Doctor Who

The only bad thing I can think about the Doctor Who TV movie is that it didn't become a new series. Paul McGann did an excellent job as the Doctor. Hopefully, he'll get another chance to play the role again someday. Loved the new TARDIS console room as well. The movie did a fine job in appealing to both long-time Doctor Who fans and people unfamiliar with the show.

It is now twenty years since the US/UK co-production of Doctor Who: The Movie was broadcast. Shown seven years after the cancellation of the television series and nine years before the relaunched series with Christopher Eccleston.

It was the only new Who in the 1990s. It also brings a lot of ingredients that was used in the relaunched series as Russell T Davies studied what it did right and what it got wrong.

Sylvester McCoy returns as the seventh Doctor, he gets shot and after receiving botched hospital treatment, regenerates into Paul McGann's eighth doctor.

The Tardis lands in San Francisco in 1999. The Master escapes in a snakelike form from the Tardis and plans to take control of the Eye of Harmony once he has occupied the body of a paramedic (Eric Roberts).

The Doctor must find a beryllium atomic clock and stop the Master with the help of Dr Grace Holloway.

British director Geoffrey Sax made use of the higher budget with good use of special effects even though he was hampered with a reduced number of shooting days.

The Tardis is much bigger but I guess the HG Wells like interior setting does not make it look like a Gallifreyan time machine.

The visuals were grand and obviously some of the morphing techniques were inspired by films such as Terminator 2.

The casting of Paul McGann was the master stroke, with the 60 minutes screen time he had, you really felt that he was the Doctor. A Byronesque romantic (he even got to have a kiss) and man of action.

It was a shame we have seen so little of McGann's time lord apart from the mini adventure, The Night of the Doctor; although there are plenty of Eighth Doctor audio adventures.

I also liked the malevolent interpretation of the Master by Eric Roberts who really pushes up the dial with his campiness when he puts on the time lord regalia. He shifted the emphasis of the Master from the moustache twirling villain of Anthony Ainley and it has been carried on by the subsequent Master's since then, male or female.

The story was not that great, you felt it needed a bit more reworking and it had rather a lot of continuity which was fine for fans of the original show, but what about new viewers?

A point not lost in the 2005 re-continuation which started afresh and only added continuity in small measures over subsequent seasons.

Some of the elements of the television film might have introduced a few groans. The cloaking device to describe the Tardis chameleon circuit and the Doctor being half human. However it was a lot less Americanised than people feared and had it contained lots of links to the television series.

There were a segment of fans who were disappointed after this was shown in 1996. Yet the movie received very good viewing figures in the UK and two decades on it was worth revisiting McGann's outing.

The summary says it all: Oh, dear.

I don't particularly like it when Hollywood attempts to "glamourize" an existing phenomenon in order to rope in lots and lots of new viewers (to make money, of course, what other reason can there be?) but I've grown to accept the fact that it's an established part of the entertainment business. I approached this movie with what I hoped was an open mind, and I was even slightly intrigued by the first five minutes or so of the movie...

This changed, of course, when suddenly stuff started blowing up, pointless FX started popping up all over the place, and the scriptwriters apparently forgot that they were writing for DOCTOR WHO and seemed to think that they were employed by Chris Carter and the X-FILES, as they started a direct rip-off of the black oil creature, which is suddenly all that's left of the Master. (That this flies in the face of all previous background established by a show that had run for over twenty-five years is only to be expected; after all, it was only a cheesy little British sci-fi show and everyone KNOWS that Hollywood knows best, after all!) I was left with my mouth hanging open, aghast at the mess to which I was being subjected.

Paul McGann tried. God, how he tried. I can almost see him as the Doctor if I squint. This has nothing to do with the man's acting ability, which is superb, nor does it have to do with his comparatively young age--he was about the same age as Peter Davison was when he took over the role, after all. I just could not believe in a Doctor who was playing second fiddle to a completely new and fictitious TARDIS--say, last time I looked, wasn't the Eye of Harmony something to do with Rassilon back on Gallifrey?

Let us mercifully pass over the spectacle of the Doctor's first on-screen kiss--except to say that if he was never tempted by some of the companions in his past (particularly Romana, who at least was of the same species!) then why the heck would he be tempted by some jittery Earth woman who didn't particularly like him?

Please, o scriptwriter, if you're going to use characters and equipment that have been established over a quarter of a century, does it not make sense to have some passing familiarity with what you are writing? Or am I being ridiculous?

Never mind. At least I still have access to all of the videos of the classic episodes. Be sure that this travesty is one that I have zero interest in acquiring. If you're a fan of the television series, avoid this movie or spend the duration of it weeping for the mess they've made of DOCTOR WHO. If you've never seen the series and are a big fan of on-screen stuff that is really special effects in search of a movie, well, this will be right up your alley. Just don't subject a true fan to this nightmare, please.

At last people can stop taking the proverbial out of the special effects in Dr Who! Instead they can take the proverbial out of the limp plot (if you can call it that). Eric Roberts isn't a patch on either of the previous incarnations of the Master. Paul McGann, however, makes an original Doctor and it's a shame a potentially interesting incarnation of the great Time Lord wasn't allowed to develop. There was a lot of complaining about the kissing scene, but I personally didn't see what was wrong with it as long as the Doctor doesn't turn into James Bond or Captain Kirk. Anyway, since the Doctor has a grand-daughter (Susan) then he must have done more than kiss a woman at some point in his life! But I did see what was wrong with the 'half-human' business. Can't people accept somebody who is an alien?

This film certainly has its moments and shows great potential for a new series, but it's just a shame Fox couldn't get their act together and make that series instead of allowing it to fall back into the clutches of the money-minded BBC where it'll probably never be seen again.

Not an example of Dr Who at its best by any means, but if you're a fan of the program like me then it's worth watching just to see the Doctor back in action, if only for one adventure.

Whenever anyone talked about the possibility of America doing "Dr. Who" (especially after BBC cancelled the show), people would joke, "Oh, right! They'd add car chases and gun fights and the Doctor would fool around with his companions!" Then they'd have a hearty laugh at these stereotypes of Hollywood, confident that they were being sarcastic and, if it ever DID happen, certainly people involved with the show would try to preserve the sensibilities of the series. That'll show 'em for over-estimating the intelligence of our media! I think America should revive the Lend-Lease Act, providing funding for any future movies but letting the Brits actually make them. In turn, the BBC should file for a gun law exemption so they can shoot any Fox producer trying to visit the set.