while i enjoy both old and new who, i will point out the vast difference between a series which functioned as such (to wit: a
serial, and including the trademark of such a format: the cliffhanger), which took varying amounts of time to tell varying stories, many of which directly continued into one another, and a series that is merely a collection of one-hour one-offs. i think the great building subtlety of the decades of original who is lost amidst the bright shininess of nuwho, and is only used as fodder to bring gravitas to quick-fix scenarios. not to be
too much of an old fuddy-duddy (for the umpteenth time) but it seems that the new series is more popular with much younger viewers unaccustomed to a more subtle pace, whereas the die-hard adherents of oldwho were more likely to have grown up watching not only those serials, but also "slow" tv shows like star trek (the original one), and whatnot (i will confess to olddudeitude when i acknowledge my shock that star trek tng is older than many people on these boards).
just a point on production:
the original dr who programs were never given preferntial treatment by the bbc, even though they quickly became insanely popular; their budget was never more than other bbc programs in that time format, which explains a lot of the "shoddy" props/costumes/sets. also, special effects for the show were largely produced as filming occurred, with almost no post-production available to the directors. i think what carried those admittedly weak effects was the quality of the storylines and the likeability and "realness" of the characters, which allowed for the ready suspension of the audience's disbelief. i see the effects in (particularily the tennant era) newer episodes, and because they want to make it so slick, it looks even more markedly fakey.
i just sit here in my cave and absorb your facts and figures.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/03/2010 09:24PM by blackliner.