My guess would be as well as, not instead of; perhaps a proper cameo instead of a repurposed clip, and a proper regeneration scene for Hurt. But no more than that.
Given Eccleston's attitude since leaving the show, there's absolutely no way that Moffat would've written the script for Nine and then changed it for the War Doctor later. That would have been an insane gamble to take.
Not to mention that Nine is a fresh regeneration in Rose. Sure, it's not so obvious that Moffat couldn't have ignored it, but it would've made certain parts of Rose seem odd - 'why's he looking at his ears?' In any case, it always struck me that RTD thought it'd be sensible to start a brand-new Doctor Who with a brand-new Doctor, so to me the fact that Nine is freshly regenerated has always seemed self evident.
The hints at the Time War also reinforced that to me, strongly implying that the Time War is still recent history for him, that he's newly regenerated because he died at the end of the Time War (indeed, that Hurt regenerates into Eccleston makes that supposition of mine canon now).
Where Moffat I think changed things is that I'd always assumed it was McGann's Doctor who fought and died in the Time War. So if the script for the Day of the Doctor was ever written for a non-Hurt Doctor, it would've been written for McGann. If that's the case, why Moffat changed it I couldn't say. My best guess would be that the McGann stories done on the radio had established Eight's identity and Moffat felt he couldn't get from there to Eccleston without having another Doctor to bridge the gap; that he wanted to respect Eight's continuity without 'spoiling' it by changing him to fit the War Doctor role.
As you say, dramatically speaking, four characters is much harder to fit in than three. This would also account for McGann not playing any part, I suspect.
True about the reuse. Human Nature's probably the biggest example.
Moffat does canonise McGann's radio dramas in Night of the Doctor, though.
As for the regeneration, I swear I'm not mad, but just before it cuts away from Hurt during the regeneration you can see his face for a split second start to change into Eccleston.
I must have watched that about seven times now, having heard people say that, and if you can point out the bit that's clearly Ecclestone (and not, say, Atkinson) I'll be very impressed!
It looks to me like they just blurred his face a bit, to be honest.
(And yes, they occasionally do reference the radio/books in the TV series, when they feel like it. No love for Frobisher yet though.)
Had a quick look on the internet but only regeneration clips I could find were low-res smeary messes. Will have another look for something high-res tomorrow.
(Belatedly, I remember I have a copy of the Writer's Tale somewhere, so if I can find it I could check to see if it verifies or contradicts any of my thoughts above re: Nine being new.)
Given Eccleston's attitude since leaving the show, there's absolutely no way that Moffat would've written the script for Nine and then changed it for the War Doctor later. That would have been an insane gamble to take.
Not to mention that Nine is a fresh regeneration in Rose. Sure, it's not so obvious that Moffat couldn't have ignored it, but it would've made certain parts of Rose seem odd - 'why's he looking at his ears?' In any case, it always struck me that RTD thought it'd be sensible to start a brand-new Doctor Who with a brand-new Doctor, so to me the fact that Nine is freshly regenerated has always seemed self evident.
The hints at the Time War also reinforced that to me, strongly implying that the Time War is still recent history for him, that he's newly regenerated because he died at the end of the Time War (indeed, that Hurt regenerates into Eccleston makes that supposition of mine canon now).
Where Moffat I think changed things is that I'd always assumed it was McGann's Doctor who fought and died in the Time War. So if the script for the Day of the Doctor was ever written for a non-Hurt Doctor, it would've been written for McGann. If that's the case, why Moffat changed it I couldn't say. My best guess would be that the McGann stories done on the radio had established Eight's identity and Moffat felt he couldn't get from there to Eccleston without having another Doctor to bridge the gap; that he wanted to respect Eight's continuity without 'spoiling' it by changing him to fit the War Doctor role.
As you say, dramatically speaking, four characters is much harder to fit in than three. This would also account for McGann not playing any part, I suspect.
Reply
And _clearly_ Hurt doesn't regenerate into Ecclestone.
It's Hurt -> Atkinson -> Grant -> Broadbent -> Grant -> Lumley -> Ecclestone.
Reply
Moffat does canonise McGann's radio dramas in Night of the Doctor, though.
As for the regeneration, I swear I'm not mad, but just before it cuts away from Hurt during the regeneration you can see his face for a split second start to change into Eccleston.
Reply
It looks to me like they just blurred his face a bit, to be honest.
(And yes, they occasionally do reference the radio/books in the TV series, when they feel like it. No love for Frobisher yet though.)
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment