The Archers ran longer.
Not rubbish just over rated.
A bit of Saturday afternoon tea time fun, that was much improved after a long break.
Quote: Matthew Stott @ May 30 2011, 12:27 PM BSTYou're not going to convince any of us that classic Who, that much loved series that ran for thirty years, was actually rubbish!
Oh and as ever when ever I'm write no one adresses my actual salient point.
So I win.
Again.
Sooty, you're so far off the mark it's not funny. You clearly didn't like the show before. You're not really considering when it was made or the environment it was made in. Overt affection between a middle-aged male and a young girl wasn't acceptable in children's programme. Nowadays emotional incontinence is the starting point of all drama and the Doctor is young enough to be the assistant's boyfriend.
Doctor Who was worked on by some of the best people to have ever worked in British TV production. John Friedlander who sculpted the original Davros mask, Raymond Cusick who designed the Daleks - surely one of the greatest production designs of all time. A wealth of actors, musicians and production designers.
Bringing back the show after 20 years was always going bring benefits. Based on the fact that a post-modern outlook and better special effects/more money was a given, the new teams haven't added a tenth of what the previous production teams added in quality.
That is not to say there hasn't been greatness because there has - brilliant ideas, brilliantly realised, but the idea that the new show is so much better than the old show is a misconception. They are separated by nearly two generations in some cases.
I liked it Godot, I liked it alot.
But when it went off air, what can I say I got my geeky fix doing other things.
So when I came back to it on video (I didn't get one till 5 years later than most kids). It was with enough time to have forgotten and ergo a lot of freshness of vision.
And time doesn't mean that much. Doomwatch is still way better than the Xfiles, Quatermass is superior to new and old Who, and old V kicks new V's ass all day.
But still answer my original question. Why if it's so good, when the 2 lead characters are together do they have nothing to say?
Or look at how irritating and pointless Liz Sladen was in Old Who and how much more magnificent and rounded a character in The Sara Jane Adventures. A show with no sex but acres of heart and character.
Quote: sootyj @ May 30 2011, 1:09 PM BSTBut still answer my original question. Why if it's so good, when the 2 lead characters are together do they have nothing to say?
I'm not really sure how you came to that conclusion. They didn't talk to each other in the same way they tend to now though, no. McCoy and Ace I think are a great example of a duo who really spoke to each other..
That's fair comment, I'm starting to join with you in seeing the McCOy era as underrated. Certainly he was a pretty good actor.
Quote: Matthew Stott @ May 30 2011, 1:29 PM BSTI'm not really sure how you came to that conclusion.
Check out the interaction in the first 10 minutes in the Tardis or Sara Jane's goodbye in The Hand of Death.
It's so unemotive and static it's weird.
Quote: sootyj @ May 30 2011, 1:33 PM BSTThat's fair comment, I'm starting to join with you in seeing the McCOy era as underrated. Certainly he was a pretty good actor.
Others will never agree, but certainly his final two series were really refreshing Who after a poor few years. They were taking the show in an interesting new direction and contained some really classic Who stories. See Ghostlight for the kind of creepy, bonkers story they would never have tackled in the Baker or Davison era! Even a Story like The Happiness patrol; people see the Bertie Basset monster and mock, without actually watching the story itself, where it actually really works in the world they've created.
As I say though, for some McCoy will always be the whipping boy.
Quote: sootyj @ May 30 2011, 1:35 PM BSTCheck out the interaction in the first 10 minutes in the Tardis or Sara Jane's goodbye in The Hand of Death.
It's so unemotive and static it's weird.
Oh sure, the emotional side of things when it came to the Doc/companion relationship was often not really there.
Not to blow the McCoy era too much, but it certainly was something that they tried to develop more between him and Ace.
Quote: sootyj @ May 30 2011, 1:09 PM BSTBut still answer my original question. Why if it's so good, when the 2 lead characters are together do they have nothing to say?
Or look at how irritating and pointless Liz Sladen was in Old Who and how much more magnificent and rounded a character in The Sara Jane Adventures. A show with no sex but acres of heart and character.
I can't answer your question Sooty, I don't really get what you're on about.
Leela is a really clever character who most of the writers managed to use well. She is scornful of the lad in Fang Rock because he's scared, she attacks Magnus Greel with a knife and has to be told off by the Doctor for killing people on a number of occasions.
I don't agree that Sarah Jane is irritating and pointless either. I've never felt anything close to this emotion watching Liz Sladen. I'm always impressed by how well she acts, sometimes with mind-numbingly weak lines (Terry Nation).
I've never seen the Sarah jane adventures so I can't comment on that, but it is a modern programme. Thirty + year old TV shows must be watched with an awareness of the climate they were made in.
Quote: sootyj @ May 30 2011, 1:35 PM BSTThat's fair comment, I'm starting to join with you in seeing the McCOy era as underrated. Certainly he was a pretty good actor.
There was nothing wrong with McCoy, he wouldn't have been my choice - but neither would Davidson or Colin Baker. I thought they were all good and worked hard at the part and deserved respect.
Baker and McCoy were especially hampered having ridiculous costumes and having to work when the prog was under fire from management and being produced by widow Twanky.
Quote: Godot Taxis @ May 30 2011, 1:51 PM BSTBaker and McCoy were especially hampered having ridiculous costumes and having to work when the prog was under fire from management and being produced by widow Twanky.
His jumper was silly, yeah; though the rest was fine. Especially when he changed to the brown jacket.
There's no saving grace in Colin baker's though!
I suppose I'm referring to the umbrella as well. As you say Colin Baker's was diabolical.
I really don't like Matt Smith's outfit. The close the actor wears in real life seem much more suited to me. The skinny jeans/braces/bow tie thing seems tired even before it starts.
I also think Amy's outfits have been a massive wasted opportunity. Can you even remember what she wears off the top of your head?
Short skirts, shorts, short skirts, tights.
And Godot what I mean is at a fundamental level all truly good stories are about people.
Professor Quatermass a rolling cauldron of self righteous fury, pride and terrible guilt.
Ecclestone's Who (the best for my money) a loud, brash know it all show off, covering up for terrible guilt and loneliness. Frequently lashing out at those around him.
Arrogant, imperious Kirk, a bully a racist and a misogynist. But fearless and noble.
It's their stories I want to see. And if there's a bit of clever scifi bollox along the way no harm done.
Not some weird sexless uncle, probably on bromide and the sex offenders register. Ineptly bumbling into situations and forever stuck with monotone companions.
I'm Sara Jane I'm perky!
I'm Leela I'm agressive.
Quote: sootyj @ May 30 2011, 4:03 PM BSTArrogant, imperious Kirk, a bully a racist and a misogynist. But fearless and noble.
I don't think any of that was on purpose, apart from the fearless and noble. The Doctor is a far more interesting and fun character than Kirk.
Quote: Godot Taxis @ May 30 2011, 3:55 PM BSTI suppose I'm referring to the umbrella as well.
(I actually quite liked that! It appealed to me as a six year old)
Quote: Matthew Stott @ May 30 2011, 4:19 PM BST(I actually quite liked that! It appealed to me as a six year old)
But not so good when you're 24. (McCoy's question mark umbrella)
Quote: sootyj @ May 30 2011, 4:03 PM BSTAnd Godot what I mean is at a fundamental level all truly good stories are about people.
Professor Quatermass a rolling cauldron of self righteous fury, pride and terrible guilt.
Ecclestone's Who (the best for my money) a loud, brash know it all show off, covering up for terrible guilt and loneliness. Frequently lashing out at those around him.
Arrogant, imperious Kirk, a bully a racist and a misogynist. But fearless and noble.
It's their stories I want to see. And if there's a bit of clever scifi bollox along the way no harm done.
Not some weird sexless uncle, probably on bromide and the sex offenders register. Ineptly bumbling into situations and forever stuck with monotone companions.
I'm Sara Jane I'm perky!
I'm Leela I'm agressive.
Well I always assumed that you were meant to think that the Doctor was shagging his companion. Not hard to do with Tom in role as he usually was.
All of the depth you're talking about I find in Hinchcliffe-era Who - that's why I watch it.
I don't think we're after different things, I just think for some reason you're immune to the blandishments of 70s Who.
Quote: sootyj @ May 30 2011, 4:03 PM BSTShort skirts, shorts, short skirts, tights.
Yeah but it's not sexy short skirts and tights is it? And she wears flat lace-up boots like a dyke Bavarian hill-walker.
Quote: sootyj @ May 30 2011, 4:03 PM BSTI'm Sara Jane I'm perky!
She sure was. 
Quote: sootyj @ May 30 2011, 1:35 PM BSTThat's fair comment, I'm starting to join with you in seeing the McCOy era as underrated. Certainly he was a pretty good actor.
Check out the interaction in the first 10 minutes in the Tardis or Sara Jane's goodbye in The Hand of Death.
It's so unemotive and static it's weird.
But it's subtle. No overly loud, long music!
Quote: sootyj @ May 30 2011, 8:54 AM BSTThe nadir of Robot's of Death is in the first 10 minutes.
The Dr explaining to Leela how the Tardis is bigger on the inside.
1 Oh God not again! Dr Who's pub bore conversation.
2 Is that all they have to talk about? Emphasising the lack of any interesting character dynamic in Old Who.
3 A prime example of "what's that?" and "how does that work?" compnaion dialogue.
4 It's blatant filler. Any show how ever small the budget doesn't need filler.I don't care about production values, I care about what they do with resources.
Sorry but Robots of Death is a turgid, obvious grubbing in Asimov's dustbin.
And Leela's accent? Dear God emphasis of how the show couldn't even get the most basic characterisation right.
It improved with Peter Davidson, but it couldn't get much worse.
Until Colin Baker...
You just haven't got a clue, have you?
What makes you say that?