First Season Review (long)
Matt Michael
Hello and welcome to the first in a series of reviews - one for each season
of DW (bet you can't wait for the next one ;-) Without further ado:
First Season (1963-64)
(A note on story titles: no offence to revisionists, but I've stuck to the
traditional story titles, e.g. "The Daleks" not "The Mutants [Hartnell]")
A: Part 1 - "An Unearthly Child"
One of the very best first episodes of anything ever. The decision to
introduce the world of the Doctor and his TARDIS through the eyes of two
adults was a brilliant move: the episode avoids any pseudo-teenage "Wow,
like, a time machine man" dialogue and instead concentrates on some very
realistic reactions from Ian and Barbara, neither of whom quite believe what
they've stumbled across. In particular, Jacqueline Hill shines as Barbara,
creating a thoroughly rounded and believable lead. William Hartnell is also
very good as the enigmatic Doctor Who. It was brave move to initially make
the central character an anti-hero. Hartnell manages to pull it off very
well, moving between condescending scorn and angst to ensure that the
audience knows he is motivated not by malevolence but by fear for his family
and home. It's surprising how well the leads' characters are sketched out
by the end of the first episode - Doctor Who is the arrogant scientist whose
selfish nature sometimes jeopardises his companions' safety; Ian is the
impetuous young hero figure, chasing after Susan, arguing with the Doctor
and trying to escape; Barbara is the voice of morality and reason, the
conscience of the crew, if you like, counselling against rash action and
tempering Ian's headstrong nature with her patience and rationality; Susan
is the screaming girl (it's sad to note that once her primary function in
the plot, to act as a reason for Ian and Barbara to go poking around in
Totters Lane, is completed, Susan does very little else - a sign of things
to come?). The magical wonder hiding in a junk yard works well as an
allegory for the series' place at the BBC - a marvellous creation treated
like garbage. On a cold November evening in 1963 something wonderful was
born.
10/10.
A: Parts 2-4 - "100,000 BC"
After the fantastic first episode, this is a huge let down. It isn't badly
written, but it's incredibly tedious and dull (the first
capture-escape-capture story, and, unfortunately, not the last) - not helped
by some very boring sets. There are some worthy attempts to show primitive
thought patterns (Za tries to make fire from long cold ashes), but
all-in-all it's very uninvolving - perhaps because dialogue between the crew
and the cavepeople is so limited in scope. However, in the absence of a
strong plot there's plenty of time to learn more about the leads. The
Doctor is far less objectionable than in "An Unearthly Child", and he comes
to an uneasy truce with Ian and Barbara as they are thrown together in
adversity. As a serial, it's completely atypical of later DW (if there's
such a thing as an atypical DW story :) It's a historical, really, but it
doesn't fit comfortably into that or any other category. Not one of my
favourites.
4/10.
B: "The Daleks"
<Received Wisdom>"The Daleks turned DW into an overnight success</Received
wisdom>. It's actually a very good serial, and although some of the
"morals" seem a little trite ("stand up for what you believe in",
"beautiful=good, ugly=bad" and "nuclear war is a Bad Thing") they never get
in the way of an entertaining story. The first half (parts 1-4) is
extremely good, with a well-designed forest and city, lots of tension and
mystery and yet more character building (the Doctor once again risks his
companions' safety to fulfill his own selfish curiosity - foreshadowing the
Pertwee era?). The second half is much less thoughtful, consisting of three
episodes of set-pieces strung together by the vague threat of Dalek
retaliation as the Thals, plus Ian and Barbara, try to enter the Dalek city
via their
equivalent of a back door. Brainless, but still fun. Unfortunately the
Thals, a rather wet bunch, aren't nearly as interesting as the Daleks
(wonderful creations which fulfill Terry
Nation's brief of looking totally inhuman), but they're saved by some good
acting and Barbara's rather touching romance with Ganatus. Great fun.
8/10.
C: "The Edge of Destruction"
A cheap filler serial - and it shows. The script veers between class (the
Doctor and Barbara's confrontation) and crass (some truly appalling
dialogue, e.g. "We've had time taken away from us through the clocks and now
it's returning in the fault locator" or something rubbishy and nonsensical).
The leads fluff their way through the two episodes, with Hartnell making a
total hash of some scenes. The plot doesn't really make sense, either. And
the much-praised "character building" takes up about a minute at the end of
part 2 when the Doctor apologises for being so nasty. There are some good
bits, but overall it doesn't work.
3/10.
D: "Marco Polo"
Considering most reviewers virtually want to marry this serial and have its
children, I was expecting something truly spectacular. It is very good, but
it certainly isn't the unparallelled classic of repute. The script is
extremely good, and, as far as one can tell from the audio and a few stills,
it's well acted and directed and brilliantly designed. However, the plot
meanders quite a lot, and some episodes are entertainingly empty - advancing
the plot not one iota and telling us precious little new information about
the characters (IIRC, part 5 is particularly slow). It isn't bad by any
means, but neither is it the zenith of 60s DW.
9/10.
E: "The Keys of Marinus"
After the thoughtful "Marco Polo" comes one of the most hilariously awful DW
serials *ever*. Resembling a DW pic'n'mix, an unwieldy Frankenstein's
monster of a serial emerges from the pen of Terry Nation, apparently
constructed from the cast offs of other series. We have a typical Tales of
the Unexpected episode set in Morphoton, ostensibly a Utopia, but, in a
"shocking twist", revealed to be a sham; there's the mad scientist episode,
followed by the "gritty" realism of the snows of terror (which contains an
attempted rape scene that achieves its power merely because it is so
misplaced) and topped off by a side-splittingly unsubtle and obvious
Kavanagh QC episode. All framed by a pointless excuse for a plot. If the
Voord, who at first appear to be the main villains, had actually *done*
anything, other than wear rubber fetish gear and dress us in cloaks - if
they had actively pursued the crew through the various zones of Marinus then
some excitement might have ensued. As it is they remain comedy villains,
largely because they're so ineffectual and daft. As a whole, "The Keys of
Marinus" is dreadful - but amusingly dreadful. I'd like to mark it down,
but it's stupidity is its salvation: it's *so* bad that it entertains
through sheer comedy value.
4/10.
F: "The Aztecs"
If "Marco Polo" was a story about one man, then "The Aztecs" is a story
about an entire culture. It's certainly the best serial of the first
season, and, arguably, of the Hartnell era as a whole. The wonderful Jackie
Hill takes centre stage, clashing with the Doctor in some of the series'
finest scenes - both for script and acting. Her mission is to change
history and save a culture; his to preserve it and in so doing letting a
culture be destroyed. In fact, all the regulars get a good slice of action
in a serial that is about people as much as it is about plot. The guest
stars, the two Aztec priests Tlotoxl and Autloc, are both brilliant,
embodying the dichotomy of the Aztec culture - civilisation and reason
against barbarism and superstition. The design and direction are excellent,
too. The bittersweet ending, when the Doctor tells Barbara that she may
have failed to save a culture, but she did at least save one man, is the
best until "Doctor Who and the Silurians".
10/10.
G: "The Sensorites"
From the sublime to the ridiculous. "The Sensorites" isn't bad, as such,
but it's very stupid. The plot plods along with no conception of pace; some
of the ideas are rubbish (most obviously the fact that the Sensorites can
only tell one another apart by the clothes they wear), and the regulars all
fluff their lines. However, underneath it all there's something half good
trying to get out - the Sensorites are cool monsters, menacing and yet
gentle, and the design of their city is brilliant, However, it's far, far
too dull and uninvolving to achieve any real degree of success.
5/10.
H: "The Reign of Terror"
And back to the sublime: "The Reign of Terror" is very good - the precursor
to the historicals of the late Hartnell/Troughton era in that it's based
more on a popular preconception of history (this time taken from "The
Scarlet Pimpernel" and Dicken's "Tale of Two Cities") than on history itself
(altho' it *is* quite accurate). It manages to effortlessly combine the
action of "The Daleks" and other space stories with the drama of "The
Aztecs": IMO, if the historicals had continued then they would have adopted
this format. It's also very witty, with the Doctor's encounter with the
roadworks overseer a particular delight. However, the script also
acknowledges the grim reality of revolutionary France, with plenty of scenes
that convey the harshness of the period (Robespierre getting shot; the
prison; the attack on the farmhouse). Barbara gets another decent slice of
action, and it's interesting to note that she's learned from her experience
in "The Aztecs". She knows her brief romance with Colbert is hopeless.
Indeed, all the regulars do very well, particularly Hill and Hartnell, who
obviously has a flair for the comic. The design is, again, exemplary, and
the brief location filming adds a degree of realism and scope to the serial
that it might otherwise have lacked. All in all a very charming story.
8/10.
OVERALL
A very good first season. There are a couple of poor serials, but there are
also a handful of "classics". It's interesting to note that the historicals
are by far the most highly regarded entries, possibly because they haven't
dated nearly so much. It's also interesting to note how much the regulars
change and grow over the course of the seson - from unwilling companions at
the beginning to firm friends by the end (in fact, Ian's final line of the
season suggests that he's quite looking forward to further adventures).
Season Average: 6.5/10
Best Lead: Jacqueline Hill as Barbara
Best Guest Actor: Keith Pyott as Autloc
Best Serial: "The Aztecs"
Worst Serial: "The Edge of Destruction"
Best Villain: The Daleks.
Warhead
<7q4f8p$o4s$1...@nclient15-gui.server.virgin.net>...
>It's interesting to note that the historicals
>are by far the most highly regarded entries, possibly because they haven't
>dated nearly so much.
And the fact that no-one's seen them for years (Aztecs excepted). It would
be interesting in a parallel universe to see how say "Keys" and "Sensorites"
might fare thirty years on if only the audio were available, and "Marco" and
"Reign" were they available on video.
However - I must confess to being recently most impressed with "The
Massacre" CD. A story that I've never been able to separate in my mind from
"Reign" ("the other French one") , I'm now a staunch convert.
> It's also interesting to note how much the regulars
>change and grow over the course of the seson - from unwilling companions at
>the beginning to firm friends by the end (in fact, Ian's final line of the
>season suggests that he's quite looking forward to further adventures).
It is a good season. It's balanced and as you say, there is some development
going on, and IMHO, it only ended when the last of the original companions
left in "The Chase" - plunging us into the tedium of Steven and Vicki, and
worse, Steven and Dodo.
--
---------->Warhead<----------
www.i.am/warhead
Matt Michael
Kelly Robinson wrote in message <7q4qvu$2m...@enews3.newsguy.com>...
>Matt Michael <matt.m...@virgin.net> wrote in message
>Definitely. Long before "womens' lib", Barbara was written as a very
>intelligent, self-minded women who didn't want to be bossed around. She
>screamed at times, but at least those were situations that felt natural.
>Even Ian and the Doctor had natural reactions when they saw the Daleks
>initially, too...
This is quite true. I think it was Katy Manning who said, "Well, you'd
scream if a deadly alien started menacing you".
>> B: "The Daleks"
>> <Received Wisdom>"The Daleks turned DW into an overnight
success</Received
>> wisdom>. It's actually a very good serial, and although some of the
>> "morals" seem a little trite ("stand up for what you believe in",
>> "beautiful=good, ugly=bad" and "nuclear war is a Bad Thing") they never
>get
>> in the way of an entertaining story.
>
>So what? Are they trite by 1999 standards? or by 1963 standards? It's
>unfair and arrogant to judge something of today's standards by the
standards
>of then.
Well, perhaps the nuclear war is bad allegory was fairly topical then, but,
IMO, the ugly=bad, pretty=good moral was totally out of date even in 1963 -
note that it was refuted two years later in "Galaxy Four". And the
criticism of pacifism seems to me to be fairly dreadful.
<Serial C>
>acting is sadly misplaced as well. The second part does improve... and you
>can't deny this is another example of pre-feminism Barbara Wright being
>Right.
She certainly holds her own against the male characters. It's good to see
them taking a woman seriously rather than treating her like a little girl
(shame it didn't last with later companions).
matt
Matt Michael
Warhead wrote in message <7q5nef$md0$1...@plutonium.compulink.co.uk>...
>>are by far the most highly regarded entries, possibly because they haven't
>>dated nearly so much.
>
>be interesting in a parallel universe to see how say "Keys" and
"Sensorites"
>might fare thirty years on if only the audio were available, and "Marco"
and
>"Reign" were they available on video.
True, true. Anything that's lost tends to be deified far beyond its
capacity to entertain (just look at "Tomb") All the Missing Stories might
be called classics, simply because no-one has seen them for thirty odd
years. "Fury", "The Massacre" and "The Celestial Toymaker" all all,
supposedly, bona fide classics - and all are missing, presumed dead. So
there you are, if it's gone, it's good. (Except for "The Space Pirates" of
course, cos everyone knows that's shite :)
>However - I must confess to being recently most impressed with "The
>Massacre" CD. A story that I've never been able to separate in my mind from
>"Reign" ("the other French one") , I'm now a staunch convert.
IMO, "The Massacre" is a far more personal story than "Reign" because it's
so small scale. The imminent Massacre of St. Bartholomew's Day (oh yes,
that's when it was, not on "St. Bartholomew's Eve" which is just silly) is
obviously terrible, but we are not witness to that massacre - we see the
majority of the serial through Steven's eyes only, intercut by a few brief
scenes featuring the high and mighty discussing the murder of one man. And
because it's so personal it has a greater impact (as Lawrence Miles pointed
out, the death of one or two people is more moving that the death of
thouands - because we can't imagine thousands of people as anything more
than things). "Reign" is much wider in scale and scope, and much more
accessible. It's also a lot more fun, understandably.
>> It's also interesting to note how much the regulars
>>change and grow over the course of the seson - from unwilling companions
at
>>the beginning to firm friends by the end (in fact, Ian's final line of the
>>season suggests that he's quite looking forward to further adventures).
>
>It is a good season. It's balanced and as you say, there is some
development
>going on, and IMHO, it only ended when the last of the original companions
>left in "The Chase" - plunging us into the tedium of Steven and Vicki, and
>worse, Steven and Dodo.
I don't think Steven (Ian substitute) or Vicki (Susan substitute -
interstingly there's no Barbara substitute, as though the producers were
acknowledging the fact that the Doctor is now the voice of moral authority,
taking over the role from Barbara) are particularly bad - alhough Vicki
never got *anything* to do, not even show slight telepathic skills (and
Maureen O'Brien is a better actress than Carole Ann Ford). Steven's quite
good, too, as "The Massacre" demonstrates. I think if more of his serials
survived he'd be more highly regarded. Dodo is particularly uninteresting:
her character is never developed (and, by this stage, the grand-daughter
substitute idea's wearing a bit thin), and Jackie Lane is saddled with
conflicting instructions from the producers and the Powers That Be at the
BBC. I don't think she's badly portrayed (unlike Adric who was a
potentially interesting character undermined by poor scripts and terrible
acting), but the character is completely two dimensional. Thankfully, Ben
and Polly were a breath of fresh air, and a huge improvement.
matt
David Brunt
>Matt Michael wrote in message
>
>>are by far the most highly regarded entries, possibly because they
>>haven't dated nearly so much.
>
>be interesting in a parallel universe to see how say "Keys" and
>"Sensorites" might fare thirty years on if only the audio were available,
>and "Marco" and "Reign" were they available on video.
I wouldn't have thought that 'Keys' or 'Sensorites' would have fared better
or worse if they only existed on audio. Tedium is the same in any format.
'Wheel in Space' shows that....... The impact of almost all of
'Sensorites' cliffhangers would be lost though........
The difference with the 'real' historicals, of course, is that the script
writing was generally better crafted than the SF ones. So, 'Polo',
'Aztecs' and 'Crusade', and even 'Reign' to a smaller extent, can stand the
test of time better than the sloppy scripting of 'Keys' or 'Sensorites'.
David
Andrew
>
> Warhead wrote in message <7q5nef$md0$1...@plutonium.compulink.co.uk>...
> >Matt Michael wrote in message
> >However - I must confess to being recently most impressed with "The
> >Massacre" CD. A story that I've never been able to separate in my mind
from
> >"Reign" ("the other French one") , I'm now a staunch convert.
>
>
> IMO, "The Massacre" is a far more personal story than "Reign" because it's
> so small scale. The imminent Massacre of St. Bartholomew's Day (oh yes,
> that's when it was, not on "St. Bartholomew's Eve" which is just silly) is
> obviously terrible, but we are not witness to that massacre - we see the
> majority of the serial through Steven's eyes only, intercut by a few brief
> scenes featuring the high and mighty discussing the murder of one man.
And
> because it's so personal it has a greater impact (as Lawrence Miles
pointed
> out, the death of one or two people is more moving that the death of
> thouands - because we can't imagine thousands of people as anything more
> than things). "Reign" is much wider in scale and scope, and much more
> accessible. It's also a lot more fun, understandably.
I disagree.
I've always found death on a large scale to be as moving, if not more so,
than individuals. It depends on the circumstances and how 'into' the
film/book I am. Disaster movies like Earthquake and Poseidon Adventure
scared the shit out of me, mainly due to the mass death scenes, rather than
the individual survivors who don't quite make it (Shelley Winters, Gene
Hackman etc).
Indepedence Day did the same thing with the complete destruction of the
major cities which I found absolutely terrifying. The fact I don't 'know'
the characters dying, is replaced by the sheer terrible scale of it.
> I don't think Steven (Ian substitute) or Vicki (Susan substitute -
> interstingly there's no Barbara substitute, as though the producers were
> acknowledging the fact that the Doctor is now the voice of moral
authority,
> taking over the role from Barbara) are particularly bad - alhough Vicki
> never got *anything* to do, not even show slight telepathic skills (and
> Maureen O'Brien is a better actress than Carole Ann Ford). Steven's quite
> good, too, as "The Massacre" demonstrates. I think if more of his serials
> survived he'd be more highly regarded. Dodo is particularly
uninteresting:
> her character is never developed (and, by this stage, the grand-daughter
> substitute idea's wearing a bit thin), and Jackie Lane is saddled with
> conflicting instructions from the producers and the Powers That Be at the
> BBC. I don't think she's badly portrayed (unlike Adric who was a
> potentially interesting character undermined by poor scripts and terrible
> acting), but the character is completely two dimensional. Thankfully, Ben
> and Polly were a breath of fresh air, and a huge improvement.
Funnily enough, I always remember a cartoon, by Tim Quinn and Dicky Howett,
in DWM years ago which was an exhibition of useless things is Doctor Who
with the legend 'Unfortunately John and Gillian couldn't be here today, but
Polly and Ben more than fill there shoes."
I disagree though. I love them in War Machines and on the audios that exist
for them. It's a crying shame they suffered so badly from the archive
purge.
Andrew
*******************
52 Festive Road
Tim Roll-Pickering
> True, true. Anything that's lost tends to be deified far beyond its
> capacity to entertain (just look at "Tomb") All the Missing Stories might
> be called classics, simply because no-one has seen them for thirty odd
> years. "Fury", "The Massacre" and "The Celestial Toymaker" all all,
> supposedly, bona fide classics - and all are missing, presumed dead. So
> there you are, if it's gone, it's good. (Except for "The Space Pirates" of
> course, cos everyone knows that's shite :)
Since when have Galaxy 4, The Savages, The Smugglers or The Highlanders
been 'classics'? And as for The Underwater Menace...
To be fair, the historicals can maintain their reputation because they
tended to be more wordy than the scifi ones, and so can be enjoyed as
well through audio tapes and reconstructions.
TB
> Hello and welcome to the first in a series of reviews - one for each season
> of DW (bet you can't wait for the next one ;-) Without further ado:
>
> First Season (1963-64)
>
> If "Marco Polo" was a story about one man, then "The Aztecs" is a story
> about an entire culture. It's certainly the best serial of the first
> season, and, arguably, of the Hartnell era as a whole. The wonderful Jackie
> Hill takes centre stage, clashing with the Doctor in some of the series'
> finest scenes - both for script and acting. Her mission is to change
> history and save a culture; his to preserve it and in so doing letting a
> culture be destroyed. In fact, all the regulars get a good slice of action
> in a serial that is about people as much as it is about plot. The guest
> stars, the two Aztec priests Tlotoxl and Autloc, are both brilliant,
> embodying the dichotomy of the Aztec culture - civilisation and reason
> against barbarism and superstition. The design and direction are excellent,
> too. The bittersweet ending, when the Doctor tells Barbara that she may
> have failed to save a culture, but she did at least save one man, is the
> best until "Doctor Who and the Silurians".
> 10/10.
In fact, not only was the destruction of Pompeii a fixed point in time, it turned out to be necessary to destroy Pompeii to prevent some nasty aliens from taking over Earth! These aliens were using energy from the volcano to prepare to conquer Earth, and were preventin the volcano from erupting! The Doctor and Donna therefore destroyed their energy converter to let the volcano erupt and destroy the aliens. As the volcano erupted, Donna made the Doctor rescue one family, just like Barbara saved an Aztec man.