Slashdot Mirror


Ask Slashdot: How/Where To Start Watching Dr. Who?

stinkfish writes "I am a big fan of science fiction, especially good TV science fiction. For some reason Dr. Who is a show I have watched very little of. My question to Slashdot is, whats the best strategy for enjoying this classic show? Looking at the wikipedia page on Dr. who, I see there are 11 Doctors, so is hard to pick a good starting point. If it was just up to me, I would start watching from the very beginning. But I know my wife would not watch a show that dated, though she is a science fiction fan herself and enjoyed a few seasons of Torchwood. So where do I start? Here's an article on this topic; is there more to say?"

483 of 655 comments (clear)

  1. At the risk of my nerd card... by elrous0 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You aren't alone. I never got into this show, and I've just never been particularly interested in trying.

    And you know what else--I thought "Lord of the Rings" was boring (both in book and movie form), "Babylon 5" was poorly written and acted, and the movie version of "Starship Troopers" was much better than the book. There, I said it.

    I assert that being a geek doesn't mean having to like *everything* associated with geek life. And if you have to FORCE yourself to get into it, you're probably going to take all the fun out of it anyway.

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    1. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by Crunchie+Frog · · Score: 5, Funny

      Phew... well at least he didn't take a pop at Firefly

      --
      --- Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity
    2. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by dragonhunter21 · · Score: 1

      Never say Babylon 5, never watched or read Starship Troopers, but beyond that, with you all the way.

      There's different classes of nerd. A movie nerd, I am not.

      --
      Sent from my CR-48
    3. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by marco.antonio.costa · · Score: 1

      Wow, Heinein's book just trumps that ridiculous 'Saving Private Ryan' in space.

      But Babylon 5 really was beyond saving. And to my shame I followed it with a passion... kids. :-)

      --
      Send your spendthrift head of state this
    4. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Your nerd card has been officially revoked.
      -Sincerely, The Internet

      LET THE NAME "elrous0" BE STRIKEN FROM THE SCROLLS!

    5. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by jdpars · · Score: 1

      I love firefly, but I admit it probably never had enough appeal to be a mainstream, high-budget show.

    6. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by JameskPratt · · Score: 1

      Someone please rip his nerd card up. His license to geek should be no more!!

    7. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by HungryHobo · · Score: 2

      everything is a matter of tastes, personally I don't think any of the starwars movies are much good.

      If you're interested in giving Dr who a go though forget the really old ones, many of the oldest episodes are gone, tapes reused, episodes lost.

      A good starting point would be the 2005 revamp.

      Yes Dr Who is camp, yes it's a bit hit an miss but I like Dr who, as long as you're good at suspending disbelief it's a charming series.

    8. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by FreonTrip · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I don't agree with everything you've said, but your perspective's interesting. More importantly, it's entirely worth defending. When a friend told me to hand in my geek card because I've never cared for Firefly, I turned it around on him. After a few questions, he admitted that didn't know who Jerome Bixby or Harlan Ellison were*, and that he'd never read anything by Isaac Asimov. Long story, made short: "Nerd authenticity" is relative, and it's worth shaking the foundations a little to ensure that they stand on merit rather than orthodoxy.

      As for Doctor Who, start any place. The Fourth Doctor's a classic for a reason, and I'm partial to Chris Eccleston's turn (2005 series). Don't worry too much about formality or getting off on the wrong foot; it's designed to be pretty approachable.

      * You don't have to like them, but they were both influential enough that it really helps to know why they matter.

    9. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by bigstrat2003 · · Score: 1

      Bah, who would revoke a geek card over Firefly? I'll never understand how anyone liked that show at all. No accounting for taste, I guess...

      --
      "16MB (fuck off, MiB fascists)" - The Mighty Buzzard
    10. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by Jimbookis · · Score: 1

      Turn 5 again so the monsters can scare the bejesus out of you. I loved to be scared by it in the Tom Baker days, especially by the Cybermen. I particularly remember being reduced to crying hysterics by them but I'd keep coming back for more. As I got older it became more apparent that it is a CHILDRENS and adolescents show. So move on and don't worry about it too much.

    11. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by cayenne8 · · Score: 1

      If it was just up to me, I would start watching from the very beginning. But I know my wife would not watch a show that dated...

      Hmm..doesn't she have her OWN tv to watch??

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    12. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by Assmasher · · Score: 1

      Dood, I don't think I could trust someone who didn't like the original Star Wars - it's hard to trust the soulless...

      --
      Loading...
    13. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm in the same boat. I go back and catch up on old series with Netflix. But Dr. Who is just intimidating.

      For example, my current series is Smallville. I've done 9 1/2 seasons in about 4 months. I'm going to try and time the finale with the actual shows finale. I did DS9 in 6 months. All of SG-1 in 10.

      But Dr. Who has 770 episodes. 770. That's one a day for 2 years.

    14. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by Xaedalus · · Score: 1

      Agreed. I just started my Dr. Who experience with the 2005 revamp, and both my wife and I are now hooked. Christopher Eccleston as the Doctor ROCKED!!!!!

      --
      Here's to hot beer, cold women, and Glaswegian kisses for all.
    15. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      Firefly was really a Western. That made it more general interest in a way. Although Westerns themselves are dated and most people would not be able to get past the whole "space" thing.

      Although it's cool that someone finally put some "historical context" into a Western.

      OTOH, if there were a better example of that I would likely be unaware of it being a Sci-Fi geek that generally dislikes Westerns.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    16. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by Push+Latency · · Score: 1

      Hahaa yeah!

    17. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by guspasho · · Score: 4, Funny

      "the movie version of "Starship Troopers" was much better than the book. There, I said it."

      Of course it was; it had Denise Richards.

    18. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by Seumas · · Score: 5, Informative

      First, you need to remember that Doctor Who started life as a children's show. Thus, the first bunch of seasons were very oriented toward the 60s serial audience for children. As a Doctor Who lover, I had to really push myself through the first three doctors worth of shows. That isn't to say that there aren't some really great shows to be found early on, but I can see how it might not be the cup of tea of most viewers.

      The show really kicks off with the fourth doctor (Tom Baker), often heralded as the most popular doctor. For a certain generation (such as myself, being around thirty years old), Tom Baker is "the" doctor, kind of the same way that for people around my age think of Ronald Reagan as our concept of what "the" president should look like.

      Anyway, I would say Tom Baker is the place to start and if you discover that you have a hunger for even more, you can go back and watch the rest. There's a good chunk of missing content over the first three doctor's, however. There's some beyond the third doctor that is still missing, too, but the most content is missing from early on. Back in the day, the BBC just threw out films in order to make room to store more. And at another point, I believe a fire destroyed a lot of it. Where possible, people have recreated episodes by merging audio recordings with still photos from the set.

      Beginning with the 2005 Doctor Who, the show technically had a "reboot". You could reasonably only have ever watched these episodes and nothing before. While it's a reboot, the doctor's still count in order and the chronology of everything still happened. So it's a reboot, but . . . . not really. The tone of the show also changed, dramatically. While the doctor always had companions, it was never a show about a brooding sad doctor alone in the world having one romantic interest after another with all the intrinsic undertones. This puts a lot of fans off. If the early doctor who shows (the first three doctor's, at least) were very oriented toward young children, the latest three doctor's were very oriented toward the female "Lifetime" channel audience (to a degree). I find it a noticeable change, but honestly, I don't have a huge problem with it. I like the additional depth the doctor has grown to have.

      Anyway, my advice would best be summarized as:

      + You can get away with just watching the modern Doctor Who.
      + I'd really suggest watching everything beginning with Tom Baker onward.
      + If you're hungry for more, afterward, go back and pick up what you can of the first three doctors.

      Then you can add on the rest of the shows, like Sarah Jane Adventures and Torchwood (none of which I have watched yet, but will, eventually -- I don't know much about them).

      As for how to find them? You can find old episodes on Netflix. Not sure how much is there. I'm not sure what the legal status is of the copyright and distribution on the content is, but if you know where to look around, you can find collections of all Doctor Who episodes available to the world on bit torrent. It comes out to 26 seasons and about 750 episodes (none of this including 2005+). I would absolutely love to have some sort of an official collection of every single Doctor Who content out there (they also have lots of books, comics, and radio plays . . . all of which I've owned to some extent over the years, because I'm a raging dork). Unfortunately, I don't know where you can find a lot of the content, commercially, and torrent seems possibly the only way for much of it.

    19. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by Beyond_GoodandEvil · · Score: 2

      the movie version of "Starship Troopers" was much better than the book.
      That's b/c you missed the point of the book, and what self respecting geek doesn't love powered armor?

      --
      I laughed at the weak who considered themselves good because they lacked claws.
    20. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by shaitand · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That is the source of all this confusion. People can't seem to grasp the difference between nerds and geeks.

    21. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by shaitand · · Score: 1

      geek != nerd

    22. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by TClevenger · · Score: 2

      Agreed. Maybe it's because he was the first Doctor I saw, but I still think he was the best.

      Then again, I like Roger Moore and Timothy Dalton as Bond for the same reason, so maybe my judgment isn't the best in these matters.

    23. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by shaitand · · Score: 1

      +5 Insightful

    24. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

      Firefly was really a Western. That made it more general interest in a way. Although Westerns themselves are dated and most people would not be able to get past the whole "space" thing.

      Cowboy Bebop?

    25. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by kuzb · · Score: 1

      Any show that sports a ship that houses a high class hooker is A-OK with me!

      Jokes aside, does anyone notice how if a show attempts to be even remotely creative these days it gets cancelled within one or two seasons of release?

      --
      BeauHD. Worst editor since kdawson.
    26. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by jzarling · · Score: 2

      I'll take a shot at Firefly -
      Joss Whedon's inclusion of the killer pixie character ruined the show.

      The source material was set in the time of Reconstruction after the Civil War, dealing with how the crew, essentially former Confederates dealt with becoming even a marginal part of the new "world" should have been the focus.

      --
      It is better to be the hammer than the anvil.
    27. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by bigstrat2003 · · Score: 1

      Timothy Dalton was an excellent Bond. I prefer Pierce Brosnan, but nonetheless, Dalton played the part quite well. Moore was OK if the movie was good (not many of the Moore movies were, sadly), but I thought he was pretty bad otherwise.

      --
      "16MB (fuck off, MiB fascists)" - The Mighty Buzzard
    28. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by insertwackynamehere · · Score: 1

      I suppose this means another geek will have to hand in his nerd card. When will it end?

    29. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by kuzb · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Even my mother liked firefly. We can't have nice things because the majority of people are fucking stupid, ignorant drones that believe reality TV shows like "Jersey Shore" are the pinnacle of human creation.

      --
      BeauHD. Worst editor since kdawson.
    30. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by The+Grim+Reefer2 · · Score: 1

      But Dr. Who has 770 episodes. 770. That's one a day for 2 years.

      Not to mention that some of the older shows cold be insanely long. War Games was over 4 hours in its entirety. One of the lost Hartnell/Dalek episodes was 5 hours.

    31. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by ackthpt · · Score: 1

      You aren't alone. I never got into this show, and I've just never been particularly interested in trying.

      And you know what else--I thought "Lord of the Rings" was boring (both in book and movie form), "Babylon 5" was poorly written and acted, and the movie version of "Starship Troopers" was much better than the book. There, I said it.

      I assert that being a geek doesn't mean having to like *everything* associated with geek life. And if you have to FORCE yourself to get into it, you're probably going to take all the fun out of it anyway.

      I feel the same way about Red Dwarf - the books were kinda-sorta OK, though I felt highly derivative of H2G2. When I first saw the Red Dwarf shows on TV I wasn't so much non-plussed as mildly revolted - yet the series has a strong following. Not all things for all geeks.

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    32. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by HungryHobo · · Score: 1

      I never got firefly but then while I love scifi I hate westerns.
      It's just like "you've got a space ship. you have GOT to have a better way of doing things than walking around with a future-pistol. I mean the energy and technology that's got to be available...."

      I read the methods of rationality too much.

    33. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by gatkinso · · Score: 2

      I am nerd beyond measure, yet I have found the series to be at best mildly interesting.

      Nerdy friends would force me to sit through it, all the while I'd be saying very uncharacteristic things like, "let's go out side and toss a(n American) football."

      --
      I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
    34. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by somersault · · Score: 1

      Hah, I agree on LOTR and Babylon 5, though I've never read the book Starship Troopers is based on so can't comment there.

      I remember loving Dr Who as a kid, the family used to watch the TV series in the late 80s, and I read one of the books.. I saw a couple of episodes of the new stuff and it didn't seem my cup of tea so to speak, though I'd love to watch from the originals and then might watch the new series too.

      A lot of the stuff that is considered essential to hold your "geek card" is very good, and I'm slowly picking up more of such things from Slashdot, but there is a lot of stuff out there that other geeks seem to love, that I generally can't be bothered with. Not going to go into details, but I do get fed up of the groupthink sometimes.

      --
      which is totally what she said
    35. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by H0p313ss · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Agreed. Maybe it's because he was the first Doctor I saw, but I still think he was the best.

      In Dr. Who fandom it's commonly said: "You never forget your first Doctor."

      I started watching Dr. Who in 1977 (I was eight...) when I spent four months living in an old manor house on the outskirts of Sheffield. So of course for me The Doctor will always be Tom Baker. He could even make K9 tolerable.

      --
      XML is a known as a key material required to create SMD: Software of Mass Destruction
    36. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by jhumkey · · Score: 1

      (Yes, I realize I'm mixing my Scifi shows but . . .) Because in the end, all the guns, lasers, spaceships, aliens, transporters, and holodecks in the universe . . . are just contrived plot devices. In the end . . . its always the people and the choices they make that matters. I watch TV shows and movies (aside from the pretty girls) for one reason . . . in hopes of seeing the "one perfect moment". Where story, writing, delivery, photography, all come together to produce something more than just "a scene". For me, in Firefly, that "one perfect moment" came in the 2nd episode "The Train Robbery". "Mal" has unwittingly stolen medicine desperately needed by the mining colony. When he sees what has happened, and how many will suffer for it, he tries to return it. The Sheriff spots him coming to drop off the stolen goods and intercepts him. Saying . . . "Times are hard. A man might take a job and not ask too many questions about what's involved. When he gets the full story, he has a choice to make." Mal says "No, I don't believe he does." When faced with jail time, or possibly even death . . . for Mal there was no other choice but to "do the right thing". He was a man of character at all costs to himself. In Serenity the movie, the entire crew essentially made a similar choice. And some did die for it. It was about people being their best, when things were at their worst. It may not qualify as great SciFi . . . but it can make your heart soar to watch. It can make you wish at 48, that you can still be Malcolm Reynolds when you grow up. And strive to be him every day.

      --
      No, I don't remember your name. But the memory mapped screen on a TRS80 from 1977 is from 15360 to 16383 if that helps.
    37. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by somersault · · Score: 1

      Well, it made it to being a generally released and probably relatively high-budget movie at least :)

      --
      which is totally what she said
    38. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by Normal+Dan · · Score: 1

      Is there a definite mostly agreed upon distinction? I remember reading somewhere that geeks tend to like to know stuff about things and will want to tell you all about them. Like a sci-fi geek will tell you all about his favorite show, or a computer geek will know the latest and greatest gadgets, etc.

      A nerd on the other hand enjoy figuring things out. Like geeks they might have a primary focus, but they tend not to go around telling everyone about it. They are more into science and technology in and of itself rather than the product of said technology. A nerd tends to think what he or she is working on will change the world in some way.

      Unfortunately, I hear the opposite from other sources and even wildly different definitions depending on who you ask. So, here I ask again, is there a widely accepted definition of nerd and geek?

      --
      A unique way to learn a language: http://languageloom.com
    39. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by Raffaello · · Score: 4, Informative

      I'm a whole generation older than you, so I started watching Tom Baker as the Doctor when I was a teen in the 70s. I have a friend the same age as me who lived in the UK as a child and watched the original series live as a small child. He remembers thinking it was craptastic even as a 5 year old (but he watched it anyway - not a lot of good options back then). I saw the shows from the 60s in my teens in the mid 70s and really couldn't get past the lack of production values. Revisiting them later on in my 30s, I still didn't find them really worth watching.

      For me, the best Doctors were Tom Baker, David Tennant, Peter Davison, and Christopher Eccelston. I like Matt Smith, the current doctor as well.

      I agree with your overall advice to the OP:

      1. If you have have limited time, just start watching from the "reboot" of 2005.
      2. If you have more time, start with Tom Baker, then continue on with his successors from the original series as long as your interest holds up.

    40. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by Codeman125 · · Score: 1, Informative

      Firefly was really a Western. That made it more general interest in a way. Although Westerns themselves are dated and most people would not be able to get past the whole "space" thing.

      Cowboy Bebop?

      Cowboy Neal?

    41. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by bigstrat2003 · · Score: 1

      I agree that the trappings of sci-fi are just trappings, and that it's really about examining ourselves through the lens of the unfamiliar. That said, the trappings can be off-putting, and in the case of Firefly, I couldn't get past the Western motif. It was just too cheesy, and completely wrecked the show for me.

      --
      "16MB (fuck off, MiB fascists)" - The Mighty Buzzard
    42. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Wow, Heinein's book just trumps that ridiculous 'Saving Private Ryan' in space.

      Did you seriously just compare the Starship Troopers movie with Saving Private Ryan? I think you badly misunderstood the tone of one or both of those films.

    43. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      Remington Steel will never be James Bond. Sean Connery is the best James Bond, but at least Dalton is better than Remington Steel.

    44. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by Gilmoure · · Score: 1

      Same recommendation. I could never get into earlier Doctors, starting with Scarf guy but once we gave Eccleston a chance, I was hooked. And we introduced Daughter (10 years old) to 10th Doctor (Tennant) last year, right before 11th showed up. Since then, have acquired full set of 2005+ shows and have started watching earlier DW on Netflix. Daughter even likes those, though the production values are so much lower than current stuff.

      --
      I drank what? -- Socrates
    45. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by bigstrat2003 · · Score: 1

      I can't agree there. Sean Connery is an alright Bond, but he didn't bring the magical blend of suave, professionalism, and deadly assassin to the role that Brosnan did. I felt he was pretty unremarkable as Bond, to be honest (although a great actor in general).

      --
      "16MB (fuck off, MiB fascists)" - The Mighty Buzzard
    46. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by marco.antonio.costa · · Score: 1

      Yes, it was easy to get the sense that I compared the plot. But no, what I mean is the gung-ho 'we're US marines, lets do it, roarrr!!!' thing.

      The book has politics, it's a smart read. The film is pure diluted space opera where bugs rip people's arms and marines empty clips at them.

      --
      Send your spendthrift head of state this
    47. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by ackthpt · · Score: 1

      the movie version of "Starship Troopers" was much better than the book.
      That's b/c you missed the point of the book, and what self respecting geek doesn't love powered armor?

      Starship Troopers received the same treatment as Jurassic Park - all the interesting theory was stripped out for the action bits. "Hey, let's ditch most of that Ian Malcolm rubbish and make a movie about dinosaurs!!" Most of Heinlein's later works were similar to Cricton's, which is what real sci-fi is about, exploring morality plays, scientific theories, etc. through the vehicle of a fantasy world - "We could go to war against these aliens, and possibly beat them, but who's more fit to make such decisions - people with no stake or experience in military service or a load of Television watching, cheese doodle munching civilians?

      I never got around to much of the Dr. Who universe and whether there was some actual depth to it or it was nothing more than a Sci-Fi soap opera.

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    48. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by GooberToo · · Score: 1

      First and foremost, you need to understand, Dr. Who absolutely is NOT science fiction. Dr. Who is science fantasy. Dr. Who has almost no elements required for good science fiction. That's not to mean Dr. Who can't be enjoyed. Its just that it can't be enjoyed on the basis of science fiction.

      I agree with you, Firefly is so-so, but at least its actually science fiction. Babylon 5 actually had a story to tell, which means it has far, far more to offer than most mainstream entertainment and is a polar opposite of anything J.J. Abrams has to offer. Which is not to say everyone must enjoy B5 either.

      I assert that being a geek doesn't mean having to like *everything* associated with geek life. And if you have to FORCE yourself to get into it, you're probably going to take all the fun out of it anyway.

      I completely agree. A lot of extremely geeky humor is not the least bit funny. Often its a three year old's humor which is supposed to funny because its to the exclusion of non-intellectuals. That to me isn't humor, its a poor attempt at creating an exclusive club. Which explains a lot since many Geeks have been socially excluded so its their one up attempt at righting the world.

    49. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by KingMotley · · Score: 1

      I agree. Tom Baker was definately the best of them, but there were quite a few very very good ones.

    50. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by TClevenger · · Score: 1

      I liked Pierce in Goldeneye; I haven't actually gotten a chance to see anything newer.

    51. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by toastar · · Score: 1
      IMNSHO...

      Moore > Connery > Brosnan > Dalton

    52. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by blair1q · · Score: 1

      I can imagine people who didn't see it in the 70s finding it a bit meh. They didn't experience it among the vast sea of storyless, introspective, or exploitative junk that Hollywood movies consisted of at the time. It catalyzed the rebirth of storytelling in movies with strong protagonists, atavistic forces in conflict, and action that was driven by and drove the plot. If they've come to it in about 1981, they've probably seen 10 movies that wouldn't have been made without it, but copped all of its dramatic techniques. Plus they would have been immersed in iteratively improved special effects, leaving them completely underawed instead of galactically blown away by the never-before-seen compositing and motion-control shots like we all were.

    53. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by Yvan256 · · Score: 1

      the movie version of "Starship Troopers" was much better than the book

      I liked it too. There's nothing like a good over-the-top military comedy that takes itself seriously and it has great special effects on top of that.

    54. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by Assmasher · · Score: 1

      Wow, you must not trust virtually every mail North American/Western European between the ages of 30 and 60. Good luck with that... As for brainless - LOL.

      --
      Loading...
    55. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by Davorama · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No, K9 was tolerable because you were eight. At fourteen K9 was an unforgivable joke but Tom Baker was still the best Doctor.

      --

      Davo -- Free speech, free software, AND free beer.

    56. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by Damouze · · Score: 2

      Babylon 5 is by far one of the best science fiction TV series ever written. It was way ahead of its time. There is no denying it. Very few TV series can top it. Firefly certainly, the reimagined Battlestar Galactica maybe, Farscape for sure, Doctor Who is on par with it, but that's about it. What most people misunderstand about B5 is that it's basically a novel in an audiovisual format: the first season is the prologue, the second, third and fourth season is the main story and the fifth season is the epilogue. My personal favorite is season 2, episode 21 "Comes The Inquisitor". I knew it was about a certain figure from British history before the episode was halfway through. Why? Because of the subtle clues that JMS wrote into it. (I also feel it should be required viewing for double-duh-Bush-lovers ;-))

      If you really want to get into Doctor Who, watch the new series from 2005 on first. Why? Because it will give you a good feel of the show. Then watch some episodes from the Tom Baker era. If you're still intrigued, watch the rest from start. The first serials will definitely feel 'slow' and the special effects are dated (we are talking about a B&W science fiction show from the early 60s after all), but it will definitely be worth the watch.

      --
      And on the Eighth Day, Man created God.
    57. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by Assmasher · · Score: 1

      Oops, pulled a Jerry Reed there - *male

      --
      Loading...
    58. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by toastar · · Score: 2

      God at least the scarf is better then a bow-tie

    59. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by ae1294 · · Score: 1

      Even my mother liked firefly. We can't have nice things because the majority of people are fucking stupid, ignorant drones that believe reality TV shows like "Jersey Shore" are the pinnacle of human creation.

      THIS

    60. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by Damouze · · Score: 1

      There are only two real Bonds. The rest of 'm are all bad copies. The first is Sean Connery. The second is Roger Moore.

      --
      And on the Eighth Day, Man created God.
    61. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by ae1294 · · Score: 1

      I suppose this means another geek will have to hand in his nerd card. When will it end?

      Tomorrow...

    62. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by blair1q · · Score: 1

      And she was the second-hottest chick in it.

    63. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by idontgno · · Score: 1

      Well, if that matters, you just go right ahead and visualize Denise Richards as Carmen Ibanez as you read the book. That satisfies that particular requirement while saving you from the rest of the hideous abortion that movie was.

      --
      Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
    64. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by N0Man74 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's not simply a matter of reality TV shows being more popular... They are really cheap to make. My impression is that they can cancel a typical (non-reality) television show, and replace it with a reality show, and still be more profitable even if the reality show gets less viewers.

      The free market has many strengths, but it doesn't necessarily promote the best of the arts.

    65. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by CrackedButter · · Score: 1

      Its a welcome change that the 11th Doctor doesn't pine over lost women. He just gets on with it, even when he technically has a wife as well!

    66. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by muindaur · · Score: 1

      It's one of the few Anime series that I will watch, and for a few good reasons.

      1) Finite length
      2) Broad characters (with depth!)
      3) Plot
      4) Plausible Sci-Fi
      5) Great voice acting.

      I liked GITS: SAC and Wolfs Rain for similar reasons. With NGA I wasn't sure if it wasn't all just a dream(that's really the impression I got from the series as it seemed like something a boy stressed about family, school, and dealing with puberty feelings towards his best friend.)

      Unlike shows such as: Bleach, Naruto, DBZ, etc.

      Firefly was a great series, though I didn't see it as having the same plot depth, but it's also been a long time since I last had a chance to watch it: good character depth though. The movie was great, and didn't have sound in space. As for the sequence firing their makeshift gun, if there was sound(can't recall) it was only the sound of the vibrations you would hear on the ships interior(my brain could have just imagined those.)

    67. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      I don't know a single adult who has watched a star wars movie in the last ten years. I would no more watch 'Star Wars' again then I would 'Star Trek' or 'He Man and the Masters of the Universe'.

      You will find a lot of nostalgia for these old POS movies. They will introduce them to the kids, but not watch them.

      George Lucas's best film was 'American Graffiti'. A movie that had human characters, not cliches right of of Pokemon.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    68. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by PsychoSlashDot · · Score: 2

      Bow-ties are cool.

      --
      "Oh no... he found the .sig setting."
    69. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by nomadic · · Score: 2

      Jokes aside, does anyone notice how if a show attempts to be even remotely creative these days it gets cancelled within one or two seasons of release?

      Huh? Lost? 24? 30 Rock? Shows tend to be a lot more creative these days than any point in history (except maybe the first few years of television when it was all new). I mean, I grew up in the 80's and TV then was terrible. Didn't get better in the 90's. 70's reruns are almost universally bad. 50's and 60's sitcoms are offensive in their tameness.

    70. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by squidfood · · Score: 2

      In Dr. Who fandom it's commonly said: "You never forget your first Doctor."

      You mean your first companion, if you're 13 and the companion is Leela.

    71. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by nomadic · · Score: 1

      Babylon 5 was good but not great. Way too many cliches taken from other science fiction books, movies, and television shows. JMS' stories always seemed like they were written by your smart, creative 14 year old nephew who got too much of his stuff from things he read or watched already.

    72. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by Assmasher · · Score: 1

      Why does liking/loving a movie mean you have to watch it repeatedly? I love Star Wars (and Empire), but I haven't watched them in years. The last time I watched them was because I'd finally put a home theater into my house and I wanted to see it on a big screen again.

      I don't know who you hang out with but several fathers of kids in our neighborhood have watched Star Wars repeatedly with their kids.

      Star Wars an old POS? You may not realize it but you're definitely in a minority in that regard.

      --
      Loading...
    73. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by King+InuYasha · · Score: 1

      Indeed.

      I first watched Doctor Who on my local PBS station, they were showing a Third Doctor story... I think it was "Inferno." I later went to the library and checked out all the videos and books they had on Doctor Who (this was before the 2005 series arrived). My favorites wound up being the Third, the Sixth, and the Eighth Doctors. Though I do love the Eleventh.... He's quirky, kooky, and fun!

    74. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by nomadic · · Score: 1

      Neither the movie nor the book was particularly good; the best part of the book was that it was short, and the best part of the movie was the nudity. Wouldn't go through either one again though.

    75. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by Damouze · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I disagree. I view the Ninth, Tenth and Eleven Doctor as - and in some ways quite liteally - three faces of the same individual: Eccleston's Ninth Doctor is the mysterious happy-go-lucky persona that comes in from the cold and takes you up into an adventure. Tennant's Tenth Doctor is a bit more pragmatic, maybe a bit less mysterious: he knows his time is running out and he will go to great lengths to postpone that, and hints of his true age show up all over. And he falls in love. Smith's Eleventh Doctor is neither. Only the Doctor has remained. In a way, he has been reborn, not just regenerated.

      --
      And on the Eighth Day, Man created God.
    76. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by grep+-v+'.*'+* · · Score: 1

      The show really kicks off with the fourth doctor (Tom Baker), often heralded as the most popular doctor. For a certain generation (such as myself, being around thirty years old), Tom Baker is "the" doctor

      I agree wholeheartedly. Tom Baker is "The" "Doctor", all of the rest are just wanna-be interns.

      --
      If the universe is someone's simulation -- does that mean the stars are just stuck pixels?
    77. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by Chris+Burke · · Score: 1

      The movie is stuffed with politics! Granted it definitely turns the dial way more towards "mindless action" for much of the film, and is certainly no equal to the book in that regard (then again a film where main characters mentally soliloquy about politics and philosophy would be Thin Red Line, and thus awful). But it has plenty to say politically. You just have to get over the natural assumption that because it's space opera it can't have anything to say.

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    78. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by treeves · · Score: 1

      You've got to be kidding! Roger Moore was the worst James Bond ever. Moonraker = worst 007 movie of all time.

      --
      ...the future crusty old bastards are already drinking the Kool-Aid.
    79. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by cubex · · Score: 1

      Yes, I liked Tom Baker too. I also liked Hartnell, and after a while I started to like Peter Davison too. Didn't like like Tennant as much, he over-acted. The other ones I've barely seen so it wouldn't be fair to form an opinion on them, but Tom Baker and William Hartnell are my two favourites. Hartnell brought some dignity to the role that was rather lacking afterwards.

    80. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      Jon Pertwee was my first doctor, but for sure Tom Baker was better. He was the best of the classic series doctors. But even he was bettered by Christopher Eccleston and David Tennant. So I don't think its necessarily your first Doctor that you think is the best. Although, you're right, like girlfriends, your first Doctor is always going to have fond memories of first discovery.

      I watched some of the William Hartnell episodes fairly recently. They were either broadcast live, or filmed as live without re-takes. And Hartnell being rather old had trouble remembering his lines, and often fluffed them. It's surprising to see these mistakes in what was the final transmitted version of a show. Also, as a character he was quite different from all the subsequent actors in being rather dark, unsympathetic and amoral. In those days, much more than at any time since, it was his assistant, his "granddaughter" Susan, who brought morality to the stories.

    81. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by dgatwood · · Score: 1

      Ultimately, it comes down to the people making movies being in it only for the money. It stopped being about talent and drive to create something amazing a long time ago. These days, it's about maximizing profit. That will continue until such time as enough small teams are creating good movies and cleaning their chronometers.

      And really, that's for the best. Back when film was the only way to do things, making a movie was really expensive, both in terms of equipment and film/processing/editing, so it made sense to have a few big companies that controlled the production. And showing movies was expensive, so it made sense to have those movie production houses also own theater chains, etc. These days, making movies is cheap, and distributing movies is cheap, making these behemoths largely obsolete. Over time, they will be replaced by smaller firms doing the same thing, and those firms will be driven more by the art than by the dollar because they will be run by creative people instead of by MBAs. And if they end up being run by MBAs, it will be cheap enough for new people to create new firms to push them out of the way.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    82. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by CorSci81 · · Score: 1

      I started with the 2005 revamp, but so far my favorite Doctor is Matt Smith. Christopher Eccleston was a bit too moody for my taste. David Tennant was of course fantastic as well, but I think Smith has admirably filled his shoes.

    83. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by The+Great+Pretender · · Score: 2

      The preferred Doctor seems to be the one you grow up with. My elder sister was a Pertwee fan I was a Baker fan. However, in saying this, I would start at Baker. The style of the show (while remaining lovingly cheesy) became more along the lines of what you may be used to in today's age. As mentioned, Hartnell and Troughton led shows more aimed at the younger generation and Hartnell was depicted as a grandfather figure to young Susan, so the episodes can get a little parental preachy. The problem for me with Pertwee was the true embracement of late 60's early 70's culture. The electronic synth that runs constantly through his episodes will drive your brain nuts. However, Terror of the Autons introduced the Master and for that I thank the 3rd Dr. (The Deadly Assassin was the best Master episodes in my opinion). The 'maturing' of the Dr. became apparent in Tom Bakers role with the addition of Leela (The Face of Evil), where the older males started to be attracted to the show due to her skimpy outfits (I still remember my Dads comments). In my opinion this bought in a new mature audience that then started to redefine the approach. I never really thought that Tom Baker could be surpassed until the second season with Tenet; he really did fit the role around then.The other things that are worth watching are the older movies made in the 60's with Peter Cushing as the Dr (Day of the Daleks and Daleks-Invasion Earth). Different premise somewhat to the series, but Cushing fit the role well and was a mature contrast to Hartnell. These of course are just my ramblings as a life long fan of DW who hit 40 last year.

      --
      A positive attitude may not solve all your problems, but it will annoy enough people to make it worth the effort.
    84. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by Damouze · · Score: 1

      We'll have to agree to disagree then. I count it as one of his strongest points that in B5 he always seemed able to put contemporary problems into a format that would work in such a setting. Be it a fight against tyranny, xenophobia or religious ethics, he always found a dilemma, and choose to not always provide an answer. I like that in a series. Not everything needs to be tidied up neatly. There have to be loose ties. Some things have to be let to the viewer's imagination.

      Of course I recognized influences from other authors and other shows. I personally liked the link between Delenn (and the rest of the Minbari) and Carl Sagan. The part about star-stuff. It always rang true to me, right from the beginning.

      --
      And on the Eighth Day, Man created God.
    85. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by kbob88 · · Score: 1

      "the movie version of "Starship Troopers" was much better than the book. There, I said it."

      Of course it was; it had Denise Richards.

      I fail to see what is funny about that. If I had mod points, I'd mod it 'insightful'. I thought the movie was barely OK, but I might have to watch it a few more times now that I remember she's in it...

    86. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by SydShamino · · Score: 1

      If you don't want to start with the revamp, might I suggest starting with Tom Baker? Specifically, watch The Android Invasion. It was the first episode I ever saw and it worked pretty well for me.

      If, after you watch it, you wonder what that UNIT thing is all about, then go back and watch the Jon Pertwee episodes. If you are happy to never see those characters again, just keep watching from here.

      --
      It doesn't hurt to be nice.
    87. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by Provocateur · · Score: 1

      And don't forget the stunning sequel...Wild Things, where she emerges from the Pool and even tries to establish close contact with the other female Neve Campbell.

      --
      WARNING: Smartphones have side effects--most of them undocumented.
    88. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by muindaur · · Score: 1

      Similar(means it may contain some, but not all of the listed factors), and yes there was a plot to it: although not as deep as others. It was the search for paradise, and the futility of it: then the element of them being led there without realizing it. Unless I also imagined the imagery about the cycles of society, time, and the balance of good and evil(the remaining eye causing a slow poison of evil to spread across the new paradise.)

      So it may not have had the best laid out plot, and it was felt it was rushed, yet I still liked it(still doesn't top Cowboy Bebop in my list, and bottoms below NGA.)

    89. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by billstewart · · Score: 1

      30 Rock came out around the same time as Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip, which was a far more creative show, and which got cancelled after about two seasons. I like Tina Fey, but the writing wasn't as good and I found Alec Baldwin's character to be an uninteresting caricature.

      24 was creative enough that it taught a generation of Army interrogators how to get information out of prisoners, and I've never forgiven Kiefer Sutherland for it, in spite of it being a well-paced and interesting show. (Also, it's very strange to have The President keep showing up on car insurance commercials...)

      --

      Bill Stewart
      New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
    90. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by gd2shoe · · Score: 1

      The politics were both integral to the book, and its Achilles heel. The problem is that people generally cannot appreciate philosophies that they disagree with. Geeks and nerds certainly can't, but the general populace even less so.

      In order to keep the politics out to the film, they ripped out all of the plot (and most of the legitimate sci-fi). It was very unfortunate.

      --
      I won't join Slashcott. OTOH, If Beta goes live, I just won't be back until it's fixed. Sorry Dice.
    91. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by Damouze · · Score: 1

      Blame Sc[y|i]f[y|i] for that. It seems that their beef is with any show that grows beyond the mediocre. It gets cancelled in favour of shows that don't.

      Take Farscape for example. Went boldly where no science fiction show had gone before. Got cancelled prematurely. Still, a good miniseries wrapping it all up got made. Or Caprica. Great show, great potential. Got cancelled after only one season.

      --
      And on the Eighth Day, Man created God.
    92. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by hovelander · · Score: 1

      Just like Fringe is likely to get cancelled now, and how SG:U was cancelled. I agree that anything that isn't cookie cutter is dying on network TV. Sad that we can't have intelligent, big budget SciFi on anymore. After Fringe, will there be any "non jokey" SciFi left? (I'm not even interested in Fox trying dinosaurs instead of Fringe and syfy is just an embarrassment now.)

      Big channels will just have crap cop procedurals, talent and reality. Smells of Telemundo and Univision, that. So sad.

      Good SciFi is going to have to go down-channel and try to mimic the small channel success of Spartacus and The Walking Dead. Fewer episodes and smaller audiences, intelligent SciFi is only going to happen by accident. SciFi has historically been a slightly underground niche and it is fortunately/unfortunately returning there.

    93. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by nschubach · · Score: 1

      You are not alone. I loved Firefly's concept... hated the execution.

      --
      Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
    94. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by VanGarrett · · Score: 1

      I like Westerns. I like Sci-Fi. I really enjoyed Cowboy Bebop, but I never really got a "Western" vibe off of it. It seemed to me, to have more of a 1930's PI feel to it, with a twist of mob-drama.

    95. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by DrZib · · Score: 1

      Don't you DARE compare Doctor Who to Bored of the Rings!

    96. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by pthisis · · Score: 2

      I disagree; the last 10 years have pretty much been the golden years of TV. The Wire, Mad Men, Breaking Bad, the Sopranos, Deadwood, the Shield, Sons of Anarchy, Queer as Folk...even the step below that are still a ton better than most of what was on in the 70s, 80s, or 90s.

      --
      rage, rage against the dying of the light
    97. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by DurendalMac · · Score: 1

      There were laser pistols, but apparently you had to either be part of the Alliance government/military or have some really good connections. The brothel episode's bad guy was packing one.

    98. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by pthisis · · Score: 1

      Moonraker was terrible, but Live and Let Die was awesome. Dalton's the only Bond who didn't have at least something to add to the role (even Lazenby was better than him).

      --
      rage, rage against the dying of the light
    99. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by syousef · · Score: 1

      I was nodding my head agreeing with you, then you lost me on Babylon 5.

      --
      These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    100. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by pjt33 · · Score: 1

      At least you've seen the Star Wars films. I saw Attack of the Clones when I called round on a friend just as he was putting the DVD into the drive, but other than that I haven't seen them. However, just from hanging around /. and reading Darths and Droids I know enough to be the person everyone looks to when SW comes up in the pub quiz.

    101. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by hovelander · · Score: 1

      But as to OP's question:

      Start with 2k5 Dr Who like people are recommending here, and then go back to the absolute beginning and watch. I'm still making my way through and enjoying it.

      But if there is only one episode to NOT MISS it is "Blink", http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1000252/. I couldn't believe how absolutely perfect a Dr Who episode could be. I still get chills and teary eyed thinking about that episode. Not to be missed by any true fan of good writing and SciFi.

      IMO: Best Doctor is Tenent. Best Companion by FAR is AMY POND.

      As another side note, I curse you bastards who are recommending B5. I spent last summer gagging my way through that steamy turd of s series. Maybe 3 good eps in the entire run, and yes it is only my opinion. HOT CRISPY JESUS I curse those who recommend B5. I want that time back to watch something better, anything better, even LEXX!!! I trusted you bastards!!!

      Gah!

    102. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by PCM2 · · Score: 1

      But no, what I mean is the gung-ho 'we're US marines, lets do it, roarrr!!!' thing.

      Here's a clue for you.

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
    103. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by metrix007 · · Score: 1

      The book is simply a journey of a marine. It has no depth andisn't a smart read, except for the odd sentence or two where a controversial idea is made. The movie explores many of the themes brushed upon in the book in further detail through satire.

      --
      If you ignore ACs because they are anonymous - you're an idiot.
    104. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by Chris+Burke · · Score: 1

      The movie was great, and didn't have sound in space. As for the sequence firing their makeshift gun, if there was sound(can't recall) it was only the sound of the vibrations you would hear on the ships interior(my brain could have just imagined those.)

      Nope, no sound even then. The entire movie and series were wholly sound-in-space free.

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    105. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by Truekaiser · · Score: 1

      Two of those anime's don't belong on that list. Both bleach and dbz have ended. the anime's that have not ended yet and most likely will not are pokemon and one piece.

    106. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by Jeremy+Allison+-+Sam · · Score: 1

      Where in Sheffield ? (Just curious, my home town you see :-).

      Jeremy.

    107. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by h4rr4r · · Score: 2

      The current one is worse. He looks like a Bond villain not a Bond. First time I saw him I wondered what Vladimir Putin had given the USA to get that film role.

    108. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by geminidomino · · Score: 1

      I liked the first season of 30 Rock. By the third, I was bored -- mostly because it's the same unfunny gags from the first season over and over again.

      "OMG! Tracy did something stupid and Liz said something that someone standing on their head with a boot in their left ear almost might consider racist and now she's freaking out!"

      Jack could only carry it so far.

    109. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by Requiem18th · · Score: 1

      I also liked the ST movie better in part because it sort of mock the book itself. Never got around Babylon 5 but do like LotR.

      But every thing I read about Dr Who suggest me to avoid it like hell. I have a hard time accepting a species that renamed themselves "Time Lords". Even if they invented the technology, it's like renaming ourselves TV Lords then Internet Lords every time we invent something. I have a hard time accepting that a race of "Time Lords" can experience conflict of any kind. How many times does time machinery fail per episode? Even 0.5 times per episode would be too much to take. I have a hell of a time accepting that these "Time Lords" look so damn human like. And yes I know that quote, it doesn't make it any less ludicrous.

      Even with parallel, convergent evolution, the odds against two species being so identical are so great that you would need multiple universes, which I hope is their final official explanation for our similarity. That is, if there is any such thing as official any. As far as I know the doctor has gone over several iterations and I'm sure there's at least a couple of retcons.

      --
      But... the future refused to change.
    110. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by Chris+Burke · · Score: 2

      Agree completely, Cowboy Bebop, despite the name, was more Noir with Spike being the Private Dick.

      Outlaw Star was more of a "Western-in-Space" style of Anime, and the one I think Firefly owes a much bigger debt. Even down to the Girl in a Box with a Mysterious Purpose. Who, I just remembered, kinda becomes part of the ship to pilot it, which is vaguely mirrored in the last episode of Firefly.

      All three shows follow the basic pattern of a small group of people on a small ship trying to make ends meet.

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    111. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by dwywit · · Score: 1

      Nah.... start with the Jon Pertwee episodes. You get Jo Grant AND Sarah Jane Smith as companions. I never liked the Tom Baker shows as much as many others - the stories were good, but the cheap effects really brought it down to the 'cheesy' level.

      And as for Amy Pond.......sure she's cute, and smart, and brave, but Karen Gillan's vocal delivery is F#CKING ANNOYING! - She doesn't articulate well - it's like she's trying to get away with minimal facial movements when she talks, and the speech audio on all the shows since the reboot just doesn't seem to work - it's like they've put a narrow-pass filter over the human speech frequencies - I can't make out what they're saying half the time. And it's not my ears - I can hear other TV shows quite well, even shows on the same channel (ABC Australia) /rant

      --
      They sentenced me to twenty years of boredom
    112. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by hovelander · · Score: 1

      Been waiting to watch all of those shows, and I agree about the observation, just that for SciFi the golden age looks gone. ((FX isn't exactly a large but I do respect that they somehow get quality on par with HBO series. But they don't do SciFi : ( ))

    113. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by tylernt · · Score: 1

      Babylon 5 is by far one of the best science fiction TV series ever written.

      People keep saying this but I've watched the first season and a few episodes of the second season, and it frankly... sucks. Terribly poor acting, weak storylines, and heavy-handed "plot complications" (the show tries to make itself more dramatic that it is). I keep watching only because the SO does... maybe it gets better, but the first season at least is a pass.

      People complain about Star Trek DS9, well, B5 is worse.

      --
      DRM 'manages access' in the same way that a prison 'manages freedom'
    114. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by natehoy · · Score: 1

      The 2005 reboot is what got my wife interested in Doctor Who at first. Once we ran out of new ones between seasons, I started with "An Unearthly Child" and we've watched pretty much everything but the reconstructed episodes (and even a few of those). We just finished the Season 16 "Key to Time" series, and we'll probably watch all the way through Baker, Davison, C Baker, Sylvester McCoy, and the McGann special, then start again with "Rose" and watch the new reboot with a different context and from a different perspective.

      As a side effect, she's starting to learn basic database stuff and her geek card is on its way. (grin) Love ya, honey.

      --
      "This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
    115. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by Silverhammer · · Score: 1

      While the doctor always had companions, it was never a show about a brooding sad doctor alone in the world having one romantic interest after another with all the intrinsic undertones.

      The explicit romance may be new, but there has always been an undercurrent of loss and loneliness in the show regarding the Doctor and his companions. For example, the marriage of Susan, the marriage of Jo, the abandonment of Sarah Jane, the death of Adric, the nervous breakdown of Tegan... and those are just the ones I can think of at the moment.

      Furthermore, the Doctor feels each loss more strongly now because after the fall of Gallifrey, all he has left are his companions. It is a very reasonable change in tone when going from a low-rated, half-hour kids' show to a top-rated primetime hour.

    116. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by yelvington · · Score: 1

      Very nice summary. Tom Baker is the high point of the original set, and his energy is clearly the inspiration for all the latter-day doctors. I would differ only in a couple of areas:

      * A new viewer should start with the "reboot" (2005) and should leave the old episodes alone until getting fully caught up. (Netflix is the place to go.) For modern viewers, the cheesy production values of the original series can be jarring. And accidentally tapping into the Colin Baker or Sylvester McCoy eras could put you off Dr. Who forever. There's a reason Dr. Who disappeared from the screen.

      * Watch Torchwood. Watch all of Torchwood. It's very well done. (But discover Jack Harkness through Dr. Who first.)

      * Do not watch ANY Dr. Who movies until you're hooked, and even then only as an academic exercise -- did you know Peter Cushing (Grand Moff Tarkin in Star Wars) played the Doctor? But not the canonical Doctor.

      * Don't forget to watch the Red Nose Day comedies http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Do-wDPoC6GM and John Barrowman singing the theme song http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FtdGwiMtZ08 and Craig Ferguson's version http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M9P4SxtphJ4 ... Dr. Who isn't just a TV show, it's a cultural phenomenon subject to many interpretations.

      And if you're very, very brave, watch the Beedeer Dr. Who. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PxcMCr_lA7M

    117. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by biodata · · Score: 1

      Agreed - start with Christopher Eccleston and work forward, then go back to the beginning and go forward again. I've seen most of them over the years, but the reappearance with Eccleston was a real update to current TV production values, and will help you appreciate the creakiness of the older ones. Also remember, the doctor is a time traveller, and the series follow his (their?) timeline, but you are also a time traveller so in your timeline Eccleston might have predated the earler doctors.

      --
      Korma: Good
    118. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by hovelander · · Score: 1

      Wait a minute... Amy Pond speaks???? I'll have to check into that.

      Her facial expressions are subdued, but I think it is because of youthful subcutaneous fat. I personally love the Scottish accent and haven't noticed any annoying compression on her voice. (But then again, I download, so I can't exactly say.)

      Karen Gillan could read some random repair manual and I would still be hooked.

    119. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by dwywit · · Score: 1

      Oh, hells yes. She has a nice feminine voice, and the accent's great, too - but I can't understand the words. I can understand David Tennant when he speaks with his natural accent, but not her.

      --
      They sentenced me to twenty years of boredom
    120. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by Seumas · · Score: 1

      The first three doctors are definitely worth watching, but the tone of the shows are decidedly different. It'd be worth catching a couple episode of each of the three to see if one is open to watching the rest of them -- but they're so different that I think you can survive entirely without them. There was some charming stuff and I liked the "cranky old doctor" version a lot. Ever since, the roles keep being filled by younger and younger guys.

      I liked the doctors all the way up to the modern ones, but they definitely aren't quite up to the same snuff. A lot of the episodes I happened to catch as a kid were re-runs of McCoy, so I kind of like him a bit.

      I agree wholeheartedly that Tom Baker and Davidson are must-watches, if you can only bother to watch two old doctors series. They seem to embody the show the most.

    121. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by treeves · · Score: 1

      I suppose it wasn't all Moore's fault that Moonraker was so bad, or to his credit that Live and Let Die was good. I still think he was the worst, but I haven't seen the newest one, whom the commenter below says is worse.

      --
      ...the future crusty old bastards are already drinking the Kool-Aid.
    122. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by Seumas · · Score: 1

      I actually dig the whole melancholy brooding doctor aspect. Mostly because it's balanced by his manic excitement and glee. And it would be hard to ignore the ramifications of life bouncing through and people. Hell, the guy saw the end of time. I just always feel that the new series is right on the edge of becoming insultingly obvious about the whole relationship stuff. Kind of like how every show on SyFy now has nothing to do with science fiction and are just veiled "relationship" shows to draw chicks (think Warehouse 13).

      I know a lot of people hated the whole Rose arc, but I was suckered in by it. Partially, I suppose, because it wasn't something I expected for Doctor Who. It was a little original and a bit new. Unlike Martha (awesome) and others since then, which sort of feel obligatory at this point.

      I'm just glad that they've continued to hold on to the slight kitch of the special effects and types of monsters (the adipose fat deposit creatures, the minister of defense or whoever she was that was an alien, etc). That was always the special treat of Doctor Who.

    123. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by Seumas · · Score: 1

      I haven't seen any Torchwood yet, but I plan to. The story of Captain Jack (you know what I mean) blew my mind.

    124. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by TheRaven64 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Hartnell was also obviously a stage actor (in that period, most people on TV were). Whenever he makes an entrance, he pauses to make sure that the audience has seen him before continuing to walk onto the set. This is normal on a stage, where you don't want people to start delivering lines before the audience has noticed that they're there, but on TV it just looks weird.

      Patrick Troughton was the first Doctor I saw, but I was too young for the episodes to make much sense. Jon Pertwee was the one I saw when I was old enough to appreciate the show. I only watched any of the ones between Tom Baker and Eccleston after the new series aired, and they're not really worth it. The arc that they were trying for just before it was cancelled looked interesting, but they ignored it in the new series.

      I'm not sure where the best place to start is. Some of the old episodes are really tedious, and only worth watching as a historical curiosity. The end of Troughton or start of Pertwee is probably around the time when they get to the point where they're watchable for a modern audience - they look horribly dated, but they're still entertaining. Some of the Tom Baker ones are superb, but then it quickly becomes appalling.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    125. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by matthewd · · Score: 1

      I'll second this, but add a third option:

      3. After watching the 2005+ series, if you don't have enough time to watching everything in order starting with Tom Baker, watch at least his first season, which includes stories with three recurring villain races. Then if you are interested in the classic episodes but don't want to slog through them in order, skip around based on a theme, say all of the Dalek episodes in order, or regeneration stories (last and first episodes when the actor portraying the Doctor changes). Some of the episodes and seasons are tied together with a theme (Season 16: Key to Time, Season 23: Trial of a Timelord, Keeper of Traken/Logopolis/Castrovalva form a sort of trilogy). Others are notable for certain reasons (e.g. City of Death was filmed in Paris and written by Douglas Adams and will seem familiar if you've read Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency). There are a few multiple doctor episodes (The Five Doctors, The Two Doctors, The Three Doctors) that are worth watching. Watch at least one episode from each of doctors 4-7. Check out the only Eighth Doctor (Fox TV movie) because like or not, that's all there is for the eighth doctor (and they did get Sylvester McCoy back for the first 20 minutes to include the regeneration sequence).

    126. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by Mana+Mana · · Score: 1

      > you know what else--I thought "Lord of the Rings" was
      > boring

      *jijiji* Righton! I've never read the books, I found The Hobbit or one of the other books (who remembers) boring. And for a while next to me there was bar? restaurant? called the Bilbo Baggins that I stumbled past on the weekends and made me scratch my head as incongruous for that neighborhood.

      > (both in book and movie form), "Babylon 5" was
      > poorly written and acted,

      All these scifi tv shows, and the channel itself disappointed me. As did the comedy channel, I was expecting Pryor/s all-some-of-the-time. Then again I happen to think that Letterman, Conan have always sucked, are unfunny, are ticks and ego. Kimmel is fullofshit too. Carson was pleasant, Leno makes me smile because the guy is likeable and collects cars, all kinds of cars and is philantrpoic, decent. And I don't hear shit about his kids, his wife, his contract and shit.

      > and the movie version of "Starship Troopers" was
      > much better than the book.

      Disagree with you there. That movie sucked. And Denise Richards was a fresh young whore.

      Spider Man 1, 2 and X suck/ed!!!

      X Men sucke, well that was alright, sort of, goofy but.

      And that Firefly shit you guys tricked me into, well that shit sucked too; although that odd looking chick, his number one, from that Chris Rock movie was cuuute.

      Ironman 1, soright. 2? sucked^googel_power.

      Captain Marvel! where are you?

    127. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by Kjella · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's not simply a matter of reality TV shows being more popular... They are really cheap to make. My impression is that they can cancel a typical (non-reality) television show, and replace it with a reality show, and still be more profitable even if the reality show gets less viewers.

      This. Low paid participants who don't need any acting skills, simple camera work and almost no retakes just broadcast whatever happens. Take something like Paradise Hotel. Rent a luxury hotel, find a few good-looking guys and girls and give them skimpy swimwear and free booze. That's pretty much all the props you need for the entire season, the rest is just gossip and intrigue.

      Even if you just compare it to some drama series you still need fairly known actors, script, clothing, props, scenery, you need to do many takes per scene and so on . There's just no doubt that reality shows is much, much cheaper to produce. I once saw some numbers but I've completely forgotten, the difference was stunning though.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    128. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by jeko · · Score: 1

      After a few questions, he admitted that didn't know who Jerome Bixby or Harlan Ellison were*, and that he'd never read anything by Isaac Asimov.

      Never mind his nerd card. At that point it's time to wish him into the cornfield.

      --
      He put his boots up on the table and made a face. "The sig," he smirked. "You can waste your life in search of the sig."
    129. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      the death of Adric

      You mean the bit when all of the characters look at each other and are obviously thinking 'we've got a time machine, we could pop back and get him off the ship before it crashes without altering the time line. I hope no one else thinks of that...'? We had to wait until Donna Noble before we got a companion more irritating than Adric.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    130. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by SpazmodeusG · · Score: 2

      I imagine he got the point of the book. The movie is better because, whether intentionally or not, it completely turned Heinlein's message on its head by taking it to such a ridiculous extreme it became satire.

    131. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by Mana+Mana · · Score: 1

      Yes. Last I read circa 47% of the serial is missing and known destroyed.

      I started last year with the modern BBC serial, is cool, doable. Go for it. I saw Tennnant (stuck in the perpetual traffic jam), and Eccleston (billion years plus, end of Earth) on PBS and it peaked me.

      I saw the original cranky doctor #1 (petrified forest, Daleks, Dalek little-hand shot) as I thought that episode, 1963? was the first episode. Wikipedia filled me in. I was going to bounce back and forth afterward, haven't gotten around to it though.

    132. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by mattack2 · · Score: 1

      30 Rock & Studio 60 started the same season -- 2006.. and Studio 60 lasted only one season. I liked it a lot, though I also think 30 Rock is hilarious.

    133. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by mhotchin · · Score: 1

      The difference between a geek and a nerd is that a geek knows the difference between a geek and a nerd.

    134. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by penguinchris · · Score: 1

      So how do you explain all the people who grew up in the late 80's and 90's, such as myself, and got just as much into Star Wars (perhaps even more so) than those who were young when it was originally released?

      I knew even as a kid that the special effects were slightly dated (though I still think they're quite good even today - nothing CGI can match physical stuff in my opinion), but it didn't matter - besides the fact that we watched them on relatively small TVs on pan-and-scanned VHS tapes, the effects were second to the great characters and the interesting story.

      Again, even as a kid, I could tell when other movies were copying techniques from Star Wars, whether visual effects or aspects of the storytelling and characters (now that I'm older I recognize that it's more complex since Star Wars took huge influence from so many earlier sources, but it's safe to say much of the 80's and 90's copycats were copying from Star Wars and not the original material). They didn't do it as well, and the movies weren't as good.

      It's not just because it was the "first" to offer great special effects and an exciting method of storytelling with great characters. It truly was excellently done and stands up well to those films that followed it. Which isn't to say that there aren't similar films made later that are as good or better - there are - but most aren't. I think kids today watching the original Star Wars films will be just as entranced as previous generations, despite the improved special effects today and everything. The original films "got it" just right, and almost nothing in the mean time has to the same extent (the original Indiana Jones films did, and you could perhaps argue the LOTR trilogy).

      Personally, my kids (when I have any in the future) are going to watch the original Star Wars and Indiana Jones films. I'll let them watch newer stuff too, of course, but I'm going to do my best to hide most of the drivel available these days from them, especially the Star Wars prequels and Indiana Jones 4. I have no reason to doubt that they will like the original movies as much as I did, even though by then they'll be ancient history as far as my kids will be concerned.

    135. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by penguinchris · · Score: 1

      For Your Eyes Only is my favorite Bond film, and it's Roger Moore. His other ones I can agree were often pretty silly (The Spy Who Loved Me, Moonraker, and A View to a Kill especially) but For Your Eyes Only is basically the ultimate Bond film, and Roger Moore is great in it.

      I have to agree with Pierce Brosnan being great, though... except that most of his films were pretty awful too! Goldeneye was excellent, but it went way downhill for Brosnan after that, despite him being excellent in each one.

      FWIW my ranking is Moore -> Connery -> Brosnan -> Dalton/Lazenby/Craig (tie - I thought they were all fine, just didn't bring anything special like the others did) but I can't deny that Connery's Bond films are among the best (though they can be quite silly sometimes too - I always think of the flamethrower vehicle thing in Dr. No as an example).

    136. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by Randle_Revar · · Score: 1

      Yeah, no. You are just wrong on all three counts.
      The only one could have any sort of argument at all on is LotR: if you have the attention span of a three-year-old, then yes it might be boring to you.

      Acting on B5 started a little rough, but rapidly became quite good. Story-wise, there isn't a live action show that comes close, unless perhaps you count parts of shows - season 1 of Heroes was very good, for example (and was rather poor all other seasons).

      And the movie of Starship Troopers? Really? First off, it should have been called "Space Marines vs Bugs" or something, it had no relation to the book beyond a few names and the title. And even as "Space Marines vs Bugs" it was pretty darn bad. The book on the other hand is very well written, which anyone should admit even if they disagree with the message(s).

      ...I have been trolled haven't I?

      10/10

    137. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by Randle_Revar · · Score: 1

      >"let's go out side and toss a(n American) football."

      Get out.

    138. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by timelorde · · Score: 1

      Maybe it's because he was the first Doctor I saw, but I still think he was the best

      And so a new generation discovers the universal truth.

    139. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by vrmlguy · · Score: 1

      Here's a Venn diagram that explains why Doctor Who beats everyone else: http://mooseintheyard.blogspot.com/2010/12/why-im-doctor-who-fan.html

      --
      Nothing for 6-digit uids?
    140. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by vrmlguy · · Score: 1

      OB Doctor Who reference: Timothy Dalton is also a pretty bitchin' Lord President of the Time Lords.

      --
      Nothing for 6-digit uids?
    141. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by dbIII · · Score: 1

      people around my age think of Ronald Reagan as our concept of what "the" president should look like

      That explains a lot about the USA today :(
      You DO know that the guy was an actor and that his "we will never deal with terrorists" was just a line because on the first day of his first term he paid a fortune in cash as a ransom to Iranian terrorists?
      It's also depressing but funny that the most loved President on the other side of US politics (Kennedy) also nearly got the place nuked.
      It will be scary in the future to have people who have a concept of what "the" President should look like as George (always on vaction) Bush, Hillary, Palin or Gingritch.

    142. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by david+duncan+scott · · Score: 3, Informative

      You know, "Blink" is superb Dr. Who, and the funny thing is that there's hardly any Doctor, or even a companion, in it, which makes it a weird introduction to the series.

      --

      This next song is very sad. Please clap along. -- Robin Zander

    143. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by filthpickle · · Score: 1

      kneejerk was to flame him....then I thought to myself...someone else here read Heinlein's book and knows what an UNBELIEVABLY idiotoc statement that was. Thank you.

      You may as well say that you liked Armageddon.

      The only redeeming quality of the ST movie was the whole creepy Dougie Howser Nazi MD thing, imagine his creepy Jewish friend sneaking in his window every night.

      That book is good to fantasitc....I will allow you leeway. That movie is dogshit.

      OK..I will help anyone that thinks that movie isn't horseshit. In the book...the space marines were so tech'd out and such badasses that a handfull of them would raid a planet. They would NOT line up with machine guns shooting at bugs while nobody wondered why it didn't occur to anyone to mount a few machine guns on something that could fly too.

      You people are funny to me. You are like clowns. You amuse me.

    144. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by filthpickle · · Score: 1

      I just recently watched firefly and loved it. But anyone can say they didn't like it and that's fine. But to say that you like the starship troopers movie more than the book is just unforgivable.....unforgivable is a fantastic movie, to balance out a horrible one with a great one.

    145. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by filthpickle · · Score: 1

      I feel compelled to defend a book that I liked. You are more than welcome to have not enjoyed it...but I am certain we can both agree that the movie was horrible.

    146. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by CohibaVancouver · · Score: 1

      I grew up in the 80's and TV then was terrible

      Cheers?
      L.A. Law?
      Hill Street Blues?
      Miami Vice?
      Night Court?
      St. Elsewhere?
      Amazing Stories?
      Max Headroom?
      ST: TNG?
      Quantum Leap?
      Police Squad?

      ...and that's just off the top of my head.

      Sure, there was rubbish like "Mister Belvedere," but there was a lot of good TV in the 80s

    147. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by filthpickle · · Score: 1

      "let's go out side and toss a(n American) football."

      (In my best Hank Hill voice) Come one over an toss an American football whenever.

    148. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by H0p313ss · · Score: 1

      Totley, we stayed in Totley Hall back when it was still part of the teachers college.

      --
      XML is a known as a key material required to create SMD: Software of Mass Destruction
    149. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by IICV · · Score: 1

      The "girl inna box" sequence was explicitly an homage to Outlaw Star. Unfortunately, Fox's advertising for Firefly focused way too much on it, which made Firefly look like a ripoff (e.g, "these Americans won't have seen an anime, we can steal as much from it as we want and even advertise the fact")

    150. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      When a friend told me to hand in my geek card because I've never cared for Firefly

      When somebody tells me to 'turn in my geek card' for 'not [liking|having [watched|read]] $FASHIONABLE_MEDIA_PRODUCT', I tell them to eff themselves with a sharp spiny object. That's being a fashionista, and no different or better than the masses who swoon over American Idol or Survivor.
       
      I'm an old school geek - I'm a geek because I have a particular approach to living and learning and a fascination with an obscure and specialized field of knowledge. (Actually several in my case.) That's why back in the day we had "computer geeks" and "history geeks" and "math nerds", etc... etc...
       

      Long story, made short: "Nerd authenticity" is relative, and it's worth shaking the foundations a little to ensure that they stand on merit rather than orthodoxy.

      Long story short, once you start talking about 'geek cards' and 'nerd cred', you're announcing that you're a sheep - not a geek or a nerd. When you talk about 'standing on merit', you're actually talking about what is widely accepted as merit - which is just another way of saying orthodox.

    151. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by ArundelCastle · · Score: 1

      "Babylon 5" was poorly written and acted,

      If you are going to say that about the professionals involved in that show, I insist you justify it, compared to what?

    152. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by Walt+Dismal · · Score: 1

      Agent 0034159 ... license to geek. I prefer my hard drives rotating, not shaken.

    153. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by im_thatoneguy · · Score: 1

      Californication, Community, Entourage, Rome, Arrested Development, BSG, 30 Rock, I thought Kings was really under-appreciated as well. I completely agree with your disagreement, this is the best era of TV. There used to be a time when you had movie actors and you had TV actors and the thought of working in TV was a sign that you couldn't cut it in the 'real' motion picture industry. Film is no longer the exclusive domain of really groundbreaking storytelling. Yes we have reality shows, but there were always game-shows and fluff--by and large this is a golden age of television.

      But back to the original topic:
      The best introduction to Doctor Who is Blink. It's a stand alone, it's exciting, it's funny, it's well written, it introduces the character of The Doctor in a pretty approachable manner and it'll leave them wanting to know more.

    154. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by FreonTrip · · Score: 1

      Incidentally, "nerd authenticity" was placed in quotes because it's an ill-defined concept, and entirely subjective. As for merit, that's a term used to describe whether something has worth, and in this case, "shaking the foundations" is a way of evaluating whether something is worthwhile and has value regardless of what some outer constituency's consensus is on the subject. A more careful reading of what I said would show that you and I are on the same page. Don't pick fights where none exist!

    155. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by Adam+Jorgensen · · Score: 1

      I could have swallowed the first two, but claiming the Starship Troopers movie is better than the book is just deluded.

    156. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by immaterial · · Score: 3, Insightful

      you have GOT to have a better way of doing things than walking around with a future-pistol. I mean the energy and technology that's got to be available....

      Somewhere on this planet is there's a naked kid scrounging through the mud for some fish to eat. His mom works for $0.25 an hour on an assembly line painting details onto plastic gewgaws that'll sell for fifty times that to some (relatively) astronomically rich Florida tourist on some other part of the planet she can't even dream of seeing for herself. His dad was hacked to death by angry guys with machetes and a different political opinion. When he goes home, he might wash himself off with dirty water heated up on a beat-up pot over an open flame.

      But that can't be. There have GOT to be better ways of living than that. I mean seriously, we have nuclear reactors, hot and cold running water, machine guns and ICBMs, and specialized advanced fishing equipment with built-in radars and GPS....

    157. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by ljhiller · · Score: 1

      The Wire, (cable)
      Mad Men, (cable)
      Breaking Bad, (cable)
      the Sopranos, (cable)
      Deadwood, (cable)
      the Shield, (cable)
      Sons of Anarchy, (cable)
      Queer as Folk (cable)
      Not disagreeing. Just saying.

    158. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by westyvw · · Score: 1

      Do start with the reboot of the new series in 2005.
      Give yourself about 4 episodes or so, it grows on you. My first impressions were that it was like watching the Outer Limits series when it was redone; decent TV nothing exceptional. But then about by episode 4 or 5 I found it to be more, the characters were interesting and I rooted for the doctor. From then on it is good TV, acting is well done, some of the episodes (Empty Child/Doctor Dances) are really great, and you realise there is an story arc encompassing each season. I also found it to be a great vehicle to bond with my pre teen. There is science to talk about, CGI to gawk at, and human relationships to explore, while never crossing the threshold of distasteful or vulgar.

    159. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by a1englishman · · Score: 1

      This is such a truth of Doctor Who fandom. That being said, the Doctor Who for the modern audience is the modern Doctor Who. My first Doctor was Tom Baker and he will always be the best, but unless you're five, he's not going to stand up to BSG. Watch the new seasons, enjoy Silence in the Library and Blink, along with the other new episodes, but then go back and watch the best of the old seasons. Then read the books that were published while the show was off the air. Some of those were really great.

    160. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by blackest_k · · Score: 1

      i run to a bit earlier , jon pertwee was my first dr and he was good (tom baker was better) some good stories and very scary at times.
      I do like the early drs especially the first.

      sylvester mccoy totally killed dr who and turned it to junk,

         

    161. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by Apathist · · Score: 1

      Hah! Try again....

    162. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      A more careful reading of what I said would show that you and I are on the same page.

      When you mention things like "authenticity" and "foundation", it's blatantly obvious that you and I aren't on the same page. When you imply that you "need to know who $X is' to have 'cred'", it's even more obvious.

    163. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by Zadaz · · Score: 1

      Okay, but what the hell does this have to do with the question? Or are you just trying to trade your nerd card for a hipster card?

    164. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by Frnknstn · · Score: 1

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Western

      Star Trek was pitched as a Space Western thing quite a while before Firefly. Them referring to space as the 'final frontier' was a bit of a give away. Even DS9 was intended as a frontier-town type western.

      --
      If it's in you sig, it's in your post.
    165. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by zmollusc · · Score: 1

      It is obvious that reality shows are cheap to make, what baffles me is why anyone watches them.
      Reality shows are just a bunch of jerks acting like assholes, I thought TV was escapism from jerks being assholes? Why should I pay money for HD coverage of morons when I can look out of the window and see morons in true 3D for nothing?

      --
      They whose government reduces their essential liberties for temporary security, receive neither liberty nor security.
    166. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by mwvdlee · · Score: 1

      You mean that puppet show (exactly how was this better than average scifi?) and the soap-opera prequel to a remake that went on for too long?

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    167. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by unitron · · Score: 1

      And Star Trek was pitched as "Wagon Train" in space.

      What's your point?

      --

      I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.

    168. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by AlamedaStone · · Score: 1

      And fezes, fezes are cool.

      I was devastated to see Tennant leave, but Smith has a sillier style with a lot of charm, the world weighs on him less heavily.

      --
      "All these years believing you're the signified monkey, only to find out you're just a big hunk of nobody cares."
    169. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by MPolo · · Score: 1

      I just used some Babylon 5 for my English class (I have all boys, so showing soap operas, as the German government would have me do, was really out of the question). From the first season, there are really only one or two episodes that really add to the plot, and one of those would be more noticed in retrospect, once things start happening. Seasons 3-4 are the best part of the series, where the story takes place, and the actors have more or less gelled into their roles. (Season 5 was a bounce back from being cancelled, so that they had crammed most of the story into Season 4, and as a result seems to drag a lot.)

    170. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by Sparx139 · · Score: 1
      --
      Our culture doesn't get smarter, it just finds new ways of being retarded.
    171. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by sincewhen · · Score: 1

      I think you should view the Starship Troopers book and the movie as two entirely different and unrelated works. The same a I, Robot.
      Each can be enjoyed on its merits, but they shouldn't be compared.

      --
      -- Braden's law of data: All data spends some of its lifetime in an excel spreadsheet.
    172. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by kikito · · Score: 1

      Dexter.

    173. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by cyclomedia · · Score: 1

      There are also Eighth Doctor (amongst other doctors) radio productions, lots of fun if you're able to provide the visual effects in your head

      --
      If you don't risk failure you don't risk success.
    174. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      dr who is just supposed to be watched as it comes from the tv.

      this is like asking "where should I start watching the bold & beautiful?"

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    175. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      the book would have worked as a plot for a game pretty well, or for an episode based short series.
      the stuff in the book would've been hard to do on movie screen well though(I think there's an anime version.. yet to check it out though).

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    176. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by ian_from_brisbane · · Score: 1

      And she was the second-hottest chick in it.

      She has nice eyes, but what's with the chin putty?

    177. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by dkf · · Score: 1

      Not to mention that some of the older shows cold be insanely long. War Games was over 4 hours in its entirety. One of the lost Hartnell/Dalek episodes was 5 hours.

      Dr. Who used to be structured as having relatively short seasons with each season devoted to a single story arc. The individual episodes would each end with a cliffhanger of some kind, so as to suck people into watching the rest of the season. (I can't remember if the individual episodes were shorter back then; I wasn't paying attention to that when I was that young.)

      --
      "Little does he know, but there is no 'I' in 'Idiot'!"
    178. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by mcvos · · Score: 1

      You call the Starship Troopers movie "Saving Private Ryan in space"? Have you really missed all those heavy handed fascism themes?

    179. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by mcvos · · Score: 1

      Moore was better than Brosnan. Moore had style and irony. James Bond has to be a bit campy. It shouldn't be indistinguishable from other nameless spy thrillers.

    180. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by ndixon · · Score: 1
      As someone from the UK who was watching Dr Who in the seventies and eighties, the old seasons peaked with Tom Baker.

      The later seasons with Peter Davison, Colin Baker and Sylvester McCoy seemed weaker; maybe that's because it was still aimed at a young age group that I was growing out of, or maybe it's because by then I'd seen enough US Sci Fi movies and TV shows that Dr Who looked distinctly low-budget.

      The new series' have much higher production values, and seem to be pitched at an older audience - my kids can enjoy it, but there's something there for adults too.
      David Tennant made a better Doctor than Christopher Eccleston though.

      Best candidate for Twelfth Doctor: Benedict Cumberbatch.

      --
      Oh, how convenient: a theory about God that doesn't involve looking through a telescope.
    181. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by One+Monkey · · Score: 1

      Paul Verhoeven is a trendy, liberal Dutch film director. This is why his films revolve around crude satire and boobies. His commentary on ST makes it very plain he saw it as a satire. His commentary on The Hollow Man made it very clear that we should never let him become invisible...

      --
      www.nodicerpg.com - Some RP stuff for free, some not so for free, but still cheap.
    182. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by Laurence0 · · Score: 1

      One of the bits that really struck that home to me was the first episode (I think) where Serenity drops from space into a planet's atmosphere, and suddenly you can hear the roar of the engines. It's possibly a little too sudden, but I think we can handwave that by saying the ship was dropping pretty quickly.

      Also, if I remember correctly, isn't there a steady thrum all the time they're on the ship and flying in deep space? The thrum of the engines as heard from inside the ship (I know the external shots are all silent, apart from music).

    183. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by RogerWilco · · Score: 1

      Although I liked both: Asimov >> Firefly

      Ellison and Bixby I've heard off, but never read anything. I haven't seen them for sale here in Europe. Unlike Asimov, who can still be found in the larger bookstores.

      --
      RogerWilco the Adventurous Janitor
    184. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by RogerWilco · · Score: 1

      I think you should watch the movie as a story of what could happen if the military-industrial complex gets even more power over society than it has now.

      Replace the aliens with "terrorists" in Irak and you have essentially the same story.

      On the face of it, it's just a simple action movie. but as I know Paul Verhoeven's films, there is always an undertone with a deeper message.

      But then I don't think Jurassic Park was a bad movie either. It's just that you have to cater to the unwashed masses first, or the studio bosses will not pay to have it made.

      --
      RogerWilco the Adventurous Janitor
    185. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by Laurence0 · · Score: 1

      There's an easy way to spot the best Doctor Who episodes (at least from the first few series of the revamp). Check the writing credits, if it says "Steven Moffat" the episode will be fantastic, and also creepy.

    186. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by Methuseus · · Score: 1

      Sometimes you can't just double park your spaceship to get what you need. There are regulations, and smugglers need to doubly follow them to not be caught. We don't have any hand weapons other than pistols for the foreseeable future, either We may never have any handheld energy weapons to be honest.

      Yes, the engines and power sources for ships are a little beyond anything you can really expect. But there has to be some suspension of disbelief with sci-fi.

      --
      Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity, though I'm not yet sure about the universe. - A Einstein
    187. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by jarlsberg71 · · Score: 1

      Fez's are cool.

      --
      E8B8B
    188. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      I liked Firefly very much. It was one of only two things Joss Whedon has ever done that I've liked. The other is the script for the underrated "Alien: Resurrection." But seeing as the Betty crew in Resurrection are basically just prototypes of the Firefly crew, I should probably count those as the same thing.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    189. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      People like watching other people who are fuck-ups/whores/losers/addicts. It makes them feel validated (i.e., "Well, my life may suck, but at least I'm better than these dipshits").

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    190. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      "Rome," now *there* was an epic series. I still occasionally re-watch that episode "The Spoils" with Pullo in the gladiator ring. Pretty amazing episode.

      I would also add the short-lived but impressive "John From Cincinnati" to the list (made by the same people who made "Deadwood").

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    191. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      Whedon has a weird fetish with 90-lb cute girls who (very) implausibly kick ass. I always suspected he was just trying to get laid during casting. I swear, if you asked him to do a drama set at an all-boys school he would still find a way to throw in an ass-kicking waif.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    192. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      Dweebs won't.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    193. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      Actually, I kind of like the idea of re-interpreting "Saving Private Ryan" as humorous social satire. I can just hear Tom Hanks in my head saying "I'm doing *my* part!"

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    194. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      The film is pure diluted space opera where bugs rip people's arms and marines empty clips at them.

      Wow, you REALLY need to watch more closely next time. I bet you didn't laugh once during Robocop, did you?

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    195. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      They're related in the sense that the movie is meant, in part, as a satire of the book (one of the reasons so many fans of the book hate it). But, you're right, other than that they really are completely different works.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    196. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by arikol · · Score: 1

      pfffffff

      No nerd or geek can criticise another nerd's taste in science fiction if he doesn't know the basics of sci-fi.....

      You're *obviously* wrong on the Firefly thing, it's just that he was MORE wrong :D

    197. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      No problem, I can get it back with one trip to ComicCon.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    198. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      Roger Moore was the best Bond of all time, IMHO. And that has nothing to do with the fact that he was the Bond I grew up with, of course.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    199. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      What, no Lazenby love?

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    200. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by MrNiceguy_KS · · Score: 1

      Also agreed, and this is coming from someone who had seen a number of the old ones as PBS reruns in high school. (early 90's)

      --
      Redundancy is good And also good.
    201. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by Tyler+Durden · · Score: 1

      Jon Pertwee was my first doctor, but for sure Tom Baker was better. He was the best of the classic series doctors. But even he was bettered by Christopher Eccleston and David Tennant.

      Baker bested by Tenant? Blech! Tenant's performance always struck me as just a knock-off of Baker's Doctor. And an excessively silly and cheesy one at that.

      I don't think he was better than Baker, but I really liked Eccleston's Doctor. A very original take, and he could be very convincingly serious at times. Just wish he would have stuck with it longer.

      --
      Happy people make bad consumers.
    202. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      The point was that the book was a fascist rant in favor of overthrowing popular democracy in favor of military oligarchy. The movie was made by a director who recognized the book for what it was and chose to satirize that gung-ho stupidity.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    203. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by Chris+Burke · · Score: 1

      The "girl inna box" sequence was explicitly an homage to Outlaw Star. Unfortunately, Fox's advertising for Firefly focused way too much on it, which made Firefly look like a ripoff (e.g, "these Americans won't have seen an anime, we can steal as much from it as we want and even advertise the fact")

      Interesting! I didn't know if it was a case of homage, or a case of "good artists borrow, great artists steal." I'm not the kind to get hung up about someone taking ideas from other sources.

      About Fox... in the commentary for the first episode, Wedon complains that Fox producers put the shot of River in the box in the intro (and advertising), basically ruining the surprise that was supposed to create the cliffhanger at the end of the first hour. Since Fox also showed the episodes out of order, everyone watching would have also known that River was Simon's sister. So when they saw the first episode, they would have been all "Oh hey it's the box with his sister in it!"

      Man did they screw that show up. :/

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    204. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by elrous0 · · Score: 2

      It was very intentional. If you listen to the commentary track, Verhoeven makes it clear that this was his intention from the get-go (and it put him at odds with the screen-writer, who was a big Heinlen fan). Verhoeven found the neo-fascist philosophy of the book laughable, and having grown up under Nazi rule himself, decided to satirize it.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    205. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by RKThoadan · · Score: 1

      Stick with it a little longer. It picks up quite a bit all through season 2. You'll quit seeing monster of the week type episodes and start to see some great character development. Seasons 3 and 4 are truly exceptional. If I recall correctly B5 Season 3 was the first time a single person (JMS) had written every episode of show for the entire season and the coherence shows. He then wrote all of season 4 and all but a very few episodes of season 5 as well.

      Once you've seen the later seasons you'll actually enjoy the earlier seasons more. Partially because you'll see that they actually knowingly set things up 2 and 3 seasons in advance. Seasons 1 and 2 are the foundations. They're not terribly exciting on their own, but you'll appreciate how well they were used to set things up and the show as a whole is an amazing creation.

      It's a shame about season 5 though. As I understand it they were told late in season 4 that there would not be a 5th season so they basically crammed the plot of season 5 into the last 3 episodes of season 4. They actually pulled that off really well, but when season 5 was un-cancelled they had themselves in a bit of a pickle. Season 5 is rough because they had to re-invent it. The finale is very well done.

      If you're still not enjoying it too much just ignore everything that's mostly about Sheridan. His story is the classic hero myth-arc. You've seen it before and Boxleitner isn't particularly noteworthy in pulling it off. It's the other characters whose story and acting is amazing.

    206. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      Wow, you *really* missed to the point of the movie. It wasn't *glorifying* a right-wing military dictatorship, it was *satirizing* it.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    207. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by dmunz · · Score: 1

      You could add War of the Worlds Friday the 13th, the TV Show Tour of Duty There was some good stuff in the '80s FWIW DLM

    208. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      Heinlein rules!

      No, fortunately, neither he, nor anyone sharing his political philosophy, ever did. Not in the U.S. anyway (though a few neocons certainly came all too close).

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    209. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by cfulton · · Score: 1

      You are right being a geek is does not necessitate liking everything that you are told to like by the "geek" community any more than being gay means you have to have a lisp. Everyone is entitled to their opinion and yours is as valid as anyones. Except of course that Starship Troopers is a classic and wonderful book turned into a vapid and stupid movie. There I said it.

      --
      No sigs in BETA. Beta SUCKS.
    210. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      When Bruce Boxleitner, the kid from Lost in Space, and Dorfman from Animal House are your most seasoned talents, I wouldn't brag too loudly about your professional cast.

      And compared to what? Oh, I don't know, compared to dozens of other, much better, shows.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    211. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      If I wanted a hipster card, I would just go buy a MacBook.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    212. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      Obvious attention deficit problems here. Lord of the Rings was both apocalyptic and cataclysmic - in book and film form. It was gripping, fantastically creative, beautifully visualized, and superlatively expressed. As a work of art it has earned its place in history.

      Just looked like a lot of walking to me.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    213. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by telekon · · Score: 1
      You really can start anywhere, and I also recommend the Tom Baker years, or the beginning of the new (2005) series.

      It really doesn't matter, however; there's a reason the Torchwood writers had a running gag about wiping people's memories with a drug called 'Retcon'.

      --

      To understand recursion, you must first understand recursion.

    214. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by hesiod · · Score: 1

      You would have gotten your point across easier had you merely said "the film industry was ruined when they invented 'talkies'! Get the hell off my lawn!"

    215. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by gfreeman · · Score: 1

      Firefly was really a Western.

      So was Star Trek.

      --
      Ceci n'est pas un sig.
    216. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by overlordofmu · · Score: 1

      There is no "Starship Troopers" movie based on Heinlein's novel, it is simply a film that shares the same name. Did you both, read the book by that title and, also, see the film with that title? If you had, you would have no doubt that the film had nothing, not one fucking thing, to do with the book. I think we should also mention a little film called "Minority Report" that butchered the plot of Dick's short story so badly that (and this is a real peach here) there is NO FUCKING MINORITY REPORT IN THE MOVIE! Please stop being a consumer of video entertainment. I don't need to watch more crap produced in an attempt to cater to your lack of taste. Along those lines, please stop buying books and music as well. If you want to buy quilts, I will allow it with a pre-approval form filled out in triplicate. Consider this an official notice of revocation of your media consumer privileges. * AND YOUR NERD CARD IS FORMALLY REVOKED *

    217. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by Kjella · · Score: 1

      And fezes, fezes are cool.

      *draws blaster*

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    218. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by acklenx · · Score: 1

      and the movie version of "Starship Troopers" was much better than the book.

      Didn't /. have a friends AND an Enemies option at one point. It's been years since I've even look, but this post motivated me to look for that Enemies button. All I see is how to friend someone... and I'm sorry elrous0, that aint happenin'.

      --
      Never let a mediocre career stand in the way of a good time
    219. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by meloneg · · Score: 1

      +1

    220. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by zeroshade · · Score: 1

      The celery was great though. Not many people can pull off a decorative vegetable.

    221. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by tmarsh86 · · Score: 1

      Just looked like a lot of walking to me.

      That's usually what happens on quests, when you don't have the luxury of planes, trains and automobiles.

    222. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by Matheus · · Score: 1

      That's the downside of "forcing" someone to do anything. Their natural instinct is to rebel whether consciously or unconsciously. Now, if they had told you that Dr. Who was the most awesome thing ever, then denied you the ability to watch it, you would track that booty down with a vengeance and probably love the show with an Apple Fanboi kind of vigor.

      There's also the issue of setting the expectations too high. They plopped you down in front of the show saying "You're going to love this." and so you wre sitting there ready to have a whole pile of awesomeness delivered straight to your brain. Dr. Who is what it is... there's a lot to love if you want to but that show really doesn't stand up to any sort of in-depth analysis. You've got to let it happen, not think about it too much and then you maybe have a chance of liking it. As many /.'rs have pointed out it was originally a children's show. Expand that demographic to include people on mind-expanding drugs who liked to watch the intro, cheesy laughable effects and the metamorphosis episodes and there you have the tone of the show. You can also add to that people who just can't get enough of British accents and low brow British comedy and I think I've just described the first 7 doctors worth of Who.

      At my age demographic, I place a fairly high measure of nerdness on my peers having watched Dr. Who when they were growing up. On the other hand, I recognize the show for what it is (which is something I haven't watched an episode of in at least 20 years) and don't expect anyone to love it today and have no expectation of anyone younger having gotten into it as the world changed significantly entertainment-wise post-my childhood years.

    223. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by ninjagin · · Score: 1

      I went to my first Whovian Festival (a DWFCA event) in 1980. I liked Tom Baker a lot (gave me the inspiration to learn how to knit, too!). After awhile, my local PBS station started airing a bunch of Pertwee episodes, and I held on through Peter Davison's run, but the station aired a lot of Troughton's run, eventually, too. Basically, I was a dedicated viewer for 10 years, with all those re-broadcasts.
      I like all of them. I have not tried watching the 2005 reboot, as I don't want to spoil my remembrances of those old shows, but perhaps I'll give in at some point.
      For me, the background stories about Galllifrey (and the politics of the timelords), the origins of the Daleks and Cybermen, and the development of The Master were the sources of the most interest.

      --
      .. pa-ra-bo-la, pa-ra-bo-la, 2 pi R, 2 pi R, where's your latus rectum, where's your latus rectum, 2 pi R
    224. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by Phoghat · · Score: 1

      I assert that being a geek doesn't mean having to like *everything* associated with geek life. And if you have to FORCE yourself to get into it, you're probably going to take all the fun out of it anyway.

      Yes, if you have to force yourself to get into anything it won't be fun, but your views are ONLY your personal assessments. The vast majority of geeks hold the complete opposite view. Me along with them.

      --
      Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
    225. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by nomadic · · Score: 1

      You've got to be kidding me. Cheers was horrible. Miami Vice was horrible. Night Court is the platonic ideal of lousy 80's TV. ST:TNG was horrible during the 80's; it didn't get good until the 90's. Max Headroom was actually pretty good.

    226. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by meloneg · · Score: 1

      But every thing I read about Dr Who suggest me to avoid it like hell. I have a hard time accepting a species that renamed themselves "Time Lords". Even if they invented the technology, it's like renaming ourselves TV Lords then Internet Lords every time we invent something. I have a hard time accepting that a race of "Time Lords" can experience conflict of any kind. How many times does time machinery fail per episode? Even 0.5 times per episode would be too much to take.[...]

      As far as I know the doctor has gone over several iterations and I'm sure there's at least a couple of retcons.

      As I remember, not all Gallifreyans are Time Lords. It is more of a title than a species. But, most of the universe is not familiar with the non-Time Lord Gallifreyans.

      Further, they aren't just time-travelers using some neat tech. They are attached, in-tune, with their TARDIS in some way. There are several references to the Doctor being able to "feel" time and events. Looking into the Vortex somehow tunes them into the entire multiverse.

      As to machine failures, the Doctor's TARDIS is one of the oldest in usage when the series began. He stole it and hasn't done much, if any, of the appropriate maintenance he should have. It breaks down because it is several generations out-of-date technology that the Doctor chooses to nurse along.

      When you're talking about a time-travel series, it could be easily argued that the term RetCon is meaningless.

      As someone else has already pointed-out, Dr Who is not science fiction. It's science fantasy.

    227. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by Chris+Burke · · Score: 1

      One of the bits that really struck that home to me was the first episode (I think) where Serenity drops from space into a planet's atmosphere, and suddenly you can hear the roar of the engines. It's possibly a little too sudden, but I think we can handwave that by saying the ship was dropping pretty quickly.

      Or handwave it by saying it's still basically right yet dramatically effective. I mean, I don't know how fair you'd have to be in an atmosphere before you could hear sound, nor how fast the ship was falling, so yeah, plus-or-minus my ignorance it works. :)

      Heck if we did decide we were going to nitpick the accuracy, there's also a scene in that episode where Serenity and the Reaver ship slooooooowly pass each. Wedon himself admitted it didn't really make any sense . :)

      I think you're right about the engine hum thing.

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    228. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by markian · · Score: 1

      The powered armour in the book was way better than that in the movie!

    229. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but that doesn't mean I want to spend 8 hours watching it.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    230. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by IKnwThePiecesFt · · Score: 1

      Caprica was terrible. I wanted to like it so bad but it was just far too slow.

    231. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by pthisis · · Score: 1

      But Rome was also cancelled within 2 seasons, so it's not really a counterexample to the premise. Ditto John from Cincinnati.

      --
      rage, rage against the dying of the light
    232. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      Baker bested by Tenant? Blech! Tenant's performance always struck me as just a knock-off of Baker's Doctor.

      Not at all. If you look at Casanova for example which Tennant did before Doctor Who, you can see his style is already there. It's perfectly possible that he was cast as Doctor Who by people who likes Tom Baker's style, and that explains the similarity. But Tennant certainly isn't aping Baker. He's not a "knock-off". He's playing in his own style.

    233. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by nomadic · · Score: 1

      I don't really follow; you've moved to a level of generality that doesn't really preclude enjoyment. It's like saying you're not going to see a movie because you've already seen plenty where there's a buildup to a conflict, then a climactic moment, then some sort of resolution.

    234. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by geminidomino · · Score: 1

      Must be a subjective thing then, but on the 60-somethingth iteration, I find that the same gags are about as amusing and clever as "that's what she said."

    235. Re:At the risk of my nerd card... by geminidomino · · Score: 1

      I count it as one of his strongest points that in B5 he always seemed able to put contemporary problems into a format that would work in such a setting.

      While I mostly agree with this, you have to admit, he could be REALLY ham-handed about it. Especially when Earthgov goes bad (Seasons 2, 4), all you're missing is some slashdot troll screaming "Godwin!" in the corner of the screen every ten minutes like Dan Forden in Mortal Kombat II.

      Still, I watch the series through 2-3 times a year, so I guess I've gotten used to it by now. :D

  2. New stuff by NoobixCube · · Score: 1

    This is probably blasphemy to a lot of /.ers, but the new seasons, 2005 onwards, are alright. Good a place as any to start. I've been meaning to go back and watch the whole Trial of a Timelord season, but haven't gotten around to it yet.

    --
    Admit it. You post strawman arguments as AC so you get modded Insightful for refuting them, rather than Troll
    1. Re:New stuff by emag · · Score: 2

      If there's one season worth skipping, IMHO it's Trial of a Timelord. Colin Baker's probably my least favorite Doctor...

      --
      "The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule." --H.L. Mencken
    2. Re:New stuff by Willuz · · Score: 1

      Netflix is a great place to get some of the old episodes but they have major gaps in the sub-plots. You can watch some of the "Trial of a Timelord" series but not all of it. They also don't have all of the stories written by Douglas Adams. For a new viewer though, pre-2005 episodes may not be interesting. Most of us enjoy them out of nostalgia even though they can be quite terrible. It's just not the same without the interruptions for the PBS funds drive.

    3. Re:New stuff by cpu6502 · · Score: 1

      I thought T of T season was dull. I think the best episodes of the Classic Who are from circa 1975 to 1985. Prior to that the stories were s-l-o-w (6 hours long when they should have been 1.5 hours) and after that the writers lost their ability to tell a good story. Of course it didn't help that BBC canceled the show for a year, fired the actor playing the doctor, and that disrupted the writing staff.

      My starting point was Doctor #8, the movie doctor, and then I went back and watched the 5th doctor on PBS reruns.

      BTW you can bittorrent all of the classic episodes from demonoid.com. They have one huge file containing all of them, even the "lost" episodes.

      --
      My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
    4. Re:New stuff by The+Grim+Reefer2 · · Score: 1

      Agreed. You probably should start with the 2005 series and watch them through until the most current.

      From there, probably the Tom Baker years. If the low budget look of these don't turn you off then it's a toss up as to where to go. If you like the last of the Baker episodes, then just keep going through them in order. The producer that is credited for "running the show into the ground" took over in the later Baker years and remained until the end of McCoys tenure. Personally I liked the Jon Pertwee episodes better when I was younger. Patrick Troughton reminded me too much of Moe from the three stooges when I was a kid. But since I've gone back and watched some of the "restored" episodes, I found it truly a shame that most of them no longer exist.

    5. Re:New stuff by BarryHaworth · · Score: 1

      This is probably blasphemy to a lot of /.ers, but the new seasons, 2005 onwards, are alright. Good a place as any to start.

      I'm a Doctor Who fan from way back - I watched the Jon Pertwee (third doctor) episodes when they were first broadcast in the 19070s - but I would more or less agree with the this.

      Doctor Who has gone on for a long time, and can be picked up more or less anywhere. So long as you have the basic idea - the Doctor is an alien (a Time Lord) who wanders time and space in his TARDIS, having a series of adventures and accompanied by a changing gaggle of assistants - then you can pick it up more or less anywhere. Because the series changes its main characters on a regular basis most of the stories are pretty much self contained and it is not expected that you follow the whole thing from the beginning. That said, it would be a good idea to start with the debut of a particular Doctor, or a particular assitant, and go in order from there. In the older series you might start with the debut of the third or fourth Doctors, or an assistant like Sarah Jane Smith (who debuted in The Time Warrior in season 11).

      I've been meaning to go back and watch the whole Trial of a Timelord season, but haven't gotten around to it yet.

      Part of the folklore of the series is that everyone's favourite Doctor is whichever one was on air when they were growing up. In my case it's Pertwee (the third doctor), though I also like Tom Baker (the fourth). An older friend of mine prefers Thoughton (the second doctor). That said, some Doctors are better than others and some less good - I would not recommend the Trial of a Timelord series. In the older series I'd recommend either the third or fourth Doctors, but that's my preference.

      Do be warned, though - quality does vary somewhat, with some stories more absurd than others, and bear in mind that the older series are somewhat different in character to the newer ones.

      Speaking as an older fan, though, I have been (mostly) enjoying the newer series (2005 onwards) and think that's as good a place to start as any.

      --
      I am a Statistician. One false move and you are a Statistic
    6. Re:New stuff by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Yep, start with the Christopher Eccleston version. It has enough info along the way to fill you in on what needs to be said, and the series never really assumes that you're a long time fan who knows everything. Sure occasionally something is tossed into a background that fans might appreciate for its foreshadowing but it won't leave new viewers scratching their heads.

      The doctor's companions as well are completely new to the Doctor Who genre as well, so they act as a nice surrogate for the viewer. You don't have to ask "why is the doctor panicked by this shoddy looking dead alien with a plumber's helper for a weapon" when there are characters in the show asking the same question.

    7. Re:New stuff by queBurro · · Score: 1

      these old episodes, are they out of copyright? that's cool

      --
      sag
    8. Re:New stuff by cpu6502 · · Score: 1

      Yes the old episodes are still copyrighted. Your point? (points to thousands of disks downloaded in the 80s from pirate BBSes). I'll buy a show/game/song if I like it, but most of the pre-75 Doctor Who doesn't qualify - I'd not want to watch them twice.

      Anon. Coward: Sorry I can't access demonoid.com from work, so there's no way for me to provide "keywords". Maybe Doctor Who Complete or something similar. Google found this: www.demonoid.com/files/details/1190423

      --
      My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
    9. Re:New stuff by queBurro · · Score: 1

      are you sure about that? "Invasion Earth" was 1966, that's 45 years ago

      --
      sag
    10. Re:New stuff by queBurro · · Score: 1

      ahhh, google tells me they're not out of copyright until 70 years have passed since airing

      --
      sag
    11. Re:New stuff by PCM2 · · Score: 1

      Remember, though, that particularly around "Trial of a Time Lord," the show was beset upon all sides by bad critical response, BBC budget cuts, and other production problems. Also, I think Colin Baker gets sort of a bad rap as the Doctor. They launched him off as an unpredictable, occasionally irrational character that could often be abrasive, but the idea was that he'd change a little over time and settle into a more nuanced performance. Then the costume department gave him that horrible multi-colored coat, the budget got cut, stories got canceled, they messed around with the format (turning it from a half-hour drama into a one-hour show), and any chance for character development basically went out the window.

      In hindsight, the years when John Nathan-Turner was the producer of Doctor Who were not the best.

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
    12. Re:New stuff by hovelander · · Score: 1

      I've only seen a few of the Colin Baker eps before I started from the beginning and haven't made it back. But the most unfortunate thing, outside of the series slide into cancellation, has to be that damned coat.

      The 80's clothing culture should be tried for war crimes.

      I have mental scars to serve as evidence at trial.

    13. Re:New stuff by unitron · · Score: 1

      I'm a Doctor Who fan from way back - I watched the Jon Pertwee (third doctor) episodes when they were first broadcast in the 19070s...

      Boy, now that's time travel!

      --

      I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.

    14. Re:New stuff by Phreakiture · · Score: 1

      I second that.

      By my reconing, there are basically five good places to start, and they all are at the start of a new Doctor: The start of the 1963 season (An Unearthly Child, William Hartnell), the start of the 1970 season (Spearhead from Space, Jon Pertwee), the start of the 1974 season (Robot, Tom Baker), the start of the 2005 season (Rose, Christopher Eccleston) or the start of the 2006 season (New Earth, David Tennant).

      Episodes with Peter Davison and Sylvester McCoy are, in my opinion, lacklustre, episodes with Colin Baker and the TV Movie with Paul McGann are actually mostly pretty bad. I think they jumped the shark after Tom Baker retired, but hit bottom in the Colin Baker days. The fifteen-year hiatus before the reboot was the only way to breathe life back into this marvelous series.

      If you don't go all the way back, there are probably some key episodes you should see, just to set the tone for what is what and who is who. I'm a little hard-pressed to think of specific episodes, though, besides The Dalek Invasion of Earth from the 1964 season, and the Key To Time story arc, which was basically the entire 1978 season.

      --
      www.wavefront-av.com
  3. If your wife finds the first Dr Who "dated"... by Hazel+Bergeron · · Score: 1

    ...without even having watched it then she isn't really a "science fiction fan". That sort of prejudice will get you nowhere.

    Also, don't base your aesthetics on what your wife will tolerate.

    1. Re:If your wife finds the first Dr Who "dated"... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Also, don't base your aesthetics on what your wife will tolerate.

      Are You married?

    2. Re:If your wife finds the first Dr Who "dated"... by Hazel+Bergeron · · Score: 1

      Re marriage: No, but my partner is more of an SF geek than I am and we don't restrict ourselves to the other's prejudices.

      Re dating: Might be; might not. Treat the work on a case by case basis. Religious texts make for some excellent millennia-old science fiction. I feel the past deacde's Dr Who is going to date more quickly because it has made references which so obviously tie into very contemporary events, technologies, fashions, etc.

      ST: the sexism of TOS has dated it, just as the patronising 80s whiny-feeliness of Troi has dated TNG. But the messages of heroism and technical straightforwardness of TOS remain poignant today; as are the messages of dplomacy and social progressiveness of TNG.

    3. Re:If your wife finds the first Dr Who "dated"... by shaitand · · Score: 1

      Crappy color, lack of color, old costumes, lousy makeup and effects, strings in the picture. These are the kinds of things that date film and television. Why watch content with strings and models when I can watch content with cgi that looks like someone filmed the events actually happening? Sexism isn't even on the list.

      If you think any Star Trek is about heroism, diplomacy, and social progressiveness its you who needs to turn in your geek card.

    4. Re:If your wife finds the first Dr Who "dated"... by turing_m · · Score: 1

      Is This Slashdot?

      There are two kinds of people who post on slashdot. Those who don't get any sex, and those who are married. In practice, the second is just a subset of the first.

      --
      If I have seen further it is by stealing the Intellectual Property of giants.
    5. Re:If your wife finds the first Dr Who "dated"... by brentrad · · Score: 1

      Also, don't base your aesthetics on what your wife will tolerate.

      Never been married, have you?

      As a married geek, I can tell you that you will be a lot more successful at getting what you want if you submit your proposals to the wife test first.

    6. Re:If your wife finds the first Dr Who "dated"... by Hazel+Bergeron · · Score: 1

      Why watch content with strings and models when I can watch content with cgi

      Seriously? Have we really reached that point where science fiction isn't spurring the imagination, just about feeding an image to your head? I couldn't give a hoot about visible strings or "crappy colour", just as we can both cope that we don't have a 360 degree 3D panorama with tactile and olfactory stimulation.

      If you think any Star Trek is about heroism, diplomacy, and social progressiveness its you who needs to turn in your geek card.

      What is it about? Spaceships with flashing lights and meeting funny-looking aliens?

    7. Re:If your wife finds the first Dr Who "dated"... by shaitand · · Score: 1

      The Sci-Fi STORY is about spurring the imagination. It about me using my imagination to pretend the crappy and unrealistic effects used to portray that story don't detract from it. Each time I notice an effect the immersion is ruined and that detracts from the story.

      It gets a little tiring hearing people talk about good effects and CGI as if it is somehow evil. You can make a shit movie with good effects and you can have a good plot without good effects but you can't have a great movie without a good plot AND good effects (good being that everything on the screen looks photo realistic).

      Shit 80's and earlier effects detract from the movie and ruin the experience. These were okay back then, before we knew better but just like faster computers, faster internet, and better game graphics you can enjoy what you have but once you get used to something better you can't enjoy going back.

      "What is it about? Spaceships with flashing lights and meeting funny-looking aliens?"

      The same thing all sci-fi is about. Pseudo future technology and aliens (which is part of the same thing). That is why sci-fi and fantasy get grouped together. Fantasy uses magic instead, but magic just takes on the role of another primitive physical force with new possibilities. As gets we want to explore these possibilities, mentally catalog it and imagine what it would be like to manipulate our worlds (or the fantasy world) with it just like we do the technology that really exists.

      "just as we can both cope that we don't have a 360 degree 3D panorama with tactile and olfactory stimulation."

      When movies are typically in 3D I certainly won't be crazy about watching 2D content anymore. Just like I can't see myself being interested in watching the old forest gump once I've acquired a taste for the holodeck experience.

    8. Re:If your wife finds the first Dr Who "dated"... by Hazel+Bergeron · · Score: 1

      Weird. I find any attempt to "immerse" me by bombarding my senses just distracts or limits my imagination from providing a more interesting experience. It'd be like reading fiction with pop-ups every few pictures.

      As gets we want to explore these possibilities, mentally catalog it and imagine what it would be like to manipulate our worlds (or the fantasy world) with it just like we do the technology that really exists.

      This is relevant. If you don't think "imagin[ing] what it would be like to manipulate our worlds" involves heroism, diplomacy and social progression then.. erm.. something's gone wrong.

    9. Re:If your wife finds the first Dr Who "dated"... by Rallion · · Score: 1

      Bad special effects are like bad editing. It's distracting. Think of trying to read while somebody else is trying to talk to you. It prevents you from having a seamless experience, which prevents your imagination from getting very far. Of course, it's worth remembering that the definition of "bad special effects" changes both over time and with the age of the viewer.

    10. Re:If your wife finds the first Dr Who "dated"... by danlock4 · · Score: 1

      ST:TOS was more commentary about politics and human nature and showing us here on Earth that our governmental/racial prejudices are meaningless when there exist many other intelligent beings in the galaxy and we've just got the United Federation of Planets unifying Earthlings against and with the others. I'd say the many spinoff series and alternately good/bad/good/etc. movies prove its resilience. Watch the TOS episode "Space Seed" and then watch the movie ST 2: The Wrath of Khan and you'll have a prequel and its sequel. I can still hear Checkov in my mind: "Botany Baay... Botany Bay! Oh, no--Keptin! We have to get out of here NOW!" and "Guess.. who's.. comeenk to dinner!" (quotes from TWoK)

      Oh, and TOS featured the first on-screen kiss between a white man (Kirk/Shatner) and a black woman (Uhura/Nichols) on broadcast TV, and it was SO much better than The Partridge Family and Dennis the Menace.

      g'night. too late for me. Wee hours of the morning are bad for bedtime if I want to feel productively perspicacious seven hours hence.

      --
      To .sig or not to .sig, that is the question.
    11. Re:If your wife finds the first Dr Who "dated"... by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      aesthetics on dr who are really low and finding it dated is because all seasons have been dated already on the day they were made, like plan 9 from outer space.
      I mean REALLY LOW on the aesthetics. it's a time travel fantasy series, so that they can use anything they happen to have as scenery. it has nothing to do with science and everything with cheap airtime filler for kids. which is why many hardcore dr who fans are really lost in the real world and also why many parents love that their shut in kids watch it, because it doesn't offend with real life crisis.

      I mean, they could just as well watch lucy. it's less dated even. but some scifi from the 70's hasn't aged one bit.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
  4. Start with the modern ones - by DontScotty · · Score: 4, Interesting

    With Billie Piper and C. Ecklsteiner.

    Then, David Tenet.

    Then - I haven't seen them, but get caught up.

    From there - you'll know the flavor of Doctor you like, and be able to make a more informed choice.

    The nice thing about a Time Travel series - is you need not watch it sequentially!

    1. Re:Start with the modern ones - by Nefarious+Wheel · · Score: 1

      Buy the boxed whole season sets. Don't eat your bandwidth, they don't cost that much - and they're not affiliated with Sony.

      --
      Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
    2. Re:Start with the modern ones - by tool462 · · Score: 1

      Agreed. The recent seasons have modern writing, effects, and production values, so nothing to distract a new viewer in that sense. And if your wife enjoyed Torchwood, she's quite likely to enjoy these. My wife likes it and she's not a science fiction fan, generally speaking. After getting through the current stuff, she may be hooked enough to overlook the aesthetic distractions of the older shows and enjoy those too.

      Or you could just watch those on your own late at night. You'll get to watch some awesome sci-fi, and she won't harass you about it because she'll think you're looking at porn.

    3. Re:Start with the modern ones - by pauljlucas · · Score: 1

      The nice thing about a Time Travel series - is you need not watch it sequentially!

      Actually, you sometimes do. Quite often, they refer to things that happened in the past (relative to the Doctor). If you never saw the older episodes, you won't know to what they're referring to.

      --
      If you reply, do so only to what I explicitly wrote. If I didn't write it, don't assume or infer it.
    4. Re:Start with the modern ones - by OldSoldier · · Score: 1

      I absolutely agree to start with the modern ones. The older ones are good (I got hooked with Tom Baker) but looking at them now the 70s/80s directing style shows through and they appear much slower paced to a modern audience.

      I firmly believe you gotta love it before getting steeped in the older lore. I'd suggest just going straight to Tennant. I'm not convinced you should cherry pick among the fan-rated best (for example "Blink") mainly because some of the coolness of that will be lost on you first time through and besides if you start with the best... it's down hill from there.

      After (if?) you're hooked, you may want to watch older ones involving the Master (for example) or any episodes set on Galifrey. (My fav is the episode right after Sarah Jane Smith left.) Or any of the villians who are repeat characters (cybermen, daleks, sontarans, etc)

      One thing the new series is leaving out is how vast the interior of the tardis is/can be. One T.Baker episode showed it as huge, with rooms for each companion as well as a garden, pools, etc. Kinda wish they'd do that here.

    5. Re:Start with the modern ones - by Seumas · · Score: 1

      The series may consist of time travel, but the doctor exists sequentially and chronologically (more or less). Wouldn't really be any harm in not watching sequentially, but if you're going to make the effort to go back to the older doctors (again, I'd say start at Baker and watch everything from there onward), then you might as well watch those in order. Not that you need to watch them before watching the modern shows -- but once you've watched the current ones, that's the order I'd advise (or you could watch the old concurrent with the new).

    6. Re:Start with the modern ones - by tomkost · · Score: 1

      That is the best way to start with his girlfriend. But after watching those, then you can try to get into the old classics. From the older series, Tom Baker was my favorite. Try a few of those episodes and see if you don't love it. Part of the fun of the old episodes is that the stories are good and the sets and special effects are hokey. These days in too many movies, they go for special effects over plot and story.

    7. Re:Start with the modern ones - by cpu6502 · · Score: 1

      I disagree with all these that recommend the modern series.

      The new ones are not bad, but there are better "science" stories in the old show, especially the later 70s and early 80s. Kinda similar to how Star Trek's 1st and 2nd seasons run circles around any season of TNG or Voyager or Enterprise. (Note I didn't include DS9, which I consider equal to B5. i.e. The best of SFTV.)

      --
      My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
    8. Re:Start with the modern ones - by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      You don't need to watch sequentially, however there are a lot story lines that take 2 or 3 episodes. That's what made it hard for me to watch as a kid, because the few times I could stay up late to see it I would inevitably catch the second half of a two parter and be confused about what was going on.

    9. Re:Start with the modern ones - by SwordsmanLuke · · Score: 1

      Gesundheit.

      --
      Any plan which depends on a fundamental change in human behavior is doomed from the start.
    10. Re:Start with the modern ones - by blair1q · · Score: 1

      Well....

      In most cases they do enough exposition. And if you have watched the right ones you can fill in years of later plots when they're mentioned offhand in the latest episodes. Which is why I say don't bother with anything between Tom Baker and Chris Eccleston.

    11. Re:Start with the modern ones - by qrwe · · Score: 1

      With Billie Piper and C. Ecklsteiner.

      Then, David Tenet.

      Then - I haven't seen them, but get caught up.

      From there - you'll know the flavor of Doctor you like, and be able to make a more informed choice.

      The nice thing about a Time Travel series - is you need not watch it sequentially!

      It's not too picky to point out that it's Christopher Eccleston and David Tennant, and nothing else. Besides that, I fully agree: Eccleston -> Tennant. When you've melted the concept, you can choose to continue with the modern branch (Smith, 11th Doctor) or get back to where it all began in the sixties. The latter will turn you into a full Who-geek, as it is a much greater effort in getting the series, watching them in order an.. well.. actually see them ALL. Whatever you choose: have a happy time watching Dr. Who!

      --
      There are 2 types of people in the world - those who understand decimal and those who don't.
    12. Re:Start with the modern ones - by Jezza · · Score: 1

      Excellent advice, and exactly right. The makers of Dr Who expected that a large part of their audience would be in this camp - so it's written with that in mind. Plus hardly anyone likes Sylvester McCoy as Dr Who (I do, but I know I'm in a vanishing minority) so unless you want to watch that, then you're kinda starting here anyway. Also the DVD's from this time are really easy to get hold of.

      And as the Man said, it's time travel, you can "jump back" if you wish. (Personally I'd want to see the Tom Baker, but that's my age talking...)

    13. Re:Start with the modern ones - by TavisJohn · · Score: 1

      You can start with the new re-launching of the series from the BBC.

      However I felt like going Hard Core. I have watched every episode from the beginning through the 2010 Xmas special.

      The best starting point is any transition between doctors. Do not start 1/2 way through a doctor, you will be a bit confused.

    14. Re:Start with the modern ones - by Mike+Van+Pelt · · Score: 1

      I remember a couple of Tom Baker ones -- one, he uses a rubber ball to propel himself from one spacecraft to the other. Throws it at the ship he's leaving, catches it on the bounce, throws it back... until he gains enough velocity to get to the other ship. (It was a plot point that Time Lords can survive in vacuum for a while.)

      Another one, on a planet with a methane atmosphere, Baker's Doctor needs to set off an explosion. He does it by opening the valves on some oxygen tanks. That's the sort of "reversal of what you'd expect on Earth" thing that Asimov did in a few of his stories.

      And ... forgetting the name of Baker's successor ... there was a signal they needed to figure out what it was, and the math genius kid Adric said "Oh, I can just do a Fourier analysis on this!" In a context where that actually made sense.

      Don't expect it to be rigorous science fiction, though. As someone else said, it's "science fantasy", often with the emphasis on "fantasy." They never let consistency get in the way of the story they want to tell. I haven't seen those episodes, but I'm told there were four separate, and completely inconsistent with each other, episodes set at the Sinking of Atlantis. And in the reboot, how can "Gallifrey is destroyed, I am the last Timelord," matter if he is, you know, a *TIME TRAVELLER*, who in the old series, traveled far in the future of anything shown in the new series.

      To a greater or lesser extent, you have to turn part of your brain off. But it can be fun. I used to watch it, but kind of lost interest at some point.

    15. Re:Start with the modern ones - by treeves · · Score: 1

      Ja, das ist Die Deutsche version, mit Kristoph Ecklsteiner als der Zeitlord: Herr Doktor Wer.

      --
      ...the future crusty old bastards are already drinking the Kool-Aid.
    16. Re:Start with the modern ones - by tholomyes · · Score: 1

      Totally agree, all of the first four seasons of the modern series are on streaming Netflix-- or at least they were as of a year ago, and it's a great place to begin. Frankly, I've never watched anything earlier than those (but may sometime). IIRC, Torchwood is also streaming and well worth a watch.

      --
      When did the future switch from being a promise to a threat? -C. Palahniuk
    17. Re:Start with the modern ones - by Em+Adespoton · · Score: 1

      I agree -- but I'd also recommend listening to the radio shows first. You could also read the books, but they're sometimes harder to find. I found reading the books for the lost episodes to be immensely informative, and my imagination is probably better than the original video.

    18. Re:Start with the modern ones - by Omestes · · Score: 1

      And here in the states they cost much more than other television series. For example, excluding Amazon discounts: House Season 6: 59.98, Dr. Who season 5 (or whatever it would be factoring in the originals) 79.98.

      And if someone is "trying to get into a show", I don't think they really want to spend $400 on DVD box sets (ignoring the older ones, which also cost a ridiculous amount of money compared to like products). Unless they have much more money than brains.

      In cases like this, I have no problem saying "go pirate a couple episodes, if you like them, then think about buying them.". Technically illegal, but completely ethical.

      That said, watch the 2005 seasons and work your way up. If you dig it well into the David Tennant shows, then think of going back and watching some of the older ones (they're on Netflix, and The Pirate Bay), especially the Tom Baker episodes. I did pretty much the same thing, I watched some older episodes on PBS when I was a kid, but never "got it", I even abstained from the 2005 reboot (since I didn't have as good memories of it). I started watching it when David Tennant took over, and haven't looked back since... Or rather, I have, since I've pretty much caught up on the entire back catalog by now.

      --
      A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
    19. Re:Start with the modern ones - by Cloud+K · · Score: 1

      I believe in David Tenet.

      Anyway... yeah I'd say start with the reboot as well, there's some great stuff in there (silly Russell Davies episodes and his farting aliens aside) and it just seems sensible to start with the modern. Indeed you can always go back.

      I have tried watching from the very first episode with Hartnell and was bored to tears - plus there were LOADS of episodes as it was a serial with the kind of regularity of Coronation Street.. not like the 13 episodes a year or whatever it is nowadays. It'd take forever.

      Go for the popular stuff like the Tom Baker episodes maybe if you want to geek out a bit, but I'd concentrate on the modern day version.

    20. Re:Start with the modern ones - by gravis777 · · Score: 1

      I second this. The ones that started in 2005, while he was the 10th doctor, seemed to be made where one could easily pick up on the show with having no previous knowledge of it. Once you get the feel of the show, start with some of the older shows. What is nice is you can kind of watch some of the older shows out of order. The Three Doctors is a good few shows, and it gives you a feel for the first few doctors. There is also a fan edit out there called the 5 Doctors, which will introduce you to a couple more.

      You won't be able to start from the begining and watch every single one, don't even try. The reason for this is that the BBC has LOST many of the original episodes - either by recording over the tapes they were recorded on, or whatnot. There has been an effort the past couple of years to scour the world looking for copies of these "lost" episodes. When they do find copies, they are sometimes several generations removed from the original, and look awful. I think a few have even been recreated based on the scripts and stuff, but I have not seen any of those.

      I believe there was also one doctor who only made an appearence in a Fox Made For TV movie (I believe he is considered the 9th Doctor, but I could be mistaken. Of course, a simple search on Wikipedia would tell me, but I'm too lazy this morning). I got it on VHS somewhere, but good luck finding it online or anywhere else.

      I should warn you, though, that if you do venture into classic Doctor Who territory, you will find the show to be pretty different than the modern day Doctor Who and Tourchwood. The shows are generally much slower paced - with a story lasting several episodes, and the shows are so low budget, you really have to use your imagination to buy the "special effects", scenery and props. It doesn't mean they are not good, but if you have only seen the modern ones, you will probably be in for a bit of a surprise.

    21. Re:Start with the modern ones - by gravis777 · · Score: 1

      PS - If you really want to get a feel for the show without delving too far into it, check out The Specials - http://www.amazon.com/Doctor-Who-Complete-Specials-Blu-ray/dp/B002ZHKZEC/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1301054662&sr=8-1 The stories there are generally self-contained, and require no previous knowledge of the show to Enjoy. The boxed set does NOT include the 2010 Christmas special - http://www.amazon.com/Doctor-Who-Christmas-Carol-Blu-ray/dp/B004FUYSUO/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&qid=1301054713&sr=8-5 - Just a warning, while the 2010 special is FUN, its a bit on the corny side. However, you do have an AMAZING vocalist in it!

  5. In media res. by LaminatorX · · Score: 1

    Start with the beginning of the modern show, then sample previous eras here an there as you go. The discs of the old shows usually have entire story arcs on them, so you can treat it like a buffet.

  6. I think you've answered the question. by whovian · · Score: 1

    If she doesn't want something dated and enjoys Torchwood, I think I would start with Doctor Who circa 2005. There are Torchwood tie-ins that will become apparent.

    --
    To-do List: Receive telemarketing call during a tornado warning. Check.
    1. Re:I think you've answered the question. by Seumas · · Score: 1

      I think there's a distinct problem to be found in trying to associate modern viewers who like modern Doctor Who with fans of science fiction. As much as I'd like to think otherwise, I think that a huge portion of the audience that never heard of Doctor Who until this century would care as much about the actual earlier seasons as someone's girlfriend who says "gosh, this ipad thing is neat!" would be interested in sitting down and writing software.

  7. My opinion - for what little it's worth by Tigger's+Pet · · Score: 1

    I would recommend that you start with the 'newer' series, from about 2005 onwards. This will get you Christopher Eccleston, David Tennant and Matt Smith. The older ones just look aged, or rather pants (McCoy & McGann never really seemed to fill the role properly).

    Opinions are like arseholes - everybody's got one and this is mine.

  8. Depends by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 1

    If you have a *lot* of drugs you can start with the older stuff, but not all the way back. Maybe some Pertwee? If you are really really high, it's pretty entertaining. Otherwise, start with 2005 (Christopher Eccleston).

  9. Start modern and mix in classic by Fiddlingfrog · · Score: 1

    Start with the first series of the modern production (Christopher Eccleston) and go forward, and intersperse it with some stories from the classic series. For the classic episodes I don't think it's necessary to go in totally perfect order, but try to go in Doctor order to get a sense of the show's progression.

  10. I'd start with the 2005 series by bryan1945 · · Score: 1

    It has the newer feel, somewhat like Torchwood. My wife (and I) enjoyed the new run immensely.

    --
    Vote monkeys into Congress. They are cheaper and more trustworthy.
  11. Beginning not an option by XanC · · Score: 1

    My understanding is that most (all?) of the First Doctor's episodes are sadly no longer extant.

    1. Re:Beginning not an option by D'Arque+Bishop · · Score: 1

      Several still do exist, actually. In fact, the first three serials (including "The Daleks") are available in a box set called "The Beginning".

      My only advice, though, is to remember two things: 1) "The Daleks" is rather slow and is best watched over multiple nights, and 2) the Doctor is not a very nice person in his first incarnation. It took a while for him to lose his arrogance and low regard for other people.

    2. Re:Beginning not an option by Goobergunch · · Score: 1

      Actually, the Second Doctor got hit hardest by the BBC throwing out episodes. (Algeria bought most of the first two seasons and didn't return its copies until after the junkings stopped.) That being said, 108 missing episodes is a bit of a hurdle to jump through... at least we have audio!

    3. Re:Beginning not an option by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      ...then perhaps a good approach would be to start with a "best of" selection from each of the classic doctors. Perhaps include the regeneration episodes.

      Definitely get the introduction of the recurring major villans like The Master, the Cybermen, the Daleks and the Sontarans.

      Since Sara Jane shows up, perhaps include some more early Baker(1) episodes.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    4. Re:Beginning not an option by Remloc · · Score: 1
      1st and 2nd, actually.

      A group of volunteers called "Loose Cannon Productions" has cobbled together reconstructions for most, if not all of the lost episodes from the existing audio, stills, existing short clips, etc. However, if not truly hardcore, those would be even harder to stomach.

  12. Tom Baker is the best doctor of them all by melancolico · · Score: 1

    Tom Baker is the best doctor of them all, start with him, then go forward or backward it doesn't matter, every other doctor pales by comparison.

    1. Re:Tom Baker is the best doctor of them all by bigstrat2003 · · Score: 1

      Cue Tom Baker vs David Tennant war... NOW!

      --
      "16MB (fuck off, MiB fascists)" - The Mighty Buzzard
    2. Re:Tom Baker is the best doctor of them all by suutar · · Score: 1

      Nah. They'd wind up going off for a coffee together. For a newcomer I think I would also recommend starting with Eccleston, if only because the first few seasons of the new stuff (2005+) are on netflix. Digging up Tom Baker would be worthwhile if you decide you like the concept enough, but it's got a different feel (which, thinking back, I tend to attribute to the production values, especially in background music).

    3. Re:Tom Baker is the best doctor of them all by Eudial · · Score: 1

      Depends. Pertwee is definitely a must-watch if you're an engineering or science type nerd, as especially some of the earlier serials really go to town with the men in lab coats and science facilities. Furthermore, having Roger Delgado as the Master is also a very good thing.

      --
      GAAH! MY PRINTER IS ON FIRE!!! PUT IT OUT! PUT IT OUT!
  13. Re:In my opinion... by HikingStick · · Score: 1

    Once you get into the mythology, even the older ones tend to be loved (something to which my wife and kids will attest--I was watching since I was a lad).

    --
    I use irony whenever I can, but my shirts are still wrinkled...
  14. Use the Tardis... by JaydenT · · Score: 2

    ...and watch some future episodes

  15. Dated by BradleyUffner · · Score: 1

    For me, that "dated" feel of Doctor Who was what made it great. Though some of the very early black and white ones where a little too much for me, some of the B&W ones were great. I still enjoy the last few "modern" seasons, but the look and feel of the show has changed a lot from the classics for me, and I just don't enjoy them as much. The sets and effects are a little TOO perfect in the new ones, which really breaks my suspension of disbelief.

    If you want fun, start with Tom Baker and go forward from there, but you will miss a lot of important back story and character development that happened early on.

  16. Re:In my opinion... by bigstrat2003 · · Score: 1

    I agree with this. I love the new material, but no matter how hard I try, can't go back to the old. It's... I don't know if it's dated, or cheesy, or what, but it's something, and I don't like it.

    --
    "16MB (fuck off, MiB fascists)" - The Mighty Buzzard
  17. Don't turn your back, don't look away, and don't.. by D'Arque+Bishop · · Score: 1

    I had been considering that question, myself, and then decided that if I were to introduce someone to the show, I'd do so with a new series episode, and one that would give the newbie an idea of why kids used to watch the show from behind the sofa.

    One word: "Blink."

  18. Early shows by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 1

    You really can't start at the beginning. The very first shows are available on DVD, but then there are gaps where shows got taped over because the BBC could not imagine anyone *ever* wanting to watch something that was already broadcast. Yeah, TV executives haven't improved very much.

    I have no idea where you should start. :) The first black and white episodes are good too see where it all started. Shoestring budgets, but even then the Daleks were pretty cool.

  19. The books were better by ShitSoup · · Score: 1

    I have actually read a whole lot of Doctor Who Books published by BBC rather than see the series......I have also seen some of the earliest episodes and the latest ones. I must say- Books were better.

  20. I didn't start until last year. by yincrash · · Score: 1

    I started with the first season of the modern ones. Hooked me, and now I've seen all the modern ones as well as the specials. I would suggest the same thing. The older ones move much slower.

  21. Start New by Ambiguous+Coward · · Score: 1

    Even if you did start watching from the very beginning, you'd have a tough time tracking down all the episodes, since a good number of them are simply lost to time. That is to say, there's NO way to watch them all. Some have been found again, some have been animated based on radio broadcasts, some have been restored...but some are just gone.

    My advice for someone new to Who: give the new series a go. It's incredibly accessible and available, and David Tennant does a great job at playing the Doctor. If he can't make you fall in love with the whole thing, maybe it's not for you. And once you're in love with the series, you'll probably have an easier time accepting the older, lower-budget episodes of days gone by, and you'll be positively drooling for the back story the older episodes provide.

    Of course, someone with a different favorite Doctor may tell you to start elsewhere, but I think my argument of accessibility/availability is still a good one. :)

    --
    Their may be a grammatical error, misspeling, or evn a typo in this post.
  22. If you're short on time... by Brazilian+Geek · · Score: 2

    Start with the 11th Doctor.

    It's a sort-of fresh start and while it does reference the past Doctors, if you're interested in knowing more - look up the episode on Wikipedia and I'm sure a bigger nerd will have linked to the past episode.

    The biggest things that came back from past episodes were the Steven Moffat episodes from the previous seasons - those might be worth viewing just to catch up and also to see how good Doctor Who can be if in the hands of a good writer.

    Previous Steven Moffat stories:
    Series 1:
    1.9 "The Empty Child"
    1.10 "The Doctor Dances"

    Series 2:
    2.4 "The Girl in the Fireplace"

    Series 3:
    3.10 "Blink"

    Series 4:
    4.9 "Silence in the Library"
    4.10 "Forest of the Dead"

    Just listing those episodes reminds me of a lot of the stuff introduced in them that are referenced in later episodes.

    --
    All browsers' default homepage should read: Don't Panic...
  23. Old series or new series? by pauljlucas · · Score: 1
    You really have to decide whether you want to start watching the "new" series (starting with Christopher Eccleston) or the old series (starting with, conceivably, William Hartnell).

    The new series has much better special effects, but, occasionally, they pay homage to the old series, so those bits will be lost on you. The old series has, by today's standards, cheesy special effects (perhaps even cheesy by the standards way back then).

    However, the old series does have some very good stories, so if you can suspend your criticism of the special effects, start with the old series. Many of my favorites are in the Tom Baker (#4) era. In the new series, anything written by Steven Moffat is brilliant.

    Although there tends to be a Dr. Who bias whereby whichever Doctor you see first is your favorite Doctor (similar to one's first James Bond), my personal favorites are Tom Baker (#4) and David Tennant (#10).

    --
    If you reply, do so only to what I explicitly wrote. If I didn't write it, don't assume or infer it.
    1. Re:Old series or new series? by frank_adrian314159 · · Score: 1

      Although there tends to be a Dr. Who bias whereby whichever Doctor you see first is your favorite Doctor (similar to one's first James Bond), my personal favorites are Tom Baker (#4) and David Tennant (#10).

      That's not particularly true for me... I started watching Doctor Who when Tom Baker played the character. When the switch to Peter Davidson was made, he became my favorite Doctor (I sort of liked the fact that he seemed annoyed most of the time). I really didn't much care for Colin Baker, but Sylvester McCoy was sort of OK (if you could get past the crappy writing) - he was actually better in the Fox movie where he died and was replaced with Paul McGann (but again, the writing sucked), and McGann was OK for the single movie he was in. But with Chris Eckleston and the relaunch of the series, things really took off. He quickly became my favorite Doctor. David Tennant was fine, and Matt Smith has been saved so far by really great writing but, in my opinion, Eckleston has been the best Doctor - his combination of actually showing a range of emotions together with a great sense of him having fun and with some of the best writing happening when the relaunched show was fresh makes him the right place to start and him my favorite Doctor (up to this point; that's one of the great things about Doctor Who - the next one can always be better).

      And, so to get back to your point, while there might be a bias among fans where the first Doctor you see is your favorite, it isn't always so. In fact, I'd take any of the ones from the new, relaunched series over any of the old ones.

      --
      That is all.
    2. Re:Old series or new series? by unitron · · Score: 1

      Although there tends to be a Dr. Who bias whereby whichever Doctor you see first is your favorite Doctor (similar to one's first James Bond), my personal favorites are Tom Baker (#4) and David Tennant (#10).

      So Baker is your favorite Doctor Who and Tennant is, at some point in the future where you've apparently already been, going to be your favorite James Bond as soon as they get rid of that Daniel Craig guy and the next three actors after him? : - )

      --

      I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.

  24. A note on the oldest episodes... by HikingStick · · Score: 1

    The BBC didn't save all of its old tapes, so many of the oldest episodes were lost. Some have been converted from private collections (VHS/beta tapes) to fill in the gaps.

    At one point in time, WTTW in Chicago ran through all the doctors (to the then current one) in order, and I recorded every single episode. I regret to admit that I, like so many others, consigned those tapes to the trash years ago.

    Anyway, just keep that in mind if you do decide to go back and watch the earlier series. I really liked the first three Doctors, by the way. Baker was fine--I first found the series while he was on--but I was never convinced that he was the ultimate one (I know, that's blasphemy to some).

    --
    I use irony whenever I can, but my shirts are still wrinkled...
    1. Re:A note on the oldest episodes... by Em+Adespoton · · Score: 1

      If you want to get started on the old stuff, you can always start with the radio shows, as they span the "lost episodes" years quite nicely.

  25. I read the (slashdotted) article by Goobergunch · · Score: 1

    I generally agree with the article that starting with the 2005 series is the easiest way to get into Doctor Who. There are a few references to old stuff that you won't get, but they're subtle and not important to understanding what's going on.

    If you want to start with the classic series, the more accessible places to start are either with Season 7's Spearhead from Space (the Third Doctor) or Season 12's Robot (the Fourth Doctor). Many episodes in the first six seasons were thrown out by the BBC, so they can only now be watched through audios and slide-show like reconstructions which can a bit challenging to watch. There are some restoration issues with the Third Doctor's stories, but at least all of the episodes are there.

    Note that not all of classic Who has been released on DVD, so some of it may be a bit hard to find (at least legally).

  26. SImple by LDAPMAN · · Score: 1

    Tom Baker....anything before that is too dated. The Tom Baker episodes hold up well and he is very entertaining.

  27. Start with the modern ones. by Cyno01 · · Score: 1

    I would start with the revival, that would be the 9th doctor, Christopher Eccleston. If you want to include torchwood and/or the sarah jane adventures (although a kids show is better than most stuff on tv), heres the viewing order i kinda pieced together along with all the specials.

    Doctor Who S1
    Doctor Who - Children In Need Short (2006)
    Doctor Who - Christmas Invasion
    Doctor Who - Attack of the Graske
    Doctor Who S2
    Doctor Who - The Runaway Bride
    Torchwood S1
    Sarah Jane Adventures - Invasion of the Bane
    Doctor Who S3
    Doctor Who - The Infinite Quest (actually takes place between 3x09 and 3x10)
    Doctor Who - Time Crash (2007 Children In Need)
    Doctor Who - Voyage of the Damned
    Sarah Jane Adventures S1
    Torchwood S2
    Doctor Who S4
    Sarah Jane Adventures S2
    Doctor Who at the Proms
    Doctor Who - The Next Doctor
    Doctor Who - Dreamland
    Doctor Who - Planet of the Dead
    Torchwood S3 - Children of Earth (some of the best television ever)
    Sarah Jane Adventures S3
    Doctor Who - The Waters of Mars
    Doctor Who - The End of Time
    Doctor Who S5
    Sarah Jane Adventures S4
    Doctor Who - A Christmas Carol
    Doctor Who - Space & Time (comic relief 2011)

    --
    "Sic Semper Tyrannosaurus Rex."
    1. Re:Start with the modern ones. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Torchwood S1
      Sarah Jane Adventures - Invasion of the Bane
      Doctor Who S3

      I would disagree with this order; I've found that watching up to Doctor Who S3 Ep 10 (Blink) and then watching all of Torchwood S1 before continuing with Doctor Who S3 Ep 11 (Utopia) makes a lot more sense. The last moment of the last episode of Torchwood S1 is the first moment of Utopia and makes a lot more sense to be watched that way.

  28. Steven Moffat - start with him. by scott2181 · · Score: 1

    Current head writer Steven Moffat's episodes are pretty much golden. Search through the episode list and start with those. I started with The Empty Child - a gorgeous horror tale with the Ninth Doctor, set in Blitz-era London, with a little gas-mask child walking the streets. Properly spooky stuff, superbly written and directed. Blink is a modern classic, inventive plotting, clever ideas and (surprisingly) very little of the Doctor. it also boasts the best monsters (the Weeping Angels) since the series revival.

    All things considered (14 episodes) the Eleventh Doctor is my favourite Doctor. He's just the right shade of alien, oblivious, brilliant and full on performance. The Eleventh Hour was the reason I paid the licence fee last year - a gorgeous, imaginative fantasy about a time-travelling imaginary friend, a crashing spaceship, a brilliant magician, spunky eye-candy and a plot of deft nonsense. That story hits all the classic fantasy notes, from Narnia to Roald Dahl's wibblier flights of fancy.

    Hope you enjoy the show.

  29. Not Ture by alexander_686 · · Score: 1

    Most of the episodes are still around. Some have been lost. Others have not been released to DVD yet.

    You can get An Unearthy Child, the first episode from Amazon or whatnot. Now, mind you, it is "live teleplay" and in black and white, so it is going to be a lot different then today's doctor who.

    I will echo what a lot of people have been saying. Start with the reboot with "Rose". It not that the older stuff is bad - it is just very different.

    For example, I would recomand "Robots of Death" - a Tom Baker / 4th Doctor story - when you get done with the "modern" stories. I think it was 3 [or 4?] 1/2 hour episodes that's now a 90 minute "movie". The pacing is very different.

  30. Eccleston by guspasho · · Score: 1

    Start with the 2005 reboot with Christopher Eccleston. It's a nice introduction that doesn't need any background to get in to, and it's recent so you don't have to watch 40 years of stuff to get to the good stuff (good as in not horribly dated and of poor production quality). One thing of note is that if you do start with Eccleston then you will notice they frequently refer to a particular past event (Read backwards for spoiler: RAW EMIT EHT). This event didn't happen in any of the earlier episodes you skipped, but just prior to the 2005 reboot, sort of to distinguish the new series from the old, so you didn't miss anything.

    I watched all of the 4th Doctor (Tom Baker) and one thing you'll notice from those older episodes is how poor the production quality is sometimes (rubber monster suits, dialogue that is completely obscured by background noise). So you're better off starting somewhere recent like 2005 then going back and watching the older stuff. I never got around to watching any other old doctors, you probably won't either.

  31. Re:In my opinion... by click2005 · · Score: 1

    I agree but the older ones do feel dated and 'holding a purple sheet of fur over your head' to play a monster is hard to swallow for most people.

    Avoid Colin Baker and Peter Davidson (especially any with Adric) and its good cheesy SciFi entertainment.

    --
    I am a free slashdotter. I will not be modded, blogged, DRM'd, patented, podcasted or RFID'd. My life is my own.
  32. lost in history. by renegade600 · · Score: 1

    unfortunately you will not be able to watch it from the beginning. So many early shows have been lost. I started watching Doctor Who with Tom Baker and only seen a few of the earlier Doctors on Netflix. I recently got caught up with watching all the episodes of new series. Personally I found the new series not as entertaining as the old. It is not to say the newer ones are bad, they are actually pretty good in their own way but when compared to the older, they are lacking and much, much darker.

    To answer your question, if you were going to try to addict someone with Doctor Who, start with Tom Baker. Once addicted then try to make them hard core by watching the black an white series that's available.

  33. Re:In my opinion... by queBurro · · Score: 1

    yeah, was just going to say the same thing myself, Christopher Eccleston was the relaunch of the series after it was cancelled back in the day (80's?), it was all interesting and exciting again, and at some point catch a few of the Tom Baker/John Pertwee ones too (but remember they were shot a while ago) otherwise you won't be able to join in on the "who was your favourite Dr" discussions down the pub oooooohhhhhhhh, don't forget the old movies, check this: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0060278/

    --
    sag
  34. Baker by gilesjuk · · Score: 1

    Tom Baker seems to be a favourite but most people tend to like the one they grew up with.

    There are two Dr Who Films that you might want to view, I'm not sure how they well regarded they are by fans but I like them. They have Peter Cushing in and are about the Daleks. They were made in the 1960s. You can at least have a laugh at the terrible FX and funky music.

    The films don't really have anything in common with the TV shows.

    1. Re:Baker by 0123456 · · Score: 1

      There are two Dr Who Films that you might want to view, I'm not sure how they well regarded they are by fans but I like them. They have Peter Cushing in and are about the Daleks. They were made in the 1960s. You can at least have a laugh at the terrible FX and funky music.

      I find the movie DVDs work best if you switch them to the French soundtrack and turn the TV color off so it's in black and white. That way they look like pretentious 60s French movies. Particularly the one that's set in London.

  35. Hartnell+Baker by Improv · · Score: 1

    There are 7 Canonical doctors, and then there's the remake series. I'd suggest you ignore the latter entirely, and start with Hartnell (1st) or Tom Baker (4th). The series varied reasonably in style over the years it ran; some of the doctors had story arcs while with others the episodes were closer to being one-off. It was a fantastic series.

    --
    For every problem, there is at least one solution that is simple, neat, and wrong.
    1. Re:Hartnell+Baker by H0p313ss · · Score: 1

      I'm a big fan of the 3rd and 4th Doctors, but the latest young fellow is not bad at all.

      --
      XML is a known as a key material required to create SMD: Software of Mass Destruction
    2. Re:Hartnell+Baker by Improv · · Score: 1

      McCoy? Yeah, he was fantastic.

      (on the off-chance it's not clear, I consider the remake series non-canon)

      --
      For every problem, there is at least one solution that is simple, neat, and wrong.
  36. Douglas Adams by tomcode · · Score: 1

    I grew up watching the old series and I think I have the answer you're looking for: 4 key episodes from the old series and the infinitely more watchable new series.

    The modern series definitely stands on its own, but it does have a lot of in-jokes and references to the old series, so it might be worth finding a few key episodes from the Tom Baker (4th Doctor) years. I'd recommend just as a sample the ones where Douglas Adams was involved: Pirate Planet (you'll recognize the writing if you've read THHGTTG), Shada, and City of Death. You will also want to watch Genesis of the Daleks, as Davros and the Daleks play an important role in the Doctor Who multiverse.

    So there's 4 old episodes to get your bearings, and then dive into the new series from the beginning (and listen carefully for a mention of that nice young man Arthur Dent in series 1).

    --
    f u cn rd ths u cn gt a gd jb n cmptr prgmng
  37. Do start with the first by fermion · · Score: 1
    I would suggest that pretty early on you see the first season, with Hartenll, in as much completeness as available. I think the first series has some very strong serials. I believe many episodes are mssing, so it is hit and miss. This will form a background on the what the show was intended to be.

    After that I would take a look at several serials from later doctors. For instance for Troughton the Wheel in Space or the Krotons. For Pertwee Carnival of Monsters. For Baker The Talons of Weng-Chiang or City of Death. And so on. You may like to look at different companions/assistants as well.

    Each Doctor has a different feel, and by looking at the various doctors you will find a few favorites. Then you can look for episodes that feature your favorite Doctor or Companion. A limiting factor on this may be available episodes, though Netflix and Itunes has a good selection.

    The current incarnation there is no reason to not start with the current series. The last christmas episode, in my mind was quite strong. If you stick with Matt Smith, there is really no reason to go back. If you want to go back further, then start with Eccleston and the relaunch "Rose". There is quite a bit of history and buildup during the first few seasons. I something think the purposefully cut the series apart when they hires Smith. It seems they did this couple times in the before when they felt they were getting bogged down.

    One thing with the first twenty some odd series is that they are classic tv. They expected people to sit there and wait for the story to develop. Sometime it is strained when they required a 6 part serial and the 4th and 5th part are clearly filler. There is a lot of corridor acting, of various quality. If one serial is not to your liking, there is probably another that is more dramatic or whatever you want. It can get a bit Shakespearian. But many are really well made TV. Remember the original serials were serials, meant to be wants in small chunks.

    --
    "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
  38. Re:Don't turn your back, don't look away, and don' by bigstrat2003 · · Score: 1

    Good choice, unless it's someone who can't deal with scary very well (me). I love Doctor Who, but the Weeping Angels freak me the fuck out. If that had been my first experience I might have run and never looked back.

    Still... good Doctor, excellent writing, creative premise. It's a solid first episode with the aforementioned caveat.

    --
    "16MB (fuck off, MiB fascists)" - The Mighty Buzzard
  39. Re:Baker all the way by Push+Latency · · Score: 1

    It is for this reason that I would advocate watching the series in sequence starting with Jon Pertwee, the third Doctor.

    You'll enjoy the transition into color, and the best Doctor of all, Tom Baker, will be refreshingly modern when you get to his episodes. If you can handle the camp, prepare yourself for the most awesome, un-remarkable, un-religious religious experience of your life.

  40. Don't bother by log0n · · Score: 1

    with anything pre-Christopher Eccleston. The original Dr was somehow both tedious and campy.

    Start with whatever you happen to see now (because the episodes are usually self-contained, or close enough to it) and then netflix from the beginning.

    Don't watch Torchwood (love it!) until after you've seen at least one full season with David Tennant as the Dr.

    And for the love of god, don't get anywhere close to the Dr Who mini-series/movie from Fox? from about a decade ago.

  41. Not exactly science fiction by starfishsystems · · Score: 1

    Doctor Who is not so much science fiction as a kind of theatrical sitcom based on a certain set of premises. If you keep that in mind, you'll be more able to enjoy its many interesting quirks and it's - ahem - relaxed pace.

    Occasionally, depending on the writer, a given script makes reference to some genuine science, or at any rate a tenable line of speculation. Other times it's utter nonsense. What's more, the production often finds a way to allude to the fact of it being nonsense, whether through a stray comment muttered by the Doctor, or by outrageously ridiculous costumes or pompous dialogue. The real question regarding a given episode, therefore, is whether it's good theatre?

    The answer is highly variable. Some episodes are just great at first encounter. They stand on their own merits. With others, it depends in part on context. An episode might not seem to have much on the go, except when you can see it as a counterpoint to one which preceded it. This often happens during a transition between doctors. Over the first few episodes, the new actor has to establish a new character whose quirks are distinctive and yet somehow create a familiar impression. Wit is a large part of it.

    Given a complete choice of episodes, but being constrained to watch only a select few of them, you could do worse than to choose the very first and last of each doctor. That will give you a sense of how the series has developed, and what the characters are like. These are also the episodes which are most likely to have been worked on the hardest. There are better episodes than these scattered here and there, but I can't say that I've ever found a pattern to them. Even the better writers have their off days. I agree with the general sentiment that Tom Baker made an outstanding Doctor, as did Jon Pertwee, but inevitably some of those episodes were not as strong as others.

    --
    Parity: What to do when the weekend comes.
  42. take it slow and mix it up by smylingsam · · Score: 1

    to be honest the story of the good doctor spans nearly 40 years of social mores, acting and special effects constrictions. I'ld say grab the first of the new stuff and watch a few. then watch some torchwoods and perhaps some sara jane. then mix and match some of the older stuff. it's VERY well done but each doctor reprints their own time's belief about how much science is shown vs cleverness or violence.
    I would suggest you not follow a formula until you've watched a few and decided which stories interest you the most or you may become overwhelmed and thus numb to the simple joys of the dear doctor's hacking the cosmos.
    Once you've partaken such simple joys then consider a list or mandated watching order, the stuff is so good that it can be watched again several times.

  43. Re:In my opinion... by Seumas · · Score: 1

    Doctor Who is all ABOUT being a low budget special effects science fiction show. Despite Eccleston being a great version of the doctor, Tom Baker remains "the" Doctor, in most people's eyes (not everyone's, but clearly most). Peter Davison is also considered the favorite of (I believe) Russel Davies and it would be a shame to miss him.

    It also brings more meaning to characters that show up or are hinted at in the reboot of Doctor Who. The Master probably means jack to anyone who hasn't gone back and watched the original series. And you'd miss out on K9. And you'd miss out on Sarah Jane. The awesome original Tardis that looked less like a used antiques store and more like a space ship. You'd miss great (some would say, awful) stories like The Happiness Patrol ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Happiness_Patrol ).

    You could definitely get by with only the modern incarnation of the show, but if you have any appreciation for this type of science fiction (Red Dwarf, Blake's Seven, etc) then you definitely have to at least consider going back as far as the fourth doctor and catching up from there.

  44. Re:In my opinion... by tverbeek · · Score: 1

    The Christopher Eccleston series was the beginning of the "current" Dr Who program, and that makes it an excellent place to start. You don't need to know much of anything about the previous Doctors' adventures (though it helps if you know what a Dalek is, etc), and allowing for the usual sorts of hills and valleys along the way, the production values, writing, acting, etc. are all very good. Once you've caught up with that, you can go back and sample the earlier Doctors, watching the ones you enjoy and skipping the ones you don't.

    --
    http://alternatives.rzero.com/
  45. Tom Baker is the only Doctor who matters. by 0m3gaMan · · Score: 2

    That show came to prominence in the late 70s on PBS in the US. For this viewer, his era is then only one that matters. Watch an episode featuring him, and you'll know why.

    1. Re:Tom Baker is the only Doctor who matters. by bythescruff · · Score: 1

      Too bloody right. Tom Baker *is* the Doctor. And Daleks do *not* fly. Trust me; I'm British, and the uni I went to was well posh...

      --
      Chuck Norris: Socialism == a thousand years of darkness.
  46. Start by Corwyn_123 · · Score: 1

    at the beginning

  47. Easy... by Gunnut1124 · · Score: 1

    Start with Battlestar Galactica (2004-2009) and skip the Doctor Who altogether. All episodes are available on Netflix and it's a better use of your geek-time.

    --
    America is all about speed. Hot, nasty, badass speed. -Eleanor Roosevelt, 1936
    1. Re:Easy... by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      Do yourself a real favor and skip the last season. BSG jumped the shark in the last season.

  48. 9th doctor is the easy starting point by Vornzog · · Score: 1

    I watched some of the old stuff as a kid with my dad, missed the series starting back up, then got my wife into it right after the birth of my daughter. We had a lot of time where there was a sleeping baby preventing you from doing very much, so we got a NetFlix subscription and caught up on what had been happening since the 2005 revival of the show.

    Start with the 9th doctor (Christopher Eccleston). The show had a great run in it's heyday, fizzled a bit, and went off the air for ~10 years. When it was revived, it kept a lot of the flavor of the old show, but didn't assume that you as the viewer had seen any of the old stuff. This is a great starting point, especially if you don't know much about the old series. From there, you move on to David Tenent - getting top quality actors and giving them weird stuff to do is awesome entertainment. The techno-babble is techno-lite and babble-heavy, and you don't even care because it is *fun*. Torchwood spins off from the second season of David Tenet, so that should give you a little backstory that was lacking if you started watching that series cold.

    Once you've done that much, jump around a bit. Matt Smith's 11th doctor started a little slow, but is growing on me. Catching some of the original William Hartnell 1st doctor episodes was a hell of a throwback, and honestly, it is amazing how much conceptual integrity there is in the show even from those early days. Big chunks of Patrick Troughton's 2nd doctor are missing (destoryed by BBC for shelf space). The 3rd and 4th doctor episodes (Jon Pertwee, Tom Baker) are some of the most iconic and best remembered. Doctors 5-8 are a bit of a hole in my experience - I don't remember them from being young, and I haven't gotten back to them this time around (not yet, anyway).

    Because Dr Who is such a part of British scifi culture, it also has a lot of material that surrounds it. Articles, books, radio shows, and 'Dr Who Confidential' (a making of for the new series), tabloid speculations about both the doctor and favorite companion characters, etc. If you like to go deep, there is plenty of extras out there.

    --

    -V-

    Who can decide a priori? Nobody.
    -Sartre

  49. Start with the re-imagined series, 2005 by roc97007 · · Score: 1

    Early Dr Who has a lot of good material, but the pacing tends to be very sluggish and the production values tend to be strictly high-school. The series went on hiatus in the 1980's and deservedly so, in my opinion.

    The show came back in 1995 as a made-for-tv movie starring Paul McGann. If you can find it, it's pretty good -- better production values, faster paced, and decent acting. McGann got robbed, in my opinion, as he made an excellent doctor and only had one chance to play him on-screen.

    The show returned again in 2005 as a re-imagined series of 13 episodes, more edgy and gritty than the original as was Battlestar Galactica. I have to say, the first episode starts out a little silly, but it rapidly improves and is going full-bore by episode 3.

    The new series is available on Netflix instant play, so if you have an account you can start watching it now.

    Each new season (with one exception) is 13 episodes plus a 14th "Christmas Special". There is an overall story arc that is foreshadowed early on and reaches climax on episode 13. The Christmas Special is usually a stand-alone episode but may foreshadow the following season.

    The new series interweaves a bit with Torchwood, a Doctor Who spin-off aimed at adults (with a much harder edge -- be cautious letting kids watch it) and also with The Sarah Jayne Adventures, another Dr Who spin-off aimed at a younger audience.

    Have fun.

    --
    Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
  50. TARDIS by A+Big+Gnu+Thrush · · Score: 1

    First, you'll need to travel back in time to when you were 13. Now you should be able to appreciate this "sophisticated" show.

  51. Dr who from 2005 to 2011 can be seen here by Cito · · Score: 1

    To start at the Christopher Eccleston - David Tennant - Matt Smith era you can watch every single episode here http://www.icefilms.info/tv/series/1/353.html Great place to begin

  52. Masochist by StikyPad · · Score: 1

    Since you seem to be seeking painful experiences, it doesn't really matter where you start. In fact, just start from the current episode and watch them all in reverse order.

    While you're at it, allow me to suggest some other material you may like, including such classics as "Whisky Made From Diabetics' Urine" and "George Lucas to Resurrect Dead Movie Stars."

    Have fun and remember to pick a safe word in advance!

  53. Starting with Chris Eccleston by Leo+Sasquatch · · Score: 3, Informative

    would be like watching Enterprise, and not wanting to watch original Trek because it was dated and didn't have bucket-loads of CGI for space battles.

    He's good, but for the full flavour, you need some of the early stuff.

    Start with 'An Unearthly Child', then 'The Daleks' - the first two stories of Hartnell. Try 'Tomb of the Cybermen' - the first existant Troughton. Watch 'War Games', then 'Spearhead from Space' to get the transition to Pertwee's doctor. Most Pertwee stuff is pretty good, but with special mention for 'Terror of the Autons'. Tom Baker had a lot of good stories, but again, special mention for 'Genesis of the Daleks', 'Pyramids of Mars', and 'The Masque of Mandragora'.

    Peter Davison is a little harder to pick and choose, as they were running loosely-connected plot arcs over entire series at this point, but 'Earthshock' is a good one.

    From Colin Baker, I'd pick 'Vengeance on Varos', and for Sylvester McCoy, 'Battlefield', and 'The Curse of Fenric'.

    Remember, budgets were pitiful, it spent a lot of time being perceived as a children's show, and yes, they did script pacing differently back then. Sets are wobbly, some effects are woeful, and some acting isn't up to much. But underneath are stories, characters and entire mythologies that make something greater than the sum of their cardboard spaceships and bad chromakey effects.

    The Daleks, the Cybermen, the Doctor himself, these will be myths and legends long after everyone's forgotten Firefly.

    1. Re:Starting with Chris Eccleston by eck011219 · · Score: 2

      I mostly don't disagree, but I would only say that starting with Eccleston is more akin to starting with "Next Generation," not "Enterprise." The new Doctor Who is very well-formed and works well as a standalone series, but is nicely enhanced by any information you might have from the original.

      Dang, that's a level of sci-fi geektalk I never imagined I'd write. But there it is, and I'm not sorry.

      --
      It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
    2. Re:Starting with Chris Eccleston by TreeInMyCube · · Score: 1

      By way of amplification, during the 3rd doctors seasons (Jon Pertwee), the budget was really small. The doctor was stranded on Earth for quite a few episodes, so this limited their storytelling abilities. Not that I have anything against Pertwee's Doctor, but he just didn't get a big galactic/time-spanning sandbox to play in.

  54. Here's an awesome guide someone did by ReK_42 · · Score: 1
  55. Re:Doctors by Seumas · · Score: 1

    This is a pertinent point. If you're watching Doctor Who because "it has this attractive person in it" or "because I like the romantic tones", then you're not the audience for actual Doctor Who. The recent Doctor Who has some gorgeous women in it and some really great moments between them and the good Doctor, but they are incidental when you watch Doctor Who because the doctor is awesome and you like science fiction.

    Keeping this in mind will help one decide whether or not it's worth the effort of expanding someone's doctor who experience if they only came to it post 2005.

  56. Please turn your card in at the door as you leave. by allanmackenzie · · Score: 1

    Don't let the door hit your ass on the way out

  57. Here's an entire discussion on this by sconeu · · Score: 1
    --
    General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
  58. Firefly by ackthpt · · Score: 2

    I'll take a shot at Firefly -

    Joss Whedon's inclusion of the killer pixie character ruined the show.

    The source material was set in the time of Reconstruction after the Civil War, dealing with how the crew, essentially former Confederates dealt with becoming even a marginal part of the new "world" should have been the focus.

    Killer Pixie - as you label her, was a real game changer and such changes will always upset the balance of a narrative. The dustbins of obscure works are populated with books, comics, etc, which could have sailed along smoothly, but for someone who thought they had a better idea - often the creator of the work itself.

    River could at any moment appear in the role of Deus Ex Machina, to bail Mal and the good crew out of any jam. That's tough for any fan to swallow, it's like having a reset button you can press any time things get ugly. Build in some high degree of unreliability could restore some of that balance ("ah, crap she's suddenly in a coma and can't come save us, looks like we have to get out of this one ourselves!")

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    1. Re:Firefly by nattt · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Nothing excuses the theme tune though...

      --
      -- oldthinkers unbellyfeel ingsoc
    2. Re:Firefly by ckaminski · · Score: 1

      I would say that except for the movie, River Tam was more of a hindrance than a help. She had a couple good contributions, but only in the instance where she took over for Kaylee and shot the Feds did she really stand out, IMHO.

      I think the over-the-top River in the movie was yet another effort by Joss to ensure that Firefly was dead and stayed dead.

    3. Re:Firefly by Totenglocke · · Score: 2

      Yea, who wants a good song that's relevant to the story?

      --
      "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." ~Thomas Jefferson
    4. Re:Firefly by Methuseus · · Score: 1

      Why would you need to excuse the theme song? I love it, and I hate country music!

      --
      Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity, though I'm not yet sure about the universe. - A Einstein
    5. Re:Firefly by Xanlexian · · Score: 1

      Nothing excuses the theme tune though...

      "You can't take this guy from me".

      That's what I've always heard.

      --
      "Congratulations, Boots. Your robot has become self-aware. You're a daddy now." -- Dr. Rho Bowman
  59. Here's my vote: by blair1q · · Score: 1

    Start in the last couple of episodes of the Pertwee era, just so you get a regeneration story, then watch every Tom Baker you can get your hands on, in order.

    Then skip until you get to the Ecclestons, so you know who Rose Tyler is (it ought to be called the Rose Tyler era, really), then watch all of the Tennants.

    After that you can be itinerant about it, jumping around the story lines. Kind of like a Time Lord.

  60. Start with the new, Be picky about the old by Talcyon · · Score: 1

    Yep, everyone is saying "Start with the 9th Doctor"

    Be picky about the "Classic" series. But if there's a classic to watch, it HAS to be "Genesis of the Daleks" It's long, but there's a reason it was voted the best DW story of all time.

    The BBC have also been doing some interesting things recently. The "Mara tales" box set, Kinda and Snakedance, have had the some of the old effects replaced with new CGI ones. If they'd had the CGI Mara snake in the original back in the eighties, kids would have run screaming from the room instead of peeking out from under the dining room table, or from behind the safety of a sofa cushion!

    Some good classics to mix in when you're ready:

    1. Genesis of the Daleks
    2. Planet of the Spiders
    3. Horror of Fang Rock (Personal favourite, not everyone's)
    4. The Key to Time series (The pirate captain is just awesomely over the top)

  61. Start with the most recent by H0p313ss · · Score: 1

    I watched the 3rd and 4th Doctor as a kid and I've found Mat Smith is doing a wonderful job of bringing the character back to life. (Tenent wasn't half bad, but a little too reminiscent of the 5th Doctor for me...)

    --
    XML is a known as a key material required to create SMD: Software of Mass Destruction
    1. Re:Start with the most recent by idji · · Score: 1

      Coz Tenet was (and is) in love with the 5th doctor's daughter and is getting married to her http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgia_Moffett#Personal_life

  62. Re:Don't turn your back, don't look away, and don' by GumphMaster · · Score: 1

    Abso-blinking-lutely, awesome ep.

    --
    Patent litigation: A doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction... in which everyone seems willing to push the button
  63. How/Where by Hatta · · Score: 1

    I'd suggest using a TV. LCD or CRT won't matter. A DVD player might be the best way to watch Dr Who on your TV, but other options are available. I used XBMC on an Xbox to watch Dr Who.

    The best place to watch Dr Who would be someplace with comfortable seating and few distractions. Probably your living room if you have one.

    If you're wondering when to watch Dr. Who, I found it best to watch in the evening. Usually between 9pm and 11pm. After that, I'm too tired to pay attention. Before that, I'd rather do something interactive. Of course, YMMV.

    --
    Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    1. Re:How/Where by Megane · · Score: 2

      But most importantly, you need a sofa.

      It is essential to have a sofa so that you can hide behind it during the "scary" bits.

      Well it is if you're a kid or have them, that is. Hiding behind the sofa during Dr. Who is apparently a tradition in the UK, practised by many youthful Brits.

      --
      #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
  64. Re:Don't turn your back, don't look away, and don' by Darth_brooks · · Score: 1

    DON'T START THERE!!!!!!

    Blink is a *fantastic* episode (although, the later appearance of the weeping angels was a bit of a "Fry's dog" for me. Their first appearance was fantastic, they didn't need to be brought back and have their impact lessened), but it's not the best place to start. It's so good, that other episodes may have trouble living up to that bar. I personally liked "Silence in the library" as a good "out of the blue" starting point, but you really should sit through the 9th doctor to get a feel for the series, then let the really good episodes come to you.

    --
    There are some people that if they don't know, you can't tell 'em.
  65. Re:In my opinion... by somersault · · Score: 1

    Wow, and I think the new ones are incredibly cheesy and over the top.. I remember loving the originals as a kid, and I think I'd be able to enjoy it even with the cheesiness.. same kind of idea as Thunderbirds or Captain Scarlett, etc.

    --
    which is totally what she said
  66. Start with Billy Piper by maroberts · · Score: 1

    ..with some Lalla Ward and you won't want to get out of your bunk for weeks

    --

    Donte Alistair Anderson Roberts - hi son!
    Karma: Chameleon

    1. Re:Start with Billy Piper by unitron · · Score: 1

      What, no Mary Tamm?

      --

      I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.

    2. Re:Start with Billy Piper by maroberts · · Score: 1

      OK, but can I add Georgia Moffet too? Damn too late, Tennant saw her first :-(

      --

      Donte Alistair Anderson Roberts - hi son!
      Karma: Chameleon

  67. Watch the new stuff, then try some of the old by Thag · · Score: 1

    I suspect you will find the newer stuff more accessible. I would start with the Christopher Ecclestone season and watch through to the present day.

    After that, you may want to sample some of the older stuff, so here are a few suggestions for the various Doctors:

    William Hartnell: An Unearthly Child, The Daleks, The Dalek Invasion of Earth. The first two are included in a set called In The Beginning

    Patrick Troughton: The Tomb of the Cybermen

    Jon Pertwee: Spearhead from Space, The Sea Devils

    Tom Baker: Robot (his introductory episode), Genesis of the Daleks, Pyramids of Mars, Robots of Death, Deadly Assassin, City of Death

    Peter Davison: Earthshock, The Caves of Androzani

    Colin Baker: Revelation of the Daleks

    Sylvester McCoy: Remembrance of the Daleks

    In my opinion, seasons 12-15, the first four seasons of Tom Baker, are the best of the older series. But the list above should give you a taste of the whole thing. See what you like.

    --
    All opinions expressed herein are my own, and not those of my employers, who are appalled.
  68. Re:Don't turn your back, don't look away, and don' by D'Arque+Bishop · · Score: 1

    In that case, if I was to start with a Ninth Doctor episode, I'd probably start with "Dalek". While "The Empty Child"/"The Doctor Dances" is a better story and has a much creepier premise, "Dalek" establishes the Daleks of the new series, reveals the basis of what happened between the old series and the new series... ... and most importantly, shows just WHY the Daleks are so feared in the Whoniverse when the common conception from non-Who fans was that they were oversized dustbins with a screeching voice that couldn't handle stairs.

  69. Read the books instead by turing_m · · Score: 1

    Yes. I remember some of the books being really good (as a teen). Bit disappointed to find you are the only other person advocating the same. What sort of nerds prefer the TV over a good book?

    --
    If I have seen further it is by stealing the Intellectual Property of giants.
  70. Start with Hartnell or nothing by Blackbrain · · Score: 1

    If you are REALLY interested in Doctor Who you would start with "An Unearthly Child". Forget this namby pamby "Try the 2005 series and then the older ones" B.S.

    The 1963 series is the best to start with. The Doctor is a complete unknown and quite sinister, Susan is weird as hell, Ian and Barbara are out of their depth and just trying to survive. There is no guarantee anyone is going to live to the end of each episode and the stories are still surprising after all these years. Don't miss out on the greatest era of Doctor Who just because it's "old".

    --
    Where would we be if Wheel had hid her round rock in a cave instead of showing everyone how it rolls?
  71. Re:Don't turn your back, don't look away, and don' by porges · · Score: 1

    If you want a scary new-series episode, I think "Twilight", from the next season, is a better starting place. (I think it's better than that season's Moffat 2-parter, but I admit that's a minority opinion.) "Blink" is great, but I think you want to start with an episode that doesn't rely on the viewer already knowing what show he's watching, and why the Doctor is anyone at all.

  72. Watch these episodes! (list provided) by migglelon · · Score: 1

    I'm a huge life-long fan and have watched it all, multiple times, and love every episode, but let me give you are realistic list.

    Here are what I recommend, in order. Don't start with the new series, start with the old, specifically:

    1) Destiny of the Daleks (Tom Baker)
    Watch this one first, it will get you hooked on to Doctor Who!

    2) An Unearthly Child (William Hartnell)
    You can see how it all began

    3) Spearhead from space (Jon Pertwee)
    Has a monster you will see later in the new series

    4) Inferno (Jon Pertwee)
    Today's Slashdot story about drilling to the core of the earth is of relevant interest, you will see what happens

    5) Frontier in Space (Jon Pertwee)
    One of my favorite stories with the Master

    6) Genesis of the Daleks (Tom Baker)
    See the Daleks

    At this point look for the Key to Time series (Tom Baker, 6 stories), watch a few episodes by the 2nd, 5th, 6th, and 7th doctors, then you can move to the 2005 series.
    For example:
    2nd Doctor, watch War Games
    5th Doctor I recommend Earthshock, the Five Doctors
    6th Doctor watch The Two Doctors, Revelation of the Daleks
    7th Doctor watch Remembrance of the Daleks

    After this, watch more Tom Baker, or move to the 2005 series.

    Enjoy!! You will love this show. It's truly the best science fiction show ever created.

  73. hit a few 4th Doctor eps, then start w/ the reboot by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 1

    I've been introducing one of my girlfriends to Doctor Who, via Netflix. I filled her in with some background (read the wik entry at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor_(Doctor_Who) and you'll be set), showed her an early Tom Baker ep (The Ark in Space) to give her a sense of the old show, and then started off with the reboot.

    If you want to watch more of the old series for background, seek out the first ep, "An Unearthly Child", and "The Three Doctors" and "The Five Doctors", to get quick exposure to the early incarnations.

    Of the "original" Doctors, the Tom Baker and Jon Pertwee, and some of the Sylvester McCoy, eps are probably the most enjoyable, IMHO.

    --
    Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
    You cannot wash away blood with blood
  74. Read about the old series; watch the new series by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I would recommend reading up on the mythos on Wikipedia. Get an understanding on the Doctor's background, recognize that Sarah Jane was kind of a big deal and get your feet wet with some background on the Time Wars. The older shows are basically crap compared to the new ones, not merely in special effects, but in the quality of the writing.

    Then start with Eccelston and keep moving forward. Torchwood's storyline interweaves quite often with the series and should be watched contemporaneously starting with the 10th Doctor.

  75. Treat Dr. Who like sushi by aoeusnth · · Score: 1

    (Stay with me: there's a point to this story) The first time I had sushi I was a guest in some sort of luxurious retreat in Japan. I think each meal cost some $200-300 per person (in grad school I ate Jack in the Box for a whole year, to give you a sense of my wonderment). Needless to say, the meal was totally, utterly wasted on me. I actually disliked it, in fact. Nowadays I love sushi, yet to this day I can't pinpoint when I had that second meal of sushi. I just remember always loving sushi, except for that first meal. Somewhere between that first and the second meal the revelation came, unforced and unannounced.

    Dr. Who was the same way for me. My first episode was David Tennant's second (I love love LOVE Tennant btw) and after it was over I just sat there scratching my head in bemusement. I was with my family-in-law so you know, when in Rome .... I thought it was a bit naff, to be honest (Earth is saved thanks to ... I won't give it away, but come on: a beverage?!). Now I absolutely adore Dr. Who, yet I can't remember when I watched that second episode. I just seemed to always love it, except for the first time.

    So my advice is: pick the first episodes of any particular actor who plays a modern Doctor -- i.e. Christopher Eccleston, David Tennant, Matt Smith -- and if you don't like it outright, set the other episodes aside for awhile. Come back to it when you have a particularly boring afternoon when you can't think of anything interesting to do, and then watch the next episode. You'll probably find you have come to love it already!

    P.S. I happen to like Tennant and Smith, so those get my vote for a first Doctor. Actually I think Smith may be the best of the modern Doctors, but this is so highly dependent on the quality of the writing that it's safe to say that if you don't like one of the three, you won't like the other two.

    P.P.S. And, if you missed it: as others have mentioned, if you're an Amazon Premier member, all the modern Doctor Whos are free to watch on Instant Video.

  76. Re:Eccleston by Bemopolis · · Score: 1

    I would suggest hitting some of the Tom Baker Dalek episodes for context, so at a minimum RAW EMIT EHT makes sense. At a minimum, "Genesis of the Daleks" is important.

    --
    "I guess the moral of the story is, don't paint your airship with rocket fuel." -- Addison Bain
  77. Re:In my opinion... by Rising+Ape · · Score: 1

    I'd recommend Blake's 7 over Doctor Who, to be sure. Much more adult themed - don't forget that Doctor Who is more or less a children's show, varying with doctor, writer and era.

    But if we're going with Who, my favourites have always been the Pertwee and Baker ones. They also have sensible pacing - the earliest being painfully glacial and the modern ones look like everyone involved was on cocaine when they made them.

  78. There's only one Bond... by Anne+Honime · · Score: 2

    ... who is at least faithful to the novels' main character as depicted by Flemming, and it's Lazenby.

    All other are showman ruining splendid, dark, brutal stories, and turning them into a Hollywood sanitized farce.

    And co-starring in this movie is Diana Rigg, making it by far the best Bond ever.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Her_Majesty%27s_Secret_Service_%28film%29

    1. Re:There's only one Bond... by pthisis · · Score: 1

      Casino Royale (Daniel Craig) was darker and more brutal than On Her Majesty's Secret Service.

      --
      rage, rage against the dying of the light
    2. Re:There's only one Bond... by Anne+Honime · · Score: 1

      I sorta agree Daniel Craig is a passable Bond. At least, the stories improved considerably; but I don't really find him very expressive as an actor. But it's already way better than the Moore - Dalton - Brosnan tenure.

    3. Re:There's only one Bond... by beanyk · · Score: 2

      IMO, Lazenby was a joke. He smirked his way through most of OHMSS just as badly as Moore did later on. He took it about as seriously as Karen Allen took the last Indiana Jones film (which as we know WAS NEVER MADE).

      It wasn't all Lazenby's fault, of course. The producers made half of the film (OHMSS) a tongue-in-cheek reference to the fact that Bond wasn't Connery any more (e.g. "this kind of thing never happened to the other fella"), when they weren't hammering home that YES THIS IS JAMES BOND, REALLY WE MEAN IT (long nostalgic montage of previous missions' mementoes in his desk).

      Once they'd gotten over that, and the interminable Louis-Armstrong-soundtracked love story, it was a decent film that was pretty close to Fleming's book.

      But I think Craig is much closer to the Fleming character. As close as you can get without making him unbearably sexist and pretty boring as well.

    4. Re:There's only one Bond... by silly_sysiphus · · Score: 1

      Yup, spot-on. OHMSS had the closest thing to an unmolested Fleming story, had a fantastic score, and happened to be one of the best Fleming original stories, at that. Unfortunately, it made no sense how Blofeld didn't recognize Bond, since the movie producers swapped the order of OHMSS and You Only Live Twice (nevermind trashing the original YOLT story). Originally, SPECTRE was part of a three-story arc (Thunderball-->OHMSS-->YOLT), but that disappeared due to From Russia With Love using SPECTRE as the villain instead of SMERSH (for political reasons, one assumes). That said, if you can accept the SMERSH/SPECTRE swap, FRWL is is a pretty good take on Fleming's idea of 007, too. The new Casino Royale actually did a pretty good job, but the movie would have been far better if they'd kept Fleming's original ending (Vesper commits suicide in the middle of the night at a seaside hotel, leaving Bond a suicide note explaining her double-cross), rather than turning it into crazy action hysterics with sinking Venetian buildings/gunfights etc. I'm still holding out for a proper Moonraker movie, though--using the book's plot--including the chapter-long side story where Bond and M play bridge (no joke!)

    5. Re:There's only one Bond... by MrNiceguy_KS · · Score: 1

      I've actually been thinking for years that I'd love for Hollywood to reboot the Bond franchise and actually try to accurately reflect the books, including setting them in the early days of the Cold War. Moonraker isn't a laser, dammit, it's an early ICBM!

      Other than the modern setting, Casino Royale was the closest they've come in a long time.

      --
      Redundancy is good And also good.
  79. Doctor! Doctor! by woboyle · · Score: 1

    I'v been a long-time fan of the Doctor. We started watching it in the 70's in graduate school. Most every Saturday night a bunch of us would get together at a colleague's house, eat pizza, play bridge, hearts, spades, video games, and then watch Monty Python, Doctor Who, and Saturday Night Live. I have, over time, collected all of the available episodes, including many from the 60's that the BBC so thoughtlessly destroyed, but that fans have reconstructed as well as possible. The early Doctors are well worth watching, but for someone with no exposure to the old (a lot in black&white), you might want to start with Christopher Eccleston who was the first of the "new" Doctors. The first episode that he starred in was called "Rose", and brought back an old enemy, the Nesteen (sp?) Hive. Basically, a petroleo-organic life form that can animate store window manikins/dummies. Like Pinky and the Brain, it's purpose is to take over the Earth! :-) Anyway, check out Amazon.com or Netflix. You should be able to get plenty of new and old episodes from them.

    --
    Sometimes, real fast is almost as good as real-time.
  80. Extremely New stuff by Hartree · · Score: 1

    "when they were first broadcast in the 19070s"

    Ah, so you've met the good Doctor. Or at least someone with a Tardis.

    (Pertwee is my favorite Doctor as well.)

  81. Piper and Baker and Pertwee by echusarcana · · Score: 1
    My kids and I started with the Billie Piper years (I recommend watching Secret Diary of a Callgirl yourself at the same time).

    Next we're going back for the Tom Baker and Jon Pertwee years... the classics.

    It is a show that has maintained its charm.

  82. Re:Don't turn your back, don't look away, and don' by grep+-v+'.*'+* · · Score: 1

    One word: "Blink."

    "Blink" is wonderful. I got a friend hooked on Dr Who by accidentally showing it to him.

    --
    If the universe is someone's simulation -- does that mean the stars are just stuck pixels?
  83. Re:In my opinion... by Remloc · · Score: 1

    I've actually been watching from the beginning, even the "Loose Cannon" reconstructions for the missing episodes. I'm around April of '72,
    The first 2 doctors were interesting for the cheesy effects and acting and obvious attempts to keep it relatively non-violent, having started as a children's program.
    I'm having a really hard time getting past this 3rd doctor/(almost) always on Earth/random new monster shows up and is battled by the navy/"The Master" is always behind it, however.

  84. Start in 2005 by samael · · Score: 1

    The series took a long hiatus from 89-2005, and was then basically rebooted. You can start in 2005 without knowing anything about the show before that point.

    If you go to Amazon.com, they seem to be advertising "the complete first series", etc. - and they're starting from the 2005 series (with Christopher Ecclestone and Billie Piper). Start there, and work onwards. You'll be just fine.

    (If you like it, you can then work your way back and try some of the classic stories. Genesis of the Daleks is well worth it, even if the special effects are a tad dated, what with being 35 years old now.)

  85. Use Amazon Unbox by polyomninym · · Score: 1

    I use Amazon Unbox for all of the new series, including specials. This however doesn't cover everything modern. There seems to be some cartoon that you have to have a proxy to download from BBC. Cheers!

  86. Only Four Good Starting Points by icannotthinkofaname · · Score: 1

    I recently finished watching the whole series. Took me ~13 months to get through the classics, and I spent the few months before that watching the modern series. If you don't want to jump into the middle of something, these are your only options for starting points:

    • "An Unearthly Child" (Season 1, 1963 - start of First Doctor, first Doctor Who story ever)
    • "Spearhead from Space" (Season 7, 1970 - start of Third Doctor; previous Doctor and companions had been simultaneously written out in the previous story)
    • "Rose" (Season 27, 2005 - start of Ninth Doctor; first story in the modern series)
    • "The Eleventh Hour" (Season 31, 2010 - start of Eleventh Doctor; previous Doctor and companions had been simultaneously written out in previous story)

    Personally, I recommend starting with "Rose", watching through the latest stories, and then catching up on the classic seasons if you really feel the need.

    --
    Let q be a radix > 1. I am in ur base-q, killing 10 d00ds.
  87. You Never Forget Your First Doctor by billstewart · · Score: 1

    I liked the First Doctor. I never got hooked on the show, but some years after my parents' kids had all moved out, they started watching Dr. Who on PBS, and I occasionally caught episodes when I was visiting them.

    The special effects in the early shows were great - they'd have some scene in a cave and be dropping big cardboard rocks on people because real Styrofoam was just wayyyy too expensive for their budget, and it was fine. So it was kind of weird seeing the Eccleston versions where they actually were spending a lot of money on visuals.

    I only caught a couple of the David Tennent episodes, and he didn't seem to have really turned into The Doctor by then, unlike Eccleston who did that pretty fast. Haven't seen any with the new kid yet - he looks way too young for the part.

    (Roger Moore? Are you serious? Dalton ok.)

    --

    Bill Stewart
    New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
    1. Re:You Never Forget Your First Doctor by PCM2 · · Score: 1

      I do not get how many people still rave about Eccleston. I enjoyed his episodes, don't get me wrong. But I just never saw him as the Doctor. At all. People rave about his performance; I thought he was just constantly chewing the scenery throughout the entire thing, really gnawing it into a fine mush. I just could not figure out what kind of personality he was trying to project, for most of the time. One minute the Doctor is all serious, then he's all giggling and babbling with this totally forced, maniacal grin. It seemed like there was nothing in between. If anyone acted like that in real life, their friends would be urging them to seek mental help. The costuming also seemed all wrong to me (a black leather jacket? on the Doctor?). Eccleston certainly seems to have succeeded at what they hired him for -- bringing a lot of attention to the show -- but for me he just did not work.

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
    2. Re:You Never Forget Your First Doctor by TheRaven64 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      One minute the Doctor is all serious, then he's all giggling and babbling with this totally forced, maniacal grin. It seemed like there was nothing in between. If anyone acted like that in real life, their friends would be urging them to seek mental help.

      I think that was the point. He'd been responsible for the destruction of his entire species in the Great Time War and then had spent a lot of time alone. He was pretty unhinged, and certainly suffering from post traumatic stress problems. One of the major plot points for the new series has been that he needs to have humans with him to keep him approximately sane.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    3. Re:You Never Forget Your First Doctor by TheRaven64 · · Score: 2

      Haven't seen any with the new kid yet - he looks way too young for the part.

      He's done very well. Becoming younger makes sense, if Time Lord psychology is anything like human. When he was young, he wanted to regenerate into older, more distinguished looking, bodies so that he'd appear mature and wise. Now he's old, and approaching his final regeneration, he's concerned about his mortality and recapturing his youth, so regenerates into a young body.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    4. Re:You Never Forget Your First Doctor by meloneg · · Score: 1

      >

      I only caught a couple of the David Tennent episodes, and he didn't seem to have really turned into The Doctor by then, unlike Eccleston who did that pretty fast.

      You should watch "The Christmas Invasion", David Tennant's first episode. He defines his Doctor very well. And, lives up to it throughout the next several seasons.

    5. Re:You Never Forget Your First Doctor by Xaedalus · · Score: 1

      Agreed. There were two moments that sealed Eccleston for me: the first when he's sealed up with the Dalek and then goes through the battle of wits with it, and the second when he's having dinner with the Slitheen and counters her pleas for mercy. Those two sealed it for me. Eccleston to me captured that perfect blend of fun, antics, and seriousness that the Doctor is.

      --
      Here's to hot beer, cold women, and Glaswegian kisses for all.
  88. Maybe it was the harsh glare of studio lighting by Provocateur · · Score: 1

    ...on everything that came from a UK studio (was it IFC?), but then those lights got really intense out of a BW TV set we had. I couldn't get into it or suspend my disbelief enough to engage. But seeing how some of you have pointed out that it's Science Fantasy, I guess I can breathe more easily now.

    --
    WARNING: Smartphones have side effects--most of them undocumented.
  89. Essential Doctor Who by hagbard23 · · Score: 2

    A friend of mine put this together as a "essential guide" to the classic Doctor Who:

    http://woodelf.wordpress.com/2011/01/27/essential-doctor-who/

    I highly recommend it.

    --
    Dan Bongert <*> http://www.tiltingatwindmills.net
    This is a Chao. A Chao says "Mu."
  90. From Season 1 Episode 1 by Princeofcups · · Score: 1

    If you have not seen An Unearthly Child, then you are not allowed to comment.

    Start at the very beginning. I wish that I had. For the record, I started watching with the 4th Doctor, the first one broadcast in the US.

    --
    The only thing worse than a Democrat is a Republican.
    1. Re:From Season 1 Episode 1 by Tharsman · · Score: 1

      I have seen An Unearthly Child. I have had friends watch it. I had friends start at 2005. I have noticed starting ANYONE that was born in the last 35 years with An Unearthly Child makes it extremely hard to get them interested in the series any further.

      I only recommend going back to the classics (STARTING with An Unearthly Child and going on from there) after they are already hooked with the current continuity and high budget series.

  91. Re:Don't turn your back, don't look away, and don' by Em+Adespoton · · Score: 1

    This has to be one of the best episodes ever... not even eclipsed by the 2010 Angels episodes. My next top picks would be the old episodes that first introduced the Daleks, followed by the ones that filled in their back history.

    Really, you could go about this many ways... I'd suggest looking up an episode guide and picking the theme you want to start with; themes, just like time lords, hop all over the Dr. Who continuum; you don't even need to watch them in order (other than watching Blink before the later Angels episodes).

  92. Re:In my opinion... by PCM2 · · Score: 1

    Avoid Colin Baker and Peter Davidson (especially any with Adric)

    But then you'd be cheating yourself out of the deep sense of contentment that comes when the credits roll on the last episode of "Earthshock"!

    --
    Breakfast served all day!
  93. Start with 1 episode of current Doctor. by SicariusMan · · Score: 2

    I would tell you to start with the season that started with the current Doctor. Then go back and start on a season when a new Doctor starts. Every doctor has his own arc and don't really cross over each other much. In some of the newer ones, you won't make the connection to some of the "older" characters that make guest spots, but then when you work your way back to the season where they show up originally, you'll be like, "Oh, OK I get it now". Someone else put it in another of the comments that the great thing about a time traveling show is that you don't have to watch them sequentially. That's kinda true, but I'd say its nicer to watch the episodes of a season that way, and to watch a Doctor develop from the start of his first season as the Doctor. Good luck with catching up.

  94. Start with Tom Baker by billmarrs · · Score: 1

    I'm biased because he was my first doctor, but I think it's fair to say the show got more serious during Tom Baker's run and it's a very long run.

  95. Not Saying Just Saying by Cr1ms0nB1n0me · · Score: 1

    1) It's written Doctor Who not Dr. Who.

    2) I have watched from the beginning up though the Fox movie (shudder) and into the new Doctors and you cant really skip much because the original run gives you so much on UNIT, the companions and why they are important, the reoccuring villians (Daleks, Cybermen, The Master etc).

    3) Tom Baker is the best Doctor. Followed by Tennant. We should all forget McGann ever played the Doctor (even if it was for only 2 hours and subsequent radio and books events).

  96. For me, always the first doctor by kiore · · Score: 1
    I was 6 years old and I was so scared of the Daleks I had to watch from behind my mother's chair.

    In the 70s I was a teenager & the show was still pretty juvenile and had become self referential so not only did I outgrow it but it sowed the seeds of its own demise.

    The 200x-201x version is much more aimed at an adult audience. I'd suggest starting with it.

  97. Re:Don't turn your back, don't look away, and don' by PCM2 · · Score: 1

    You mean "Midnight," not "Twilight."

    --
    Breakfast served all day!
  98. Re:Don't turn your back, don't look away, and don' by porges · · Score: 1

    Yeah, so I do. Correction acknowledged.

  99. Play the pinball by MobileDude · · Score: 1

    Play the Dr. Who pinball and you'll be set.

    http://ipdb.org/machine.cgi?id=738

    --
    10 MD .\crash 20 CD .\crash 30 GOTO 10
  100. My recommendation by jsprenkle · · Score: 1

    There are two possible ways I would suggest.

    If you're sure you want to watch all of it start with the third Doctor portrayed by Jon Pertwee. Warning: These were produced a long time ago and they require more attention span than most people seem to have. They're charming if you're willing to take them for what they are.

    Alternately I would recommend you start with Christopher Eccleston as the Ninth Doctor. These are paced and produced in a much more modern style so are more popular with less tolerant audiences.

    My personal opinion is Dr. Who really hit it's stride under Eccleston and David Tennant and has gone down hill significantly with Matt Smith. I'm not sure if Matt could do the part justice but it's hard to tell with the mediocre shows after Russell T Davies and Julie Gardner left the show. I will always remember the days my wife and I watched this show together. I hope you enjoy it as much as I did.

    --
    - I've got bad karma because I won't parrot everyone else's opinion
    1. Re:My recommendation by Cr1ms0nB1n0me · · Score: 1

      i agree with the comments on matt smith. it could be his age (28-29) and experience (about 7 years if you include his theatre work) but Peter Davidson (5th doctor) was 30 with about 7 or 8 years of experience... though i didn't like Davidson's Doctor very much. -shrug- The attitude they gave the Doctor for Tennants run he pulled off nicely, he made it believable, something about the way he played the Doctor made me believe he would eff up my day if I crossed him, but Smith is too... silly, dont think that is the right word to describe what i have in my head. Just take the first episode of Smith and watch the end, they try to tie his Doctor to Tennants with the 'Dont cross me' attitude but it just doesnt work because they veer from that in so many episodes (the Dalek episode,and the final episodes)

      Also talking about mediocrity, is anyone looking forward to Torchwood US? I read that and threw up a little in my mouth... the last time the US touched Doctor Who we got the 2 hour swill that is Paul McGann's Doctor... now Starrs has not made anything bad... yet, but I don't personally think the US should touch Doctor Who ever again and leave it in the hands of the British where it belongs.

  101. Re:In my opinion... by Rallion · · Score: 1

    I can think of lots of things that I would hate if I first saw them now, but because I liked them when I actually saw them, I'll like them forever.

    Maybe I liked them because they were good in the context of the time, like a lot of stuff with special effects, animation, etc. that's bad enough by modern standards to be distracting. Maybe I only liked some things because I saw them as a kid. But as bad or simplistic or whatever these things might be by todays standards, and my own current standards, these things get an exception because I liked them once

    I'm not saying classic Doctor Who necessarily fits into this kind of category for everybody, I'm just throwing it out there.

  102. Re:You can safely start with the modern run... by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 1

    I've been a fan of Doctor Who since the Pertwee era, but missed out on everything from Colin Baker to Sylvester McCoy due to non-carriage in my area, only catching a few episodes through local fan groups, until the DVDs came out. I've been watching them as close as possible to original order since, but have been making slow progress (I've gotta stop watching the procedural crime franchises).

    I introduced a friend to Doctor Who starting with Eccleston. We watched everything up to Tennant's last specials, then inexplicably he didn't want to see any more of it, nor anything else. I may have managed to get him to watch "Planet of the Dead" but not "The Waters of Mars". From this and other things, I deduce we are unfriends.

    --
    Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
  103. Re:*So* not a reboot. by Seumas · · Score: 1

    They call it a reboot, of sorts. Even though it isn't really, except a bit in tone. Unfortunately, you're sort of stuck having to refer to it as the "new series" or the "rebooted series", because instead of calling it season 27, 28, 29, 30, and 31 they call it seasons 1 through 5 of the "new series" or the "2005 series". I don't know if that was all a marketing decision or what. :/

  104. One possible way by Seto89 · · Score: 1

    I find your position easy to relate to. I've spent years being aware of the show, somewhat tempted to try it, but the number of season has always put me off. I've spent a large chunk of my life watching all the Stargate (among other series), so I knew that such number of seasons is a big commitment, particularly when I find it hard to relate to the older stuff.

    But then when Season 5 started and all my sci-fi-watching friends were jumping around from happiness, I couldn't resist anymore. So I started at the rebooted Season 1. In retrospect that definitely was a good place to start. It's fairly new, so I could relate to it rather easily. Everything is explained as if it's the first time you see it, all characters and concepts are well introduced. Plus the series picks up the pace quite fast and as soon as you reach Season 2 and the Tenth Doctor (David Tennant) you will find out why he's one of the most popular doctors. Once I went through all the new seasons, ending with the end of Season 5, I suddenly had a lot of time to spare before Season 6 came along. And so I started exploring the original series, the first eight doctors.

    Someone recommended to me to check out the Fourth Doctor and particularly to start with the episode the Ark of Truth and then watch the next few episodes. That was a great idea. I was introduced to the character in an interesting, but not too important episode, then suddenly I was watching one of the key origin episodes in which the Doctor is present at the creation of Daleks. After watching the series since reboot, this was really a big deal. Afterwards I watched a few episodes featuring other doctors. Eight Doctor is just a movie, which is easy to find. The others were a lot harder to track down.

    It turned out that BBC has taped over a lot of their archive tapes, destroying many of the key episodes. That became the number one reason why I didn't try watching the whole series from the very beginning - a lot of it was missing. Amazon surprisingly features a decent collection of a few episodes in its videos on demand. I got a gift card for it when I was buying a textbook, so I tried it and in the end was quite pleased, as I found some episodes I couldn't find anywhere else.

    And so watching the rebooted series and then picking up a few (often random) episodes from the original series worked out quite well. The new series provided a good foundation, so I could follow all of the old episodes...

    --
    There are two kinds of people - those who are radioactive and those who have already decayed..
  105. Holy Crap, we're all gonna be rich! by jeko · · Score: 1

    Cayenne, you did it! You just gave me the idea thats gonna make us all buzzword rich! We're gonna virtualize televisions sets. One TV, many people. One set, but each watcher sees and hears their own show. I get to watch "Damnation Hell: The Bloodening" on the same set at the same time she sees "Wuthering Twilights: Team Gypsy." Arguments over the remote are a thing of the past. We're gonna be rich.

    OK, so anyway, you go ahead and work out the minor details about how to make that happen, and when you get it, just forward them to me so I can file my patent...

    --
    He put his boots up on the table and made a face. "The sig," he smirked. "You can waste your life in search of the sig."
    1. Re:Holy Crap, we're all gonna be rich! by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      I think you misunderstood my subtilty...I meant is she doesn't like it...tell her to go into the other fucking room and watch what she wants if she doesn't like what I'm watching.

      My house....my rules. If she doesn't like it...there's others out there...always...

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    2. Re:Holy Crap, we're all gonna be rich! by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      I actually typed a response detailing how to accomplish this very simply with current TVs, but Window 7 decided to throw up the "Your system has been updated, do you want to restart" dialog box, stealing focus thus turning my last carriage return into a system restart. Arrrrggggg....

      Anyway, I have been saying that this would be simple since I got my first nVidia 3D shutter glasses a decade ago. They used the same method of offering 3D as the current crop of 3D TVs. So, instead of retyping directions AGAIN on how to implement this, I did a quick search and found that Sony has recently patented it using the incredibly obvious solution. Here is a description of how to do it.

      http://singularityhub.com/2010/07/26/sony-patents-turn-3d-tv-into-2-shows-at-once-maybe-you-just-want-video-goggles/

    3. Re:Holy Crap, we're all gonna be rich! by jeko · · Score: 1

      Hi Belial6,

      I just love Slashdot. Thanks for the response. I had no idea someone had ALREADY DONE THIS.

      Wow. Just wow. Thanks for the post.

      --
      He put his boots up on the table and made a face. "The sig," he smirked. "You can waste your life in search of the sig."
  106. William Hartnell by adamofgreyskull · · Score: 1

    You CANNOT just jump in and start watching the rebooted series...you MUST start at the very beginning and watch the episodes in order...

    You know what? If anyone says that, pay no heed. Personally, I think if you're trying to get your wife interested, you should start with the first series of Matt Smith, beginning to end, that way you get a whole story arc which is really accessible and a really great Doctor. I considered recommending you start with the Ecclestone Doctor's first appearance, but he can be a little annoying and there is too much played upon a possible romantic connection between him and Rose, which I didn't enjoy...but your wife might.

    Basically, what icannotthinkofaname said, but I think starting at the first Doctor, or any Doctor before...Tom Baker would turn your wife off it faster than you can blink. Hook her on Matt Smith/David Tennant/Christopher Eccelstone, then go back to the beginning.

  107. There is no canon... by denzacar · · Score: 1

    Also, everything is canon.

    It's a time traveling show in which characters continuously change the outcome of past events. (HA! Get it? Past... events. In a time traveling show that regularly jumps between ancient past and beyond distant future.)

    And if that was not enough to make everything that was ever written/recorded possible in SOME iteration of the wibbly-wobbly timey-wimey... stuff - Eleventh Doctor basically (re)creates a blank slate making any attempt at canonizing past events moot.
    While at the same time remaining a continuity of those events!

    Hilarious, isn't it?

    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
    1. Re:There is no canon... by denzacar · · Score: 1

      Last time I checked, BBC (the entity that hires authors and licenses out all the stories in all the media) was not dead. Yet.

      And if you are holding to that particular trope as an excuse for a canon... well... don't know how to put it to you... that trope limits you to the "original material only". I.e. One single story. EVER!
      Coburn and Webber - i.e. "the original writers" of "the original material" only ever did that one.

      That is unless you are one of those fans that "only use this [trope] as an excuse to ignore any Word Of God that they don't like".
      And that is about as valid as picking any random 5 minutes of any episode and claiming that it is "not canon".

      --
      Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
    2. Re:There is no canon... by Improv · · Score: 1

      Read what I linked you. "Death of the Author" is the idea that anyone may construct a notion of canon/authenticity, and that the author's is not necessarily special. Just reading the title of the link is not enough.

      --
      For every problem, there is at least one solution that is simple, neat, and wrong.
  108. My Pattern by misfit815 · · Score: 1

    I stumbled upon "The Girl in the Fireplace" - a second-season episode of the 2005 reboot - on SyFy and loved it. That got me to watch the whole reboot. When my wife and I had finally "caught up", we actually went back and watched it again, this time incorporating Torchwood into it at the points that the two cross. We had actually tried watching Torchwood once before, and didn't quite make it through the first season. It didn't have quite the appeal. On the second go-around, though, I found that the second season was better than the first, and that the third - short as it was - was probably the best.

    It's also worth noting that the reboot does have some replay value. We caught stuff the second time around that we missed the first time. So, as I've seen others advise here, one method is to start with the reboot, and watch those in order. With or without Torchwood (I can't speak for Sarah Jane).

    Somewhere along the way, I watched the very first episode (felt really Twilight Zone-ish) and was mildly impressed with it. But I also managed to see several clips throughout the years, and had trouble getting past the very low-budget effects. But I've heard plenty of people talk about Tom Baker, so I suppose that option (starting with Tom Baker) is probably not a bad one. By the way, if you go back before Tom Baker, you'll actually find that a few episodes don't even exist anymore. That kind of thing tends to irritate the Sheldon Cooper in all of us.

    So there's my history - take it or leave it.

    --
    Jesus told him, "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one can come to the Father except through me. - John 14:6 NLT
  109. Oh and... by denzacar · · Score: 1

    Tom Baker, David Tennant, Christopher Eccleston, Matt Smith with a special mention of Rowan Atkinson and Joanna Lumley.

    As for the order of watching for those just tuning in - start with the Ninth Doctor and take it to the the end of the current run.
    Throw in Torchwood after it and Captain Jack Harkness appear in the main show, and if you like you may try doing the same with Sarah Jane.
    Although, that one (being a teen show) is on completely opposite side of the spectrum from Torchwood (which deals with some rather adult subjects), with Doctor Who being somewhere around the middle between those two.

    If you like those, pick up the 4th Doctor and after that... experiment.

    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
  110. The IMDB Review Thread by allenw · · Score: 1
    You might want to take a read through this: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0056751/board/nest/175533855

    Someone is watching all of the complete episodes in order. As someone who has watched almost all of the remaining episodes (in fact, I started watching Troughton's War Games episode for the 3rd time last night), it is fascinating hearing an outsider's perspective of some of the episodes.

    I tend to agree with most of what has been said here. For Classic, start with Baker and work your way up. Even though I still think most of Pertwee, Troughton and Hartnell is great to watch, there are a lot of slow episodes in those first three Doctors that you likely won't survive.

    For modern, start with Eccleston (altho he wasn't my favorite) if only because there is a lot of background provided that you'll need for the rest of the (new) series.

  111. Let Netflix be your guide by engineereeyore · · Score: 1

    You can always use the Netflix streaming option to filter your choices. The newest four seasons are currently available via streaming on Netflix, so I'd start there. My wife got me interested in this show and that's where I started. I have to admit, when she makes me watch the old ones, I do often find them cheesy. If you just start with the old ones, I think you won't appreciate them enough to watch them all. However, if you start with the new ones, they will introduce you to most of the classic villains. Once you know them and enjoy them, you'll be interested in understanding their back story. Take for instance the Daleks. Their orignal story is really good, but I enjoyed it as much as I did because I knew them from the newer seasons. I just don't think that the story lines enough will be sufficient to keep your interest given the old special effects. But add in there the desire to understand their origins, and you have motivation to help through the cheesy parts. Just my $.02.

  112. Wrap around by base_chakra · · Score: 1

    This question delights my nerd gland, since I endeavoured to watch all 695 episodes of the classic Who. I started in 2008. The pace and writing of the new series are very different from "classic" Doctor Who.

    Because there are so few landmarks of linearity from one Doctor to the next, I think it's safe to start with whichever Doctor you like best. Since I have good memories of watching Tom Baker episodes when I was a boy, I started with Robot, the first Baker serial. I didn't want to have to wait ages and ages to get to the Baker stuff, and I also didn't want to end on the sour notes of McCoy and McGann. Starting with Baker and then looping back to Hartnell also meant that I would conclude with the transition from Pertwee to Baker, which was perfect.

    I'm now halfway through the Troughton years (Doctor #2). It's pretty arduous slogging through the lost episodes, but you get used to it. I took a break from Who for a while and finished Blake's 7.

    My personal ranking:
    1. Tom Baker (a Doctor who's fun, has presence, conveys brilliance, and shines despite the show's meager budget)
    2. Hartnell (the most dignified and patient doctor; the gentleman scientist)
    3. Pertwee (grey pompadour ftw. He might climb this list someday.)
    4. Davison (hypertensive fun. Cricketing whites 24/7.)
    5. Troughton (too bad many of his episodes are boring)
    6. Colin Baker (a bit angry and dysfunctional)
    7. McGann (what a wimp!)
    8. McCoy (utter retardation)

  113. My Tested and Proven Guide to Jump Into Dr Who by Tharsman · · Score: 1

    I have myself started watching Dr Who recently (in the last 3 years) and also introduced a few friends first hand to the series. As such, I have noticed there is a way that works, and a way that does not work so well, to get started in Dr Who as a virgin.

    Start with the 2005 series (available for streaming in Netflix.) It was designed to be a perfect jump-in point for newcomers to the show. Some of my friends I had to force to finish, others also caught up mid way (even myself I had to force to watch the first few episodes.) Even if you don't like it, I strongly recommend you force you through it (I found the first few episodes bleh myself, but started loving it the minute they got to the episode Dalek.)

    The beauty of this season is it was designed for newcomers all over. It introduces you slowly to the established myths and lore of the Dr Who universe. Some would say you should skip it, and strongly recommend that, but I think that would be a horrible thing to do to yourself.

    Once you are done with Season 1, there is a very short clip called Dr Who Children in Need 2005 special. You really really should see it before going on.

    Once you see that, next is a movie/special: "The Christmas Invasion". Watch that.

    Now you can keep going with Season 2. You will likely LOVE that season, even if you did not liked the first one that much.

    Now again there is a movie/TVSpecial to watch: "The Runaway Bride"

    By this point you will had been introduced to the lead character of a spin-off TV Show: Torchwood. I would advice strongly to watch Season 1 of Torchwood at some point before you finish Dr Who Season 3 as the endings of Torchwood tosses you right before the last 3 episodes of Season 3 of Dr Who. If you follow this list and do go through it, just Watch Torchwood S1 before so you finish it before going beyond the episode Blink. This is optional, but I wish I had seen it in that order. Oh and one warning: Torchwood is NOT family friendly. I would say not even safe for work in many episodes. Also requires you to be VERY open minded. If those things bother you then just ignore Torchwood.

    Then there is a tiny mini clip again, you can find it in youtube. Called "Time Crash"

    It gets followed by a movie called "Voyage of the Damned".

    Then as usual watch Season 4

    Then comes a series of movies:

    "The Next Doctor"

    "Planet of the Dead"

    "The Waters of Mars"

    "The End of Time" (Part 1 and 2)

    Then you watch Season 5.

    Then you watch a new movie/TV Special: "A Christmas Carol"

    Then, you have traveled in time into the future and you get to watch the new TV show that we all are still waiting for.

    BTW, at any point you can go back to Torchwood, although there is another Tie-In with Dr Who, it does not get any buildup from within Torchwood. You will very likely love the main character so it's a cool thing to watch once you are done with all things Dr Who if you are still starving for more.

    At some point you will catch up with everything that has been done in recent times, at that point I recommend you hunt down a website that has all the classic episodes up for streaming (remember NoScript while on that site, it's messy.) You can watch the very first episode there, and if your Dr Who hunger is still strong, you can keep watching those episodes until new episodes come out.

  114. Start with Tom Baker by TreeInMyCube · · Score: 1

    That aphorism definitely applies to me. I began watching Dr. Who in the late 70s/early 80s, and my first Doctor was Tom Baker. My girlfriend at the time even knitted me an 8-foot scarf, which I still have. Start there, because his characterization is accessible and often funny, while still showing courage, skill, and compassion. A great toothy grin, and carries off his derring-do with aplomb. The recent doctors are good as well, though I haven't watched as much of them as I did back in the day.

  115. Random order by martin-boundary · · Score: 2
    You should watch them in completely random order. This is the best way to get the TARDIS time travel experience.

    Also, if you watch them chronologically, then you'll just have weird experiences, like wondering why the doctor keeps wearing the same clothes for years at a time, and nobody commenting about the smell.

    1. Re:Random order by MrNiceguy_KS · · Score: 1

      Timelords don't sweat.

      --
      Redundancy is good And also good.
  116. Re:Tom Baker by ArundelCastle · · Score: 1

    While Tom Baker is my personal favourite, for someone new to the series many of the episodes (especially with Romana II) could be impenetrable. And if you don't warm to K9 immediately he doesn't get any more charming.

    For "classic" Who, always bet on Pertwee. More Brigadier for your buck, too. And you'll get to see when the show got colour.

  117. Starting Point by Rhawk187 · · Score: 1

    It depends on how much of a commitment you are a willing to make. If you just want to try one episode to get a taste. I'd go with Revived Series 3, Episode 10 "Blink." If you just want to try one season, I'd probably go with the most recent Revived Season 5. If you are fairly certain you are willing to commit and just want to know where to start, go with 2005, Revived Series 1. If you are looking for a good Classic Who serial, go with "City of Death."

  118. I can answer this question. by Nyder · · Score: 1

    I'm a big Doctor Who fan (points if you know which episode my name is from) and I understand the series isn't for everyone.

    If your not into black & white TV, old school BBC, or not totally realistic special effects, then your best bet is to start with the Doctor Who reboot, namely, when they picked it up back in 2005. If you enjoy the episodes, then you might find you want to see what all the hub bub is about.

    Note: Everyone has their favorite doctor and suggest you start there.

    I love Tom Baker (and Slyvestor McCoy), but you'd be missing out.

    I suggest you start at the beginning. You can skip the episodes that don't have film of all the parts, because even I find them boring (and i'm a fan).
    Sure, the 1st Doctor is cranky, the episodes are in black and white, and no nudity. But honestly, the stories are pretty good.

    2nt Doctor I like, but then I'm part scottish, so go figure.

    Okay, I guess if you wanted, you could skip out on the first 2 doctors and start it with Jon Pertwee, but I warn you. The writors got really fucking lazy during Jon's years, and we get the same villian for like 20 episodes in a row. Granted, the Master rocks, but I tend to like him more later on myself.

    Tom Baker is probably some of the best episodes you'll find of the older stuff. Do NOT MISS.

    5th & 6th doctor, peeps don't like, mainly the 6th doc, but then what do peeps really know? Some decent stories, okay companions. Do NOT MISS Peri's tits. I repeat, DO NOT MISS Peri's tits. Thank you.

    7th Doctor, Sly McCoy rocks, but the series got cut short. I'm sure Ace was about to do nude scenes, not sure if that would be good, or bad, but i always had a crush on her in the 80's.

    the "8th" doctor, Paul Mcgann, forget about it. Eric Roberts plays the master, enough said. Plus american made, we fucking ruin everything we get our hands on. If you dont' believe me, watch it.

    Then it was dark. Who fans everywhere cried out in terror, etc.

    2005, shit got reboot, but you should be watching that right now anyways.

    After you download the 242gb worth of Doctor Who episodes that is.

    Here's some links, sorry, could not find the big 200+ archive i downloaded (tooke a few months) of all the episodes. never can find it on tpb, but it's there.

    anyways Tom Baker: http://thepiratebay.org/torrent/3494674/Doctor_Who_-_Fourth_Doctor_(Tom_Baker)_-_Complete

    The lame american made movie from 1996: http://thepiratebay.org/torrent/5255446/Doctor_Who_1996_Paul_McGann

    here's some colin baker (6th doctor): http://thepiratebay.org/torrent/5252515/Doctor_Who_1984-1986_Colin_Baker

    2nt doctor: http://thepiratebay.org/torrent/4603553/Doctor_Who-_Patrick_Troughton_Megapack_XViD

    Here's the latest stuff: http://thepiratebay.org/torrent/5974206/Doctor_Who_2005-2010_Complete

    Anyways, Watch the newest stuff first, then probably watch the tom baker. If you need more, then there is still plenty more.

    Enjoy!

    Oh, Please support the BBC & Doctor Who by buying the newest episodes on DVD or Bluray. That is, if you like the series.

    --
    Be seeing you...
  119. easy peasy! by Tumbleweed · · Score: 1

    With over 460 comments, I'm not sure the original author will see this, but here it goes:

    Start with Tom Baker, by far the best doctor ever. Cheesy special effects, but that version of the Doctor is the pinnacle of Doctor-ness. He also had most of the best companions.

    Continue with Peter Davidson if you must, who got better stories and slightly better special effects, but who was an irritating git of a Doctor, and who had the most-irritating companion ever, Teagan.

    Then you may safely skip forward to the new Doctor Who shows that started in 2005.

  120. watching the old series by arthur01 · · Score: 2

    You should be aware that there are episodes that were lost in fires etc. So if you start from the beginning, you might be disappointed. Starting from the new series (2005) is probably OK for the uninitiated. If you watch the old series, you have to be prepared to watch some cheap sets and bad writing. Most of the sets were done with cellophane and papier mache. It is fun to watch, but if you watch the "confidential" series, the commentary refers back to the old series, where necessary.

  121. What are you doing here? by ihaveamo · · Score: 1

    Here's some of the "great" doctor who scriptwriting, down through the ages.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DtG5dK_HaGg

    Seriously though - In Australa, we have been lucky enough to have Doctor Who grace our airwaves through our government-funded ABC channel, which has some sort of loving relationship with the BBC. This means we've always had the latest shows fairly quickly.. I'm a huge Scifi follower, and nothing comes close to Doctor Who at its best... but it needs to be seen at it's best, to appreciate it. Let me say it now - the older shows are dated. Very dated. Woth watching? sure!, but I believe it's first worth seeing at least some of the (great) newer series, with million dollar plus special effects that scifi seems to need to have any following. My opinion? Start at 2005 - (Christopher Eccleston), and then power through to 2010. Go back to the older shows later!

  122. Start with the relaunch by ALeader71 · · Score: 2

    I grew up watching the occasional Dr Who on PBS...the original BBC America. I think it would be hard to watch the low production values today. Stick with the current series starting with Christopher Eccleston in 2004. The production values are much, much higher and the stories aren't serialized. When I was a kid, you'd need an entire afternoon to get though three major plot points. Now, you get a story you can enjoy then move on with your life.

    Watch this series before trying out Torchwood. Things will make a lot more sense if you do. Torchwood is a spin off of the 2004 re-launch.

    --
    Only the dead have seen the end of War. - Plato
  123. 40 years viewer opinion.. by doccus · · Score: 1

    I think after 40 years of the good doctor.. i have an insight.. i never thought i'd still be watching it when i'm old an grey though... In answer to your question.. the turning point for the series when it 'grew up'.. as it were,.. is clearly with the wit and improvisation of Tom Baker.. (around 1973 to somewhere near 1980) I would URGE anyone looking for a starting point to start with his episodes.. ..And I sure wish I had some copies to watch too.. it's been 20 years since I last saw one of those episodes

  124. Where to begin? by MajikJon · · Score: 2

    There are really four epocs of Doctor Who. Epoc 1: The Black & White years. Doctors 1 & 2 (Hartnell & Troughton). The show in its earliest days. While there are things to be enjoyed here for hard core fans (like me) it's probably not for everyone. Unfortunately, many of the shows in this era do not survive, so it's impossible to fully appreciate or judge the first two doctors as fully as we might. Epoc 2: The Cheesy years. Doctors 3 & 4 (Pertwee & Tom Baker). Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed this era immensely. Jon Pertwee is probably my favorite Doctor. But the budgets and production values of this era is like watching a B-movie when you're used to big-budget Hollywood blockbusters. It can be painful. Still, a lot of seminal Doctor Who lore stems from this era, and for a true appreciation of Who, one must really start at the beginning of Pertwee's era and follow through to the end. (If you start with Tom Baker, you miss such formative events as the debut of The Autons, The Master, Sarah Jane Smith, and much of the background of The Doctor himself, as well as the Time Lords.) Epoc 3: The 80's. Doctors 5, 6 & 7 (Davison, Colin Baker, McCoy). Peter Davison was fantastic. Colin Baker was a joke. Sylester McCoy was intriguing, unfortunately the show ended (at least the original run) on his watch, so we didn't see as much of him as we should have. Cheesiness is still evident, but the show was evolving in this era. If you like the Modern Who enough to want to explore more, you could do well to start with the first 5th Doctor episode and see how far your interest takes you from there. Epoc 4: The Modern Era. Doctors 9, 10, 11 (Eccelson, Tennant, Smith). If you can't enjoy this show from the 2005 reboot, then you have no reason to watch anything earlier. The show has evolved into the modern era and become far more than anything before it. As others have suggested, you can watch from 2005 and get the vast majority of good "Who" without missing much. I have been a Who fan for over 20 years, and watched every extant episode at least once (as well as reconstructions of most of the "lost" episodes). I won't encourage anyone to take their interest in Who as deeply as I do (I mean, get a life, already). That being said, my vote would be to give the 3rd, 4th, 5th and 7th Doctors a chance. They all have their charms, and if you like what you see, the others might have something to offer you, as well.

  125. Eccleston 2005! or Matt Smith by wolverine1999 · · Score: 2

    Start with either Eccleston (2005 series) / 9th Doc or 11th Doctor (Matt Smith). Both are good to start.

    Once you get to Tennant (10th) you can review some old eps eg 4th Doctor ones.
    I'd avoid 'web planet' - that was unwatchable to me too.

  126. I'd recommend starting with Tom Baker by Tesseractic · · Score: 1

    I had started watching Dr Who before Tom Baker's time (I remember that I used to hide behind a chair when the Daleks came on), but in my opinion, Tom really brought the character to life, so if you have the choice, start with him. JMHO.

  127. Re:Careful watching anything pre 2007... by unitron · · Score: 1

    ... or whenever it was that the leftwing nutjobs at the BBC decided to bring Doctor Who back (and ruin it).

    You might see what my childhood was like - an all white country, where London wasn't a third world city, and we can't have that, can we.

    White people have the right to have their own countries.

    And if they'd stayed there and not colonized/oppressed/exploited the lands of the darker/more colorful/less pale peoples, those peoples wouldn't have wound up following them home, and they'd still have the whole place to themselves.

    --

    I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.

  128. Re:In my opinion... by somersault · · Score: 1

    It's the same for me, for things like music too. I don't get people who completely dis the music they used to love. I still like everything I used to like. My musical taste just expands with time, rather than shrinking or completely changing.

    --
    which is totally what she said
  129. If you don't want to start with William Hartnell . by ed · · Score: 2

    Then best start with the new stuff, beginning with Christopher Eccleston then watcdh the older stuff as you come to it

    If you want to experience the full thing in "we have no money o vision" and you can't transform yourself to me aged 5 in Scotland on a Saturday night, then try starting with Jon Pertwee then move into Tom Baker.

    I never saw the earlier stuff so can't comment, but those two had some cracking stories, the Green Death, the Autons (put me off Daffodils for years), Pyramids of Mars and some Dalek stories

  130. Please tell us more by WaroDaBeast · · Score: 1

    Enquiring minds want to know.

    --
    "The body may heal, but the mind is not always so resilient." -- Deus Ex: Human Revolution
  131. Start with 2005 by AigariusDebian · · Score: 1

    Just start with the 2005 revamp. It is not dated, it assumes many of the viewers have no idea what is going on and it is fun. Also I would recommend watching the corresponding episodes of Doctor Who Confidential right after each episode. These 'making of' really explore the back story, are very funny and often show relevan bits from the old shows, so that you can understand what is really going on. :)

  132. Three at once by Retranca · · Score: 1
    I started three simultaneous timelines:
    1. Tom Baker. That's the fourth doctor, the one I could watch when I was a child on the Galician Television.
    2. Christopher Eccleston, the ninth doctor. The reimagined series can be watched without knowing anything about the former.
    3. William Hartnell. The very beginning of the show. Unfortunately, there are some missing episodes, reconstructed from pictures and audio recordings, not very amusing.
  133. Do you collect comics too? by trevc · · Score: 1

    I would suggest you and your wife find something more worthwhile to do with your lives.

  134. It doesn't matter in terms of backing story. by Pinky · · Score: 1

    As someone who has watched just about every doctor who made it really doesn't matter where you start in terms of backing story. It's not like the show has been particularly self consistent. The character of the doctor is supposed to be a big enigma so as far as learning about the character or the overall story arc it doesn't matter.

    if you're looking to watch a bunch of classic doctor who then I'd go for the 4th Doctor series. These are the classics. There are a batch in the middle that have Douglas Adams as the editor (and sometimes writter) that are very funny. "City of death" typifies the style. The third doctor isn't bad either. I'd also recommend watching the very first episoide of doctor who ever made as well. It's insanely good for a show that old.

  135. Christopher Eccleston by sesshomaru · · Score: 1

    "But I know my wife would not watch a show that dated, though she is a science fiction fan herself and enjoyed a few seasons of Torchwood. "

    Here's the thing, I'm not going to recommend Pertwee or Baker to anyone who has a problem with things that are dated. However, if you were going to watch the Eccleston series I suggest you find the time to watch Terror of Autons (Pertwee) and Genesis of the Daleks (Baker) on your own before you start watching the new show with your wife.

    --
    "MIT betrayed all of its basic principles."
  136. Re:Eccleston by oh_my_080980980 · · Score: 1

    IT'S NOT A REBOOT!!! How does someone who watch Doctor Who not know this??? It's a continuation.

  137. Start with Eccleston by Chelloveck · · Score: 1

    As others have said, start with the modern (2005 onward) era. It's not a reboot of the series in the sense that the new Battlestar Galactica was. It carries the history (and baggage) of all the earlier shows, but it's plenty accessible if you've never seen any of them. And it benefits from having modern production values, as opposed to the campy B-movie production the series had before.

    Each season has an overall story arc, so it's helpful to watch the shows within a season sequentially. Most episodes stand on their own, so watching them sequentially isn't strictly necessary. Seasons build upon one another, too. Watch them in order if you can, but don't worry about it if you can't.

    And don't expect rigorous continuity. It's a fun adventure show. It's not hard science fiction. Sit back, enjoy the ride, and don't think too hard about the Doctor casually doing something in one episode that in a previous episode would have destroyed all time and space.

    --
    Chelloveck
    I give up on debugging. From now on, SIGSEGV is a feature.
  138. where to start opinion by themib · · Score: 1

    I'm consider myself a long time fan of Dr. Who. I started watching some time during the fourth doctor (Tom Baker). I have fond memories when I was really young watching the show with my father in the late 70s and early 80s. I continued to watch the who up until 89 when it died. I was thrilled when I hear that they were making a made for TV Dr Who movie. I wasn't as thrilled when I finally saw it. I was also thrilled when I heard that BBC was rebooting the series in like 2004ish.

    I've given some thought to where I would tell people where to start with Dr Who, and I feel that it is dependent on the person in question. If you can tolerate old black and white low budget TV shows then by all means start at the beginning. If you can't, but can tolerate color low budget TV shows with better, but still cheesetastic special effects then I recommend one of the most popular Dr's of all time Tom Baker (1974). If you want modern special effects then start with Eccleston (aka season 1) from 2005. The show is semi self referencing though, so starting earlier you have more background for the things that you learn in the newer series. The later in the series that you start the less nostalgia you will have. Of course since your just getting around to watching it now I don't think that the nostalgia factor would really do much anyway. You do not have to have watched earlier seasons to understand what is going on though. Dr Who is episodic enough to stand on it's own.

    --
    The Man in Black
  139. Start with the Ninth Doctor, episode "Rose" by axl917 · · Score: 1

    (didn't realize I was logged out, ignore the similar post from 'anon coward', haha)

    I faced a similar situation a few years ago. I had watched a bit of the Tom Baker era (#4) but really not much since then. What I found was that they made a theatrical film in the mid-90's with doctor #8, but IMO after watching that, it served more as a code for the earlier series (as it began with #7 being killed) than as a setup for the next, which was not revived til around 2004.

    "Rose" begins with the Ninth Doctor, but there's no real connection to the movie; he at some unseen point already regenerated, so it really is starting from scratch.

    Enjoy!

  140. Where to start? Season 13! by Markvs · · Score: 1

    Maybe it's because this is where I started (as a youngin' back in 1980)... Start with "Pyramids of Mars", which is a great primer episode. If you like it, then watch The Android Invasion. If you can stomach the production values of THAT, you can watch any old Doctor Who episode with impunity! Then move onto "Brain of Morbius" and "Seeds of Doom". Now that you've gotten a decent dose of Tom Baker... go watch "The Five Doctors". This will get you a solid basis with the other characters and Doctors. "The Three Doctors" is optional, IMO unless you really like one of the first three.

    But the best way to start is to watch the first and last episodes of each Doctor from 1-7, (read: 14 episodes) then start the modern series with Christoper Eccleston.
    I also believe these are episodes ANY Whovian needs to have seen, (besides the first and last of any Doctor):

    William Hartnell (Doctor #1): The Daleks, The Dalek invasion of Earth
    Patrick Troughton (Doctor #2): The Tomb of the Cybermen
    Jon Pertwee (Doctor #3): Ambassadors of Death, The Time Warrior
    Tom Baker (Doctor #4): The Masque of Mandragora, The Invasion of Time, Full Circle/State of Decay/Warrior's Gate
    Peter Davidson (Doctor #5): Black Orchid, Arc of Infinity
    Colin Baker (Doctor #6): Trial of a Time Lord (I'm probably going to get killed for this, but if you watch it all in the same week and in order, it's one of the best stories ever written for DW!)
    Sylvester McCoy (Doctor #7): Ghost Light

    --
    46. The Hobo smiles, his eyes glaze over, and he burps. "Beware the man who has lived longer than the Wasteland."
  141. Re:Don't turn your back, don't look away, and don' by jarlsberg71 · · Score: 1

    While Blink frightened me somewhat, Nothing scared the pants off me like "The Empty Child"

    --
    E8B8B
  142. Re:In my opinion... by HikingStick · · Score: 1

    Actually, the campy cheesy-ness of those early episodes is what endeared Dr. Who to me. That only increased my wonderment and appreciation for the newest series, since the effects have much matured since then.

    I also must say that I really liked Pertwee as the third Doctor.

    --
    I use irony whenever I can, but my shirts are still wrinkled...
  143. Start with the new series by sarbonn · · Score: 1

    I started watching Dr. Who with the brand new television series (which is aptly referred to as Season 1. This is the latest version of the property, and in it, you'll watch at least 3 Doctors, and MOST IMPORTANTLY, it will help make sense of what exactly is going on with the doctor in teh first place. After I watched the current edition of the series, all the way to the current doctor, I then started going back and watching the older versions of the doctor and got a great sense of what was going on, and enjoyed it. I realize having done it this way that if I would have started from the very beginning, it's very possible I never would have made it a few episodes further just because of the age of the show. But now I was able to go back and watch those earlier ones through a sense of nostalgia, and then enjoy them just as much. That's my advice, seeing as that's how I did it. I, too, was one of those who never watched it, convinced it wasn't going to be something I'd enjoy. I was wrong.

    --
    Sarbonn's blog: http://www.sarbonn.com/blog
  144. How I got my wife hooked by ab0mb88 · · Score: 1

    Start with the tenth doctor (David Tennant) and Rose unless she can make it through the ninth doctor (Christopher Eccleston) without getting bored so she is caught up on the dynamic. My wife was just ok on the ninth, but liked Rose enough to watch. David Tennant is the doctor as far as she is concerned and she is a true convert since him.

  145. Re:Don't turn your back, don't look away, and don' by meloneg · · Score: 1

    Um, if you want a no-prior-knowledge episode, it really doesn't get any better than "Blink". At least three, er four, characters have to have the Doctor explained to them in that ep. In addition, it has THE BEST description of non-linear time ever!!!

  146. How about you read the entire text on the trope... by denzacar · · Score: 1

    And not just the first line?

    In the fan community, this has changed into the idea that something is only canon if it appears in the original source material, and thus any Word Of God has no more weight to it than any piece of fanon cooked up by the fans. Though some fans honestly hold this opinion, many only use this as an excuse to ignore any Word Of God that they don't like. Some fans can even take this further, and use this to ignore parts of original source material they don't like, per the Fiction Identity Postulate. A recent example would be the Harry Potter fans who ignored or even protested J. K. Rowling's comment that she thought of Dumbledore as gay.

    This is a given in works where the authors don't hold copyright and can be replaced, especially Shared Universes; if a writer is fired and replaced by another, anything the old writer has stated in interviews can be (and often is) freely Jossed by the new writer.

    Also, note the "a concept from the field of literary criticism" part.
    You know... criticism... as in "interpretation". As in "how it all ACTUALLY happened" explained by the person who DID NOT write the story.

    Not that that can't be fun too. Ever seen Dante's Peak? Ever seen it as a Terminator/James Bond crossover?
    Pay attention next time to evil robots, character back-story, absent fathers, female mayors with affinity towards waitressing living away from the main hubs of civilization, and how fate treats those who stand in the way of Sarah Connor and James Bond romance and him becoming the stepfather/mentor of the savior of humanity. The story culminates in a temporal rift that causes a rupture in Earth's crust, destroys an entire town and half a mountain - just so that particular time-line could occur.

    But that is not the "official" story. Nor would it be continued in that vein.
    Which is a pity. It would surely beat anything post T2 and Die Another Day.
    What was it those two recent supposedly 007 movies had the apparently immortal secret agent do? Ah, yes... Win a card game against a guy who cries when he gets upset and chase around a guy stealing water.
    And the less is said about the last Terminator the better.

    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
  147. The best Doctor Who story to start with... by Terminus32 · · Score: 1

    ...is Death to the Daleks, a real gem of a story!

    --
    http://nathanlindsell.blogspot.com/
  148. I'd start with Jon Pertwee by dragonard · · Score: 1

    Catch The Dead Planet from Hartnell's work; don't bother with the rest. There are damned few episodes of Troughton's work that survived the BBC purges intact, and it's downright painful to watch the kinescopes of those that did. (This is too bad; Troughton's a good actor.)

    Start with Jon Pertwee--the first decent doctor. Watch him and Tom Baker. Don't bother with Peter Davison. Colin Baker's only worth watching to catch up with DW continuity in the Trial of a Time Lord thread. I personally love Sylvester McCoy's work, but that's me.

    Skip Eccleston altogether--a potentially interesting character development that never got close to being realized. Go right to Tennant; you could watch his stuff twice over if you're so moved. I cannot abide Matt Smith, but again--that's me.

    I'm still lobbying for a female Doctor for the next incarnation.

  149. Re:How about you read the entire text on the trope by Improv · · Score: 1

    I'm referring to the field of literary criticism version of the trope, not the fandom one.

    I'm not interested in the Terminator stuff, sorry.

    --
    For every problem, there is at least one solution that is simple, neat, and wrong.
  150. Something for everyone by sjames · · Score: 1

    It's really a matter of what you like. There's a lot to choose from spanning several decades. For the modern viewer, it might be easiest to start with the new series with Christopher Eccleston. The earlier series has mostly good writing but truly terrible special effects.

    Depending on your tastes, the effects in the old series may detract from or enhance your enjoyment. The bad effects, in a sense, made it what it was. They HAD to have good writing to keep people watching. Given their low budget and production schedule, they actually did a decent job and even if not spectacular they were sometimes quite creative.

  151. Re:How about you read the entire text on the trope by denzacar · · Score: 1

    I'm referring to the field of literary criticism version of the trope, not the fandom one.

    Jolly!

    But the specific target of your referral is not the issue at all - the trope you pointed at illustrates very precisely the circumstances that correspond to your case.
    You are taking one part from the continuing story, written over many decades by many commissioned writers, and claiming that only the part you have arbitrarily chosen to be "true" actually IS "true".
    Regardless of "word of god", or the fact that you are accepting the logic in use up to an arbitrary point in the story - but you find it unacceptable beyond that point.

    In other words, you preaching the "Death Of The Author" puts you right smack in the middle of "My Doctor is the ONLY REAL Doctor" fan-group.
    You're not just referring to the trope - you are also an example of it.
    But that does not make your position any more correct than say... a man caught speeding arguing with the police how the speed limit is set too low.
    Or someone claiming that the character of Superman can't really fly - only jump really high/far.

    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
  152. Re:How about you read the entire text on the trope by Improv · · Score: 1

    Did you think I'm not aware of this? I not only am aware of this, I advocate it. Everyone should build/maintain their notions of canon for any story where they take an interest. There is no truth in these matters, only interpretations. People should not consider the BBC to be the only authority on the versions of the stories they have in their heads. Stories branch, and they belong to every individual.

    --
    For every problem, there is at least one solution that is simple, neat, and wrong.
  153. Yeah, well... by denzacar · · Score: 1

    Next time YOU write a storyline spanning two centuries be sure to remember to stick to that.

    Considering that in this case there wouldn't be ANY stories without the BBC I do believe that they have a thing or two to say on the subject.
    Particularly since they are practicing a VERY open-minded approach to it.

    Did you think I'm not aware of this? I not only am aware of this, I advocate it. Everyone should build/maintain their notions of canon for any story where they take an interest. There is no truth in these matters, only interpretations. People should not consider the BBC to be the only authority on the versions of the stories they have in their heads. Stories branch, and they belong to every individual.

    I don't think that you are not aware of it.
    I just feel that you are not aware how... silly and... childish... and fallacious that is.

    You know... Just like that "Superman can't really fly" guy out there somewhere.

    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
    1. Re:Yeah, well... by Improv · · Score: 1

      You really haven't made an argument here, just insulted my position.

      --
      For every problem, there is at least one solution that is simple, neat, and wrong.
    2. Re:Yeah, well... by denzacar · · Score: 1

      Well, some arguments can't help but to insult if you invest too much in the contrary position.

      --
      Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens