5 Reviews for Doctor Who Reviews

Guest's review has yet to be rated - Be the first!
Report this review

Doctor Who contains maybe too much fantasy and not enough truely scientific for the viewers, contains some non-logical features (intentionally)

On average, people found this review very helpful
Report this review

Spanning three decades, Doctor Who was one of those shows that never failed to pull viewers. With rickety sets, initially poor editing, over-acting from guest stars and low-budget special effects bordering on laughable (green painted bubble-wrap was a favourite in the mid 1970's, and if you look har ...

blueroseuk's review has yet to be rated - Be the first!
Report this review

The very first few episodes of Doctor Who in the early sixties, I find to be very slow moving. Good story lines yes, but it takes ages for something to happen. However, this problem is overcome quickly from here, and Doctor Who was arguably at its best until the mid-Tom Baker years (near the end of ...

saltrampen2's review has yet to be rated - Be the first!
Report this review

The BBC has generally done a good job bringing back Dr Who, with convincing sets, CGI and believable dialogue. Both David T and Christopher Eccleston are up there with the previous Doctors in the acting stakes. I felt a little let down with the second series in that the plots and locations in severa ...

Charnelmind The Smart's review has yet to be rated - Be the first!
Report this review

Dr Who was naff in the '70s and '80s and it's naff now. How can anyone find a giant dustbin with one arm the scariest thing in the universe? There's a reason that Christopher Eccleston was playing the Doctor like a goofy children's entertainer - even he couldn't take it seriously.

The effects we ...