Howling:What would you like to see for the 50th anniversary show?

I see that November 23, 2013 is a Saturday. I believe we all expect a spectacular episode that evening. Who or what would you like to see? Me, I'd like to see Carole Ann Ford. Boblipton talk to me 22:10, November 10, 2011 (UTC)

I'd like to see something like what Star Trek Deep Space 9 did, by inserting their characters into an old series episode. They could put Matt Smith and companion(s) digitally into scenes with each previous Doctor. He wouldn't have to interact with them, just observe them, but it would be a great way to include all the other Doctors. Oh and bring back Jamie too. Shambala108 talk to me 06:57, November 11, 2011 (UTC)

The Trials and Tribbleations approach might not work for Doctor Who as well as it did for DS9. Keep in mind, DS9 was celebrating the anniversary of what was technically a different show than their own. DS9 could honor TOS by having their characters travel back to an old episode, but since Doctor Who is still technically the same show I'm not sure that it would work as well. They probably already came as close to doing that as they're going to with Rememberance of the Daleks. Anyway, I'd definetly like to see Carole Ann Ford return, as well as William Russell (Sarah Jane could have been wrong about him not having aged), as they were both there from the beginning. I would also love to see Jamie return at some point, although since they would need to deal with his memory wipe it might make more sense to do that in an episode centered around him (like School Reunion was for Sarah) instead of bringing him back for what I'm sure will already be a big episode. They should also stick to the formula of their previous anniversaries and bring back any past Doctor who would be willing to come(and is still alive). They could use a bit of technobabble to explain why the ones who are way older than they were when they were on the show look different(like in Time Crash) or they can just ignore it and hope nobody notices(like in The Two Doctors). It should also have Daleks, Cybermen, Time Lords, the Master, Sontarans, Autons, or all of the above. Also, as long as Moffat is doing a story arc involving the Doctor's name, it might be interesting if we learned either his name or the mystery behind it on the shows 50th anniversary, although it might be best if he keeps it seperate from his main story arcs. Anyway, I'm starting to wish that the BBC had started the show about 2 years earlier.Icecreamdif talk to me 16:50, November 11, 2011 (UTC)

But, if it had, you'd have said exactly the same thing about 2 years ago! You're just impatient. (Mind you, you're not the only one.)

On the subject of Ian Chesterton's age: In the release of the surviving episodes of The Crusade (1965), William Russell played him as considerably older in the narration that replaces the missing episodes. As the "Releases" section of the TARDIS Index File article on that story points out, that seems to contradict Sarah Jane's reported rumour but there's nothing in the narration to indicate when it is set, so it could conceivably be well into the future.

"Inserting" characters into an old episode would be difficult to pull off technically, as well as dramatically. The aspect ratio has changed (from 4:3 to 16:9), so using old footage means either not filling the full width or (alternatively) lopping off the top and bottom of the frame. There would also be a problem with image quality, since the resolution has improved greatly. That's not to say nothing of the kind could be done, however. One way -- and there must be others -- would be to set an entirely new story in the same place and time as an old one. One of the hazards the Doctor and perhaps one/more of his companions would have to deal with would be the risk of meeting their earlier selves. They'd be trying to avoid that, so footage from the old episodes could be confined to longer shots, where there's room to crop the frame. An obvious candidate for the setting would be Shoreditch in late 1963. Not only did the first episode, An Unearthly Child, take place there but so (slightly later) did Remembrance of the Daleks. There'd be scope for "near misses" with the First Doctor and/or the Seventh. If they brought Sophie Aldred back as Ace (which would be quite possible), she too would have to contend with there being a younger version of herself around the place. Mind you, letting two Aces loose would be quite dangerous -- Shoreditch could get blasted out of existence even without a contribution from the Daleks.

One thing is extremely obvious, however: Trying to put everything into a single anniversary episode or even a two-parter would be foolish. Too many people have too many disparate hopes for who and what will reappear and the story would get badly overcrowded. Because the golden anniversary is such an important one, spreading the celebrations, and therefore the reappearances, over most of a series would make much more sense. --89.241.69.17 06:37, November 12, 2011 (UTC)

i like that idea 89, and it would make a lot of sense to have an aniversary year versus a single aniversary episode. just want to say, that if there was a multi-doctor episode, i hope it would start something like this: 11 and his companion at the time land the tardis in an empty meadow on earth or something and 11 starts complaining that that wasn't where he wanted to be. then 10 arrives with donna (i think she would work better for this type of episode compared to martha) and starts complaining similarly to 11 before donna points out 11 behind him. then 9 arrives with rose and a simmilar thing happens again. they mingle for a bit before hearing another tardis land and one of the doctors already there speculates that it might be 12 or 13 and then they are all surprised when it turns out to be a pre time war doctor. i just think that would be a cool opening if they did that. but i really don't care much what they do, as long as it is awesome (although i do hope they will continue their tradition of multi doctor episodes) 121.216.142.176 07:57, November 12, 2011 (UTC)

arg. i've got to remember to log in before posting! that was me, btw. Imamadmad talk to me 07:59, November 12, 2011 (UTC)

If they really wanted to do an episode where the Doctor runs into past versions of himself through archive footage, they probably could technically pull it off. A 90s episode of Star Trek was able to be set in a 60s episode, and they could just film those parts of the anniversary special in 4:3 if they wanted to. I'm just not sure if they could come up with a very good story to make that work. For the Star Trek episode, they didn't do an episode where a hundred Jem'hadar ships travelled back in time to destroy the Enterprise so that Kirk wouldn't be able to save the Federation in the future. Instead, they had a relatively useless Klingon travel to one of the silliest episodes of the Original Series, where he tried to kill Kirk by putting a bomb in a Tribble, forcing the DS9 crew to where the 60s uniforms and hang out on the Enterprise. For the Doctor Who anniversary though, I think people are expecting something a bit more epic than that though. People are expecting different versions of the Doctor to team up to fight old enemies and old companions to come back. That just wouldn't really work with that format. An anniversary year would be awesome, but unless Moffat finishes up his Silence arc in the next season, he may not want to spend an entire year focusing on the show's past. As for your idea about the different Doctors all landing in the same place-I hope you mean that some force brought them there and it wasn't just a funny coincidence. Back in the Classic Series, the multi-Doctor episodes were usually brought about by the Time Lords, although that is obviously impossible. They'll have to find some other way to bring different Doctors together. They could do an episode like The Five Doctors (but better) and find an excuse to make most of the reccuring enemies (Daleks, Cybermen, Autons etc.) minor enemies who are working for or being manipulated by one major enemy (like the Master, Omega, or the Silence). Or he could bring a bunch of old enemies back the way he did in The Pandorica Opens, but give them all more to do.Icecreamdif talk to me 18:34, November 12, 2011 (UTC)

Icecreamdif, "unless Moffat finishes up his Silence arc in the next season, he may not want to spend an entire year focusing on the show's past": Are you sure about that? The Silence arc is already pointing straight at the show's past with the question "Doctor Who?" and the golden anniversary isn't going to have taken Moffat by surprise. It wouldn't totally surprise me if the question/answer/silence stuff is the buildup to the anniversary. -- 2.96.24.170 (formerly 89.241.69.17) 21:54, November 12, 2011 (UTC)

just saying, i've heard rumours that 11 will regenerate during the 50th anniversary. i'm not sure if it would be true, but it would be a good time to have the battle with the fall of 11 at the anniversary and either reveal or deepen the secret of the doctor's name right before 11 regenerates, with all his past selves and many of his past companions arround him. also, i wonder how the writers would introduce the classic doctors/companions to the new generation of watchers, the kids who have only been watching since 2005 or later and don't know about the classic series. it might be confusing to suddenly reintroduce aspects of the classic series without 8 year old being left sayin "what? what!? WHAT!?!". lets hope the writing is as good as in school reunion with bringing back sarah jane, and that they will bring back classic doctors for a multi doctor episode. it would be a shame to just bring back the new-who ones. Imamadmad talk to me 01:28, November 13, 2011 (UTC)

Well, the 8 year olds who were watching The Five Doctors may have been confused about Patrick Troughton and William Hartnell(impersonator), but as long as they are already familiar with the concept of regeneration they should still be able to figure out what's going on. 2.96, if you had read my first post on this page you would have realized that I have thought about the idea of Moffat doing some kind of reveal about the Doctor's name (either actually telling us the name or explaining why it is a secret), and if done correctly that could be a very good story to tie into an anniversary year. I'm not sure if he would want to do that but it would be awesome if he did. Also, for the anniversary, he might want to bring back a more classic villain, like the Master or the Daleks instead of the relatively new Silence. Still, it is possible that the Master arranged for the Daleks to ask the Doctor his true name after the Cybermen had fired their truth ray at Trenzalore, and the Silence were just trying to kill the Doctor to stop this. (just for the record I don't really think that that the Cybermen have a truth ray or anything). Bringing past Doctors into a regeneration episode could be interesting too. It could be The Twelve Doctors, even though one of them is caught in a space eddy, one of them is lost inside the vortex, and one of them is played by a look alike, and the rest of them all sufferred rapid aging.(it makes about as much sense as only having two past Doctor-actors return in The Five Doctors)Icecreamdif talk to me 02:07, November 13, 2011 (UTC)

Icecreamdif, "2.96, if you had read my first post on this page ...": I did read it but I'd forgotten that bit by the time I posted my note about "the question/answer/silence stuff" -- otherwise I'd have added something like: "as you suggested above." Sorry. -- (IP address will have changed again, I expect) 89.242.71.175 07:38, November 13, 2011 (UTC)

Imamadmad, "i've heard rumours that 11 will regenerate during the 50th anniversary. i'm not sure if it would be true": Well, I've heard Matt Smith say he'd like to break the record for the longest serving Doctor and to outdo Tom Baker's 7 years, he'll need to keep going far beyond the anniversary. Mind you, the last actor to express an ambition to do that was Colin Baker, which proves ambition is an unreliable guide to what will actually happen. --89.242.71.175 07:47, November 13, 2011 (UTC)

well, at least matt smith has equalled colin baker so far and will beat him next year. one baker down, one to go :) Imamadmad talk to me 10:17, November 13, 2011 (UTC)

Some nice ideas here, but I have a couple of oddballs myself. First, I'd like to see what would happen if they moved back to a half hour slot -- twice the episodes, so that some of the stories can get their proper lengths -- some have definitely felt like they could use another half hour this season. My other oddball ideas is I'd like to see the old actors back.... but why do they have to be in their original roles? Let 'em come back as villains and have a little fun. Oh yeah, Graeme Harper to direct. Boblipton talk to me 20:39, November 13, 2011 (UTC)

Bringing back old actors to play new roles might work for the actors who are old enough so that they look significantly different from their previous role. Or they could just say that Omega still looks like Peter Davison. Some of the episodes this season have definetly felt like they could have been longer. I don't know why they didn't just make them longer though. There have been plenty of episodes of the new series that have been longer than the normal 45 minutes, especially finales. The Wedding of River Song was definetly to short. Matt Smith isn't nearly as obnoxious as Colin Baker was, and a far as I know the ratings aren't as bad as they were during the 80s, so I can't see them kicking Smith out like they did to Baker. We really do need Doctors who will stay around for longer now that we're approaching 13, so I'd like to see Matt Smith break Tom Baker's record. 89, it's fine. I don't really expect you to remember everything that I've ever written. No need to apologize.Icecreamdif talk to me 21:09, November 13, 2011 (UTC)

"Matt Smith isn't nearly as obnoxious as Colin Baker was": I assume you mean CB's portrayal of the Doctor was obnoxious, rather than the actor himself. (I've never met him but many who have have said he's nothing like that in real life.) At the time, I thought his portrayal of the Doctor would have worked with a stronger companion -- someone more like Mary Tamm's version of Romana (often referred to as Romana I) -- so the two of them could strike sparks off each other, like flint and steel. The pairing of CB's Doctor and Nicola Bryant's Peri was more like flint and blancmange; strike those together and all you get is a mess! Peri worked fine as a companion to Peter Davison's Doctor but was simply wrong for CB's Doctor. The current team is far, far better -- especially (but not only) when River is involved.

"We really do need Doctors who will stay around for longer now that we're approaching 13": We also need them to come up with a way out of the 12-regeneration limit -- a way that will actually be accepted, not just a silly retort to a character's question. Personally, I can't see how that could be done without addressing the question of why (in-universe reason) there was a limit, in the first place.

Oh, and don't worry: I won't remember everything that you've ever written. I won't even remember everything that I've ever written. :) -- (formerly 89.242.71.175, among other IP addresses) 89.241.76.99 05:23, November 14, 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I guess I should have phrased that "11 isn't nearly as obnoxious as 6 was." I have no idea what the actors were like, but it is hard to imagine Colin Baker, or anyone, being as obnoxious as the Sixth Doctor. Another companion might have worked better for Colin Baker's Doctor, but really the essential problem was the guy was a jerk. I mean, the first thing he did upon regenerating was to correct a confused Peri's grammar, and then he spent pretty much his entire tenure bullying her. If the rest of the new series actors stay for a long time like T. Baker did, then the new series will have been going on for more than 20 years anyway, at which point it might be time to end the new series anyway. Personally, I think that the 13th Doctor's death might make a good end to the series, and I think it would cheapen the Doctor's character if they got rid of the regeneration limit and made him essentially immortal. That's what we have Captain Jack for. Anyway, back to the main subject here. Maybe they can bring C. Baker back for the 50th anniversary, and have him hang out with Amy. She would probably be able to handle his obnoxiousness much better than Peri did.Icecreamdif talk to me 06:26, November 14, 2011 (UTC)

donna+amy vs 6? now that's something i want to see! hopefully, they will bring back all the doctors (with alternative actors for some of the older [younger?] doctors) as well as their main/the writer's favouite copanions. i would love to see how different companions react to different doctors! Imamadmad talk to me 07:34, November 14, 2011 (UTC)

I don't really see the point of recasting the Doctors. While Richard Hurndall was a fair impression of William Hartnell, it always felt a bit pointless to me to bring back the first Doctor but not William Hartnell. In my opinion, that special should really have been The Three Doctors (with a different title obviously) since there was little point in recasting Hartnell, and T. Baker's "inclusion" was beyond pointless. Recasting Hartnell once was pointless enough, but I can't picture 2 or 3 (easily 2 of the best Doctors ever) being played by anyone other than Troughton and Pertwee. It's really too bad that they're dead, because having the two on screen at the same time was by far the best part of any anniversary special. As for the actors who are much older than they were when they played the Doctor-well, that didn't stop them from including Patrick Troughton in The Two Doctors, and Time Crash proved that it doesn't take too much technobabble to explain why a past version of the Doctor can look older than they did when they regenerated. It could also be cool if River got to meet some of the classic Doctors (seeing her flirt with the First Doctor would be funny), and if all of the characters from the past lost their memories of the special (as clearly happenned in The Five Doctors), it wouldn't cause any continuity errors with Silence in the Library.Icecreamdif talk to me 14:12, November 14, 2011 (UTC)

Icecreamdif: Nor do I see any point recasting Doctors. Richard Hurndall wasn't an outright disaster but he wasn't particularly good as a substitute for William Hartnell -- too amiable, for one thing.

The 6th Doctor did come across as a jerk -- really as a bully -- but it seemed to me that what he was looking for was an equal, which Peri wasn't and couldn't ever be. However, someone (probably several someones) scripted and directed the character as an arrogant bully and scripted and directed Peri as a whining brat, so that's what we got.

Imamadmad: Never mind Donna and Amy vs 6, try River vs 6! She's sharp enough with 11, who's much less full of himself.

The big problem with bringing back favourite companions from the "classic" series is, of course, age (and, sadly, death). It worked with Sarah Jane because Elisabeth Sladen had aged well and was a really, really good actor but we've lost her now, which is horrible but irremediable. Jo Grant (Jones) worked OK in SJA's The Death of the Doctor -- but only because she was allowed to be a batty old woman having a "last fling" at adventuring. Ace would work because Sophie Aldred is still young enough. Between Sarah Jane and Ace, however, there aren't any really good companions who plausibly could be brought back. Romana was a Time Lord, so she's ruled out unless they want to destroy the "Last of the Time Lords" thing. Leela was last heard of permanently settled on Gallifrey, so she'd be difficult to retrieve. Nyssa and Tegan might be possible, although neither Sarah Sutton nor Janet Fielding is still acting -- and were they "favourite companions", anyway? Neither Peri nor Mel was anywhere near a favourite companion. Of the males: Harry Sullivan is dead (and Ian Marter, who played him, died in 1986); Adric was detested and is dead; Turlough was never a favourite but might be possible. Going back before Sarah Jane simply makes the age problem worse, and bringing Susan back has exactly the same disadvantages as bringing Romana back. --2.101.54.208 20:34, November 14, 2011 (UTC)

Which is why having them play different characters would work. Boblipton talk to me 21:01, November 14, 2011 (UTC)

And the strong association with their former characters is why, in the great majority of cases, at least, it wouldn't. --2.101.54.208 21:34, November 14, 2011 (UTC)

Unless their resemblance was a plot point. Why does the Doctor keep seeing people who resemble old companions? Boblipton talk to me 21:42, November 14, 2011 (UTC)

That's a good question? Why does the Doctor keep seeing people who resemble his companions. Princess Strella, Ann Talbot-it's pretty weird. Anyway, I don't think that that would really be a good plot point. If you're going to bring the actors back anyway, then why not bring them back as the characters that they're famous for playing. I don't know about you, but I wouldn't be happy if Tom Baker came back in a supporting role, but the Fourth Doctor didn't. Susan and Romana can both come back as long as it's given enough technobabble(which is, after all the only reason the Time Lords can't come back in the first place). As long as they're having the Doctor break the laws of time and go back in his own timestream anyway(which is almost inevitable), he could break the laws of time and hang out with Romana and Susan. Presumably they both died either during or before the Time War, but that's the beauty of time travel. To the Doctor, nobody's really dead, even if the laws of time prevent him from ever seeing them again. Besides, Romana could have easily survived the Time War since she was off in 0-space the last time we saw her. Jo was said to have been adventuring with Cliff the entire time during the Sarah Jane episode, just as she was planning to in The Green Death. Bringing her back could still work with that characterization. It doesn't really matter how old any of the characters are as long as the writers can come up with a reasonable excuse for them to be fighting aliens or whatever in their old age. After all, Lethbridge Stewart was just as bad-ass as ever in his Sarah Jane episode, and he was about a million years old at that point. Sarah Jane was in her 60s, and she got her own spin-off. Besides, the older companions don't have to do all the running around and fighting aliens. They can be given more supporting roles. Zoe, for example, can be just as useful as ever with her photographic memory and mathematic skills(if they can find a believable enough solution for her to regain her memory of her time as a companion anyway). Jo proved that she was still a good companion in Death to the Doctor, and she's younger than Sarah Jane was anyway. If they really wanted to bring Leela back, they could easily say that she left Gallifrey before the Time War, and apart from Adric they wouldn't have any problem bringing back any of the later classic companions. Well, it might be hard to bring K9 back without bringing Luke in, which they may not want to do. If I could forgive any companion for whining too much, it would be Peri-I mean, can you really blame her for whining the way that the Sixth Doctor treats her. It's not really her fault-when she joined the Doctor, he was still in his fifth incarnation and was infinitely nicer. Then he regenerated and immediately starts acting like a jerk to her, and even tries to kill her at first. All things considered, she actually handled it pretty well. Still, she wasn't exactly one of the best companions the Doctor's ever had, and I don't think that anyone would miss her if she didn't show up for the anniversary. It's too bad that the Brigadier can't show up, since he was by far the best companion ever, but if we can't have the head of UNIT then I'm sure the head of Torchwood can still make an appearance. Now that Jack's back on Earth, and immortal again, I wouldn't be surprised to see him in the anniversary special. As for Ian, he may be ancient at this point, but can they really pass the opportunity to bring back the show's first ever companion on the show's 50th anniversary? Also, keep in mind, just a couple of years ago we had an eighty-something companion who was even in all the action scenes. Besides, think how hilarious it would be to see the Doctor as a relatively young guy with Ian as an old man.Icecreamdif talk to me 21:58, November 14, 2011 (UTC)

The only real reason for bringing the actors of former companions back is their association with the characters they played. Icecreamdif is spot on in saying it would upset the (older) fans if the actors came back in other roles. The only way anything like that has worked in the past was the way it was done in Silver Nemesis (25th anniversary). In that, the gaggle of tourists being shown round Windsor Castle consisted of people associated with the show who'd not otherwise have appeared, such as Nicholas Courtney (wearing a flat cap, face not seen). That was a "thank you" to those individuals and wasn't done for the fans -- most of whom didn't know anything about it until the DVD extras revealed it.

The technobabble isn't the problem with bringing Susan and Romana, or any other Time Lord, back. Technobabble can always be managed. The problem is that no Time Lord can be brought back without ending the "Last of the Time Lords" thing. If the makers of the show don't mind doing that, there's no problem at all; if they do mind, they can't bring Time Lords back unless they also have a way of getting rid of them again. It worked in The End of Time because they did have a way of getting rid of them again and a good reason for doing that. If only Susan and Romana returned, why get rid of them again? Of course, it might be possible to have the Time Lords make another attempt to break out of the time lock and have Susan and Romana (and possibly others) sacrifice themselves to help the Doctor prevent it -- but that would just be a re-run of The End of Time and it wouldn't work because it would be an obvious re-run. --2.101.54.208 23:10, November 14, 2011 (UTC)

Using technobabble to bring Susan and Romana back could work as long as the technobabble makes it clear that bringing them back is something that should be impossible, but is happenning somehow, and is impossible to ever happen again. It could work if it is the Susan and Romana from before the Time War, who are restricted from interacting with the Doctor not by the time lock but because he can't go back within his own timestream. If he already knows how they die, then normally he can't just go back to the 22nd century, or to 1963 to hang out with Susan, but since that law of time is generally broken in the anniversary specials anyway (and has to be to bring back past Doctors), bringing back Susan and Romana could work. Also, having the Time Lords try to break out of the time lock again wouldn't work anyway. It was pretty clear that Rassilon didn't have a backup plan, and according to the Oracle the Eighth Doctor destroyed the Time Lords the next day. The story will have to be something completely different the next time they bring back the Time Lords.Icecreamdif talk to me 23:28, November 14, 2011 (UTC)

ummm, it wouldn't need any extra technobable or bizzar explanation to explain why dead and timelord companions come back with the doctor. it would be for similar reasons as in time crash that they come out of the time lock, and the companions just come from the same point as the doctor is in their timestream. as a more recent example, it would be like saying they couldn't bring back donna because of the memory loss part, but if the doctor's run into eachother when 10 and donna have only just left the library or something, she would still have all her memories up to that point in the timestream. so technically, any companion can return aslong as there is an actor to play them and they come from a relevant point in the doctor's timestream. Imamadmad talk to me 06:46, November 15, 2011 (UTC)

Time Crash was only a couple of minutes long, but even that required a little bit of a technobabble explanation, and they didn't even get into the time lock. Mainly, I think, the time lock doesn't actually prevent the Doctor from, for example, travelling back to Earth on New Year's Eve 1999, and and talking to the Master while he's posessing Bruce. It's the same laws of time that always existed that prevent that. Those laws prevent the Doctor from interacting with Time Lords who haven't experienced the Time War yet, and the only Time Lords that have already experienced the war are dead(except the Master-we all know he's still alive-somehow). However, by definition, the Doctor is already breaking these laws to interact with his past selves, so they could bring Susan and Romana back the same way. Most companions, it is obviously easier to say that this is them from after they left the Doctor, mainly because the actors have aged. To bring back Donna, it is easier to just have her travelling with the Tenth Doctor, but that doesn't work as well for Jamie and Zoe since they are clearly older than they were in The War Games. Icecreamdif talk to me 21:26, November 15, 2011 (UTC)

I think it would be quite cool to reveal the Doctor's name in this episode. I also wanna see:

All possible Doctors

Matt Smith Regenerate into the twelfth Doctor

Daleks

Cybermen

The master

Silence

Sontarons Vs. Rutans

Autons

U.N.I.T

Cpt. Jack

Jo Grant

Ace

Peri

Adric

Leela

Rose

Martha + Mickey

Amy + Rory

With their appropriate Doctors of course.

Caged1, 17:09, 20th Nov 2011

I hope you don't want to see all of that at once. The only thing I disagree with is Sontarans Vs. Rutans-that would probably be better if it was given its own episode, not distracted by the 50th anniversary.Icecreamdif talk to me 19:11, November 20, 2011 (UTC)

well, if there is an aniversary year instead of episode, maybe we could have an episodde all about sontarans vs rutans. but i agree, all "iconic" dw monsters should come back for the aniversary as well as ALL the doctors + their companions from that part of their timeline. and captain jack needs to come back! (maybe with 9 and rose...) i wonder if the show's creators ever come here for ideas. they would certinally get a lot! Imamadmad talk to me 01:04, November 21, 2011 (UTC)

Unless they do an anniversary year, the only way that they could possibly bring back all the monsters would be to either do something like The Pandorica Opens and The Five Doctors, where they all show up, but only a handful actually do anything. Daleks, Cybermen, the Master, and maybe Sontarans should definetly show up, but even just those would be a bit much for one episode. It also wouldn't be practical to bring back all the Doctors, since three of them are dead, and most of the rest are much older than they were when their Doctor died. You have a similar problem with the companions, who are mostly much older than when they left the Doctor. (though Ace gets around this since we don't know how long she stayed in between Survival and the TV movie). The Five Doctors got around both of these problems though. There solution to the companion problem would work-just pulling them out of time from a point after they left the Doctor. Their solution to bringing back the past Doctors, however, would not work as well. Would anybody really be interested in seeing anybody other than Patrick Troughton and Jon Pertwee playing 2 and 3? The whole point of bringing past characters back in the anniversary specials is to bring the old actors back. Their solution to Tom Baker not showing up is even more pointless-apart from the fact that I doubt that they could find unused footage of all the Doctors who are too old or too dead to show up, there is really no point in bringing them back just to have them "stuck in a time eddy." Of course, it isn't impossible for the old actors to come back to play the roles. We never saw McGann regenerate, so it doesn't matter how old he is, and bringing back Eccleston and Tennant at this point wouldn't really be to difficult. The ones who are visibly older, however, might be a bit harder-they just ignored it in The Two Doctors, which was kind of dumb(they could have given Troughton a wig, or dyed his hair, or something), and then they came up with a technobabble explanation in Time Crash, which might be their best bet. While I would like to see as many past Doctors as possible, all of them might be a bit much. I also wouldn't really like to see Matt Smith regenerate into the Twelfth Doctor-well obviouly I would eventually, but not for a few more years. He's a pretty good Doctor, though not as good as his predeccessor, and we need Doctors who will stay around for longer than a few years(like T. Baker did).Icecreamdif talk to me 03:27, November 21, 2011 (UTC)

well, david tennant stayed arround for 5 years and if matt smith stays until the end of 2013, he would have stayed for 4 years. that's still a pretty long time. anyway, 7 years is a bit long imo. Imamadmad talk to me 06:37, November 21, 2011 (UTC)

Well, I think all we need for a good anniversary is Doctors 4-8 and 10-11 (Baker has said he'd love to do it, but Eccles says otherwise), Some good-ol' Mondasion Cybermen, a bitty the Master, and a good amount of classic companions (I.e. Ian, Susan, Lela, Ace, etc, I don't care for most new companions). Oh, and I see it entirely likely that Matt's gonna be around past 2013. --OttselSpy25 talk to me 06:46, November 21, 2011 (UTC)

"I also wouldn't really like to see Matt Smith regenerate ... for a few more years": No. We really could do with him lasting a fair bit longer. I'm not sure if David Tennant was better or if it's just that I liked the style of the stories better but MS is pretty good. As the Doctor has said more than once, the problem with regeneration is that you never know what you might end up with. Anyway, regenerations have something in common with many other things: if they happen too often, they get devalued.

Icecreamdif's more general point that we don't (or at least shouldn't) want the anniversary story to be so overcrowded with past Doctors, companions and monsters that there's no room for the story. If the story isn't the first priority -- and first by a wide margin -- we'll get something we'll soon wish we hadn't got. I, for one, don't want to see a topic started here in November 2013 about how disappointing the anniversary was and why it was such a missed opportunity. Unless it's a really good story, it won't matter who or what wanders in front of the camera. If it is a really good story, we'll be able to live with the absences. An anniversary year would be the only way to bring in anywhere near all the stuff people are asking for without crowding out the story.

On the DVD commentary for the Special Edition (disc 2) of The Five Doctors, Terrance Dicks (who wrote it) repeatedly refers to the problem that there were so many companions it was impossible to find them all enough to do -- and that was in a 90-minute episode, the equivalent of a two-parter in the revived series.

It's also worth bearing in mind that, in 2015, we'll have another significant anniversary: the 10th anniversary of the revival. Something needs to be kept in reserve for that. --89.240.251.199 07:00, November 21, 2011 (UTC)

People have brought that up before. I don't think 2015 matters that much, and I frankly think selebrating it would only remind us of the fact that at times zclaasic and new who seem like two different shows. Plus, it'd probably suck.

And now that I think about it, all I want in annivursary is all the Doctors they can get. Some have suggested that David and Matt alone would make a reasonable special, and I say no way. That would be crap. We need at least Baker and Davidson, and I really think the more the better. --OttselSpy25 talk to me 07:21, November 21, 2011 (UTC)

I'd definetly like to see as many past Doctors as possible, and a few of the better companions. T. Baker, unfortuanetly, doesn't really look the part anymore. Of course, they could just give him a wig and throw in a bit of technobabble to explain why he was aged, and nobody would really care. It might be worth doing something for the 2015 anniversary, though it might seem rather pointless. For that, though, it would really only make sense to bring in the new series Doctors and companions. Matt Smith certainly isn't a bad Doctor, but David Tennant, in my opinion, is one of the best Doctors in the series' history (behind only Pertwee and Troughton). Anyway, he may have stayed for four years, but he hardly even showed up for one of those years, and even if he had I still wish he had stayed longer. Many shows last more than six years, and most do not change the main cast nearly as frequently as Doctor Who does. It really wouldn't hurt to see another Doctor break T. Baker's record, and Matt Smith is certainly a good enough Doctor to do it. For the 2013 anniversary, the story should definetly come first, but it isn't impossible to do a good story and bring back lots of good elements from the past. The Three Doctors was very good, although it featured an entirely new villain, no past companions, and William Hartnell was stuck in the TV the entire time. The Five Doctors also wasn't bad story-wise, although it could certainly have been better. Bringing back Jamie, Zoe, Liz, and Yates as hallucinations seemed pretty gratuitous and added nothing to the story, the Cybermen were pretty pointless in their role, and Susan and Turlough weren't really given anything to do. The story would have worked if they had focused more on Rassilon, and on Borusa's quest to gain immortality, and less on all the cool stuff that the time scoop had brought to the death zone. Hopefully, Moffat will learn from the show's past mistakes.Icecreamdif talk to me 05:31, November 22, 2011 (UTC)

I think the only must-have is William Russell. Even if he's only reading out an introduction to the 50th Anniversary episode. It would be nice to have Doctors 4-7 in it, even nicer to splice in Doctors 1-3... Doctors 9 onwards could perhaps be saved till the 10th Anniversary of "Rose" a couple of years down the line, the eighth Doctor could appear in one or the other depending on what would work best. Oh, yes, and the story actually needs to be good.109.150.29.224