@@FroggytheFroggy It should be "shouldn't have" not "shouldn't of". "Shouldn't of" makes no sense at all, so it doesn't work either way. It works one way.
There was at least one other scene Rachel Talalay showed off at Regeneration Who in Baltimore. It was when they were going to get Rusty, Twelve expressed reservations about his recent regenerations and the mess they tended to make, 10->11 in particular.
David Bradley should definitely film the missing First Doctor episodes and Reece Shearsmith (portrayed Patrick Troughton/the second Doctor in “An Adventure in Time and Space”) could film the missing second Doctor episodes
I sort of have mixed feelings about that idea. While it would be great, especially after seeing the remake of "Mission to the Unknown", they'd be replacing the original actors completely if they replace the original surviving soundtracks too.
@@AndrewChapmanas long as those original tracks are preserved i don’t see a problem with them recreating the lost episodes isn’t it better than nothing?
@@Insanepie Well I wasn't really implying recreating lost episodes is a bad idea. It would be awesome and get a rough idea what the original live action footage would've looked like. But cuz the animated recreations are with the original tracks, we're still hearing the original actors. I guess in a way we're getting some sort of feel of the original episode production, whether we're watching an animated version (audio) or a live action version (visually).
@@AndrewChapman I think we could have both like they could make the audio available but also recreate the episode so you can choose to listen to the original audio of you want
Strange that the recreation sets and costumes somehow manage to look cheaper than the one's from 1966. That shows you the skill of the original set designers.
@adrianace1725 Well considering these scenes accounted for 50 seconds of footage, in an hour long episode, they probably didn't put much of the budget into this section, use your brain.
@@Chris-uu9me It still looks cheap and nasty. Designer Peter Kindred did a much better job on half the budget back in 1966. Luckily these scenes were'nt used in 'Twice Upon a Time'. They look absolutely awful!
@@adrianace1725 that's because of the higher image quality. If this was filmed with the same cameras they used back then, you probably wouldn't even notice a difference
It would be great if they could/would refilm all the missing episodes this way... they'd have to find a better dopleganger for the 2nd doctor than they did in "An Adventure in Time and Space"
Well, I think that's more of the fact, That we're trying to replicate Is something That was near perfection you're not gonna get it Is correct Doctor who in the sixties was amazing
Whilst I don't think it was an exact replica I think we have to be realistic in that it's just not the same person. There's a common misconception that an actors job is to impersonate (even with historical firgures etc) and this just isn't the case in reality (unless an actor is actually paid to be an impersonator). An actors job is to interpret and here I thnk it's what Bradkey is doing perfectly. He has the essence of the doctor, the inteligence, the wisdom, the ckeekiness (maybe not the glee so much) but he's still bringing himself as an actor so that we can connect with the new situation he's thrown in. We're not seeing the first doctor have his first adventure recreated, we're seeing him in a very new situation so it calls for an actor who doesn't just impersonate Hartnell otherwise it would feel like a very hollow performance. I think there's no point to comparing him to Hartnell because A. to copy hartnell would be a total waste of Bradley's acting ability as it is very limiting to an actor especially with the material and B. Any interpretation of the role by any actor would be totally crticised if we tried to see how close it was to Hartnell because he's NOT Hartnell. I think we just need to accept that. If you want Hartnell go back and watch Hartnell. But he can't be recreated and rather than criticizing Bradely consider just admitting that actually you would love to see Hartnell in this role and are sad he couldn't be there (i.e. alive) to film. (Also, some of the changes are definitley down to Moffat's writing as he just isn't written like Hartnell in some places either, i.e. way too thrown off by new technology and the way he speaks to Bill etc)
other commenters are talking about how they'd like to see the missing episodes remade, here's how i want it done. Cast actors whose bodies are a match for the original actors, recreate the original episodes to look exactly like the original broadcast versions with no 'improvements', use cgi/ai to put the original actors heads on the new actors bodies, use the original audio, edit all existing footage into the episodes. It doesnt matter to me if it's filmed in color or b&w. I would call these 'reproductions'.
A nice idea, but that would require the consent of the actors or their estates to use their likenesses to create an essentially-new performance. It would also be an expensive use of resources for very little payoff.
@@philollenberg i didnt think of consent for use of likenesses, that would be an issue. But i dont think it would be expensive. Those old sets were cheap, the new actors wont be paid for speaking roles, cgi & ai only need to be used on the faces/heads so that shouldnt cost much. Hopefully it wouldnt cost much to use those likenesses, who will not be delivering new lines they need to be paid for
Some of this really rubs me the wrong way. They chose to recreate the 60s effects and cardboard sets even after it moved to HD and colour but used the New Who regeneration glow. Feels like they wanted to make the 10th Planet look worse by comparison. Should have used New Who quality sets and effects when it moved from black and white.
I think you may be looking a bit too much into it, they just recreated the old set as it was to make it as accurate to it as possible without changing a thing, & it’s insinuated that in old Who they still had the glow, at least the 1st doctor did, when he regenerated his face almost gets enveloped in a bright light before he turns into the 2nd & the light dies back down, I’m not sure about any of the others after that but I know at least his had the glow just not colored gold because the show was in black & white
You can recreate the old sets and not make it look like its made of cardboard, the same way Rogue One recreated sets from A New Hope. They could have created a new and more realistic effect for the cybermen disintegrating but they chose not to.
@@DiamandaHagan I do understand where you’re coming from in fact I think I would’ve preferred if they did update it a little bit but I also like that they kept everything exactly as it was even from a set production standpoint. They made the sets the same way, everything the exact same but filmed via new technology & it’s pretty cool even if it does look a little dated, because that’s the point, it doesn’t make it any lesser though
I get what you're saying and not invalidating it at all. Just to offer some perspective though; Personally I think that based on the context and what they're trying to acheive it wouldn't have been the right call for production. I think the point was to make it look exactly like it did in the original only with filling in missing bits if lost footage and including David Bradley to ease the transition and make it feel like it also happened recently. As if to say "from this point onwards we're accepting David Bradely is William Hartnell" I also think symbolically it's meant to be nostlagic and a throwback for fans seeing it as they remember but also seeing how far the doctor has grown and changed and therefore how much the show and the times of the show has changed too (hence the doctor making his misogynistic comments etc and not relying technology as much, it's not really a comment on the doctor but the times the show was made) I think if you were recreating the episode or having the doctor revisit for a longer period to relive the adventure you could totally update the sets and make it more detailed and modern and I think this would be the right move but like I say, i don't think that was the point in this episode.
Yeah, and the real Polly was taller than Ben. Hopelessly miscast. Neither looked anything like Michael Craze or Anneka Wills. Such a shame as the recreated set looks amazing.
Proof that All the Strange Strange Creatures should never have been retired after series 4
@@KerryRasch I mean speaking as a Tennant fan I would've enjoyed it.
@Kerry Rasch tennant fan here. would've loved if it became a recurring song in the series like 9s theme did.
No, the music feel out of place here.
They brought it back in The Time Of The Doctor
It was used since this was Murray Gold's last episode, he'd put a few of the old pieces in throughout Series 10 and a bit of Series 9
This shouldn’t of been cut it’s an absolutely fantastic previously trailer
“Have”
@@rightside works either way
@@FroggytheFroggy You’re entirely wrong about that.
@@rightside w h e n
@@FroggytheFroggy It should be "shouldn't have" not "shouldn't of". "Shouldn't of" makes no sense at all, so it doesn't work either way. It works one way.
There was at least one other scene Rachel Talalay showed off at Regeneration Who in Baltimore. It was when they were going to get Rusty, Twelve expressed reservations about his recent regenerations and the mess they tended to make, 10->11 in particular.
Why where these scenes cut? They are FANTASTIC!
Dear me ,they always have a bad habit of cutting out the very good scenes .
okay who else agrees that it would be kind of awesome to classic doctor who episodes recreated today.(obviously with different actors but still)
Heck yeah!! I was thinking about this
@@YoSparkles glad I am not the only one lol
I'd rather they just colorize them tbh. Or animate the missing episodes in a way that prioritizes looking great over faithfulness to the original
just the missing ones
@@zyg9 EXACTLY!! I need to see marco polo
They had the sets and the actors, it's beyond me why they didn't recreate the Tenth Planet episode 4
David Bradley should definitely film the missing First Doctor episodes and Reece Shearsmith (portrayed Patrick Troughton/the second Doctor in “An Adventure in Time and Space”) could film the missing second Doctor episodes
I sort of have mixed feelings about that idea. While it would be great, especially after seeing the remake of "Mission to the Unknown", they'd be replacing the original actors completely if they replace the original surviving soundtracks too.
@@AndrewChapmanas long as those original tracks are preserved i don’t see a problem with them recreating the lost episodes isn’t it better than nothing?
@@Insanepie Well I wasn't really implying recreating lost episodes is a bad idea. It would be awesome and get a rough idea what the original live action footage would've looked like. But cuz the animated recreations are with the original tracks, we're still hearing the original actors. I guess in a way we're getting some sort of feel of the original episode production, whether we're watching an animated version (audio) or a live action version (visually).
@@AndrewChapman I think we could have both like they could make the audio available but also recreate the episode so you can choose to listen to the original audio of you want
He was a great doctor from what I can tell
the original, you might say
@@LabradorIndependent
(You beat me to it! 😉)
@@bobblum5973 Why is that in brackets?
@@Redstar2613 I did that to be sort of like leaning over and whispering _You beat me to it!_
Would have been cool if the actors looked or sounded like who they were meant to.
Strange that the recreation sets and costumes somehow manage to look cheaper than the one's from 1966. That shows you the skill of the original set designers.
Remember though those original sets were made to be shown on small 405 line black and white sets not the 4KUHD 50”+ monster sets we have today.
@adrianace1725 Well considering these scenes accounted for 50 seconds of footage, in an hour long episode, they probably didn't put much of the budget into this section, use your brain.
@@Chris-uu9me It still looks cheap and nasty. Designer Peter Kindred did a much better job on half the budget back in 1966. Luckily these scenes were'nt used in 'Twice Upon a Time'. They look absolutely awful!
@@adrianace1725 that's because of the higher image quality. If this was filmed with the same cameras they used back then, you probably wouldn't even notice a difference
Doctor💖💖
NAhh cut scenes is crazy
It would be great if they could/would refilm all the missing episodes this way... they'd have to find a better dopleganger for the 2nd doctor than they did in "An Adventure in Time and Space"
and better replacements for ben and polly. Polly was tall, ben was short!
It's fare from all over it's only just begun
Should have kept this in.
it a real shame
❤️🥰🤣😅😂😱🤯👏
recolor got so good they race swapped a character
Is it just me that really didn’t rate David Bradley’s performance as the first doctor? The only similarity is he looks vaguely like hartnell..?
Well, I think that's more of the fact, That we're trying to replicate Is something That was near perfection you're not gonna get it Is correct
Doctor who in the sixties was amazing
Whilst I don't think it was an exact replica I think we have to be realistic in that it's just not the same person. There's a common misconception that an actors job is to impersonate (even with historical firgures etc) and this just isn't the case in reality (unless an actor is actually paid to be an impersonator). An actors job is to interpret and here I thnk it's what Bradkey is doing perfectly. He has the essence of the doctor, the inteligence, the wisdom, the ckeekiness (maybe not the glee so much) but he's still bringing himself as an actor so that we can connect with the new situation he's thrown in. We're not seeing the first doctor have his first adventure recreated, we're seeing him in a very new situation so it calls for an actor who doesn't just impersonate Hartnell otherwise it would feel like a very hollow performance. I think there's no point to comparing him to Hartnell because A. to copy hartnell would be a total waste of Bradley's acting ability as it is very limiting to an actor especially with the material and B. Any interpretation of the role by any actor would be totally crticised if we tried to see how close it was to Hartnell because he's NOT Hartnell. I think we just need to accept that. If you want Hartnell go back and watch Hartnell. But he can't be recreated and rather than criticizing Bradely consider just admitting that actually you would love to see Hartnell in this role and are sad he couldn't be there (i.e. alive) to film. (Also, some of the changes are definitley down to Moffat's writing as he just isn't written like Hartnell in some places either, i.e. way too thrown off by new technology and the way he speaks to Bill etc)
@@jd_music23 yeah honestly your input has helped my perspective. I absolutely agree with what you’re saying, thank you for sharing!
@@shaunwilliams9577 thank you! I appreciate you taking it into account
other commenters are talking about how they'd like to see the missing episodes remade, here's how i want it done. Cast actors whose bodies are a match for the original actors, recreate the original episodes to look exactly like the original broadcast versions with no 'improvements', use cgi/ai to put the original actors heads on the new actors bodies, use the original audio, edit all existing footage into the episodes. It doesnt matter to me if it's filmed in color or b&w. I would call these 'reproductions'.
A nice idea, but that would require the consent of the actors or their estates to use their likenesses to create an essentially-new performance. It would also be an expensive use of resources for very little payoff.
@@philollenberg i didnt think of consent for use of likenesses, that would be an issue. But i dont think it would be expensive. Those old sets were cheap, the new actors wont be paid for speaking roles, cgi & ai only need to be used on the faces/heads so that shouldnt cost much. Hopefully it wouldnt cost much to use those likenesses, who will not be delivering new lines they need to be paid for
Some of this really rubs me the wrong way. They chose to recreate the 60s effects and cardboard sets even after it moved to HD and colour but used the New Who regeneration glow. Feels like they wanted to make the 10th Planet look worse by comparison. Should have used New Who quality sets and effects when it moved from black and white.
I think you may be looking a bit too much into it, they just recreated the old set as it was to make it as accurate to it as possible without changing a thing, & it’s insinuated that in old Who they still had the glow, at least the 1st doctor did, when he regenerated his face almost gets enveloped in a bright light before he turns into the 2nd & the light dies back down, I’m not sure about any of the others after that but I know at least his had the glow just not colored gold because the show was in black & white
You can recreate the old sets and not make it look like its made of cardboard, the same way Rogue One recreated sets from A New Hope. They could have created a new and more realistic effect for the cybermen disintegrating but they chose not to.
@@DiamandaHagan I do understand where you’re coming from in fact I think I would’ve preferred if they did update it a little bit but I also like that they kept everything exactly as it was even from a set production standpoint. They made the sets the same way, everything the exact same but filmed via new technology & it’s pretty cool even if it does look a little dated, because that’s the point, it doesn’t make it any lesser though
I get what you're saying and not invalidating it at all. Just to offer some perspective though; Personally I think that based on the context and what they're trying to acheive it wouldn't have been the right call for production. I think the point was to make it look exactly like it did in the original only with filling in missing bits if lost footage and including David Bradley to ease the transition and make it feel like it also happened recently. As if to say "from this point onwards we're accepting David Bradely is William Hartnell" I also think symbolically it's meant to be nostlagic and a throwback for fans seeing it as they remember but also seeing how far the doctor has grown and changed and therefore how much the show and the times of the show has changed too (hence the doctor making his misogynistic comments etc and not relying technology as much, it's not really a comment on the doctor but the times the show was made)
I think if you were recreating the episode or having the doctor revisit for a longer period to relive the adventure you could totally update the sets and make it more detailed and modern and I think this would be the right move but like I say, i don't think that was the point in this episode.
Well the regeneration effect that used is literally the same except it's yellow
Mouse cursor
Should have cut the entire thing. One of the worst Christmas specials ever.
Oh, THAT hit the spot! I'd love to see them doing more of that!
Ben and Polly (the new versions) were terrible actors
Didn’t even look like them at all. Bad wigs
@@dickiegreenleaf750 lol totally
Yeah, and the real Polly was taller than Ben. Hopelessly miscast. Neither looked anything like Michael Craze or Anneka Wills.
Such a shame as the recreated set looks amazing.
Didn't have much to do, and the guy playing Ben was too tall.
@@ianotimelord yup