Fake Doctor is Fake Fake Doctor?

In the final scene of The Day of The Doctor, there is a lineup of all 12 of the Doctors so far:


Clearly this shot features a lot of fakery and CGI, as three people on there are dead, five haven’t aged well, and one is a notorious curmudgeon. Only the three at the front are real: Hurt, Smith and Tennant.

Now apart from the effect looking absolutely awful (Paul McGann seems to have no neck, and Christopher Eccleston appears to have had his stretched), one of the fake shemps doesn’t even seem to have a real actor’s head.

To my knackered eyes, it looks like the fake Tom Baker is actually a fake fake Tom Baker, and is really the head from the Waxworks Dummy used in the Five Doctors publicity photos:


It is the sort of thing that Moffat would do.


8 thoughts on “Fake Doctor is Fake Fake Doctor?”

  1. That’s what it looked like when I watched it. Maybe it’s accidental, but maybe it’s an in-joke (like how Peter Davison dealt with Tom in the Five-ish Doctors spoof).

  2. I guess they had to go with the most iconic (and canonical), most instantly recognisable images. McGann from the TVM, not McGann from the later Big Finish image or Night of the Doctor.
    On the other hand, Name of the Doctor used the least representative clips of Troughton and Pertwee. Both from The Five Doctors. For Troughton it was because it was 625-line and color, but why do it with Pertwee. Surely film of the Doctor in Bessie from The Daemons or The Green Death would’ve blended better than OB when Pertwee was a decade older.
    And there’s another odd choice of archive footage that must be a deliberate… Have you noticed that there were actually 14 Doctors flying in at the end of Day of the Doctor?

  3. How many people who only know the new series would have seen the the McGann film?
    But how many who’ve been into this stuff since Pertwee would have watched Night of the Doctor?

    625-line colour Troughton was also available in The Three Doctors, and The Two Doctors! The last was better quality, but arguably less representative.

    As for The Daemons, my copy has cock-awful colourisation (yes, it is on VHS). I didn’t know it had been improved.

    As for 14 Doctors. I never spotted that. I’ll have to check on it…

  4. Tony, you’re right about seeing McGann in the film, but I guess most viewers’ reaction to the lineup would’ve been something like “gosh, haven’t there been a lot of them”.
    Those who took the time to freeze the picture or seek out screencaps on line have probably spent a lot of time over the last few years poring over photos in BBC-approved coffee-table books and official web sites. So they would have seen the canonical set of photos of past Doctors and committed them to memory.
    You’re right about where to find Troughton too. I completely overlooked The Three Doctors.

  5. I hadn’t forgotten The Two Doctors; I discounted it because Troughton’s appearance had changed so much.
    A while back I wrote something about something about (in the old series) clever ideas being let down by flabby scripts, good scripts being spolied by less-than-committed acting, great performances being undercut by poor design and good design being ruined by unsympathetic lighting. (Something like that.) And about attempting to represent an entire planet and culture with a single throne-room set and half a dozen performers. The new series most of the time has all elements working toward the same ends and they have the skills, resources and desire to get all the elements right.
    I rewatched The Happiness Patrol over the last week and it was a struggle. Critics treat the Kandyman as an emblem of the failures of the old series, but he’s actually fine, best thing in it probably. But the script logic, the themes and ‘message’, many of the performances, and much of the design were quite poor and distracting.
    Did you see what I meant about there being 14 Doctors saving Gallifrey? McCoy was there twice: once in footage from the 80s and once in footage from the Movie. His face (and hair) and costume were so different that the only explanation is that he turned up twice, the second time near the end of his ‘life’. (His TARDIS would also be different in each clip, but I don’t think that’s visible.)

  6. I like your McCoy theory, it really is hard to spot though. It took me five watches of the sequence to get it, even pre-warned. It fits nicely in with the 7th Doc being the mysterious one. He would do that, I think.

    I know what you mean about the old series having its problems, but so does the new one. Spangly SFX do not make up for a lack of a good script. I counter “Happyness Patrol” with “Love and Monsters”.

    I personally don’t see a problem with taking an old idea and re-imagining it with modern technology. It was a staple of ST:TNG for years. And then ST:DS9, and then Voyager. Some of the old stories could be retold and made to work. Of course, I’m thinking of Shada (shhhh!).

    I cite “Curse of Fenric” as one as the best of late old-Who, yet cite “Smith and Jones” as possibly the worst of Doc10’s tenure. (odd that they both had “Haemovores” and included the same actress).

    It would also be nice to see Doc8 (and Paul McGann has agreed in principal to do stuff) do a story set in the Napoleonic wars. That way we might just see how Sharpe might have turned out if he hadn’t broken his leg the day before filming started. (Now there is a parallel universe for you!)

Leave a Reply