Sarah Jane Smith from Dr Who Died

[Ben]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-13137674

[Jim North]

That is just . . . awful.

[PyscoUno]

such sad news to hear

[Joopac_Badur]

Weird how this happened just a little while after the guy playing the Brigadier died. These two were probably the most well known of the Doctor Who companions. I wonder what they'll do with the Sara Jane adventures now?

[kleptoman]

Not sure. I suspect it would be just canceled, but then it is the BBC. I think it's possible for them to figure out a poignant final episode about death, but still being respectful to the show, and still be entertaining to children.

But then, having said that, I didn't really watch the programme in question.

[Jim North]

I wonder what they'll do with the Sara Jane adventures now?

Just watch, it'll turn out that the sonic lipstick and K-9 Mark IV weren't the only gifts the Doctor left behind. She'll also have gotten a single regeneration.

[Joopac_Badur]

She'll also have gotten a single regeneration.

Man ... that would be just ... so lame. I know it's RTD who works on the show, but that would completely cheapen everything. Part of the Doctor's tragedy is that he lives on, but everyone he knows dies. Plus, it would be passing up a great opportunity for the show to have a great story (dealing with death, etc.)

[Jim North]

It would also allow them to continue producing the show, getting those ratings and keeping people in jobs and whatnot. Sure, the whole "Time Lords have to keep keepin' on while everyone else dies" thing is a big part of the Doctor's character now, but when they originally introduced the idea of regeneration, it was so they could continue producing the show, getting those ratings and keeping people in jobs and whatnot. The vast majority of the franchise is based on the very thing you're saying would cheapen it now, and it would be rather unfair to peg it on RTD anyway since it's not an idea that originated with him.

I'm not saying that would make it a good or bad move either way, really. I personally don't care. I'm very sad that Elisabeth Sladen is dead, and I did like the character of Sarah Jane Smith, so the loss of both of them is very unfortunate to me. But the show itself was, in my opinion, terrible. I don't think anything they might or might not do with it now could possibly cheapen it any further, so the only other direction any changes could take it is up in my estimation. But I have no emotional investment either way. Regenerate her, don't regenerate her, whatever.

[Joopac_Badur]

Touché on calling out regeneration always being a ploy to continue the show and keep people's job security intact. In that regard, okay, I'd accept giving Sarah a regeneration. I'd doubly accept it also, considering that regeneration is an ability granted by technology rather than an inherent biological, Time Lord function. Although if the Doctor is able to bestow regenerations to people, I wonder if it'll negate the whole he's only got twelve chances to regenerate.

I myself have also not seen the show. I knew it was supposed to be a more kiddie version of Doctor Who (whereas Torchwood is more of an adult version), and it apparently is hugely popular. It will be interesting to see how this all pans out.

[Matador]

I'm not invested in either show, but I'm a bit interested in how the regeneration came about.

Back when Dr. who first had a regeneration (when they moved from Hartnell to Troughton), it was standard for a new actor to come in and take the other actors place as the same character, and to go on like nothing had happened. It would be like having an undersutdy come in to play a character on stage, even though this was a new contract. The regeneration was a way to lampshade this, and was far more artistic than "Keep everyone in a job." It acknowledged a change and embraced it as part of the story.

Basically, Regenerations was a solution to a problem they didn't have. It was not a matter of brining in Kirk as a new captain to replace Pike: At the time, they could have declared Shatner as Pike and everyone would accept it. But rather than ignore the new actor, they drew attention to the change and made it part of the story: part of the legacy.

Again, I don't watch Dr. Who (I don't have the money for the DVDs or the television to watch the series on), but I think that the idea of the regeneration was far more intelligent than you gave it credit, Jim.

[Jim North]

Although if the Doctor is able to bestow regenerations to people, I wonder if it'll negate the whole he's only got twelve chances to regenerate.

I believe we've already discussed this here, haven't we? Or did I discuss it with folks elsewhere? Either way, yah, it may have already. In the episode of Sarah Jane Adventures with the Eleventh Doctor, he mentions have over a hundred lives. There's no real indication of how serious he is on this point, but from what has been said by RTD (and apparently it is a shared attitude with Moffat), "they only said 12 like once or twice in the old shows". Which is a ridiculously infuriating way of looking at the continuity, but there we are. At least we fans have the slim idea to hang onto that if he does have so many regenerations going now, at least there is a legitimate canon way that he could have gotten them. He is pretty much the arbiter of everything Time Lord now, so there's nothing saying he didn't just pop himself into a regeneration pod and crank the handle a few times.

I myself have also not seen the show. I knew it was supposed to be a more kiddie version of Doctor Who (whereas Torchwood is more of an adult version), and it apparently is hugely popular.

Meh. I could go on about the bad points of the show as I see it, but I've decided not to do so in a thread about the main actress' death. Instead, I'll say that if you do ever decide to watch the show, I would personally recommend The Day of the Clown, Prisoner of the Judoon, and Death of the Doctor.

Again, I don't watch Dr. Who (I don't have the money for the DVDs or the television to watch the series on), but I think that the idea of the regeneration was far more intelligent than you gave it credit, Jim.

I never said it wasn't intelligent. It was, in fact, a very smart move on their part. Not just in hindsight - though it certainly can be seen to have been a smart move in hindsight, given how long the series has run and its insane popularity - but at the time as well. The reason they instated it was because Hartnell's health had been failing for quite some time, and he finally simply couldn't keep making the show, meaning it was a solution to a problem they very much did have. Their original plan to deal with this was to start a new series with the Son of the Doctor, but this was discarded as being a bad idea, thankfully. Coming up with regeneration and thus not only keeping the same - if somewhat altered - character via means that could be easily explained away in-universe by "he's an alien, he can do that" . . . well that's just absolutely brilliant.

But no matter how great an idea or how well integrated it was into the overall story, it was still a decision based on one simple thing: to enable them to keep making Doctor Who, which had already become one of their most popular shows at the time.

[Matador]

I know that Hartnel wasn't able to continue performing, but there was precedent to bring in a new actor to play the same exact character at the time without missing a beat or acknowledge any change, and the companions (as characters) wouldn't have noticed. The audience would just accept it.

But They decided to incorporate it into the story, and thus began the legacy. They altered the fiction when they didn't need to, but in a way that could continue the franchise. It wasn't a matter of "Hartnel's health means no more Doctor Who." It was a matter of "We need to recast in the middle of the series."

It would have been perfectly acceptable back then. If Back to the future had been a television series, it would have been acceptable that they begin with Eric Stoltz and then have Michael J. Fox replace him as Marty in the middle of the series. Instead, they kept the same character and adapted the fiction, and it has since become a legacy.

I do believe that it wasn't necessary at the time to add in the regeneration. It wasn't a matter of practicality, it was a matter of acknowledging the change to the audience.

I suppose I'm not explaining this very well. Instead, I'll link you to my primary source: SFdebris.

[Jim North]

EDIT: Ugh, sorry. Life is sucking me down into a neverending vortex. Discussing stuff like this in a thread about someone who's just died simply isn't helping matters. Anyway.

[Matador]

Crap. Wrong episode. I watched them all last week.

Honestly, if you're a who fan, you'd probably enjoy those takes on the lost episodes anyway.

This episode at minute 15:30, should do a better job. The example he gave was of the character Darrell on Bewitched.

I'm sorry If I've been a contrarian ass hole.

[Jim North]

I'm sorry

Meh. Me too. I'm just uggle fuggle bleh.