Doctor Who News 4961313-low-the-musketeers

Published on April 23rd, 2014 | by Danny_Weasel

Confirmed: New Doctor Who Star Peter Capaldi Not In Musketeers Series 2

It would seem that even with a TARDIS at his disposal these days Peter Capaldi cant manage to be in two places at once. Alas, this means an end to his  involvement in The Musketeers as the villainous Cardinal.

Naturally this leaves a burning question to fans of the show, how will they write out the cardinal? Fellow members of the cast have their own ideas about it as Tom Burke AKA Athos told the Radio Times recently:

Come the next series the Cardinal will be dead. He’ll just be gone. We’re all like, ‘Where’s the Cardinal? Oh he’s dead’.

Capaldi’s replacement as nemesis on the show is already in place in the form of Marc Warren as Rochefort.
Could this mean a longer than previously rumoured single series run for Capaldi as the Doctor, if he is willing to be killed off in a rather successful show like Musketeers one would assume he has so long(ish) term job security for the future. Could we have Capaldi still making a comeback in series three of the show, should it happen? What are your thoughts, will the loss have an effect on the viewing figures? Can you really have a Musketeers show without the diabolical Cardinal? Drop us a message below and let us know your feelings on the matter.

(Via Entertainmentwise.)


Tags: , , , , ,

About the Author


22 Responses to Confirmed: New Doctor Who Star Peter Capaldi Not In Musketeers Series 2

  1. avatar simon magellan says:

    “Could this mean a longer than previously rumoured single series run for Capaldi as the Doctor”

    Yes – a *rumour* not a fact.

  2. avatar DonnaM says:

    I’m sorry they’re taking the drastic step of killing off the Cardinal, mostly because it’s a step too far in the “cavalier rewriting of history” for this history geek. And frankly my only small moment of not being utterly thrilled that Capaldi’s playing the Doctor now was the end of the first series of The Musketeers :-)

    It would’ve been nice if he could have made a brief appearance in series 2, but what the heck? By the time that rolls around I believe he’ll be filming his second series of Doctor Who. I’m sure that’ll help with the disappointment!

  3. avatar TonyS says:

    In the books, the sequel “Twenty Years After” starts with de Richelieu dead. There is mention of his ghost. The real de Richelieu died in 162.

    • avatar DonnaM says:

      I’m a total pedant where historical facts are concerned – even when Dumas’ own novels are very definite historical fiction :-) As Series 1 started with “Paris, 1630″ they’re going to have to age up the others by 12 years or offend Donna’s tender sensibilities…;

      Not really much of a contest!

      I’m glad they’ve brought in an actor of Marc Warren’s class for the replacement villain, though.

      • avatar TonyS says:

        One day I will read my posts before I post them and not suggest that the real de Richelieu died 1468 years before the events of the series. You are, of course, right, DonnaM. :)

        • avatar DonnaM says:

          I usually do that, Tony!

  4. avatar Spider-pope says:

    Muskateers loss is Doctor Who’s gain.

  5. avatar mrjohnm says:

    I still don’t understand how he couldn’t be in both series. Surely, with a 10 and 13 episode run, Capaldi could film both series. Yes, that would mean he’s a very busy actor. But isn’t that what an actor wants to be?

    • avatar Ella says:

      The Musketeers started filming a few days ago, the filming ends in November. DW ends filming in August but then there is a promotion and also, as much as any actor wants to be busy, he also needs some time for his family and a little rest.

    • avatar Spider-pope says:

      Conflicting film schedules. He’d have to be in two different places at once. It’s possible to work around, as seen in ‘Sherlock’ where they altered the schedules so they could have Martin Freeman while he was busy with ‘The Hobbit’, but that costs money and time. Ultimately it’s easier to let the actor go.

  6. avatar Rick714 says:

    A full series of doctor Who takes 9 months to shoot. that l;eaves only three for the lead getting any type of break and some of that’s used up for press tours, etc. No way he could do two full series at the same time. We don’t want to kill the guy, we need him to be around for a while!

  7. avatar Ella says:

    No offense, but you take the “single series” as a fact, which is not. It was a rumour. A silly rumour, which has been around since Tennant. Really, from actors, Capaldi is the last one who would leave Doctor Who after just one series. Stop writing about it and let´s hope the rumour dies quickly..
    As for The Musketeers – no loss for Peter. I can imagine he will be a great Doctor but he was barely in first few episodes of The Musketeers. It is a fun show but DW is just 100% better.

    • avatar Rick714 says:

      I don’t think you were responding tome but be that as it may—I don’t put any stock in the single series bit. I think that Capaldi will stay for quite a while, barring some ratings or health-related disaster. He’s been in the business for so long, he could never get typecast at this point and he loves DW more than any actor who’s ever played him, probably as much if not more so than even Tennant.

      My point is that I would be willing to bet that he stays longer than Eccleston, Tennant or Smith. I’ll guess 5 full series, a minimum of 4.

      • avatar mrjohnm says:

        I do actually hope he stays around for a while. My wife has been complaining that the number of actors to take on the role and then leave after only 3 seasons, plus the introduction of the War Doctor, meant that the series would soon be ending. Of course, now that the problem of the limited number of regenerations has been solved . . .

        • avatar Rick714 says:

          The three year rule in itself has gotten a bit distorted over the years. A lot of “ifs”. For instance, when Davison conversed with Troughton, Pat said that three years was good for him and Davison decided to do the same but after shooting Caves of Androzani, said that if the rest of his run was as good as that story, he might have stayed longer.

          If not for the BBC stretching out series 7 across an entire two years, Matt Smith could have easily filled the time with a 4th series.

          If not for the untimely end of the series in 1989, McCoy said the stories were getting so good and they all felt they were really hitting their stride, he said he would have stayed for a 4th year at least.

          And of course, if not for Michael Grade and the rest of the BBC’s idiocy during Colin Baker’s time, he himself had said he would have liked to break Tom Baker’s record! Which also would have been awesome but we would have needed a new producer so we could have gotten rid of the coat.

          Both Hartnell and Troughton only did about 3 years a piece yet worked year ’round, thus putting in the equivalent of six seasons these days.

          Not sure about Tennant though. they put the show on hold for most of 2009 and had just a few specials. I wonder if it were up to him if he would have just done a 4th series instead.

          Either way, I’ll be very curious to see how far Capaldi goes.

  8. avatar Docnine45 says:

    I love the show, but I never watched just to see him as the Cardinal, it’s got a good cast and the stories have been good so far. I think the show will do just fine without him. As for Capaldi staying for more than a year, i would imagine so, it makes no since to go through all the buildup and the wait to see him be the Doctor just for it to end after 14 episodes, not that the BBC has been known for making great decisions when it comes to shows that should be kept and other such matters.

    • avatar DonnaM says:

      I’m certainly still planning to watch the next series – the first was lots of fun. Unless of course – given the way it ended – they’re planning a fairly major change to the history of the French monarchy (“Spoilers!”), in which case I will bin it out of pure historical pedantry :-)

      And I agree – the BBC gave Capaldi’s casting the full bells-and-whistles treatment. To do that believing he’d only be around for one year? I don’t think they’re that stupid!

  9. avatar drewboynton says:

    Imagine the uproar if the headline to this article would have been “Capaldi Not in Second Series”!

  10. avatar Ella says:

    It was meant for the article, which states it almost as a fact. I love Peter Capaldi and I think he is accomplished enough to stay for a bit longer. I hope in 4 or 5 years. From the photos and videos, he obviously enjoys it too much to leave after just one or two years :)

    • avatar Spider-pope says:

      If it were up to me, most of the Doctors would have stayed a year or two longer than they did. So a longer tenure for Capaldi is absolutely fine by me.

  11. avatar Kanlo says:

    I could picture the Cardinal faking his own death and disappearing for a while only to reappear when it suits some scheme of his.

    (not that I would want to see Capaldi to leave Doctor Who – I hope he stays in the role a good long while!)

    • They did that with Nottingham in the BBC One Robin Hood, which was made by many of the same production team, so it would be interesting to see if they got away with it…

Please be aware that all comments are subject to adherence to our comments policy.

Back to Top ↑