Matt banned from exposing his rear?!

[poprockgeek]

Yes ... who else but The Sun would report this story. I'd thought I'd share because, true or not, it amused me.

DOCTOR Who star Matt Smith was banned from baring his bum while filming a new show about a gay writer.
BBC chiefs feared it would tarnish Matt's image in the sci-fi show, so he had to keep his rear hidden.

Matt, 28, plays novelist Christopher Isherwood in the one-off drama, which features gay sex, male nudity and sado-masochism.

It's a far cry from the Tardis and Daleks.

A BBC source said: "Because Dr Who is a firm favourite among family audiences, we thought it would be better if we didn't show Matt's behind in his new drama."

As for filming the near-**** scenes, Matt said: "Well, you've just got to commit to it, gung-ho.

"It's different from when you're doing **** scenes with a boy than with a girl, as you can imagine.

"Having to kiss boys, and finally understanding the nature of stubble rash, was interesting."

CHRISTOPHER And His Kind is on Saturday, March 19, at 9.30pm on BBC2.

See HERE for full article.

[MandyDuchovney]

Haha...interesting clause in his contract no doubt

[Vampyros Adric]

I saw this too - it sets an interesting precedent and might put off some higher quality actors from taking the role of the Doctor in the future. If there is a good part that requires a bit of nudity then an actor shouldn't be dissuaded from taking the role because of the day job. I also wonder if they would have (dared) do this to Chris Ecclestone or David Tennant?

Of course, I know that with the Dream Lord being in the show Matt probably didn't want to give him anything more to goad the Doctor with

[MandyDuchovney]

Do we know that Chris and David didn't have to sign up to the same?

At the end of the day it is only his backside they've requested he keep under wraps - clearly he's free to do what he likes with the rest of him

[Vampyros Adric]

Do we know that Chris and David didn't have to sign up to the same?

Knowing the actor and person that Chris Ecclestone is I cannot imagine he would agree to such a restriction of his artistic freedom. And many fans I know would not only not object to DT exposing his posterior, I know of three online petitions positively demanding it lol

At the end of the day it is only his backside they've requested he keep under wraps - clearly he's free to do what he likes with the rest of him

Bad, bad beans

And clearly it isn't such an issue with Karen Gillen either...

[MandyDuchovney]

I think you're right Chris -  I doubt either Eccleston or DT would have agreed to such a restriction. Or possibly even been asked to so why draw the line with Matt? It's okay for him to be semi **** in DW/ have **** scenes in C &HK provided he doesn't show his backside?

What kind of logic is that? 

[Nyki]

Yes, it is a bit of a cheek (well, someone had to say it )

[Oh-Wise-One]

Where did that facepalm picture get to?

[MandyDuchovney]

Where did that facepalm picture get to?

Will this one do?

[MandyDuchovney]

Yes, it is a bit of a cheek (well, someone had to say it )

Yes they did and for your cheeky ness I award you the     

[missadric2]

I don't see why they have done it the first place he's an actor for goodness sake!!!!

[Oh-Wise-One]

Ha it certainly will!

We need to get the Doc to add it to the smileys

[MandyDuchovney]

I don't see why they have done it the first place he's an actor for goodness sake!!!!

Quite 

It reminds a little of Jeff Hunter (Captain Pike in the first pilot of Star Trek-The Original Series ) and his role as Jesus in the King Of Kings. He was literally made to live as a recluse during the making of the film so that the 'image' of Jesus was not tarnished in any way by the actor's lifestyle/behaviour etc.

Obviously that is a very 'extreme' case of the role dictating but in relative terms the business with Matt is equally detrimental and really rather insulting to the viewing public in that it implies we cannot distingush between the role and the actor.

[Vampyros Adric]

Having reflected on this I have come round to a rather positive view of it. In a way, it is quite a significant statement by the BBC that they see Doctor Who (and the franchise) as being important enough to impose such a restriction. Matt Smith is clearly regarded as being an important and influential commodity so I guess they are saying "If you want to be the Doc then there are certain restrictions you are just going to have to live with."

Let's be right, Colin Baker could have gone on TV waving his meat and two veg around and the Beeb wouldn't have given it a second thought so this must show the influence the show has?

TMI?
 

[missadric2]

Yeah I can certainly see where you are coming from I mean the bbc do have a reputation but look at davids other projects and billie pipers and they don't get banned? I just don't see why they can ban an actor from doing what an actor sometimes has to do!!!! Look at matt stage work yeah I know you can't ban things in the past, the doctor isn't here to help them out haha, but people are going to see it

[MandyDuchovney]

But ( and excuse the pun ) why only his backside? Why not **** scenes altogether? Swearing? He's shown smoking/drinking in CAHK?

Why is the line well and truly drawn at his butt?

[The Doc]

Are we even sure that this story is genuine?

[MandyDuchovney]

  I'll drop the Beeb a line and ask

[missadric2]

Yeah we should be thinking if its real first haha some newspapers make this stuff up

[MandyDuchovney]

Well the original source was The Sun  Although they - like a lot of the tabloids - hang out on the forums for snippets of info 

I'll google it