The Colin Baker era was showing signs of recovering from its inauspicious start and the return of Robert Holmes should have confirmed this. Holmes's last offering, The Caves of Androzani is still a strong contender for the title of best Doctor Who story ever made, a wonderfully stylish distillation of the best of both 80s and 70s Doctor Who. What we have with The Two Doctors is more of a clash. There are signs of Holmes's brilliance- the Androgums are an alien race with a sense of culture and history, prime examples of Holmes creating worlds through words alone. There is some excellent dialogue and (when it is given a chance) good characterisation. However, the plot is poorly thought out and the pacing is a mess. The story is 'about' vegetarianism or, more precisely, in the cruelty to animals that carnivorousness engenders. Holmes was clearly happy writing a tale about Androgums coming to Earth to sample the local cuisine and it is here that his writing shines. However, he was lumbered with the longest story since 1978 and the inclusion of the Sontarans in the plot. The Sontarans serve virtually no story function other than to die messily, perhaps to punctuate the story with some action. The central plot thread of isolating a Time Lord's 'symbiotic nuclei' wouldn't be very compelling were it not for the fact that the Time Lord in question is the Second Doctor and the story itself discards this for a while (albeit with a rather entertaining tangent). Entertaining though some of these bits are, they are jumbled together with little grace.
Visually, the studio scenes have that infamous 'Sixth Doctor Look' and, unfortunately, we have Peter Moffat behind the camera. Moffat never understood the storytelling possibilities of the camera itself- apart from the oft-cited revelation of the Sontarans, he gives Shockeye a similarly uninspired introduction and totally fumbles the cucumber gag in episode one. Moffat's direction lacks any vision beyond 'point and shoot'- the best that I can say is that he is marginally better on film than on video. Despite some of the studio gaudiness, the production values are generally good. A notable failure is, unfortunately, the realisation of the Sontarans. The masks are much less effective than the ones used for The Invasion of Time and don't hold a candle to the Kevin Lindsay versions. The script makes the Sontarans look ridiculous anyway, but the (in)effect is further compounded by giving Stike a swagger stick.
As said, there are some good characters and they are brought to life by some fine performances. John Stratton attacks the role of Shockeye with relish and the scenes of him palling around with the Androgummed Second Doctor are wonderful. Oscar Botcherby is very entertaining, thanks to James Saxon's game performance. Dastari is, on the page, underwritten, but Lawrence Payne's performance is very appealing. In fact, if there's one performance I have a problem with it's Jacqueline Pearce as Chessene. It is a perfectly good performance, but she does not at any point convince us that she is an Androgum, something that John Stratton does, despite his skinny physique and ridiculous costume.
However, despite the Sontarans, Androgums and symbiotic nuclei, the main attraction of the story is still the final appearance of Patrick Troughton as the Doctor, accompanied by Frazer Hines. From the instant they appear on screen for the first time, Troughton and Hines are utterly mesmerising, their rapport undiminished from their heyday. It is a pity that Troughton is then missing for a large part of the story, but it is truly joyful to see him again. Frazer Hines had aged shockingly little since 1969 and he makes Jamie as appealing as he ever was- I love his repeated attempts to be kissed by all the ladies he meets. In addition, Colin Baker continues to be more likeable and skilful as the Doctor- his 'boiingg!' moment is both archetypally Doctorish and very Colin Baker. Nicola Bryant supports ably, as usual.
There is a problem with this story that has to be dealt with separately- the question of tone. This can be addressed by looking at one sequence. The very entertaining interplay between Shockeye and the Androgummed Second Doctor have led them to the restaurant where Oscar works. There is comic dialogue between Oscar and Shockeye, and the Androgummed Second Doctor and Shockeye eat a comically large portion. In response to a request for payment, Shockeye gives Oscar some alien currency ('nargs'). This is also reasonably amusing. Even later, Oscar (comically holding several narg notes) asks for proper payment- whereupon Shockeye stabs him in the guts. Not only is this unnecessary in story terms, it is totally undermined by giving Oscar a bitter-sweet comic death scene. Despite him having been stabbed in a place that would leave him in excruciating pain. Of all the complaints of violence in this era, in the whole programme, this is the most justified. There are other very nasty bits- Shockeye snapping a rat's neck and biting into it, Shockeye waving the severed leg of Stike around. In skilled hands, such playing around with moods could be interesting. But we are not in skilled hands.
Despite the plot and production problems, this is a reasonably entertaining story- but beware the aftertaste.
NEXT: Timelash
Showing posts with label Peter Moffat. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Peter Moffat. Show all posts
Monday, 17 August 2009
Saturday, 8 August 2009
The Twin Dilemma
There has, perhaps, never been a bigger nose-dive in quality in Doctor Who as occurred here. The Caves of Androzani is one of the absolute high points of the programme as a whole, so following it would always be a daunting task, even if it wasn't the début for a new Doctor. The script is not particularly good, but offends more in the execution rather than the plot. It tries to take on concepts like myth and modelling space-time events with mathematics. If Christopher Bidmead had edited the script, we might have had a far better story. Unfortunately, the story unfolds in a haphazard way, with some atrocious dialogue and poor characterisation, which only makes the central idea of slugs engineering supernovas seem even more ridiculous.
However, this is only the start of the horror. The production is not bad, in the sense of technical incompetence or poor budgeting, for what we have is reasonably convincing. However, the overall look sears the retinas with its garish, horrible colours. It is this story which really shows John Nathan Turner's limitations as a producer of a televised drama. He wanted the Doctor to have a horrible brightly coloured costume, not realising (or, perhaps more damningly, no-one telling him) that the limited colour bandwidth of videotape meant that everything else had to be garish as well- to say nothing of the fact that it detracts from the ability of both the viewer and, by connection, the fictional characters he meets, to take the Doctor seriously. The director is Peter Moffat, who, whilst reasonably good at directing actors, was never the most visually adventurous director. The score by Malcolm Clark is either tunelessly listless or aggressively flatulent. It has to be said, however, that the costumes and make-up for the Jocondans are first rate. The performances of the Conrads as the titular twins further cripple the story. As Womulus and Wemus, they manage to be both bland and hugely annoying. There are some great actors such as Dennis Chinnery, Kevin (A)R(R) McNally and Maurice Denham, but the terrible twins are placed in the foreground.
Of course, this is the first story for Colin Baker as the Doctor, and his portrayal is good throughout. Unfortunately, what he portrays is a raving, unlikeable madman for the first half of the story. It is a bad mistake to have the new Doctor criticising his previous incarnation- it has never been done before and this insufferably arrogant portrayal of the Doctor wasn't the best place to start. It was a good idea to have the Doctor be genuinely unpredictable, but the writing for this stinks. This, plus the awful costume, unfairly handicaps Baker's performance. Nicola Bryant manages to come out reasonably unscathed in this mess.
This is the worst debut story for a Doctor- at the time I remember missing Peter Davison at the start and still missing him at the end, something which hadn't happened with Logopolis/ Castrovalva. What I get from it now is a Doctor Who story that looks like it had deliberately been made to look bad. If you do watch it, your retinas, optic nerve and brain will never forgive you.
NEXT: Attack of the Cybermen
However, this is only the start of the horror. The production is not bad, in the sense of technical incompetence or poor budgeting, for what we have is reasonably convincing. However, the overall look sears the retinas with its garish, horrible colours. It is this story which really shows John Nathan Turner's limitations as a producer of a televised drama. He wanted the Doctor to have a horrible brightly coloured costume, not realising (or, perhaps more damningly, no-one telling him) that the limited colour bandwidth of videotape meant that everything else had to be garish as well- to say nothing of the fact that it detracts from the ability of both the viewer and, by connection, the fictional characters he meets, to take the Doctor seriously. The director is Peter Moffat, who, whilst reasonably good at directing actors, was never the most visually adventurous director. The score by Malcolm Clark is either tunelessly listless or aggressively flatulent. It has to be said, however, that the costumes and make-up for the Jocondans are first rate. The performances of the Conrads as the titular twins further cripple the story. As Womulus and Wemus, they manage to be both bland and hugely annoying. There are some great actors such as Dennis Chinnery, Kevin (A)R(R) McNally and Maurice Denham, but the terrible twins are placed in the foreground.
Of course, this is the first story for Colin Baker as the Doctor, and his portrayal is good throughout. Unfortunately, what he portrays is a raving, unlikeable madman for the first half of the story. It is a bad mistake to have the new Doctor criticising his previous incarnation- it has never been done before and this insufferably arrogant portrayal of the Doctor wasn't the best place to start. It was a good idea to have the Doctor be genuinely unpredictable, but the writing for this stinks. This, plus the awful costume, unfairly handicaps Baker's performance. Nicola Bryant manages to come out reasonably unscathed in this mess.
This is the worst debut story for a Doctor- at the time I remember missing Peter Davison at the start and still missing him at the end, something which hadn't happened with Logopolis/ Castrovalva. What I get from it now is a Doctor Who story that looks like it had deliberately been made to look bad. If you do watch it, your retinas, optic nerve and brain will never forgive you.
NEXT: Attack of the Cybermen
Wednesday, 22 July 2009
"The Five Doctors"
Doctor Who's 20th Anniversary was marked by this feature length episode. As expected, the story is primarily there to celebrate Doctor Who's history, of which there was a hell of a lot. Terrence Dicks's script was a last-minute rush job that juggled five Doctors and their companions and the usual array of guest characters, so it is a miracle that the story works so well. Dicks reuses a plot element from The War Games (kidnapping alien beings to do battle in a game) and uses it to give each Doctor breathing space in this convoluted affair and the quest aspect is well handled to bind the differing journeys together. The story is also a quest for the identity of the Doctor himself, something made explicit in the plot and also lying implicit in the story's aim to be a celebration. Gallifrey is again given a sense of history with great economy and Dicks includes a great deal of memorable dialogue in a script that shows his skill and consummate professionalism.
Peter Moffat is hardly the most visually adventurous director, but he does reasonably good work here. Despite Gallifrey having a similar look to Arc of Infinity, scenes are cut with more urgency which compensate for this. The locations are well shot, with some very atmospheric scenes in the caves, and there is some great matte painting work for the exterior of the Dark Tower and great set design for the interior. We get some of the series' most celebrated monsters, with the appearance of a Dalek and a Yeti, but the main 'monsters' are the Cybermen. These are of similar design to those in Earthshock but, unfortunately, the key touch that made this design so great (the silver jaw visible behind the face-plate) has been omitted. However, the Cybermen form part of perhaps the most memorable set-piece in the story, the Raston Warrior Robot. This is a shockingly violent scene, where a platoon of Cybermen are impaled and dismembered by the Robot. The Robot is instantly memorable in a scene that is immaculately shot and edited.
Of course, the main attraction is the appearance of the five Doctors themselves, although, in reality, this is really another 'three doctors'- William Hartnell had been dead for 8 years and Tom Baker declined to appear. Jon Pertwee and Patrick Troughton effortlessly ease back into their roles and their interplay with their companions is excellently written and performed. Tom Baker appears in the form of a scene from Shada, but the First Doctor has been recast. Doing an impersonation of the inimitable Hartnell would have been disastrous, so it is good that Richard Hurndall gives us his own interpretation- he doesn't giggle or go 'hmm', but we still believe in him as the Doctor. If it had been up to me, I would not have had the First Doctor in it, but Hurndall does a good enough job. The guest performances are good, with Phillip Latham's power-mad Borusa being a highlight. The characterisation of the Master as being thwarted in his attempts to help the Doctor is highly amusing and works well.
The Five Doctors is eminently successful in both celebrating the programme and entertaining the viewer. This is the first story where I have had to review two versions. In 1995, an extended edition was released with 'improved' special effects and extra scenes. However, there are only two actual improvements, in my opinion- the first entrance of Borusa and the Doctor going into Borusa's office are better edited, but, in general, the pace is lost in the new edit. Also, the iconic black trapezoid used to represent the time scoop has been needlessly replaced with what looks like a CGI ice cream. If you only have time for one, make it the original.
NEXT: Warriors of the Deep
Peter Moffat is hardly the most visually adventurous director, but he does reasonably good work here. Despite Gallifrey having a similar look to Arc of Infinity, scenes are cut with more urgency which compensate for this. The locations are well shot, with some very atmospheric scenes in the caves, and there is some great matte painting work for the exterior of the Dark Tower and great set design for the interior. We get some of the series' most celebrated monsters, with the appearance of a Dalek and a Yeti, but the main 'monsters' are the Cybermen. These are of similar design to those in Earthshock but, unfortunately, the key touch that made this design so great (the silver jaw visible behind the face-plate) has been omitted. However, the Cybermen form part of perhaps the most memorable set-piece in the story, the Raston Warrior Robot. This is a shockingly violent scene, where a platoon of Cybermen are impaled and dismembered by the Robot. The Robot is instantly memorable in a scene that is immaculately shot and edited.
Of course, the main attraction is the appearance of the five Doctors themselves, although, in reality, this is really another 'three doctors'- William Hartnell had been dead for 8 years and Tom Baker declined to appear. Jon Pertwee and Patrick Troughton effortlessly ease back into their roles and their interplay with their companions is excellently written and performed. Tom Baker appears in the form of a scene from Shada, but the First Doctor has been recast. Doing an impersonation of the inimitable Hartnell would have been disastrous, so it is good that Richard Hurndall gives us his own interpretation- he doesn't giggle or go 'hmm', but we still believe in him as the Doctor. If it had been up to me, I would not have had the First Doctor in it, but Hurndall does a good enough job. The guest performances are good, with Phillip Latham's power-mad Borusa being a highlight. The characterisation of the Master as being thwarted in his attempts to help the Doctor is highly amusing and works well.
The Five Doctors is eminently successful in both celebrating the programme and entertaining the viewer. This is the first story where I have had to review two versions. In 1995, an extended edition was released with 'improved' special effects and extra scenes. However, there are only two actual improvements, in my opinion- the first entrance of Borusa and the Doctor going into Borusa's office are better edited, but, in general, the pace is lost in the new edit. Also, the iconic black trapezoid used to represent the time scoop has been needlessly replaced with what looks like a CGI ice cream. If you only have time for one, make it the original.
NEXT: Warriors of the Deep
Monday, 13 July 2009
Mawdryn Undead
Peter Grimwade's second contribution to Doctor Who is, thankfully a vast improvement on his first, Time-Flight. The story takes place in two time zones, making it a rare instance of time travel being part of the plot, rather than the means to get the Doctor to his latest adventure. This is tied to the journey of Mawdryn and his fellow scientists on a quest for death. Apart from this, the story has to introduce new companion Turlough, have a guest role for the Brigadier and incorporate the return of the Black Guardian. In spite of some irritating technobabble, this story works very well. This story, of course, caused the 'UNIT dating controversy', but I can easily overlook this- things were more homespun then. Then, there is Mawdryn and his companions. They are by no means villains and their motivation in the story is a welcome change from the usual. There is good dialogue and all the strands are tied up very well.
The realisation of the story is very impressive, with sumptuous sets for Mawdryn's ship. However, the costumes for the mutants are a bit silly and, even though it has been pointed out by others, why does the Black Guardian have a dead crow on his head? Peter Moffat plays to his limited strengths as a director- canny editing sells the juxtaposition of different time zones and there are no fight scenes or complicated camera moves, something which Moffat has never been good at. The only time his limitations are shown is in the appalling shot of the 'dream Turlough' getting back into bed.
There are some very good performances, from Stephen Garlick's engaging 'Hippo' to Angus Mackay's restrained, yet very effective headmaster. However, there are two performances which really stand out. For the first time since 1975, the Brigadier appears and never before has he been portrayed as such a layered character and Nicholas Courtney rising admirably to the challenge, making the 1977 and 1983 Brigadiers genuinely seem like one person at different times of their lives. The portrayal of the Brig's apparent breakdown is portrayed surprisingly effectively and sensitively without betraying the heart of the character- something which is as much due to Courtney as to the script. I have seen David Collings in many things and he has never been anything less than brilliant. Collings infuses Mawdryn with a sense of menace, pain and tragedy, yet Collings makes us see a good person condemned to suffer for one mistake. Peter Davison works his usual magic, as does Janet Fielding and Mark Strickson makes an immediate impression as Turlough.
Mawdryn Undead is a highly enjoyable entry- with, incidentally, a really cool title!
NEXT: Terminus
The realisation of the story is very impressive, with sumptuous sets for Mawdryn's ship. However, the costumes for the mutants are a bit silly and, even though it has been pointed out by others, why does the Black Guardian have a dead crow on his head? Peter Moffat plays to his limited strengths as a director- canny editing sells the juxtaposition of different time zones and there are no fight scenes or complicated camera moves, something which Moffat has never been good at. The only time his limitations are shown is in the appalling shot of the 'dream Turlough' getting back into bed.
There are some very good performances, from Stephen Garlick's engaging 'Hippo' to Angus Mackay's restrained, yet very effective headmaster. However, there are two performances which really stand out. For the first time since 1975, the Brigadier appears and never before has he been portrayed as such a layered character and Nicholas Courtney rising admirably to the challenge, making the 1977 and 1983 Brigadiers genuinely seem like one person at different times of their lives. The portrayal of the Brig's apparent breakdown is portrayed surprisingly effectively and sensitively without betraying the heart of the character- something which is as much due to Courtney as to the script. I have seen David Collings in many things and he has never been anything less than brilliant. Collings infuses Mawdryn with a sense of menace, pain and tragedy, yet Collings makes us see a good person condemned to suffer for one mistake. Peter Davison works his usual magic, as does Janet Fielding and Mark Strickson makes an immediate impression as Turlough.
Mawdryn Undead is a highly enjoyable entry- with, incidentally, a really cool title!
NEXT: Terminus
Monday, 29 June 2009
The Visitation
After three highly unusual stories, The Visitation looks like an oddity, simply because it is a straightforward ‘pseudo-historical’. The plot has a lot in common with The Time Warrior- an alien crashes in pre-industrial England and uses the local population as slave labour. The plot is very straightforward, but is half-baked in places- the Terileptils’ aims have clearly not been thought through by Eric Saward and there is a good deal of padding- a lot of it very entertaining, but blatant padding nonetheless. However, the script shows a quality not often associated with Saward: love. Saward clearly loved writing the character of Richard Mace and was clearly enjoying creating the Terileptils. Although their aims are unclear, Saward does a great job in giving the Terileptils a culture and a history, clearly because they existed as a fully formed race in Saward’s mind, rather than a stock alien menace. Saward portrays them as desperate criminals, rather than evil conquerors, which makes the interaction between the Terileptil leader and the Doctor interesting and the outcome unclear- will the Doctor talk them out of their plan? He doesn’t- in fact, the Doctor’s involvement in the outcome is not as great as it could have been.
The production is of a very high quality, with very effective period detail, as one expects from the BBC. The sets for the Terileptil ship are also very well done, although the ‘beautiful’ android is beautiful only in a gaudy 80s way, unfortunately. The Terileptils are very convincing, all things being considered. They are designed to be a cross between a man, a lizard and a fish which works very well. The fact that the voice is not treated in any way is startling and works well in this case, making the Terileptil a person as well as a monster. Even the gaffes in the Terileptil’s realisation work in its favour- occasionally Michael Melia’s chin can be seen inside the Terileptil’s mouth, but it actually looks like a tongue. Perhaps the biggest production drawback is the direction. Peter Moffat could make a scene visually interesting via editing- the wonderful opening scene is a great example- but he has no idea how to use the camera itself to tell a story- the first revelation of the Terileptil’s face is wrecked by Moffat’s shot choices and he is hopeless at directing fight scenes.
Of the guest performances, as said, there are only two real characters. Michael Melia gives the Terileptil leader dignity and menace and Michael Robbins is, predictably, wonderful as Mace. Of the regulars, Peter Davison continues to impress, as usual as does Janet Fielding. This is, unfortunately, not a story that plays to Matthew Waterhouse’s very few strengths- he is, frankly, bloody awful in parts. Happily, this is a good story for Sarah Sutton and Nyssa finally gets a bit of personality.
It won’t blow your mind or change your life, but The Visitation is great fun and well worth a punt.
NEXT: Black Orchid
The production is of a very high quality, with very effective period detail, as one expects from the BBC. The sets for the Terileptil ship are also very well done, although the ‘beautiful’ android is beautiful only in a gaudy 80s way, unfortunately. The Terileptils are very convincing, all things being considered. They are designed to be a cross between a man, a lizard and a fish which works very well. The fact that the voice is not treated in any way is startling and works well in this case, making the Terileptil a person as well as a monster. Even the gaffes in the Terileptil’s realisation work in its favour- occasionally Michael Melia’s chin can be seen inside the Terileptil’s mouth, but it actually looks like a tongue. Perhaps the biggest production drawback is the direction. Peter Moffat could make a scene visually interesting via editing- the wonderful opening scene is a great example- but he has no idea how to use the camera itself to tell a story- the first revelation of the Terileptil’s face is wrecked by Moffat’s shot choices and he is hopeless at directing fight scenes.
Of the guest performances, as said, there are only two real characters. Michael Melia gives the Terileptil leader dignity and menace and Michael Robbins is, predictably, wonderful as Mace. Of the regulars, Peter Davison continues to impress, as usual as does Janet Fielding. This is, unfortunately, not a story that plays to Matthew Waterhouse’s very few strengths- he is, frankly, bloody awful in parts. Happily, this is a good story for Sarah Sutton and Nyssa finally gets a bit of personality.
It won’t blow your mind or change your life, but The Visitation is great fun and well worth a punt.
NEXT: Black Orchid
Friday, 12 June 2009
State of Decay
It is surprising that the Hinchcliffe/ Holmes ‘Gothic Horror’ era never did a vampire story (actually there is a boring production based reason) but we finally get one in the form of State of Decay, from the ever present pen of Terrance Dicks. Dicks’s script takes influences from the classics of Vampire fiction (well, two of them anyway). We have the ancient castle where the vampires live and the peasants who cluster around it ‘like ducklings’ and who live in fear of their vampire lords and owe them tribute. Of course, this is adapted into a Doctor Who context, with the castle being a spacecraft and the traditional vampires that are seen are a mere shadow of the ancient evil beneath the castle, an ancient enemy of the Time Lords. The script blends horror with musings of the decline of civilisations and evolution of language and the effect of the collective unconscious on legend. There is some deft characterisation, especially in the portrayal of the dynamic of the ‘Three Who Rule’, although the rest of the characters are less well drawn- the peasants and their society are not portrayed with the same degree of care as the vampires. There are some things left unexplained- what is ‘The Wasting’ (are they the bats, if so the Three Who Rule are running a protection racket!) and what exactly is the significance of the Chosen Ones?
However, the story is further strengthened by its very impressive realisation. The sets, especially for the castle interiors are gorgeous, with some very effective matte shots being used for the throne room and the blood-red brickwork for the castle corridors are a welcome touch. The miniature shots for the castle are superbly detailed, unlike other miniature efforts in the past. The only production let downs are some of the shots of bats attacking and the realisation of the Great Vampire. I can just about forgive the giant hand, but the terrible shot of the creature on the scanner is awful. Peter Moffat directs the scenes with an elegant simplicity, although he is rubbish at fight scenes.
The cast are first rate- the Three Who rule are terrifyingly cadaverous, but it is clear that they are inhibited and controlled- witness their ritualistic hand-washing. Moffat has the Three arranged in tableaux for several scenes, which seems ‘stagey’ at first, but becomes more appropriate as one understands the story more. Zargo and Camilla are king and queen but Aukon is the one who communes with the Great Vampire. The Three are excellently performed, with special mention for the wonderful Emrys James as Aukon. Tom Baker is wonderful, with the Doctor driven by more than his usual desire to right wrongs. Lalla Ward’s Romana performs the role of Mina Murray very well, although, with Camilla, the influence shifts from Dracula to Le Fanu’s Carmilla (Camilla shows signs of being a lesbite, or lesbian vampire). Matthew Waterhouse is wisely kept in the background and doesn’t manage to be too annoying.
Despite its faults, State of Decay has something in it for all Doctor Who fans and is great fun.
NEXT: Warriors’ Gate
However, the story is further strengthened by its very impressive realisation. The sets, especially for the castle interiors are gorgeous, with some very effective matte shots being used for the throne room and the blood-red brickwork for the castle corridors are a welcome touch. The miniature shots for the castle are superbly detailed, unlike other miniature efforts in the past. The only production let downs are some of the shots of bats attacking and the realisation of the Great Vampire. I can just about forgive the giant hand, but the terrible shot of the creature on the scanner is awful. Peter Moffat directs the scenes with an elegant simplicity, although he is rubbish at fight scenes.
The cast are first rate- the Three Who rule are terrifyingly cadaverous, but it is clear that they are inhibited and controlled- witness their ritualistic hand-washing. Moffat has the Three arranged in tableaux for several scenes, which seems ‘stagey’ at first, but becomes more appropriate as one understands the story more. Zargo and Camilla are king and queen but Aukon is the one who communes with the Great Vampire. The Three are excellently performed, with special mention for the wonderful Emrys James as Aukon. Tom Baker is wonderful, with the Doctor driven by more than his usual desire to right wrongs. Lalla Ward’s Romana performs the role of Mina Murray very well, although, with Camilla, the influence shifts from Dracula to Le Fanu’s Carmilla (Camilla shows signs of being a lesbite, or lesbian vampire). Matthew Waterhouse is wisely kept in the background and doesn’t manage to be too annoying.
Despite its faults, State of Decay has something in it for all Doctor Who fans and is great fun.
NEXT: Warriors’ Gate
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)