Could a retcon be concocted that way?
Could a retcon be concocted that way?
Could a retcon be concocted that way?
On 1/12/2025 2:30 pm, Nomen Nescio wrote:
Could a retcon be concocted that way?Sorry. What do you mean?? Peter Cushing being one of the missing
Timeless Child incarnations?? (I could live with that.) Peter Cushing
being after DoctorJo?? (I could live with that ... but less so.)
What do you mean??
Daniel declared:
On 1/12/2025 2:30 pm, Nomen Nescio wrote:
Could a retcon be concocted that way?Sorry. What do you mean?? Peter Cushing being one of the missing
Timeless Child incarnations?? (I could live with that.) Peter Cushing
being after DoctorJo?? (I could live with that ... but less so.)
What do you mean??
The only trouble is that the Cushing Dr Who films were remakes
of Hartnell serials. You would have to explain why both Doctors
were present at the same events, doing the same things at
the same time, but never saw each other.
And that’s before you deal with the alternative versions of
Susan, Ian, Barbara, etc. Are they all Timeless Children too?
You could probably find a way to make it work, but it seems like
it would be a lot of trouble.
On 1/12/2025 2:30 pm, Nomen Nescio wrote:
Could a retcon be concocted that way?Sorry. What do you mean?? Peter Cushing being one of the missing
Timeless Child incarnations?? (I could live with that.) Peter Cushing
being after DoctorJo?? (I could live with that ... but less so.)
What do you mean??
----
Daniel70
In article <6afd0499af77f59751a59391ca1b5202@dizum.com>,
nobody@dizum.com says...
Could a retcon be concocted that way?
So... people thought the standard Doctor was the Timeless
Child, but really it was the half-human who also calls
himself the Doctor? Something like that?
I guess anything's possible, at least if viewers are
willing to ignore details.
Melissa
Daniel declared:
On 1/12/2025 2:30 pm, Nomen Nescio wrote:
Could a retcon be concocted that way?Sorry. What do you mean?? Peter Cushing being one of the missing
Timeless Child incarnations?? (I could live with that.) Peter Cushing
being after DoctorJo?? (I could live with that ... but less so.)
What do you mean??
The only trouble is that the Cushing Dr Who films were remakes
of Hartnell serials. You would have to explain why both Doctors
were present at the same events, doing the same things at
the same time, but never saw each other.
And that’s before you deal with the alternative versions of
Susan, Ian, Barbara, etc. Are they all Timeless Children too?
You could probably find a way to make it work, but it seems like
it would be a lot of trouble.
----
solar penguin
On 1/12/2025 11:22 pm, solar penguin wrote:
Daniel declared:Oh!! Is that right? O.K., then, that WOULD make things difficult!!
On 1/12/2025 2:30 pm, Nomen Nescio wrote:
Could a retcon be concocted that way?Sorry. What do you mean?? Peter Cushing being one of the missing
Timeless Child incarnations?? (I could live with that.) Peter Cushing
being after DoctorJo?? (I could live with that ... but less so.)
What do you mean??
The only trouble is that the Cushing Dr Who films were remakes
of Hartnell serials. You would have to explain why both Doctors
were present at the same events, doing the same things at
the same time, but never saw each other.
And that’s before you deal with the alternative versions of
Susan, Ian, Barbara, etc. Are they all Timeless Children too?
You could probably find a way to make it work, but it seems like
it would be a lot of trouble.
----
Daniel70
On 1/12/2025 11:22 pm, solar penguin wrote:
Daniel declared:
On 1/12/2025 2:30 pm, Nomen Nescio wrote:
Could a retcon be concocted that way?
Sorry. What do you mean?? Peter Cushing being one of the missing
Timeless Child incarnations?? (I could live with that.) Peter Cushing
being after DoctorJo?? (I could live with that ... but less so.)
What do you mean??
The only trouble is that the Cushing Dr Who films were remakes of
Hartnell serials. You would have to explain why both Doctors were
present at the same events, doing the same things at the same time, but
never saw each other.
And that's before you deal with the alternative versions of Susan, Ian,
Barbara, etc. Are they all Timeless Children too?
You could probably find a way to make it work, but it seems like it
would be a lot of trouble.
Oh!! Is that right? O.K., then, that WOULD make things difficult!!
On 2025-12-01 12:40:11 +0000, Daniel70 said:
On 1/12/2025 11:22 pm, solar penguin wrote:
Daniel declared:
On 1/12/2025 2:30 pm, Nomen Nescio wrote:
Could a retcon be concocted that way?
Sorry. What do you mean?? Peter Cushing being one of the missing
Timeless Child incarnations?? (I could live with that.) Peter Cushing >>>> being after DoctorJo?? (I could live with that ... but less so.)
What do you mean??
The only trouble is that the Cushing Dr Who films were remakes of
Hartnell serials. You would have to explain why both Doctors were
present at the same events, doing the same things at the same time, but >>> never saw each other.
And that's before you deal with the alternative versions of Susan, Ian, >>> Barbara, etc. Are they all Timeless Children too?
You could probably find a way to make it work, but it seems like it
would be a lot of trouble.
Oh!! Is that right? O.K., then, that WOULD make things difficult!!
Peter Cushing theorised that the Toymaker made the Dcotor relive the >adventures:
When Cushing was asked how his Doctor fit into the continuity
of the series, he said, "One of the few episodes of the Doctor
Who series that I saw involved a kind of mystical clown
(The Celestial Toymaker), and I realised that perhaps he
kidnapped Doctor Who and wiped his memory and made him relive
some of his earlier adventures. When Bill Hartnell turned into
Patrick Troughton and changed his appearance, that idea seemed
more likely. I think that's what happened, so I think those
films we did fit perfectly well into the TV series."
BUT, an in-universe solution already exists where the character Peter >Cushing was playing in the two movies was NOT the real Doctor Who.
Cushing was playing a human actor making the story with the real
Doctor's approval:
In the 2018 novelisation of "The Day of the Doctor", it is
established that in the Doctor Who universe, these two Dr. Who
movies are fiction movies, Peter Cushing was an actor, and the
actual Doctor approved of these movies. This has been described
as "corrective canon"."
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dr._Who_(Dalek_films)>
Peter Cushing theorised that the Toymaker made the Dcotor
relive the adventures:
When Cushing was asked how his Doctor fit into the
continuity of the series, he said, "One of the few episodes
of the Doctor Who series that I saw involved a kind of
mystical clown (The Celestial Toymaker), and I realised
that perhaps he kidnapped Doctor Who and wiped his memory
and made him relive some of his earlier adventures. When
Bill Hartnell turned into Patrick Troughton and changed his
appearance, that idea seemed more likely. I think that's
what happened, so I think those films we did fit perfectly
well into the TV series."
BUT, an in-universe solution already exists where the
character Peter Cushing was playing in the two movies was NOT
the real Doctor Who. Cushing was playing a human actor making
the story with the real Doctor's approval:
In the 2018 novelisation of "The Day of the Doctor", it is
established that in the Doctor Who universe, these two Dr.
Who movies are fiction movies, Peter Cushing was an actor,
and the actual Doctor approved of these movies. This has
been described as "corrective canon"."
The only trouble is that the Cushing Dr Who films were remakes
of Hartnell serials. You would have to explain why both Doctors
were present at the same events, doing the same things at
the same time, but never saw each other.
Your Name wrote:
Peter Cushing theorised that the Toymaker made the Dcotor
relive the adventures:
When Cushing was asked how his Doctor fit into the
continuity of the series, he said, "One of the few episodes
of the Doctor Who series that I saw involved a kind of
mystical clown (The Celestial Toymaker), and I realised
that perhaps he kidnapped Doctor Who and wiped his memory
and made him relive some of his earlier adventures. When
Bill Hartnell turned into Patrick Troughton and changed his
appearance, that idea seemed more likely. I think that's
what happened, so I think those films we did fit perfectly
well into the TV series."
A perfect explanation that works well.
BUT, an in-universe solution already exists where the
character Peter Cushing was playing in the two movies was NOT
the real Doctor Who. Cushing was playing a human actor making
the story with the real Doctor's approval:
In the 2018 novelisation of "The Day of the Doctor", it is
established that in the Doctor Who universe, these two Dr.
Who movies are fiction movies, Peter Cushing was an actor,
and the actual Doctor approved of these movies. This has
been described as "corrective canon"."
I'm sticking with the Grand Moff's version. It makes more sense
to me than any of that rubbish Doctor Who fandom spews out.
The only trouble is that the Cushing Dr Who films were remakes
of Hartnell serials. You would have to explain why both Doctors
were present at the same events, doing the same things at
the same time, but never saw each other.
Were they all remakes? For some reason, I had the possibly incorrect >impression that at least one of the movies pre-dated the Dr Who TV
series.
* SLMR 2.1a * You are now entering a School Free Drug Zone.--
In article <xn0pe27b95loaef002@post.eweka.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
BUT, an in-universe solution already exists where the
character Peter Cushing was playing in the two movies was NOT
the real Doctor Who. Cushing was playing a human actor making
the story with the real Doctor's approval:
In the 2018 novelisation of "The Day of the Doctor", it is
established that in the Doctor Who universe, these two Dr.
Who movies are fiction movies, Peter Cushing was an actor,
and the actual Doctor approved of these movies. This has
been described as "corrective canon"."
I'm sticking with the Grand Moff's version. It makes more sense
to me than any of that rubbish Doctor Who fandom spews out.
That works for me.
Peter Cushing theorised that the Toymaker made the Dcotor relive the adventures:
When Cushing was asked how his Doctor fit into the continuity
of the series, he said, "One of the few episodes of the Doctor
Who series that I saw involved a kind of mystical clown
(The Celestial Toymaker), and I realised that perhaps he
kidnapped Doctor Who and wiped his memory and made him relive
some of his earlier adventures. When Bill Hartnell turned into
Patrick Troughton and changed his appearance, that idea seemed
more likely. I think that's what happened, so I think those
films we did fit perfectly well into the TV series."
BUT, an in-universe solution already exists where the character Peter Cushing was playing in the two movies was NOT the real Doctor Who.
Cushing was playing a human actor making the story with the real
Doctor's approval:
In the 2018 novelisation of "The Day of the Doctor", it is
established that in the Doctor Who universe, these two Dr. Who
movies are fiction movies, Peter Cushing was an actor, and the
actual Doctor approved of these movies. This has been described
as "corrective canon"."
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dr._Who_(Dalek_films)>
Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote in
news:10gl35t$1o8k5$1@dont-email.me:
Peter Cushing theorised that the Toymaker made the Dcotor relive the
adventures:
When Cushing was asked how his Doctor fit into the continuity
of the series, he said, "One of the few episodes of the Doctor
Who series that I saw involved a kind of mystical clown
(The Celestial Toymaker), and I realised that perhaps he
kidnapped Doctor Who and wiped his memory and made him relive
some of his earlier adventures. When Bill Hartnell turned into
Patrick Troughton and changed his appearance, that idea seemed
more likely. I think that's what happened, so I think those
films we did fit perfectly well into the TV series."
This ties in nicely with both the RTD2 reboot (where the Toymaker said
he made a jigsaw of the Doctor's lives) and also a short story published
by BBC Books, where the Fourth Doctor was apparently kidnapped by the >Toymaker and everything after that was implicitly made up by the
Toymaker. (Not sure, but I think that one was Gareth Roberts under a >pseudonym?)
BUT, an in-universe solution already exists where the character Peter
Cushing was playing in the two movies was NOT the real Doctor Who.
Cushing was playing a human actor making the story with the real
Doctor's approval:
In the 2018 novelisation of "The Day of the Doctor", it is
established that in the Doctor Who universe, these two Dr. Who
movies are fiction movies, Peter Cushing was an actor, and the
actual Doctor approved of these movies. This has been described
as "corrective canon"."
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dr._Who_(Dalek_films)>
This reminds me of Lance Parkin's "Dying Days" novel, where it was
implied that all of the Doctor Who novels were based on true adventures
that the Doctor had, but some of the details of the stories set on Earth
had to be changed, so people wouldn't know it was actually real.
In article <10gn2d4$2eh8i$1@dont-email.me>,
Don Macron <notemmanuel@mail.fr> wrote:
This reminds me of Lance Parkin's "Dying Days" novel, where it was
implied that all of the Doctor Who novels were based on true adventures >>that the Doctor had, but some of the details of the stories set on Earth >>had to be changed, so people wouldn't know it was actually real.
NA or 8DA?
doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca (The Doctor) wrote in news:10gn394$1j6t$8 >@gallifrey.nk.ca:
In article <10gn2d4$2eh8i$1@dont-email.me>,
Don Macron <notemmanuel@mail.fr> wrote:
This reminds me of Lance Parkin's "Dying Days" novel, where it was >>>implied that all of the Doctor Who novels were based on true adventures >>>that the Doctor had, but some of the details of the stories set on Earth >>>had to be changed, so people wouldn't know it was actually real.
NA or 8DA?
"The Dying Days" was the last New Adventure published under the Doctor Who >license, although IIRC they had already dropped the "Doctor Who" label from >the cover art at that point.
I vaguely remember that there was a reference to "Ambassadors of Death" in >that story, and it ended with the Doctor implicitly having sex with Bernice >Summerfield.
The only trouble is that the Cushing Dr Who films were
remakes of Hartnell serials. You would have to explain
why both Doctors were present at the same events, doing
the same things at the same time, but never saw each other.
Were they all remakes? For some reason, I had the possibly
incorrect impression that at least one of the movies pre-dated
the Dr Who TV series.
Dumas Walker wrote:
The only trouble is that the Cushing Dr Who films were
remakes of Hartnell serials. You would have to explain
why both Doctors were present at the same events, doing
the same things at the same time, but never saw each other.
Were they all remakes? For some reason, I had the possibly
incorrect impression that at least one of the movies pre-dated
the Dr Who TV series.
That is indeed incorrect. The two Amicus produced "Dr Who"
movies were adapted from two First Doctor BBC television stories.
So in essence, they were cinema versions of the TV stories...
but the TV versions came first.
| Sysop: | Scott |
|---|---|
| Location: | Freeburg, IL, USA, Earth |
| Users: | 4 |
| Nodes: | 16 (0 / 16) |
| Uptime: | 246:08:20 |
| Calls: | 4 |
| Messages: | 14,713 |