🚀 go-pugleaf

Am 18.05.2013 21:02, schrieb AlfaMS:
> I have to admit I never grew to Matt Smith, what - after Ecclestone, and
> especially David Tennant, but I guess he also had his moments..
> But does it have to be a grumpy looking new one like many of the three
> from the beginning? And tonight's ending doesn't shed a promissing light
> on this one, neiter..

So sorry for the spelling mistakes: *twelfth*, and *neither* were the 
words I wanted to write. :(

DW wasn't worth watching, after John Pertwee left. Tom Baker was
a reasonable replacement ... then it all got a bit too silly.

The Sea Devils, The Green Death & Terror of the Autons were scary
& much anticipated watch,  for a (then) 10yr old-ish kid !

.... Sylvester bloody McCoy !??!   UNbelievable .......  :-/

"AlfaMS" <AlfaMS@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:kn8j18$tfb$1@dont-email.me...
>I have to admit I never grew to Matt Smith, what - after Ecclestone, and 
>especially David Tennant, but I guess he also had his moments..
> But does it have to be a grumpy looking new one like many of the three 
> from the beginning? And tonight's ending doesn't shed a promissing light 
> on this one, neiter.. 

Am 18.05.2013 21:27, schrieb Evertonian:
> DW wasn't worth watching, after John Pertwee left. Tom Baker was
> a reasonable replacement ... then it all got a bit too silly.
>
> The Sea Devils, The Green Death & Terror of the Autons were scary
> & much anticipated watch,  for a (then) 10yr old-ish kid !
>
> .... Sylvester bloody McCoy !??!   UNbelievable .......  :-/

I remember the 15 minutes clips on BFBS from the late 70s and early 80s, 
and your description fits them mostly. But starting with Ecclestone, and 
especially D. Tennant I think Doctor Who entered a far more 
sophisticated sphere of entertainment, and mystery IMHO. It was a good 
idea not to split a story into up to ten 15 minutes' parts, but let it 
run for 30, and later 45 minutes, and not to (usually) stretch an arc 
over more than two episodes. Just my humble oppinion..

"AlfaMS" <AlfaMS@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:kn8l2m$828$1@dont-email.me...
>  ....But starting with Ecclestone, and especially D. Tennant I think 
> Doctor Who entered a far more sophisticated sphere of entertainment, and 
> mystery IMHO. It was a good idea not to split a story into up to ten 15 
> minutes' parts, but let it run for 30, and later 45 minutes, and not to 
> (usually) stretch an arc over more than two episodes. Just my humble 
> oppinion..
>

 You're probably right & I can't comment after McCoy. By then the prog had
gotten so stupid that I stopped watching & have never bothered since.
 Space *comedy-horror* hit a new high, though, with Red Dwarf (1988 - 
present day)
& with so much other good stuff ( & available channels) & only so many hours
in the day to watch TV .... DW has ben relegated  into insignificance for me
personally. To tell the truth, I'd rather watch the digitally remastered, 
first couple
of Star Trek series .     :-)

Evertonian.  (aka Willie Eckerslyke)

 

AlfaMS writted:
> I have to admit I never grew to Matt Smith, what - after Ecclestone, and 
> especially David Tennant, but I guess he also had his moments..
> But does it have to be a grumpy looking new one like many of the three 
> from the beginning? And tonight's ending doesn't shed a promissing light 
> on this one, neiter..

I was a little puzzled about that ending.  John Hurt is clearly playing the 
Valeyard, *not* the Doctor.  So why label him as the Doctor when the 
dialogue of less than a minute earlier contradicts that fact?

-- 
Enzo

I wear the cheese. It does not wear me.

 

Am 19.05.2013 18:34, schrieb Enzo Matrix:
> AlfaMS writted:
>> I have to admit I never grew to Matt Smith, what - after Ecclestone,
>> and especially David Tennant, but I guess he also had his moments..
>> But does it have to be a grumpy looking new one like many of the three
>> from the beginning? And tonight's ending doesn't shed a promissing
>> light on this one, neiter..
>
> I was a little puzzled about that ending.  John Hurt is clearly playing
> the Valeyard, *not* the Doctor.  So why label him as the Doctor when the
> dialogue of less than a minute earlier contradicts that fact?

Well - it was all quite mysterious to me, since I have no recollection 
of the Valeyard, at all.. :/

"AlfaMS" <AlfaMS@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:kn8j18$tfb$1@dont-email.me...
>I have to admit I never grew to Matt Smith, what - after Ecclestone, and 
>especially David Tennant, but I guess he also had his moments..
> But does it have to be a grumpy looking new one like many of the three 
> from the beginning? And tonight's ending doesn't shed a promissing light 
> on this one, neiter..

I agree with Peter Davison when he was asked about the new Doctor Who with 
Eccles - he sort of scowled and said,

"Well I think it's good it's back"!

Lousy writers liked the conceited Moffat are no help - I've decamped!

--
Nick