The Doctor is in, but the storyline is hard to find

Jules K says:

08:36am | 12/07/10

Because of his Dad? or because he is a good actor in his own right?

Rob says:

12:08pm | 12/07/10

He’s nothing like Tennant. Most of Tennant’s comedy, for example, drew from his rambling on about science and “wibbly-wobbly, timey-wimey, stuff,” while Smith plays the Doctor as simply a fish out of water — more alien than ever. His impulsive nature only makes this nature more apparent — like after stealing a tweed suit with a bow tie, Smith proclaimed, seemingly out of nowhere, that “bow ties are cool.” Tennant wouldn’t have done that in a million years. Their styles are VERY different.

DD Ball says:

01:07pm | 12/07/10

Chris L, there are big differences. Matt is not that handsome, and he is younger. He is arrogant, and inspirational for Dr Soon as well as others. He clicks his fingers and the Tardis doors opens ..

shane says:

09:14am | 12/07/10

Agreed!!! Rory is fantastic, plastic or otherwise.

AJ says:

11:07am | 12/07/10

I was beginning to think people had missed Amy completely.  I never thought a Scottish accent, red hair and a pair of Converse would do it for me.

papachango says:

04:23pm | 12/07/10

It’s somehow lost something without the cheesy low budget special effects of the 70s and 80s.
But I concur - all this is somewhat irrelevant when balanced out by Pond - she’s absolutely SMOKING HOT.

Chris L says:

01:25pm | 12/07/10

Coloured Daleks are actually a throwback to the old Dr Who movies starring Peter Cushing. These movies don’t really exist in the television Dr Who timeline ‘cause the movie Doctor was a human who invented the Tardis (and the movies were just rehashes of two William Hartnell espisodes anyway) and so “bringing back” the coloured Daleks is just lazy, pointless and incongruous.

I dare anybody to outgeek me now!

DJ says:

02:35pm | 12/07/10

Chris - since they don’t actually exist on the Dr Who timeline I therefore do not count them so still think it’s brilliant

DJ says:

10:19am | 12/07/10

I don’t know the Doctor/Donna did some damage to Stavros and those daleks

Mike says:

04:53pm | 12/07/10

The old series were Pre-Time War. When you are the last of your kind (or think you are), I believe your perspective would change.

The end will come when he taps four times

stephen says:

12:09pm | 12/07/10

Pretty good, but really too much fiction and not enough science e.g, too much talking and a very nervous script.

Days of our Daleks says:

03:58am | 13/07/10

The new series has episodes where two of the Daleks share more than weapons as love blossoms between the pink and blue androids until the black dalek finds out and wants to,,,,,,,,Exterminate

Anne71 says:

12:43pm | 12/07/10

@Thatcherschild, you’ve put into words my exact feelings about this new series. When they chose Matt Smith as the new Doctor, the producers made a big point of saying that they weren’t deliberately looking for a younger actor in order to attract younger viewers. Although a bit dubious, I gave them the benefit of the doubt and waited to see what the new series was like. It only took a few episodes to confirm my worst fears - it was definitely aimed at a young audience. Not only that, at times it appeared to be in danger of becoming a parody of itself.  Matt Smith, while not the worst Doctor I’ve seen, lacks the air of authority his predecessors had. It was hard to take him seriously at times, but that is probably more to do with the scripts and direction than Matt himself, at least I hope so.
I was also a bit surprised that, apart from River Song (and the Nestene!) making a comeback, it was as if the previous series had never happened. Not a word about Torchwood, for example. It’s almost as if Moffat was trying to completely eradicate all traces of Russell T Davies’ influence on the show.
I’m really not surprised that it’s been losing viewers in the UK, and I can only hope that Moffat and co. can take the hint and go back to writing for the same audience that RTD used to, otherwise it will continue to do so.

Brissy says:

01:28pm | 12/07/10

I have to agree.  I tuned in last night and it looked like it was aimed at teenagers with no sense.  Didn’t even seem like Dr Who.  It seemed that it was trying to erase the rest of Dr Who and this would be the stand alone.  I hope it gets better but I’m not holding my breath.  The storyline was great but badly done.

Ajent says:

08:37am | 13/07/10

Geez, you lot are a tough crowd! I think the major problem with series is that they only had 13 eps to work with. With a 1/2 length series, you just cant cover everything!

I love Matt Smith - didn’t think I would, but I do. I love that there are two companions and that they are very different from previous ones (and if you want to comment on them being too young and juvenile then dont forget the lovely Rose - you cant get more juvenile than Billie Piper in her first season!).

The whole point of a new Dr is that things change, and they have. It always takes a while for things to bed in, so sit back and enjoy the ride people. And lets be honest - who really cares about Torchwood crossovers?

And as for story continuity, did you notice River at all? Wakey wakey people, the big story for next season is the River/Dr story. Its been coming for a couple of seasons…...

Anne71 says:

12:54pm | 13/07/10

Ajent, we aren’t demanding frequent Torchwood “crossovers”. We’re just wondering why they completely fell off the radar this series. Perhaps you aren’t old enough to remember the original series of Doctor Who, but they featured an organisation called UNIT, which had similarities to Torchwood, and they frequently popped up when the storyline demanded it, regardless of which Doctor was in the Tardis. And as for things changing, the problem is that they haven’t. They weren’t really doing anything different at all in this series. I literally changed the channel when the Daleks appeared in the second last episode. Seriously, haven’t we seen enough of them and the Cybermen over the last few series? Give it a rest, Moffat!

Ash says:

11:05am | 14/07/10

Doctor Who has always been a ‘family’ show, so complaining that it’s aimed too much at young people is a bit silly.

DJ says:

12:55pm | 12/07/10

I don’t know, Amy is good and all but my favourite companion is Donna

Richie says:

05:36pm | 12/07/10

Damm tootin James A. My favourite episodes ever are: The Ark In Space, The Robots of Death and Planet of the Spiders. I like the new Dr Who, but it can’t hold a candle to these earlier era’s.

Anne71 says:

12:59pm | 13/07/10

Anyone remember “The Horror of Fang Rock?” It was a Tom Baker episode and it featured this sort of radioactive jellyfish which haunted a lighthouse and went around sliming people to death. I was about eight years old at the time and I loved it!

Crag Less says:

05:06pm | 12/07/10

Well indeed!  Although I’ve only seen 2 episodes of the new series, I don’t see that it is heading anywhere particularly divergent to the previous series.  I like the potential of Amy, but obviously need to see more episodes to see how the character develops.  As an overall comment I feel the show is targetting new fans primarily.  Since the show is now into a 5th series, there is obviously now a new generation of fans who have only seen the new program.  That’s not necessarily a bad thing, but I’m disappointed that the episodes of late seem rushed and seriously over produced.  I know “Classic” Who was held together with sticky tape, but the over blown music, special effects etc. are really spoiling the new series at the moment.  Sometimes less is more.  We need a return to episodes such as Human Nature, Blink etc. where the script, performances and characters take the driver’s seat - not just effects and Hollywood style fast action cuts.

Anne71 says:

12:46pm | 13/07/10

@Thatcherschild, I like!! Or perhaps you could have the Doctor waking up on the floor of the Tardis, with the whole previous storyline just the product of post-regeneration delirium.

Anne71 says:

12:42pm | 13/07/10

@Faz - “But let’s be honest - it’s been more consistent and less earth-based than Serues One RTD” - more consistent?!? Obviously our expectations are completely different. I can’t think of a single episode in the series just finished which came anywhere near the quality of, for example, “The Unquiet Dead”, “Father’s Day” or “The Empty Child / The Doctor Dances”. Then again, they weren’t written with a juvenile audience in mind, which the last series so obviously was. Moffat needs to realise that he does not have to “dumb it down” to get the kids interested - they watched it before so why change the style to suit them, at the risk of alienating (no pun intended!) the adult audience?

E says:

02:11pm | 14/07/10

Yeah totally, I mean dustbins on wheels must have seemed scary in the 70s or something, but now they look lame. Also, if the Daleks are such terrors, why havent they ever, upon discovering the doctor is on a planet, nuked the site from orbit, its the only way to be sure.

My 2 cents, i miss the old 6 episode arcs from the earlier series, this current incarnation is purely marketing driven, not much depth or anything. And yeah, why on Earth would The Master have bothered with the Earth? I mean its just stupid, he has the whole of time and space to mess with, and he chooses early 21st century Earth? Boring!

thatcherschild says:

11:02am | 14/07/10

JRB - Re Torchwood , as you know in Children of Earth the Torchwood HQ was wiped out, along with most of the Torchwood staff.
The word from the UK (on Digital Spy a few weeks back) is that the Torchwood franchise will now move to America and become an international set up with John Barrowman as Capt. Jack leading the cast, theres talk of him being joined by Gwen,
I understand pre-production is underway and shooting will begin when Barrowman has finished his current stint on Desperate Housewives.