Howling:John Hurt confirmed as 9th incarnation

The Howling → John Hurt confirmed as 9th incarnation

There be spoilers about un-released stories here.
Run back to the forums if you're scared.

http://www.bleedingcool.com/2013/08/16/john-hurt-reference-in-new-doctor-who-comic/

Recent comics leading up to Doctor Who's 50th Anniversary have revealed that John Hurt's character is indeed the "real" 9th incarnation of the Doctor. It is also said that the reason why he did not go by the name of the Doctor was due to him fighting in the Time War. What this means for the future of the show is unknown at this point. However, if John Hurt's Doctor is not written out of time in the 50th special, then Peter Capaldi is the 13th and last incarnation.

(above post unsigned)

In his first season finale, Moffat ended the Universe, then restarted it whilst writing the Doctor and the linking plot element of the season (the cracks in time) out of existence. Two more seasons and two more (undone after-the-fact) universal destructions later, and I think that Hurt being written out of time for good is actually a likely scenario, if not just because it's Moffat, then so a horde of angry fans don't burn down the BBC for lying to them for 9 years. —BioniclesaurKing4t2 - "Hello, I'm the Doctor. Basically, . . . run." 02:31, August 25, 2013 (UTC)

I agree. I think Moffat has set up a situation in which the current (Matt Smith) incarnation is the one who dies at Trenzalore & the TARDIS in her current "desktop theme" becomes his tomb. That's not something Moffat's going to leave unchanged. My guess is that the Anniversary Special will show how it's changed & (probably) the Christmas Special will show the consequences of the change: regeneration into an incarnation that wasn't in the timestream at Trenzalore.

I'd further guess that the John Hurt incarnation either will redeem himself by making the change or will make the change by redeeming himself, possibly writing himself out of the Doctor's past in the process.

By the way, despite what Moffat says:http://metro.co.uk/2013/08/22/steven-moffat-confirms-doctor-who-can-only-regenerate-12-times-3933733/. I do not believe that the 13th Doctor will be the Doctor's last incarnation. The BBC's Doctor Who FAQ suggests that now the Time Lord social order has been destroyed, the Doctor may be able to regenerate indefinitely; it says: "Now that his people are gone, who knows? Time Lords used to have 13 lives." Believe me, if the BBC want to continue past Doctor 13, they will certainly find a way.

Also, if you may remember, the Eighth Doctor's regeneration has not been seen. It's a mystery as to how he lost his life and the circumstances behind it which caused him to regenerate. Ever since the show came back to our tv screens in 2005, we have always assumed that Paul Mcgann's Doctor fought in the Last Great Time War against the Daleks and that his next incarnation was Chris Eccleston. However, with John Hurt being the real 9th incarnation, it could be that the Eighth Doctor didn’t fight in the Time War or simply perished during the early years and it was in fact the Hurt Doctor who ended the Time War. Hopefully the mystery behind the Eighth Doctor’s regeneration is finally explained within the 50th Anniversary Special…comment signed by 92.

This is Moffat we are talking about. I followed the link to see what he actually said. Question: "Do you acknowledge the convention that The Doctor can only regenerate 12 times?" Answer: "Yes."

Where I live, "acknowledge" can mean the same as "accept", but need not. If he said," Yes I accept that convention," one may understand it as above. But by saying ,"Yes I acknowledge the convention..." he is possibly only saying, "Yes I recognize that many people believe..." Which is not to say that he believes it himself.

As for the comic, all I have read are the frames linked to above. Perhaps there is more in the actual comic. But the linked frames don't specify either which iteration of the Doctor is the subject, only that he rejects the name, and sides against The Time Lords in someway, but doesn't say why. Phil Stone ☎ 03:54, August 26, 2013 (UTC)

Oh, I see.