Quote: chipolata @ June 24 2009, 10:27 AM BSTIn a way that was his problem in Doctor Who, he seemed a different sort of actor to the others in the show.
What, you mean he wasn't a bloody pop star or a comedy actor?
Doctor Who... Page 315
Quote: john lucas 101 @ June 24 2009, 10:32 AM BSTWhat, you mean he wasn't a bloody pop star or a comedy actor?
In a sense, yes. There are actors you see who seem very "TV". While others seem more film and stage.
Quote: chipolata @ June 24 2009, 10:35 AM BSTIn a sense, yes. There are actors you see who seem very "TV". While others seem more film and stage.
He's done great TV too though, he was brilliant in Cracker.
Quote: Matthew Stott @ June 24 2009, 10:39 AM BSTHe's done great TV too though, he was brilliant in Cracker.
And in that thing where he played Jesus II. Although I think in both of those shows he was surrounded by actors with a similar background to him.
Quote: chipolata @ June 24 2009, 10:42 AM BSTAnd in that thing where he played Jesus II.
Ha! (also a Russell T Davies show)
Quote: chipolata @ June 24 2009, 10:35 AM BSTIn a sense, yes. There are actors you see who seem very "TV". While others seem more film and stage.
He certainly seemed at odds with some of the 'humour' in that first series.
Quote: john lucas 101 @ June 24 2009, 10:43 AM BSTHe certainly seemed at odds with some of the 'humour' in that first series.
I always thought he handled those bits well, he seemed very childlike.
Quote: Matthew Stott @ June 24 2009, 10:44 AM BSTI always thought he handled those bits well, he seemed very childlike.
He seemed like a gurning fool. It was painful to watch, and I normally like painful to watch stuff, but even I had to look away from this painful to watch gurning.
Quote: chipolata @ June 24 2009, 10:47 AM BSTHe seemed like a gurning fool.
Well, not to me, I'd say Tennant out-gurns him, the mans face is never still!
Quote: Matthew Stott @ June 24 2009, 10:49 AM BSTWell, not to me, I'd say Tennant out-gurns him, the mans face is never still!
Yes, but when Ecclestone did it felt wrong. Like his Doctor Who wouldn't gurn like a fool. I thought Ecclestone was at his best when being ultra-serious.
With Tennant, he seemed more lightweight, so the gurning japery seemed to fit him better.
Quote: Matthew Stott @ June 24 2009, 10:49 AM BSTWell, not to me, I'd say Tennant out-gurns him, the mans face is never still!
And Matt Smith appears to have a natural gurn. *Ooh, bitch*
Quote: john lucas 101 @ June 24 2009, 10:51 AM BSTAnd Matt Smith appears to have a natural gurn. *Ooh, bitch*
I thought he had a bit of Fergal Sharkey about him.
Quote: Nil Putters @ June 24 2009, 11:04 AM BST
I knew he reminded me of someone! Still, at least we know he's got a good heart. And apparently they're hard to find.
Quote: chipolata @ June 24 2009, 10:47 AM BSTHe seemed like a gurning fool. It was painful to watch, and I normally like painful to watch stuff, but even I had to look away from this painful to watch gurning.
The thing is like Startrek Dr Who isn't a comedy show, it's a show with humour in it. So when RTD goes for out and out comedy it always fails. I mean the Benny Hill alien scene in Love and Monsters would have looked silly with any one.
I think Ecclestone did well with witty, slight humerous moments like remembering to dance or pointing out Jack being gay.
But out and out comedy he failed at. As did Tenant who also always looked a bit lost when he was play it cute.