So about Paterson Joseph

Doctor or not? I don't know anything about him but on OG I'm seeing mostly positive reviews. And a very interesting thread on if the Doctor can be black.

So if it is Paterson, and some are convinced that it is, would there always be the question of was he chosen because he'd make a good Doctor or was he cast because with him you'd automatically shake things up a bit and be "out of the box?" Sort of like Jack Harkness' character. Some people on OG are concerned that he'd be cast "because he's black" but I think that's a huge disservice to the DW team. I don't think it would be that at all. I think it would be more a case of "he's different and that shakes things up." They're always trying out new directions and concepts. I don't think they would cast someone who wasn't capable of playing the role simply because they wanted him to be a specific race. So I think it would be because it's something different and he would bring something interesting to the role.

They're having the same debate in threads that ask, "can the Doctor be a woman?"

In all honesty, I'm nervous about both concepts but I think it's only because I'm used to the Doctor always being white and male. However, if the actor is good and the writers play it right, I think I'd quickly get over any hangups I had and go with the flow. Another race or another gender could work perfectly fine and I think it would be fun to see. Just because it's something different.

What sayeth thee?

It would be highly entertaining to watch the Companion's reaction. They'd be all like o_O


LOL!

ZOMG if the Doctor turns into a woman and, god forbid, meets Rose again, can you imagine how THAT would go? And I can just imagine the comments from someone like Donna. I can see her being like, "...well that's different. Get tired of the same ol' same ol', did we?" and then just going on about things like normal.

Ok, srsly?

I'm on Democratic Underground again (Why do I bother? I hate that site so much.) and WHY ARE THERE 500 RICK WARREN THREADS? I understand expressing outrage and fighting over the decision but why can't everyone do it in ONE THREAD. This goes for both sides of the argument. Whether for or against, there's absolutely NO NEED to start a new fucking thread to spout your own opinion. Please debate it all you want, but can't it be done in a omnibus post? Honestly. To each person posting a separate thread for or against, you're not that important. Really you're not. STOP POSTING NEW THREADS ON THE SAME DAMN TOPIC JUST SO YOU CAN BE SEEN.

AAARRRRGH. I fucking HATE that site with a deep, burning passion. I don't even know why I keep going. Everyone on there, EVERYONE, is self-absorbed, arrogant, and no matter what their opinion is, absolutely CONVINCED that they're right. You can see how this makes for a great number of arguments.

They almost deserve to be trolled.

Dammit. I wish I had a sock puppet for that site.

ETA: MORE. FUCKING. THREADS.

"I'm OK with the choice because..."
"I think it's a terrible choice because..."
"This is Obama's first BIG mistake because..."
"I think it's a really smart thing to do because..."

Sometimes I hate the Left despite being part of it. This is why it takes us years to get through a meeting or actually DO anything when we gather. Because of this. Everyone has to spend 15 minutes bloviating. But they can't be arsed to do it in ONE thread. Nope. Each person needs their own fucking thread. Nobody cares what you have to say enough to warrant you having your own thread. stfu and go diaf.

McGann's return - View capture

I would KILL to see this on film. What an awesome idea! Yeah, I'm a hopeless 8th Doctor fan.

McGann's return - View capture

Posted using ShareThis