The original series of Dr.Who was the worst peice of dog **** I had ever seen... the new series is just as bad! A large budget can make a huge difference e.g. watch an episode of stargate from season 1 and then watch an episode from season 9-10, massive difference in the way it looks.

That's within the same show, though. Increasing the budget of a good show is obviously going to make it seem more impressive, but the show has to be solid enough beforehand for the budget to matter. Giving a bad show a huge budget is akin to shining a piece of shit - it's not going to make the show look more impressive. Hence, the budget is unimportant relative to the show's concept.

I just marathonned the whole series. I thought it was pretty good. I really like Charlie Brooker, the main writer, anyway... particularly the first episode is recognisable as his work, knowing his views on the media and that. But yeah, Big Brother contestants and media types vs. zombies = win. I liked it.


There were lots of subtle jokes and digs, but I guess they had to avoid the properly outrageous comedic angle to avoid comparisons with Shaun of the Dead. Speaking of which... Simon Pegg and Charlie Brooker have been having it out through the Guardian about proper zombie classifications. Worth a look.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2008/nov/04/television-simon-pegg-dead-set

And the second half of http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/nov/10/barack-obama-zombies-running