News Categories
Archives

Capaldi’s Familiar Face Addressed in a Low-key Way

fires-pompeii-Peter-Capaldi-CaeciliusSteven Moffat has said Peter Capaldi’s past appearances in the Whoniverse will still be addressed in Series 8 but fans shouldn’t expect a major story point out of it.

Moffat reiterated that the theory Russell T Davies came up with while he was still showrunning will serve as the basis for the explanation.

Speaking at the LFCC he said: “Truthfully I don’t think it’s something you have to resolve because audiences do understand that the same actor can play different parts.

“When Peter Capaldi turned up in Torchwood Russell said he had a plan in his head on why he looked like the guy in The Fires of Pompeii. So I emailed him and said what was the explanation and does it fit with the new Doctor? And it sort of does.

“So in a very low-key way we’ll address it. It won’t be a major deal because in the end people know the real reason is he’s played by the same actor.

“What’s really worrying me is Karen Gillan in The Fires of Pompeii. That’s just inexplicable – I’m going to get to that eventually.”

Step back in time...

COMMENT GUIDELINES

Please be civil and keep article comments relevant and on topic. Flag and report any offensive/trolling behavior, or contact us with details.
Please do not post SPOILERS including anything from leaked episodes! Your account could be banned. For complete details on our comment policy please read.
205 comments
felixvitae3
felixvitae3

One excuse could be that time was altered at two points in the same persons history close together after the doctor touched Peter's other character, some form of DNA transfer through the time vortex? Just a thought?

Maiden_Ty_One
Maiden_Ty_One

Double casting is no big deal, The X Files and Stargate did it all the time. In fact The X Files triple-cast the actor Colin Cunningham in three different roles. I only noticed when I did a marathon run of the entire show.

VinnieBartilucci
VinnieBartilucci

No great challenge - Amy said she always liked ancient Rome.

Polyphase
Polyphase

Like others have said, Romana's character explained how it can be done :)

GrannyMumantoog
GrannyMumantoog

I've been looking over most of the comments.

I just wanted to add that so many actors play more than one role over time in long running shows. It's the nature of the job. Can you imagine how boring watching TV would be if we had to have some kind of explanation for all of them? OY!

VictorWong1
VictorWong1

For those looking forward to Moffat's explaining Karen Gillan in Pompeii, I bet you're *really* looking forward to the scene when Clara tells the Doctor she used to be married.


D: Oh?

C: Yeah, just seemed like a good idea at the time. Didn't last long.


D: And who was the lucky--


C: Watson. Harry Watson.


D: And what was he--


C: She.


D: She?


C: Yeah, long story. I thought I liked her, but she drank. Gave her a mobile so I could check on her; last I heard she gave it to her brother John.

AnEnglishCartman
AnEnglishCartman

The obvious explanation for capaldi being in the fires of Pompeii and children of earth would be that frobrisher is a distant relative of ceacillius (or however you spell it). Capaldi being of Italian descent would add weigh to that, but him being the doctor would be much harder to pigeon-hole. Atoms effect genes so it effected the doctor's regeneration perhaps?

SteveWillis
SteveWillis

Genes affects our physical appearance, as does environmental influences. Eventually, due to the laws of probability, you will have two faces that look similar enough. In the case of The Doctor, you may even have three faces. I think the explanation is down in the idea of somethings are not infinite. In a universe of space and time that is infinite in vastness, you will get some repetitions.



I prefer Miss Bosswald
I prefer Miss Bosswald

Moffat doesn't explain everything and trusts the viewers to understand by themselves : PLOTHOLES !


Moffat includes an explanation in a low-key way :  it's utterly unnecessary! We don't need this! DON'T!

Diana van der Pluijm
Diana van der Pluijm

Don't. Please. Don't explain ANYTHING. It's fine the way it is. We get that one actor can play more parts. I don't need to have it explained, 'cause any and every explanation will come across as just that: an explanation, tacked-on as an afterthought. It's not necessary. Really. Just... don't.

GRANDMARSHALL
GRANDMARSHALL

Isnt it interesting that Caecillius bought the Tardis and put it in his home ! Its almost like Caecillius had felt a connection to the Tardis and had to have it. I must be mistaken As I thought an episode in series 8was filmed in Pompeii or aboutPompeii in some regard? That was the episode I assumed would explain why the Doctor now looks like Caecillis and John Frobisher. I think Im wrong as it will be explaimed nonchalantly in a one liner , Almost like the way the Silence was explained in "Time Of The Doctor"

brch2
brch2

Speaking at the LFCC he said: “Truthfully I don’t think it’s something you have to resolve because audiences do understand that the same actor can play different parts."

Who ever said he did need to resolve it? Who ever said (besides maybe a tiny minority of 'fans') that there was anything to resolve? Oh yeah... Moffat. He's the one that decided there should be an explanation. He's the one that made a big deal about providing one (that most fans don't want to begin with, unless it's somehow unbelievably brilliant and entertaining). Why is he now acting like people are making a big deal about it and acting like he's not the one that made it a deal to begin with?

LisaFreer
LisaFreer

Meh, I'm sure there are a slew of new little Whovians who haven't even seen any of the Tenth Doctor's episodes (Which is terrible, yes). They probably won't even know what the poop is going on.

Oodkind is foretold...
Oodkind is foretold...

I'm glad he's not making a big deal out of it. We just had the same thing with Clara, and doing the lots-of-versions-of-the-main-character thing again would just seem redundant. 

Saying Caecilius was The Doctor in disguise leaves out Frobisher, so I think that's not very good. I wonder what RTD came up with and how closely Moffat will stick to it.

33andme
33andme

So why are they ignoring the ''elephant in the room''. Capaldi play a big role as John Frobisher in Torchwoods Children of Earth, and he killed himself, Ianto Jones was killed by the Aliens. So if Frobisher comes back to the Whoniverse as the Dr, what does Ianto Jones come back as... what, just the fan base for ''9 hysterical women''? He wasn't there to save Earth, so that is another mistake he has to fix, because Ianto and Stephen should not have died. These issues should be addressed as well, otherwise there will ALWAYS be a ''Black Hole'' in the Fanlore of the Whoniverse... 




AnthonyJFuchs
AnthonyJFuchs

This was already sort of addressed in "Journey's End" when the Doctor met Gwen Cooper, who was played by Eve Myles, who had previously played Gwyneth in "The Unquiet Dead":




TEN: "Tell me, Gwen Cooper: are you from an old Cardiff family?"

GWEN: "Yes. All the way back to the 1800s."

TEN: "Yeah: thought so. Spacial-genetic multiplicity."

I expect that Peter Capaldi's previous appearances will be little more complex than that.




Brainlock
Brainlock

Caecilius is minor, like Maxil.

FROBISHER did some things that must be accounted and atoned for.  THAT issue must be addressed.

RickXeros
RickXeros

I'm glad he is keeping it low key, I'd rather they not make a big deal about the whole Pompeii thing... at least not yet...


VictorWong1
VictorWong1

I always figured that the Doctor's new regenerated forms were based on fragments from his memory: for example, the Hartnell Doctor may have encountered the despot Salamander, leading to the regeneration basing the Troughton Doctor on that character; and either version encountering someone with Jon Pertwee's face, and someone with a snake's tattoo, leading to the Pertwee Doctor's eventual form.


This is one of the reasons why I figure the Curator is *not* the Tom Baker Doctor, but a man whom the Doctor met during their younger days, when the Curator's hair was dark brown and long.

Cyruay
Cyruay

   







 "So in a very low-key way we’ll address it. It won’t be a major deal because in the end people know the real reason is he’s played by the same actor."  



 




     Because you didn't have enough money to get a higher paying actor/actress



MoserGray
MoserGray

The reason for that is it's The Doctor trying to subconsciously remind himself of the time he broke the rules and saved someone who shouldn't have been saved; that history can be rewritten.

Ollie Walton Harrod
Ollie Walton Harrod

I don't think Karen Gillan was shown enough in 'The Fires of Pompeii' that it could be said that it is undeniably her. Obvioussly, it is her. But her role is minor, and she has a whole different costume and face paint, and is barely shown; so I don't mind.

mentalfoto
mentalfoto

Maybe the 12th Doctor looks at his new face, it seems familiar, but of course Caecilius being someone he met hundreds of years ago he can't place it. He must wonder I would think what's going on with his genome and where all these faces come from? Are these faces that vaguely resemble his ancestors going back hundreds or thousands of years before he was born? Or perhaps he sees faces and they subconsciously become part of his future, like Mels concentrating on a dress size as she regenerated into River? Is the Doctor trying to tell himself something subconsciously, or are they phantoms of his past like dreams caused by a bit of undigested potato?

Could the 12th Doctor meet Caecilius again? That would be a fun double acting part to see!

lukefoord
lukefoord

I just like the idea of Caecilius being the future Twelfth Doctor in human form (aka Human Nature). It's awesome to think that 10 would have saved his future self from dying.

thribs1
thribs1

I did notice that in the episode. It was rather subtle.

Arkleseizure
Arkleseizure

Did they ever explain why Steven Taylor looked like Morton Dill?

JFrance
JFrance

I had a feeling it wouldn't be a big deal but it will be interesting to see what the theory is.  

joe4
joe4

How about this? Time Lords regenerate to look like other people they have seen in the past and whose likenesses are stored in their memories. There you go. No dumb, convoluted explanation needed.


Moffat needs to stop dwelling on issues like this. If he is going to then he should explain why the 6th Doctor looked like Commander Maxil and why guest actors have appeared as several different parts/characters while he's at it. A waste of time.

JoeLowery
JoeLowery

@AnEnglishCartman I like this because I have a theory myself based on the trailer.  He says he is over two thousand years old and has made some mistakes and it's time he corrected them.  What if he wears that face now as a reminder that by saving Ceacillus when he should have died brought about the events in Children of Men.  It's always been stated that Torchwood dealt with the things the Doctor couldn't or wouldn't for one reason or another.  Jack even says I think that at times the Doctor must be ashamed of humanity.  What if instead he is ashamed of his inferences in history that changed things for the worst?

SteveWillis
SteveWillis

"In the case of The Doctor" - I realised this might be misunderstood. Since The Doctor is so Old, is a Timelord, and we never know how their appearances gets chosen during a regeneration, there's a good chance that somehow, the appearance of one of his regenerations might resemble  a "face" that has existed before.                                                Since the criteria is a closely-similar face, the probability is much higher compared to an identical face (hence why the three faces many look different (age wise or make up application).


Possible Girl
Possible Girl

Reactions like this are probably the reason he is making it low key.

Arkleseizure
Arkleseizure

That's easy. Frobisher is a shape shifting Whifferdill who at one point adopted the guise of the Twelfth Doctor (or maybe Caecilius). Makes a change from being a penguin, anyway.

MistyDawn666
MistyDawn666

@Cyruay It's Peter freaking Capaldi. What more could you want? You're probably one of those nonces that wants Tom Cruise as the Doctor or some such.

RickXeros
RickXeros

@Ollie Walton Harrod Its certainly not as bad as Freema Agyeman's appearance in Army of Ghosts/Doomsday. That one's pretty darn glaring. :P

Amy says Peter Davison is the Thirteenth Doctor!
Amy says Peter Davison is the Thirteenth Doctor!

Moffat has stamped out that theory already, and it wouldn't work anyway because Russell would not have had the Twelfth Doctor in mind when he came up with the idea to connect Frobisher and Caecilius.


MetamorphmagusWho
MetamorphmagusWho

@joe4  Perhaps that's the explanation he'll give, or at least something similar. It makes the most amount of sense, it's probably one of the simplest explanations and he says it won't be addressed in a convoluted manor.

Amy says Peter Davison is the Thirteenth Doctor!
Amy says Peter Davison is the Thirteenth Doctor!

"Moffat needs to stop dwelling on issues like this. If he is going to then he should explain why the 6th Doctor looked like Commander Maxil and why guest actors have appeared as several different parts/characters while he's at it. A waste of time." -How do you know that this won't cover that? Besides, Moffat says up there that no, it doesn't NEED to be explained. However, if he can get a good story out of it, then there's not really any reason NOT to do it.


Liana21
Liana21

Technically that was the explanation when Lalla Ward took over Romana, she liked the aspect of Princess Astria and she took it.

Ollie Walton Harrod
Ollie Walton Harrod

@Lemonhead118 @SephoraNeedSeries8 I'm not going to go into a list of plotholes, I'll leave that to someone else with more free time on their hands. But I'm just saying that, firstly, it's 'plotholes' not 'potholes'; 'potholes' are geographical occurrences.

And secondly, that depends how you define plotholes. Moffat doesn't necessarily write things which contradict previous events (which is what people generally consider to be a plothole). But he does, a lot of the time, not explain things sufficiently/at all, which does annoy some people.




Brainlock
Brainlock

@Amy is Hannibal Rusty had his theory on record back when COE happened. Capaldi's casting as Doctor is a new twist to whatever that theory is.