Before y’all get all riled up and such, this is not me about to defend something the world over said ‘no’ to, but neither is this me about to join in and condemn it, either. It is not a slight at the fans, and it is not a slight at the producers of the show. Instead, this is a short discussion on some thoughts I had on how both Russell T Davies (RTD) and the fans, collectively may be entirely missing the point here.

First, context, for those who don’t know:

In Doctor Who lore, Davros is a character who was introduced in 1975 as the creator of iconic villains the Daleks (about 12 years after the debut of the Daleks themselves). According to the story, Davros became a deformed, chair-using maniac after some sort of explosion (I’m not 100% up on this, but the point is that Davros was depicted as always using this Dalek-style wheelchair-like device).

In 2023, RTD wrote a mini-episode sketch titled “Destintion: Skaro”. The minisode, which is considered ‘canon’ to the main show, ‘retcons’ Davros into a non-deformed (or non ‘disabled’ person, as per RTD). RTD gave his reasoning and was quoted as saying:

We had long conversations about bringing Davros back because he's a fantastic character. Time and society and culture and taste has moved on, and there's a problem with the Davros of old in that he's a wheelchair user who's evil. And I had problems with that, and a lot of us on the production team had problems with that, of associating disability with evil, and trust me, there's a very long tradition of this. I'm not blaming people in the past at all, but the world changes, and when the world changes Doctor Who has to change as well. So we made the choice to bring back Davros without the facial scarring and without the wheelchair or his support unit, which functions as a wheelchair. I say this is how we see Davros now. This is what he looks like. This is 2023, this is our lens, this is our eye. Things used to be black and white, they're not black and white anymore. And Davros used to look like that and he looks like this now, and that we are absolutely standing by.

As you can imagine, this led to backlash, and strong feelings on both sides. Fans lashed out at what they perceived as over-sensitive, while RTD went as far as to mock fans who appeared to only be trying to engage in meaningful conversation. (I don’t like making jibes, but could the man who gave us ‘Midnight’ really not come up with anything better than ‘oh poor baby’ there???)

However, in the storm of media barbs, I’m looking at this whole debate. And I’m thinking something: are both sides missing the point here?

What if (and yes, this is arguably more controversial, but it’s a point that needs be made) the question we should be asking is not ‘how should Davros be brought back’, but rather: should Davros be a character who is even brought back in the first place?

Hear me out: If there’s one thing that this whole debate brings to light, it’s that Davros is, or at least has become a divisive character. This particular debate between the fans and RTD did not start with them — there has been debate over whether Davros represents disabled users (consider this: both Little Britain and Phoenix Nights, shows which are 20+ years old now, both referred to a character in a wheelchair as ‘Davros’, so the comparison (and therefore likely the question) has existed long before this). Knowing this, it’s almost baffling that RTD simply didn’t think to let past grievances lie, rather than let himself be perceived as some sort of wokeish Mary Whitehouse-type showrunner.

Furthermore, all that aside, does bringing Davros back even make sense simply from a narrative perspective? Sure, they say anything can go on a sci-fi time-travelling show, but what more does Davros have to offer from a narrative perspective, able-bodied or not? In fact, looking back on Davros’ character history, all he ever seems to have really done is sat around and get dominated by the Daleks (and maybe act as their scientist or whatever). The appeal of Davros, therefore, doesn’t seem to be his narrative as much as his cool design. And if there needs to be debate over his design, then maybe it would be logical for the creators to say ‘ok, he had some cool episodes. Let them episodes stand, and let’s move on with some fresh, new villains’ (interestingly enough, RTD is on record as saying that he wanted to bring fresh new villains [that said, he then proceeded to bring back Sutekh, the Rani, and Omega, amongst others]). From a narrative (and design) point of view, Davros is irrelevant to some extent: the Daleks debuted twelve years prior and had already by that time become some of the most iconic sci-fi villains of all time. All without the help of Davros.

To be clear, this is not necessarily my personal opinion, just some interesting thoughts I had as I observed the whole debate. What’s your thoughts?

During the classic first Tennant era episode School Reunion there’s a detail that is technically correct, however it is only inadvertently correct.

When the Doctor and Sarah Jane first encounter each other, they exchanged the following dialogue:

SARAH: It's you. Oh, Doctor Oh, my God, it's you, isn't it. You've regenerated.

DOCTOR: Yeah. Half a dozen times since we last met.

Now, back in 2006, this was technically correct, as from Baker to Tennant, that was 6 regenerations e.g.

• 1: T.Baker to Davison
• 2: Davison to C.Baker
• 3: C.Baker to McCoy
• 4: McCoy to McGann
• 5: McGann to Eccleston
• 6: Eccleston to Tennant

There we have it: 6 regenerations, half a dozen exactly, and everything fit nice and snug…

Then came the War Doctor, and messed everything up 🙄.

The inclusion of the war doctor in 2013 (first appearing in the Name of the Doctor) adds another regeneration to the list, thereby breaking the Doctor’s assertion of half a dozen. It’s still close, but not quite exact. So you’d think this breaks what the Doctor said, right???

Wrong.

The fact is, there’s one detail that actually makes this statement true: the five Doctors.

Most people are assuming that when the Doctor says this, he is referring to her travels with Tom Baker as ‘the last time we met’. However, the last time the doctor and Sarah Jane met (in the mainstream show, at least; we’re not counting comics/audiobooks which completely blow this all out anyway from all angles) was in the 1983 classic The Five Doctors. And what was the latest incarnation the Doctor was in at that point? His 5th: Peter Davison. Hence, the last time the Doctor and Sarah Jane met was when he was already in his 5th incarnation and had already gone through his initial regeneration. In fact, Tom Baker famously wasn’t even in the episode, aside from a minor extra-footage cameo. Revising the list, we can therefore see that the Doctor’s assertion holds correct.

• 1: Davison to C.Baker
• 2: C.Baker to McCoy
• 3: McCoy to McGann
• 4: McGann to War
• 5: War to Eccleston
• 6: Eccleston to Tennant

Interestingly enough though, this minor detail technically only makes the statement true since 2013: before 2013, there was no War Doctor and Toby Whitehouse (the writer of the School Reunion episode) and RTD had no way of knowing that Moffat would eventually create the War Doctor, but they also never factored in the Five Doctors to that comment at the time, which is a surprising detail to miss as it technically would have made the assertion incorrect if not for the creation of the War Doctor. If they had, then technically there would’ve only been 5 regenerations since — again, a close number, but still technically incorrect:

• 1: Davison to C.Baker
• 2: C.Baker to McCoy
• 3: McCoy to McGann
• 4: McGann to Eccleston
• 5: Eccleston to Tennant

What a strange inadvertent occurrence.

This is an update to Chapter 1 of short-ish original Doctor Who story I'm writing. Or trying to, at least. I'd love some opinions on whether or not I'm capturing the energy of the show in a kind of novel-form.

I have it up as a Speechify above which will narrate it, or a PDF: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1DO6ZoDWImaaAiaj8P1TUeukzXm6GbP5-/view?usp=drive_link

An original story, in progress.

If you’re a fan of the BBC sci-fi series Doctor Who, you may have been surprised to hear the news that the planned Christmas special for 2026 will no longer be made.

When the announcement was made on Wednesday, it also came with news that the team behind the show is leaving too.

This led to a huge reaction on socials, with some people believing that the show - which first aired way back in 1963 - is finishing for good, claiming that the BBC has cancelled it. But is this really true? BBC Bitesize Other Side of the Story has taken a look at the info to see if the Doctor has been exterminated forever, or has a chance of a whole new regeneration in the future.

What has been said about the future of Doctor Who?

A statement - also known as a press release - was shared on the official Doctor Who website saying that the 2026 Christmas special - which was announced last year - would not be made. It also said that the BBC wanted to carry on making the show and that different programme makers would be invited to bid for permission to be the new team behind Doctor Who and its next series at some point in the future.

Russell T Davies, the show’s chief writer, posted on Instagram that he was leaving Doctor Who too, while also saying that he had never written the script for the Christmas special and that he was “as excited as anyone to see what comes next”. Bad Wolf, the company which made the past two series of Doctor Who, also posted an image of the Tardis door closing to show that their time with the show had also come to an end.

Has Doctor Who been cancelled?

No, it hasn’t. When news like this happens, it’s important to look for primary sources of information. In this case, it is the official BBC statement about the future of Doctor Who. It says that the Christmas special is cancelled, but not the programme itself. It also makes clear that the BBC considers Doctor Who an important show and wants to continue making it, which is why other companies will be asked to come forward with plans for future series.

If any sites or posts are claiming Doctor Who has finished forever, it is speculation, not fact. Some posters could be exaggerating the news as a form of clickbait, to get more hits on their website or followers on socials. These posts could also be from people who dislike the show, its makers, or the BBC itself and want to spread disinformation - or fake news - about the programme in line with their own opinions.

Why do people think the show has been cancelled?

Doctor Who fans - like fans of other shows, bands or sports teams - can be very passionate about the thing they love. They could follow other fans on socials who think the same about it as they do. That creates an echo chamber - where you only see opinions that reflect your own, as served up by your social platform’s algorithms.

It could also be that some Doctor Who fans remember the show being ‘cancelled’ before. In 1989, Doctor Who stopped being made after a 26-year run and did not become a regular series again until Russell T Davies and the BBC brought it back in 2005. That 16-year gap is called ‘the wilderness years’ by some fans, when the Doctor’s adventures carried on in comic strips, novels and audio plays instead of on TV. There were some references on socials after the Christmas special announcement that another ‘wilderness years’ has begun, although there is nothing in the BBC statement that suggests Doctor Who is about to vanish from our screens for more than a decade.

Until the BBC officially announces that the Doctor is dematerialising in the Tardis forever, then the programme is not cancelled. The Daleks and the Cybermen are not safe from our favourite Time Lord just yet.

The Doctor tells Grace that in ten years Gareth will head the seismology unit at UCLA, and devise a system for accurately predicting earthquakes, which will "save the human race several times". The movie takes place in 1999, so Gareth will devise this system circa 2009. "The Enemy of the World", a Second Doctor TV story, in which Ramón Salamander comes close to global dictatorship through the use of an earthquake machine, takes place in 2018. Now, in all likelihood, the events of TEOTW are no longer canon, since I feel like that would have come up during the Thirteenth Doctor's tenure if Salamander was that significant a public figure. But I could be wrong.

So the question becomes: was the Eighth Doctor preventing those events or causing them? TBH it's kind of weird that he knew about Gareth's poetry exam at all.

Yes. It’s actually real.

Edit: it may have been an April Fool’s joke.

cross-posted from: https://feddit.uk/post/45752375

Episodes 1 & 3 of The Daleks’ Master Plan will be released on iPlayer 4th April.

Been thinking quite a bit on the Topic of what Doctor Who Episode would be the best one to show to People who have never watched the Series.

Previously my personal Pick has always been the 2006 X-Mas Special "The Runaway Bride" for both Showing some good Action, Humour, Doctor Whoisms and even the Darker theme of the 10th Era, all in a Massively Entertaining Package!

But I'm really curious, what would you Pick to show your Friends?

cross-posted from: https://piefed.social/c/bmoviebonanza/p/1795272/dr-who-and-the-daleks-1965-mastodon-watch-party-this-sunday-evening

Starring Peter Cushing, "the guy who blew up Princess Leia's planet!" Yes, Dr. Who and the Daleks (1965) is the movie for this Sunday's "monsterdon" watch party over on Mastodon, our fediverse sibling!

• Just start watching that movie this Sunday, Feb 22 at 9pm ET / 8pm CT / 6pm PT which is 2am Monday UTC
• and follow #monsterdon over on mastodon for live text commentary. For example, you can follow that hashtag here: https://mastodon.social/tags/monsterdon
• I usually open two web browser windows side-by-side on a computer. But you could follow the mastodon commentary on a phone app while watching the movie on TV or something.

How to watch the movie:

• tubi (availability varies by country): https://tubitv.com/movies/547338/dr-who-and-the-daleks

• uBlock Origin adblocker on Firefox should work for that tubi link

• archive (3 minutes shorter?): https://archive.org/details/dr-who-and-the-daleks_202505

• it's usually streamed on https://miru.miyaku.media/ at that time

• if you want to pay and/or watch ads, look here: https://www.justwatch.com/us/movie/dr-who-and-the-daleks or here: https://nobraincellsleft.github.io/JustWatch-Search/title/tm83604

• apparently it's free on Pluto TV but idk wtf that is. I guess you could give it a try here https://pluto.tv/us/on-demand/movies/685972fd2339944cec974634 but idk if adblockers work or they make you sign in or some bs like that

The story is based on the Doctor Who television serial The Daleks, produced by the BBC. Filmed in Technicolor, it is the first Doctor Who story to be made in colour and in a widescreen format. The film was not intended to form part of the ongoing story-lines of the television series. Elements from the programme are used, however, such as various characters, the Daleks and a police box time machine, albeit in re-imagined forms.

...

Halliwell's Film Guide described the film as "limply put together, and only for indulgent children".[12] John Clute, in the book Science Fiction: The Illustrated Encyclopedia, gives the film one star out of three, stating: "Many people would like to see the [Doctor Who] television series back; few mourn the long-gone films".[13] Radio Times was more favourable, awarding the film three stars out of five, commenting: "this spin-off lacks the bite and inventiveness that set the landmark series apart, unwisely injecting humour into the sparse scenario, and the cheap art direction is strictly '101 Uses for Pink Plastic Sheeting'. However, despite the many faults, it's still a fun ride for both the uninitiated and die-hard fans alike".[14]

In The Guardian in 2013, Stuart Heritage stated: "Cushing does his best, but he's not exactly given a lot to work with." He described the Daleks as "so pointlessly toothless here" and also criticised the "incredibly tedious" amount of Dalek dialogue to explain their motives, the portrayal of the Thals, and Roy Castle's performance, saying "to call him hammy would be to provide the greatest disservice to pigs."[15] Andrew Nette of the British Film Institute stated the film was "widely derided by many fans and critics", adding it is "certainly an uneven affair. Some scenes [...] still have the capacity to thrill. Others, like the final victory over the Daleks, feel rushed and flat. The Doctor's granddaughters are largely one-dimensional... The aspect of the movie that most antagonises purists is Cushing's Doctor." Nette described the film as having a "wonderfully pulpy sci-fi atmosphere", saying: "The highlight of the movie is its look... Many of the sets [...] are impressive" and "the movie Daleks are more impressive than their small screen counterparts".[8]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dr._Who_and_the_Daleks

In 1996, Paul McGann debuted as the Eighth Doctor in Doctor Who, a feature length co-production between the BBC and the American Fox network, more commonly known as The TV Movie.

This 90-minute feature was shot on film, and now, for the first time, all 219 reels of original film (totalling almost 200,000 feet!) have been pulled from deep storage in the US and meticulously scanned over 21 days, then restored by Paul Vanezis to provide a definitive 4K experience.

This new release is available on 4K in a limited edition steelbook with exclusive artwork, as well as standard Blu-ray, and includes a host of special features including:

• The ‘uncensored’ UK version
• The USA broadcast version
• Soundtrack in Dolby Atmos, 5.1 and stereo
• In Conversation with director Geoffrey Sax
• Sylvester McCoy and Janet Fielding featurette
• 3 New Featurettes with Daphne Ashbrook, Eric Roberts and Yee Jee Tso
• Two audio commentaries
• Isolated music score
• Production info text
• The Seven Year Hitch making-of documentary
• Paul McGann’s audition tape
• Alternate takes
• Electronic press kit and behind the scenes footage
• TARDIS tour
• BBC Trails

I've been looking into getting myself a Complete Physical Collection of Doctor Who and while everything 11th and Onwords I'll Likely go with Bluray for the Better Quality, I'm not sure about 9-10?

I did Originally Watch Those on TV Back in the Day, Noting that the Quality most Certainly wasn't even near HD. So I can't help but wonder if those Series where even made in HD in the First Place? If they weren't HD I may as well go with the Cheaper DVDs...

What do you Folks think?

Zai Bennet is the CEO and Chief Creative Officer for BBC Studios

No decision more neatly demonstrates the nasty headwinds facing scripted than Disney pulling out of the Doctor Who deal with the BBC, BBC Studios and Bad Wolf after just two seasons. For the show to continue long beyond its 2026 Christmas special, which is being penned by showrunner Russell T. Davies, the BBC now needs to replace some of that lost budget, which totals millions of pounds per hour.

Bennett avoids directly answering the question of whether BBC Studios will stump up some of the lost cash to give the show a long-term future – noting that he “won’t speak for the BBC” – but says “we’re all in it together” when it comes to keeping the Time Lord on the small screen for years to come.

“We’re a big important part of Doctor Who and are all motivated to make sure Doctor Who has a long and flourishing life,” he says. “We’ve got the Christmas special coming. After that, it’s time for us all to work on it.”