The storylines

[Ice Warrior]

I was thinking to myself, and by all means I want to know your opinion also, about the quality of the storylines compared to the new series. By quality I mean the application of Science-Fiction in the story.

During the first Doctor era, they produced episodes such as Planet of Giants which dealt with the group materialising smaller than they should have, or The Space Museum where they arrive before they actually arrive.

These are my two prominent examples where the story concentrates more on an element of the realms of science fiction in comparison to some of the later 'classic series' stories and the new series, where they concentrate more on a civilisation and a threat.

So I am suggesting that perhaps the sci-fi elements of the original era are 'better' compared to the later stories.

Yay? Nay? What say you?

[tractator]

Pertwee's reign had Inferno (Alternate Universe, but only as a diversion from the main storyline), and Day Of The Daleks (Time Travel Paradox).

Apart from that I can't think of any (unless you count Logopolis/Castrovalva, which are about the science of Block Transfer Computation).

[The Thinker]

I personally preferred the stories of the 4th Doctor's era but I like the stories of the sixties too. The "sci-fi" element in a sense, applies to all non-historical stories to some degree. In fact alien races are another sci-fi element did you know?

[Eryx]

If we're talking quality, then I would say that Dr Who has got better and better with every season. And in my opinion, the new seasons have been some of the best yet.

I do miss the days of multiple episode stories though, and I will say that they were often much better written because more could be said and done.

If we're talking purely William Hartnell era though, I feel that the historical stories lacked something... maybe not quality, maybe there was just too many of them compared to the more usual sci-fi stories.

[The Thinker]

I'm not too overly keen on the historical stories, though 'The Crusade' is the major exception in my opinion. The others were usually too limited as to what could be done in them.

[Eryx]

johnlumicdavros said:

I'm not too overly keen on the historical stories, though 'The Crusade' is the major exception in my opinion. The others were usually too limited as to what could be done in them.

I agree. In the early days there were too many historical stories. Dr Who is science fiction first and foremost, and thats where its strengths lie. Not in acting out history to teach kids (as I've heard one reason for the show was).

[Dominic Smith]

I actually rather enjoy the historicals, in fact the sixties stories were some of the best in the series history for me.

[The Thinker]

As a matter of fact, I find some historicals quite boring, especially with repeated viewing. However I think a good deal of the Sci-Fi stories are more interesting to view repeatedly.

[tractator]

Eryx said:

...Dr Who is science fiction first and foremost...

Actually that isn't right.

When it was first commisioned it was as an entertaining yet educational show. Its 'mission profile' if you like, was to make history interesting, hence the whole point of the 'time machine'.

After the Daleks aired it was decided to that an even mix of purely sci-fi and historical stories would be used because while history was okay, it was the alien monsters that kept the viewers hooked in the long-term.

Gradually, the whole historical angle fizzled out.

[Eryx]

Aye, it did start out that way, but historical episodes for their own sake have never worked for me. Great idea back in the day, but from the early 80's (when I started watching Who) its always been the sci-fi, men in suits monsters and all that which have made the show.

[The Thinker]

The last historical story of the Sixties was 'The Highlanders' and after that they dissapeared from our screens bar repeats. There was one other story made where the only Sci-Fi element was the TARDIS and that was 'Black Orchid'. After that the historicals were no more...