Very very predictable, including the post credit scene !!!

The film was still a fun one that will make you laugh and have you leaving the theater feeling like you just stole something valuable and got away with it.

At first rather annoying in its heavy emphasis on reenactments, this movie ultimately proves fascinating, simply because the complicated, highly dramatic tale it tells still almost defies belief.

It is an exhilarating, distressing, funny and profound film, with one of the more memorable film scores in years,

Listen Americans, you can't take any of our good British ideas and Yank-ise them. It just doesn't work. Jut like this movie.Now, I'm more of a modern-day Whovian. Matt Smith was the Doctor when I started watching it (2013 I believe it was) and then I became hooked. I watched every episode after that, and watched some of the originals, which were great shows for their time, and some episodes hold up today (but not the 4th Doctor story with the mummies that crush people with their chests). I understand what makes Doctor Who great, and it's the same for every series: Funny but also dark, serious and sad at times. It should have genius writing and likable characters. It should have actors who fit their roles. It needs British-ness. Does this movie have any of that? Spoiler alert: No.The entire movie has no relevance to Doctor Who. It has no actual aliens, no good writing, no likable characters and no British-ness. It's just if the Americans did Doctor Who. That means a stupid idea for the main character (The Doctor is not half human) and everything else. The Master is your generic villain who wants to take over the world (or destroy it, to be honest, it's a generic cliché that's completely forgettable) and a companion that deserves to be forgotten for how little she adds to the story besides a stupid love interest for The Doctor. My main and biggest problem with this movie is the fact that it feels nothing like Doctor Who. Why would anyone give The Master to the Daleks? The Daleks just kill everything that isn't one of them, so why would they let people bring him to their planet, hold a trial, execute him and give his remains to their biggest enemy: The Doctor? They'd kill him and The Doctor.Anyone who likes this movie and the people who made this movie obviously know nothing about Doctor Who. Don't watch this.

I have just started watching Doctor Who over the past few months and to give you an idea of what I think, the 2 best Doctors are Tom Baker and David Tenant. I have no bias to any of the Doctors (except Pertwee probably because he's stuck on Earth for most of his run and to me that's not Doctor Who) But this movie was probably as hit and miss as you can get.Okay so after Sylvester McCoy's Doctor gets The Master's Ashes after being trialled on Skaro! (If you're not a Doctor Who fan it's the home-world of the Daleks, the most recognizable villains on the show most known for their use of the word "EXTERMINATE! EXTERMINATE!") and after he is found guilty The Doctor finds his ashes... Somehow! and takes them to Gaiifrey. But The Master turns into a Water Snake and steers the TARDIS off course down to Earth where upon re-entry The Doctor is killed, only to be revived. The Master possesses Eric Roberts who somehow is an even MORE obvious bad guy then the black caped, goatee wearing twirling mustache guy(s) from the original show. So it's up to The new Doctor and a surgeon who failed to revive him when he was Sylvester McCoy and rushed to Hospital trying to stop The Master from opening the Eye Of Harmony (did they make that up just for this? No that is a serious question) to basically undo the molecular structure of the entire planet and wipe out all life.Probably the only thing about this movie that is legitimately and succeeded in legitimately entertaining me is Paul McGann as The Doctor, I mean if this was done in such a way that didn't make me question it at almost every turn I would have full faith the show would actually be revived successfully as opposed to waiting for 9 more years. The other thing I enjoyed was Eric Roberts' as The Master but I don't think it was in the way anyone in the process of making this movie thought it would. The way he does it SCREAMS "Villain!" and... Snake eyes with the black clothing and having his hair slicked back looks ridiculous when he's trying to blend in.Okay this movie makes very little sense if at all, How was The Doctor able to break out of a steel door with nothing but his bare hands? Why does that Chang Lee kid trust The Master? Why does The Hospital destroy all records of The Doctor being there saying "Nobody will come looking for him, we've only had him for one night"? Why is The Eye Of Harmony rail roaded into the plot of this movie and why is it never mentioned before or since in ANY other Doctor Who Lore? Why does The Eye Of Harmony resurrect people when it wants to? How did The Master get into The TARDIS? This and many more basically hurt the movie and made it very clear why the whole revival idea didn't work. Oh and what makes it worse is The Doctor and the surgeon do this pesky love relationship, it doesn't fit in because I don't think we are given a single reason why.All I do have to say is that Doctor Who is a British show and the British know how to handle him for the most part. This movie, made with the help of the Americans, it's made clear why it didn't take off because it stuck to conventions of American TV at the time... Which for the most part when dealing with shows like this sucked, I'm sure that people might point out a couple of exceptions to that but it is made clear that the people who made this didn't have a good idea for where to take the character, or at least if they did it wasn't executed well.

A blight on my childhood and a travesty compared to the original, classic DOCTOR WHO TV series. I remember - fondly - watching the Sylvester McCoy stories when I was a kid, and I was 15 when this TV movie premiered on television. I expected a lot; what I got was the worst kind of nonsense, a film as offensive as it was bland.Where to begin with the problems? McCoy himself is given short shrift early on, to be replaced by the uninteresting Paul McGann who never makes the role his own; sometimes he appears to think he's in a pantomime, so lazy is his performance. Then there's the narrative, which adopts some kind of nonsensical action-movie template instead of the usual intricate plotting of a proper Dr Who story.The blame for all this can be laid at the door of the producers, who decided to appeal to the American audience in an attempt to break the American market. So this was filmed in Canada with a mostly American cast, and it completely misses the boat in terms of the feel of a Dr Who adventure. Instead, we get blatant rip-offs and homages to tons of American cultural icons: dodgy liquid metal CGI effects copied from TERMINATOR 2, Eric Roberts playing the Master and dressing as Arnie from THE TERMINATOR, plus pointless comparisons to Universal's FRANKENSTEIN.And that's the gutting thing. If this had just been a typical cheesy US B-movie, I wouldn't have minded as much; I've seen plenty of bad 'uns, after all. The fact that it's masquerading as WHO is what makes me seethe, and yes, I still hate it just the same all these years later. It's a horrible travesty, and something I still couldn't get off my TV screen quickly enough.

The TV Movie: the one attempt to relaunch the series between the original series ending in 1989 and the new series beginning in 2005. So long remembered as Paul McGann's one TV appearance as the Doctor or as that time the Americans ruined Doctor Who, the TV Movie was written off for a long time. It also faded into obscurity for many US fans due to the rights issues between the BBC and Universal kept it from receiving first a VHS and then later a DVD release. With the DVD finally out and with the TV Movie's profile rising again, perhaps we can finally see it for being more then the single televised adventure of the eighth Doctor but also the comeback that should have been.Perhaps the biggest highlight of the movie is that contains Paul McGann's debut as the eighth Doctor. Some of the actors who've played the Doctor have found their feet after some time, others almost immediately and it would seem that McGann is one of the latter. From the moment he appears walking out of a morgue in a shroud to the last scene in the TARDIS, McGann embodies everything the Doctor should be: eccentric, intelligent, melancholic at times yet be an all around watchable and likable character. The American setting in fact highlights the eccentric qualities of McGann's performance even more. Perhaps the greatest shame of the TV movie is that this would be McGann's sole Doctor Who TV appearance.There's also a good supporting cast backing him up. Playing the companion is Daphne Ashbrook as Dr. Grace Holloway who goes from a simple operation into an adventure with the fate of the world at stake. It helps that McGann shares some fine chemistry with her and the movie shines whenever they're together. Ashbrook also makes Grace's back and forth swapping about whether or not to believe the Doctor work despite the fact that it makes very little sense. There's also Yee Jee Tso as Chang Lee who does a adequate job due in what seems due in large part to the script rather than his skills as an actor. Not forgetting of course Sylvester McCoy's all too short appearance as the seventh Doctor in the opening minutes either though his appearance seems rather unnecessary and potentially over complicates the film for anyone seeing Doctor Who for the first time (something that this TV Movie was supposed to be for).Which rather brings us to Eric Roberts as the Master. I mus confess that I am in two minds about Roberts' performance. There are times when he is actually quite sinister such as the scene when he initially meets Chang Lee in the TARDIS. Yet for the most part, Roberts is over the top at every possible occasion such as the "I always dress for the occasion!" line for example. The Roberts Master then is sinister yet over the top but whether that helps or hurts the film is left up to the individual viewer to decide.The production values could easily rival anything that the new series has yet produced. Of particular mention is the music of composer John Debney's score, the first time that Doctor Who had gotten the feel of having a full orchestral score including the excellent version of the Doctor Who Theme used in the opening and closing credits. The design of the TARDIS interior with its Gothic/Jules Verne, almost steam punk, feel is also of note. There is also the superb direction of Geoffrey Sax throughout the entire movie which does its best to ride the fine line between the Britishness of the series and the American setting, something in which it sometimes succeeds and sometimes doesn't.Which leads to the script. For something that was meant to be the launch of an American co-produced Doctor Who TV series yet is is seemingly continuity heavy. Within the first few minutes for example the viewer has the Master, the Daleks, regeneration, the TARDIS and two different Doctors being thrown at them. The movie itself works well with its mix of humor and a good vs evil storyline as the plot heads towards the Millennium (remember this was shown in 1996) until the ending. While there's plenty of plot holes along the way (such as the aforementioned business with Grace shifting back and forth about believing the Doctor), for the most part though the story holds up despite those faults.Where does all of that leave the TV Movie then? It features a fine debut for the eighth Doctor, good performances and has some fine production values. While it has its faults, the fact that this was more or less a pilot does excuse some of the faults present. Looking back on the TV Movie nearly twenty years after it was made one thing is clear: it was the comeback that should have been.