From: ira2p@faraday.clas.Virginia.EDU (Iain Robert Asplin)
Subject: Re: STTNG vs. Dr. Who (was RE: Saturday Night Review)
Organization: University of Virginia
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 18:49:34 GMT

In article <29SEP92.11137809.0085@VM1.MCGILL.CA> CXMP <CXMP@MUSICA.MCGILL.CA> writes:
>In article <1992Sep27.060553.22066@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> ira2p@faraday.clas.Virginia.EDU (Iain Robert Asplin) writes:
>>"Time doesn't go round and round in circles.
>>"It doesn't go anywhere, it just happens and then it's finished!"
>>
>>These quotes from the very first episode of "Doctor Who" I feel aptly
>>sum up two feelings I get                                              ode
>
>-review deleted
>>
>>I'm going to bring in some Who things again here....
>>Next Gen is treading onto territory I've seen well-covered
>>by Doctor Who, and this time they failed miserably.
>>Whovians call this type of story a "pseudo-historical," where we travel
>>into Earth's history and have something science-fiction happenning.
>>In Who, these are some of the most interesting stories, but seeing an
>>attempt at the same sort of thing in Star Trek just jars me somehow.
>>What I see is a series believing it has limitless bounds stretching out
>>the plot ideas, and not realizing their universe is indeed bound until
>>they're falling out the edge.
>>
>-disjointed, incoherent talk deleted
>>
>>I guess I'm just disappointed that Next Gen failed so miserably at
>>something Doctor Who has done quite well several times over, and Trek
>>even had the episode-minutes to match this time, and still....
>>
>>Stay out of the past Next Gen...that's my advice to you.  Going by
>>Time's Arrow, I don't think you belong there.....
>
>Let's get serious for a moment!  Dr. Who has been going for, what,
>twenty five years?  Are you saying you've never seen any really bad
>episodes of Dr. Who?  I remember seeing an old episode recently in
>which Dr. Who was facing aliens that looked like giant insects.  Boring.
>What about the way Dr. Who always had new companions to replace the ones
>that left.  How convenient!  The Dialecks were good, but aren't the
>Dialecks supposed to enslave the Earth in the future?  So how come we
>see so many humans in the future exploring space?  Come to think of it
>humans in the future or aliens in Earth's past are the two most overused
>plots on Dr. Who.  Also, isn't it a bit of a coincidence the way he and
>the Master meet so often?  How come they can always agree on when was
>the last time they met?  Also, the writers make no attempt to decide on
>any one theory of time be it elastic time (which Harlan "CotEoF" Ellisan
>likes) or alternate time lines (which Chris Claremont likes).  How come
>Dr. Who seems to know the history for all planets in the universe.  With
>all his time travels, you'd think he'd know a lot about his own future.
>Hell, he's even met himself a fe times!  Then there's the fact that the
>pseudoscience changes with every episode; no consistency at all.
>
>I'm sorry, but even a "bad" episode of STTNG spoils me too much to watch
>Dr. Who anymore.
>


No, I don't thinks IU said I don't think there are any bad episodes of who.
As for the companions bit, what's wrong with finding a new friend someplace
he goes?  I don't say "how convenient": anytime a new crewmember shows up
on the Enterprise.  
If you're going to criticize a show, at least know how the name of the
show's most popular villains are spelled:  DALEKS.  Where *did you find
that i or the the c?  As fot the Master and Doctor meeting so often,
it's often because one is pursuing the other actively, and as for an
agreed time idea, Who most definitely has one,a fluid timestream, and
that has been shown several tinmes in the series' history.  


I've had some very positive respionses to be my first posting (i.e. people
actually agreed with me on this ), so don't you think nfor one moment
that you have the *absolutely right8 idea on this.  (That's a catch sentence.
With a brain your size, you probably don't think.)

Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current