NileQT87 @nileqt87 - Tumblr Blog

jamie's appearances throughout the years

Jamie McCrimmon in Tales of the TARDIS

The most special thing that's come out of Doctor Who in years. But the most important return for me will always be Frazer Hines as Jamie McCrimmon. I want him back in a full episode. His story is so rich for a return that could only involve the Doctor (and/or the TARDIS), as well as not only having clear parallels to Donna Noble's mind wipe, but also being the Classic companion who most meant it that he'd never have left the Doctor willingly and would've followed him until the end.

For the record, this Jamie was the inspiration for Jamie Fraser (note the actor's first name being Frazer) in Outlander, as The War Games (my favorite Classic serial) was what Diana Gabaldon was watching when she came up with her idea, which is arguably Doctor Who fanfiction that 'ships time-traveling highlander Jamie McCrimmon with that serial's WWI nurse, Lady Jennifer. Frazer Hines is well aware of being the inspiration and even cameo'd.

Jamie was not only the longest-serving companion in Doctor Who history (yes, even more episodes than the Brigadier, though Sarah Jane beats him with her spinoff) with his 116 episodes (1966-1969, 1983 and 1985) and this short (2023), but he's also one of the greatest examples of the Doctor's closest and most-beloved companions not necessarily being chosen for being the most "equal" (the idea that companions from humble or easily-belittled beginnings like Jamie, Jo, Leela, Rose, Donna, etc…, who all struggled with insecurity over their worth due to their backgrounds, are his intellectual inferiors and thus not as worthy or appropriate as non-human companions like Romana or River, or even human genius Zoe here, for the Doctor to love--which is an insult to the Doctor and what he fell in love with humanity for), but for being the most human, genuine, loyal and loving as well as brave. This is one thing that Russell T Davies understood so well and Steven Moffat didn't quite get.

Jamie was hardly afraid to call the Doctor out when he disagreed or thought the Doctor had callously gone too far, by the way. Just watch/listen to The Evil of the Daleks for that, which is where the Doctor manipulates Jamie's very humanity to get him to rescue Victoria from the Daleks along with him being the source of the "human factor" used to create human-Dalek hybrids. Jamie's desperate, heartbroken, unrequited reaction (sadly, reduced to just audio, which captures the sound of a kiss) to Victoria's departure likewise puts to bed the idea that sentimental emotionalism and the Doctor dealing with companion reactions at their most human began in the Russell T Davies era.

Jamie certainly was more of a skirt chaser, albeit quite innocent, than you'd assume would be depicted in Classic Who! As much as Ian and Barbara, and then Ben and Polly, were depicted as couples in the TARDIS, they never got such an explicit declaration of feelings as Jamie's in Fury from the Deep.

Jo is the Classic companion who arguably admitted to having feelings for the Doctor himself, describing Cliff Jones as a younger version of the Doctor for why she's choosing him. These shorts allude to this moment as well, though frame it in retrospect as Jo having chosen Cliff over the Doctor, despite her arguably having more of a basis for feelings towards the Doctor than Sarah Jane in School Reunion and her inability to move on (highlighted beautifully when she walked down the aisle alone after her wedding day betrayal, only to be comforted by the Doctor, not to mention her adopting all the children she never had), which made her a mirror to Rose's future. Jo is thus a mirror to Sarah Jane as the companion arguably in love with the Doctor in a not-so-platonic way who moved on and found real love vs. one who didn't move on until it was too late, and who was likewise a mirror to Rose, who is famous for being the companion most explicitly in love with the Doctor to the extent that her moving on involved ending up with the Doctor's Metacrisis (but ultimately choosing him, their daughter Mia and a human life over the Eighth and Eleventh Doctors in Empire of the Wolf).

The Second Doctor's favoritism of Jamie extended so far as to go back for him (quite rare for the Doctor) when he was forced to work for the Time Lord Celestial Intervention Agency (season 6b, which isn't so much a theory anymore) and the reaction towards Jamie was probably the most cuddly and warm the Sixth Doctor (to the extent that the turbulent relationship with Peri got a little better for that one serial because of Jamie's presence) sadly ever got on screen before Big Finish salvaged the era. Jamie always brings out of the best in the Doctor and what the Doctor loves humanity the most for.

That Frazer Hines was so genuinely close to Patrick Troughton in real life (they were quite the mischievous pair, often sneaking gags in past the censors in addition to their pranks!) comes across so beautifully in every voice impression of his old friend and through his portrayal of Jamie whose love for and wish to have never left the Doctor is unquestionable.

Obviously, there was that fear of what he had left to return to, but also his belief that he needed to be there to protect the Doctor, which he always took it upon himself to do. Jamie would no doubt get along very well with the Brigadier (whose first story was with Jamie), Leela and Ace in their willingness towards protective violence, not to mention Ian and Rory often facing having to fill that role a little more reluctantly. And most of all, one of the deepest, most-loving friendships among Doctor and companion. Yes, there is exactly one iteration of the Doctor whose closest, most-favorite companion (that tendency towards favoritism was already there) was unambiguously not any of the female ones and was an even firmer break from the Doctor's old model of replacing his granddaughter with a relationship that felt far more like friends/partners in crime with a hint of fatherliness or mad uncle. And of course, this twin mop-topped Odd Couple fit in nowhere. Jamie was as out-of-place and "alien" as the Doctor wherever the TARDIS landed.

And given where he was sent back to by the Time Lords, his future without his memories looked pretty dire. His immediate return involved being being shot at, hanged, put on a slave ship by the Redcoats or fleeing to France--which was the context of his situation when the Doctor saved his life and he walked into the TARDIS when he was a piper from the Battle of Culloden in 1746 who could neither swim or read, and who was as likely to call an airplane a "flying beastie" as calling a Cyberman "the Phantom Piper", and then was returned to that sans all memories but for his first adventure before entering the TARDIS.

Obviously, Russell T Davies has given Jamie quite a happier ending than his tragic comic fate in The World Shapers in which old Jamie has finally gotten his memories back, but his family (he married Kirsty McLaren, daughter of the laird whom he was a humble, orphaned piper for, from The Highlanders) has abandoned him over it and he rapidly ages to death in sacrifice. The Tenth Doctor also had a comic companion named Heather McCrimmon (descended from those five daughters, but still retains the surname!) who still carried her ancestor's Artron radiation energy from the TARDIS. I would love to see Jamie meet Heather, who would be awesome to see realized on screen.

truebluewhocanoe

Tales of the TARDIS Masterpost

A COMPLETE collection of the new scenes from Tales of the TARDIS. Other ones previously posted to YouTube were incomplete or awkwardly cut, so here's all the new content in a convenient format.

Tribute to the BBC's Ghosts, created by, written by and starring the Six Idiots (Mathew Baynton, Simon Farnaby, Martha Howe-Douglas, Jim Howick, Laurence Ric...

Tribute to the BBC's Ghosts, created by, written by and starring the Six Idiots (Mathew Baynton, Simon Farnaby, Martha Howe-Douglas, Jim Howick, Laurence Rickard and Ben Willbond) of Horrible Histories fame. My introduction to Horrible Histories was through Simon Farnaby hosting The King in the Car Park documentary where he was present for both the discovery and forensic autopsy results of Richard III in 2012. Despite him clearly having been brought in to be a comedian for when it was believed nothing would be found, he treated the Ricardians, their search and the historical figure with more knowledgeable interest and respect than the disdainful scientists often showed. The Six Idiots are genuine history buffs, which can be seen throughout both Horrible Histories and here in Ghosts.

Featuring Edward IV, George, Duke of Clarence, Richard III, Warwick the Kingmaker, Anne Beauchamp, Isabel Neville, Anne Neville, Cecily Neville, Margaret of ...

Made what is undoubtedly the nerdiest fanvid I've ever done (see the end), featuring The White Queen and The White Princess.

"Sam and Dean are just using you. Don't mistake that for caring about you, because I can assure you they don't." "Wow. You learn that the hard way?"

Tribute to Neil Gaiman's The Sandman over on Netflix. The song is an obvious one and certainly reflects the era of music I know best.

Hi, I just read your post about what happened to Bobby Driscoll. You mentioned that he wrote a letter to Warhol intended for Truman Capote, but Warhol never sent it. Do you know why he didn't, or how Driscoll met him in the first place?

It's explained extensively in the first video I posted.

Bobby Driscoll was at the Factory (pretty much everyone there did drugs) with Andy Warhol in the last years of his life until he disappeared in early 1968. He was living on the streets and possibly dancing for money at the very end. He was part of the modern art scene going back years, but his lingering celebrity was why Warhol liked him around. He didn't really fit in otherwise.

He was even in an art film called Dirt in 1965 while at the Factory (he's dressed as a nun) and this is the last footage of him. It's very rough 8mm footage and he does not look well, but he's recognizable. There are also a few photos of him from these years, including the one of him sitting on a couch at the Factory.

For all his problems that began in California (he hadn't done any drugs prior to his firing from Disney at age 16), it got so much worse in New York. Initially, the idea of going to New York with his second wife (who was a bad influence and a junkie herself--his first wife ended up institutionalized for schizophrenia and they had three young children) included an attempt to relaunch his acting career, but he ended up at the Factory instead.

He visited Connie Stevens backstage at a New York television appearance of hers, which is one of the last sightings of him by people who knew him in Hollywood. His last proper film was The Party Crashers in 1958 (he acted in television until 1960 in an episode of Rawhide) alongside her and the likewise tragic Frances Farmer.

It appears he knew he was dying or in failing health, given that he makes it clear in that letter to Truman Capote that he needs a reply soon. Driscoll had earlier also attempted to take his story to a publisher, only to be told that they wouldn't touch the story due to the nature of his allegations during his time at Disney (see the second video). For the record, Driscoll never blamed Disney for his choices afterwards. Warhol kept the letter and it's unknown why. You can read the letter on bobbydriscoll.com.

Driscoll was actually clean when he died at age 31 from a hardening of the arteries in that abandoned tenement building, but getting off drugs after leaving the Factory wasn't enough to save him. His body was, of course, found by two young boys who were playing there. His cot was surrounded by a crucifix, religious pamphlets and beer bottles.

Unrecognized and assumed to be just another vagrant, he was subsequently buried a John Doe in an unmarked mass grave in the potter's field on Hart Island. He's still there and the records that could've been used to find him were destroyed in a fire. Though those records still existed when Roy O. Disney provided his fingerprints and pressured the NYPD to look into the case after Driscoll's mother got ignored until his involvement. Disney could've gotten him exhumed back then as the family wished, but they didn't. It also became habit at Hart Island for the old mass graves to be cremated to reuse the trenches, so his remains likely don't exist at all anymore.

I strongly recommend those two videos if you want to know far more than I explained. His life still had quite a lot more to it post-Disney. And yes, there are some very famous names involved well past his Disney years.

#bobby driscoll #disney #anti disney #andy warhol #truman capote #connie stevens #hart island #the factory

I didn't like the look of the C&D movie so I made no plans to see it, and learning what they did in reference to Bobby Driscoll not only enforces that decision but deeply sickens me.

Yep. I had no interest in the film either until I heard about Disney actually having the gall to mention Bobby. And not only does it look terrible on its own, that made it outright repugnant. I'm also 35 years old, so not exactly in this film's target demographic.

#bobby driscoll #disney #anti disney #chip 'n dale #chip 'n dale: rescue rangers #rescue rangers

Hi. I wanted to ask you something about your post about the actor of Peter Pan, Bobby Driscoll. Do you believe this is one of those ocassions where the decision of one company is coming back to bite them? I honestly believe this is going to backfire against them big time. At least, I hope so. Even if it was a long time ago, making fun about the suffering of someone, specially the horrors he experienced is not acceptable. Have a nice week and thanks for bringing this to my attention. FanFromSpain

We can only hope.

I sincerely doubt many of Disney's current employees have ever heard of Bobby, much less care outside of it being more bad publicity. He's in films the company wants to disown, Peter Pan now included. He's been disowned even within the context of mentioning him in extras and making everyone a Disney Legend but him for reasons of bad publicity and admitting Disney's part in the wrongs done to him.

Disney actually covered up he even died until 1971 (they knew for two of the three years!) when the media went looking for Song of the South's cast for the 1972 re-release's retrospective.

The fact that he's been memory-holed so deep, despite hiding in plain sight all around them in animated form (that's not just his voice, but his face!), is why nobody flagged that backstory; and even if they did, they likely didn't see any more biographical connections beyond the nature of his firing.

He was more acceptable for them to villainize (same with the film they're already ashamed of) than the originally-intended Pluto. Yes, a real person's tragic backstory was more acceptable as fodder for mockery than the property of their mascot's pet pooch. And it now appears Peter Pan was third choice after Pluto and Charlie Brown (which would’ve been almost as tasteless due that child actor’s life as well, except not at the hands of Walt Disney himself). There might be a disgruntled writer. Bobby is usually only ever brought up by disgruntled ex-employees.

#bobby driscoll #disney #anti disney #peter pan #song of the south #chip 'n dale #chip 'n dale: rescue rangers #rescue rangers

Disney’s treatment of Bobby Driscoll

I am absolutely seething about what Disney just did to Bobby Driscoll again 54 years after he was buried a John Doe (his corpse was found by two children playing in an abandoned tenement building--his death date is actually unknown and the date given is the day he was instead found) in an unmarked mass grave in Hart Island's potter’s field (not identified for a year until his mother pressured Roy O. Disney to make the NYPD care enough to match his fingerprints) where he still is surrounded by prisoners and unidentified vagrants (literally referred to as the "poor, unable and unwanted" on a sign)...

And 69 years after they fired him by letting him read it in a gossip column. Walt had his secretary call security on him and he was thrown out of the building crying at 16 years old (near his birthday--he was 14-15 during Peter Pan's production). The film was #1 at the box office and in release for several weeks when he was fired. There's also a rumor that Howard Hughes was pressuring the firing, as he absolutely loathed child actors in general, and was in charge of RKO.

Bobby was the voice and rotoscoped character model for the titular Peter Pan. He was also in Song of the South, Melody Time, So Dear to My Heart and Treasure Island. His live-action movies literally saved the Disney company from total bankruptcy in the '40s. He was the very first actor ever signed to the company. He was only one of twelve child actors to ever receive a Juvenile Oscar (with such company as Judy Garland, Mickey Rooney, Shirley Temple, Margaret O'Brien and Hayley Mills) for his performances in 1948/9's The Window and So Dear to My Heart. And for the record, Walt didn't treat Adriana Caselotti (Snow White) much better, to the point where he denied her the ability to get work with her voice ever again. It's just that Bobby is possibly the most horrific ending of a child actor ever in Disney's history (there are many).

Disney just made Peter Pan the villain in the new Chip 'n Dale abortion that gives the animated character Bobby's actual backstory (this is not an evil Peter Pan take based on the book and not in any way comparable to Once Upon a Time!) of being an actor fired for hitting puberty and having acne. That's not Peter's backstory; that's Bobby's. And it's too specific to be a coincidence. They drew a character, who was drawn unmistakably with the actor's real features and acting performance, as a fat, middle-aged man, despite the fact that he died at 31 and Peter's voice basically was his post-pubescent adult voice. They made him a hideous monster aged far past an age he ever reached.

The film also ends with the character incarcerated, which happens to be yet another thing from the man's real life. By his own words, he was raped in prison. His spiral on drugs sent him to Chino, which didn't happen until he was bullied mercilessly in public school after being pulled from the child actors’ school (he had stage parents who beat him and locked him in a closet to the point that Disney had earlier stepped in to send him to live with costar Luana Patten's family as a child--there are also allegations he was molested while working at Disney) when Disney basically ended any chance of steady work. He was a straight-A student prior.

I've been telling this story every chance I've gotten for nearly two decades. Few today know who he is, because Disney does everything to keep the story hidden and him forgotten. Bobby is not a Disney Legend, despite fans lobbying for decades. The Peter Pan DVD/Blu-ray avoids mentioning him as much as they can. Another one of his films is de facto banned.

That Disney just pulled this with a disgusting, sick joke that laughs at his backstory and misfortune, then turns him into an irredeemable villain in a plot that essentially turns themselves into the victims of copyright theft (they're responsible for lobbying to get copyright law extended indefinitely). So, in other words, Disney has framed themselves as the victim of a heartlessly-fired child actor who died tragically instead of the villain and framed themselves as the victim yet again.

If there's any silver lining, it's that Twitter and social media just learned about him for the first time because of outrage over Disney spitting on this dead man's unmarked grave yet again. I knew this story decades ago (I had a Peter Pan obsession). Undoubtedly, nobody working on this stupid film was with the company 70 years ago and most were likely not even alive when he died, but somebody there had the bright idea to put the biographical data of a person Disney has spent decades trying to make everyone forget as a villain origin story.

"I have found that memories are not very useful. I was carried on a silver platter and then dumped into the garbage can." -Bobby Driscoll

Louis - Blood // Water

Tribute to l'enfant terrible herself, Claudia.

For those unaware, Claudia was based on Anne Rice's own daughter Michele, who died at five years old from leukemia. The resulting depression led to Anne Rice publishing her first of many gothic horror novels, starting with Interview with the Vampire, in 1976. While Claudia was based on Michele, so was Lestat on her husband Stan (originally intended to be named Lestan) and Louis on herself.

The 1976 novel is unfortunately the only entry in The Vampire Chronicles from Louis' POV, which came from a place of her own personal trauma. Lestat was obviously a far more flamboyant, fun, fanciable character for her to focus on, but ultimately not as prone to exploring the existential crises and philosophical questioning present in her original novel.

One may also notice that the doll shop owner Madeleine's backstory is that of a mother who lost a young daughter who likewise never got to grow up. Rice's house in New Orleans was famously filled with antique dolls, which is imagery very much associated with Claudia.

For obvious reasons, a five year old was deemed unable to handle the demanding role of Claudia, which is that of a woman's mind driven mad trapped in a child's body (she's actually over eighty years old by the end of her story), and so the role was aged up for a then eleven-year-old Kirsten Dunst. There was a nationwide search that included younger actresses, but Dunst was one of the few who could handle the part. She actually didn't get to see the film until years later, either. The 1994 film also included her first kiss, which was with none other than Brad Pitt, though neither were enthused! Dunst also wore the blue dress when she attended Rice's Memnoch Ball in 1995.

Hi! Sorry to bother you. But I've seen you mention a non-canon Buffy book, where Angel protects Sunnydale with Giles and Jenny while Buffy is in L.A. with her father (between S1 and S2)? Do you know what this book is called? Because I would kind of love to read it, tbh. I've read all the Buffy comics now, mostly, and now I guess I might even be going for the companion books. 0_o Thank you so much in advance. You're seriously the best!

The book is How I Survived My Summer Vacation. Honestly, that book makes Buffy’s behavior far more understandable and sympathetic in When She Was Bad, in addition to filling in the Angelus invitation plot hole. And of course, it does wonders for setting up the tragedy of Angel with Giles and Jenny.

The original tie-in novels are all better than the rancid ‘canon’ comics (the original tie-in comics were also better) and that’s not an exaggeration.

Those authors tried their hardest to keep everyone in character. And, while they couldn’t do anything too game-changing, they still managed to give them really beautiful, meaningful moments. They also appreciated Angel as one of the two equal show leads and the second-most important character of the franchise in a way that the ‘canon’ comics never did.

Honestly, the crossover books spend more time with the Fang Gang than the Scoobies, which I’d rather read about anyway.

The only thing that is a bit laughable about the tie-in novels is that so many of them are crammed into season 3 that the calendar literally runs out of days of the year for them to all be included (I’m the person who actually tried to make it all fit). Nevertheless, they’re awesome books and some of them are legitimately things I wish could’ve been on screen.

There are a few books that got written too early (namely Halloween Rain taking place before Buffy canonically ever moved to Sunnydale--which was January 1997, given the Harvest being referenced as the next moon cycle after the winter solstice), but most try very hard to fit in the continuity.

#buffy the vampire slayer #angel: the series #angel the series #angel #angel the vampire #angelus #bangel #calendiles #buffy summers #rupert giles #jenny calendar #fang gang #angel investigations #the scoobies

Some feelings I've had for a long time in regards to Anne Rice

The biggest crime of the later books is how Anne Rice completely threw away what would've been far more profound for Louis (and of course, Claudia was dead) because of her rampant author's pet blind spot. Ironically, Louis was her self-insert, while Lestat was her husband and Claudia was her dead daughter.

It's like it never occurred to her that the "Human Nature" trope (see Clark in Superman II, Angel in Angel: the Series, Clark again in Smallville, the Tenth Doctor in Doctor Who, Castiel in Supernatural, etc...) is so much more profound for the tragic inhuman character who actually desires most to be human, is at odds with their own species or wants to experience human belonging/family/love, rather than the one who would happily throw away that humanity they never really wanted (Lestat in The Tale of the Body Thief). Funnily enough, Brad Pitt’s Meet Joe Black is also this trope. Louis, not Lestat, is the character who belonged with this trope as it is in every other piece of fiction that uses it. Those medias understood it's best used as a heartbreaking gut punch instead of a comedy romp. It's something that hurts when it is cruelly snatched away or must be given up for the sake of a duty larger than oneself. The only Vampire Chronicles character who would prefer even more to be human than Louis because of the profound unhappiness in their physical form would be Claudia. It's the thing they most have in common together.

Merrick was yet another time when these characters' potential to continue on the center stage was woefully misused and under-realized in favor of endless new OCs and Lestat. Louis was written out of the starring role that put Anne Rice's career on the map the second she and the fandom wrote him off as a liar, despite never being able to fully retcon out Lestat's actions during Interview with the Vampire. There were certainly better uses for Claudia's ghost than as a cruel manipulation that then never gets closure for her or Louis' obviously continuing feelings for her. Given that he's still not over her death more than a century later, it's always the elephant in the room in regards to Louis in the present. It's the storyline that keeps Louis frozen in time, unable to continue his own story beyond the 19th century except as a series of vignettes and observations by other characters. Merrick completely failed both Louis and Claudia. He's as much of a ghost in the present story as she is.

Because of this, Louis' story now will always be incomplete; a profoundly influential character used as little more than a prop in the background of other characters' narration. And of course, Claudia's tragedy was being incomplete from the start.

Characters like Angel and many copycats (not only vampire characters either--Russell T Davies has fully admitted Buffy and Angel's influence on his Doctor Who revival and Torchwood spinoff, while the entire Fanged Four are Anne Rice's archetypal lineup) would directly not exist without Louis. And yet, Angel got the center stage as the deeply-flawed inhuman protagonist with a "human soul" that Louis never got again. Louis is Anne Rice's archetype (a massive influence on all inhuman creatures with human feelings ostracized from their own kinds, doomed to never belong to either world and the outsider looking in on a life they can never have) that has actually inspired more leads than Lestat ever did. Other media, in Interview with the Vampire's image, knew that the flashier, funnier, cooler Lestat archetype (which was likewise influential, but rarely an initial lead) is instead an antagonistic, often villainous foil to a more serious, introspective character's existential crisis and the greater philosophical and moral depth that this brings a story.

Anne Rice stumbled upon that when she wrote Interview with the Vampire, but seemingly didn't understand it. Or perhaps it was easier for her to avoid her personal trauma by focusing instead on an object of fantasy and fancy.

Unfortunately, she denigrated Louis to make Lestat palatable as an antihero instead of a villain or even antivillain. He and his POV became inconvenient to the change in narrative and Lestat's POV became rarely challenged, despite him being the more likely of the two to fit as the unreliable narrator with far more reasons to lie and make himself look better. His verifiable actions contradict lies like him only killing evildoers. Claudia being the most glaring refutation, but also the fact that Louis was targeted not because he was evil, but rather because he had wealth Lestat wanted. Louis was telling his story as a cautionary tale in which he wasn't sugarcoating himself (quite the opposite--he's the king of self-loathing) or anyone else, not a narcissistic ego trip disguised as a rebuttal.

The author's retcon and fandom buying into the narrative of Louis as the unreliable narrator is a huge mistake and it goes a long way to explain the fall in quality of the later series. Louis should never have been consigned to the role of Antonio Salieri.

Interview With The Vampire - Welcome To The Black Parade

Trending Blogs

Recently Viewed Blogs

NileQT87