- Both series have survived multiple changes in lead actor; indeed, in "Doctor Who", such changes are an integral part of the plot (the Doctor is a Time Lord whose body regenerates when under great stress). Both have survived wobbly periods in the 1980s when they seemed to lose their hold on public enthusiasm (the later Roger Moore Bond films were painful, as was Timothy Dalton's first outing; "Doctor Who" disappeared, apparently for good, in 1989 after years of cardboard scenery and dodgy acting). But both have had modern revivals which recall the golden age of the 1960s and 1970s. And both have a long fascination with gadgets—Bond has exploding pens and magnetic watches; the Doctor prefers a versatile sonic screwdriver and his spaceship, the Tardis, which not only travels through time but usefully translates all conversations into English.
StJohn I know you are a big Doctor Who fan and thought you might enjoy this.
Many thanks! It's a great comparison, and easily the best way of explaining multiple Doctors to people who aren't familiar with the show. In Doctor Who they actually have a narrative reason for why the Doctor changes (he's an alien…) while in James Bond we just accept that it's the same character played by a different actor. Although, that said, I've heard a fan theory that "James Bond" is actually a title just like "007" (or "Dread Pirate Roberts") that can be passed on once the previous Bond retires. That would mean that every Bond is actually a different person who holds the same rank as his predecessor. That theory is a load of bullshit, in my opinion! But it's been repeated to me often enough. Are we supposed to believe that every Bond coincidentally happens to be a loyal, ingenious, good-looking lady-killer with a talent for one-liners? What's more interesting is that both Bond and Who have a kind of built-in resilience that means they won't ever stop. There will always be more because people will always have new visions for what Bond/Who can be, and they have a ready-made way to implement their vision. Compare that with something like Marvel Comics, who've had to create parallel universes to explore new takes on their characters. Read about Marvel's Multiverse and boggle! Hilariously enough, Earth-215476 appears to be "Home reality of a superheroic version of Sesame Street". Bless 'em.
RE the Bond theory, it would have seemed an odd theory that "Bond" was a title and not a character until the most recent one. Bond has never been a muscular fella. He's always been more of an "out-smart-ya" pretty boy that could throw a good punch but not much else. Now he's a bad ass. Maybe it is just a title. Nah.Hilariously enough, Earth-215476 appears to be "Home reality of a superheroic version of Sesame Street". Bless 'em.
Heroe(s)? There is more than one sesame street hero? Super-Grover is going to be pissed if he finds out.
Hah, once you start down that rabbit-hole it will never stop! But would you have described Connery as a pretty-boy? Brosnan, sure, but Connery was reasonably rugged and well-built. Also, Roger Moore went to space in Moonraker. Give the man some credit! PS, nobody has yet discovered Super Big Bird's secret identity, but he has a devil of a time changing costume in phone booths.
Craig looks much different than any other Bond. I think he's a great Bond, one of the best but definitely out of the mold.
