March 6, 2005, 8:15 p.m. CST
How else are we going to see this revamping of a classic TV show here in America? It will take a couple of years before it hits PBS (if they even carry it). I think that Sci Fi has really missed a great opportunity here -- turning its back on a show that is deeply inbedded in the channel's roots. Damn them for not having vision.
March 6, 2005, 8:23 p.m. CST
by The Outlander
I downloaded it last night and I have to say I found it quite entertaining.
March 6, 2005, 9:05 p.m. CST
I watched it tonight and found it was somewhere between Sid & Marty Kroft, and something good. I can fully understand the Sci-Fi channels decision not to pick it up because it just doesn't FEEL like Doctor Who. I think the first thing they needed to do was deal with the history of the series and not try to use it as a toss away line here and there. They introduced a nice tweak with the internet guy, who had drawings and photos of the doctor through time, but it would have been 100 times better if it would have been his predecessors and not just the new guy. Plus the Doctor seemed too intent on violence this time. I'll give a few episodes and see if it catches it's stride. But the biggest number one mistake, and this is unforgivable, no regeneration scene, and no finding himself scene, this is where the actor really gets to establish himself as the Doctor and the producers forgot that. Even McCoy did one with out Baker being there, and it helped immensely. Just my 2
March 6, 2005, 10:18 p.m. CST
Your right about Pertwee, I forgot about that. I guess I got used to the idea that the doctor regenerates and rediscovers who he is. I just overall they missed a huge boat here, and could have really brought the fans on board with a nice 10 or 15 minutes of the doctor figuring out his persona and the hand off from McGann. While I wasn't a huge fan of the telefilm, they did a nice job crossing over from McCoy. I also liked Baker/Davison change. It would be cool to see McGann and McCoy in a nice 3 Doctors style of show, but my spider sense says this one won't be on that long. I hope I'm wrong, really enjoy the Doctor again. By the way did the Tardis look bloated?
March 6, 2005, 10:25 p.m. CST
I can't find the avi file anywhere on torrentspy...wonder if its been removed?
March 6, 2005, 10:31 p.m. CST
I've just watched it. Now, admittedly, I've been a fan for more than 30 years, and I'm generally more partial to UK TV than American stuff, but I thought it was absolutely spectacular. The change is simple: the show moves at the pace of life circa 2005. As an introduction to the characters, it's great. As an actual episode, it's adequate, but future episodes won't have the burden of exposition. The effects are fine, too -- Buffy-quality, but never showy. My wife, who has "tolerated" Dr. Who for years, loved it. It's gonna be great. I can't wait to see the other twelve episodes.
March 6, 2005, 10:48 p.m. CST
Thanks for posting Ellis' comments in talkback. Much easier to read them there, all scrunched together without paragraph breaks - certainly much easier than clicking on the link I posted that takes you to the man's original post.
March 6, 2005, 11:28 p.m. CST
by Mad Barchetta
I certainly expected a lot of whining and bitching from fan boys who wouldn't be able to 1) understand a Dr. Who episode and 2) accept a new version that wasn't exactly the same as the old version or turned into a darker "reimagining" as is the trend, so I'm not surprised is some people are negative. However, the plain and simple fact is, if Warren Ellis says its good, I'm strongly inclined to believe him.
March 7, 2005, 12:30 a.m. CST
i'm not going to link to the torrent, but I've been a who fan for years, and sometimes its better to search for "dr who" instead of "doctor who" (hint hint)
March 7, 2005, 12:44 a.m. CST
by Roj Blake
I've never dl'ed a Bittorrent file in my life, but having been an American fan since age 13, and knowing that I may have to wait a while to see this stuff, it was just too tempting to pass up. I watched it a few hours ago and it is SMOKIN'!!!! Waaayyyy better than any of these reviews would have led me to believe. As far as visuals go? I just had a friend over and after three minutes he said that it looked like a Fox series - he also got major goosebumps watching the mannequins come to life. If this is just the beginning, I'll have a heart attack before I get to the end of Ep. 13. Does it have some problems? Sure. Are they forgivable? Definitely. Billie Piper is indeed excellent; Eccleston's accent is somewhat thick at times and the sound mix on this obvious rough cut didn't help matters, but I saw plenty that speaks of future greatness. The Doc is back and he's in more than safe hands...not that I ever thought he wouldn't be. Lynxpro - thanks for being the uber-cool spokesman within these talkbalks - it's refreshing.
March 7, 2005, 1:01 a.m. CST
by Lazarus Long
Are you honestly stooping to the level of calling one of the talkbackers a retard, simply because he called you out on taking Ellis' quotes out of context? Could you appear more petulant? We're really sorry Angel is off the air, but don't take it out on us because a classic show that lasted OVER TWENTY YEARS is back on the air. Lynxpro merely QUOTED the article you linked to, he didn't reprint the whole goddamed thing. What's it to you? Maybe you should take a second to assure us of your impartiality instead of just confirming what everyone's accusing you of. Thanks, we'll just get back to discussing Doctor Who now. *** Does anyone have any thoughts as to what other U.S. network is likely to take a shot at DW now that Sci-Fi's out of the picture? It would really suck if people had to get BBC America to watch the thing--although I'm not picturing this thing on Spike, even if they do show Star Trek: TNG twice a day.
March 7, 2005, 1:34 a.m. CST
If I'm anti-Who, why would I be bringing attention to Warren Ellis' favorable review via this post? The whole review isn't posted here because I don't cut and paste entire reviews if they're available on the original site. Quicher bitchin or I'll pull down this post for good and let the bad reviews be the final word. Buncha whiners.
March 7, 2005, 1:40 a.m. CST
Oh and? Better be careful with those bittorrent files, kids. The MPAA is filing hundreds of Napster-style lawsuits against American file-sharers (and, when minors are invovlved, their parents). Your mommy and daddy may not be happy if they wind up owing the MPAA companies thousands of dollars in settlement money because of you.
March 7, 2005, 1:52 a.m. CST
Herc, you should watch it... I've seen it, it's pretty good. I watched it with my girlfriend, and she loved it. We're both hard core Buffy fans. I'll admit, i was a huge fan of the original series, WHEN I WAS A KID, but lately the old show's kinds hard to watch... But this new Who is fantastic. It's a lot of fun, and because the story is told in ONE episode it has less of a chance of getting boring. I know, i'm a heretic, but come on guys, let's face it... some of those six parters could get sloooow.
March 7, 2005, 1:55 a.m. CST
Don't use the word "retard." It's not nice. Unless you're Alicia Silverstone in "Clueless."
March 7, 2005, 2:20 a.m. CST
you called lynxpro a "tard"... Lazarus was "calling" "you" "on" "it". "Tard".
March 7, 2005, 2:23 a.m. CST
by Lazarus Long
Fair enough, Herc. I now get your play on "Tardis", perhaps the worst pun I've read in ages. But honestly, I'd rather be Paul Rudd in Clueless. If I was Silverstone I'd just be playing with myself, and agonizing over whether or not to do that "Excess Baggage" flick with Del Toro...
March 7, 2005, 2:28 a.m. CST
by Roj Blake
Yup, most of 'em were overlong and padded. But given the budgetary constraints of the time, it was easier (think Pertwee era) to do 6 parters utilizing the same sets/casts/costumes etc. rather than the 4 parter norm that came later on. Not to mention that when they were originally broadcast, they were seen in 23 minute blocks. Anyway, moving on. "The Green Death" (a Pertwee 6 parter) came out on DVD here in the States this week and it's a huge amount of fun (even if eps. 3 & 4 are a bit on the padded side). Highly recommend "the one with the maggots".
March 7, 2005, 2:32 a.m. CST
wish i could delete posts... stupid talkbalk. tard..is.. so tired...
March 7, 2005, 3:17 a.m. CST
no one gets your jokes. they just get everyone all upset. "i know it is true, because it is a fact."
March 7, 2005, 3:20 a.m. CST
I will give you the opportunity to provide the link to the post in which I state "HD-DVD will bury Blu-Ray." I love all HD. I love HD broadcasts, HD cablecasts, HD satcasts, HD-DVD, Blu-Ray (which is an HD format) and HD-VHS. And yes, HD-VHS (and indeed ALL HD) IS superior to standard-definition DVD, as anyone who has seen both will attest. I love my HD-VHS player so much I bough a second one for upstairs. I now love them both and the fabulous HD tapes they plays. HD is vastly better than SD, regardless of the medium on which one stores it.
March 7, 2005, 3:28 a.m. CST
Please tell me that you're not normally this petulant and you're having a bad day or something. And you're calling other TBers whiners? Hello, Mr. Kettle, meet Mr. Pot.
March 7, 2005, 3:37 a.m. CST
by Roj Blake
As much as I personally disagree with the way Herc is handling these DW talkbacks, I will say in his defense that there is almost no other type of human being as unruly and difficult to deal with as a scorned Doctor Who fan. There's a very good chance he's receiving death threats in his e-mail box as I type. That would likely irk me too.
March 7, 2005, 3:37 a.m. CST
by Don Lockwood
...as it already sorta has been, that the MPAA couldn't give a tinker's damn about Doctor Who, Battlestar Galactica or any other television show. The MPAA has been going after torrents and the people who use them who stream DVD rips and screeners. If ANYONE wanted to get involved in prosecuting television-based torrents, it'd be the FCC and they'd have a tough time of it, although that doesn't necessarily preclude them trying to take some action. It's difficult to prove the difference between my taping a show for a friend on my VCR and then loaning it to him (which is covered by fair use) and my digitizing a show for a friend and streaming it to him via BT. Either way, unless the show is currently available on a format other than the airwaves, there's not much of a case, particularly if I'm not profiting from it.
March 7, 2005, 3:45 a.m. CST
Why don't you post something positive about the show, or post nothing about it?
March 7, 2005, 3:54 a.m. CST
by Jim Jam Bongs
The MPAA covers the motion picture (the movies) industry. The RIAA covers the recording (major label music) industry. The television industry does not have an equivalent collective organization that deals with the piracy of its content. For now, matters like this are dealt with on a studio by studio basis. Now, as for the BBC, their programming is paid for by taxes levied upon British television owners. The legal area about sharing BBC programming amongst British television owners is a gray legal area. As for those who are not British television owners who share BBC programming, I imagine it's even grayer. But the bottom line is: the MPAA has absolutely no jurisdiction to enforce antipiracy measures on the sharing of Dr. Who episodes. Herc, I urge you to do some research into these matters, or asking others on the TB who may know these issues for their take/opinion, before spouting off ominous warnings about the MPAA. It's understandable if you have a problem with online filesharing, but statements like this only muddle, not clarify, the moral issues of filesharing.
March 7, 2005, 3:58 a.m. CST
1) The FCC is a government agency taht has no jurisdiction over the Internet (so far). They concern themselves solely with American broadcasts taking up the public airwaves. They don't care about Bittorrent. 2) The BBC is not an MPAA company, and Dr. Who, I guess, is not their concern at the moment. That would change, however if SciFi (owned by MPAA member NBC Universal) purchased American broadcast and/or home entertainment rights. Which I guess isn't going to happen, so who cares? Of course I suppose the BBC could file their own lawsuits over Who. 3) Battlestar Galactica is owned by NBC Universal, so the MPAA would find trafficking in Galactica torrents very naughty and actionable indeed. Same applies to any media owned or licensed by an MPAA company.
March 7, 2005, 4:04 a.m. CST
Any filmed entertainment property (ER, CSI, Alias and BG included) owned by Disney/Touchstone/Miramax/Dimension, Sony/Columbia, Warner Bros., News Corp/Fox, Viacom/Paramount, NBC/Universal and their subsidiaries is fiercely protected by MPAA lawyers. I promise.
March 7, 2005, 5:50 a.m. CST
by Andy Dufresne
Aside from your irrational love for the "sometimes entertaining" OC I always thought you a good runner of this part of the site and you draw attention and support to some good stuff, Why are you letting whiny fan boys provoke you so easily? How about you tell us instead what happened to the Paramount announcement that never came. You have better things than bickering knoblets. Everyone will know soon enough if Who is any good.
March 7, 2005, 6:14 a.m. CST
Saying 'post a positive review or post nothing at all' is kind of bias in itself... its 'say something good about it or I dont want to hear about it.' Personally, I want to hear if a show is supposed to suck hard, or if its the next bloody coming of christ. Good news and bad news go hand in hand, remember that.
March 7, 2005, 6:44 a.m. CST
I believe the BBC are broadcasting the first episode on soon so we will all get a chance to see evaluate it then. Christopher Ecclestone is a very talented and commited actor, as anyone who has seen his previous work can attest - Our Friends in the North for example. Also the writers for the show are some of the best we have in the UK. I would think that most of the people involved in the show will have grown up watching it as kids and I do not believe that they are knowingly producing work that does not live up to their own professional standards or have anything but respect and love for the show. I know if I was lucky to be involved I would do my best to make it a success. Why do it any other way? I think Thunderbirds is a cautionary example of what happens when you don't understand the original idea behind a show. I refuse to believe this is happening with Dr Who. Mind you its going to be on soon so we will all find out... in the UK of course!
March 7, 2005, 6:53 a.m. CST
by Dave Patrick
I've downloaded it and really enjoyed it. It certainly is Doctor Who and it is very British. I don't see why Americans couldn't like it, just as I like many very American shows. One note, Warren criticises the opening sequence, but neither the visuals or the music are the final mix and the image from the 'Doctor Who Confidential' title sequence suggests the final version is much better. Christoper Eccleston nails the role as the Doctor, and Billie Piper is just as good as his companion. For a British show it has a big budget. it doesn't rival the most expensive American shows, obviously, but it looks damn fine to me.
March 7, 2005, 6:59 a.m. CST
I still havent seen it but i imagine what Mr Ellis said about the show being too british is probably spot on. The american audience does generally need spoon feeding. As he says it is not going to endear itself to anyone looking for Battlestar Galactica. We should be carefu to see the expression 'too british' as derogaratory. Im glad it hasent been fucked over and americanised cause thats what happened to the Paul McGann version and we all know what a low brow pile of shit that was.
March 7, 2005, 7:48 a.m. CST
Calm down dear!...it's only a talkback! I think both Lynxpro and Herc need a sit down and a drink of cooling H20. Now deep breath in........hold it......and out. I'm gonna go with Mr.Ellis on this one. I'm lookin forward to it. As a Brit, the whole Dr.Who series is almost part of my DNA. I really dont know why Sci-Fi would turn it down, especially if they thought it was too english!!. You Yanks get our humour a lot more than people give you credit for. Look at the love on this website for Shaun of the Dead and anything from Aardman Studios. I think someone said 'If your a human being, you gotta love Wallace and Gromitt'. Also take into account the continued USA support of Red Dwarf, and it just goes to show how absurd the whole thing is!!!!! Thanks, I needed to vent my spleen.
March 7, 2005, 9:24 a.m. CST
.... you bought TWO HD-VHS players? Herc, you need to explain this once and for all for those of us who are now alternating between derisive laughter and stunned incredulity. I remember after you bought (!) the first one and told us that you had purchased your last standard DVD and that the rest of us DVD buyers were all chumps. Why in God's name would you buy a SUPERIOR format on an INFERIOR system? Twice? Why didn't you just wait (like you told us to do) until HD DVD or Blu-Ray? Why the fuck would you buy fucking videotape?!?! In a couple of years' time, when they no longer produce HD VHS, you'll be sitting with two obsolete and idiotic machines and a rapidly deteriorating tape collection consisting of films you will yet again have to repurchase on HD DVD or Blu-Ray. You will have had to upgrade twice while the rest of us only upgrade once. As far as I'm concerned that doesn't make US the chumps.
March 7, 2005, 9:58 a.m. CST
I swear to god there is too much estrogen in the water supply!! Even the guys are gettin pre-menstrual!! Sheesh!!
March 7, 2005, 10:14 a.m. CST
No, DOCTOR WHO isn't "too English" -- It's apparently too different from the likes of MANSQUITO and PIRAHNA VS. GOLDFISH so the masterminds at the Sci Fi channel have found it apparently "somewhat lacking" in being a total piece of shit. If you're paying attention, people are looking to watch something new and different that still manages to be consistently entertaining. LOST, DESPERATE HOUSEWIVES, HOUSE, MEDIUM...all of these are shows considered outside the norm that are becoming the norm. Hell, the new BATTLESTAR GALACTICA managed to stand out from average science fiction shows like STAR TREK: ENTERPRISE and STARGATE SG-1 by being different but still entertaining, so why not give DOCTOR WHO the same consideration?
March 7, 2005, 10:18 a.m. CST
at a talkback, fucking hilarious - I am though going to wait till Who streams in all it's glory through my digi box on glorious BBC1 and my god it will be the first show i've watched on Prime time BBC1 since the X files short lived time there in it's prime . Now i don't know much about what all this super hd vhs nonsense is but i'd like it if someone could explain - I mean am i alone in thinking that there are few things to complain about with dvd - maybe my picture glitches for a millisecond every now and then but I'm sure this is cos my Player is a 25 quid multi region ...
March 7, 2005, 10:24 a.m. CST
For making a perfectly valid point albeit one in opposition to Herc's? Surely not...?
March 7, 2005, 10:32 a.m. CST
Not at all, ScaryJim, old buddy. However, would you buy a movie with much better picture and sound quality on tape? Or would you wait a couple of years (happily watching DVDs in the meantime) for a much more durable and sensibly priced format? HD VHS is an abomination. It lures buyers with the prospect of superior sound and image (which it does have), but it's still on stinky old videotape. Within a couple of years they'll be using HD VHS machines and tapes as landfill while everyone else will have moved on to HD DVD or most probably Blu-Ray.
March 7, 2005, 10:32 a.m. CST
I just watched the first episode- thankfully before I read any reviews. I want to say that I was worried for the first five minutes -- that opening pop/rock "rose at work" montage didn't really do it for me, but my fears went away the second Eccleston popped on the screen. There's a lot of room for improvement, but I still can't wait for the rest of the series.
March 7, 2005, 10:32 a.m. CST
Yeah wouldn't that make you a umm dictator Herc ... :0)
March 7, 2005, 10:37 a.m. CST
being more than aquainted with sound engineering i wondered if this was a kind of analogue reel to reel vs. digital hd recording argument - so i guess this super VHS is kind of like Digital Dat tape or something ? can you actually buy Films in super VHS ? I'm sorry this is so OT i'll do a google..YES NOT THAT I'D WANT A SUPER VHS .. TAPE IS SO 1980'S..
March 7, 2005, 10:43 a.m. CST
he changed the headline - we can put the knives away lads...lol !
March 7, 2005, 10:45 a.m. CST
ahh no .. eyes decieving me ..i'll shut it now ..
March 7, 2005, 11:01 a.m. CST
ahhh screw it. To quote the ever lovin preacher in Blazing Saddles: "Son!.......your on your own"
March 7, 2005, 11:15 a.m. CST
It's Doctor Who. If you like Doctor Who, or you're a 12 year old kid and the smartest one in your class, then you'll love it. If you're into The Matrix and Star Wars or think Buffy is the pinnacle of the television genre, then it's probably not your cup of tea. There's a poll on Outpost Gallifrey right now asking the hardcore fans to rate the new ep. Right now 80% rate it good to great, 15% rate it middle of the road, and 5% don't like it. Take from that what you will.
March 7, 2005, 11:24 a.m. CST
The BBC seem to be losing it big time at the moment. It's biggest show (Eastenders) is going to shit. Any comedy show, sitcom or otherwise, it produces is just plain horribly shit (According To Bex, My Hero, All About Me, Mad About Alice, Eyes Down etc etc...why were ANY of these made???). The only BBC shows that work are those that are written and produced by people with some real talent, such as The Office, League Of Gentlemen. The BBC have little involvement in making them, so they're better. Doctor Who is another show like this. Russell T Davies is in charge of Who, not some cunt of a BBC exec. So hopefully Who, like The Office, will be a success. Please let it be.
March 7, 2005, 11:34 a.m. CST
Seriously I'm Herc's biggest fan but the way he's used this site to rail against Dr Who is sad. Its to the point now where Harry or someone should really step in. Anyway, I've seen it. Title sequence owns, so not sure what drug ellis was doing when he watched it. The show is, on the whole, rather silly, and I can understand why SciFi would think it wouldn't fit with episodes of the ever-boring Battlestar Gallactica (I tivo'd fridays ep and haven't watched it yet. I'll see if I can get through it without falling asleep). There are scenes that work brilliantly, but the background music is truly awful. For a few seconds you hear something that reminds you of the brilliant music from the original series. I was braced for disappointment so I'm not shocked, they certaintly could take what they have and turn it into something amazing fairly easily. In the same way that a cartoon like Batman the Animated series took its source material more seriously than the multi-million dollar movie staring George Clooney and Uma Thurman, Doctor Who always took itself (and its viewers) seriously regardless of dodgy stageprops or slow moving latex aliens who may or may not be able to walk up stairs. Slow moving aliens being exactly what we get in this episode. They REALLY should have used the Dr Who book link from the last 15 years for show ideas rather than going back to the original show. Rose however is a great companion. Slightly annoying, and the woman has some meat on her! If this was remade in America they'd cast some stick like myrissa from the OC. It is NOT however "too british", some people simply use the word "british" as if it means the same thing as "silly". Its not the same thing. TOUCHING EVIL and SECOND SIGHT are examples of shows that are great but "too british". This reminded me a lot of shows like GvsE and KEEN EDDIE. Final analysis: if you go by what you've read on AICN, you are going to be pleasantly suprised by what you see, but I don't blame Sci-Fi for not picking this up after the first episode. They would have no idea how to market this.
March 7, 2005, 12:35 p.m. CST
by Roj Blake
I thought one of the great triumphs of the introductory ep was that lack of reliance on references to the old series. I mean seriously - how would anything of that ilk make for a better story? It very likely would not and in fact would bog the whole thing down. The "ears" bit was there for the hardcore fans and it was vague enough that it lends itself to speculation/debate and yet it could be totally ignored by a newbie or written off as a bit of eccentricity. A big part of the beauty of "Rose" was how fast it moved. It told a far more engaging story than the TV movie in half the time, and yet I saw numerous nods to the McGann film that acknowledged what it attempted to do at the time. Honestly, the one and only thing I truly hated in the entire ep was the belch from the dustbin; that scene worked great for me up until that point and in fact I was imagining how much more effective it would have been sans belch - with the scene simply ending on the shot of the quiet dustbin. (Yes, I'm aware of how truly ridiculous all of this sounds, but Davies & Boak somehow make it work.) If you're not for Doctor Who, you're with the terrorists.
March 7, 2005, 1:24 p.m. CST
Especially if Warren Ellis is, indeed, a Brit. One of the biggest compliments an English person can give is "oh, it's too English - the Americans will never understand it". As a Brit myself, when I saw the quote I definitely saw it as a positive endorsement of the new Who.
March 7, 2005, 1:36 p.m. CST
Good thing for Universal/Sci-Fi someone in England didn't decide that BATTLESTAR GALACTICA was "too American" and pass on co-producing the show. Where would they be then?
March 7, 2005, 3:12 p.m. CST
OMG TEH HERC IS ACTUALLY DAVROSS! HE WANTS TO KIL TEH DOCTRO!
March 7, 2005, 3:28 p.m. CST
"Too British" isn't the worst thing you can say about something. One of the reasons I pointed out Ellis is himself a Britisher. I think the quote is intriguing and designed to lure all to Ellis' site. Anybody here find clicking on that link too exhausting?
March 7, 2005, 3:45 p.m. CST
Yeah, I'm gonna get the HD-DVD AND the Blu-Ray machines, probably before anybody else, mostly because I'm an impatient idiot and Harry pays me way too much per talkback. Here's the biggest benefit of HD-VHS, though: you can use it to *RECORD* HD! As much of it as you like! I've hundreds and hundreds of hours of the stuff archived! (You should only bask in the splendor that is my HD copy of the Galactica mini!) Probably won't be able to record anything on those HD-DVD and Blu-Ray machines, at least not for a while, am I right? Time will tell. The other big advantage of HD-VHS? I can watch and enjoy it NOW! I've been using HD-VHS for a year and a half now, and HD-DVD is STILL nine or so months from market. And, yeah, for the guy who asked if you can buy HD-DVD prerecorded tapes, new titles come out every month, and they're be-a-u-tiful. But I mostly use my HD-VHS to make my own.
March 7, 2005, 3:56 p.m. CST
it IS insulting to say my boss and friend Harry is fat, but, let's face it, he's not the skinniest. So you have truth on your side there. But to say I'm an idiot because I favor Blu-Ray over HD-DVD? That's fucking ban-worthy slander, dude, because I never said I favored Blu-Ray over HD-DVD! Never. Never happened. You lie. (As I say, I'm pretty much resigned to buying both machines.) So I offer this reasonable choice: link to where I said I favored Blu-Ray, or fucking take it back. If this is too high-maintenance a request, CHUD and Dark Horizons have very fine TV sections. They too may have talkbacks, and are certain to value your sterling insight more than I.
March 7, 2005, 3:58 p.m. CST
-i feel better now , there is definitely nothing worth recording off terrestrial British tv (hmm except maybe Who lol)so i'll be happy with my inferior dvd player until they bring out HD DVD or bluray at 25 quid a unit :0)
March 7, 2005, 4:06 p.m. CST
no one in America will be able to understand a word he says. It's like every British comedy group has one guy who's completely unintellegable.
March 7, 2005, 4:13 p.m. CST
Where in the world are you guys downloading this from? The torrentspy site doesn't have it.
March 7, 2005, 4:47 p.m. CST
by Big Bad Clone
How bad could this so really be? Oh and Ellis, don't you have 50 books to write this month?
March 7, 2005, 5:53 p.m. CST
No doubt about it, that looks like a Herc HD-DVD endorsement. But I swear it was just a smart-ass from-the-cuff talkback remark designed to mock pro-Blu-Ray logic, not Blu-Ray itself. In my heart I know Sony's failure with Betamax isn't necessarily a predictor for Blu-Ray. SO HERE'S MY REAL POSITION, HONEST TO CHRIST: I have no idea which of the formats will win out and I never have, and I never meant to seriously imply I had. And when one of the formats win, I will likely be the last to hear about it, as I'll be using both. If you think I'm an idiot for NOT favoring Blu-Ray over HD-DVD, that's fine, because that's my position. On HD, I'm as agnostic as Harry is not-svelt.
March 7, 2005, 6:51 p.m. CST
In fact "Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country" is nearly identical in plot to the Doctor Who episode "Frontier in Space" aired in the early 70s. Obvious really. Of course they both ripped off "Most Dangerous Game" (Arena/Deadly Assassin) and really Star Trek is nothing but a TV version of "Forbidden Planet" and Doctor Who is a TV version of a french series of novels called "Doctor Omega"... but we could go on all day.
March 7, 2005, 7:04 p.m. CST
Its common knowledge (and I believe confirmed by the creators involved) that Buffy's "Master" is meant to pay homage to Dr. Who. It is also common knowledge that the Borg are a direct ripoff of the cybermen. This however all points to the tragedy of this most recent endeavor. The old Dr. Who was one of the most original science fiction stories *ever*. Hence why it gets ripped off so much. The books also produced some of the best science fiction writing of the last 15 years (I know, thats not saying much). So what do we get now? A poorly produced rendition of the Autons, which wasn't a great story in the first place. The show hits all the nostalgia sweet spots, but thats pretty much it.
March 7, 2005, 7:16 p.m. CST
that picture was an homage to a who book about the kennedy assination. never read that one myself. anyhow wolf I'm sorry you didn't make the cybermen-borg connection. everyone else did.
March 7, 2005, 7:23 p.m. CST
Reading your comments was like a cyber soap opera. You could make a mini play based on that. All that it's missing is the part where you 2 meet up and get it off your system once and for all: rip off each others clothes and go at it!!, yeaaah :D
March 7, 2005, 10:44 p.m. CST
Dude, your baiting tactics were old five DOCTOR WHO talkbacks ago. Let it go already.
March 8, 2005, 2:55 a.m. CST
by Frank Einstein
In the 1976 Doctor Who serial "The Deadly Assasin," The Doctor plugs his brain into a super computer called 'The Matrix' and battles an opponent (who is also jacked in from another location) on a surreal, virtual landscape where they can both call up weapons for their virtual selves to fight with. When the Doctor's opponent is defeated in the Matrix, his body dies in the real world, and the Doctor is able to determine the villain's location by tracing his computer link. This was in 1976. Now I'm not suggesting the Wachowskis' "Matrix" is a ripoff of Doctor Who, but those are interesting similarities.
March 8, 2005, 4:41 a.m. CST
...see some deep breaths and a stiff one (drink I mean) can help anyone. Also the Borg were a Cyberman ripoff. Sorry Wolf but its true!
March 9, 2005, 1:42 p.m. CST
by Black TARDIS
Unlike the Fox movie, it actually makes sense for non-Who fans! The casting is great, the new Doctor is like a neurotic Bond, unlike the uninspiring McGan. It should of had a better villain, not a talking blob in the finale, but other than that, it's entertaining. The Doctor being a cocky prick in a leather jacket, can you really ask for anything more? Finally a good looking Doctor ALA Peter Davidson. (Well I guess it's all relative, isn't it?) Lots of potential for this show. And Who fans, can we really complain about production values? Let me remind you the last time that Who had a budget. A Master was executed by Daleks in an opening that made no sense. And a guy from Aliens 3 was yelling about the eye of harmony and Grace. And then at the end, instead of taking the Asian boy and Grace with him, he just leaves, leaving the network executives scratching their heads, leaving no room for a pilot or series. This time, it ends correctly. Rose ranks up there with Peri when it comes to my favorite ditzy assistants! Also, this will appeal to non-Who fans way more than those lame 60's flicks starring the Death Star Commander. Come on, they Googled Who! We all should be thanking the Mighty One that any form of Who is on! A
March 9, 2005, 3:14 p.m. CST
I'm about 70% well-chuffed. I'm hoping Russell T Davis is following these talkbacks. Firstly, I WILL watch it when it screens here, because the series deserves the support. We can't just be bittorrent leechers. Okay, on to the show... Negatives first. The Autons were a bad choice. They are a 70s monster. That's when they worked. Now, it's just a bit cheesy. Also, the slapstick was misjudged (the choking hand, the burping bin). I can see where they are coming from - a comedy drama a la Buffy - but the throwaway lines (personal faves are 'breast implants' and 'it'll never work - he's gay and she's an alien') worked FAR better than the silliness. Also, SACK WHOEVER DID THE INCIDENTAL MUSIC! It felt like cheap MTV in some places, 1970s Dr Who in others. The music should have been eerier, sparser. That said ... LOVED the cast. Chris Ecclestone shows every sign of owning the character. He could be to the Doctor what Brosnan was to Bond (not Connery, but by far the best since). And yet it's not his circus. Billie Piper is ALL OVER this episode. She's a pitch-perfect companion, but updated without the screaming just nicely for the Buffy age. And suitably yummy. LOVED the TARDIS interior. The special effects, for the most part (again, that bloody bin), were just fine. The show would naturally look better on film, but it does the job nicely. What was most pleasing was that, particularly in the second half, there were moments where I was totally captivated. I was there with these characters in the story, and it wasn't set in an American location. Given that my favourite shows of the past few years are Buffy, Angel, Lost, Alias and The OC, to have that sensation with a UK show is superb. We've really only had Ultraviolet in recent(ish) years to crow about, so Doctor Who needs support. Roll on Victorian London and Daleks!
March 9, 2005, 5:38 p.m. CST
Here are some positive reviews to counterbalance Herc's relentless campaign of hate for Doctor Who: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,7434-1518035,00.html - - - - - - - - - - http://www.manchesteronline.co.uk/entertainment/filmandtv/tv/s/150/150567_doctor_who.html - - - - - - - - - - http://media.guardian.co.uk/site/story/0,14173,1433619,00.html?gusrc=rss - - - - - - - - - - http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/showbiz/articles/17138125?source=Daily%20Mail
March 10, 2005, 12:16 p.m. CST
March 11, 2005, 6:16 p.m. CST
It's gonna be awesome!