Posted July 4, 200817 yr Who's you favourite assistants from the original series. My favourite was Jo Grant played by the gorgeous Katy Manning along side John Pertwee
July 4, 200817 yr Who's you favourite assistants from the original series. My favourite was Jo Grant played by the gorgeous Katy Manning along side John Pertwee yeah i liked jo grant.... didnt she marry sgt yeates? sarah jane was good too i wonder how many will pick bonnie langford!!! :lol:
July 4, 200817 yr Original series: Romana - regeneration II (Lalla Ward) http://www.bbc.co.uk/doctorwho/classic/images/173/romana2.jpg The original Romana helped the Doctor to track down the scattered segments of the Key To Time. After finishing their mission, Romana regenerated into version II. Taking into account this series developments & references with Donna Noble (Catherine Tate) .............. you know where my train of thought is going :thinking:
July 4, 200817 yr Oops! :heehee: The original series are absolutely tragic from the bits I've seen, ugh. And calm down, you miserable git! I'm going to say something controversial........ I think the current revival of Dr Who is.......... MUCH BETTER than it ever was, even in its Tom Baker heyday!!!! I bought in the last fortnight (because I remembered it distinctly as a 7/8 year old) the Tom Baker-era Doctor Who story City Of Death produced by Douglas Adams (Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy), and what most disappointed me about it, was how despite the excellent writing & acting, the whole story drags...... when compared to the 21st Century revival, and some of it is just plain corny and has aged very badly, as the scary baddies now look & sound silly. http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=GMKbDupa99M http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=CqouKXST7J0&...feature=related http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=WKcekMRThNA&...feature=related http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=Sx6V3ZGp2pw&...feature=related http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=vFHmqdaOKVw&...feature=related http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=k7aSs9cg7XA&...feature=related http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=_rin9QYw9Cg&...feature=related http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=OfUq-I8RDpU&...feature=related http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=dxcB3Xyz99Y&...feature=related http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=Nqg2ucACRRA&...feature=related http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=5jwA25RED9w&...feature=related http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=Vc22Q2_S7Sk&...feature=related City of Death (Pt 1 - 12 Episodes 1 to 4) ..... A bit like watching the 1966 Football World Cup Final (as a whole on the eve of Euro 1996) and realising how poor the quality of play was, much slower, neither side could keep possession, etc.
July 4, 200817 yr Original series: Romana - regeneration II (Lalla Ward) http://www.bbc.co.uk/doctorwho/classic/images/173/romana2.jpg The original Romana helped the Doctor to track down the scattered segments of the Key To Time. After finishing their mission, Romana regenerated into version II. Taking into account this series developments & references with Donna Noble (Catherine Tate) .............. you know where my train of thought is going :thinking: interesting theory.... but i doubt it as shes never been refered to since...
July 4, 200817 yr I'm going to say something controversial........ I think the current revival of Dr Who is.......... MUCH BETTER than it ever was, even in its Tom Baker heyday!!!! I bought in the last fortnight (because I remembered it distinctly as a 7/8 year old) the Tom Baker-era Doctor Who story City Of Death produced by Douglas Adams (Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy), and what most disappointed me about it, was how despite the excellent writing & acting, the whole story drags...... when compared to the 21st Century revival, and some of it is just plain corny and has aged very badly, as the scary baddies now look & sound silly. GMKbDupa99M City of Death (Pt 1 Episode 1) ..... A bit like watching the 1966 Football World Cup Final (as a whole on the eve of Euro 1996) and realising how poor the quality of play was, much slower, neither side could keep possession, etc. tbh i dont think there is a comparison to be made 70's dr who..... cheap budget, kids programme, old fashioned technology, 00's dr who .... family orientated, much bigger budget, technology vastly improved and its given the 'big saturday night entertainment' advertising which 'tom bakers era' didnt. true, it was lazy in the old days, ive seen some tom baker on cable recently and was gutted it was so bad! but some of the episodes had a very interesting storyline. i think its easy to think of 'dr who of old' in some kind of romantically over generous light. tbh i enjoyed dr who more in the 60's, but i put that down to the fact that i was a kid! :lol:
July 4, 200817 yr yeah i liked jo grant.... didnt she marry sgt yeates? No, the character fell in love with the professor from The Green Death (her last story), and stayed with him in the end. The last scene had the Doctor driving away in Bessie (his car) into the sunset.
July 4, 200817 yr I'd have to say my fav original series companions were Jo Grant, Sarah Jane, Romana, Tegan, Nyssa and Peri.
July 4, 200817 yr oh i hope not... that fukkin car and that fukkin dog anchored dr who on earth. at least in the 60's dr who traveled through time and space far more often, and its that that was exciting about it.... space, the unknown.
July 5, 200817 yr :lol: :P I didn't even know she was a doctor who companion until I read your message; I didnt' believe you so I went to look on Wikipedia. :o :kink:
July 6, 200817 yr I didn't even know she was a doctor who companion until I read your message; I didnt' believe you so I went to look on Wikipedia. :o :kink: there you go then... old mushy aint a liar! lol. shes was AWFUL, there was nothing about her that was attractive, shes got one of them faces that needs a fist! :lol: (thats a joke btw, im not condoning REAL voilence)
July 9, 200817 yr I'm going to say something controversial........ I think the current revival of Dr Who is.......... MUCH BETTER than it ever was, even in its Tom Baker heyday!!!! I bought in the last fortnight (because I remembered it distinctly as a 7/8 year old) the Tom Baker-era Doctor Who story City Of Death produced by Douglas Adams (Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy), and what most disappointed me about it, was how despite the excellent writing & acting, the whole story drags...... when compared to the 21st Century revival, and some of it is just plain corny and has aged very badly, as the scary baddies now look & sound silly. Oh dear, you've fallen into the trap of believing bigger budgets, an MTV/CSI-style of pacing and editing, and fancy effects somehow equates to being "better" story-telling..... -_- The PLOTS are what matters at the end of the day, and Russell T Davis is an utter hack compared to the likes of Terry Nation..... I may just agree with you when we have seen what Stephen Moffat can do with an entire series to himself though, his standard of scripting is blatantly higher than Davis', which was proven by his superior episodes and the marvellous "Jekyll" series which he did..... Yeah, series Five could just outstrip old Dr Who at its best....
July 9, 200817 yr Oh dear, you've fallen into the trap of believing bigger budgets, an MTV/CSI-style of pacing and editing, and fancy effects somehow equates to being "better" story-telling..... -_- The PLOTS are what matters at the end of the day, and Russell T Davis is an utter hack compared to the likes of Terry Nation..... I may just agree with you when we have seen what Stephen Moffat can do with an entire series to himself though, his standard of scripting is blatantly higher than Davis', which was proven by his superior episodes and the marvellous "Jekyll" series which he did..... Yeah, series Five could just outstrip old Dr Who at its best.... Well prepare to be shocked. I watched the first two episodes of Jekyll, and was not impressed. The fact its first episode started off with 5.1million, then each week dropped away down so by Week 4 it was down to a disastrous 2.8million before slightly reviving before its finale to 3.2million tells its own story. But then again I always thought the original Robert Louis Stevenson story of duality of human nature was over simplistic. Added to the fact I can't stand James Nesbitt as an actor in anything (If he became the next Dr Who I think I would get clinically depressed because I dislike his OTT larky slightly cheesy humour in everything he appears in), add an Eastenders actress whom I thought was dreadfully overrated and whos (lack of) acting abilities were exposed in her run in Bionic Woman (lets face it she is no Anna Friel (whom I remember in the mid 1990s saying how gutted she was that there was no longer Dr Who on, as her father loved the show & she would have loved to have been a Doctor's assistant) acting wise). Give RTD some credit at least he was not mug enough to take her on as a Dr Who assistant (Freema Agyeman pipped Michelle Ryan for the role of Martha). Whatever Freema's shortcomings are as an actress (she was incredibly unlucky to have to follow Billie Piper & be followed by Catherine Tate), but at least I can live rest assured knowing at least it was not Michelle Ryan playing Martha. For me Jekyll is the one big black spot in Steven Moffatt's writing career so far. As I've said before I loved Press Gang. I loved Coupling, Murder Most Horrid & Chalk, whilst Jekyll was his first "miss" for me. Incidentally Jekyll was the first time in his career he Executively Produced as well as wrote the show, which is why I'm not in the camp taking it for granted that Dr Who will get better when he becomes the Executive Producer of Dr Who in Series 5, because when he had the opportunity of casting and producing a show as well as writing it, and in my opinion he got it wrong. As for RTD. From my point of view from all his work Queer As Folk, Bob & Rose, The Second Coming his weakness has always been the plot development seems to have as much substance as if it was written by a 9 year old with a purple crayon. But as he is such a good writer, writing some great lines, and storytelling full of emotion, drama, humour & tragedy then who cares. Especially as a producer he always seems to be able to get the best out of the cast he has had. For me people who over analyse the plot are missing out on what makes a great TV drama show.
July 9, 200817 yr i dunno scott... terry nation wasnt some super writer, ok he was good but i thought inconsistent. the sub plots of recent dr whos have been very good, all linking in torchwood, bad wolf etc etc... and these references throughout the seriese have been far more involved then anything from the past. tip.... totally agree about nesbit, i cant stand the bloke... and michelle ryan, way overrated. however, i will re-iterate my early comment, i dont think you can compare recent dr who with old. its practically a different show.
July 10, 200817 yr Well prepare to be shocked. I watched the first two episodes of Jekyll, and was not impressed. The fact its first episode started off with 5.1million, then each week dropped away down so by Week 4 it was down to a disastrous 2.8million before slightly reviving before its finale to 3.2million tells its own story. But then again I always thought the original Robert Louis Stevenson story of duality of human nature was over simplistic. Added to the fact I can't stand James Nesbitt as an actor in anything (If he became the next Dr Who I think I would get clinically depressed because I dislike his OTT larky slightly cheesy humour in everything he appears in), add an Eastenders actress whom I thought was dreadfully overrated and whos (lack of) acting abilities were exposed in her run in Bionic Woman (lets face it she is no Anna Friel (whom I remember in the mid 1990s saying how gutted she was that there was no longer Dr Who on, as her father loved the show & she would have loved to have been a Doctor's assistant) acting wise). Give RTD some credit at least he was not mug enough to take her on as a Dr Who assistant (Freema Agyeman pipped Michelle Ryan for the role of Martha). Whatever Freema's shortcomings are as an actress (she was incredibly unlucky to have to follow Billie Piper & be followed by Catherine Tate), but at least I can live rest assured knowing at least it was not Michelle Ryan playing Martha. For me Jekyll is the one big black spot in Steven Moffatt's writing career so far. As I've said before I loved Press Gang. I loved Coupling, Murder Most Horrid & Chalk, whilst Jekyll was his first "miss" for me. Incidentally Jekyll was the first time in his career he Executively Produced as well as wrote the show, which is why I'm not in the camp taking it for granted that Dr Who will get better when he becomes the Executive Producer of Dr Who in Series 5, because when he had the opportunity of casting and producing a show as well as writing it, and in my opinion he got it wrong. As for RTD. From my point of view from all his work Queer As Folk, Bob & Rose, The Second Coming his weakness has always been the plot development seems to have as much substance as if it was written by a 9 year old with a purple crayon. But as he is such a good writer, writing some great lines, and storytelling full of emotion, drama, humour & tragedy then who cares. Especially as a producer he always seems to be able to get the best out of the cast he has had. For me people who over analyse the plot are missing out on what makes a great TV drama show. I absolutely disagree with your assessment of "Jekyll".. So what if the audience figures tailed off a bit, obviously people just didn't like the darker direction that this drama (you know, it NOT being some sort of CBBC kind of cr@p that Dr Who was very much becoming during season 3...) was taking and couldn't take James Nesbitt doing something that wasn't his usual sort of acting turn... And frankly Michelle Ryan was hardly the most important character, she was very much an ancillary one at best, Gina Bellman acted her off the fukkin' screen (in fact, she'd've made a vastly better companion than Freema Agyeman anyday....), in what was the vastly MORE important female character anyway, ie, that of Jackman's WIFE, so to give Michelle Ryan's relatively minor supporting role equal weight to Nesbitt's is a bit dishonest on your part, she was NOT the leading lady in that series, Gina Bellman was, and given that Ryan's part was support, I felt she did adequately well, obviously in the more important role of Claire Jackman, she would've been absolutely lost... And as someone who's never really liked James Nesbitt all that much, I completely changed my mind when I saw him in this part, there was some seriously good acting on his part in this show, he really surprised me... Sorry, but I dont think it would be such a bad thing if the James Nesbitt who did "Jekyll" becomes the new Doctor tbh.... Although, personally, I still kind of like the idea of Sean Pertwee in some ways... A bit of "legacy" from father to son would be pretty cool... My dream however still remains Alan Rickman.... But, let's face it, a dream is all that is unfortunately.... As for your assessment of the RLS story, you could not be more wrong. You have to bear in mind when this story was written, before Freud, before Psychology became an important science, these were concepts that people were barely beginning to even comprehend... I think Stevenson wrote the best story he could at the time.... And Moffat updated it marvellously, certainly far better than those cretins did with "Frankenstein" and "Dracula" a couple of years back, absolute fukkin' BILGE, an insult to Shelley and Stoker..... And frankly I very MUCH care about the plot development, which is why I cannot stand Davis' hack-written sh!te tbh, and the fact that he just rips off from Sci-Fi films and old Dr Who plots and just repeats the same stories over and over, series one was great, but series 2-3 was SO hit-and-miss, the episodes from series 4 that I bothered watching were no great shakes either. Okay, so maybe he has managed to come up with good plots towards the end, but it's too little too late for me I'm afraid, he should've been WAY more consistent to keep my interest.... Moffat knows how to develop a good plot and develop characters over a period of time, which is why he's gonna be ten times the writer RTD was..... He also has something that RTD doesn't have - CONSISTENCY.....
July 10, 200817 yr i dunno scott... terry nation wasnt some super writer, ok he was good but i thought inconsistent. the sub plots of recent dr whos have been very good, all linking in torchwood, bad wolf etc etc... and these references throughout the seriese have been far more involved then anything from the past. tip.... totally agree about nesbit, i cant stand the bloke... and michelle ryan, way overrated. however, i will re-iterate my early comment, i dont think you can compare recent dr who with old. its practically a different show. Terry Nation wrote and created the brilliant "Blakes 7", which is by far one of the greatest Sci Fi shows the BBC ever produced, better in many ways than both the old and new Dr Who.. The same scripts with the bigger budget and slightly better actors would wipe out Dr Who completely IMO.. So, that alone puts him far above Mr Davis.... Go onto IMDb sometime and look at the bloke's writing credits..... I mean, I'm not completely against re-translating old shows for a newer audience.. The recent series of "Battlestar Galactica" absolutely SH!TS on the original in every way, because it has superbly written scripts, well-developed characters and plots, an absolutely compelling back-story, and an excellent cast all of whom play their characters to perfection... But above all, the writers of BG version 2.0 dont treat their audience like bloody TEN YEAR OLDS, the human characters are not all good, and the cylons aren't all bad, it aint presented as black and white as the corny old original series was, very often it goes to the intellgent Sci-Fi levels of Phillip K Dick or Aldus Huxley.... I doubt that Russel T Davis would even get a job as an Associate writer on BG tbh.... Yeah, the bloke might do emotion and drama and tragedgy, but without the actual plot development skills, this just comes across as being corny, cliched and hackneyed to me, schmaltzy even... BG has all the tragedy and emotion you can think of, which comes across a hundred times BETTER because it also has the plot and character developments to back it up.... How strange it is that the Americans who are the ones I usually criticise for lack of development and being corny are the ones who I feel are doing the FAR better Sci Fi show at the moment, BG is just a more grown up show than Dr Who or Torchwood when you look at it over the course of its 3/4 seasons.....
July 10, 200817 yr (lack of) acting abilities were exposed in her run in Bionic Woman (lets face it she is no Anna Friel . I quite agree with this part actually... Michelle Ryan just cannot carry a series, which is WHY her part in Jekyll is only pretty minor.... "Bionic Woman" was indeed pathetic, it only really came alive in the episodes which had Katee Sackhoff (who, coincidentally happens to play Lt. Starbuck in BG version 2.0..) kicking Michelle's arse.... :lol: :lol: Isaiah Washington was also an excellent addition, but then, inexplicably, they kill his character off...... :o Bad, Bad, BAAAAAAAAD move........ It's almost as if the producers of "Bionic Woman" version 2.0 wanted to fail.... Contrast this to "Terminator - Sarah Connor Chronicles", which got everything right (apart from casting the terminally useless Craig Fairbrass that is.... :lol: ), particularly the casting of Lena Heady as Sarah and Summer Glau (Firefly/Serenity) as John's Terminator bodyguard/sister.... As for Anna Friel, she came off a damn sight better - "Pushing Daisies" was pretty excellent stuff..... I'm seriously pushing now for Anna Friel to become the next companion... If we don't get Sally Sparrow back....
Create an account or sign in to comment