Half-way
So, now that we are halfway through the second series (or thereabouts) what do people think about what we have seen so far.
So far I have been quite impressed with the episodes we have seen, there hasn't been an episode I have particularily disliked (well I wasn't to impressed by New Earth) and the last two parter was excellent.
I still, however, do not like David Tennant as the Doctor. I was hoping that six episodes in my initial fears would have been wiped out but I still find his Doctor way too annoying and way too up on his own arse. After the cliffhanger to Rise of the Cybermen I thought that he might have met someone who he might have been afraid of, but no, by The Age of Steel he was back to his usual cocky self.
In general though I have really enjoyed this series so far, but I don't think it is better than series 1.
Thoughts anyone?
















I'm enjoying it more at this point than I was with (new) Season 1.
Rose - alright
End - alright
Unquiet - good
alien - below par
ww3 - alright
dalek - good
Wheras this season so far has been, for me :
New - mediocre
Tooth - good
School - good
Girl - good
Rise - good
Age - great
...so it's a winner, plus it's built up in quality better. And in a contrast, I've 'accepted' Tennant a lot quicker as the Doctor than I did with Eccleston...perhaps that could partly be due to being familiar with the new format and look of this updated Doctor Who. First season it was almost a bit of culture shock.
Posted by: Ryushinku | May 23, 2006 at 16:28
Not enjoying it quite so much, but probably just because the first season raised my expectations so far. 'Tooth and Claw' and 'The Girl in the Fireplace' are the only ones I've really liked so far, with 'New Earth' and 'School Reunion' the weakest. On the other hand, the hit ratio's the same as this time last time, when 'Unquiet Dead' and 'Dalek' were the ones that hit all the buttons. I was probably more prepared to overlook the shortcomings of 'Rose' and 'World War Three' (I did like 'Aliens of London', parts of which were among the best of the season), just because it was so good to have the damn thing back and not be an embarassment.
As for Eccleston versus Tennant - Eccleston didn't hit the mark for me until 'Dalek'. Before that, too much forced wackiness (which, with hindsight, makes perfect sense in terms of the character). Tennant hit the ground running with his first proper scenes at Christmas, doing both the goofball Lion King stuff and the grim 'No second chances'. But he's not as good as Eccleston at the big setpiece stuff - the end of 'New Earth' and the confrontation with Lumic were both a bit flat.
My main impression so far is that the new writers brought in this season just aren't meeting the standard set last time round. Though I am looking forward to the Satan Pit and the first proper alien world.
Posted by: TimC | May 23, 2006 at 17:25
"..he was back to his usual cocky self."
And Tom Baker wasn't?
Posted by: feel kollins | May 23, 2006 at 19:37
Can't agree - this time last year we'd had AOL & WWIII; this year only 'New Earth' is an episode with few redeeming features. And Tennant SO kicks Eccleston's arse in the Doctor stakes - he may not have the same level of intensity, but when it comes to eccentricity, charisma and sheer likeableness then Eccleston (no offence) doesn't hold a candle. And the best thing is that you truly feel that Tennant'f best is yet to come.
Posted by: Sean | May 23, 2006 at 19:57
Tennant rocks, and he gets the character more than Eccleston ever did, fine actor as he is. DT just has more range - he can do funny as well as the more serious bits and while the properly angry scenes (which Eccleston did so well) are a bit shouty, there's plenty of time for development.
As for series 1 vs 2, in terms of quality the current one wins hands down and personally, I'm enoying this one far more because, last year, it was all new and exciting but I didn't get it as much. Writing about something really focuses the attention more, and I think it does add to the experience to know some of the old stuff, which I was ignorant about last year.
Posted by: Flick | May 23, 2006 at 21:46
No contest - so far 2006 is blowing 2005 away.
ROSE or THE CHRISTMAS INVASION? THE CHRISTMAS INVASION
THE END OF THE WORLD or NEW EARTH? THE END OF THE WORLD
THE UNQUIET DEAD or TOOTH AND CLAW? A close call, but i think TOOTH AND CLAW just about takes it for the 'Hit Me with your Rhythm Stick' scene alone.
ALIENS OF LONDON or SCHOOL REUNION? SCHOOL REUNION
WORLD WAR THREE or THE GIRL IN THE FIREPLACE? THE GIRL IN THE FIREPLACE
DALEK or RISE OF THE CYBERMEN? DALEK
THE LONG GAME or THE AGE OF STEEL? THE AGE OF STEEL.
So i make that 5-2 for the new series over all, a landslide!
Posted by: togmeister | May 23, 2006 at 23:05
"..he was back to his usual cocky self.
And Tom Baker wasn't?"
Only towards the end of his reign. Tennant has been like that since the get go.
I can see that I am one of the few people who just don't get Tennant but I continue to hope that one day I will like him.
Posted by: adam | May 24, 2006 at 14:43
I'd say that a common trait thru each of the Doctors, more or less, is a particular self-absorbsion. I guess this could be concidered cockiness, or grouchiness, maybe this is what RTD is playing at with the "loneliness" thing this season. Did I miss anything ending in "ness"?
I think Tennent is a fine Doctor, he's got quite a good range, but I feel what he is lacking is that certian "presence", which is something I'm sure he'll grow into.
Posted by: feel kollins | May 24, 2006 at 15:37
I feel slightly the same. I love the new series, but it doesn't feel quite right without Eccleston.
Maybe I'm suffering from 'My Doctor' syndrome that manifested during the original run; where the doctor you grew up watching was your favourite.
Although Eccleston's tenure was a bit short for that. But you know what I mean. I think.
Anyway, we've only had seven episodes so far. How many did it take Colin Baker to settle into the role?
Posted by: Biggus Richus | May 25, 2006 at 09:05
*bites tongue*
Easy joke ;)
Posted by: Ryushinku | May 25, 2006 at 10:33
I was never a big Doctor Who fan. I watched it a bit growing up. I've been an Eccleston fan for many years now and that was my main draw to the series.It was weird though seeing him so zany, but, he pulls off menacing soooo well. Whereas Tennant does zany very well but not so menacing. I think it's pretty amazing though that a series can change a main actor so early on and still maintain it's appeal. I miss Eccleston but the show is still very good. Just such great writing. Dalek and Girl in the Fireplace were just great shows - no matter who was playing the doctor.
Posted by: carl | Feb 03, 2007 at 07:10
David Tennant grew up watching Tom Baker so is it any real wonder that he choses to play The Doctor in a similar way? In my opinion David gives The Doctor more appeal, he brings a lighthearted aspect to Doctor Who and I think he will encourage a wider audience, people who have no real interest in pointlessly analysing every inch of each individual episode and would prefer just to watch for enjoyment, without ruining it with nitpicking.
Posted by: Fi | Feb 13, 2007 at 23:30