Two Regenerations in the Anniversary Year

[greenpear]

In an interview for Doctor Who TV Steven Moffat answered a question in a way that made me wonder about something. The red text is mine for emphasis.

Q: Finally, running a show like Doctor Who is always going to be hard work… But how much fun was it? Bringing back the Eighth Doctor?SM: Oh, it was a complete treat! It was always frustrating that we

Comments

[ibishtar]

Oh, I wish. But I think he meant Paul and Matt, what with 2013 being the anniversary year.

[greenpear]

Paul's and Matt's are in the same calendar year. That's possible what he means.

But semantically, Paul's and Matt's regenerations are in different years of the show. The 23rd of November is like New Years day for Doctor Who. 23 NOV 2013 marks the fifty year mark. Paul's regeneration was in the 50th year. Matt's will occur in the 51st year of the show.

If he actually, by some offbeat chance, got Eccleston to agree to a regeneration scene of Hurt > Eccleston, that would put two regenerations in the 50th year.

[wheatear]

That's just not the ordinary use of the word "anniversary" though. We measure anniversaries by calendar year.

[greenpear]

With the network project I'm working on, anniversary has the specific date of the 23rd of November. It's possible that Moffat and company don't think along the same lines.

But even so, he loves regeneration scenes. And I'd love to think that he actually got Chris to agree, at the very least, to do a regeneration scene...

[wheatear]

Yeah, I'm pretty sure he's talking about Matt Smith's regeneration.

[greenpear]

See above comment.

Not holding out that Eccleston said yes, but it would be nice...

[chrisart]

I thought the same way, now I'm dreaming about the regeneration Hert>Eccleston. It'd be great!

[greenpear]

That would be the icing on the cake...

[raphemer]

I'd be more inclined to think his comment about wanting to see every regeneration scene is an interesting comment... ;-)

[kalishaka]

That is the one that is giving me a bit of hope.

[elfdream]

It looks like Moffat is doing his best to tie up some loose ends. When you think about it Eccleston doesn't have to physically be there. It could be a mirror of the 9/Warrior regeneration. Hurt's 'Doctor' regenerates and we see an imagine of 9.

[greenpear]

That could also be the case. Eccleston may own his face but the BBC still the right to use it in regards to Doctor Who. We could see a JohnHurt > Christopher Eccleston regeneration whether Chris
Ike's it or not...