What is this all about!!!

I have been going through Will Brooks' 50 Year Diary at the Doctor Who On Line site, when I got to Downtime. I thought, hang on, I've never heard of this and got very excited. Found it in on YouTube and started to watch it.

Well, what can I say. I managed to watch twenty minuets before giving up. What a load of S**T. The acting was terrible, apart from Elisabeth Sladen and Nicholas Courtney, the rest were worse than armatures.

What a complete waste of time and effort. No wonder I had never heard of it before.

Love the title of this thread!

Downtime pretty much defines the term "straight to video".

There were no Internet messageboards back then. Frustrated fans had to go and make their own audio and video projects rather than dissipate their steam on forums gradually.

I used to own the VHS of this before I downsized my video tape collection. Having seen all of the feature, I thought it was a valiant effort all round by people that actually gave two hoots about the show.
Yes, it is a bit clunky in places and the budget restraints show through more than they should but we are talking about a semi-professional production from 20 years ago that lent itself to what most audiences were used to back then, ie. not your modern way of structure and editing.
It's an acquired taste but it has its merits and would probably be best served when one is in the mood to watch it, rather than suddenly stumbling across it, getting pumped up with a new discovery and eager to watch it there and then with a today's eye-view.
I remember back then DWM drip feeding us news about these video, yes video, not television broadcast productions and many of us were grateful and excited that people were still carrying the torch for WHO. Monthly news feeds (3 to 4 years before homes went to dial-up web connections) whet the appetite and so by the time they were released they seemed a little more familiar to us and in most cases were very much welcomed.

It's all right as early fan films go, but I'd generally agree with all criticisms of it. Hated what they did with Victoria.

How old was Victoria supposed to be at that point?

She was a teenage Victorian girl when picked up by the Doctor & presumbly Downtime was set in more or less 'present day'.

150 if a day surely.

And to think, the company who did the visual effects was the same company who did Gravity with Sandra Bullock!

I think Downtime is a perfect example of what would Doctor Who would look like if forum members with strong opinions were put in charge today.

She didn't return to her home time period when she left the TARDIS but settled down whenever Fury from the Deep was set (probably mid to late 20th century).

I have to say I agree with the comments here - both negative and positive.

Despite it's faults, I have always looked on this with a degree of affection, as it was productions like this (made with little more than love for the show, goodwill and an enthusiasm to contribute to the world of Doctor Who), that helped keep the flame of Doctor Who going so it could be resurrected in 2005.

Yes, it does kind of show why fan fiction should never be made into proper telly!!

However, like other posters, I still rather like Downtime.
Yes, it's cheap, yes the acting is variable at best, yes the story is a horrid muddle of fanpleasing ideas in search of a decent story. But it came at a time when Doctor Who was all but dead - fan produced videos like this kept the fans going. The New Adventures did the same in book form. And loads of people who cut their teeth on fan videos and books went on to work at the BBC, many of them on 21st Century Who.
So for that alone I still have a soft spot for Downtime.

If you thought the original was bad, just imagine the full majesty of Ian Levine's private version featuring a new (and utterly pointless) framing sequence with Sylvester McCoy and a bloke in a bad rubber mask spouting continuity references.

Here's a sample: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4650h76xLk#t=33m26s

All very difficult to watch and verging on tragic for some of those involved. I'm so glad Liz Sladen had her revival.

Sorry. No excuses for this. It was awful. The cast only did it for the cash.
The producers did it in all good intention, but it was crap.

Yeah, but surely even though she looked like she was in her 50's (?), in reality, as she was born in the 1800's, technically she was over 100 years old! (If she was living full time in the 20th century)

Not seen the whole thing but in the clip linked to above by be more pacific she actually says she's a 140 (or something like that).

So yes if you go from the day she was born to the year Downtime is set 140 years have past but she's a time traveler and will have only aged 50 (or whatever) years since she was born.


If Time Travelers start giving their ages from the day they were born to the year they are currently in then we could end up with a 2000 year old 12th Doctor saying he's 3 years old or even getting minus ages.

River: Oh look at the time, I'm -2507.
Doctor: And you don't look a day younger.

The only good things I can say about this is that it introduced the character of Kate Stewart to the whoniverse.
Nicolas Courtney being the legend he is.
And lis sladen despite her advancing years looked good in a tight dress...Victoria too for that matter..

and it also gave Kate a son and the chance to reconcile with her father after a rift...it was interesting though.