I think a lot of the plot lines from the first 5 seasons were coherent and not cheesy nonsense at all. That is pretty much the staple of the last 2-3 seasons though.
Yeah I was really excited when Moffat took over from Davies. Based on some of his episodes I was sure Moffat would easily surpass Davies as showrunner. I am surprised to say I miss Davies and haven’t really enjoyed Moffat’s run at all.
Surely somewhere in England there is a fight coordinator who’s available to help out with Dr. Who.
I re-watched the first episode again, and I liked it better the 2nd time. Also the intro is fantastic.
But how was it the 3rd time?
Saw it on the big screen and enjoyed the Strax intro, but heard from someone else that part didn’t make it to TV. Do you know if it finally did?
Strangely I am tempted to watch it again, I blame months of WHO withdrawal.
I can’t think of much to say that hasn’t already been said here. More of the same, nothing has really changed, Moffett and crew still aren’t figuring out that cuteness keeps the younger fan base but is a huge disservice to the greatness of the legacy of older series and the first few seasons of the current one. And the story and plot were empty, and the side characters both interesting and uninteresting because they’re wasted, and the action sequences totally sucked and yeah, the new edition has appeal but seems to be Smith wearing a Capaldi skin. Etc., etc., preaching to the choir. I did find the psychological subtext thing or whatever it is kind of interesting – projected narcissism and ego mania – but it was unclear where they’re going with that or why I should find it meaningful or important. And the major arc reveal? Ugh, that was terrible.
Edit: oh and to answer Mr. Theman’s question, the Strax intro didn’t appear to make it to the TV release. (My theater was sold out, so I watched at home.)
I didn’t get that at all. Capaldi’s doctor is almost the polar opposite of Smith’s. He seems world weary and cynical, whereas Smith was like a child most of the time (in a good way).
While it may not have been award-worthy, it certainly added a nice touch. Probably out there on the intertubes, someplace.
Soooo . . . I promise I’m not trolling, but since I love Capaldi I watched the S1E1 and E2 of the new Who. Serious question: Is the music, bad lighting, and low-quality video look intentional? I like the writing and the actors very much, and I totally get that the intro is retro and they kept the iconic sounds like teleporting and the TARDIS, but the other stuff seems really off-putting. The look and sound remind me of low budget 90’s TV. Is that a good thing?
I’m guessing you’ve not seen a lot of low budget '90’s tv if you think Doctor Who 2005 is that bad. ;)
In my opinion, the new series has always had better than average production value.
Something to consider: S1 (Eccleston, that is) was not done in HD. Also, the series used essentially trash to outfit some of their monsters and what not through the ages, so in some ways I think it was likely done to evoke that same feeling. Also, the funding was probably not that high for a restart of a show which epically failed in its last restart attempt.
Anyway, the effects do get significantly better, but never great.
Fair enough, I figured the name was famous enough that the budget would have been there, but if it’s an honest effort I’m good with it.
I don’t know, the dinosaur was pretty decent looking ;)
There is (and almost always has been) an element of camp to the series, to be fair. They could just as easily not try to include aliens/scenery/effects that their budget can’t do justice to, but part of the charm of the show is in this stuff, too. I mean, the most famous foe of them all, the Daleks? Just midgets walking around in upside-down trashcans with a plunger, right? But somehow, that serial where they were introduced is nonetheless menacing and terrifying and awesome, or at least was for its time.
When the show’s heart is in the right place and the writing, acting, score, and whatnot all are in sync, it works despite the camp and makes you fear and feel and laugh and love. I’m of the opinion all of that happened noticeably more in the era of the show you’re about to walk into than it does these days, but it still comes together often enough that I keep on watching and enjoying :)
I still don’t believe it’s even close to the level of bad effects from the nineties. And that’s primarily because of CGI. Nowadays even the smallest of budgets can afford it. And let’s be honest, the budget for Doctor Who isn’t THAT small. It’s a world wide phenom that has spawned shows talking about the show. When the announcement of a new doctor makes the front page of American news sites, you can’t say it’s not popular.
Sure, but I think we’re primarily discussing the first season of the revival, which, sure, outpaces the look of older iterations of the franchise by bent of sheer technological advancement, but was hardly the gargantuan multi-media, international behemoth that it is today. In 2005, DW was the fondly remembered, if somewhat weird, British cousin to proper, successful scifi like Star Trek, squarely in the domain of diehard adherents who bought [mostly] shoddy licensed paperbacks and listened to audio dramas because they hadn’t gotten a proper, new episode in almost 20 years. While its budget wasn’t infinitesimal at that time, it’s definitely (and obviously) grown a lot in the intervening 9 years.
Which is my point. ;)
As I sat and watched “Rose” back in 2005, I remembering marveling and how good the production values were. It may seem like no great shakes now, but then it was certainly more than respectable, especially to older fans. Even the introduction of the Slitheen didn’t take the bloom off the…well, you know.