The Movie Diary
In May 1996 we were all treated to a screening of the first new Doctor Who episode in over six years, at Christchurch College in Canterbury. Perhaps seeing the film on the big screen afforded it a better reception than it would otherwise have had, as no-one seemed to have a bad word to say about it (except Pete Stepney, of course - but this is to be expected). It wasnt long before people started to complain, however. Here, by raiding the editors diary, we take a look at how the next twelve months treated the US Telemovie with the Pertwee logo.
May 1996
The Doctor Who video comes out next week... Im quite pleased with the storyline, although how successful it is as an introduction for newcomers remains to be seen. The design seems quite good, although I think they may have overdone the H G Wells element.
What is odd is that this story has more continuity in it than ever before - and although Segal seems to be a bit of an anorak, the writer seems to think it was all his idea. Hes either a fan or hes done his research. I mean, theres a bloody link to the Eye of Harmony in the TARDIS, which is a typical fan-fiction idea but the sort of thing they never did in the programme, even at its most anal. Also, the continuity regarding the Masters current regenerative state appears to be spot on. Matthew Jacobs says the only proviso he was given was that it should start with the new Doctor in the hospital, so presumably it is all down to him. It was certainly his idea to have Sylvester at the start, which Seagull was happy with - but, he says, BBC Worldwide were not. It sounds like they are more keen than anyone to disassociate this version from the old one. Which is a bit hypocritical, because, I have to say, I dont think anything in the new film itself could be quite as tacky as the Hes back - and its about time! caption that theyve plastered all over the books, video, trailers, etc, (and which now has an exclamation mark, just as it did in my nightmares).
Jacobs says he will be involved if the series goes ahead. But what would the future hold?... Segal, misty eyed, has his own dreams. I would like to have an adventure with the Daleks on Skaro... an encounter with the Cybermen, possibly as they attempt to invade the earth... (Im sure he would, but what about the show...) And Jacobs view? Theres no point in going back and just bringing back the Daleks and the Cybermen and whatever, because theyre kind of a bit retro. Cant get much plainer than that.
Seagull apparently is not confident that he will be involved in the series (possibly because he went over budget on the pilot) - although Jacobs is contractually supposed to be. So who knows which worldview would win out. More importantly, Segal has suggested Terrance Dicks as producer! If not, he definitely wants him as a writer, and hes also interested in bringing back Eric Saward! Noooo! It promises to get ever stranger if it does go ahead... But that, of course, is unlikely.
Segal has given the story an unofficial subtitle, presumably just to please the fans (too late for it to appear on the video or books - or, indeed, anywhere). It is The Enemy Within. Good one! Gary Russell has written the book in a pleasing cod-Terrance Dicks style. Doctor Who and the Enemy Within.
May 23rd (the day after)
Watched most of Enemy Within again tonight. Beneath it all its just a traditional, simple Doctor Who story: prologue from Deadly Assassin, hospital shenanigans a la Spearhead/Robot, Masters plan from Castrovalva via Logopolis, and the Doctor himself a pleasing combination of Pete and Tom, with even a dash of Pertwee. Its interesting, though probably not surprising, that Segal hasnt mentioned the Davison influence (McGann is a very human Doctor, even leaving aside all that half-human stuff and snogging), yet I suppose the Davison re-evaluation still hasnt reached some parts. Perhaps my favourite scene is where the Doctor refers to meeting various historical figures and actually makes it sound convincing (something theyve never actually tried before!) The result is a splendid and touching moment (It was so sad!), which in one instant lends the Doctor both the great gravitas and the childlike pathos which a figure of such age and experience demands. In any case, its a world away from Pertwees arrogant name-dropping and Bakers lunatic boasts.
September 1996
There was a rather good article in the last DWM wherein they showed the movie to a class of ten year olds, who had been shown Terror of the Zygons the year before. They were all quite perceptive and encouragingly receptive, noting that it looked better than the old one, but the story wasnt as good. Particularly interesting were their attempts to make sense of the climax, where they reasoned it all out using both their juvenile logic and reference points from other films. They concluded that although it wasnt 100% clear what happened, it didnt really matter because it was obvious that something happened, and merely the gist of it was enough to forward the narrative - which more or less concurs with my view. (And no, Im not ashamed to back up my opinions by recourse to 10 year olds. Some of my best friends were once ten year olds.)
November 1996
We have at last been able to see a complete version of the story from America, and judge for ourselves whether the BBCs cuts were gratuitous. Conclusion: yes, they were.
January 1997
It seems that even the normally sane DWM have refused to refer to the movie (Doctor Who) as The Enemy Within, on the grounds that this title was appended to it after transmission and does not appear on any contemporary literature. Unlike, say Inside the Spaceship, Dalek Cutaway or Doctor Who and the Silurians. This nonsense just makes me more determined to use it. Enemy Within! Enemy Within!
Virgins useful little book The Nth Doctor recounts all the aborted attempts to bring the show back, and big-screen proposals from the mid-eighties onwards. For all its faults, theres no doubt that Enemy Within struck a better balance than any of the other ideas, which varied from anally fannish to horribly un-Whoey, and would all have been shite television.
Its been revealed, through the grapevine, that Terry Dicks and Bazza Letts walked out of the shows preview screening in a fit of pique at its lack of quality. Its a good job people had better manners when they were in charge of it.
The Movie Review
Okay, its a bit late in the day for a proper review of the movie, not least because every literate fan, and not a few illiterate ones, has already written their own. So instead of a review, here are a few random jottings from the obscure and flighty mind of our senior staff writer, Lisa R. Rumpo.
Well, I liked it. But thats not what youre paying me for. I must start by saying that I am not going to go against the grain in this review. Like just about everyone else (apart from Pete, of course), I thought the movie was (clich alert) a flawed gem. Watching it is like dating a pretty young thing with some slightly irritating habits but a winning personality which compensates for them - great fun at the time, but very tempting to slag off when its all over.
This was, of course, no ordinary Doctor Who story. But it is a story of such manifestly splendid elements that it is much fairer to review them all individually. So I will. Starting with the story's most important new element and greatest asset - the boy McGann. Don't doubt it, he was an inspired choice, as perfect as any actor could be in these post-Tom Baker days. He is not only a good actor, like Davison, but is up there with Troughton in being one if the most versatile actors to tackle the part. Importantly, this skill is coupled with a characterisation which gives him room to manoeuvre (arguably for the first time). Clearly, the number of one-track eccentricities to foist upon the lead actor was bound to run out eventually, but all the same it is a fitting development of such a distinguished character. There are two clear points of reference for the new Doctor: Baker T, obviously - particularly the more detailed persona of seasons 13 and 14 - but leavened with the human touch of Dr Pete. Inevitably there are other echoes: occasional Troughton/McCoy style whimsy, some of the pontification of Hartnell and a smattering of the Pertwee action-man. If this character is the work of writer Matthew Jacobs it is miraculous - a well instructed computer or a committee of fans couldn't synthesise the essence of the Doctor better than this, yet it is a more solid and soulful persona than either of those options would have delivered. As for the likelihood that his portrayal will end here, never to develop further? So sad!
The outgoing McCoy gets one of his most dignified appearances, hinting, perhaps accidentally, that the gradual maturing of the seventh Doctor has continued off-screen; a development, but by no means a reinvention, of the Cartmel version. It's also nice to see that the seventh Doctor was at peace in his final days. The manner of his death may be mundane when compared to the grand style in which he lived, but in dramatic terms the operating theatre scenes make up for this. Even those who complained endlessly about McCoy's admittedly loose idea of acting in the 80's should finally have been able to watch him without hiding behind the settee. What's more, his increasingly eccentric appearance means that he actually looks the part now.
As for the rest of the cast: Grace is a nineties' companion, a proper grown-up woman for once, rather than a little girl in her mum's make up and high-heels. Not the archetypal, or even the ideal, companion, but just what the story and the new Doctor needed. Initial fears that storys gestation in the X-files era might result in a drab, monotone Scully substitute were mercifully unfounded. The other main player, Roberts Master, may not have been to everyones taste, but was a perfectly valid interpretation of what has always been a pretty cacky character.
The direction is some of the best ever - easily overlooked because the whole production is so glossy, but there's clearly a lot of thought at work here. Geoffrey Sax's background was in filmed comedy-dramas, which makes him more suitable than some of the soap-opera survivors JNT employed. It's also far superior to the average American TV movie. The plot is simple, but no more so than most regeneration stories, and bearing in mind that it is really designed as a second pilot, strikes a good balance between explanation and exposition. The only serious problem with the storyline regards 'what exactly happened at the end. Ive already said all Im going to on that subject (hooray!) so if you want a more in-depth analysis of the final scenes you will find it elsewhere in this issue courtesy of our scientific adviser Bob Morris.
I suppose I ought to mention that perennial fan bugbear, continuity. Its deployment here is much better than could have been expected - and anyone who's read The Nth Doctor will know what we could have been lumbered with. But we all know that continuity isn't the end of the world - that elusive Doctor Who style is what's important, not crappy details, and the achievement of that is the most miraculous aspect thing of all. Having said that, there are no major cock-ups - certainly no more than in other turning-point stories such as The War Games, the Deadly Assassin, or even Genesis of the Daleks. (Never forget that wonder of the natural world, the slow but sure metamorphosis of the common-or-garden cock-up into cast-in-stone certainty. Generally taking between 3 and 5 years, although constant repetition can bring this down even further, the average fan's dully empirical love of 'facts' ensures that even the most minute of minutiae will be treated as Holy Grail when some fool dares question it).
Thus we get the predictable diet of jelly babies, sonic screwdrivers and so on as a harmless sop to the fans; we get the eye of harmony, which falls into the JNT trap of bringing back elements only to misuse them and thus annoy the fans even more (although we all know that it takes very little imagination to explain this particular one away. Even Terrance Dicks has managed it); and we also get new ideas... such as the Doctor being half-human. Taken in the context of this one film, it is wholly unnecessary and employed rather too glibly to endear it to fans. However, if used well, it could have proved an important and even interesting addition to the series mythology. The idea itself is fine, but the rationale behind it is inane. It is apparently supposed to clarify why the Doctor likes Earth, but the idea that this needs some kind of empirical explanation is an over-literal and typically American thing to do. Of course, it looks increasingly unlikely that it will ever be referred to again in whatever medium, so it may all be irrelevant.
Allow me, as a little digression, to contend that the Pertwee era had the most appalling continuity of all - it ignored much of what was established before, and most of its own ideas were later treated with equal disdain. With plot holes such as Lupton's unnecessary chase in Planet of Spiders, and messy denouements like Azal's self-sacrifice in The Daemons, Terry and Barry's criticisms of the movie bring to mind words such as 'pot', 'kettle', 'black', and 'twats'. I wouldn't be surprised if the half-human issue proves to be the most determinedly ignored piece of continuity since Doctor Who (The War Machines) was revealed to have had a dozen previous incarnations in Brain of Morbius - although, as he had lived for several thousand years (The Silurians), why should anyone have been surprised?
Back, briefly, to the subject in hand. All in all? The most fun I've had with Doctor Who since Destiny of the Daleks. And I'm sure even the story's critics will agree with me there.
Article Text © 1998/2003 the respective author(s). All other text © Rob Morris / SAD Magazine. Design © Rob Morris 1999/2003. No reproduction of material in whole or in part may be undertaken without permission of the copyright holders.