Classic or New Dr Who?

[smurf_sista]

I am interested to know peoples views, i have been in many debates with many people over which one is better and why. Some of my firends (thoes that dont hate it) think that the new series depends on special effects, and that leaves the story line behind.

I love both, the new ones have the bonus of David Tennant (sex on legs) but the old ones have a certian charm that i dont know how to descibe (and im finding myself more and more attracted to Peter Davison, vvvvery worrying!)

Any views?

 

[toscano]

Tom Baker

 

[U2Kitten]

"Sex on Two Legs?" That new guy is hideous! I'd as soon do a kangaroo!

TOM BAKER is classic and he IS Doctor Who. I can accept no other.

 

[smurf_sista]

Kitten you must be kidding, David Tennant is the sex!

 

[U2Kitten]

You mean he's not that really ugly, creepy, skinhead guy I saw on the new show? They changed doctors again?

 

[TheQuiet1]

You mean he's not that really ugly, creepy, skinhead guy I saw on the new show? They changed doctors again?

That sounds more like Christopher Eccleston (the doctor in the first series of the new show) than it does David Tennant (the doctor in the second series of the new show).

As for which series I prefer- I can't say that I've seen many of the old series but from what I have seen I gotta say there is something about the cheapness and slight campness of it all which appeals to me.

 

[UberBeaver]

I prefer the new series. The old series is campy and cheesy and charming in that way, but I find the new series to be a better quality. Know what I mean?

 

[smurf_sista]

i do, completely

i find the old series, had well... different stories they seem to be more, like in the mind. And i donno that appeals to me.

But yea the umm special effects, whilst probably awesome for there time (i wouldnt know i was born a year after the show finished) it all looks very very dated now

 

[LJT]

The special effects in Dr Who were never considered awesome, even for their time

Tom Baker was really the only Dr I liked greatly out of the old series, so far I have loved Ecclestone and Tennant, plus the slightly new seriousness in the writing.

 

[lazarus]

Well the older episodes tended to have a lot of filler, esp. the 6 part ones. But I feel like all the new stories are much too rushed, even if good. The two-part installments are usually the only ones to fully satisfy (exceptions being The Girl in the Fireplace and School Reunion, the latter with the benefit of having an old character come in with baggage that didn't require setup or explanation).

Really I think you need at least an hour to give a story a good go, and I'd rather have extra material than not enough. Give me Talons of Weng-Chiang, Caves of Androzani, Pyramids of Mars, The War Games, or Inferno any day over the new stuff.

But I love the new series and it's better than I could have hoped for, and I think I loved the first season of Torchwood even more.

 

[U2Kitten]

That sounds more like Christopher Eccleston (the doctor in the first series of the new show) than it does David Tennant (the doctor in the second series of the new show).

Yeah, that sounds like what happened, I got them mixed up. I checked their pics in google image search and you're right. I don't think Tennant is 'ugly' but he's still not 'sexy' IMO, though much better than Eccleston.

As for which series I prefer- I can't say that I've seen many of the old series but from what I have seen I gotta say there is something about the cheapness and slight campness of it all which appeals to me.

I like the campness better too. I also like the campy old "Batman" TV series much better than the movies. They bore me to sleep.