Quote Originally Posted by Weezer View Post
I agree, Romana is my favorite of the old-Who companions, it was so unique having someone around who was the Doctor's equal in most respects and even his superior in others, especially in many things regarding theoretical/academic knowledge, cause apparently the Doctor unsurprisingly wasn't the best student. I think she was the one who started the trend of calling out the Doctor for being bad at flying the Tardis, which earned her a special place in my heart. I loved when after she left the Doctor would wish Romana was around so she could fix something.
Yes, it was sad when Romana left. "You were the noblest Romana of them all." As I think I mentioned, I named my first cat after her. My Romana turned out to be my best companion too.

Quote Originally Posted by Tergon View Post
Look, I'm not saying the original magnificently hammy bastard that the Master always acted like was anything other than brilliant, but the John Simm Master was fantastic in his own way. He was exactly as arrogant and egotistical as his old incarnations, but the new regeneration gave him a sense of humour. And what do you get when you give an arrogant, egotistical bastard a sense of humour? Pretty much the way John Simm played him. I thought it was a brilliant take on the Master.

The Doctor is a classic Trickster archetype. No weapons, no aggression, and usually no idea what's going on, but he bumbles his way into the Apocalypse, fools the bad guys into blowing themselves up, shares a jelly baby or two with the survivors, and bumbles off again into the sunset. It's a big part of his charm and his character as well as why he's so good at what he does, because everyone always underestimates him.
John Simm was the Master who took on this trait: He was an evil Trickster. He cackled, laughed, sneered, and then outwitted the Doctor. Multiple times. He defeated the Doctor, Captain Jack, and the entire world for entire year, only underestimating Martha. When he came back from the dead, he didn't even make that mistake - he tricked everyone into letting him copy himself onto every human in the world, and ultimately had the Doctor beaten until the returning Time Lords betrayed him. Say what you will about how you liked his portrayal, but he came closer to winning than any incarnation of the Master before him.

Basically after thirteen regenerations of learning that his Evil Grand Vizier archetype wasn't giving him victories, he stole the Doctor's greatest weapon by becoming a Trickster like him. He was just as hammy and smug and unmistakably evil as he's always been, but now he did it with a grin on his face and cackling with genuine delight as he watched the world burn around him.

You may not have liked it; but I loved it.
The original Master definitely had a sense of humor. "Ah, tried and true methods are the best, Doctor," said with a grin. The difference is that the original Master, the Roger Delgado Master, had class as well as villainy. He even had an odd sentimental streak for the Doctor. I mean after all they were both renegades from the boring and oppressive Time Lords. Remember when, after having defeated the Doctor, the Master offered to share rule with the Doctor? Of course the Doctor said, "I want to see the universe, not rule it," but the fact that the Master really did want to share it with him showed a depth that the annoying, snarky, snot-nosed brat John Simm Master didn't have. I think it's a sad testament that so many people think "snarky" makes for a good villain. Even in Great Britain, which virtually invented class, there seems to be precious little left.

It's too bad that they didn't keep Derek Jacoby as the Master. Now he has class. They could have brought in John Simms to play his snarky, snot-nosed son from whom the Master had to keep saving the world--after all, you can't rule it if your idiot son burns it down.