?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

The Daleks Are Here

Speaking of Doctor Who...

 (Which we were.  At least in passing, in my last post, and some of the comments on it).

... if you have ever wanted to see the Doctor on the big (well, medium-sized) screen, we're opening a Dr. Who movie at the Cocteau tonight.  Yes, there was a Doctor Who movie.  Two of them, in fact.  I am surprised by how many fans don't seem to know that.



Peter Cushing plays the Doctor.  The Daleks play the Daleks.

(Maybe some hardcore Who-fan can tell me... when the Doctor's fandom talks about the third Doctor and the seventh Doctor and all that, right up to the present, how come Peter Cushing is never included or given a number.  Doesn't he count?  It almost seems as if his turn as the Doctor has been written out of history.  Was that done with time travel?)

LATER:  Okay, thanks for explaining, guys and gals.  I've got it now.

Comments

( 20 comments )
dazzedelf
Jan. 16th, 2015 08:30 pm (UTC)
Peter Cushing's doctor is viewed by most people as an actor substitution for Hartnell's doctor. Technically, 14 people have played the Doctor but there have only been 12 regenerations into different actors. (Including Hurt's war doctor)
Ronja
Jan. 16th, 2015 08:38 pm (UTC)
Apparently, he doesn't count.
"The movies, Dr. Who and the Daleks in 1965 and the awkwardly titled sequel Daleks' Invasion Earth: 2150 A.D. in 1966, are brushed off as not part of the television series continuity because they stray from the established canon. It was based on the second season of the British television series, and as is often the case when films adapt content from other sources, changes were made. In the films, the nameless alien Time Lord is actually a human being, born on Earth, whose last name happens to really be "Who." The relationship to his companion becomes a familial connection, and the TARDIS time machine becomes an invention that Dr. Who created. (The killer Dalek robots are as menacing as ever in all their cheesy goodness.)"

Though some fans seem to accept him as the Doctor in some kind of alternate universe within the story.
Robert Farley
Jan. 16th, 2015 08:45 pm (UTC)
The other doctor
The 2 dalek movies are basically a remake of a couple of the early Dr Who stories and not part of the main continuity, Peter Cushing's effectively playing the part of William Hartnell's Doctor. If I had to give him a number it'd probably be 1A. :-) Good movies though.

Hardly anybody's heard of Richard Hurndall or Michael Jayston either, and they actually played the Doctor in the TV series. (I may be a bit of a Dr Who geek.)
westeroswolf
Jan. 16th, 2015 08:48 pm (UTC)
I think he's supposed to be a human called Dr Who, not a time lord called The Doctor.
areacode212
Jan. 16th, 2015 08:50 pm (UTC)
The TV continuity and the Peter Cushing continuity were completely separate--that's why he doesn't count in the numbering. I've never seen the movies, but the way I understand it, he's a different take on the William Hartnell version of the Doctor.
improbableone42
Jan. 16th, 2015 08:50 pm (UTC)
If I am not mistaken, Peter Cushing's Doctor is not a part of TV-series canon. The filmes were based on TV-series, but had some differences. For example Barbara there is not Susan's teacher, but Doctor's granddaughter. Also in BBC series the Doctor uses name Jihn Smith if he need to pretend a human. Here he doesn't even have to pretend. Peter Cushing's Doctor is an actual human named Doctor Who. So it's most likely an alternative universe Doctor, who has a very slight connection with the 'mainstream' Doctor.
Drifty Gypsy
Jan. 16th, 2015 08:54 pm (UTC)
Doctor Who
Because to Doctor Who fans this movie does not exist. Or they rather it and Doctor Who and the Daleks did not exist. First his last name is Who and he is an inventor not a Time Lord, he is not "The Doctor"
chris_archer
Jan. 16th, 2015 08:55 pm (UTC)
Cushing's Doctor is the only Doctor who is explicitly called "Dr Who" instead of "The Doctor" and also is a human, not Gallifreyan so he's kinda out of canon.
rumhamrock
Jan. 16th, 2015 09:00 pm (UTC)
Cushing’s Doctor generally isn't considered to be a part of the series’ canon because of several key differences in the character. Notably the fact that his Doctor is a human with the surname Who, who invented his own TARDIS, rather than being a Timelord who stole it. On top of that, the two films he stars in are loose adaptations of early TV serials The Daleks and The Chase.

I’m not sure, but I think the changes may have been made to make the character more sympathetic and relatable to worldwide audiences.

There have been several attempts to tie in the events of these films to the TV series through the expanded universe books and radio plays. Commonly, Cushing’s Doctor is explained as an in-universe fictional take on the character based on the memoirs of companions and distorted accounts of his adventures :)
zelgarion
Jan. 16th, 2015 09:10 pm (UTC)
Cushing isn't regarded as canon but he would count alongside Hartnell as the first given those two movies were just remakes of Hartnell stories for the big screen. Different cast, bigger budget but pretty much identical story and characters.
Agustn Garro
Jan. 16th, 2015 09:13 pm (UTC)
Re Peter Cushing
Hey George, I believe the Doctor incarnation played by Peter Cushing has never been canonized by the BBC, mainly because they were "based on" the Doctor Who character, but not exaclty him (if that makes any sense), they even changed the backstory of the character by making him a human and a few other changes.
Heidi Hannibal
Jan. 16th, 2015 09:14 pm (UTC)
If I remember correctly...
...the Doctor on the big screen movies is explicitly stated to be human, not an alien. The movies, while sharing such elements as the TARDIS and the Daleks exist in a completely different timeline.
thremnir
Jan. 16th, 2015 09:20 pm (UTC)
Cushing Dr who
So far as I recall, the Dr. Who of the two movies is an eccentric human inventor, rather than an alien Time Lord, so he doesn't really fit within the overarching canon. As to the two movies, I recall the first one as being pretty good, the second one less so.
daveon
Jan. 16th, 2015 09:24 pm (UTC)
Basically the movies are not and we never considered Canonical so Cushing is never considered to be the actual Doctor.

This was pretty early on so they were still feeling their way, and it was certainly pre the 12 regeneration 'limit' and even the Time Lords.

One of the things to note is that they refer to him as "Doctor Who" rather than "The Doctor" in this.
Brian Golden
Jan. 16th, 2015 09:25 pm (UTC)
Not a Time Lord
The Doctor on the TV show and Cushing's Dr. Who were different characters. TV show Doctor is actually just called, The Doctor. The line, "Doctor Who?" is usually the response from a person the first the first time they meet him, and he usually looks at them oddly and says, "just the Doctor."

In the TV show he is also from a planet called Gallifrey that is inhabited by an ancient and powerful species known as the Time Lords. When they are injured they can regenerate to repair themselves, but in doing so they change their entire bodies. So they essentially become new people, but retain all their past knowledge. I always thought this was a brilliant way to recast an actor.

Another difference is that Time Lords grow their TARDIS (Time and Relative Dimensions in Space) machines. The Doctor stole his, and at some point it got stuck with the appearance of a blue telephone box when something broke. Cushing just built his I believe.

I hope I helped. Explaining Doctor Who is hard haha
JamieCherry2
Jan. 16th, 2015 09:27 pm (UTC)
I am a Whovian by marriage :) I believe the answer lies in the fact that the company which produced the movies (Amicus) bought the option to do so from Terry Nation and the BBC for ₤500 (info from Wikipedia). Not only were they not produced by the BBC, there were fundamental changes made to the character of the Doctor. Most significant among them is that in the movies he is a human rather than a Time Lord. That fact alone puts these movies outside the official "Doctor Who" canon. But believe me, if my husband and I were anywhere near Santa Fe, we'd be there tonight!
(Deleted comment)
(Deleted comment)
saxster
Jan. 16th, 2015 09:31 pm (UTC)
The Whovians blood is strong in your followers, George. (Count me among them. LOL)
( 20 comments )

Profile

Spain
grrm
George R.R. Martin
George R. R. Martin

Latest Month

November 2017
S M T W T F S
   1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
2627282930  

Tags

Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by Lilia Ahner