Shop now Shop now Shop All Amazon Fashion Up to 70% off Fashion Cloud Drive Photos Shop Amazon Fire TV Shop now Shop Fire HD 6 Shop Kindle Voyage Shop now Shop Now Shop now
Customer Review

166 of 204 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars Moan moan moan moan moan..., 19 Aug. 2010
This review is from: Doctor Who - The Complete Series 5 (Limited Edition Steelbook) [DVD] (DVD)
'Oh, I didn't like it', 'He's not as good as David Tennant', 'It's not as good as the original show', 'Well of course, I remember William Hartnell' blah blah blah blah blah. It's funny, Doctor Who fans now don't have to hark all the way back to the original series ('63- '89) anymore, but now can hark back to more recent times to come up with a flaccid 'the new series isn't as good as it was' argument. I have been a fan for Doctor Who since 1973, through it's considerable highs and it's many (lets be honest here) considerable lows. To admit one was even a fan of the show was at one period of history akin to admitting to necrophilia, although not as racey. But Doctor Who has done what it always does; it dusts itself off and enjoys the fact that it can regenerate, just like the main character in the series. It saddens me that Who fans have a demographic within them that is bitter, bitchy, po-faced and nostalgic to the point of myopia. Some of the more negative critiques (and I use that word very loosely indeed) aimed at series 5 on Amazon have again been sadly penned by this camp of moan-mongering morons who wish it was yester-year again. It's not; get over it.

Here's joke for you; How many Doctor Who fans does it take to change a light bulb? Just one, but they think the new light bulb isn't as good as the old one.

Matt Smith was a suprising choice and I had mixed feelings when the news broke late in 2008. Tennant did a wonderful job and was given many wonderful stories to get his teeth into. Smith has taken the mantel of Who and done some equally wonderful work with it. I think Moffatt was put on a pedestal by fans to be knocked off if any of his tenure of producer gave stories worse than 'Blink', 'The Empty Child' etc, and much of the complaints by those who disliked this series are generated by such a line of thought.

Not every part of this series totally worked for me; I thought the new titles and music not as good as previously since returning in 2005, and I thought the new Daleks were inferior to the previous model. But I think, on balance, this series worthy of 5 stars as it was excellent; well acted, well written and well produced. After years of the bitch abuse Russell T Davies got from nasty bickering Who fans, I expect he can enjoy halcyon days as these same fans now like him as he was better than this young Moffatt upstart!

I thought 'Vincent and the Doctor' one of the finest stories ever made (Tony Curran as Vincent van Gogh and Karen Gillan as Amy Pond giving some of the best acting performanced I have seen on tv for a good long while), and the final few episodes gave a less bombastic and more measured climax in 'The Big Bang' than some of the previous ones we have had. The fact that all loose ends have not been tidily sorted is a great idea, as this leads a viewer back to it next Spring (what is The Silence? Who's is the voice that speaks of it? Who is River Song? What role does she play in the Doctor's future?). I thought Smith's first story to be one of the finest tales to introduce a new actor in the role (loved the fish fingers in custard), the Silurians were at last given some depth and were no longer blokes in rubber suits with dodgey Cornish/Russin hybrid accents, and the Weeping Angels story was not a simple remake of their previous tale (something that could easily have happened in the hands of someone less skilled than Moffatt). Brilliant stuff!

For those who cannot enjoy this for whatever reason, ok, we are all entitled to our opinions, no matter how misplaced and ill-judged they may be. But let me finish on this point; it is no so long ago that Doctor Who was really very poor, a fact illustrated by it's deserved removal from our screens for 16 years. By the late 80s it really was a limping duffer of a programme, lead by a producer who thought he was working in light entertainment; it is now in comparison a strong, engaging and thought-provoking show. Long may it remain a flag-ship of the BBC.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No

[Add comment]
Post a comment
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Amazon will display this name with all your submissions, including reviews and discussion posts. (Learn more)
This badge will be assigned to you and will appear along with your name.
There was an error. Please try again.
Please see the full guidelines ">here.

Official Comment

As a representative of this product you can post one Official Comment on this review. It will appear immediately below the review wherever it is displayed.   Learn more
The following name and badge will be shown with this comment:
 (edit name)
After clicking on the Post button you will be asked to create your public name, which will be shown with all your contributions.

Is this your product?

If you are the author, artist, manufacturer or an official representative of this product, you can post an Official Comment on this review. It will appear immediately below the review wherever it is displayed.  Learn more
Otherwise, you can still post a regular comment on this review.

Is this your product?

If you are the author, artist, manufacturer or an official representative of this product, you can post an Official Comment on this review. It will appear immediately below the review wherever it is displayed.   Learn more
System timed out

We were unable to verify whether you represent the product. Please try again later, or retry now. Otherwise you can post a regular comment.

Since you previously posted an Official Comment, this comment will appear in the comment section below. You also have the option to edit your Official Comment.   Learn more
The maximum number of Official Comments have been posted. This comment will appear in the comment section below.   Learn more
Prompts for sign-in


Tracked by 7 customers

Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 41-50 of 58 posts in this discussion
Posted on 17 Apr 2011 21:17:55 BDT
emi793 says:
I absolutely agree with you, thank you for posting this.
It makes me so sad to see people bashing this series of Doctor Who, when it is arguably one of the best of 'New Who' so far. I am not old enough to have seen original who when it was first broadcast, but even I appreciate that the point of the show is that it changes. The character, not just the actor changes, and that is exactly what keeps this show so original and fresh and exciting. People who think that one actor's interpretation of a role (as brilliant as DT may have been) should be the definitive Doctor just don't get it. And in any case, I don't think Smith and Tennant are really that different - I am a huge fan of both Doctors. Perhaps it is just that where Tennant would ramp up the drama, be all impressive and shout, Smith goes dangerously quiet and keeps it understated and subtle.
And as for comparisons between RTD and the Moff.... I'll save my rant for later. But I think the same argument applies.

In reply to an earlier post on 17 Sep 2011 22:52:51 BDT
No it wasn't

In reply to an earlier post on 18 Sep 2012 20:05:37 BDT
You didn't like FREEMA? I thought she was fantastic. I can't believe anyone wouldn't like her--she was brave and beautiful and dauntless and she had spark and spunk...and we didn't think anyone could replace or even compete with Billie Piper, but she won us over completely. After we finished season three we dug out the Torchwood episodes that featured Martha Jones because we missed her--and found not only did they make clearer sense (Torchwood led us to Dr. Who, not the other way around) but we were so pleased to hear she had a boyfriend already-the young doctor who "died" for her, obviously. She is a lovely actress. Maybe you should look again. What's the beef?

In reply to an earlier post on 18 Sep 2012 21:14:54 BDT
Miss says:
For my money, the trouble with Freema was that, despite the fact that she is extremely beautiful, she could not act. She emoted, but nothing ever reached her eyes. She had some fun stories, but I was very glad when we traded up for Catherine Tate - now there's a woman with sass! But everyone's going to have their favourites. Mine have been Rose and Donna, and my favourite Doctor was actually Ecclestone. And then there's River Song, possibly my favourite ever non-Doctor character. They were so lucky to get Alex Kingston. Indeed, that's part and parcel of a show that evolves. Whether you like the actors or not, it's not going to be too long before it's all change. I thought Season 5 did have some corkers and some duffers (Victory of the Daleks being a particularly low point), but it also laid some of the groundwork for the superior Season 6.

And there are going to be people who disagree with every single word I've written above - and that's fine too!

In reply to an earlier post on 18 Sep 2012 21:50:49 BDT
I agree with you about Ecclestone--he was enchanting. I agree that Freema did not have a full dramatic range--I could see how David Tennant could play Hamlet, and she would never be able to carry something like that off. But what I liked about her was her spark and sizzle--a kind of athletic joyousness that I found captivating. And she did dauntless extremely well. So she might be able to do Mercutio.

In reply to an earlier post on 18 Sep 2012 21:55:02 BDT
Miss says:
I was lucky enough to catch DT's Hamlet in Stratford. Absolutely brill!

In reply to an earlier post on 18 Sep 2012 22:23:49 BDT
M. Freeman says:
I never had a problem with Freema at the time but I literally always forget that her character even existed; not really a good sign.

Posted on 24 May 2013 18:50:03 BDT
Molly says:
As a lover of light bulb jokes, may I express my gratitude at what appears to be a completely new lightbulb joke -one that also tickles my Whovian funny bone. On this one sentence alone I now feel obliged to order the DVD. (Although, to be honest, I'm sure I would have found some other reason to make the purchase). Anyway. Again, many thanks.

In reply to an earlier post on 16 Oct 2013 16:41:06 BDT
Alex Lyon says:
Just one second - a person can be a 'fan', and then find that they don't like it anymore - that's OK. It's also OK just to say 'I don't like it'. Of course the series has changed and developed over the years, but nobody, however much of a 'fan' they may consider themselves, is obliged to like every change - or to continue watching.

In reply to an earlier post on 16 Oct 2013 16:45:12 BDT
Alex Lyon says:
I think that Dr Who fans have accommodated a great deal of change over the last 50 years - the biggest perhaps being the change between it being on telly, and it being cancelled for 15 years - so I don't think that dissatisfaction with Mr Moffat is likely to be a dislike of change per-se, rather a dislike of the specific changes that Mr Moffat has caused, and I think that those are perfectly valid grounds for criticism.