Eric Stevenson I don't think I had ever even heard of "Doctor Who" before going on the Internet and now it's everywhere. Last time I checked, it was even the most trope overdosed franchise ever made on TVTropes. It's a shame that unlike other immensely popular franchises like "Star Wars" and "Star Trek", it has yet to come up with a great movie. It was still nice to watch a movie based on one of the most popular things ever made, like ever. I think overall, it's even bigger than "Star Wars"! I have seen at least two episodes of the show, so I recall the tone. This was just an okay movie with nothing really good or bad about it.It annoys me how people do nothing but complain about "The Phantom Menace" when you have one of the biggest things ever made that has never had a single movie with a higher score on this website than that movie! I know "Doctor Who" didn't start off as a movie series, but there should be more people constantly complaining about never having a genuinely good movie made of it. I remember how these are the same effects from the TV show. I wonder if J. J. Abrams could make a great version of this beloved franchise? Hey, you got Alex Hirsch working on a Pokémon movie. Yeah, look that up seriously.This movie's plot is pretty basic with the Doctor time traveling to December 31st, 1999 to stop an evil plan that the Master will carry out on the turn of the Millennium. Forgive me if I get some facts wrong as I am not a fan of the show, but given the sheer number of times I've heard this show being referenced, I should at least get some stuff right. It mostly plays like a long episode of the TV show and a mediocre one at that. It just didn't have the feel of a feature length movie. That's not what a movie is supposed to feel like. In a weird way, I would recommend this movie even though it's just okay. People should be introduced to be one of the biggest things of all time in a format as easy as watching a movie.It was interesting to hear the stuff I've read about on the Internet actually come to life! Yeah, I'd seen a bit of the show, but I liked seeing the stuff I heard so many people talk about actually on screen. I remember how the Doctor had two hearts and regenerated every time he died. The Master did the same thing. I guess a downside is that it didn't teach me too many new things about the series. I wished there would be more characters from the show, but then again, I'm not familiar with them. So for me, it was just an okay movie but I'm glad to learn more about something so popular. **1/2

thecodydawson First of all: I am a mega Who fan, and would never want to diminish the awesomeness that is Doctor Who, but; these are still my opinions: While I have watched the movie twice purely out of loving Doctor Who (and trying to grasp the personality of the eighth incarnation), I do not LOVE this movie. First of all, America should have never tried to revive a purely British Sci-Fi show in the first place. (I'm American myself, and even I think this was a bad idea!) They literally urinated all over the character of both The Doctor, and the Master. Okay, to make this review simpler, I will do pros/cons.Pros (or "good things" about the movie):Paul McGann. Paul McGann wonderfully portrayed a sexy, suave Doctor. He was gorgeous, and brilliant. The Master. Once he stole a human body (*eye rolling*), he was pretty Master-y. Even stopping to dress up when so he could look the part to steal the Doctor's body or lives or whatever.The companions. Grace Holloway and Chang Lee were fun characters. A surgeon and a street thug were pretty good ideas to pair up with our favorite Time Lord.Cons (or "bad things" about the movie):Half-Human: The eighth incarnation is apparently half human? First of all, they never fully explain that crap. (It might not have been a terrible idea if they would have.) It was unnecessary, and not well done.Snot-Snake ghost crap: So the Master has all his lives taken away (haha cool punishment!), but yet is magically able to become a snot looking snaking ghost and break out of his little grave and possess someone, LITERALLY. This was never explained, since he wasn't shown to be able to that before! (Also, he has quite a bit stronger psychic abilities than I have ever seen a Time Lord have.The Eye of Harmony: New TARDIS part, I think. But nevertheless, I wished they would have just used the heart of the TARDIS as the plot device that The Master opened instead of adding that. It didn't make a ton of sense in the story and fell pretty flat with me. (Even Steven Moffat had negative comments about this and The Master snake of snot ability thing!)Seven-to-Eight: Seven's regeneration was kind of cool, but, shooting the Doctor to kill him off? Well shooting which caused a surgery and what not, but still.. That kind of craps on one of the most entertaining staples of the show! (The Doctor's ability to make whimsical speeches to get out of trouble.) Overall, not the best way to regenerate The Doctor:/Anyhow, those are my opinions. Sorry if I offended any Whovians! I still like the movie, but I just don't quite LOVE it. Also, I post Doctor Who on Instagram! Follow me if you would like: my user is: November23rd1963.

scriibe This movie is not as awful as some negative reviews state. Paul McGann does a good job as the Doctor, some glimpses in his performance from the Baker/Davison era, with hints of the darker Doctors of late. Daphne
Ashbrook is a decent companion and there is a good amount of chemistry between the two.Eric Roberts' Master is a bit problematic, a slimy '90s film noir character lacking either Roger Delgado's savage charm or

Anthony Ainley's smug self-assurance. And the whole worm- thing does NOT work.But the big problem is with the writing, it's as if they were trying to fit as many Hollywood cliché's into the movie as possible. From a corrupt, evidence-destroying hospital administrator, to a confused plot-line about New Years Day 2000 (maybe the writer really thought the world was going to end and nobody would be around to see the stupidity in his script.) It is these standard clichés that give Hollywood such a bad name, and wreck this effort.I've never completely bought into the whole "Curse of the Time Lords", business, (it always seemed something could be going on between the Jon Pertwee Doctor and Jo Grant) so found the kisses between the Doctor and companion trite, but not devastatingly so. Ah, but I remember Jon Pertwee and Katy Manning, as well as Hartnell, Troughton, T Baker, Davison, C Baker, and McCoy. I have to wonder if any of the writers or producers here gave past episodes any more than a cursory glance.Fox seems to have been very cynical about this whole project. The acting is good, and the special effects good. but it lacks the heart and soul of the original (or the current) series, leaving an altogether mediocre movie.

geekgirl101 Had less money been spent on CGI and special effects and invested instead into the plot and research into the TV series this movie would've shined. Unfortunately it doesn't. As typical of all Hollywood movies the point has been missed by a long shot for the sake of special effects, cliffhangers, and a romance scene. What's more they've rewritten the Doctor as being half-human. You can't do that to a series that has been going on for decades! And what is the Eye of Harmony doing in the tardis?Overall attempts at trying to hype up a British series and Americanize it have failed. The TV series aims at having enough suspense to have you on the edge of your seat but then some ridiculously good way of saving the day that you either fall back into your chair laughing, cheering, crying, or panicking and eager to know what's going to happen next. This movie does not reflect the TV series and attempts at being too serious that it doesn't strike the viewer in the same manner. If anything the Saw movies share more in common with Doctor Who as they contain jaw-dropping plot twists which this movie is missing out on.