Matt Smith is a much better Doctor Who than David Tennant by Michael Deacon - Ok, ok, stop right there. It's 'The Doctor', not 'Doctor Who'. I thought that was obvious. If you are going to review something, PLEASE do some research. Google it, or something. Apparently, the journalist thought it was unnecessary.
Reviewers and fans, as far as I’ve read, seem to be more or less agreed that Matt Smith has made a good start to his time as Doctor Who.
They’re right. He’s amusing, quirky and capable of giving nonsensical lines the appearance of twinkling wit (as he shouted at a Dalek in last week’s episode, while brandishing a biscuit: “All right, it’s a Jammy Dodger – but I was promised tea!”).
But I would go further than any of the reviewers I’ve read to date. Indeed, I’m prepared to utter what I gather is an unpardonable heresy in the world of Whovians. Because I’d say Matt Smith is already quite a lot better as the Time Lord than David Tennant was. - Stop right there. WHAT?? Isn't that unfair for both David and Matt?? Matt has had 5 episodes to date (3 episodes when the article was written). David had 3 amazing (yes, AMAZING, I'm not afraid of saying that out loud!) seasons. And you're already judging him? Saying that he is better than David? Can't you AT LEAST wait for the season to end?? And, just for the record... 'heresy in the world of Whovians'... did you even think that would slow us down? A mention? Nuh-uh.
David Tennant, who is often acclaimed as perhaps the greatest Doctor ever, is a very good actor – in other things. - Right. So the readers of DWM are wrong, is that what you're saying? Most reviewers are also wrong. Fans are wrong. And you're right. Oh, you're so precious. BBC Three’s 2005 series Casanova, for example. Or BBC One’s 2004 series Blackpool. Or his Hamlet for the RSC. - Yeah, you are dead right when it comes to all of those shows... INCLUDING Doctor Who.
His Doctor Who, though, I often found unbearable. All that mugging and gasping and gaping. All that sub-Frankie-Howerd squawking and groaning. - I think you have been watching Torchwood, lad - no groans in Doctor Who. All that try-hard eccentricity. - Wait, so Tom Baker was a bad Doctor as well, 'cause, apparently, eccentricity is bad. FYI, Tom and David were GREAT Doctors, perhaps the best the show has ever had. He was 34 when he started as the Doctor, and 38 when he finished – yet he played it as though the Time Lord were a 12-year-old boy. - Ahah. Yeah. *coughs* Human Nature/Family of Blood, The End of Time, Waters of Mars, etc* - Yeah, you're so right! 12 year-olds fear for their death and fight for the ones they love to death. But Tennant doesn’t look anything like a 12-year-old boy. He looks like Harry Potter’s camp uncle. - I'm not even commenting on that remark.
Doctor Who is, ultimately, a children’s programme – at any rate, it certainly has been since its relaunch in 2005. - I beg your pardon?? The Ninth Doctor had some creepy stories, and so did Ten. I'd say the show started getting more adult after Pertwee joined the show. Oh, the name doesn't ring a bell? And if the Doctor is to be portrayed as a gawky, gangling youth (rather than the barking professorial types of old, such as Tom Baker), he might as well be played by an actual youth. - Very funny. So older people have to sit on their couch all day watching soap operas, is that what you are saying?
So Matt Smith – who is 27 going on 16 – is ideally cast.
If you’re enjoying Matt Smith’s portrayal, incidentally, you might want to buy the paper version of the Telegraph tomorrow – every issue comes with a free Doctor Who audiobook, read by Smith himself. There’ll be another in The Sunday Telegraph this weekend, too. - This one takes the cookie. DAVID TENNANT READS THE AUDIOBOOKS!! You are part of the 'Telegraph' team, how can you not know that?
Right. Rant's over. I'm sorry if I was too honest. Or too fangirl-ish. Meh.