As some peeps may be aware from the advertising all about the place, this Easter saw the arrival of the new Dr Who, Matt Smith, and from what i've been hearing since....it sounds like he is already a favourite of the experts.
I am not a die-hard fan myself and I have never seen any of the episodes from the 60s or 80s era, but in the mid-90s the BBC started showing re-runs of the 70s shows which spanned the era of both John Pertwee and the ever popular Tom Baker....so I watched these aswell as the movies with Peter Cushing which used to be on TV quite often.
When the new era came about with the introduction of (local lad!) Christopher Eccleston I watched the first few episodes to see what it was like and i've kept watching since, I was a bit dubious about David Tennant's portrayal at first but likened to it later on with the thought that it gave the character more depth.
I know a few hardcore Dr Who fans whom I wouldn't dare give my own opinion to.....they can get quite violent about their passion......and up until recently they had been telling me how David Tennant's portrayal was up there with the best of them. But it sounds like the creators have hit the right note with the latest Doctor because after only the pilot episode screened just last week they are telling me that Matt Smith's Dr Who portrayal is already the best ever.
I myself wasn't expecting much based on what i'd seen before watching it, but I was actually really impressed with the way they had wrote this particular episode to bring in the new Doctor.
But what I wasn't so sure of was the change in the opening title sequence.
The opening for the previous series was very modern and quirky, I thought it was ok and it fit the mood of the series fairly well.
And with the new sequence they have changed the typography to give it a feel of the original series....which again ties in with this new characters traditional image, the nice use of the letters to make up the tardis in the sequence is quite a nice feature. But i'm not sure about the sequence as a whole, the music seems to be lacking something which underwhelms the piece.....and the graphics look a bit too clean and perhaps not chaotic enough. What do you think?
My mam watched this with me and she actually thinks it's much better, purely because "there's no flashing in this one".
9 April 2010
comment
digg this
add to reddit
add to delicious
add to technorati
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
That read so badly. I'm so tired.
pah - humbug!
doctor who is meant to be a timeless character, several hundred years old, with the wisdom of the aeons floating round in his timelord bonce. having him played by some vacant spotty twelve year-old, who looks like a refugee from hollyoaks is just the BBCs latest piss-poor attempt to appeal to make the programme 'cool', 'wicked', 'happening' and whatever other 'street' words they probably throw around at their production meetings.
mind you, being the geriatric that i am, i grew up on jon pertwee and tom baker, so am a bit biased. now there were proper dr. whos for ye!
DOCTOR WHO = POO
Hehe....there, there boys....
Usually i'd agree with you Stio, Pertwee will always be my favourite purely because I grew up watching him.....but regardless of the fact that most episodes of these new brood of Doctors are really crap, some odd episodes are excellent (usually the ones which use crafts rather than CGI). It's just a shame that most people don't watch long enough to see them....
Post a Comment