There's always the new organization called Torchwood.

I'm just glad with that even with all these haters here that it will still be hugely popular in the UK and I will still get to see all of Series two.

Part of the reason I like watching Godzilla movies is the dumb dialogue delivered in deadly seriousness. "Doctor Who" has a good handle on that, so I'll keep watching. About 3/4 of the opinions in the thread seem similar to mine, so these threads are going to be pretty dead if we all leave.

It doesn't matter. We still have the season 2 thread.

Upon reviewing my previous post it seems it was only directed at you but that doesn't make your above statement any less true.

I'll bet we could manage.

But to "stay on target", I liked this ep just as much as the other ones. I know I'm not getting Bleak House on Masterpiece Theater, but then I wouldn't want to watch that every week with a Coke and popcorn, either.

I'll admit that most (95%) of the soldier dialogue was extremely lame upon a third viewing. But I still love the episode for Eccleston's performance and giving a Dalek more to do than shout at the top of its lungs.

For those of you who aren't watching anymore - thanks for making it to the halfway point. Sorry it wasn't your cup of tea.


Tho...you are gonna be missing Capt. Jack in a few episodes. Eh!....not enough to stick around, huh? Ah well. I tried.

I love Captain Jack. The epiosdes with him add a whole new dynamic.

I grew up watching Doctor Who in syndication on PBS. I fondly remember the Jon Pertwee and Tom Baker years..... but what I think is missing from this new Doctor Who series is the serialization. Watching a serialized 30 min show was much more captivating than seeing all these episodic 60 minute shows....
and no, the handful of 2 parters do not count.

I miss the blocks of episodes from the original series. It really hurts the show in my opinion. This new version is certainly watchable, and at times fun, but it's not nearly as interesting as the original series, and could so easily be if it wanted to.

I completely agree with that point, but I think the realities of syndication force shows to become a lot more "one and done" now. Which is pretty unfortunate.

I'm new to Doctor Who and like the show plenty and plan on sticking with it, but I don't get how this is "the episode". I've liked everything that has come before just as much, if not better, than "Dalek". Maybe it's because I don't know the history, but the Dalek seemed like a pretty lame threat.

One thing that get on my nerves beyond measure was the filter they put on the Dalek's speech. There were times when I couldn't understand what he was saying. I know that is how they talk, but still it was VERY grating.

When's the ep with Simon Pegg come on?

I guess most of us Who-geeks have such fond memories of all things Dalek, that to get a lot more into their motivation and mechanics may of artifically "inflated" this episode in our memories.

I still like this one the best of first season though.

Simon Pegg shows up

The problem I have with Doctor Who and the Dalek whining about being the last of their kind is....THEY HAVE TIME MACHINES! (The Daleks must have them too since they were in the time war). Go back before your race got wiped out and tell them how to avoid it or bring a few with you so they don't all get wiped out.

They semi-explain that in a future episode, how if someone dies and you go back in time to stop it, time has a "wound" in it and there are creatures which go to heal it. I won't give too much away though.

Keep watching.

Same here. A shame really. I guess us old timers are looking at the show through rose-colored glasses. Probably just not enough action to keep mainstream US audiences interested. But hey, as long as it remains a big hit in England, at least they'll keep making 'em.

I am curious though. I was watching the fist Dalek episode (1963) on DVD over the weekend and they all seemed rather moderate voiced and coldly logical. I wonder at what point they switched over to the slightly hysterical, screaming Daleks we have today?

I suspect you've missed the fact that this is referred to as a TIME WAR. Not a conventional war. In a time war both sides have time machines. In a conventional war I try to shoot my enemy. In a time war instead I try to stop him ever being in a position to shoot at me. I try to kill his grandparents as children, to blow up his home planet before his race ever developed fire, let alone weapons, etc. Meanwhile he fights back trying to stop me being born etc. With me not born I can't kill his grandparents.

Paradoxes are no doubt the order of the day. Nature itself rebels against this sort of war and takes its own hand in the outcome. As we'll see when a paradox is created in a later episode this season. Nature's involvement is consistent with modern war, consider for example biological wars with nature breeding immunities, cures, and maybe bigger beasties rising from the muck wiping out both participants.

A Time war would be exceptionally complex and given the limited nature of the human mind to deal with paradox probably not something I can see them even attempting for TV.

I disagree. Multi-arc shows have flourished in the last 10-20 years, and most of them are still in syndication somewhere. Are you saying that Bewitched or the original Trek aren't "one and done"?

Besides, there isn't much of a syndication market in Britain, at least not how Americans think of the term.

My original statement stemmed from a comment I either read or heard specifically talking about how Dr. Who isn't able to do cliffhangers as often in today's age of television. I don't remember where, of course.

The death caul sounds:

That second Sci-Fi season isn't looking too likely, I guess.

Those rating numbers really don't mean anything without knowing what the ratings are for other Sci-Fi shows, as well as the ratings for the repeats. This isn't a network show.

True. I wonder how those numbers compare to their 'Hit' shows like Stargate, and BSG?

Compare it to just last week's episode and it's a 20% drop in share and viewers. That can't be good any way you look at it.

The season finale of BG got a 1.9 rating: http://www.astro.cornell.edu/~springob/bsgratings.html

If the ratings bounce back up to where they were, I'm sure that's a good level for it.

From TV Guide:


Surfer Girl
by Angel Cohn

Who New

If I had known that Doctor Who was as funny as it is, I wouldn't have waited so long to watch it. I had visions of it being a heavy sci-fi drama, but instead, I was delighted to discover that it is a crazy, time-traveling romp with the mysteriously sexy Doctor (that wicked smile and accent, mmmm... ) and the spunky and spirited Rose (if only I had her nerve!). From the moment Rose exited the TARDIS and walked around it puzzled and then went back in, I was hooked. Rose and her insatiable curiosity is something I keep marveling at, especially since she has no "superpowers" to speak of, unless you count a bronze medal in under-7s gymnastics. The show is the perfect combo of sci-fi, fantasy, humor and drama. It will totally keep me more than placated while Battlestar Galactica is on hiatus. Now I'm curious about the rest of the Who world: Are the other incarnations just as funny? Please tell me there is a nice Whovian out there willing to steer this newbie in the right direction as to where to begin in the Who oeuvre.