give the Daleks their own Jeremy Kyle type of show...I am sure they would be sympathetic and understanding to the problems and worries of joe public

*BZZZZT*

Sorry, my "overused joke alarm" went off again

*Checks alarm* *silent*

Heh, that is a good one!

Actually I don't know if you watch TV Burp but after some robotic shouting on Australian Princess they created a Paul Burrell Dalek......there's a show right there.

He can invade earth, demand we all lay tables properly, steal royal possessions then go and hide in a jungle!

he he he!

or alternatively set up next years celebrity BB in the style of the Games Station version...some of them won't be missed.

Blasting all contestants into space is an idea I have when BB comes on every year!

just got off the phone to CH4 and they are all for it! apparently Pot Noddle are sponsoring it

Should make that an episode title - scared the shit outa me!

that's the storyarc Yoonix

Put down your coat and sit down!

It's very interesting you say that, actually. On first viewing of TAC it didn't really get my attention that much, But L&M had me captivated.

I didn't like the ninja monks either, a bit pointless really... the werewolf it's self was very wonderfully done and could scare the crap out of a lot of kids which is a very hard thing with CGI.

But L&M was very domestic, and whilst i love a bit of Sci Fi, L&M brought the mystery of Doctor who back, which the old series couldn't do in a series never mind an episode! (7th Dr era anyone?)

And yes, i hated the Rose/Doctor dialouge. Especially the 'are you amused' line after than man was killed. So un-very Rose...

are you sure that you are not Mr Claypole from DWC..he is always singing the praises of the new series and slagging off the old.

No i love the old series, but it didn't have great writers all the time like the new series, so it was harder to make the Doctor mysterious like the new series had.

I don't know who mr Claypole is lol If he's slaggin off the old then he sounds like a right p***k

er...Robert Holmes, Chris Boucher, Terry Nation to name but a few....

Yeah i know they had great writers, otherwise i'd hate it all together, but what i'm trying to say is that they didn't have them almost every week like the new series does. I couldn't always keep up the quality it had.

considering they didn't have the budget for sets and effects back then NAF as they do today I think the classic series fares quite well and we will have to agree to disagree on this one but a lot of the stories/scripts were a lot better. know what I would rather watch if it was a toss up between The Deadly Assassin and Love & Monsters. the only writers, imo, whose scripts are of the same high quality are Moffat, Gatiss, Shearman, Cornell, Jones.

Here's what I think, when Russell leaves the show will DIE. Remember, the show won't be running for another 25 years or anything like first time around, you've got to think of it as a BBC series just like any other, like Spooks, Hotel Babylon, Hustle etc. the BBC will only run them for so long. Spooks is bloody lucky to get 5 series out of the BBC. I see there being one more Doctor after Tennant and then the BBC will axe it. And don't say they'd never axe it if the ratings are up because the axe falls for many different reasons besides ratings.

do you think no-one else could run the show then?

I think you're opinions are fair - but the highlighted but isn't. Cus you're comparing the old series most popular episode with the new series least favorate - it's like me comparing Twin Dillemma with Empty Child... see what i mean?

I loved the classic series, but it doesn't always keep up the quality, i think personally it's because they had too many episodes for one story - i personally don't like the way alot of the stories dragged on. I think the classic series is best to watch on DVD or video.

But the new series can appeal to a lot more people, one week they could tune into episode one of the new series, then tune into episode 7 and they wouldn't be confused.

They're just my opinion... you know i don't like to force my opinion on people because i'm so mellow

Which, putting aside the juvenile dig at one of the show's best ambassadors and one of the best editors the magazine has ever had, is utterly without foundation. All you've done is taken the odd comment about things the current show does differently, or better (due to more time, money, expertise etc.) and reached a wholly unjustified conclusion.

I've heard and read Clayton Hickman on the old series - and he loves it as much now as he did when he had the chance to take his current job (way before there was any new series).

You know - you are more than entitled to your view of the show, of RTD, of anything - but slagging off people based on sheer misrepresentation? That you don't have a right to.

one specially for you..if it was choice between Timelash and New Earth I would watch the latter rather than the former. Empty Child would win out too!

what I am saying is some of the new stories may have the budget and effects but they are not of the callibre of the scripts/stories from the classic series which didn't have money spent on it.

I am using the humour of RTD employs in his scripts!

I take it you didn't watch the love fest that was the last series of DWC..sycophantic immediately springs to mind.
Last edited by Black Guardian : 19-03-2007 at 20:48

Actually - The Deadly Assassin was, at the time, panned by a lot of fandom (including a very vocal attack by one prominent DWAS leader) for betraying the series etc. Likewise - City of Death was also widely panned. Meanwhile - two stories no widely reagrded as not very good (Web Planet and The Time Monster) were very highly regarded 20 odd years ago.

We really need to learn from that (i.e. when looking at reactions to Love & Monsters etc.).

I am sure Love & Monsters will be regarded as a classic in years to come. Can I ask if it was so good why wasn't it nominated and then won in a recent sci-fi writing awards. Ah! That would be Steven Moffat again....

Nah - when RTD does humour it is good.


I watched the last series of DWC. I saw enthusiastic people bigging up the series they work on or write about for a living. I don't mistake that for sycophancy.

Are you one of those peculiar fans that expects they should be negative or critical about the show? Perhaps you think they should draw lots to decide who does it each week? Or is it just that Clayton Hickman, a man who loves the show, and writes for a magazine aimed at those who love the show, isn't slagging it off for a required percentage of the time?

Seriously - what do you expect to see on a behind the scenes show designed to celebrate and explore its parent show?

would rather see a series like the first run of DWC which was informative, entertaining take on all aspects of the programme rather than comments from the contributors along the lines of we do it so much better than the old series..if it wasn't for the old they wouldn't have a new one to gloat about.

I am sure Clayton is a lovely man and you do him credit!

we will have to agree to disagree about the humour..farting gags and b**w jobs eh? very clever!

if people can't handle a bit of criticism and only want constant praise then they are in the wrong job.
Last edited by Black Guardian : 19-03-2007 at 21:05

Wow. That's a hard one. Could it possibly be that, well, I find it possible to think Love & Monsters was a great story - but that I, and clearly some judges, thought that Girl in the Fireplace was better still?

I mean come on - surely you didn't intend that as a serious point? 'Story A won an award so how can story B be any good'.

As for my Deadly Assassin point - I wasn't saying that L&M will be seen as a classic in later years - just that we don't know how it will be seen (and supposed reaction now doesn't tell us much).

Lest it be forgotten - overall amongst fans L&M was very much a divider but still had a small majority who thought it was very good and was (and this is an absolute fact) the single best received story since Who returned - by the critics). So all bets are off as to how we will see it in future years.