Well, I started watching the original Who.

[beamMe]

Thanks to domestic playback devices (VCRs, DVDs, and now BluRay) we now tend to watch the entire stories in one sitting. But you must keep in mind these 22 minute long episodes were originally aired once a week. So, a certain percentage of the dialogue may repeat some points established in the prior episode, particularly since the BBC did not repeat the last segment right before the newest broadcast.

It has been joked that if the corridor running sequences were removed, the serials would run maybe 25 percent shorter. Then again, the same could be said about your average summer blockbuster.

Have you tried spacing your viewing? No, not 1 episode per week, that would take half a year or more to watch a single "series". But try 1 episode per day. That's how a local PBS affiliate aired them when it first got the rights to air Tom Baker adventures starting in August 1982. 82?! Has it really been 20 years for me?! Dang! Anyway, an epi' an evening might help your concerns with the more methodical pacing.

Sincerely,

Bill

Honestly, not watching each story in one sitting but spacing them out over four to seven day just isn't going to improve the pacing of these old Who-episodes.
Even considering the fact that they where done in and for another time and for different audience expectations some of the oldWho is simply a chore to watch.

 

[MadOnion]

I'll be averaging two episodes a day, with the possibility of more if a serial really grabs me. But I'm not really looking forward to Marco Polo. If the first couple don't interest me enough, I may end up bailing on that one. This is a possibility for any of the historicals. I'll probably stick with the sci fi stories unless they are really bad.

Also please try not to spoil me on anything, thanks. The Ark interests me because it overlaps with a sci fi story idea of my own.

 

[MadOnion]

Honestly, not watching each story in one sitting but spacing them out over four to seven day just isn't going to improve the pacing of these old Who-episodes.
Even considering the fact that they where done in and for another time and for different audience expectations some of the oldWho is simply a chore to watch.

Yeah, even though I am approaching 50, I suffer from the same ADD as the rest of society. I was discussing with a friend the other day how I can tell the age of a movie by the pacing. Anything before the 80s tends to be just way too slow. I watched The Birds recently for the first time, and although I can see where it is a classic, it was just too slow for my tastes.

 

[VDCNI]

The historicals are the Hartnell era at its very best so if you skip them you'll be missing the highest quality stories of the period. I'd put Marco Polo in my all time top 10 though I can understand people may struggle with it as you'll only be watching a recon/listening to it on audio.

I'd definitely watch The Romans though, which is one of the most entertaining stories of the period and will probably sell you on Hartnell's Doctor if you've not been keen on him so far.

Thankfully the old line of The Gunfighters being the worst story of the sixties has been comprehensively disproved particularly after its DVD release. The Ark starts off well but nose dives in quality towards the end with the last 2 episodes feeling like they go on forever.

 

[Cutter John]

Yeah, I've honestly never been a big Susan fan either. She looked good on paper, but somewhere along the line someone decided they needed her to whine and cry a lot. Which just gets annoying. Personally I much preferred Vicki. OTOH, Ian and Barbera were both brilliant companions.

Not all Hartnell's were slow though. I always thought The Time Meddler and The War Machines were both quite snappy for their time. And the segret of enjoying The Gunfighters is to think of it as a comedy. And keep the mute button handy for when a certain saloon singer turns up. Otherwise you'll swear someone is killing a cat in the studio.

 

[Lonemagpie]

Also not all of Hartnell's line-fluffs actually *are* - a lot of them are deliberate, and are the *Doctor's* line fluffs.

In particular, the running gag of getting Chesterton's name wrong is a deliberate thing. If The Massacre still existed in full, you'd not that Hartnell - playing a double role in that story - doesn't fluff any of his lines as the other character...

 

[The Mirrorball Man]

True, although all the actors fluff their lines from time to time during the early seasons: that's just the natural consequence of the way these things were filmed. Even the Mighty Trout fluffs a line from time to time.

 

[Sindatur]

The Edge of Destruction: I really enjoyed this one, nice little bottle episode. Good bits of character development for everybody, even the Tardis. I loved the fact the "unseen alien force" turned out to be the Tardis. Stuck in reverse, nice simple concept. Was that the first appearance of the (unnamed) sonic screwdriver? One of the visuals on the screen looked a bit like the Van Gogh painting.

Negatives are the girl playing Susan isn't a very good actress and is getting on my nerves. The doctor also flubs his lines a lot. I was hoping Ian would hear two hearbeats but read that comes a while later. The reaction to an old man - the only one who can fly the ship - laid out on the floor with his skull possibly cracked open is "Oh dear, I'll go get some water." LOL And would somebody please operate those Tardis doors a little more smoothly and evenly? That really bugs me for some reason.

I don't think Susan's problem is that she's a bad actress, the problem is the part is written as a pre-teen girl character. She could've played anyone from 16 - 26 convincingly, IMHO, but, considering she already had such experiences in the TARDIS when the show started, she should be much better acclimated at her age.

On Hartnell flubbing his lines, until reading these boards, I never knew he was actually flubbing his lines, I thought it was intentional as a character trait, LOL.

 

[Christopher]

The Edge of Destruction: I really enjoyed this one, nice little bottle episode. Good bits of character development for everybody, even the Tardis. I loved the fact the "unseen alien force" turned out to be the Tardis. Stuck in reverse, nice simple concept. Was that the first appearance of the (unnamed) sonic screwdriver?

No, the sonic screwdriver wasn't introduced until "Fury From the Deep" toward the end of season 5. It must've been some other tool.

The Gunfighters is magnificent.

I've never liked it. It's awkward, unfunny, and probably the most historically inaccurate of all the historicals, and with the least excuse since it's one of the most recent timeframes they visited.

I suspect the disappointment with The Ark come about because it has a fantastic set-up and brilliant reversal at the halfway point, but then ends up as a fairly generic evil alien oppressors story for the second half. I still love it though. Fantastic direction and visually impressive throughout.

"The Ark" is quite clever. I love the idea of jumping forward through time in the second half and seeing how radically the Ark's culture has changed in the intervening generations. It's one of the first times the show ever really took advantage of the time travel aspect of the premise as anything other than a mode of transportation.

Yeah, I've honestly never been a big Susan fan either. She looked good on paper, but somewhere along the line someone decided they needed her to whine and cry a lot.

That someone was named "the 1960s." That's what most female leads did back then. If you think Susan's bad, wait until you get to Victoria.

 

[MacLeod]

Well a few years ago the Doctor Who Magazine did a poll of it's readers to come up with a top 200 list.

http://www.doctorwhoworld.org.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=5549

The Top 10

001. The Caves of Androzani.
002. Blink.
003. Genesis of the Daleks.
004. The Talons of Weng-Chiang.
005. The Empty Child / The Doctor Dances.
006. Human Nature / The Family of Blood.
007. Pyramids of Mars.
008. City of Death.
009. The Robots of Death.
010. Bad Wolf / The Parting of the Ways.

 

[Cutter John]

That someone was named "the 1960s." That's what most female leads did back then. If you think Susan's bad, wait until you get to Victoria.

Oh I don't know. Barbera seemed to have a good head on her shoulders. And Vicky was fairly competent for her age.

 

[Christopher]

Which is why I used "most," a word that is not synonymous with "all."

 

[Ubik]

To the original poster:

Look, a lot of the original Doctor Who is slow as molasses. Not just in the black and white era, but all the way through. I find most of Pertwee beyond slow.

But there are a few episodes from Hartnell which are, by general consensus, among the best Doctor Who there is. I'm talking about pace, characterization, cleverness of plot, all those sorts of things. You're right - Edge of Destruction is one of the best of the era. So, to further this, if you're watching the Hartnell era, here are the serials you absolutely should not miss:

The Daleks (the first one - the pace is slow, but those Daleks are creepier and sadder than the rebooted Daleks Terry Nation gave us in the Tom Baker years. It's essential.)

The Aztecs (it's one of the only Doctor Who episodes of the entire series that deals intelligently with the question of whether the Doctor should ever try to change history for the better. The episode makes a very good case for it, as well as against it, and it also has one of the best uses of a companion in the whole show.)

The Romans (the funniest episode to come out of Doctor Who until the Tom Baker years. Extremely quickly paced for a Doctor Who episode, and surprisingly and genuinely funny.)

The Time Meddler (this takes place right before the Norman invasion, and introduces a fellow Time Lord for the first time. He is hiding out as a monk and intends to change history. The scenes between Hartnell and the monk are great. The episode as a whole is great stuff.)

If you've watched those episodes, you've watched the best of Hartnell. The others are all hit and miss, some better than others, all suffering from a terribly slow pace. The ones I've mentioned are, I believe, the only ones that stand out as fantastic television even today, by today's standards.

(I'm talking only the surviving episodes here, mind you. If you can stand to listen to an episode without visuals, go for it.)

 

[beamMe]

To the original poster:

Look, a lot of the original Doctor Who is slow as molasses. Not just in the black and white era, but all the way through. I find most of Pertwee beyond slow.

Time really does stretch when you are with the Doctors 1 to 8.

 

[Andrew_Kearley]

I think you're all watching a different programme to me.

 

[DWF]

I think Dalek Invasion Of Earth is one that can't be missed, it's a lively good action/adventure story to me that's held up well over time. And the ending contains one of the best speeches in the history of the series.

 

[Peacemaker]

True, although all the actors fluff their lines from time to time during the early seasons: that's just the natural consequence of the way these things were filmed. Even the Mighty Trout fluffs a line from time to time.

It's been awhile, but isn't there a classic Ian fluff involving the Emergency Hatch in The Rescue?

 

[Cutter John]

I've always found that unless its something truly epic, the longer the story, the more it tends to drag. And Hartnell's era is full of six, and eight parters. It was probably a very good idea for later Producers to limit most stories to four parts.

Maybe its just me, but line fluffing on the show never bothered me. People mis-speak, or trip over their tongues sometimes in real life too don't they?

 

[DWF]

I've always found that unless its something truly epic, the longer the story, the more it tends to drag. And Hartnell's era is full of six, and eight parters. It was probably a very good idea for later Producers to limit most stories to four parts.

Maybe its just me, but line fluffing on the show never bothered me. People mis-speak, or trip over their tongues sometimes in real life too don't they?

Hartnell's era has no eight parters and only one complete seven parter, the first Dalek story. No Doctor had more six parrters than any of the rest of them.

 

[The Mirrorball Man]

Hartnell's era has no eight parters and only one complete seven parter, the first Dalek story. No Doctor had more six parrters than any of the rest of them.

And a twelve-parter.