• Doctor Who is the best

    Doctor Who continues to change which means that when something gets old it changes it gets better and better. Each incarnation of the doctor attracts to different people, while some people like one incarnation others like another. The fact is that doctor who has stood the tests of time and continues to be amazing 53 years after it started.

  • Doctor Who has it all

    The character of the Doctor is better than any of the Star Trek characters, and the companions usually have more development than most of the Star Trek crew members, who are oftentimes just there to spout out technobabble. It's also funny, which Star Trek occasionally is but it's usually very serious, which works when it has something interesting to say but oftentimes it doesn't. That isn't to say Doctor Who can't be serious as well, of course. Then, of course, the stories have much greater variety to them. Star Trek will occasionally do something out of the box, but you generally know what the tone of any given episode will be, whereas Doctor Who is constantly unpredictable, while still remaining recognizably itself.

  • The title has to go to Doctor Who.

    Both keep me interested. But the bottom line is, is that Doctor Who always had a better approach to space and traveling then Star Trek because basically in Star Trek the ships are basically just ships that could be basically put on the ground on a planet but instead are just put in space. In Doctor Who there always seems to be a variety with each episode and the writers are able to make it always interesting and enticing. However, with Star Trek the formula can get a bit stale after a while, while Doctor Who's episode never get boring even when watching 5 or 6 episodes continuously.

  • Although I love both I prefer doctor who

    These are the reasons for my choice:

    A) It has a lot of variation. Although trek has the same amount of variation, it is more likely for who to have different styles. Doctor who ranges from the incredibly childish Fear her to the downright dark Damaged Goods.

    B) Nothing is permanent. People come, people go, if you don't like one doctor or companion it is not as big a deal.

    P.S A lot of people who are saying star trek are being aggressive about it in a strange way. Please stop it.

  • Although I love both I prefer doctor who

    These are the reasons for my choice:

    A) It has a lot of variation. Although trek has the same amount of variation, it is more likely for who to have different styles. Doctor who ranges from the incredibly childish Fear her to the downright dark Damaged Goods.

    B) Nothing is permanent. People come, people go, if you don't like one doctor or companion it is not as big a deal.

    P.S A lot of people who are saying star trek are being aggressive about it in a strange way. Please stop it.

  • It has more villians

    It has loads of recurring villians like the daleks the cyberman and davros and the master and the weeping angels and sontarons and silurians and sea devils and slitheen and many many many many many many many many many many many many many many many many many many many more

  • Doctor Who changes actors more often with a story, and keeps the viewers intrigued, and on their toes, and has Weeping Angels!!!!!!!!

    Star Trek was ruined by X-Men, because the actors couldn't keep up with the show. Everyone loves Doctor Who, because the Doctor Picks up babes. Doctor Who has more monsters, and people of any age can watch it. Not just old guys that remember the show from their childhood. DW!

  • Doctor Who by a mile

    Doctor Who ran for 26 years strong, stopped for a few breaks and continued, and has been on for fifty years! Star Trek failed after three seasons, did a reboot (which failed), another different series (which failed), and so on.
    The Doctor can defeat trillions of Daleks with just the help of his companions while in Star Trek, a whole lot enterprise is needed to defeat one enemy.
    Doctor Who is more free. For example, the writers can dream up of any silly plot and still have it make sense. Star Trek is too serious and is no fun.

  • Dr Who is better

    Star Treks writing was very shallow. Each episode was its own stand alone show which over an complete season never tells an underlined story. Dr Who on the otherhand has each episode give part of the bigger story that is building between each episode. Additionally, there is nothing as family wholesome as Dr Who on TV today.

  • Doctor Who is more relatable

    Doctor Who is more human. Star Trek is good, don't get me wrong, but I can identify with the characters on Doctor Who. The Doctor is an alien time lord, but his companion(s) are always human(s) from the present. It is also way more moving than Star Trek. The Van Gogh episode, the Rings of Akahaten to name a few.

  • Star trek is better than doctor who

    Doctor who 1963-1980s sucks.The aliens are like costume and more like a kid show.Star trek 1966 is better because the episodes are exciting and more like wow.Most of doctor who's episode are boring and can make me fall asleep yeah.Star trek for the win!!!Yeah yahoo oh yeah rock on! Yes

  • Couldn't get into Doctor Who

    My whole family likes to watch Dr Who but I couldn't share their passion for it. I do like some episodes like Genesis of the Daleks and the Weeping Angles but not enough to commit to watching it regularly.

    My main beef with Dr Who is that the Doctor just pulls things out of his ass too often. In almost every episode the Doctor gets into terrible peril only to wave his magic wand and reveal some knowledge that gets him out of danger. This is sloppy writing and it really impacts my enjoyment of the show.

  • Star trek was successful enough to spawn 13 films. Doctor who spawned one disappointing film.

    Yeah, some of the films were terrible, some of them were great, but the point is that there was a greater demand for trek. Producers saw the franchise as a moneymaker specifically because of how successful the television series' had been. Also, a lot of the arguments in favor of Who specifically state how the changes to the show are what keep it interesting, but a lot can be said for consistency. The Trek film First Contact establishes a plot device that is explored in Enterprise, while another episode of ENT explains a Klingon genetic issue to retroactively explain events in TOS. Even the rebooted film series clearly follows the original continuity. Meanwhile, in Who, London is constantly being invaded by aliens, but history is constantly being rewritten by the doctor and his companions so the invasions never happened and you never know whether these daleks are the same as those other daleks from that other episode. To me, this is basically the same approach as the "it was all just a dream" approach: lazy and uninteresting. The overarching plot devices seem silly as hell. I remember watching the "bad wolf" season finale and thinking "wow, this bad wolf thing seems really forced." I felt the same way about the "Doctor Donna" and "River song" devices as well, and I was so annoyed by the shows efforts to shove down our throats that the Doctor was so in love with Rose. It's the same impression I got when a pushy car salesman told me that I should buy from him because he wasn't pushy. What you're telling me and what I'm seeing are two different things. The plot's insistence on establishing the love between these two was already too much in the seasons that featured Rose, but then they just kept pushing it even in the seasons that followed, which really made the episodes that featured Martha seem extra cheap. I obviously like Doctor Who enough to follow it throughout all this, but Star Trek has never irritated or frustrated me in these ways. The overarching plot devices in Trek take time to evolve naturally, and the explanations for events are satisfying, even when they rely heavily on technobabble. Doctor who is fun, but Star Trek is definitely more intelligent, which makes for better entertainment in my opinion.

  • Star Trek is deeper

    While I LOVE Doctor Who, I must say that Star Trek is better. While they both explore human nature and our funny little heads (that most people have), Star Trek goes deeper than Doctor Who. Star Trek is more realistic in technology and in psychology. And as of Vulcans VS Time Lords? I must say Vulcans (they are more civilised), but the ultimate alien would be a half Vulcan- half Time Lord :-D

  • Very long, rambling, post-all-nighter rant.

    Firstly, some argue that the characters are better in Doctor Who. I disagree. I have always liked Doctor Who, but I never became emotionally attached to the characters in Doctor Who the way I did to the characters in Star Trek. Think of Spock- Doctor Who doesn't have any character with such depth, except for the Doctor himself, who is very difficult to connect to because he is so far above his human companions. The larger ensemble cast is much more enjoyable to watch than the Doctor and his two or one companions, with many different kinds of relationships on screen at once.
    Secondly, above, somebody has made the point that the Doctor can 'defeat trillions of Daleks with just the help of his companions while in Star Trek, a whole lot enterprise is needed to defeat one enemy'. Putting aside questionable grammar, this is called being realistic. This is less true for Classic Who, but in reboot Doctor Who a lot of this involves a power of love ending mixed with pseudoscience. I am certainly not denying that there is pseudoscience in Star Trek, but at least in Star Trek they solve the problem with a practical, technical solution. In Star Trek, Starfleet is a well-run, organised military organisation. The crew got to their high positions by moving up through the ranks, from Ensign to Admiral, by WORKING for it. By doing what they're told to do by Starfleet, because that is the best way for a starship to actually work. They don't have a sonic screwdriver, they have phasers and photon torpedos, because they actually need them.
    Star Trek is a larger universe. There are far more planets mentioned, more races that are actually called by name. Take two of the most famous, for example- Romulans and Klingons. Both have a well fleshed-out history and culture. Romulans and Vulcans can be compared to show both the good and bad sides of embracing and rejecting emotion. In TNG and DS9 we get a Klingon crewmember who is benevolent, despite the fact that Klingons have also been villains. This is far more subtle than the utterly evil Daleks, which feel only hatred and attempt to kill all other life forms, or the Cybermen, who are simply emotionless robots.
    I'm not arguing that 'Spock's Brain' is better than Doctor Who. Not at all. Doctor Who is a good show, and Star Trek also had some REALLY low points. And some that are nice enough, you just can't quite figure out why they exist at all. I used to be a Doctor Who fan, and I still am to a certain extent- but when I started watching TOS, I was immediately far more engaged than I'd ever been in Doctor Who.

  • Star Trek is way better

    They make piece and are awesome in Star Trek they teach lessons and always go by the code. In Star Trek they youse things that we can relate to can you relate to an old ugly telephone box? Star Trek fans can ask a Star Trek dislikeing Doctor who fan about Star Trek and they will not know anything about it.

  • I don't like either of them.

    They are both not really my cup of tea, but startrek is much much MUCH better, just because it is way easier to get into. I tried to watch Dr who, and I hated it. I tried to watch star trek, and thought. "yup. That could be cool. I should see more"

  • We go all out!!!!

    We Trekies are way to good for you fools. Doctor who is good, but not as good. Us Trekies are way more dedicated than you chumps with your sonic screwdrivers and celery and long scarves and tardisis. We explore while you mess with time. All in all, we are the better people. So suck it Doctor Poo.(LOL SON!!!!!!!!!!!!)

  • Star Trek is simply Inspiring

    Both are great. But my vote goes for Star Trek. It Inspires and entertains at the same time. While Doctor Who is simply entertainment. Doctor Who you can watch and simply turn your brain off and enjoy the ride. In Dr Who, you have creative fantasy worlds, but they're just fantasy. A world where everyone is stuck in a traffic jam for 20 years, statues come to life and a race of salt shakers with plungers for hands. If the Salt Shakers choose that body, why choose a format that is just utterly ridiculous. With the technology available to them, why not be mech warriors or something more useful. Again, just stop thinking and enjoy the ride. It is a fun ride though. Star Trek aliens are more realistic with warrior races who succeed in the universe through brute strength and war, a race where money is everything, a race where logic rules all decision making. When you imagine humans going out into space, you can imagine that humanity will run into aliens like the ones seen in Star Trek. It's inspired real life scientists and engineers with cell phones, ipad and many other tech.

  • Star Trek is superior science fiction.

    It appeals to a much larger range of audiences. Why ? In DW, all the characters are white English men or women. In ST, however, we have white Englishmen (Jean-Luc Picard), white Americans (Jim Kirk, so many others that I can't be bothered to go into detail for), Asians (ensign Harry Kim, Hikaru Sulu), blacks (nichele Nichols, who played Uhura, was the first African American ever to be in a tv series, avery brooks as Captain Benjamin Sisko, Levar Burton as Geordi LaForge and Tim Russ as Lietenant Commander Tuvok). It even frequently had women as main characters, most notably Capatain Kathryn Janeway who was the main character on board the ship in VOYAGER (1995-2001). When was the last time there was a female doctor ? Oh that's right. NEVER. In 52 years, NEVER. Also, if you think that the Trekkies stole the Borg from the Whoovian's idea for the Cybermen. You're wrong. They're different. The Borg ASSIMILATE people. The Cybermen just invade in general, which is boring.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.