Doctor Who Movie Won't Not Happen

Comment on “Doctor Who Movie Won't Not Happen”

Note: This website is not meant for use by minors. The views expressed in the comments section below are not our own. This section is intended for discussion of the topic in the post above. Disagreement is encouraged, however comments which attack, insult, or threaten the author in a personal manner won't be published. Similarly, comments that we deem to be poorly worded, or wildly off topic will also not be approved and may be mocked. For free, uncensored, unfettered, and possibly dangerous discussion visit our forum.

1. Chris Crosby Says:
   October 8th, 2007 at 12:59

   I strongly disagree.

1. JoshT Says:
   October 8th, 2007 at 13:00

   You're welcome to Chris, but as much as I love all things Science Fiction I've never understood what's so great about Doctor Who.

1. Kris Says:
   October 8th, 2007 at 13:44

   I have to admit Dr. Who started and ended with Chris Eccleston. Im sorry but ill watch anything with him in it, hes amazing. Josh you gotta admit, the guy is good. If anything watch that season of Who...

1. JoshT Says:
   October 8th, 2007 at 13:46

   Oh I love Ecclestein. He was the main reason I tried to force myself to watch the new Dr. Who as long as I did. He's also the reason I'm one of the few critics to actually give The Seeker a positive score.

1. Jason Says:
   October 11th, 2007 at 13:55

   Your love of all things Sci-Fi is probably the very reason you don't like Doctor Who. I'm the opposite: can't stand sci-fi, but I love Doctor Who - both the original series and new.
   
   To set the record straight, no the show in all its incarnations has NOT been shoddily produced and completely unwatchable - that's your unfortunate opinion but the facts state otherwise. (OK, some of the new series' 3rd (most current) season has faltered, I'll give you that - but some of it has been amongst the best television ever made anywhere.)
   
   While the original series in the 1960's, 1970's, and 1980's does not stand up well to current TV, not a lot of TV from that era does. They did what they could with a UK television (i.e. not movie) budget for that time, and the go-anywhere, go-anywhen nature of the show meant being in a different time and place in every story, having to continuously build new sets, and therefore stretching the budget as far as it would go... and then further still.
   
   The new series, though? Not a geek subculture phenomenon. Not cult anymore. It's the highest rated, most watched drama in all of Britain (some of the soaps beat Who in the ratings, but their audience appreciate figures pale in comparison - as do most other British shows in comparison to new Who). And although I haven't followed Who's ratings on Sci-Fi, I know at least the new series' first season had as many or more viewers than almost all of Sci-Fi's other weeknight programs - which is significant when you compare the relative lack of promotion Sci-Fi did for Who versus Sci-Fi's homegrown series (and who can blame them, considering how little they spent on purchasing new Who vs producing their own series like Battlestar etc).
   
   Not a wide audience for Doctor Who? It's watched and loved by numerous countries all over the globe, many of them redubbing the program for their native language. The only reason it hasn't done better in the States - and make no mistake, it's successful here too (as successful as you an expect considering its location on a cult network) - is the American viewers' apparent distaste for TV that's not American. Note how other UK series like Queer as Folk, The Office, Coupling, etc were remade in the US/Canada for the American audience. The difference with new Who is that it's NOT shoddily made - in fact, some of the new episodes are so well done and cinematic, they wouldn't look out of place in movie theatres just as they are. And if they do decide to do a movie on a movie budget, I guarantee you it'll do well not only in the UK, but here in the states and no doubt all the world over.
   
   Sorry it's not to your taste, Josh, but I guess you can't please everyone. Regards.

1. Matthew Milam Says:
   October 28th, 2007 at 01:51

   You say it's been badly produced and completely unwatchable.
   
   I don't understand this idea.
   
   If a show is crappy in production, how does that make it crappy?
   
   Supernatural has the budget of modern-day television and yet is as boring as shit. It also has a tired forumla borrowed from the X-Files.
   
   Somehow I can turn to the old Doctor Who, and sometimes the new, and not feel completely embrassed. Sure, there are issues I have with it, but I still can't help watching it.
   
   Now if you want a culture of geekdom that you wouldn't understand, try the Ultraman fans.

1. Meg Says:
   February 29th, 2008 at 15:50

   I accept your opinion, Doctor Who isn't for everyone.
   
   But bear in mind, this show is fundamentally a show for children or a family show (i.e. parents with young children). So, being a geek really is optional - those who watch Doctor Who, watch it because they genuinely enjoy watching it and not because its an obsession.

1. slp Says:
   June 10th, 2008 at 23:52

   Dr. Who's survival for more than 4 decades is pretty a good indicator of its quality. It is true that the production standards may not always be up to the standards of multi-million dollar movie productions, but the stories and writing for this show are superb compared to some of the empty headed attempts at SciFi that I have seen offered up by the current generation of filmmakers which can't seem to get beyond T&A and blood and gore.

Leave a Reply

Name (required)

Mail (will not be published) (required)

Website

Security Code (required)