Time Lord Tales

• http://cuttingsarchive.org/images/d/dc/1996-09-05_Starlog_231.pdf
• pdf help

[edit]

• Description
• Text
• Citations

• Publication: Starlog
• Date: number 231 (October 1996)
• Author:
• Page: 20
• Language: English

...I am writing this letter in response to the "New Doctor Who" article in STARLOG #227. First off, I want to say that I was almost beside myself with excitement when I found out that Doctor Who was being revived. Fantastic! I've loved Doctor Who since I was introduced to it in college.

I bought your issue after I saw the show, because I wanted to know more about this new Doctor, and was thrilled to find this article. But I was dismayed by the statement that "if ratings merit, it may spawn further TV films or a weekly series." I want to see a series! I only saw two ads for this show and would have missed it altogether if it had not been for a co-worker who told me about it. I realize a show based on a British format might have some trouble winning over an American audience, but I personally feel that, if given the proper chance, this show could go far.

As for Paul McGann's portrayal of the Doctor, he did an excellent job. The fact that he used Tom Baker's jelly babies was a nice touch. Even so, I felt his character was his own. He was boyishly exuberant, as he begin to revelling in his responsibilities, just as you would expect from the Doctor. He looks like the classic English gentleman and I really like that.

Speaking from a woman's point-of-view, I like the idea of the Doctor falling in love. It's about time! I always felt that Tom Baker's Doctor had a fatherly sort of unrequited love for his female companions and I, as well as others, really liked that touch.

Correze Ford

PO. Box 252

Westlake, LA 70669

...Doctor Who returned in the form of a $5 million TV movie on Fox. What a disappointment. The Fox movie is an utter disaster. The script is boring and bizarre, and the acting only middling.

The movie takes far too long to begin, and the regeneration is absurdly intercut with scenes of an allegedly comic character watching Frankenstein on TV. The new Doctor wanders around the hospital bellowing, "Who am I?" This sort of thing happened after some of the regenerations in the series, but never was presented in such an overly melodramatic manner. After finding some clothes, the Doctor promptly becomes romantically involved with a woman—something he never did in the series.

It has been suggested that Whovians will be upset by the Doctor's engaging in an overtly romantic relationship. I suspect that truly obssessed Whovians like myself will be far more surprised and disconcerted by the utterly shocking revelation that the Doctor is half-human—"on my mother's side."

The proper time for this to have been revealed would have been back in the '60s or '70s, when the Doctor Who mythos was still being established. It's ludicrous that such a central concept has been revealed this late in Who's history, and almost unbelieveable that the fact would not have been mentioned at some point in one of the 155 Doctor Who serials. Furthermore, this revelation deprives what is perhaps the most beloved and lovable SF character of all time of much of his alienness and otherworldly mystique. It seems to be merely an attempt to make the character more sympathetic in the eyes of American audiences, or even to duplicate the success of Spock.

Despite various good qualities, including the special FX, the TV movie is my least favorite of all the Doctor Who stories I've seen. McGann is my least favorite of the Doctors, although this is probably more due to the script than to his performance. Indeed, the Doctor and Grace spend so much time running around San Francisco that McGann never really gets a chance to establish this Doctor's personality. All in all, the main blame for the artistic failure of the TV movie must fall on Matthew Jacobs, its writer, who crafted perhaps the worst Who script of all time. For continuity's sake, if there's a new Doctor Who series soon, I hope McGann stars as the Doctor—his version is worth further development—and I would be happy if Daphne Ashbrook and Yee Jee Tso (who played Chang Lee) appeared too. The new series should be produced in a different style, one less American, glossy and brash. A style more British, whimsical, eccentric.

Anthony L. Bernacchi

P.O. Box 356

Arlington, MA 02174-0004

Disclaimer: These citations are created on-the-fly using primitive parsing techniques. You should double-check all citations. Send feedback to whovian@cuttingsarchive.org

• APA 6th ed.: (number 231 (October 1996)). Time Lord Tales. Starlog p. 20.
• MLA 7th ed.: "Time Lord Tales." Starlog [add city] number 231 (October 1996), 20. Print.
• Chicago 15th ed.: "Time Lord Tales." Starlog, edition, sec., number 231 (October 1996)
• Turabian: "Time Lord Tales." Starlog, number 231 (October 1996), section, 20 edition.
• Wikipedia (this article): <ref>{{cite news| title=Time Lord Tales | url=http://cuttingsarchive.org/index.php/Time_Lord_Tales | work=Starlog | pages=20 | date=number 231 (October 1996) | via=Doctor Who Cuttings Archive | accessdate=24 November 2024 }}</ref>
• Wikipedia (this page): <ref>{{cite web | title=Time Lord Tales | url=http://cuttingsarchive.org/index.php/Time_Lord_Tales | work=Doctor Who Cuttings Archive | accessdate=24 November 2024}}</ref>