True fan Test - Just for fun!

[TMLS]

I have totally ripped this off from another forum:

Just for amusement, and quite possibly enlightenment, why not have a go at the following questionnaire designed to make some headway into the time-long argument of what makes a "True Fan". Make a note of your answers ("A", "B", or "C") to each of the 15 questions, then simply tot up the amount of A's, B's or C's and unspoiler the relevant scientific evaluation at the end of the questionnaire, to see if you have what it takes to be... a "True Fan".

Best of luck!



1. On the latest incarnation of The Master...
a) Preferred Jacobi's. Much more sinister.
b) Didn't prefer one or the other.
c) Preferred Simm's. It was funny.

2. What do you think of the show taking regular "gap years"?
a) Not too happy about it to be honest. We've never needed one before.
b) Who cares, as long as it's coming back.
c) Great idea. It'll return refreshed and better than ever.

3. Catherine Tate as companion?
a) F*** ***!
b) As long as she's not all shouty and annoying, like in the Christmas special.
c) A top choice. Perfect. Donna was well-written, brilliantly portrayed, and not a bit like any of CT's other comedy characters.

4. I prefer the "baddies" to be...
a) Scary and ruthless.
b) Not bothered. It's the soapy bits that I prefer.
c) Humourous. Wise-cracking, farting, over-the-top. That kind of thing.

5. The Slitheen...
a) Childish rubber dross.
b) They were okay. In a cheesy-funny-fartmongous kind of way.
c) Great "Who" Baddie. Most are just too dumb to realise it.

6. New Who's episodes...
a) A few corkers, but most probably rate as poor to average/okay.
b) The weaker episodes don't go unnoticed, but I generally enjoy most of what I've seen.
c) Have yet to encounter a bad one.

7. How would you like the show to develop?
a) A little darker and scarier - that's what Who's all about.
b) Wouldn't worry if it did go more Scooby Doo or Harry Potter.
c) It's perfect as it is.

8. On the Christmas episodes...
a) Usually weak, repetitive, style over substance. Could be better.
b) Light, fluffy, plenty of cheesy thrills. Just the ticket for a Christmas Day.
c) Outstanding examples of the show at it's best.

9. On plot-holes...
a) They do tend to stick out and spoil the effect.
b) Noticed one or two, but they don't really spoil it for me.
c) Never really spotted one.

10. On who should replace David Tennant as The Doctor...
a) Has to have screen prescence. Good actor. Preferably serious. Not too young.
b) Don't care, as long as they're quirky and pull funny faces.
c) Must be male. Sexy. Sense of humour. Someone I'd sleep with.

11. On the family/love/emotional sub-plots...
a) Can be badly written. Repetitive. Clichéd. Too soapy and often embarrassing.
b) All structured as your typical soap drama - I can handle that.
c) Love all that. Every Companion should fall in love with The Doctor.

12. On Torchwood...
a) I'd be hard-pushed to find anything good to say about it!
b) I'll watch it if it's on. Seems ok.
c) A worthy companion show to Doctor Who.

13. On Sarah Jane Adventures...
a) A good effort. Doesn't talk down to young or old. Reminiscent of Classic Who.
b) Enjoyable kid's stuff, like Doctor Who.
c) It's great, but don't like to talk about it. It makes Doctor Who look flawed in comparison.

14. On Russell T. Davies and genre writing...
a) Really hasn't got a clue what sci-fi is.
b) I'm not really a sci-fi fan, but it appeals to me.
c) RTD is a literary genius who excels in writing sci-fi.

15. On the best Who script-writer...
a) Can't decide. Perhaps Paul Cornell or Stephen Moffat.
b) Don't pay that much attention to who writes what. Sorry.
c) Russell T. Davies. Without a doubt.



Quick evaluations of your score:

Mostly A's:



You're just a fan of exciting and well-written drama - what are you doing here? Get over to the "Lost", "Prison Break" and "Battlestar" threads immediately!

True Fan? Er... no. Sorry. Too sophisticated.



Mostly B's:



You really couldn't care less, could you? You'll watch it, but tend not to criticise or worry about any Production decisions whatsoever. Just an uncomplicated dependable viewer, without doubt or reserve.

True Fan? Most definitely! Congratulations! You'd watch any old ****! The BBC are proud of you!



Mostly C's:



Sorry mate, but you're just a delusional saddo-masochist! Possibly with "stalker" tendencies too! It's only a TV show!


True Fan? Only in your overactive imagination.



Sorry, I haven't a clue why only one of the spoilers works!

[constantine]

I refuse to answer, on account of the fact that this is only new who. There. I pulled a kobiyashi maru

[TMLS]

I scored a's and b's. Therefore I'm a sophisticated true fan who'll watch any old rubbish ;)

[MidgardDragon]

I refuse to answer on the grounds that these questions are all based in opinion, and someone's opinion should not determine whether or not they are a "true fan".

[constantine]

Originally posted by TMLS
I scored a's and b's. Therefore I'm a sophisticated true fan who'll watch any old rubbish ;)

I'm a sophisticated sci fi fan who loves anything bad and features the BBC quarry every other week.

[Pesk]

1. On the latest incarnation of The Master...
a) Preferred Jacobi's. Much more sinister.


2. What do you think of the show taking regular "gap years"?
a) Not too happy about it to be honest. We've never needed one before.


3. Catherine Tate as companion?
b) As long as she's not all shouty and annoying, like in the Christmas special.


4. I prefer the "baddies" to be...
a) Scary and ruthless.
c) Humourous. Wise-cracking, farting, over-the-top. That kind of thing.

Too close to decide.

5. The Slitheen...
b) They were okay. In a cheesy-funny-fartmongous kind of way.


6. New Who's episodes...
b) The weaker episodes don't go unnoticed, but I generally enjoy most of what I've seen.


7. How would you like the show to develop?
a) A little darker and scarier - that's what Who's all about.


8. On the Christmas episodes...
b) Light, fluffy, plenty of cheesy thrills. Just the ticket for a Christmas Day.


9. On plot-holes...
b) Noticed one or two, but they don't really spoil it for me.


10. On who should replace David Tennant as The Doctor...
b) Don't care, as long as they're quirky and pull funny faces.



11. On the family/love/emotional sub-plots...
a) Can be badly written. Repetitive. Clichéd. Too soapy and often embarrassing.


12. On Torchwood...
a) I'd be hard-pushed to find anything good to say about it!


13. On Sarah Jane Adventures...
a) A good effort. Doesn't talk down to young or old. Reminiscent of Classic Who.
b) Enjoyable kid's stuff, like Doctor Who.
c) It's great, but don't like to talk about it. It makes Doctor Who look flawed in comparison.

Never watched it; no opinion.

14. On Russell T. Davies and genre writing...
a) Really hasn't got a clue what sci-fi is.


15. On the best Who script-writer...
b) Don't pay that much attention to who writes what. Sorry.



The BBC are apparantly proud of me. :)

[smallville0001]

l say that this doesn't include a large enough variety of answers.And all you need to ask to find out a true fan is,what do you think of the Show generally?

I would answer,I Love every episode,the writers and directors manage to Come up with different ways or impressing me everytime. :)

[borednow]

you can't even say that Sarah Jane Adventures suck, I don't know if they do or not because I haven't seen them but someone must think they do, or that emotional plots have been well handled but you'd like to see them well controlled, aka no more companions falling for the doctor, how about something new. Given that the doctor is now the last of the Time Lords there needs to be emotional subplots or it's unrealistic. There where emotional subplots in the old show they just avoided having the doctor involved in romantic ones. This test is garbage in my opinion, none of my answers are there at all. It's also disrespectful because if you actually like the show you are stalker? pfff.

Whoever wrote this probably hasn't gotten over that they replaced Tom Baker. Disrespectful, in poor form, and biased towards old school Who Nazis. Just because you can enjoy something for what it is doesn't make you a herd animal. Just because you can't doesn't make you an intellectual. Enjoying New Who doesn't make you stupid. If you don't like it, fine don't watch it. Write letters to BBC. Do something positive, don't insult people who are enjoying themselves.

[TMLS]

If you read all three you'll see there's no "correct" answer, even as a "true" fan you're accused of watching "any old ****" - you can't win. Whether you've been positive about Nu-Who or not. It's biased against everybody.

It was a silly joke, someone dreamt up on OG. Most people take it in the correct spirit, please try to.

[borednow]

It's very negative. I'm sorry if my reaction was overly so but it's seems to be in mean spirits. This is the type of stuff/attitude that I think causes a lot of the fights around here. I don't think it's silly.

[newbaggy]

Originally posted by borednow
It's very negative. I'm sorry if my reaction was overly so but it's seems to be in mean spirits. This is the type of stuff/attitude that I think causes a lot of the fights around here. I don't think it's silly.

Welcome to the joys(!) of true Who fandom. I've watched the series since the early 70s (yes, I'm that old!), so I can remember a time when some people were complaining that Tom Baker was too silly and not a patch on Jon Pertwee! Basically, for the last thirty years, Doctor Who has "not been as good as it used to be" and whoever made up the then current production team "don't know how to make good stories" - at least, that has seemed to be the view expressed by some "fans". That's why you get joke polls like this one.

So for Nu-Who fans who feel put upon by the old-timers, I'd say that "classic" Who could be brilliant, but also very inconsistant. For every truly great story, there is one that should probably stay locked away in the archives and never seen again. I grew up loving Jon Pertwee and Tom Baker, but I loved Christopher Eccleston as much, and David Tennant, to me, is (just) the best ever. Similarly, my preference for best companion would be Sarah Jane, but Rose and Martha were fine companions - and far superior to the likes of Jo Grant, Mel Bush and Adric. The writing and acting nowadays isn't always as good as it could be, but at worst is still far superior to some of the frankly embarrassing scripts and performances that cropped up in the 70s and 80s.

Don't worry, in ten years' time, there will be a load of new fans, and you can complain that Doctor Who was so much better in the old days "when Billie Piper was in it". Then you will be a "true Who fan".

[TMLS]

Originally posted by newbaggy
Welcome to the joys(!) of true Who fandom. I've watched the series since the early 70s (yes, I'm that old!), so I can remember a time when some people were complaining that Tom Baker was too silly and not a patch on Jon Pertwee! Basically, for the last thirty years, Doctor Who has "not been as good as it used to be" and whoever made up the then current production team "don't know how to make good stories" - at least, that has seemed to be the view expressed by some "fans". That's why you get joke polls like this one.

So for Nu-Who fans who feel put upon by the old-timers, I'd say that "classic" Who could be brilliant, but also very inconsistant. For every truly great story, there is one that should probably stay locked away in the archives and never seen again. I grew up loving Jon Pertwee and Tom Baker, but I loved Christopher Eccleston as much, and David Tennant, to me, is (just) the best ever. Similarly, my preference for best companion would be Sarah Jane, but Rose and Martha were fine companions - and far superior to the likes of Jo Grant, Mel Bush and Adric. The writing and acting nowadays isn't always as good as it could be, but at worst is still far superior to some of the frankly embarrassing scripts and performances that cropped up in the 70s and 80s.

Don't worry, in ten years' time, there will be a load of new fans, and you can complain that Doctor Who was so much better in the old days "when Billie Piper was in it". Then you will be a "true Who fan".

May not agree with couple of the points (Tennant???), but brilliantly put.

[newbaggy]

Originally posted by TMLS
May not agree with couple of the points (Tennant???)

Ah, well, ever since I first saw in in "Takin' Over the Asylum" in 1994, I've thought of him as a potential Doctor, so I do feel a bit propretorial towards him. One of the great strengths of Doctor Who is that there really is no "Best Doctor" or "Best Companion" - but there are some excellent candidates, and there is sure to be one to suit your personal taste.

[TMLS]

Oh certainly. Doc-love is as subjective as music.

[Cromartiefan]

1. On the latest incarnation of The Master...
c) Preferred Simm's. It was funny.
(I'm ignoring everything that happened in Last of the Time Lords. before that he was great)

2. What do you think of the show taking regular "gap years"?
a) Not too happy about it to be honest. We've never needed one before.

3. Catherine Tate as companion?
b) As long as she's not all shouty and annoying, like in the Christmas special.

4. I prefer the "baddies" to be...
a) Scary and ruthless.

5. The Slitheen...
a) Childish rubber dross.
Although they were better in the Sarah Jane adventures...a little

6. New Who's episodes...
a) A few corkers, but most probably rate as poor to average/okay.

7. How would you like the show to develop?
a) A little darker and scarier - that's what Who's all about.

8. On the Christmas episodes...
a) Usually weak, repetitive, style over substance. Could be better.

9. On plot-holes...
a) They do tend to stick out and spoil the effect.

10. On who should replace David Tennant as The Doctor...
a) Has to have screen prescence. Good actor. Preferably serious. Not too young.

11. On the family/love/emotional sub-plots...
a) Can be badly written. Repetitive. Clichéd. Too soapy and often embarrassing.

12. On Torchwood...
a) I'd be hard-pushed to find anything good to say about it!

13. On Sarah Jane Adventures...
c) It's great, but don't like to talk about it. It makes Doctor Who look flawed in comparison.

14. On Russell T. Davies and genre writing...
a) Really hasn't got a clue what sci-fi is.

15. On the best Who script-writer...
b) Don't pay that much attention to who writes what. Sorry.

So that's 10 As - I'm hardcoooore!

[ginnyfan]

I'm a delusional sado-masochist with stalker tenancies. I'm only a Doctor Who fan in my overactive imagination. :\