it's a childrens' adventure show, don't expect it to be as high brow as sherlock. people like it because it's light-hearted, exciting and feel-good. also:
Hmmm the thing about Doctor Who is you can't take it too seriously. I think some of the appeal is its meant to be ridiculous. But in a good way.I also agree that some episodes are diabolical, Love and monsters for instance.I still don't know what the hell happened in that episode. But equally there are also some episodes which are hilarious/creppy as heck/ have brilliant acting/ are generally awesome. I reccommend Blink
it's a childrens' adventure show, don't expect it to be as high brow as sherlock. people like it because it's light-hearted, exciting and feel-good. also:
I can see this is going to digress into a yet another debate about the subjectivity/objectivity of the intrinsic value of programming if we are not careful, but please do elaborate. How exactly are these shows "better" than Dr Who?
To summarize you're claiming that: 'Dancing on ice' a show in which Z list celebrities faff about on some ice; 'X Factor' a programme in which a group of talentless individuals are eventually whittled down until we're left with some vaguely in tune generic pop 'artist'; 'Take me out' a show based exclusively on the superficiality and shallowness of its moronic contestants. And 'Total Wipeout' the concept of which sees people repeatedly falling off of things into some water, are all better than Dr Who? A Bafta award winning programme listed in the Guinness World Records as the "most successful" science fiction series of all time and the longest-running science fiction television show in the world. On what conceivable objective measure of "better" are you basing this absurd assertion?
X Factor is a worldwide show, with hundreds of awards and tenfold the viewers of Doctor Who. Is that a good enough basis? I'd much prefer the X Factor to the reign of Moffat & Smith, however not Davies & Tennant.
Seriously, it is one of the worst things I think I have ever seen.
I think I have seen 3 full episodes and each one was worst than the last. The acting is so over the top and good actors like David Tennant and Matt Smith seem to crumble and turn into blithering idiots, reeling off cliche after cliche. Granted, they can't be blamed for this, the script is weak. The special effects are laughable and the storylines are severely lacking as well as highly predictable.
I initially overlooked this and admittedly could see how children may enjoy it but I come on here and I see people raving about how good it is and my housemates are the same, they all claim it is brilliant. Doctor Who is an icon of British TV but that is no excuse for the terrible episodes being churned out nowadays. There was not a single thing I enjoy about the show and I find myself cringing in places because the dialogue is so poor. Three episodes is enough for me, I don't think I'll be wasting anymore time on it.
There are plenty of bad TV shows out there but usually I can see their appeal, this is not the case for Doctor Who.
Maybe I'm missing something, is it supposed to look low budget? Is the acting over the top on purpose? Am I missing some huge inside joke? Help me out guys!
Watch these episodes and then see if you want to change your mind: Blink The girl in the fireplace Forest of the dead Silence in the library The empty child The doctor dances.
Another good episode is gridlock, although i don't think it is quite as good as those episodes.
I can see this is going to digress into a yet another debate about the subjectivity/objectivity of the intrinsic value of programming if we are not careful, but please do elaborate. How exactly are these shows "better" than Dr Who?
To summarize you're claiming that: 'Dancing on ice' a show in which Z list celebrities faff about on some ice; 'X Factor' a programme in which a group of talentless individuals are eventually whittled down until we're left with some vaguely in tune generic pop 'artist'; 'Take me out' a show based exclusively on the superficiality and shallowness of its moronic contestants. And 'Total Wipeout' the concept of which sees people repeatedly falling off of things into some water, are all better than Dr Who? A Bafta award winning programme listed in the Guinness World Records as the "most successful" science fiction series of all time and the longest-running science fiction television show in the world. On what conceivable objective measure of "better" are you basing this absurd assertion?
it's a childrens' adventure show, don't expect it to be as high brow as sherlock. people like it because it's light-hearted, exciting and feel-good. also:
Dr Who has always supposed to be "cheesey". You should check out some of the older episode with Tom Baker in as the Dr!
Although I tend to agree with some of what you have said as with the increased budget of the effects & production you might expect the acting to have been taken more seriously.