Re: Big Chief Studios - 1/6 Doctor Who - #04 Tom Baker
Look at the disparity between the BBC's words and Capaldi's comments - the former emphasizes the boldness, the time for change, etc all that happy horse manure - while the latter comments on her as an actress, lists the reasons why she is qualified.
If that doesn't speak volumes, I don't know what does. It shows the mindset here, and what is being broadcast by BBC. It's been very apparent Capaldi hasn't liked the Doctor they wrote for him, and, for the short of it, they've progressively Tumblr-ized the show through his seasons. That doesn't seem to be him in reality. Each Doctor is in some capacity representative of their actor.
If female Doctor would have been introduced 3, 4 years ago, I think it would have been totally fluid and just would have worked without a hitch. Kind of the way Star Wars did it with Rey (though that was already pushing the tipping point with society). I have NO problem with a female actress taking the role. There was a time I really liked the idea of Hayley Atwell as the Doctor. I have no problem with people of different beliefs, sexualities, whatever - live and let live. What I have a problem with is shoehorning these aspects into a show JUST to appease a very vocal group of people. It's this wild paradox, people want these aspects in shows and movies, but forcing them in diminishes the value of the individuality in each one.
Could you imagine having to write for a show where, before you get to even take the pen cap off, you HAVE to include a character that is X, Y, or Z? That's the attitude this show has taken, and it's unfortunate. It feels forced. Let those traits naturally be written in. Do we even need to discuss relationships? Nah. Then let's spend more time on other characterization. Yes? Okay, how do we write whether they are straight or gay based on everything? Can this character work better as a woman, okay let's do that (Ripley anyone?). Should this character be black, tan, white, purple? Yes/no, the setting does/doesn't support that. Stop restricting writers.
Sorry for the rant. It's been building up for a while since I've been watching the most recent season on DVR. This seems to be the only place where discussion remains pretty even keeled, so I knew it was safe to explore it a bit.
Very well said.
This was always inevitable, and as such, even though I was one who didn't see anything wrong with the current male character format, and so didn't see it as needing to change, it was always going to happen at some point. And I just hoped that when it did, it would be done because they had someone so undeniably Doctor-ish that gender didn't even really come into it. That we wouldn't get the 'female Doctor', but instead a new Doctor that just so happens to be played by a female actress, but that this was the least interesting thing about the choice, and not the focal point. That the casting was personality rather than gender based at the heart of its reasoning. And that's why I'm unconvinced by this because from what is being said by those involved the whole point was to cast a female Doctor rather than just to cast the Doctor, that was their 'bold move', and that is a big difference, as far as intent goes. And it's a difference that slightly bothers me, to be honest.
Add that to my personal opinion that Jodie Whittaker is a rather bland performer (not at all bad, just bland), and I'm just not convinced she has the presence, personality or gravitas to truly sell the part. She strikes me a bit along the lines of Peter Davison, fine, does the job, but just a bit unexciting really (I would have felt the same way about Kris Marshall, just for the record). And if all you are is the next Doctor, you could get away with that. If Whittaker had been the second female to be cast as the Doctor, it wouldn't be an issue, because the battle for acceptance would have already been fought, and everyone would have moved on, one way or another. But the first female in the role needs to be a bit special, they need to be like Tom Baker or David Tennant or Christopher Eccleston, someone who becomes unquestionably the Doctor in the majority public mindset pretty much right from the off, and I'm unconvinced that Whittaker has the chops to deliver that.
Anything less, and if ratings drop and people are indifferent, then the road may soon become very bumpy indeed. My worry is that Jodie Whittaker just isn't capable of helping deliver that gigantuan task, and of establishing the true validity of a female as the Doctor in the way that will be required for such a change to be seen as worthwhile and not just a bit of stunt casting or gimmickry. It's not fair, but neither is much of life. she has the hardest job in the role since Patrick Troughton took over and originally had to try to sell the idea that the Doctor isn't just William Hartnell, but can change and become someone entirely different. I hope she surprises and proves me wrong, but right now, she just doesn't inspire much confidence personally, and if it goes wrong - and I truly hope that it doesn't - I hope she's prepared, because things could get very ugly indeed, and she may end up as the new series equivalent of Colin Baker, and unfairly eviscerated and scapegoated just as much, from both sides of the divide. Because the press and the general public are fickle, and any sniff of weakness and they will turn. And most of those crowing this a victory and gloating today won't be there and will no longer care, because a great many of them don't even watch the show to begin with. They got their perceived win for the cause, they'll move on to demanding something else somewhere else now. It's the fans and regular viewers that will be left, so for their/our sake I just hope she will turn out to be a Doctor who does surprise, and becomes one that we can all believe in.
Time will tell, it always does.
I would love to see how the Pertwee figure is coming along, really hoping for a a Second Doctor figure announcement as well but I suspect that that is a long way off...I can but hope!! 
