Ain't It Cool News (
Movie News

David Yates is bringing DOCTOR WHO to the Big Screen in 2 or 3 years!!!

What's the Doctor's name?

Doctor Who

That's what I'm asking you.


The Doctor, What's his name?

Not What, but Who

The Doctor.


Hey folks, Harry here...  Sometimes I find that Abbott & Costello are too firmly entrenched in my mind to allow for a normal discussion of a DOCTOR WHO movie, but that's where we are.   David Yates, the man who killed off the HARRY POTTER franchise...  giggle.   I'm actually quite excited by this.   I am fond of Peter Cushing's theatrical bow as DOCTOR WHO - but who will be Who for the big screen?

I think it is a very good thing that the BBC is very much thoroughly involved in the production - and that they seem to be taking their time with the production.   Stating that they intend to take 2 or 3 years to get it right...  and getting it right will be something entirely up for debate as the legions of DOCTOR WHO faithful will likely debate every bit of knowledge that we gather for this time-travelling Time Lord.   SO...  Which WHO is the WHO you'd love to see on the Big Screen - and...  Whom have you always wanted to see be a big screen DOCTOR WHO?   

Scarfs are going to be so popular!

Thanks goes to VARIETY for breaking the story.

Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • Nov. 14, 2011, 3:07 p.m. CST


    by gotilk

    Sounds great, but... HUH?? Smith is my choice.

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 3:08 p.m. CST

    Paul McGann

    by Mike Wyant

    He deserves another Movie.

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 3:09 p.m. CST

    I'm going to be punched straight in the TARDIS for this...

    by Nordling

    and I'd like to think that I'm pretty knowledgable in most things sci-fi... except one. And that's Doctor Who. It's got a huge fanbase and a lot of love, and I know of it, and enough about it to know that it's probably something I'd enjoy, but there are so many episodes and characters and Dr. Whos themselves that it's incredibly intimidating to follow. At this point, I'm not sure I can. But I interviewed David Yates this weekend, and man, if I had any inkling this was happening, I would have asked him. I'm glad a film is being made, and hopefully it will be a good entry point for those of us who are hopelessly lost.

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 3:11 p.m. CST

    Alfred Molina

    by ihatetalkbacks

    or Sean Pertwee

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 3:15 p.m. CST

    Ok I'll say it...

    by JethroBodine

    Brian Cox as Dr. Who!!!!

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 3:17 p.m. CST

    I just hope they do manage this time to stick

    by gotilk

    to the established characters/universe. *Getting it right* would include this first and foremost. This is actually really exciting. Especially if they could re-use sets/costuming in the series before, during and after filming (oh I know it could only be after). I would really want it tied in to the show. I cannot see even the casual fan-base jumping up and down about a Doctor Who film that features a *film-only* Doctor. I do know that the Friday of release, no matter what happens, will feature an extremely fun DocBack. Guaranteed.

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 3:17 p.m. CST

    It should be whoever the current Doctor is

    by photoboy

    I don't think they should go back to Tennant or Eccleston just because they were (arguably) more popular (Tennant) or a bigger name (Eccleston). If Matt Smith is still in the role then he should be the star. A multi-Doctor story would be OK (especially if they can use McGann), but if they bring back Billie Piper then I'm fucking boycotting the film for life! ;)

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 3:20 p.m. CST

    No Question of Who

    by Gabba-UK

    It's gotta be whoever is the current actor playing Dr. Who on the TV show is when they make the film, that gets to the make the film.. No other option will work.

  • With Ben Kingsley as Devros. Tell me that wouldn't kick all kinds of Whovian ass?!

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 3:23 p.m. CST

    Dr. Who movie?

    by lochkray

    I don't know. It's such a dense and thick mythology. I don't know how you could possibly translate all the quirky qualities and concepts of the series into a two hour movie that the general public would understand - and not bore the die hard Dr. Who fans. Or even just regular ones. How do you do something as simple as introduce the Tardis, without addressing the bigger-on-the-inside concept? Fans of the series have accepted that since, as early as, 1963. It's wierd. It's wonderful. I don't feel like listening to the Doctor go into depth about it - and that's what is needed if you are going to sell the series. And the Tardis is only step one of dozens of oddities that surround the fantasticness that is Dr. Who

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 3:24 p.m. CST

    What's the point?

    by smaugchow

    Unless it's a 3-on-2 gangbang of the last 3 docs shagging Rose Tyler and Amy Pond, I'll pass. This show is fine as-is and a movie is unlikely to be anything but bad.

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 3:26 p.m. CST

    Truly awful idea

    by catlettuce4

  • A human thought of this? I suspect this might not turn out to make as much money as someone hopes it will.

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 3:29 p.m. CST


    by Ivan

    You should watch the recent (David Tennant) season 3/ep 10: 'Blink' I'm not a massive 'who' fan but thought this was an excellent episode and works quite well as a stand alone, non-intimidating, fifty mins...

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 3:31 p.m. CST

    Have Matt Smith's Eleventh die in the show, and at the end

    by Michael_Jacksons_Ghost

    he regenerates into the Movie Doctor. When the movie starts, the Doctor has been doing his thing for a month or so, then get's a new companion, and a new adventure. Do three films, while the show takes a break. Then bring the show back when the movies are done.

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 3:31 p.m. CST

    Well if you are going to go someone with some gravitas

    by papabendi

    then I would let Gary Oldman loose on the role. Let him channel Tom Baker.

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 3:32 p.m. CST


    by Celicynd

    I understand the idea of doing your own universe... to lure in new fans... But at the same time, considering the show is still on the air, and has had running canon (for the most part) for almost 50 years, it's kind of an odd move if you're hoping to pull in current fandom. Why would I go see a movie version of my favorite show, that I'm still watching new episodes of, only to have it have nothing to do with said show?

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 3:33 p.m. CST

    No punching in the Tardis...

    by Brian

    @nordling, I was weary of getting into Dr. Who too; I as well am pretty much versed in all things Science Fiction. It took me a long time to finally sit down and watch Dr. Who. I would suggest just starting where I did; just watching it in order from 2005 to now. Just start with Christopher Eccleston's Dr. and go from there. I went into the new series not knowing a thing but after the first couple of episodes it's easy to follow and understand the general idea of what and who a Dr. Who is.

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 3:33 p.m. CST


    by LordMaker

    The Paul McGann movie was originally supposed to be a reboot, then it was worked into the canon. I don't think they will reboot because a) BBC heavily involved and they've got to think about their videos and stuff. b) Rebooting is actually built into the format as it is. It has been rebooted 3 times on TV.

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 3:34 p.m. CST

    Nathan Fillion...

    by Dominic Murray

    He's already got a "Who" personality on screen, as long as he can do a great British accent (yes, I am a Brit suggesting an American...hey, it's Fillion!)

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 3:34 p.m. CST

    That's assuming they are going the

    by papabendi

    Peter Cushing route.

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 3:35 p.m. CST

    As I said over on the other talkback...

    by Noel

    The BBC charter in the UK means that the movie - if it gets made - must not be required viewing in order to understand the series. So - the movie Doctor will be different from the TV actor; the storyline will be completely standalone and never be referenced on TV. I wish them luck. I really do. Just don't give the Doctor guns - and keep the TARDIS the same shape.

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 3:39 p.m. CST

    Late 2013 release...

    by tomdolan04

    Oh for a big screen 50th birthday bash with Smith, Tenant, Eccleston, Mccoy, Mcgann and Baker... <p> We wont get it. I imagine 'broaden the appeal to the masses' will be the order of the day. Not cripplingly so, but large parts of the history and arcs will just be rammed in as nudge nudge wink wink notes - coupled with probably daleks and lotsa 'splosions. Erm yay.

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 3:40 p.m. CST

    skeekloon, Charter will be bent for the movie.

    by Michael_Jacksons_Ghost

    It will flow with the show universe. See docback for details.

  • One with international regonisition. Didn't Johnny Depp say he wanted to be Doctor Who in a film version? I dont think he would be a good choice as he'll just do his usual weirdo impression

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 3:41 p.m. CST

    MOV, if your in this non-docback, what is your take on this?

    by Michael_Jacksons_Ghost

    Should it be in the same universe as the show, or not? Would love your opinion, because I think it can work with the show universe.

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 3:44 p.m. CST

    karen gillans legs in IMAX has appeal though

    by tomdolan04

    There is some...indepth...fanfic out there.

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 3:44 p.m. CST

    Not a Who fan, yet excited by this because...

    by rogerdodger21

    I am a sci-fi nerd and always have been, but I don't like Doctor Who. I like the premise and greatly respect that there is a devout audience of obsessive fans. I will even watch some of the Christmas Specials where things feel suitably budgeted and amped up for a wider audience - but I've never been able to get past the shitty production values of old Doctor Who and the exhausting adherence to the past and minutiae. The Who devoted have their show. That's great. THIS film is for the rest of us. This film is for those who don't watch the show (i.e. most of planet earth). They've already made it clear that this will not be cast with the current Doctor. This is stripping away the past and presenting Who in a new light with a big budget and a tweaked origin. Not unlike the new Star Trek reboot, they can throw in nods to the past, but this is for the future. I would never think to pay money to see a Doctor Who movie spun off from the show, but if Yates does what I think he's going to do, I might just see this.

  • I recommend: The Ark in Space - Alien four years before the release of Alien The Brain of Morbius - the Doctor vs. Prometeus/Frankenstein Genesis of the Daleks - the Doctor goes back to the origins of his greatest enemy The Talons of Weng-Chiang - the Doctor plays Sherlock Holmes, complete with deerstalker hat, in old Victorian Chinatown

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 3:45 p.m. CST

    Peter Cushing did not play Doctor Who. He played Dr. Who.

    by Royston Lodge

    There's a subtle difference. Trailer for Dr. Who and the Daleks:

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 3:47 p.m. CST


    by Spyderpig

    Nuff said...

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 3:51 p.m. CST


    by tomdolan04

    Since you speak as a non fan, your attitude is probably reflective of the masses. <p> It always amuses me though that people say 'yeah id go see it if it stripped away and changed everything about the show'. You dont want Doctor Who the movie, you want 'generic space action swashbuckler movie of the week'.

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 3:51 p.m. CST

    by Cobra--Kai

    Stabby, great call on that casting. Cumberbitch seems like the goto guy right now for this kind of thing. Yes - would also be cool if this was tied directly into the TV series.

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 3:51 p.m. CST

    Peter Cushing...

    by Dominic Murray

    ...his Dr Who wasn't a Time Lord.

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 3:52 p.m. CST

    by Cobra--Kai

    Also needs to have Christina Hendricks as the assistant, squeezed into a very, very tight latex dress. Make it so.

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 3:55 p.m. CST

    The Cloister Bell is ringing..

    by Captain Howdy

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 3:59 p.m. CST

    SpiderPig is so right, but ...

    by Anthony Torchia

    Christopher would make a better Dr Who in an SNL skit, stretching it to movie length is too risky, or do I mean risque? Hey SpiderPig, what do you actually do?

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 3:59 p.m. CST

    Should be a full re-imagining reboot.

    by the Green Gargantua

    I have always loved the concept but found it unbearably silly.

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 4:01 p.m. CST

    good thing is a film version ...

    by Nick

    Of doctor who will mean a Porn version would not be far behind! Closest thing to Kareen Gillan naked on the silver screen that we are going to get for now.

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 4:03 p.m. CST

    This movie is going to bomb...giggle

    by Pete Michaelson

    I don't really know, I just had saw that "giggle" and it made me sick to my stomach so I had to repel the feeling somehow. In all seriousness, I have never met anyone IRL who watches or knows anything about Doctor Who. I only know of it; I have never followed it nor is there anything that I've heard about it that makes me want to get involved in it. If they're going to make a movie that is going to appeal to anyone but the fanbase, it would have to be a primer or origin story, and I don't think that the current fans would dig that, so this is going to be tough nut to crack. Why bother, if the TV series is going so well? I mean, it's been an on-going series for like thirty years now, right?

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 4:05 p.m. CST

    Great Idea!

    by gcodori

    The movie will blow for the following reasons - 1. They use the existing doctor at the time. Who wants to see a movie with the same actors as the TV show? X-files movie anyone? A better choice is a break from the series and a few bigger budget episodes/mini-series. 2. They use a different actor for the doctor...utter fail. Anyone remember Dr. Who and his home built time/space machine? And plucky grand-daughter Susan Who. The movie would only succeed if they either do an origin story with a young first doctor breaking ranks and stealing the tardis or the time war story. If they do a young first doctor - take a change and get a good young actor and not give him a Twilight makeover. For the time war - McGann is getting old for the part and Christopher Eccleston does not want to return. So we will get a one-off story which would better serve the fans being televised.

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 4:09 p.m. CST

    ....ooooooooohhhhhh, that really really very not good.

    by Sundaycall1

    Leave it alone. Just leave it alone. The show still has time to go. Stories to tell. Don't reboot it. Don't make it bigger than it is. Don't cuz it'll loose it's charm and the humour? It'll definitely loose it's sense of humour. And seriously folks if you fuck it up and make a hash of it, hell it may turn newbies off who forever. It might ruin the show. What if the show wants to renew?? And don't be giving me that ol' "hey sundaycall1! Calm down. They did movies before and no biggie! The show went on!" I say to you SSHHHHH. A) geeks now are not like geeks then. We're not. We are a vindictive breed if you fuck with our shit. We will take to the Internet and spread our geeky disapproval and YOU WILL BE SORRY. B) why? It's not needed. The property's bigger than ever and has a great cast and crew. AND TWO DOCTORS LEFT. C) I swear to god if David Yates casts Rupert fucking Grint as anything in this I will murder all visible gingers (sorry Harry. Luv the site btw)..... Although Alan rickman or brendan gleeson would rock...

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 4:10 p.m. CST

    Tom Baker is the "quintessential" Doctor only...

    by Bill Clay

    ...because he was the first Doctor most Americans saw when PBS began playing Doctor Who in the US back in the 70's. I doubt that British audiences are as wildly fervent about Big Tom as we Yanks are.

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 4:14 p.m. CST

    nordling, its a kids show, easy to follow

    by thedarklingthrush

    continuity means nothing outside of each doctor and even season to season.

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 4:16 p.m. CST


    by Stabby

    Cumberbatch would totally kill as the Doctor. Add Christina Hendricks in Leela's primitive girl loincloth and you got B.O. gold.

  • Yates ruined Potter with his bland ass style and direction.

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 4:18 p.m. CST

    I smell a StarTrek all over this.

    by Colin Dent

    Is Tennant bankable Stateside? How did "Fright Night" do? They'll start it off with him, the most popular of the recent Doctors, he can appear at any point in time after all. See how it goes, if it does the biz we'll have another two. Tennant passes movie franchise to young Karloff and the big wheel starts rolling. Or they could just do the decent thing and LEAVE THE FUCKER WHERE IT IS! ON TV! That is all.

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 4:21 p.m. CST

    lol, this sounds fucking horrific ...


  • Nov. 14, 2011, 4:21 p.m. CST

    Can you imagine QUENTIN TARANTINO as Dr. Who?

    by DrPain

    That would be damn awesome.

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 4:21 p.m. CST

    Tom Baker

    by Noel

    Clay - We Brits are just as fervent in our worship of Baker's Doc. Probably because he stayed so long and just got everywhere in the 70's. This is going to be interesting to watch develop. Already the internets seem to have exploded with equal amounts of encouragement and vitriol.

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 4:22 p.m. CST

    YATES is a cunt of a movie director - should have stayed in TV

    by melonman

    Just watched final POTTER. Just like all the others there was the usual hype about how it really gets going this time and delivers. Yet again another dripping fucking turd of a movie. CUARON was the only director who delivered anything with that franchise. The whole thing was am Emperor's New Clothes scenario. And DAVID take the money go through the motions YATES was responsible for half of it. Shame really. STATE OF PLAY on TV was really bloody good.

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 4:25 p.m. CST

    I like David Yates a lot, this is cool with me.

    by Randy

  • Rising nausea. Almost threw up in my mouth. HARRY: please stop saying it. You're sounding like a gurning paedophile wiping his cock with peanut butter while watching old KROFTT show re-runs. It's not good.

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 4:28 p.m. CST

    Maybe they'll call the movie version Doctor Whom.

    by Royston Lodge

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 4:29 p.m. CST

    bill clay: the best Doctor is always the one you grew up with

    by melonman

    And any 70s kid will tell you. TOM BAKER is a fucking God.

  • Plus, classic who is very Shakespearean, particularly given that many of the actors were trained in Shakespeare and Shakespeare is right up Branagh's alley. Would love to see a straight up serious take on Doctor Who like the best of Baker, Pertwee and Davidson as opposed to the silly manic cartoon clown depicted in the current series. Don't get me wrong, there are a few gems in there like Blink, The Girl in the Fireplace and Silence in the Library. But, few and far between. Actually really disappointed in Who since Moffat took over. Expected a lot better from him.

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 4:32 p.m. CST

    Matt Smith is the best Doctor Who after Tom Baker

    by sasquatch_with_a_swatch_watch

    It should be him. Hopefully, he'll still BE the Doctor Who on the series when this thing makes it into theaters... because the job should go to the Doctor Who of the day. Just like the casts of Firefly, Dark Shadow, the show is finally good enough- and in the pop culture eye enough- to deserve its ascension to the big screen. The whole cast and Stephen Moffat, too. If there is any justice it will be Matt Smith who gets to represent Doctor Who at that level. I say he is the best Who because he really GETS the role. There is whimsy there... He brings a much needed Willie Wonka and The Cat and The Hat to the Doctor

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 4:36 p.m. CST

    And when can we get a decent Doctor Who video game?

    by Stabby

    That's a long time coming isn't it? I don't even play video games, but I'd play that.

  • ...gobblegoo!

  • ...crazy old coot - imagine John Hurt...OH YEAHHHH!!!!

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 4:42 p.m. CST

    radical transformation?!

    by Gustav Niemann

    To me, Yates saying "It needs quite a radical transformation to take it into the bigger arena" is immediately frightening. Sure, the story will need to be structured for a two hour movie and it also need some big stakes (though Christ, can you get bigger stakes than pretty much every series finale since the return?), but really, the less radical transforming the better. I DO like stabby's idea of making it the fourth doctor and doing an adaptation of one of his best stories. Wouldn't mind seeing City of Death or Talons of Weng-Chang myself!

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 4:47 p.m. CST

    Doctor Who: The Revenge of Adric

    by HornOrSilk

    Staring Matthew Waterhouse as the Doctor and Adric. The Doctor regenerates and find himself face to face with the face of an old, dead friend. The Daleks run afraid that they, too, will be infected by the Adric virus..

  • Or a continuation of the Cushing films.

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 4:48 p.m. CST


    by spacehog

    I refuse to believe this until I hear directly from you. Because this sounds, ah, STRANGE.

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 4:51 p.m. CST

    I don't think his name is Who...

    by Zakari Paolon

    ... It's just The Doctor. In the new series, at least...

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 4:52 p.m. CST

    IF they're REALLY gonna' do this...

    by batmancw

    and I'm not sure they should, IMO, it should require that Matt Smith, Alex Kingston & the Ponds? be willing to stick around...hey, why not? surely they'd all collect a nice paycheck for the movie IF so, make it a BIG BUDGET continuation of the ongoing "thread" that is now in it's second season & continuing into the third season next year that takes us in big screen fashion to The Fields of Trenzilor...& The Fall of The Eleventh "when no living creature can speak falsely or fail to answer, a question will be asked—one that must never be answered. And Silence must fall when the question is asked." The First Question The Oldest Question Hiding in Plain Sight The question that IF asked means Silence MUST Fall DR WHO? Bring in The Silence and a nice assortment of the classic Who villains & it COULD be awesome. It could be used to set up the next Doctor & next TV season--presuming it continues & draw in a bigger audience IF the movie was done well.

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 4:55 p.m. CST

    @sasquatch & melonman

    by batmancw

    I agree with both of you. I LOVED Tom Baker when PBS was running the show in the late 70's and he WAS my favorite, with Tennant a very close second until Matt Smith took over. The way he can convey BOTH the weight of his 900 years AND his ability to display the delight of a child all in one scene just floors me

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 4:57 p.m. CST

    Well if we're throwing out suggestions...

    by Hogan55

    If you want an actor that can really put it out there (i.e., quirky/brilliant) then I suggest...Eddie Izzard (no cross dressing but it would be interesting), David Tennant, naturally, and Rhys Ifans.

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 4:59 p.m. CST

    Doctor Who 2: Doctor Whore

    by SiouxCitySarsaparilla

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 4:59 p.m. CST

    So it turns out Herc was right. Some folks need to eat crow.

    by SiouxCitySarsaparilla

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 5 p.m. CST

    If you read the full interview

    by damned-dirty-ape

    Yates says it will be a completely separate entity and have no link to the series, which in my opinion makes the whole point of this totally ridiculous. I can't see this working at all and i think it's a bit of a slap in the face to the people behind the series. I'm sure Yates could make a very good Sci Fi film, i just don't think he would make a very good Dr Who film if he went down this route. Harry, please knock that giggle shit off. It's annoying and embarrassing and has never, ever been funny. I'm not a troll but you have truly let this site go down the toilet. If it weren't for Quint's BTS Pics and the a very rare decent interview now and again, it really wouldn't be worth the effort. I sure as hell don't come here for the latest or coolest news any more. Such a shame.

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 5:07 p.m. CST

    Any excuse to get an American playing The Doctor!

    by scriptgirl_nipples

    It will be so bastardised to fit in with The American point of view. The Doctor flying about in his time travelling yellow NY cab! Total disaster just waiting to happen!

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 5:09 p.m. CST

    Again with this crap?

    by mascan42

    Let me guess, did they also talk about casting an American as the next companion, and a black or female Doctor? These rumors always start flying during the hiatus. And there always seems to be a slight hint of reality behind them, but it always leads to the same result: no movie.

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 5:13 p.m. CST

    NO connection to the show= NO EFFIN POINT IN DOING IT

    by batmancw

  • That being said, if Nic Cage even sniffs around this the part someone should drop the Tardis on his wig-wearing skull.

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 5:23 p.m. CST

    Murray won't know much about this

    by catlettuce4

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 5:24 p.m. CST

    Hugh Grant?

    by AshMcQ

    He actually was the doctor once, you know...

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 5:26 p.m. CST

    But I hope they don't cast an american like...

    by AshMcQ

    ..Hugh Laurie! ;)

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 5:29 p.m. CST

    Harry "giggles"

    by Bass Ackwards

    At this point precisely because he knows how sick it makes some of us. Another one of the inside jokes he has with himself vs talkbackers.

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 5:30 p.m. CST

    Never going to happen

    by supertoyslast

    BBC Worldwide have been toying with making a bigscreen version of Doctor Who for years. This is the furthest it's ever got - having a director attached. But this would need a big budget to work. So they'd need an American studio with the cash. I just can't see a studio taking a risk on a property so eccentric and not particularly well-known in America (unless someone as big as Spielberg was involved ala Tintin). I'm not keen on the idea of a movie Doctor Who unconnected with the TV series. But I could live with it if Chiewetel Ejiofor was cast as the Doctor.

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 5:30 p.m. CST

    Yates, eh?

    by LuckyPierre

    Expect a lot of blue mood lighting, "dramatic" slow-motion, "dramatic" silences, "dramatic" flashbacks to scenes from earlier in the film (also blue and in slow-motion),and all of the action sequences to be cut out of the script.

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 5:34 p.m. CST

    Why a movie has no choice but to ignore the TV show

    by ByTor

    Legally it MUST be so. Per the BBC charter, you can't have a tie-in work be required viewing for something on the BBC itself. So any movie will act as though the TV show doesn't exist. Deal with it now.

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 5:35 p.m. CST


    by Mister Vertue

    Why is anyone commenting on this non-story? I'll stick to Merrick's Docbacks, thanks.

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 5:35 p.m. CST


    by ByTor

    It's gotten farther. In the past there was a director attached (Nimoy), a script (from Trek 6 co-writer Denny Martin Flynn), and locations were being scouted before the rights expired.

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 5:36 p.m. CST


    by RumpleWho

    Written by Douglas Adams, never completed due to the strike, it would be a great Doctor Who movie.

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 5:37 p.m. CST

    Rumors of it being a 15 year old Doctor

    by Jerry

    Could be cool.

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 5:40 p.m. CST


    by la te ral us

    I'll take inspector spacetime lol

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 5:57 p.m. CST


    by damned-dirty-ape

    Couldn't have said it better myself. Apart from the Docbacks, every talkback seems to be getting more and more negative. There used to be a lot of discussion, whether it was comedic, intelligent or argumentative but it was always fun. These days it just seems bitter and pointless. It's quite pitiful.

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 5:59 p.m. CST

    It's just another project 'in development'. SFW?

    by Mickey The Idiot

    This whole story sounds like an attempt to drum up studio/investor interest rather than anything really concrete. No studio attached, people. And I wonder how many other projects Yates has in development on IMDB pro. The break point will be how much IPR and profit the BBC wants to retain - probably too much for any of the majors' tastes. OK, Yates is a good name to attach, but the only reason it's a story is still that it's Doctor Who, not that there's more chance of it happening that loads of other ideas floating in the LA smog.

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 6:12 p.m. CST

    Hopefully, Yates can do for Dr. Who what J.J. did for Trek.

    by bat725

    i.e. make it more entertaining.

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 6:13 p.m. CST

    Cumberpatch as First Doctor

    by vadakinX

    If they HAVE to do a Doctor Who movie then I believe it needs to be part of the continuity and not a separate entity. This leaves three options: 1. A continuation with Matt Smith. This seems the most logical option at first glance though it would probably mean an end to the TV series. At the very least the show would need to be put on hold. 2. A continuation with a new Doctor. Much like the McGann film, this would likely begin with Smith regenerating into the new guy. This would also see the TV show delayed and much would depend on whether the actor would sign up for the TV show to follow the film or if he would only do films, in which case it could be 5-10 years before Who is back on TV, depending on the number of films made. 3. A prequel with the First Doctor. This is my personal favourite option. Hartnell was already fairly old-looking in his first appearance as Doctor Who so a movie could conceivably focus on his younger years on Gallifrey and his stealing of the TARDIS. The TV show could continue with the 11th Doctor and beyond and the movie could introduce new fans to the whole concept by starting at the very beginning. There is somewhat of an obvious story to follow by doing a prequel. There have been allusions to a family that the Doctor once had that could be explored, we could see just why he chooses the name Doctor, the eventual tragedy that leaves him alone with Susan and of course the aforementioned stealing of the TARDIS. There is a fourth option which would involved a multi-Doctor team up which while cool, could be a drawback if the intention is to get more people interested in Who as they wouldn't know what was going on. By going with a First Doctor story you can introduce people to the world, you don't have to worry about regenerations or the vast history of the character but you also don't lose the 5 decades of continuity. A Who reboot like the one Trek had could work though I think Who fans would be up in arms far more than Trek fans were when their continuity was rebooted. Who, by it's very nature is an ongoing, practically never ending story and to discard that after 50 years, when the show has never been so popular would be a massive mistake, as would having two separate Who franchises going at the same time. So my vote goes to an early First Doctor story.

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 6:15 p.m. CST

    Yeah I hope Yates does a better job than Abrams did.

    by Randy

    You know, just taking a dead franchise and making it a hit, critical success and the biggest Star Trek film ever. Casting great new actors, making old and new fans happy and starting a franchise with potential for greatness. I sure hope Yates does a better job than that...

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 6:21 p.m. CST

    Ack! That should be Cumberbatch.

    by vadakinX

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 6:27 p.m. CST

    Is Adam Sandler available?

    by SiouxCitySarsaparilla

    He could star and co-write. Miley Cyrus would be a good companion.

  • ...Which is what they did in that crap Peter Cushing movie. It revealed the utter contempt that the movie makers had for the show. If they call him Doctor Who in this new movie there will be blood on the streets.

  • As more than one Doctor would say: piffle. The show is very episodic with huge gaps in the continuity that the fans would love to see filled. If they don't do a prequel I'll be very put out.

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 6:37 p.m. CST

    Re:Paul McGann

    by MichaelH

    He doesn't just deserve another movie. That's a whole life of the character that they just skipped right over. They skipped a huge plot point: The Time War. They could make a huge movie out of that which wouldn't upset the current show one iota. And they need to recreate that Tardis set from the McGann movie, or something like it.

  • Same here. :/

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 6:39 p.m. CST

    Will Smith for the Doctor.

    by KilliK

    -Doctor,Doctor,the Tardis landed again in the wrong place and in the wrong time. -AW HELL NAW.!!

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 6:41 p.m. CST

    Pee Wee Herman for the Doctor.

    by KilliK

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 7:25 p.m. CST


    by rogerdodger21

    doctor who is like an indie band that never did a major label deal, and the fans in turn are crazy loyal. but what's wrong with a powerful filmmaker thinking bigger, shooting for a wider audience? if it sucks, it sucks either way, but if it turns out incredibly well, then doctor who can be loved by more people. the only people who get pissed are the rabid fans who feel like he is no longer only theirs because of success, but fuck their jealousy if doctor who becomes a global phenomenon. it just makes "doctor who" stronger if it's done well, and yates did pretty damn well with potter films). with sherlock holmes, some people like the books, some like rathbone, some like michael caine, some like downey, and some like the new bbc version. similarly, i just like the idea of letting a character be interpreted dramatically different ways and not just the latest actor to regenerate into the same guy.

  • It has kind of the stink of truth to it though.

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 7:39 p.m. CST

    THE FLY!

    by rebelpigs

    The only american I can ever see playing the Doctor is Goldblum. He'd be amazing. Other than that Cumberpatch was offered the role before smith and turned away.

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 7:40 p.m. CST

    The BBC needs to make a Time War miniseries

    by FrodoFraggins

    Let it end with the transformation from McGann to Eccleston. Of course TV execs think viewers are too dumb to realize it's a prequel to the Nu Who

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 7:49 p.m. CST

    I would see a big screen Dr. Who with Alan Rickman in it.

    by Margot Tenenbaum

    As the doctor. PLEASE GOD NOT JOHNNY DEPP.

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 8:21 p.m. CST

    celicynd, "why would I want to watch a movie version...

    by lv_426

    of my favorite show, while it is still on?" That is exactly how I felt when Universal announced that they were going to reboot Battlestar Galactica right on the heels of the big series finale. It just sorta sours the enjoyment. At least this Doctor Who movie stands some chance of being good, whereas with Battlestar they are supposedly ditching the new version's continuity by going back to the old cheesy version's continuity. But at least with Doctor Who, they didn't get McG or Bay to do a crass Americanized version. So on the bright side, with the BBC involved, it might be something worth seeing. Although it could be crap too. We just don't know enough yet. I just hope they make it fun without stooping to semi-retard level of the new Star Trek or Transformers. I also want it to be fun but by way of one of those mind bender style Who stories. I hope for some sci-fi brain candy with this theatrical Doctor Who movie. Also... since they are going with a new version of The Doctor for the film, I nominate Jason Isaacs for Time Lord.

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 8:26 p.m. CST

    I say cast Jason Isaacs as The Doctor

    by lv_426

    I think he could be great. He would be able to make things fun, but also bring some of the edge and intimidation factor that Christopher Eccelston brought to the role for an unfortunately short single season. Or they could just royally fuck it up and cast Kevin Costner and his non-existent British accent from Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves :)

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 8:32 p.m. CST

    As for an American playing Doctor Who

    by lv_426

    I could believe Michael Shannon pulling it off. Of course it would be a fucking bug nuts insane portrayal of The Doctor. I also wouldn't mind James Callis (aka Gaius Baltar from BSG) as The Doctor. If not for the movie, maybe for the TV show somewhere down the line.

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 8:40 p.m. CST

    Al Pacino as Dr. Who-hah!

    by blackmantis

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 8:44 p.m. CST

    The Master and K-9 must be in the film

    by lordoftheschwing

    and it must include a full frontal scene with Karen Gillan, for cinematic purposes. Also Danny Trejo should play The Master.

  • Depp is actually a good actor when he makes stuff like Public Enemies, Donny Brasco, or Blow. I am sick of his weird Pirate/Tim Burton film style of acting. If he were cast as The Doctor, we'd end up with Doctor Edward Scissorhands Sparrowho! Actually, if the Hollywood suits get their mitts on this completely, then I wouldn't be surprised to hear that Depp was going to play The Doctor, and Tim Burton were going to direct. Because we all know the general public seems to go ape-shit for a Depp/Burton collaboration. Fuck. Now I'm depressed.

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 8:50 p.m. CST

    An even better idea!!!

    by LostCause

    Leave Who the fuck alone!!! <BR><BR> Some hollywood wanker will come in and fuck it up.<BR> They'll try to give it the hollywood treatment and destroy not just the movie but the entire series. <BR><BR> The ONLY reason to make a Doctor Who movie would be to transition or explain the limit of regenerations. And it would need the same actors and characters to do it, and MOST IMPORTANTLY MOFFAT!!! <BR><BR> Doctor Who right now is fucking fantastic, and these clowns that see a good working concept decide, "Hey I could take that long standing unique TV series that has stood the test of time, make a quick few bucks on it and permenantly screw it up beyond all repair making it toxic to even the most avid whovian. <BR><BR> Its not a "Hey we have this great story that would be perfect for the big screen", or "The big screen is the only way we could really tell this", its "Hey I'm a greedy fuck pig, how can I cash in on this and rape it for all it's worth" <BR><BR> There's always some dumb ignorant fuck out there that sees something good and has the audacity and unfounded ego to think they can do it bigger and better./RANT

  • in Gilliam's Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas.

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 8:55 p.m. CST

    Can't do better than Tennant

    by DoctorZoidberg

    Best Doctor ever. No need to embrace all of the canon, just tell the backstory of his existence nd craft a single awesome time/cosmos spanning tale.

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 8:56 p.m. CST


    by lv_426

    "Doctor Who-hah! Why did you choose this particular woman to be your companion?" "Well son, it's because she's got a WONDERFUL ASS! An ass you could just gobble up like a wet scone dipped in tea." Maybe De Niro could show up and have a tense tea time conversation with Doctor Who-hah?

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 8:58 p.m. CST

    Typical Stupidity on the part of BBC Worldwide

    by lynxpro

    I consider myself a huge Doctor Who fan [and I don't mean because of weight; been watching since 1984] and I'm not interested in BBC Worldwide wrecking the tv show while trying to launch a big screen adaptation that has no real connection with the tv series. It was concluded back in the early 90s that a separate film from the tv series wouldn't work if the tv series was still on. It won't work here just as Superman Returns failed in the theatres while Smallville was on tv for free and superior. THIS WILL NOT WORK AND THIS DIRECTOR HAS AN INFLATED EGO THE SIZE OF THE TIME VORTEX. Think about it. The X-Files 1 was a decent success based upon Hollywood standards. Fox didn't try to recast the roles of Mulder and Scully when it went to the silver screen. If any film is to be made, it better have Matt Smith [or Paul McGann, for that matter] in the role of The Doctor with Steven Moffat penning the screenplay. That's the only way it could work. Doctor Who for its 50th Anniversary deserves better than to have the television production distracted internally by the BBC hellbent on rushing a film to the theatres. Take a page from George Lucas; he believes the future for genre programming is television.

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 9:08 p.m. CST

    Timothy Dalton

    by bubcus

    I'd lean towards somewhat of an origin story. Bring back Timothy Dalton as one of the Timelords if possible. Another option is to focus on the war with the Daleks? We'll see what they do.

  • Just so you know, I'm offended by this whole idea. Just because they're doing an even-more-British take on DOCTOR WHO (which, excuse me, but NuWho sure as shit ain't American) doesn't mean that these British hosers aren't going to put forth a steaming pile of shit. A more British sensibility? What the hell are they smoking? That being said, I really don't see the point of a big screen WHO anything. The whole glory of the show is the long-running arc of the character, the passage of time as you get used to characters, the ability for the writers to take their time in telling a story rather than having to neatly wrap it all up in 90 minutes (give or take.) And of course, there's the major issue of the fan base. There's a limited number of times the Doctor is supposed to be able to regenerate, if I remember correctly, and after Matt Smith that leaves three more Doctors (although there is some debate about that.) Are they going to blow one of those with the movie? Or they really going to totally ignore NuWho altogether and do their own thing? I'm a skeptic by nature, but I am totally sour on this idea.

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 9:16 p.m. CST

    We already had two Doctor Who movies ffs.

    by KilliK

    with Peter Cushing,remember? both movies diverted from the source material and were made while the show was still on the tv.The first was a hit,the second not that much. Still there is a lot of potential that a HW Dr Who might be a big success and span a new franchise.And who gives if it turns out to be a travesty which disrespects the source material and insults the fans.The same thing happened when the Nu Doctor came around..

  • There's a subtle difference.

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 9:26 p.m. CST

    Doctor Who? Is it about an Owel that's a Doctor?

    by XxSoulFlyxX

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 9:33 p.m. CST

    Stabby, re: Doctor Who video games...

    by lynxpro

    The BBC has made several Doctor Who games for both Windows and Mac and they are free over in the UK. But Stateside, you have to download them [check] through DirectPC [or whatever that service's name is] and they've so far refused to make available the Mac versions. [a**holes]. There's also an iPod Touch/iPhone/iPad game available through iTunes. It reminds me a lot of "Chip's Challenge" back on the Atari Lynx and Windows. I'd really like to see the current Who games made available on Xbox Live Marketplace and PSN but so far the BBC hasn't been smart enough to make this happen [as usual].

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 9:41 p.m. CST

    lv_426 on Depp and Burton

    by lynxpro

    You do know both of them are currently making a "Dark Shadows" film set to be released next year, right?

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 10:10 p.m. CST


    by TopHat


  • However, I bet the real story is this--Smith's Doctor will die before we get all the details regarding his origin (we'll get more questions then answers) and that's what the film(s) will cover--the Doctor's true origin before he fled Gallifrey with the TARDIS. The television series will go on hiatus why the films are shown over the course of a few years. We'll see the first Doctor as a young man before he ages into William Hartnell. Of course, the young Doctor should be Benedict Cumberbatch. He was born to play this role. And let's face it, his Holmes is so damn Whovian its beyond belief. Plus, Cumberbatch has got the eccentric curmudgeon down pat. Or they could go really crazy and cast Hugh Laurie to play the Doctor. Either way, they should give us a big budget origin story that defines the Doctor's backstory and mythology once and for all. And at the very end of the film or films, the first Doctor with his granddaughter Susan arrive on Earth in 1963... It would come full circle. And then the television series could restart and begin the adventures of the 12th Doctor. Just my two cents.

  • First up, they cast the current TV Doctor. This is not only what would be expected from fans and the Who conscious public alike, but also what would be the most readily accepted. In other words, this is the 'safe' path to take. Secondly, they cast a previous Who actor back in the role, touting it as a 'lost' adventure. Tennant would be the obvious and most easily welcomed choice by most in this case, however a more interesting, and potentially better way might be to go with either McGann or Eccleston and do the Dalek Time War story that fans never got to see. While Baker is beloved, I don't know that he'd put modern 'bums on seats', so is unlikely to be considered, and the rest of the classic Doctors aren't even on the radar. The biggest danger with not using the current Doctor in the movie though is pissing off/alienating the current actor playing the role. Of course they could always do a variant of the above and do a big multi-Doctor story, which is entirely possible as well. But that may be seen as too fan-ish, and not as easy to enjoy for casual or non Who fans, where even something like the Time War can be presented as a largely self contained (and action/set piece heavy) storyline. Or they could fuck it all up and recast the role of The Doctor by way of celebrity stunt casting, instantly alienating regular fans, confusing casual fans, and likely resulting in negative publicity from those on the show, both past and present. Whatever else they do, I hope that this is not an option that they choose to go with, if this even happens to begin with...

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 11:11 p.m. CST

    Start From the Begining

    by AstroNerdBoy

    Since it appears this movie is not going to be tied to the current TV series, then why not start it from scratch? Personally, that's what I'd love to see -- the Doctor going renegade with his granddaughter in a stolen TARDIS. Considering the regeneration aspect of the Doctor's character, the movie franchise could go on and on like the TV series. I'd just consider it an "alternate universe" Doctor and move on.

  • Egotistical wish-fulfillment wanker that he is. Hopefully if a Who film is made, and one will be eventually, it is done without his particular brand of input...

  • Nov. 14, 2011, 11:24 p.m. CST

    I'm Hesitant

    by Matthew Domville

    I don't like this talk of "starting from scratch". Anything that even smells rebooty is a bad idea. A comic on the subject:

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 12:22 a.m. CST

    Harry, don't jump on Herc's train... he's tried something similar...

    by wtriker1701

    Not worth mentioning atm. Just rumours...

  • Very-similar-but-not-identical-to-TV-canon. It'll be a reboot. Warners have built large facilities in the UK and are looking for a Harry Potter replacement franchise. I can see a BBC co-prod with WB and David Yates producing and/or directing the series.

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 12:54 a.m. CST

    There's no doubt they'll use the current Doctor

    by ThrowMeTheIdol

    Because they wouldn't be doing this at all if they weren't already confident about that aspect.

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 12:58 a.m. CST

    xxsoulflyxx, misspelling 'OWL' FTW!

    by Tom

  • I love Who, and I draw the line at Depp. I'll put up with his schtick in other movies I don't really care about, but not Doctor Who. Or Ben Stiller... Thing is, guys like that would only have to fart in the direction of this project and it it would be fast-tracked.

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 1:12 a.m. CST

    I'd vote for Gary Oldman...

    by Trancer

    and actually do the origin story. It would be cool if they took it into the origin of the Time Lords themselves. Completely separate it from the current show - causes way too many complications.

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 1:43 a.m. CST

    It's been carried on the BBC news as fact

    by catlettuce4

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 1:44 a.m. CST


    by Spyderpig

    Alan Rickman for The Master! Bruce Willis for Capt Jack!! Scooby Doo for K-9! Megan Fox for the Companion! Let's fuck up and americanise a quintesentially British production!!!! Although seeing Bill Murray would be pretty cool....

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 3:06 a.m. CST

    Men of Vertue busted as a fake?

    by catlettuce4

    I would think so.

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 3:44 a.m. CST

    Bill Clay...

    by workshed

    ...Baker WAS The Doctor. From the day he got the part he lived it both on and off screen. That's why British Who fans love him. My first Doc was Pertwee and I was gutted when he quit but that feeling didn't last long when Baker showed up and everyone realised he was barmy. Up to the release of Star Wars, the latest Dr.Who would be the talk of the playground every Monday morning. Have you read Baker's autobiography, 'Who On Earth Is Tom Baker..?'..? It's a hoot from start to finish.

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 3:47 a.m. CST

    What the Fuck did Harry write?

    by ToughGuyRizzo

    Not only is is illegible, but I don't believe it at all. Especially with the 50th happening this coming year. Fuckin idiot. Can I write for this site? I'll get my nephew to give me scoops after watching "Adventure Time" or Regular Show" on Nick and then deliver a "scoop" to AICN. But of course, I'll write it the way my 7 year old nephew says it, which will be just the way Harry writes.

  • And theat dude want to write screenplays. Hire a ghostwriter. Even tho you dont want to. It is the only way Lu***...

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 4:31 a.m. CST

    Message to Mr Yates

    by Mr Gorilla

    Dear Mr Yates, Your Harry Potter films have marked you as one of the most talented directors of mainstream entertainment currently working. But it would be a mistake to follow one kids' fantasy with another. Ang Lee followed Hulk with Brokeback Mountain. Cuaron followed Goblet of Fire with Children of Men. And apart from anything else, do you really want to face the wrath of angry fanboys for another few years? Please do something different, something in the real world. A crime film. A war film. A historical drama. You deserve better. Best wishes, Mr Gorilla

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 4:46 a.m. CST


    by Paul

    Susan was one of the Doctor’s original companions in the Hartnell era. Yes - she called the Doctor “Grandfather”.

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 4:57 a.m. CST

    Would Rather See BIG BUDGET $

    by HobGoblin

    THIS should be AN EPIC set of three films. The story is large and can tell more over time with an exciting story that tells us from childhood on who the Doctor is. We can see him as a young man and watch him grow into the hero we know. We can see his parents, meet whomever shaped his life as an older Time Lord. See his early friendship with the Master. See him 'meet' the TARDIS. -- It would be a wonderful origin story on the level of 'Rings' if done right. Like 'Potter' it would introduce Who to younger people, and make it larger in America, while it still retains its English heritage if cast right. - Even if it started with whoever is the current Doctor on TV as a reference point to whom our Doctor will grow to be 100's of years from now, it would still make sense in the cannon and not interfere with the current Who still on the air. - This is a LARGE idea for a concept that needs LARGE canvas.

  • I want this guy as far away from the things i love as possible... And who is at the top of that list Hack, pure and simple...

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 6:21 a.m. CST

    Nonfan here...

    by Aaron

    I know nothing of Doctor / Dr. Who, other tha what I pick up from lurking around here and io9. Seems interesting, and as a reader of comic books, 50 years of backstory or however much it is doesn't intimidate me. That being said, studio execs do not care about what You People think. Whatever this film turns out to be, it will be designed to make cheese, not respect lore. THAT being said, it would be nice to have an intelligent story that not only presents SOME kind of introduction / origin for the whole shit, while at the same time assuming the audience is smart enough to be able to fill in the blanks. Will that second part happen? Don't know. I was watching something terrible the other day, can't remember what it was--oh yeah, GREEN LANTERN. The dialogue... Oh Christ, everything is spelled out in big kiddie block letters. You know, a bunch of guys standing around in suits with military dudes in a dark hangar is pretty much shorthand for evil political shenanigans, right? But EVERYTHING is just telegraphed with this awful fucking dialogue. What does that have to do with DW? Respect the audience's intelligence. That way they could satisfy the hardcore fans and then people such as myself who are borderline ignorant of the characters and concepts. I mean, just by hearing you people talk about it, it seems like a pretty interesting show / concept. That is enough to get my ass in a seat. But if it looks like fucking, I don't know, PRINCE OF PERSIA or some equally generic nonsense upon release, then I will never watch it. Finally, fuck you for using this 'giggle' you goddamn asshole fuck, Harry.

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 6:27 a.m. CST

    Stephen Fry!

    by unfaithfullyyours

    And let's hope they go the "Rose" route and start in the middle, maybe from the companion's POV, instead of the well-meaning misfire of the American FOX tv show which had a tedious and labored introduction to the doctor which made little to no sense to new viewers.

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 6:36 a.m. CST

    I don't believe it for a second.

    by V'Shael

    It's as pointless as all the recent Johnny Depp as the Doctor stories that circulated. Slow news day, apparently.

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 7:10 a.m. CST

    So the last Potter sucks? Damn

    by alexander

    If it's Yates who brought Order of the Pheonix and Half Blood Prince then that's great, but if it's the guy who brough Deathly Hallows Pt 1... well, just don't make the first big screen Who outing since it's revival fifteen shades of grey please.

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 7:20 a.m. CST

    Dr. Who movie would flop in the U.S.

    by FlandersBum

    Yes, yes I know it's pretty popular in other parts of the world. But's a niche thing in the United States. Believe it or not, most regular folks here don't care for it. You gotta remember that just because something is an internet sensation or top trending topic on twitter doesn't mean much in the US. Look at Scott Pilgrim vs. the World. That shoulda been a huge smash domestically according to the hipster net kids, while back in the Real World nobody cared. Anyhow, not saying a Dr. Who movie won't still be overall successful in other parts of the world or that it would be financially a dud...just saying it won't make a lot of money in the US. It'll be the next 'Serenity'.

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 7:41 a.m. CST


    by kwisatzhaderach

    Sucks to be you.

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 7:41 a.m. CST

    Any Doctor Who movie would go the way of a Judge Dredd movie

    by kwisatzhaderach

    Destined to be a transatlantic shambles. Leave it to TV.

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 7:42 a.m. CST

    Bill Nighy Bill Nighy Bill Nighy Bill Nighy Bill Nighy

    by Dolmes

    Not Johnny Depp please. Love JD but not for this. Pleeeeeeaaaaassssseeeeee.

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 7:51 a.m. CST

    Aint It Easily Fooled By Rumors News

    by Meglos

    This is already being denied by the BBC.

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 9:47 a.m. CST

    Some REAL News-- Untitled Douglas Trumbull Project

    by Michael Lunney

    From bleedingcool and IO9---- So, as Silent Running arrives on Blu-ray today, what better time to bring news of a new Douglas Trumbull film, and it sounds like a very exciting one. Douglas Trumbull, who did the special effects for (deep breath) 2001, Close Encounters of the Third Kind, Star Trek: The Motion Picture, Blade Runner, and Terrence Malick's recent universe-bending Tree of Life, is reportedly working on plans for his third directorial effort. Trumbull explained the sort of technological innovation he'd like to bring to the movie, and what sort of film it will be: I'm shooting films right now at 120fps in 3D and I know that the result is absolutely stunning but very few people on this planet have actually seen that, yet. I have a very challenging process ahead of me to start demonstrating this and doing at least one film that I want to make. I have several films lined up but I've got one in particular that would lend itself to this. It's a big space adventure movie. And I've got to make the movie and show it in this process and convince people that there's a very big audience that wants to see this kind of tremendous technological, creative, visual leap forward to much higher quality. He also explained some of the questions that the movie would likely consider: Well, not so much an ecological bent as much as a survival bent. Having to do with reaching for the stars and why we would have to go to the stars. Are we using up this planet at such an exponential rate with population growth and the depletion of the resources that we're going to have to leave the earth?

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 9:55 a.m. CST

    They could EASILY bring Tennant back without cheesing anyone off.

    by Lt.Mindcrime

    Tennant's 'alt doctor' was left with Rose in the pocket universe. He seemed to be darker...a little violent having part of Donna. They could do it right if they used HIM as the villain. You could have Rose and Donna EASILY! Smith can be involved and use this to usher him out... Frankly that has the best 'mass appeal' I'd think...especially with Donna coming to America's version of the Office. I know it's mainly Russel T. Davies' characters...(Rose, Donna, 10th Doc...)...but they could also have Rory and Amy as well... Kinda jonesed I gotta say.

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 9:59 a.m. CST

    Oh, come on, if it's a Hollywood studio production....

    by Orbots Commander

    ....let's not pretend we can't already guess which actors will be on Yates' short list for the title role: either of the X-Men FC lead actors, Fassbender or McAvoy, Hugh Jackman, Tom Hardy or Orlando Bloom. The higher the production's budget, the 'safer' the studio and director cast choice will be. My guess is, they'll offer it first to Jackman, then Fassbender, then McAvoy, and last, Hardy.

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 10:15 a.m. CST

    I'm surprised David Yates hasn't posted in this talkback personally.

    by SiouxCitySarsaparilla


  • Nov. 15, 2011, 10:20 a.m. CST

    Simon Pegg as Doctor Who

    by Cobb05

    I would rather see Edgar Wright direct, but I think Pegg would be a cool Doctor and he's a fan of the show, so I don't think he'd piss all over it.

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 10:21 a.m. CST

    People who call others idiots for typos and mistakes

    by gotilk

    are usually not too sharp. In my experience.I'm sure there are a few exceptions. But statistically......

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 11:05 a.m. CST

    Dylan Moran for the doctor

    by Mike

    Love to see a grumpy cynical doctor

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 11:18 a.m. CST

    Chiwetel Ejiofor

    by obijuanmartinez

    Or the Cumberbatch as Baker option also works, and Genesis of the Daleks would be beyond epic!

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 11:25 a.m. CST

    Jude Law for the Doctor.

    by Hesiod2k7

    Admit it. You know that Woukd be excellent.

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 11:26 a.m. CST

    Or Idris Elba.

    by Hesiod2k7

  • The BBC's statement: A Doctor Who feature film remains in development w/ BBC Worldwide Productions in LA. As of yet no script, cast or production crew in place. This makes me think that Yates' statement is more on the lines of him wanting to make a pitch for the movie, much like you had lots of people pitching for a new Doctor Who series in the early 90's. It doesn't mean that Yates is locked in as the one doing the movie. I don't have any beef with Yates (like apparently some people here have), but I'd much prefer Edgar Wright to do the movie.

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 11:37 a.m. CST

    Not Gary Oldman, he's in everything these days

    by Damned if I can login

    Kinda like tim Burton's wife

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 11:40 a.m. CST

    As for Johnny Depp being in the movie

    by DoctorTom

    I really don't want to see him play the Doctor. What I WOULD like to see, though, is to have the Doctor meet Hunter S. Thompson (maybe to discover the horrible truth about Bat Country), and they could get Depp to play Hunter S Thompson again. If we're going to wishlist for the Doctor, as a suggestion for someone that people haven't thought about yet, Sam Rockwell would make an interesting choice. Between Confessions of a Dangerous Mind, Moon, and Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy he's shown he's got the acting chops to do it. (Hmmm, the Doctor as a cross between Zaphod Beeblebrox and Chuck Barris.......)

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 11:41 a.m. CST

    Or, Frankie Boyle as the Doctor

    by DoctorTom

    if you want to have the movie get an R rating for language.

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 11:44 a.m. CST

    They'll make the Doctor about 17 years watch.


    He'll be even younger than Matt Smith.

  • Matt Smith looked like he just came out of high school when he became the Doctor a year or two back and it'll be a fuckin joke.

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 11:48 a.m. CST

    Thoughts on an "Untitled Douglas Trumbull Project".

    by Royston Lodge

    His description of the technology he wants to use to shoot the thing gives me uncontrollable nerdgasms. "Well, not so much an ecological bent as much as a survival bent. Having to do with reaching for the stars and why we would have to go to the stars." That'd be cool, but only IF he's scrupulously obsessive about the scientific accuracy surrounding HOW we would go to the stars. Silent Running fudged things a bit too much. There's no discussion in that movie about the distances the ships were travelling, how fast their were travelling, how long the crews had been onboard or how long the mission had been ongoing before it was abandoned, etc. These details have always nagged at me when I watch that movie. "Are we using up this planet at such an exponential rate with population growth and the depletion of the resources that we're going to have to leave the earth?" That'd be cool, but only IF he truly frames it as a QUESTION, and doesn't simply try to spoon-feed his preferred answer to the audience. There needs to be some genuine ambiguity to the question for it to make a truly INTERESTING story.

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 11:50 a.m. CST

    The baby from the e-Trade commercials as the Doctor

    by DoctorTom

    just because it would be hard to go younger than that.

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 11:53 a.m. CST

    Russell Brand lol

    by VimFuego

    Shouldn't be considered

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 11:56 a.m. CST

    And K-9 will be a robotic German Shepherd

    by gotilk

    Played by an actual dog with red eyes and antennae. And he talks. With the voice of Robin Williams.

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 11:56 a.m. CST

    Michael Cera would make the perfect doctor

    by Michael Lunney

    I hear he has a really smashing British accent.

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 11:56 a.m. CST

    Test audiences love the dog.

    by gotilk

    Go do re-shoots, we want more of the dog.

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 11:58 a.m. CST

    Gotilk - naahh, they'll have Kamelion instead of K9

    by DoctorTom

    They'll just get a Sony Aibo to play Kamelion. Ironically, it will work much better than the original.

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 12:08 p.m. CST

    Hugh Laurie as the doctor

    by rakesh patel

    it's a weird one, would they carry on a tv series is there's a movie? Convential wisdom says no. so you could have a big name actor play the part, and sign up for movies but no tv.

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 12:13 p.m. CST

    royston lodge

    by Michael Lunney

    Regarding your criticisms of Silent Running, does that mean you also found 2001 lacking without those details? To me, those details would only matter, if they were essential to the plot mechanics or subtext, and made no dramatic or meaningful sense without them.

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 12:16 p.m. CST

    And if it's like Harry sodding Potter..then fuck that!


    Doctor Who should be more grown up than that in 2011.

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 12:16 p.m. CST

    Who should play the next Doctor? For me, it depends on the medium.

    by Royston Lodge

    In my humble opinion: ON THE BIG SCREEN I don't like the idea of a big screen standalone "Dr. Who" movie to begin with, but if there must be one then the lead should be a dynamic "adult" (not too old, but not too young), who can hold his own in an action movie. Make no mistake, a big screen "Dr. Who" WOULD be an action movie, and would succeed or fail based on how well it performs AS an action movie, even if they try to frame it as a "thinking person's action movie". I think the impulse to turn it into an "action-comedy" would be a huge mistake. Doctor Who's enduring reputation is as a kid's show that wasn't afraid to be scary at times. It would be hard to translate that to the big screen, but it's really the way they should try to go If they do try to make a "Dr. Who" movie. As such, I don't think Simon Pegg cuts the mustard. Too comedic. Dylan Moran, as someone suggested, might work. He's dark enough but also non-threatening. He's also "charismatic" and "witty" without be "comedic", which would seem like the right way to go. He's not an old man like Peter Cushing, but he's no "Twilight heartthrob" either. ON THE SMALL SCREEN I realize that Matt Smith isn't scheduled to be replaced any time soon, but when he does get replaced I think they should follow the quasi-established trend of going with a younger "persona" (if not actually a younger actor) post-regeneration. I've said it before, but I'll say it again, I think Rupert Grint would be a PERFECT choice to succeed Matt Smith. Firstly, he'd bring in the ratings. Secondly, there's the running joke about The Doctor not wanting to be a ginger. Thirdly, and most importantly, the idea of The Doctor having a more nervous personality over time appeals to me. The Doctor's nearing the end of his regenerations, so it would be natural for him to be more nervous and uncertain of himself. It also follows the pattern: - The Ninth Doctor (Eccelstone) was unusually manly, confident, but also somewhat weary (having just fought the Time War); - The Tenth Doctor (Tennant) was more urbane, witty, and motivated by curiosity (getting a second wind, perhaps?); - The Eleventh Doctor (Smith) is more anxious and concerned about the future, and he hides his anxieties behind a layer of glibness and humour (natural as he's wrestling with his mortality). Rupert Grint as The Twelfth Doctor could be uncharacteristically (but understandably) panicky and indecisive. His mortality could be weighing on his mind just that much. Maybe he'd be desperate to find a way around the 13 regeneration limit, which could be the leitmotif of his tenure. For The Thirteenth Doctor, I'd go back to making him confident and commanding, as if he's come to terms with his mortality and he's accepted it as simply the natural order of things. He's stopped trying to find a loophole out of the 13 regeneration limit, and he simply wants to do as much good in the universe before he's gone for good. Then, maybe, the producers could provide a serendipitous way out of the 13 regeneration limit, but only if The Doctor didn't explicitly seek it out.

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 12:17 p.m. CST

    The Doctor should be at least 40


    And an actor with a strong persona.

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 12:20 p.m. CST

    Plus.......if it's anything like R.T.D.'s Dr'll suck.


    Or even some of the crap Moffat's done like A Good Doctor Goes to War. We'll have lesbian Silurians getting married to a housemaid or some other such nonsense.

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 12:23 p.m. CST

    Time War!!!!!!!

    by Tom Fremgen

    It has to be the Time War! Big ass blow out between the Daleks and the Time Lords! Paul McGann and Christopher Eccleston should both play the Doctor, with Eccleston getting the lion's share. If not that, then please no boring origin movie.

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 12:26 p.m. CST

    Arnold. With Eddie Murphy as the Master.

    by leonardo_dicraprio

    You heard it hear first.

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 12:29 p.m. CST


    by D_T what I would except from a big budget adaptation (and based on the article). Lead named Dr. Who? Check. Phonebox that's bigger inside vs. out? Check. Hot sidekick? Check. Then I'm afraid everything else would be Bond in Space, with big action set pieces, slow-motion wire-fu, etc. I also agree it's a largely unknown property here in the US. I wouldn't suspect much in the way of name recognition driving ticket sales, so I'd assume they'd need some kind of lead that would generate some revenue. Hell, if you're going with a name people know and given the director, just go ahead and cast Daniel Radcliffe. This just seems like a weird, bad idea. @royston lodge Enjoyed your analysis of the TV show.

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 12:29 p.m. CST

    mcgootoo: Not really, because 2001 did include the details.

    by Royston Lodge

    There are very few unanswered technical questions in 2001, IMHO. The human technology in 2001 was not meant to be interstellar, only interplanetary. We know the Discovery's point of departure (Earth) as well as its intended destination (Jupiter). There's no human faster-than-light technology involved, and the Discovery is depicted as drifting to its destination without the engines running, so it's all within the realm of plausibility. We know that the trip is long enough that it makes sense to save resources by putting some of the crew in hibernation, but also that the trip is short enough that Poole and Bowman can stay awake without going bugnuts crazy. So, most likely months rather than years. Now, I understand that what happens at the end is entirely debatable. It's not clear unless you've read the book that Bowman is sucked into a wormhole and pops out on the other side of the galaxy. So I agree that the audience is left with questions about what the hell they just witnessed. On the other hand, if they did read the book, then the wormhole is subject to the "God Exemption", since it represents hyper-advanced alien technology that we can't possibly comprehend. Silent Running didn't use the God Exemption, which is nice, and it didn't use Star Trek pseudoscience either. But IMHO if you choose not to use pseudoscience OR the God Exemption, it means you have a responsibility to at least TRY to answer as many plausibility questions as possible. IMHO, pseudoscience or the God Exemption is preferable to simply IGNORING the questions.

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 12:34 p.m. CST

    d_t: Thank you. Thank you very much.

    by Royston Lodge

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 12:43 p.m. CST

    royston lodge

    by Michael Lunney

    I can appreciate your enthusiasm, but I don't see how a discussion in Silent Running about the distances the ships were travelling, how fast they were travelling, how long the crews had been onboard or how long the mission had been ongoing before it was abandoned would have made it a better film. But I understand your position. Trumball's new film will hopefully be a game changing success, no matter what route he takes with the story. To me, I hope it ends up open to interpretation, with the same sense of awe and mystery that has made 2001 the timeless classic that it is. There is just so much we don't know about the universe, so much storytelling possibility, visual majesty and mind candy that remains untapped - about all that might be - out there.

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 12:50 p.m. CST

    Fremgen - IT can't be Eccleston.

    by Lt.Mindcrime

    Looking at the first episode of the reboot (I just watched) he saw himself in the mirror for the first the odds are it was a recent change...but yeah having the Time War would be awesome.

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 1:11 p.m. CST

    Anyone else think Who was best in the Pertwee and Tom Baker years?


    When Tom Baker left I think the show went downhill and drifted more and more into a parody of it's former self.

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 1:13 p.m. CST

    As someone who

    by papabendi

    has watched the series since John Pertwee, yet hasn't fallen in love with the post 2005 run, I'd like to see Who tackled in a more adult way. The show is essentially a childrens TV series, albeit one with scares. I do feel the concept lends itself to some really far out weird adult concepts and execution. I can't see it ever happening though. You just don't mess with a winning formula.

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 2:04 p.m. CST

    NOT following the TV series

    by pikazerox

    So no Matt Smith or whatever the current Doctor is at the time. I'm not terribly interested in a re-visioning.

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 2:46 p.m. CST

    Silver lining...

    by deathraycharles

    For my part, I've loved the Moff and his tenure on I imagine I'll be in the minority here, but if this means that they'll let him finish the story shortly after the 50th anniversary, I'm on board. I think every good story needs a proper ending, and for my money, I think Moff is the man for the job. I'd much prefer that to yet another Deus ex Machina in regards to regeneration. I say, go out with a bang and try for a big screen reboot, and while you're at it, I'll second the nominations of Hugh Laurie, Alan Rickman or Dylan Moran.

  • I think most people prefer Dr Who when it's more grown up and not childish. R.T.D. aimed a lot of his stories at 6 year olds.....Moffat has been slightly better (even if he has relapses with shit like A Good Doctor Goes to War).....but Dr Who's usually best when it's not made as a parody. Unfortunately a lot of writers and producers like J.N.T. have made it as a parody and kiddified since Tom Baker left.

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 3:28 p.m. CST

    Matt Smith looks too young moore12...that could be why


    there's something about him you don't like. All of the first four Doctors had a real gravitas about them....something Smith doesn't really have. He tries too hard to come across as eccentric too.

  • There's been criticism of the different JN-T eras (the tone has shifted several times under him), but kidified isn't one that I've heard leveled at him before. If anything, many of the complaints about Season 22 were about it being too violent. Topics like cannibalism (in 2 stories that season!) and body horror aren't usually what gets associated with something that is so-called kidified. If you have problems with some of the humor that were in seasons 23 and 24, you'd be better off blaming Michael Grade rather than John Nathan-Turner. Or, blame Eric Saward for being enamored of what Holmes did in Caves of Androzani and pursued in the following season as script editor, while ignoring other good things that Holmes would include.

  • I can't believe anyone would want to see Rupert Grint or any other Potter actors as the Doctor. That'll be fuckin crap with a capital C.

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 3:54 p.m. CST

    Give directing duties to the Thin White Dork:

    by Dennis_Moore

    Duncan Jones. Also, Nordling is knowledgeable in scifi?

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 3:54 p.m. CST

    Sean Pertwee would be a good Doctor.


    He can act......he's got a great speaking voice and he's got that gravitas needed for the role of the Doctor. Some kids live off their famous parents names..........but Sean Pertwee's his own thing. I saw him playing a Roman soldier/general recently and his acting was superb.

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 3:57 p.m. CST

    And like Tom Baker...Sean Pertwee's done loads of documentaries


    As like Tom Baker....he sounds great doing voiceovers.

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 4:03 p.m. CST

    Dennis Moore - that's not a bad suggestion

    by DoctorTom

    Duncan Jones definitely knows how to handle science fiction. I don't know if he's a Doctor Who fan, though.

  • Moffat's tweet: Announcing my personal moonshot, starting from scratch. No money, no plan, no help from NASA. But I know where the moon is – I’ve seen it. I think this points out the situation about the movie perfectly.

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 4:10 p.m. CST

    I'm talking more about the Mcoy era doctortom


    But I still think Dr Who started a downward spiral when Tom Baker left. That's not to say I didn't like some of the stories after though like Earthshock and Vengeance on Varos. But J.N.T. definitely made the show a bit too brightly coloured......look at Colin Bakers dreadful outfit for a start.

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 4:26 p.m. CST

    I'll agree with JN-T's decisions about Colin Baker's costume

    by DoctorTom

    I don't think it was really a downward spiral since Baker left - it's probably more appropriate to say there was a downward spiral when Saward got more control as script editor. Don't forget that JN-T was also involved with Baker's last season, and at the time people thought he was the savior of Who, dragging it away from all the silliness of the Williams/Adams season. General consensus is that the show had an upturn in quality starting with McCoy's second season, after Andrew Cartmel had time to sit down and think about what he really wanted to do with the series, and McCoy decided to go darker with the role.

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 5:01 p.m. CST

    I'd give a kidney* to see Rowan Atkinson as the Doctor!

    by nerdator

    Or Tony Head. Hell Robbbie Coltrane even. *Not my kidney mind you, an imported one from china. I hear they're pretty cheap, and generate a all natural zero calorie flavor enhancer for Coca Cola!

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 5:06 p.m. CST

    Yeah Colin Bakers costume was BAD.


    Shame really as he was a good Doctor...........but that costume was hard to get past. Mcoy's second season was better yes but I still didn't like the Mcoy years.

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 5:09 p.m. CST

    I really can't stand the whole Harry Potter phenomenon


    So if Yates or anyone else is thinking of going down that route.........then please fuck off and give Dr Who to someone who understands it.

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 5:30 p.m. CST

    I shudder

    by Martin Hogg some of the suggestions. Benedict Cumberbatch is the best of the bunch suggested so far, i think. I dont see why it couldnt run concurrently with the TV show, during the hiatus or something, with WHOever is playing the doctor at the time. As long as its NOT Matt Smith. I do like him as the Doctor, but i dont think he has the presence to pull off a full blown feature. Tennant and Ecclestone could. Even Mgann, but not Smith. Someone in the age range 40-55. Someone British, or who can do a decent british accent. Not someone too muscly. Sorry Fillion, youre out. Someone who can do dark, serious drama, and also do a comic turn. No previous doctors. The movie should be an extended version of the episode Rose (the first ep of the 2005 relaunch, which as others have pointed out Nordling, is an excellent place to start for non-whovians). Not the same story, but something like it, a new companion being introduced to the doctor in the middle of some alien shit storm. I cant pick an actor seems right somehow....

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 5:43 p.m. CST

    Do a comic turn blagwedge?


    The Doctor's not supposed to be a fuckin comic. I jest a bit..but there seems to be a certain group of people who think the Doctor has to be this whimsical, comical parody of a character. If you look at Pertwee and Tom Baker (plus Troughton and Hartnell) they had a sense of humour.......but they weren't some silly characters from a panto. They usually played the part straight and took the part very seriously (apart from a few humouress moments).

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 5:45 p.m. CST

    Rowan Atkinson's great....but not as a Doctor.


  • Nov. 15, 2011, 5:49 p.m. CST

    The Doctor should be played by a serious older actor


    Someone who's not too famous AND at least over 40. Matt Smith's watchable but he's not old enough and any younger would be ridiculous and a joke.

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 5:56 p.m. CST


    by Dr_PepperSpray

    That's a BAD HOLLYWOOD!! BAD BAD BAD!!. I don't care what the BBC said you could do. <P> Now you go lay down over there and think about what you did.

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 5:58 p.m. CST

    You want to see Rowan Atkinson as The Doctor? Ok, here you go...

    by Royston Lodge

    It's been done:

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 6:18 p.m. CST

    Douchebags love explosions.

    by Dr_PepperSpray

    Here's a little tip Hollywood producers so listen up. Douchebags, and their little Douchebag queens will watch anything with explosions. They really will! On opening night, they'll plop down that money begged out of mom and dad to go watch the latest, biggest thing. And as long as Adam Sandler isn't in a competing movie, they'll likely vote to see whatever explosion laden thing Hollywood has dedicated to the big screen. <P> Here's another thing, big franchises like Dr Who will bring out the fans. All of'em. They'll come out just because someone rang the Dr Who dinner bell. <P> So really Hollywood could just make Explosion the movie, call it Dr Who, flash some well known actor as the Doctor for five seconds out of two hours and the financiers would likely make their money back with a little on top. It's almost a sure fire bet so long as it's the brightest, loudest thing out there... and you're not competing with Adam Sandler in drag. <P> So my point is, given these two things why not Keep it in the world that's been created and give just enough exposition to make new comers feel welcome? Make a big budget extravaganza as the finale to Matt Smith's Doctor. It would satiate the uber-fan's appetite, who'll come back for repeat viewings, more blu-ray and downloads would get sold on the back-end, and there's enough material lost on the new comers that they'd likely buy or rent the previous series. <P> Ah, but this isn't about what's smart for the creators of Dr Who or anyone at the BBC, this is about some Director or Produers in Hollywood marking their territory on a property that couldn't possibly lose given the first two knowns. <P> I say fuck this. I've already suffered through JJ Abrams rubbing his ass on the Star Trek franchise, I really don't need to see Hollywood carve it's name on the Doctor's forehead...This can't possibly be good without those creatives involved with the television series being deeply involved. <P> However, if Hollywood just so happens to be listening: If you really want to make bank, just Cast Tyler Perry as the Doctor. No matter which way it rolls, you'll get paid. <P> I'm certain, somewhere, there is a marketing test for a new Dr Who going on right now with Mr Perry's name on it.

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 6:53 p.m. CST

    just because something is commercially successful doesn't mean that it can't be called "indie"

    by sasquatch_with_a_swatch_watch

    Indie also refers to aesthetic. Doctor Who still isn't accessible to mainstream audiences... and that's part of its charm. It still casts its spell over the sort of people who might like to try custard on their fish fingers. One thing you can say about the newer BBC version, is that while still aiming for some sexy East Enders audience with the direction, they at least kept the show WEIRD and INDIE. And that is the brilliance of Matt Smith, he brings back Tom Baker's Wonka charm without being so impish and manic like Tennant that you want to smack him in his twee head Hopefully they won't ry to ruin that charm, like the Star Trek and Batman reboots did, by going all Mountan Dew Code Red extreme with the thing If there was ever a perfect Who choice for a Harry Potter director, it was Matt Smith. Benedict Cumberbatch would be fucking rad, too

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 7:53 p.m. CST


    by Mullah Omar

    Big name star show up fresh, knocks it out of the park, and regenerates into the next guy before we even get used to him. MAYBE they will find a star willing to commit to a season-long run after a movie introduction, which is the best-case scenario I can really imagine if they're going through with this, and I'd be curious if any of the "bankable" types they're probably after would even consider something like that. I have mixed feelings about this in any case. I won't argue with quality if they pull this off in a satisfying way. But I have always considered DR. WHO to be a bit of a fringe show that wasn't so big that they had to compromise for a mass audience. If the movie is a huge hit and it lures in a much larger audience, I would imagine that the show would be dumbed down. (In my opinion, the modern show is already pretty dumbed-down compared to the slower-paced classic series, but I could see it going even further if execs thought it would rake in more cash.) I'll hope for the best but prepare for the worst.

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 7:55 p.m. CST

    I've seen Rowan Atkinson as the Doctor


    And to be fair he wasn't that bad as a one off novelty Doctor...........but he's a comic actor and I think some people think to be a Doctor you have to be or look slightly oddball and quirky. And that's not the case. Tom Baker is probably recognised as the best Doctor by most people but he looked fairly normal. He also didn't try too hard to be eccentric (unlike Matt Smith).

  • Nov. 15, 2011, 10:16 p.m. CST

    Rupert Grint: The Ginger Doctor

    by ArianeB

    What if the 12th Doctor finally gets his wish to be ginger.

  • Nov. 16, 2011, 12:40 a.m. CST

    Emily Blunt for the doctor

    by ThrowMeTheIdol

    Come on, you know that would be fun.

  • Nov. 16, 2011, 1:21 a.m. CST

    No movie Doctor will ever be a REAL Doctor.

    by Sepulchrave

    You don't get to be a real Doctor unless you spend a year or two in the role at least. The Doctor is much bigger than any movie. Face it: television has all but overtaken movies in marrative scope and complexity. All movies can offer now is thrill and effects: that's why you go to the cinema. I am far more enthused about the continuation of 'Game of Thrones' than about 'The Hobbit'. I know that the former won't be a disappointment, cause it has over 13 hours to get it done. 'The Hobbit' will be effects-driven nonsense, padded with inappropriate LOTR battle scenes, a love interest and a script pitched to the youngest peeople in the audience. Gaame of thrones will be filthy, violent, complex and written for adults. All big movies are now PG-13 at best and that's crap. I want R-rated entertainment, not just for sex and bloodshed, but for ideas and seriousness too. No more childish escapism.

  • Nov. 16, 2011, 1:23 a.m. CST

    You know how they always say Doctor Who is *for the kids*?

    by gotilk

    Can you imagine how the truly young ones will feel watching The Doctor on TV and then seeing another Doctor on the big screen(even if it's just ads/toys).... then go home and see another new episode of the current TV Doctor? It would not just be confusion, it would be dilution. Many would feel the movie one is the *real* Doctor, and the TV one is *the fake one* or just simply *not the real one*. Or if we're lucky(and if it sucks)... the other way around. Yet, there are reasons for wanting it to not follow the continuity of the TV show. If it's just absolutely lame and horrible, then not being connected directly to the TV show would be a good thing. If it's the best incarnation of Doctor Who ever made (many will disagree even if it is, let's be absolutely honest with ourselves) then what effect will it have on the show and ratings? There are just so many ways this can go wrong, and I try to be very optimistic about such things. I'm not what they call a *hater* or a nitpicker. Above all else, I don't want this movie project to have a negative effect on the show. I wish them luck and hope for the best.

  • Nov. 16, 2011, 1:51 a.m. CST

    sepulchrave I agree and disagree.

    by gotilk

    I agree with you about TV. It's arrived these last few years in a huge way, and not just because of HDTV. Quality has grown exponentially, while the quality of cinema has been going down pretty steadily. And I don't mean by way of budget. I mean quality of story, character, original or new ideas. And I too look forward to Game of Thrones more than the Hobbit. I just don't think The Hobbit will be nonsense. While I do think it will be padded a bit, I also think it will be good fun and emotionally satisfying BIG movie escapism done RIGHT. I agree to disagree. The pg-13 thing has done a disservice to cinema at a time when it really, truly does need to compete with the small screen for the eyeballs of real adults. It's an inappropriate cut-off age that stinks of good old American puritanism at its worst. Thirteen?? Come on!! When I was 13 I'd already seen so many tits and exploding heads (thank you Cronenberg... I guess for both) I could have probably drawn both photorealistically. And do I get aroused when I see an exploding head? No. Do I get aroused when I see tits? You betcha. Should I NOT??? R rated films should be seen by teens, unrestricted. It does NO damage. And in the case of sheltered kids, I think it may do some good. Sure you may get some unrealistic expectations in some more impressionable people, but society in general will do that WITHOUT titty flicks. Just watch some TV, a few magazine ads... that thing they call the INTERNET.... that's all you need to get a screwed up idea about body image and expectations of such. Even if they made the age 14 or 15 for R films, it would make said films more profitable immediately. And we could get back to making films that reflect a little more of reality, rather than holding back. Not all stories need tits and fucks and exploding heads, but many do. ESPECIALLY stories about TITS and FUCKS and EXPLODING HEADS! Networks like HBO and Showtime (now even STARZ) are doing all the work in those areas. Do you think Breaking Bad would be pg-13? I think fucking not! And they're on a network that censors. Think about that for a minute. THE MOST STUPID thing about PG-13 films is the NUMBER of tits and fucks allowed. Will your 14 year old be MORE damaged by hearing ONE fuck rather than 20? More damaged by a single boob than 2 boobs, for 5 seconds longer?? OF COURSE NOT!! How about if it had 4 fucks and NO tits?? Or 2 tits and NO fucks? Yeah, way to protect those precious extensions of your own ego.. ahem.. I mean children there America !! If the rating made ANY sense at all and just completely disallowed ALL tits and ALL utterances of FUCK then at least we could say that the rating made sense. But that's just not the case. A few TOO MANY shits and sonofabitches and you have an R. One too many dry-humps? R. It's not done to PROTECT anyone. It's to APPEASE. It's diplomacy. It don't mix with art. Never has, never will. It isn't done to protect children. Not even remotely. It's done to appease a vocal minority in our society. One that has controlled things long enough. And it's allowed because too damn many cowards are afraid of being *the guy that's against protecting the children*. ENOUGH!! Pissed. (counts to ten slowly)

  • Nov. 16, 2011, 2:39 a.m. CST

    Thanks, Royston! That made my day!

    by nerdator

    I owe you one imported kidney!

  • Nov. 16, 2011, 5:26 a.m. CST

    Hugh Laurie is a good suggestion IMO

    by brechtsky

    If it can't be smith, I'd prefer Laurie or someone new try their hand at it, rather than see tenant go back to the old shtick... But what I'd like most of all is if Yates would leave the project....

  • Nov. 16, 2011, 5:49 a.m. CST

    Major casting news + title revealed

    by SiouxCitySarsaparilla

  • Nov. 16, 2011, 8:44 a.m. CST

    siouxcitysarsaparilla: fantastic link - can't stop laughing

    by melonman

    Guaranteed to quell any complaints about casting. Because it could always be worse…

  • Nov. 16, 2011, 9:31 a.m. CST

    nerdator: I live only to serve. Just ask my cat.

    by Royston Lodge

  • Nov. 16, 2011, 9:32 a.m. CST

    I nominate Vinnie Jones as The Doctor.

    by Royston Lodge

    In your heart, you know I'm right.

  • she nice :)

  • - you assume the Hartnell character is not the first version of the doctor. If you back up and tell stories that take place before that regeneration it MIGHT work. The thing they want to avoid is a chaotic mishmash like trying to do an X-Files movie in the middle of the run of the show. Humm, I also wonder if they're going to stop the tv show in favor of movies ... Time shall indeed tell ... Maybe.

  • Nov. 16, 2011, 11:18 a.m. CST

    Unfaithfully yours

    by DoctorTom

    They've established that Hartnell is the first Doctor. Of course, they still haven't explained you all those people who were shown as coming before Hartnell were (the ones shown during Brain of Morbius). Fan opinion during the 90's (building off the so-called Cartmel Masterplan) was that these were identities of the mysterious Other who hung around with Rassilon and Omega, and had part of his soul woven into the Doctor when he was created in a loom. I don't see them going that way at all for a movie, though.

  • Nov. 16, 2011, 12:26 p.m. CST

    What if he is a younger version of Hartnell's Doctor?

    by Stabby

    I'm beginning to like the idea of an origin story for this movie. The early adventures of the first Doctor. Of course, it won't include the Daleks which would probably be a good thing, imo, even though I still stand by my idea to remake Genesis of the Daleks. That said, they will probably just end up going the lazy J.J. Star Trek reboot alternate universe/timeline route.

  • Nov. 16, 2011, 12:28 p.m. CST

    Also, maybe movie versions are separate from tv canon

    by Stabby

    after all that precedent is already set with Peter Cushing's movie.

  • Nov. 16, 2011, 12:52 p.m. CST

    There's nothing "indie" about Doctor Who

    by papabendi

    it's the biggest non soap show on British TV; massive budget, big star names (in a british sense), companion shows about the shooting of episodes (with plenty of lovey gushing), toys, games, books, bed covers, everything It's the Star Wars of british television in terms of marketing and spin offs. It takes more than a few 'off beat' story lines to make a behamoth like Doctor Who anything other than the massively popular main stream saturday kids show it is. It's not exactly Saphire and Steel.