Of course, I understand people have different tastes, but there's always something that draws them in. As I'm sure you'll agree, if there wasn't, people wouldn't watch it.

I can agree with you on Lost. I really enjoyed the first two series, but by the third I was getting bored by the almost non-existant pace of the overall storyline.


I agree, I think the overall concept of Dr. Who is brilliant. I just think that the current execution and interpritation of it is extremely lousy. I started watching the new series with Christopher E. but quickly grew to dislike his interpritation of the Dr. and his acting. I think Tennant was much better, and certainly looked the part, and he's clearly a higher calibre actor then most of the cast - by far. But I quickly stopped watching again as I just thought the storylines were unininspiring, and the whole thing just looked incredibly cheap. Considering most the episodes cost a million or more to make, as a licience payer I feel that's not value for money.



Unfortunately that's how I feel about it. As I've mentioned previously, I am a hugh Sci-fi fan, and I love anything that's off the wall. Trouble is I don't see either of those particular elements there. It's been so main-streamed and dumbed down, that I think the makers are the ones who have done it a disservice.

I find especially the BBC is particularly twee these days, we have to have political correctness shoved down our throat. Don't get me wrong, we SHOULD have all sexualities, races, religions, etc. represented on TV. But when they try to weave it into the storylines, not because it makes a good story, but because they want every token character possible in there.


The reason most people are attracted to Sci-Fi, is that it inspires them with possible futures we could make for ourselves with new technology. Or take something highly unlikley like Lost, and present it in the most realistic context possible, while still showing a respect for scientific fact. Whenever Russel T tackles sci-fi head on, he shows his true ignorence of the genre and of science in general. Take todays episode where a large planet appears next to Earth, you don't have to be a geologist to realise if that did happen, the Earth would tear itself to pieces pretty quickly.
It wouldn't have been hard to show that in a much more realistic context with a bit of though. So when I say it's unoriginal, that's what I mean. Considering it claims to be a science fiction series, it shows a complete lack of respect or understanding of the genre.

When I think of all the highly tallented Science fiction writers we have in the UK, they put in a man who's never even gone near the genre before. He was so massively out of his depth, and it showed.



The one that stuck out for me, was when 'The Master' changed everyone into 'him'. The whole sequence was drawn out to a ridiculous degree. An endless amount of different shows of people being transformed, then we had to see every single shot again when they'd transformed, then they went through the whole list again to show them all laughing. Mixed in between with extra shots of the Master laughing. There were so many endlessly drawn out sequences like this.

Overall I thought the editing was clumsy anyway.


I find the trouble is, they're too busy trying to come up with constant new enemies for almost every episode. I think it just becomes disposable after a while. It would have been much better if they spent more time developing what they have already. I thought it was especially lame the way major foes like the Darleks and Cybermen would be defeated for good, only to resurface because of some half-baked excuse, only to be defeated for good again. Where's the substance in that?



Warren Clark in Dalziel and Pascoe, Patrick Stewart in Star Trek, James Gandalfini in Soapranos, Andrew LIncoln in Teachers, David Threlfall in Shameless; there's an endless list of good actors doing good work out there.


Of course it is, and David Tennant is pretty much the only decent actor in Dr. Who. I think he does the best he can which what is essentially some appalling diologue. What I find especially nausiating though is every episode has to have its moment of tiresome soul-searching, and emotional moments. They always lay it on thick and it's always ultimately shallow, because we know the Dr. will always survive.


Relationships are just one facet of any good drama, good story, good dialogue, thought provoking ideas/perspective, and in Science fictions case, at least a basic grasp of science and futurology. I find it curious you mention relationships as a driving aspect of Dr. Who though, as all the relationships I see in the programme are shallow for the majority of the time. The few relationships that ARE developed in the programme follow a very standard model. I certainly don't feel it explores relationships in any meaningful or thought-provoking way. Suffice to say, if I wanted to watch a good drama on relationships, Dr. Who would be somewhere near the bottom of the list.


Of course I will, you've acheived what no one else here has managed - or even bothered to attempt. You've offered me and intelligent and insiteful commentry into what makes it work for you, and I appreciate that, as it's all I came here to ask.

I hope in return my replies have offered you some insite into why I dislike it so much, and think considering its potential, it falls so short of the mark and is a massive waste of an opportunity. If you wonder why I hate it so much, that would be my biggest reason.

Edit: ....Never mind.
Last edited by Serif : 02-01-2010 at 02:45

No need to be when you act so inferior.


No, a conversation is a meaningful and articulate exchange of information. So far nothing you have written is articulate, meaningful, or even contains any useful information.


Oh dear, your lying is as pathetic as your reasoning. It doesn't take a genious to see how much time you spend on the Doctor Who forum, in fact you appear to have started a fair few threads yourself. Are you still going to try and imply you have no particular interest in Dr. Who?


More lies, oh dear. You answered a completely different question, one that was in fact a rhetorical question and didn't need answering!


Funny, considering not one paragraph ago you were claiming you'd already answered me. It's always going to be hard to understand someone who doesn't even know what they're talking about.


Wow, you figured that out all by yourself huh?

[quote]
As with everything else in existance it's a matter of personal taste. One person cannot truly explain to another why they like Marmite
[/quotes]

It tastes savoury and delicious.


He was a comedy genious, intelligent, insiteful, and courageous.


Never seen it.


People like watching other people make a tit of themselves. Others like good-looking disposable karioki stars.


Some people have a sweet tooth.


I think I see the problem now, you actually believe that don't you? THat people just like stuff "because they do". No wonder you have such a hard time articulating yourself.


Silly assumptions based on a flawed and ignorant theory. Bradleybarlow has already demonstrated what it is that allows him/her to enjoy the show, and I understand the reasoning. He very easily managed to do something you claim isn't possible.

[quote]
They are not right, and you are not right. Then again you would both be.
[quote]

I never claimed to be right, I haven't claimed that anyone who has offered their reasons for enjoying the show, to be wrong!


But at least most people can explain their tastes, something you really do seem to believe is impossible. Something you and almost everyone here is unwilling to do. For all your mutterings, there is nothing of value there. Again, I refer you to bradleybarlow's post, there you can see what an insiteful, intelligent, and articulate answer looks like!

Hi,

This thread is no longer constructive and has been closed.

Thanks