5 things...

Found this article on What Culture. Basically, Five things the Classic Series did better and 5 Things the New Series seems to be doing better.

The article's broken into 11 pages that start with an introduction here:
http://whatculture.com/tv/doctor-who-5-things-to-learn-from-classic-series-5-things-that-are-better.php

But if you want a quick look, here's the list. (Each one links to the specific page.)

5+ for Classic
Showing more of Time and Space
Variety in Monsters and Aliens
Companion diversity
Writing agendas (or in the case of the Classic series, a lack thereof)
Grand plots

5+ for New
Pacing
Companion departures
Supporting characters
Knowing its limits
Regenerations

Thoughts?

Id have to disagree on pacing and regenerations

Pacing- with only one ep to tell the whole story in, many times they have to slam dunk the plot at the viewer, then having a manic exposition by the Doc to try and explain it all.

Regenerations- one of my big complaints about Nu Who. Regenerations no longer have the approach and feel of a serious death scene. Instead, the 'dying' Docs are up and around doing whatever. 10 was so ridiculous- I'm dying, yet I have all the time in the world to go and visit everyone.

Cruel Angel wrote:

Id have to disagree on pacing and regenerations

Pacing- with only one ep to tell the whole story in, many times they have to slam dunk the plot at the viewer, then having a manic exposition by the Doc to try and explain it all.

Regenerations- one of my big complaints about Nu Who. Regenerations no longer have the approach and feel of a serious death scene. Instead, the 'dying' Docs are up and around doing whatever. 10 was so ridiculous- I'm dying, yet I have all the time in the world to go and visit everyone.

I agree fully with you

The speed drives me crazy and the regeneration's are more of a gimmick than a sad death...

I'm confused by "writing agendas." I get that they're saying the showrunners should fully concentrate on Who & not other side projects, but why is that an agenda? There's been plenty of lousy classic Who stories while they were concentrating on just that show & there's been plenty of great modern Who stories even though the showrunners were also running other shows.
The worst "regeneration" was when 10 got shot in the back by a Dalek death ray & he transferred that regeneration energy into his severed hand which became a human clone without permanently dying or losing one of his finite regeneration.

Although I understand some of the objections about the new series being perhaps a little too fast-paced, I still feel that on the whole, the new series pacing is better than the old series. While things may move too fast at times (particularly plot), apart from a few select episodes (in particular, the Graeme Harper ones), things tend to move at a glacial pace in the classic series, especially in stories longer than 4 parts.

Terrance Dicks and others would be quick to agree that a lot of the old stories had a lot of unnecessary padding in them, all because of budget. If Terrance and Barry had their way, there wouldn't have been as many 6-parters (maybe none at all) during their run.

Part of the pacing comes down to advances in video technology and editing techniques (quicker cuts/more variety versus long, static shots), plus the fact they're shooting in a more filmic style now (single camera) rather than the 3-camera technique. With single-camera, you can get exactly the shots you want, with 3-camera, you hope for something good. The fact that they can also now do good lighting design, rather than being at the mercy of BBC Union lighting technicians (who pretty much dictated that everything had to be brightly lit, except for the few directors--like Harper--who would fight for what they wanted).

I think the best balance today would be either a few more 2-part stories (rather than mostly stand-alones), or have the timeslot upped to a full 60mins per episode with no commercials (meaning a 90 minute slot for the US).

As for regenerations, the new series has only done it twice so far, so it's hardly a fair contest to declare it the winner there.

Cruel Angel wrote:

Regenerations no longer have the approach and feel of a serious death scene. Instead, the 'dying' Docs are up and around doing whatever. 10 was so ridiculous- I'm dying, yet I have all the time in the world to go and visit everyone.

davro wrote:

...the regeneration's are more of a gimmick than a sad death...

Fully agreed. It's "prettier to look at," but yeah...no tragedy about them.

amckinney (was sskinner) wrote:

As for regenerations, the new series has only done it twice so far

Four, if you count The Master and River Song (and actually she does it twice - as a child and as Mels, so is that five?).

SeaDevil wrote:

amckinney (was sskinner) wrote:

As for regenerations, the new series has only done it twice so far

Four, if you count The Master and River Song (and actually she does it twice - as a child and as Mels, so is that five?).

Six cos of Tennant's fake regeneration in The Stolen Earth, too.

Talk about your "gimmick" regen...

Rubbish.

The other thing about regens is that after 9, there really isn't that much qualitative difference between 10 and 11s personalities.

Right now, they are in a rut of having a sometimes manic, goofy, funny man as the Doc. I don't think we are going to see much of a departure with the next regen... it's like Nu Who has this 'formula' now they keep going back to with Docs and companions.

Tennant's Doctor wasn't as goofy and manic as Matt's, I'd say. Matt just doesn't stop, whereas Tennant would just have his moments. And I don't blame Matt; it's Moffat that insists on writing the Doctor like this.

I hope that when Matt does regenerate we are given a far more serious Doctor. The Doctor. How it should be. And I hope Moffat regenerates into something better, too...

I think the pacing issue with the classic series comes from the format....22 minute episodes with cliffhanger once a week. Trying to watch certain episodes at all at once is a bit of a task for me sometimes (unless it is Pertwee, of course!)

I am glad there is a standard regeneration effect now, but I still don't like the standing up part. If you are dying, you will most likely collapse! Drop to the ground then explode in energy!

Scary wrote:

Tennant's Doctor wasn't as goofy and manic as Matt's, I'd say. Matt just doesn't stop, whereas Tennant would just have his moments. And I don't blame Matt; it's Moffat that insists on writing the Doctor like this.

I hope that when Matt does regenerate we are given a far more serious Doctor. The Doctor. How it should be. And I hope Moffat regenerates into something better, too...

Give me a serious man of action again!! Well,that be Pertwee again, lol.

Scary wrote:

I hope that when Matt does regenerate we are given a far more serious Doctor. The Doctor. How it should be.

Is why I loved Doc 9 the most of the Nu Who Docs.

Ronpur wrote:

Scary wrote:

Tennant's Doctor wasn't as goofy and manic as Matt's, I'd say. Matt just doesn't stop, whereas Tennant would just have his moments. And I don't blame Matt; it's Moffat that insists on writing the Doctor like this.

I hope that when Matt does regenerate we are given a far more serious Doctor. The Doctor. How it should be. And I hope Moffat regenerates into something better, too...

Give me a serious man of action again!! Well,that be Pertwee again, lol.

Pertwee rules!

Cruel Angel wrote:

Scary wrote:

I hope that when Matt does regenerate we are given a far more serious Doctor. The Doctor. How it should be.

Is why I loved Doc 9 the most of the Nu Who Docs.

Completely agreed.

I'm glad to see I'm not the only one who doesn't care for the incredibly fast pace of the newer episodes. Sometimes it moves so fast I forget exactlty how it got from point A to point B. Cut to a new scene and "Wait...what...how did we get here already? Is that other bit resolved??"

Scary wrote:

Tennant's Doctor wasn't as goofy and manic as Matt's, I'd say. Matt just doesn't stop, whereas Tennant would just have his moments. And I don't blame Matt; it's Moffat that insists on writing the Doctor like this.

I hope that when Matt does regenerate we are given a far more serious Doctor. The Doctor. How it should be. And I hope Moffat regenerates into something better, too...

Sorry I think Matt is 70% Dr. and is mostly playing himself, that's the great thing about playing the Doctor... most of the actors play themselves. You can see the Doctor in Matt in this clip and many others on youtube where he is not playing the part of the Doctor.

Meh... Well then I blame Matt, too. Either way, I'm not fond of the goofiness.

Eh. I like Matt, and I don't think he has much at all in common with Tennant.

When you describe two Doctors in few enough words, they start to sound pretty similar. Seriously, almost any two. heck, describe Colin Baker and Tom Baker in the right words, and you could make them sound pretty similar: "Moody and vain, prone to inappropriate moments of humor and possessed of a most peculiar dress sense." Suits either the Fourth or Sixth Doctors.

Matt is not so much "manic" as he is "highly animated." "Manic" would implies a cognitive process which can be affected, even impaired by his mood, while the show has gone to great pains to show precisely the opposite: he's animated because he thinks so fast that his speed of thought has an outward manifestation. Tennant's manner was dichotomous, drifting between verbal playfulness and brooding sadness. Matt's childlike and whimsical, a kid in a candy store the breadth of time and space, whereas Tennant was more of the "been there, done that" kind of veteran traveler.

I just don't think the two have much in common. I tried to get my wife into Who, but she lost interest once Tennant stepped into the role. She enjoys Smith, though. Make of that whatever you will. It isn't an assessment of "value" or "worth," just a fair indicator they're pretty different.

As for another serious Doctor, nah...Davison was pretty serious most of the time, and while I enjoy his portrayal on certain levels (the contrast of the old man in a young man's body), for the most part, he doesn't excite me much. If we get another serious Doctor, I hope he's serious in the sense that Hartnell and Colin Baker were serious: their serious moments revealed flaws in their character. Entertaining stuff.

Well with out an in-depth analysis I dont like the 10th Dr. and I like the 11th.... the 11th is my sons favorite as well lol

Is it me or is Matt becoming more and more like Patrick? More manic too, but there's something that makes me keep seeing a Troughton in his portrayal.

What I like about the new series is the sets they have, and the companions, but I think they need more of the Master, the Classic seemed to have him in more stories, maybe it was just over time we saw him, the Classic seemed to explain who the Time Lords were, they nee to refresh this in a few shows for the new Whovians

I liked the old series way of Regenerations (each one was different in it's own way). After re-watching some of the new era regeneration episodes, I hope they do something different for Matt, other than the Fiona (Shrek) scene.

Scary wrote:

Tennant's Doctor wasn't as goofy and manic as Matt's, I'd say. Matt just doesn't stop, whereas Tennant would just have his moments. And I don't blame Matt; it's Moffat that insists on writing the Doctor like this.

I hope that when Matt does regenerate we are given a far more serious Doctor. The Doctor. How it should be. And I hope Moffat regenerates into something better, too...

Don't we all.