Lee Eisenberg So far I've only seen a few episodes of "Doctor Who". What I've seen impresses me. I interpret the show as a look at how we might respond if suddenly forced into another world (i.e., will we cooperate to do something that helps everyone or will we resort to war?). I also like the idea that the Doctor regenerates (meaning that twelve different people have played him). Admittedly, some of the sets and special effects look dated, but the plot is what matters, and there's plenty of that.The series is one of the favorites of the nerd/geek crowd. The characters on "The Big Bang Theory" reference it, and it's easy to find Comic-Con attendees dressed as the Doctor. It's not my favorite show by any stretch, but I like what I've seen. I recommend it.

bh_tafe3 I guess the only way you can do it is just to go over your own experience with the show. I grew up in Australia, the Australian bush specifically. The first doctor I was old enough to actually appreciate was Slyvester McCoy. I had seen all the Pertwee and Tom Baker episodes as a kid but hadn't taken them in, so my first episode I have any real memory of is Time and the Rani. And I was hooked pretty much from there. As a child of 7, I had no concept of good Doctor Who or bad Doctor Who, or, as I prefer to call them both as a grown adult; "Doctor Who." I just knew he was a Time Lord, from the planet Gallifrey, that he drifted around through time and space in a Police Box and helped people. I didn't care about effects or acting, I just liked the premise.It took about 5 years after the McCoy era ended in 1990 (in Australia) for the show to return, at 4am in the morning, and it was Peter Davison episodes they were showing. Every morning I would get up and watch the show and Davison ended up becoming MY Doctor.I spent a lot of the so called "Wilderness years" watching the old episodes, becoming acquainted with Hartnell's Doctor and re watching some Tom Baker episodes I never really followed as a child. I could see the changing world views on show, from the fear of nuclear destruction in The Daleks to the sympathetic look at Christianity in The Romans, to attacks on consumerism in the Sun Makers and anti-Thatcher sentiments of the Happiness Patrol and the increasing prominence of secular humanism within the show's ideals.I could notice stylistic changes from action oriented in early 70s, to hammer horror influences in the mid 70s, to bonkers Monty Python silliness in the late 70s and then glossy and pessimistic kill fests in the early to mid 80s. I came to admire the way the show changed and adapted as it got older. Season 22 was a disaster, both stylistically and thematically, but it was the only real clunker the show had in its original run which lasted 26 seasons. The key idea that the show had to keep was that the Doctor was an alien with a magic box who flies into a town, finds a problem, fixes said problem, and flies off.I'll list briefly the episodes that I enjoyed the most as a youngling and then take off, probably not having achieved anything apart from indulging myself.Remembrance of the Daleks- First episode I ever watched obsessively. Devious doctor, dalek civil war, creepy little girl, lots of deaths and a satisfying resolution. I hear criticism of this being too continuity heavy. All I will say is I was 8, and had no problems understanding that the daleks were fighting each other over Davros, the doctor had left the hand in a previous incarnation and he had got it from his home planet. Kids really aren't as stupid as some adults seems to think. As Peter Davison later paraphrased "The challenge with writing Doctor Who is keeping it simple enough for the adults to follow, but complicated enough for the kids to stay interested." Deadly Assassin- loved it. Crispy Master. Decadent Gallifrey. Awesome Castellan. Big stakes and Tom Baker at his best. This was another one fans at the time hated because it showed the Time Lords and Gallifrey in a different light to ever before.The Romans- got the VHS in 1996(I think) and loved this one. Ian became one of my favourite companions. Felt like such an epic. Again was criticized for its tone, but out of context it's a fun epic romp.Anyway, that's my personal experience with Doctor Who. Thanks for reading.

oscar-35 *Spoiler/plot- Doctor Who. 1963 to present. An alien beneficent race of Time Lords last member helps the Earth in major occasions of danger and strife. Time Lords travel in space and time and regenerate to be over 700+ years old.*Special Stars- Golden Era Doctors are played by: William Hartnell, Patrick Troughton, Jon Pertwee, Tom Baker, Peter Davidson, Colin Baker, Sylvester McCoy.*Theme- Intelligence and human traits will save the universe from harm.*Trivia/location/goofs- British TV series. Originally designed to be a children's show on BBC with extreme limitations on violence, gun or weapon use, and sexual situations. Longest continually running science fiction plot based TV show in TV history. Over 656 episodes and still running.*Emotion- an interesting and clever TV series that was originally designed for children, but developed into a unique TV franchise that was able to be resurrected and carry-on up to now. Enjoyable actors and challenging script themes make this show engaging and watchable. However in the new re-boot of the series, the main valid criticisms of the show now are the overuse on camera violence and violent plot themes and inclusion of sexual matters. That's quite a change from the Golden Age franchise.

The_Other_Snowman "Doctor Who" is simply one of the greatest works of science fiction ever to appear on television. The only thing holding it short of absolute, unmitigated greatness is its amazing longevity (26 seasons) which ensured that there would be a good number of lousy episodes.The American version of this show is "Star Trek", of which I'm also a fan. The differences between the two series might be used as a basis of contrasting the two nations, but I'll only contrast the shows because it's much simpler: 1) "Star Trek" has an ensemble cast, each of whom are designed to appeal to different demographics. "Doctor Who" has one regular character, the Doctor. To be fair, the Doctor has been played by ten different actors so far, each to a different effect.2) The heroes of "Star Trek" -- and while we're at it, the average US sf series -- represent a quasi-military organization tasked with keeping the peace throughout the galaxy, exploring, and righting wrongs. The Doctor doesn't follow anyone's orders, and largely makes it up as he goes along. To be honest, he's a bit of an anarchist at times, and at the very least usually totally anti-authoritarian.c) The Enterprise is a huge starship with a crew of hundreds, equipped with futuristic technology and run sometimes like a battleship, sometimes like a hot rod. The TARDIS is an antique time machine/spaceship in the shape of an antique British police telephone box.5) The Federation are the good guys. We like the Federation; they represent everything that is good and worth preserving about humanity. On the other hand: the Time Lords. Corrupt, petty, self-serving, bureaucratic. The Doctor ran off with the TARDIS to get away from them.Which is not to say that one show is inherently superior to the other. I like them both. But, as an American, "Doctor Who" is a refreshing change of pace from the standard formula of American television. The hero questions authority at every turn; he doesn't need a badge or a gun to back up his sense of morality; he is usually neither handsome nor physically strong, and there's barely a hint of sexuality. He's a champion of the oppressed and the underdog, totally free of political or nationalistic concerns.He may have had a good understanding of Right and Wrong, but what he lacked was a budget. Luckily, the BBC of old did not care, and they continued to produce the series so long as it had excellent writing and acting, which it did for the majority of its run. Each of the actors playing the Doctor has his strengths: my favorites are Patrick Troughton and Sylvester McCoy. Lack of funds ironically meant that there was no limit to what they could do: they knew it would look silly regardless, so they said to hell with it and threw everything they had up onto the screen. The result is colorful and imaginative and often very exciting. Say what you will about the show, it was never drab.