Doctor Who!

[darren]

Re: Doctor Who!

I also agree the old ones were better.

Never have been a fan of the coloured ones.

only the red ones look menacing.

i think back in the day there was a red one the supreme dalek.
red is the only colou as well as theoriginals that look really scary.

[sf1378]

Re: Doctor Who!

Never have been a fan of the coloured ones.

only the red ones look menacing.

i think back in the day there was a red one the supreme dalek.
red is the only colou as well as theoriginals that look really scary.

Daz? What you on about? We were saying the older Dr Who series from the 60s/70s/80s was much better - not the colour of the Daleks you sausage!

[sf1378]

Re: Doctor Who!

I agree the animation is amazing. Though there is no official BBC position on canon so it is not necessarily correct to describe any of the books or audioplays(not "audionovels", they are full cast dramas) as non canonical. I consider anything published by, broadcast on or licensed by the BBC as canon, and many of the audios have been broadcast on BBC radio.

Those are all 'what ifs' like Marvel or 'Elseworlds' by DC Comics in my view...add ons and extras imaginatively (in most cases) played out. 'I, Davros' being one of the best - I'd like to see that turned into a tv series, it had an 'I, Claudivs' feel to it, especially Lady Calcula, Davros' Mother....

[Sly]

Re: Doctor Who!

I remember watching a B&W (at least I think it was B&W) Dr Who and it absolutely freaked me out. It was William Hartnell, I can't remember much of it, I seem to remember they were in a lighthouse or something for some reason or another. It was low action, but think because of that it set a very tense atmosphere. It had freaky origins as a series, I see it now as more of a sci-fi comedy than anything.

This was pretty recent too, within the last five years.

[sf1378]

Re: Doctor Who!

I remember watching a B&W (at least I think it was B&W) Dr Who and it absolutely freaked me out. It was William Hartnell, I can't remember much of it, I seem to remember they were in a lighthouse or something for some reason or another. It was low action, but think because of that it set a very tense atmosphere. It had freaky origins as a series, I see it now as more of a sci-fi comedy than anything.

This was pretty recent too, within the last five years.

It seems to be comedy/light drama and was all about romance in David Tennants time as the Doc...but I agree, the limited budget allowed for better acting and as you said, atmosphere in the old series - I watched Genesis of The Daleks and the way it was lit in the trenches when they first go to Skaro in that story added to the atmosphere - at the same time I did laugh that it was such a shoestring budget and that I knew it was the BBC studio!

You may be on about 'Horror of Fang Rock' or whatever its called - that had a lighthouse in it...

[sf1378]

Re: Doctor Who!

Heres part two of the superb 'DALEK TALES - THE DALEK THAT TIME FORGOT...'

I'll link up parts 3 and 4 also...(part ones already in the thread...)

[sf1378]

Re: Doctor Who!

PART THREE:

[sf1378]

Re: Doctor Who!

FINAL PART...

This final parts extremely creative - theres a 'Battle Dalek' variant at the beginning to keep an eye out for. Its based on the conceptual illustrator Peter Mckinstry who did a lot of work for the new series seasons 2 - 5. He even did the Dalek Supreme in The Stolen Earth/Journeys End finale and this is what Lee the animator of this superb 'what if?' story took forward and tweaked about a bit...

[sf1378]

Re: Doctor Who!

And heres Peters own site, you can see his concept work/cross sections and even aborted concepts for the Dalek Supreme from the aforementioned story above.

http://www.petermckinstry.com/page9.htm

[sf1378]

Re: Doctor Who!

http://dalektricity.wordpress.com/20...supreme-dalek/ more close up images....

[tony ingram]

Re: Doctor Who!

I remember watching a B&W (at least I think it was B&W) Dr Who and it absolutely freaked me out. It was William Hartnell, I can't remember much of it, I seem to remember they were in a lighthouse or something for some reason or another. It was low action, but think because of that it set a very tense atmosphere. It had freaky origins as a series, I see it now as more of a sci-fi comedy than anything.

This was pretty recent too, within the last five years.

"Sci-fi comedy"? Hardly. Doctor Who was often witty but rarely went as far as full-on comedy except in a couple of Hartnell historical stories. The only story ever set in a lighthouse, though, was The Horror of Fang Rock, a Tom Baker story from 1977.

[Sly]

Re: Doctor Who!

I think the newer ones are. The older ones had their daft moments but the newer 00's ones seem strictly written for laughs. That's a comedy in my book. Witty? Occasionally, although I think you're overplaying that a bit. Wit is intellectual humour, most of the quips or one liners relate to whatever mumbojumo explanation they use to explain whatever fantasy just happened. It does sometimes do social commentary which is more a dig at our society than anything.

I must be mistaken with the lighthouse episode, it definitely wasn't Tom Baker though. I had to ask who the actor was because I'd never seen him before. It was a lot darker, slower and relied more on story over special effects. The first Dr I remember watching it from was Jon Pertwee., even though those shows were aired 10 years before I was born. I don't remember any Tom Bakers episodes ever, I vaguely remember Peter Davidson. McCoy was the one I grew up with and used to watch on live tv as they aired.

I think it's weird that despite watching Dr Who over the years, I actually remember very little about the stories. It's more about the monsters than the stories they are wrapped up in for me.

[tony ingram]

Re: Doctor Who!

I think the newer ones are. The older ones had their daft moments but the newer 00's ones seem strictly written for laughs. That's a comedy in my book.

I don't have a high opinion of many of the Eccleston or Tennant stories but I can still see a lot more to them than laughs, and I think the last two series' are excellent science fiction. I really can't see where you're coming from with this.

Witty? Occasionally, although I think you're overplaying that a bit. Wit is intellectual humour, most of the quips or one liners relate to whatever mumbojumo explanation they use to explain whatever fantasy just happened. It does sometimes do social commentary which is more a dig at our society than anything.

I'm not overplaying it. Maybe I'm just watching it from a very different viewpoint to you. You seem to be missing a lot.

I must be mistaken with the lighthouse episode, it definitely wasn't Tom Baker though. I had to ask who the actor was because I'd never seen him before. It was a lot darker, slower and relied more on story over special effects. The first Dr I remember watching it from was Jon Pertwee., even though those shows were aired 10 years before I was born. I don't remember any Tom Bakers episodes ever, I vaguely remember Peter Davidson. McCoy was the one I grew up with and used to watch on live tv as they aired.

I think it's weird that despite watching Dr Who over the years, I actually remember very little about the stories. It's more about the monsters than the stories they are wrapped up in for me.

That seems to be the case for a lot of people, the more casual viewers at least. Ask most people who were watching in 1973 if they remember The Green death, and you'll get a blank look. But everyone remembers "the one with the maggots".

[Sly]

Re: Doctor Who!

I don't have a high opinion of many of the Eccleston or Tennant stories but I can still see a lot more to them than laughs...

I really like Eccleston as an actor, but his style of acting wasn't really 'in place' if you know what I mean? That character doesn't suit him. I liked Tennant though. Flamboyant but he could do the serious stuff when he wanted. The whole dying process he did was touching. The isolation he portrayed was excellent.

I think the last two series' are excellent science fiction. I really can't see where you're coming from with this. I'm not overplaying it. Maybe I'm just watching it from a very different viewpoint to you. You seem to be missing a lot.

I'm not massively obsessed with it. I like watching it, but I wouldn't feel bad if I missed an episode. I don't particularly like the goofball characters they have. The Cordon episodes drove me insane. Tate could be unwatchable at times too.

That seems to be the case for a lot of people, the more casual viewers at least. Ask most people who were watching in 1973 if they remember The Green death, and you'll get a blank look. But everyone remembers "the one with the maggots".

Totally agree with this.

[tony ingram]

Re: Doctor Who!

Unfortunately, I could never accept tennant as the Doctor. He seemed to me to beplaying a much too 'humanized' character, not a centuries old alien. Tom Baker, Colin Baker, Matt Smith (despite his youth), McCoy and most of the others could make me believe in the Doctor's alienness, but Tennant just seemed to be playing a thirty-odd romantic lead, which was just wrong. The whole Doctor/Rose relationship made no sense if you considered that he was supposed to be about a thousand years older than her and a totally different species from another planet. I also thought that last episode of his was almost all totally out of character for the Doctor, with all the whining and that pitiful "I don't want to go" at the end. That wasn't the Doctor. It completely robbed the character of his dignity. The other Doctors wouldn't have said that.