I don't think you can really rank missing or incomplete stories in the same way that you can for ones that are complete. You're not judging them all on the same basis. So:-
Good:
01) The War Games
02) Tomb Of The Cybermen
OK:
03) The Seeds Of Death
04) The Mind Robber
05) The Krotons
I don't think you can really rank missing or incomplete stories in the same way that you can for ones that are complete. You're not judging them all on the same basis.
Of course you can-they're all available as soundtrack CDs, the lack of visuals doesn't stop you judging the actual story, only the effects!
I don't think you can really rank missing or incomplete stories in the same way that you can for ones that are complete. You're not judging them all on the same basis. So:-
Good:
01) The War Games
02) Tomb Of The Cybermen
OK:
03) The Seeds Of Death
04) The Mind Robber
05) The Krotons
Of course you can-they're all available as soundtrack CDs, the lack of visuals doesn't stop you judging the actual story, only the effects!
Well, we'll have to disagree on that one.
If you're ranking something then it should, in my opinion, all be done on a level playing field.
Watching incomplete stories or listening to stories that are completely missing on audio whilst looking at telesnaps (or not) is not the same as watching a complete story. The experience is completely different.
You can form some sort of opinion by watching episodes or incomplete stories and / or listening to audio soundtracks but you can't, in all honesty, claim that you get the same experience from doing that as you do from watching a complete story.
If you're ranking something then it should, in my opinion, all be done on a level playing field.
Watching incomplete stories or listening to stories that are completely missing on audio whilst looking at telesnaps (or not) is not the same as watching a complete story. The experience is completely different.
You can form some sort of opinion by watching episodes or incomplete stories and / or listening to audio soundtracks but you can't, in all honesty, claim that you get the same experience from doing that as you do from watching a complete story.
Quite correct, it is alot harder to try and judge stories that are incomplete / don't exist anymore. It's all very well saying that you can judge the stories, but without doubt awful effects, ludicrous monster design and bad acting will affect the way we judge a story that we have seen in completion. I've tried to limit my choices to stories that I have seen, and the odd one like Evil of the Daleks which have stayed in my conciousness since my first viewing as a child in the 60s.
Quite correct, it is alot harder to try and judge stories that are incomplete / don't exist anymore. It's all very well saying that you can judge the stories, but without doubt awful effects, ludicrous monster design and bad acting will affect the way we judge a story that we have seen in completion. I've tried to limit my choices to stories that I have seen, and the odd one like Evil of the Daleks which have stayed in my conciousness since my first viewing as a child in the 60s.
That's about as close as you can get I think. But, even so, it's still not the same as watching an entire block of stories in a specific time period and then ranking them in order.
How often have we seen something that we watched as a child or a teenager, thought it was brilliant and then revised our opinion again when we see it as an adult?
I saw The New Avengers as a teenager (when BBC2 repeated it) and thought it was great. Boyfriend got it for me on DVD when it came out and I revised my opinion on a lot of the episodes. And that's less than 20 years later!
The same goes for films. I could name any number that I thought were great when I was a child or teenager but my opinion of them has changed as an adult.
People who saw the missing Hartnell / Troughton episodes first time around may have had those stories locked into their memories to a certain degree and there may, in some instance, by a case of "rose tinted spectacles" going on.
I'm sure if all the episodes suddenly appeared tomorrow there'd be lots of DW fans revising their opinions of certain stories that they watched on original transmission.
Troughton was MY Doctor!! However I was only 7 years old at the time, and I only have a handful of the DVD's (if that!).
So here's my opinion:-
TOP FIVE(in order):-
1. THE MIND ROBBER ( Nice fantasy-style story...was it a dream? Who knows)
2. THE TOMB OF THE CYBERMEN (Classic aliens Vs spaceship team + Doctor)
3. SEEDS OF DEATH (Good old action-packed adventure with Jamie and Zoe.....)
4.THE WAR GAMES (Bit of a yarn, but at least we found out about where DW came from! Also a good spun-out story)
5. THE EVIL OF THE DALEKS ( Good time-travel stuff from what I can remember)
BAD ONES: (Not many I can say...but:-)
1. THE DOMINATORS (The quarks were silly and the acting was even worse...and I was 8 years old and remember it!
2. THE KROTONS (Bit of a bad choice of robot if that was supposed to be made of crystal! Cardboard more like! with a bit of egg box thrown in!!)
Cannot think of any bad ones... but I've missed a GOOD one - and that is "Web Of Fear".:)
If you're ranking something then it should, in my opinion, all be done on a level playing field.
Watching incomplete stories or listening to stories that are completely missing on audio whilst looking at telesnaps (or not) is not the same as watching a complete story. The experience is completely different.
You can form some sort of opinion by watching episodes or incomplete stories and / or listening to audio soundtracks but you can't, in all honesty, claim that you get the same experience from doing that as you do from watching a complete story.
I can in all honestly claim that, you know-and I do. I see no difference between listening to the audio and watching the TV version, it's still the same story. So, I'll judge them using my own criteria, thanks.
Quite correct, it is alot harder to try and judge stories that are incomplete / don't exist anymore. It's all very well saying that you can judge the stories, but without doubt awful effects, ludicrous monster design and bad acting will affect the way we judge a story that we have seen in completion. I've tried to limit my choices to stories that I have seen, and the odd one like Evil of the Daleks which have stayed in my conciousness since my first viewing as a child in the 60s.
So, are you saying that a blind person who saw every episode oif the classic series then lost their sight cannot give an opinion on any story since 1996 because they've only heard it, not seen it?
as far as I'm concerned, if the actors performances still exist and can be heard, the story still exists and can be judged against any other. Because that is what I care about, not the effects.
So, are you saying that a blind person who saw every episode oif the classic series then lost their sight cannot give an opinion on any story since 1996 because they've only heard it, not seen it?
as far as I'm concerned, if the actors performances still exist and can be heard, the story still exists and can be judged against any other. Because that is what I care about, not the effects.
I don't think anyone is claiming that people are unable to make a judgement on incomplete or missing stories.
My point was, and remains, that you cannot judge them on a level playing field.
Your analogy of a blind person is actually a good one. They can judge all the episodes on the same basis because they can listen to all the sountracks and then make a judgement from there.
However, you cannot under any circumstances claim that an opinion formed by looking at telesnaps and / or listening to audio is made on the same basis as watching an entire story visually.
The visual and the sensory mediums are completely different. With the visual medium all the work is done for you in terms of what the characters, locations, clothes, colours etc look like and the facial expressions of the actors (assuming they're good actors) can convey what the characters are feeling.
The audio medium is completely different and all your imagination a freer reign to imagine locations, what the people look like etc. How often have you spoken to someone on the phone, formed a visual picture in your mind and then met them and found out they look nothing like what you imagined they did?
On that basis. the visual and audio mediums are not identical and that was my whole point:- an opinion formed after watching something is not formed in the same way as an opinion formed after listening to something. In essence, part of the experience (the visual part) is missing.
That's why, whenever I've ranked the Hartnell and Troughton episodes in any sort of poll I've only ever rated the complete episode. That way, my rankings are all made on the same basis.
If other people choose to rank all of the Hartnell / Troughton stories then that's up to them and it's completely fine. But please don't try to claim that the visual and audio experiences are the same because they're quite plainly not.
So, are you saying that a blind person who saw every episode oif the classic series then lost their sight cannot give an opinion on any story since 1996 because they've only heard it, not seen it?
as far as I'm concerned, if the actors performances still exist and can be heard, the story still exists and can be judged against any other. Because that is what I care about, not the effects.
I think their judgement would be different between the stories they saw and ones they just heard, yes. And I'm sure somewhere there'll be a story that you didn't like because, for instance, the monster design was ludicrous.
I don't think anyone is claiming that people are unable to make a judgement on incomplete or missing stories.
My point was, and remains, that you cannot judge them on a level playing field.
Your analogy of a blind person is actually a good one. They can judge all the episodes on the same basis because they can listen to all the sountracks and then make a judgement from there.
However, you cannot under any circumstances claim that an opinion formed by looking at telesnaps and / or listening to audio is made on the same basis as watching an entire story visually.
The visual and the sensory mediums are completely different. With the visual medium all the work is done for you in terms of what the characters, locations, clothes, colours etc look like and the facial expressions of the actors (assuming they're good actors) can convey what the characters are feeling.
The audio medium is completely different and all your imagination a freer reign to imagine locations, what the people look like etc. How often have you spoken to someone on the phone, formed a visual picture in your mind and then met them and found out they look nothing like what you imagined they did?
On that basis. the visual and audio mediums are not identical and that was my whole point:- an opinion formed after watching something is not formed in the same way as an opinion formed after listening to something. In essence, part of the experience (the visual part) is missing.
That's why, whenever I've ranked the Hartnell and Troughton episodes in any sort of poll I've only ever rated the complete episode. That way, my rankings are all made on the same basis.
If other people choose to rank all of the Hartnell / Troughton stories then that's up to them and it's completely fine. But please don't try to claim that the visual and audio experiences are the same because they're quite plainly not.
I don't think anyone is claiming that people are unable to make a judgement on incomplete or missing stories.
My point was, and remains, that you cannot judge them on a level playing field.
Your analogy of a blind person is actually a good one. They can judge all the episodes on the same basis because they can listen to all the sountracks and then make a judgement from there.
However, you cannot under any circumstances claim that an opinion formed by looking at telesnaps and / or listening to audio is made on the same basis as watching an entire story visually.
The visual and the sensory mediums are completely different. With the visual medium all the work is done for you in terms of what the characters, locations, clothes, colours etc look like and the facial expressions of the actors (assuming they're good actors) can convey what the characters are feeling.
The audio medium is completely different and all your imagination a freer reign to imagine locations, what the people look like etc. How often have you spoken to someone on the phone, formed a visual picture in your mind and then met them and found out they look nothing like what you imagined they did?
On that basis. the visual and audio mediums are not identical and that was my whole point:- an opinion formed after watching something is not formed in the same way as an opinion formed after listening to something. In essence, part of the experience (the visual part) is missing.
That's why, whenever I've ranked the Hartnell and Troughton episodes in any sort of poll I've only ever rated the complete episode. That way, my rankings are all made on the same basis.
If other people choose to rank all of the Hartnell / Troughton stories then that's up to them and it's completely fine. But please don't try to claim that the visual and audio experiences are the same because they're quite plainly not.
I don't think anyone is claiming that people are unable to make a judgement on incomplete or missing stories.
My point was, and remains, that you cannot judge them on a level playing field.
Depends on what you consider the most important, surely-the visuals or the actual story. The story is the same whether you're seeing it or hearing it.
Your analogy of a blind person is actually a good one. They can judge all the episodes on the same basis because they can listen to all the sountracks and then make a judgement from there.
However, you cannot under any circumstances claim that an opinion formed by looking at telesnaps and / or listening to audio is made on the same basis as watching an entire story visually.
I can, you know. Because it is as far as I'm concerned. I don't bother with the telesnaps by the way, I never mentioned them.
The visual and the sensory mediums are completely different. With the visual medium all the work is done for you in terms of what the characters, locations, clothes, colours etc look like and the facial expressions of the actors (assuming they're good actors) can convey what the characters are feeling.
The audio medium is completely different and all your imagination a freer reign to imagine locations, what the people look like etc. How often have you spoken to someone on the phone, formed a visual picture in your mind and then met them and found out they look nothing like what you imagined they did?
But I know what most of the characters look like, and I can't see that it's relevant anyway. If you watch a black & white story, you don't know if a supporting character's hair is brown or red. Does it change the story for you?
On that basis. the visual and audio mediums are not identical and that was my whole point:- an opinion formed after watching something is not formed in the same way as an opinion formed after listening to something. In essence, part of the experience (the visual part) is missing.
But the story remains the same. And that is principally what I'm judging.
That's why, whenever I've ranked the Hartnell and Troughton episodes in any sort of poll I've only ever rated the complete episode. That way, my rankings are all made on the same basis.
If other people choose to rank all of the Hartnell / Troughton stories then that's up to them and it's completely fine. But please don't try to claim that the visual and audio experiences are the same because they're quite plainly not.
I'm not 'claiming' it, i'm 'stating' that for me it makes no difference. Please don't try to impose your limitations on other people.
If you imagine a DW story as a jigsaw it's complete when you watch the images and listen to the soundtrack of the episode at the same time.
Just listening to the soundtrack makes the jigsaw incomplete. You can't see the visual parts of it.
Any opinion you form about the jigsaw is therefore not made on exactly the same basis if bits of it are complete.
The human brain relies primarily on the visual medium to form opinions and make judgements about things. That is an established scientific fact.
The other senses, hearing, touch, smell and taste add additional information to the visual information that our brains have already processed.
To suggest that an opinion formed based on sight and sound is identical to one formed based on sound alone is completely stupid.
How many times have you seen shows on the television where people have been asked to identify things whilst blindfolded? Nobody gets those objects right 100% of the time because the visual sense has been removed.
In fact, let's take it down to brass tacks. Imagine DW and Sherlock are both up for an award that you can vote in. Both have run for 13 weeks. You've watched all the episodes of DW and just 3 of Sherlock.
Are you going to claim that, when casting your vote you're judging both shows on exactly the same basis?
Of course you're not. You can't possibly say that you are because the picture you have of the season of Sherlock is incomplete because you haven't watched all the episodes.
That doesn't mean that you can't have an opinion on it, just that that opinion was formed on less information than you used to make your judgement on DW.
If you imagine a DW story as a jigsaw it's complete when you watch the images and listen to the soundtrack of the episode at the same time.
Just listening to the soundtrack makes the jigsaw incomplete. You can't see the visual parts of it.
Any opinion you form about the jigsaw is therefore not made on exactly the same basis if bits of it are complete.
The human brain relies primarily on the visual medium to form opinions and make judgements about things. That is an established scientific fact.
The other senses, hearing, touch, smell and taste add additional information to the visual information that our brains have already processed.
To suggest that an opinion formed based on sight and sound is identical to one formed based on sound alone is completely stupid.
You are assuming that everyone judges things on the same basis, which is plainly nonsense.
How many times have you seen shows on the television where people have been asked to identify things whilst blindfolded? Nobody gets those objects right 100% of the time because the visual sense has been removed.
Never. It isn't the sort of show that I'd watch as I'd find it very boring.
If you imagine a DW story as a jigsaw it's complete when you watch the images and listen to the soundtrack of the episode at the same time.
Just listening to the soundtrack makes the jigsaw incomplete. You can't see the visual parts of it.
Any opinion you form about the jigsaw is therefore not made on exactly the same basis if bits of it are complete.
The human brain relies primarily on the visual medium to form opinions and make judgements about things. That is an established scientific fact.
The other senses, hearing, touch, smell and taste add additional information to the visual information that our brains have already processed.
To suggest that an opinion formed based on sight and sound is identical to one formed based on sound alone is completely stupid.
How many times have you seen shows on the television where people have been asked to identify things whilst blindfolded? Nobody gets those objects right 100% of the time because the visual sense has been removed.
In fact, let's take it down to brass tacks. Imagine DW and Sherlock are both up for an award that you can vote in. Both have run for 13 weeks. You've watched all the episodes of DW and just 3 of Sherlock.
Are you going to claim that, when casting your vote you're judging both shows on exactly the same basis?
Of course you're not. You can't possibly say that you are because the picture you have of the season of Sherlock is incomplete because you haven't watched all the episodes.
That doesn't mean that you can't have an opinion on it, just that that opinion was formed on less information than you used to make your judgement on DW.
Yet more nonsense.
That's also one of the worst analogies I've ever heard - if I watched 13 episodes of Who and enjoyed them yet watched 3 episodes of Sherlock and couldn't sit through anymore because it thought it was dreadful then I could easily tell you which is the better show!
That's also one of the worst analogies I've ever heard - if I watched 13 episodes of Who and enjoyed them yet watched 3 episodes of Sherlock and couldn't sit through anymore because it thought it was dreadful then I could easily tell you which is the better show!
Fine, if you're being deliberately awkward.
If you've watched all 13 episodes of Season Five of DW but only watch 3 of Season 6 of DW are you going to argue that you can still form an opinion of both seasons on the same basis?
Of course you can't because there'll be 10 episodes of Season Six you won't have seen.
No doubt you'll argue that you'd never miss any episodes of Season Six......:rolleyes:
If you've watched all 13 episodes of Season Five of DW but only watch 3 of Season 6 of DW are you going to argue that you can still form an opinion of both seasons on the same basis?
Of course you can't because there'll be 10 episodes of Season Six you won't have seen.
No doubt you'll argue that you'd never miss any episodes of Season Six......:rolleyes:
Ok I'll make sure to watch every televised second of everything ever broadcast before daring to have an opinion of it in future.
Look clearly you can't manage to make a reasoned judgement of audio stories but don't try and suggest the rest of us can't either.
Oh and please no more nonsense posts about jigsaws please.
Ok I'll make sure to watch every televised second of everything ever broadcast before daring to have an opinion of it in future.
Look clearly you can't manage to make a reasoned judgement of audio stories but don't try and suggest the rest of us can't either.
Oh and please no more nonsense posts about jigsaws please.
I'm beginning to wonder whether you can actually read.
I never said that you couldn't have an opinion about audio stories, nor that you have to watch everything broadcast to have an opinion.
My point has always been that, if you're going to judge something, it should be done on a consistent basis.
So, if you going to make a judgement on the relatives strengths of all 5 seasons of the New Series it should be consistent.
If someone has watched:-
+ All of Season One
+ 5 episodes of Season Two
+ 8 episodes of Season Three
+ All of Season Four
+ 3 episodes of Season Five
they can't express a consistent opinion about how they would rank the seasons, because they haven't seen all 13 episodes in all of the seasons.
So, they might rank the seasons like this:-
01) Season One
02) Season Three
03) Season Two
04) Season Three
05) Season Five
There's nothing wrong with them doing that. But they haven't made a judgement about Seasons 2, 3 and 5 in the same way that they did for Seasons One and Four because they haven't seen all the episodes in the other Seasons.
If they were to watch the 8 episodes they missed it Season Two for example they might that decide that that was the best season and rank it in first place.
If you've watched all 13 episodes of Season Five of DW but only watch 3 of Season 6 of DW are you going to argue that you can still form an opinion of both seasons on the same basis?
Of course you can't because there'll be 10 episodes of Season Six you won't have seen.
No doubt you'll argue that you'd never miss any episodes of Season Six......:rolleyes:
This has nothing to do with the original point. Missing 10 episodes altogether is not the same as listening to them without the visual element.
Comments
http://www.google.co.uk/imgres?imgurl=http://www.doctorwhoreviews.co.uk/UU_files/The%2520Mind%2520Robber%25201.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.doctorwhoreviews.co.uk/UU.htm&usg=__C4L7ZoOJjitpzSqQB5MfgxG_uCo=&h=314&w=600&sz=25&hl=en&start=49&zoom=1&tbnid=qBRwGhQRVo6bkM:&tbnh=87&tbnw=167&ei=GIFITY7XIZOD4QbRuZi3BQ&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dwendy%2Bpadbury%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26safe%3Doff%26sa%3DN%26rlz%3D1R2ACAW_enGB406%26biw%3D1076%26bih%3D423%26tbs%3Disch:10%2C1233&um=1&itbs=1&iact=hc&vpx=171&vpy=166&dur=1764&hovh=162&hovw=311&tx=198&ty=130&oei=rIBITaCKO4nChAey5JXbBA&esq=19&page=5&ndsp=14&ved=1t:429,r:8,s:49&biw=1076&bih=423
http://www.google.co.uk/imgres?imgurl=http://news.bbc.co.uk/media/images/40191000/jpg/_40191555_wendy_padbury.jpg&imgrefurl=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_pictures/3744067.stm&usg=__6RXgHUtZ7utNlX2j2C8Hs7f8ru4=&h=300&w=300&sz=27&hl=en&start=0&zoom=1&tbnid=MnZdfH7SWbBJaM:&tbnh=155&tbnw=164&ei=G4JITa8hgqLhBsubrPwF&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dwendy%2Bpadbury%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26safe%3Doff%26sa%3DN%26rlz%3D1R2ACAW_enGB406%26biw%3D1076%26bih%3D423%26tbs%3Disch:1&um=1&itbs=1&iact=rc&dur=192&oei=rIBITaCKO4nChAey5JXbBA&esq=8&page=1&ndsp=11&ved=1t:429,r:0,s:0&tx=81&ty=74
http://www.google.co.uk/imgres?imgurl=http://www.probertencyclopaedia.com/j/Wendy%2520Padbury.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.probertencyclopaedia.com/cgi-bin/res.pl%3Fkeyword%3DWendy%26offset%3D0&usg=__iJjXoxNi3QF68rhXNwWfetJmU0s=&h=379&w=200&sz=25&hl=en&start=11&zoom=1&tbnid=IFJIcV1OpMiQpM:&tbnh=126&tbnw=66&ei=goJITbbsDo2X4ga37OD7BQ&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dwendy%2Bpadbury%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26safe%3Doff%26sa%3DN%26rlz%3D1R2ACAW_enGB406%26biw%3D1076%26bih%3D423%26tbs%3Disch:10%2C309&um=1&itbs=1&iact=hc&vpx=277&vpy=9&dur=3558&hovh=303&hovw=160&tx=97&ty=228&oei=rIBITaCKO4nChAey5JXbBA&esq=13&page=2&ndsp=13&ved=1t:429,r:7,s:11&biw=1076&bih=423
I so knew one of those piccies was going to be from The Mind Robber Part 1, if not all of them!!!
I get the feeling you have the same fascination for Zoe as I have for Peri!!!!!!
It must be an age thing:)
My top 5:
The Mind Robber
The Invasion
The Web of Fear
The War Games
The Seeds of Death
Bottom 5:
The Dominators
The Space Pirates
The Wheel in Space
The Moonbase
Good:
01) The War Games
02) Tomb Of The Cybermen
OK:
03) The Seeds Of Death
04) The Mind Robber
05) The Krotons
Rather dull:
06) The Dominators
Of course you can-they're all available as soundtrack CDs, the lack of visuals doesn't stop you judging the actual story, only the effects!
Or you can get hold of the recon videos and watch the audio with the telesnaps!!!!
Well, we'll have to disagree on that one.
If you're ranking something then it should, in my opinion, all be done on a level playing field.
Watching incomplete stories or listening to stories that are completely missing on audio whilst looking at telesnaps (or not) is not the same as watching a complete story. The experience is completely different.
You can form some sort of opinion by watching episodes or incomplete stories and / or listening to audio soundtracks but you can't, in all honesty, claim that you get the same experience from doing that as you do from watching a complete story.
Quite correct, it is alot harder to try and judge stories that are incomplete / don't exist anymore. It's all very well saying that you can judge the stories, but without doubt awful effects, ludicrous monster design and bad acting will affect the way we judge a story that we have seen in completion. I've tried to limit my choices to stories that I have seen, and the odd one like Evil of the Daleks which have stayed in my conciousness since my first viewing as a child in the 60s.
That's about as close as you can get I think. But, even so, it's still not the same as watching an entire block of stories in a specific time period and then ranking them in order.
How often have we seen something that we watched as a child or a teenager, thought it was brilliant and then revised our opinion again when we see it as an adult?
I saw The New Avengers as a teenager (when BBC2 repeated it) and thought it was great. Boyfriend got it for me on DVD when it came out and I revised my opinion on a lot of the episodes. And that's less than 20 years later!
The same goes for films. I could name any number that I thought were great when I was a child or teenager but my opinion of them has changed as an adult.
People who saw the missing Hartnell / Troughton episodes first time around may have had those stories locked into their memories to a certain degree and there may, in some instance, by a case of "rose tinted spectacles" going on.
I'm sure if all the episodes suddenly appeared tomorrow there'd be lots of DW fans revising their opinions of certain stories that they watched on original transmission.
So here's my opinion:-
TOP FIVE(in order):-
1. THE MIND ROBBER ( Nice fantasy-style story...was it a dream? Who knows)
2. THE TOMB OF THE CYBERMEN (Classic aliens Vs spaceship team + Doctor)
3. SEEDS OF DEATH (Good old action-packed adventure with Jamie and Zoe.....)
4.THE WAR GAMES (Bit of a yarn, but at least we found out about where DW came from! Also a good spun-out story)
5. THE EVIL OF THE DALEKS ( Good time-travel stuff from what I can remember)
BAD ONES: (Not many I can say...but:-)
1. THE DOMINATORS (The quarks were silly and the acting was even worse...and I was 8 years old and remember it!
2. THE KROTONS (Bit of a bad choice of robot if that was supposed to be made of crystal! Cardboard more like! with a bit of egg box thrown in!!)
Cannot think of any bad ones... but I've missed a GOOD one - and that is "Web Of Fear".:)
I can in all honestly claim that, you know-and I do. I see no difference between listening to the audio and watching the TV version, it's still the same story. So, I'll judge them using my own criteria, thanks.
So, are you saying that a blind person who saw every episode oif the classic series then lost their sight cannot give an opinion on any story since 1996 because they've only heard it, not seen it?
as far as I'm concerned, if the actors performances still exist and can be heard, the story still exists and can be judged against any other. Because that is what I care about, not the effects.
I don't think anyone is claiming that people are unable to make a judgement on incomplete or missing stories.
My point was, and remains, that you cannot judge them on a level playing field.
Your analogy of a blind person is actually a good one. They can judge all the episodes on the same basis because they can listen to all the sountracks and then make a judgement from there.
However, you cannot under any circumstances claim that an opinion formed by looking at telesnaps and / or listening to audio is made on the same basis as watching an entire story visually.
The visual and the sensory mediums are completely different. With the visual medium all the work is done for you in terms of what the characters, locations, clothes, colours etc look like and the facial expressions of the actors (assuming they're good actors) can convey what the characters are feeling.
The audio medium is completely different and all your imagination a freer reign to imagine locations, what the people look like etc. How often have you spoken to someone on the phone, formed a visual picture in your mind and then met them and found out they look nothing like what you imagined they did?
On that basis. the visual and audio mediums are not identical and that was my whole point:- an opinion formed after watching something is not formed in the same way as an opinion formed after listening to something. In essence, part of the experience (the visual part) is missing.
That's why, whenever I've ranked the Hartnell and Troughton episodes in any sort of poll I've only ever rated the complete episode. That way, my rankings are all made on the same basis.
If other people choose to rank all of the Hartnell / Troughton stories then that's up to them and it's completely fine. But please don't try to claim that the visual and audio experiences are the same because they're quite plainly not.
I think their judgement would be different between the stories they saw and ones they just heard, yes. And I'm sure somewhere there'll be a story that you didn't like because, for instance, the monster design was ludicrous.
Yep to all that
Utter nonsense
I'm not 'claiming' it, i'm 'stating' that for me it makes no difference. Please don't try to impose your limitations on other people.
Really? On what basis.
If you imagine a DW story as a jigsaw it's complete when you watch the images and listen to the soundtrack of the episode at the same time.
Just listening to the soundtrack makes the jigsaw incomplete. You can't see the visual parts of it.
Any opinion you form about the jigsaw is therefore not made on exactly the same basis if bits of it are complete.
The human brain relies primarily on the visual medium to form opinions and make judgements about things. That is an established scientific fact.
The other senses, hearing, touch, smell and taste add additional information to the visual information that our brains have already processed.
To suggest that an opinion formed based on sight and sound is identical to one formed based on sound alone is completely stupid.
How many times have you seen shows on the television where people have been asked to identify things whilst blindfolded? Nobody gets those objects right 100% of the time because the visual sense has been removed.
In fact, let's take it down to brass tacks. Imagine DW and Sherlock are both up for an award that you can vote in. Both have run for 13 weeks. You've watched all the episodes of DW and just 3 of Sherlock.
Are you going to claim that, when casting your vote you're judging both shows on exactly the same basis?
Of course you're not. You can't possibly say that you are because the picture you have of the season of Sherlock is incomplete because you haven't watched all the episodes.
That doesn't mean that you can't have an opinion on it, just that that opinion was formed on less information than you used to make your judgement on DW.
Yet more nonsense.
That's also one of the worst analogies I've ever heard - if I watched 13 episodes of Who and enjoyed them yet watched 3 episodes of Sherlock and couldn't sit through anymore because it thought it was dreadful then I could easily tell you which is the better show!
Fine, if you're being deliberately awkward.
If you've watched all 13 episodes of Season Five of DW but only watch 3 of Season 6 of DW are you going to argue that you can still form an opinion of both seasons on the same basis?
Of course you can't because there'll be 10 episodes of Season Six you won't have seen.
No doubt you'll argue that you'd never miss any episodes of Season Six......:rolleyes:
Ok I'll make sure to watch every televised second of everything ever broadcast before daring to have an opinion of it in future.
Look clearly you can't manage to make a reasoned judgement of audio stories but don't try and suggest the rest of us can't either.
Oh and please no more nonsense posts about jigsaws please.
I'm beginning to wonder whether you can actually read.
I never said that you couldn't have an opinion about audio stories, nor that you have to watch everything broadcast to have an opinion.
My point has always been that, if you're going to judge something, it should be done on a consistent basis.
So, if you going to make a judgement on the relatives strengths of all 5 seasons of the New Series it should be consistent.
If someone has watched:-
+ All of Season One
+ 5 episodes of Season Two
+ 8 episodes of Season Three
+ All of Season Four
+ 3 episodes of Season Five
they can't express a consistent opinion about how they would rank the seasons, because they haven't seen all 13 episodes in all of the seasons.
So, they might rank the seasons like this:-
01) Season One
02) Season Three
03) Season Two
04) Season Three
05) Season Five
There's nothing wrong with them doing that. But they haven't made a judgement about Seasons 2, 3 and 5 in the same way that they did for Seasons One and Four because they haven't seen all the episodes in the other Seasons.
If they were to watch the 8 episodes they missed it Season Two for example they might that decide that that was the best season and rank it in first place.