Skip to main content

All we can do is marvel at the creatures who are now taking our place.


Doctor Who
The Power of the Daleks: Episode Six


Like the final episode of The Smugglers, the absence of the last part of Power from the archives is felt more strongly due to being so action-orientated. It’s a bit of a slaughter, actually, with only two supporting characters surviving the carnage. There are a couple of points where I scratched my head over plot developments, the first of which involved the rebellion.


Early on, Janley appears before Bragen, a gun slung over her shoulder (a bit proto-Patty Hearst) and announces that the rebels are victorious.

Janley: We’ve won. The revolution is over.

But what exactly did this off-screen take-over entail? Bragen has already taken charge of the colony, so what more needs to be done? Taking out a few supervisors? Bragen’s personal guard remains unaffected, and they’re the ones in the previous episode who won’t take orders from Hensell.

Bragen: The revolution is not quite over yet. You mentioned Kebell, Valmar and that rabble. Well, now they must be dealt with. They rebelled against Hensell yesterday. Tomorrow it will be my turn. Well let them rebel. Tell them the guards have taken 
control. Let them attack and then we can crush them utterly.

It’s Bragen’s utterly ruthless pragmatism that holds together a rather underdeveloped plot thread. In a particularly nasty touch, he reveals that he was ready to gun down Janley there and then if she didn’t agree to his plans for the rebels. Good as Archard is, Christopher Barry can never quite sell the idea that this is a large colony that takes its Governor days to tour. The script is mindful enough to reference the off-screen masses though, as in Bragen’s announcement.

Bragen: People of Vulcan, this is your new Governor talking to you. I have to announce that Governor Hensell has been murdered by the rebels. I have taken control temporarily until order is restored. People on the perimeter and the interior should stay calm. We know who the murderers are. I shall keep you informed of events as soon as I am able.


What works very well is Bragen’s gradual realisation, but refusal to accept, his loss of control. First comes the news that the Daleks are aiding the rebels (of which more in a moment) and then the complete lack of response to his orders (“I’m their Governor. Why don’t they answer?” – it seems there’s a montage of the devastated colony at this point, as there’s only silence accompanied by funereal music for a spell). Right until the last he continues in his attempt to hold sway.

Bragen: Daleks, listen to me. I’m the Governor. You must work with me. Do not trust the rebels. I will give you whatever you want. But, immobilise your guns. This is the Governor speaking.

With the Daleks destroyed, he corners Quinn.

Bragen: Now I shall restore law and order to this planet.

Except that Valmar shoots him.


The Daleks appear to reconsider their strategy in this episode for no good reason. At the end of Episode Five they’re swarming around screeching that they will “Exterminate. Annihilate. Destroy. Daleks conquer and destroy” but now they offer their aid to the rebels in dealing with Bragen (Valmar overheard Bragen’s instruction to Janley).

Dalek: We will fight for you. You will lead us to the middle of your party of human beings. We are your friends. We will serve you.

It may be that they consider it more economical to mop up the rebels in one place, but they hardly represent a realistic threat now that the Daleks are on the rampage. It doesn’t make much sense either that a scene or two earlier we hear “Orders received. Daleks to commence extermination”. Wouldn’t the rebels have picked up that this was going on?

There’s a sense that the whole “Power” of the Daleks premise, in respect of their becoming autonomous, would not have been conceived much beyond the ‘60s. We’re now used to Daleks being self-powering, pretty much, but in Episode Six they still haven’t quite sorted out their system.

Dalek: Static circuit is nearly complete. Soon we can abandon the power we are using.

There’s another reference here to “the law of the Daleks” which is now “in force”. Of the supporting cast, they exterminate Kebell, Janley and, with something approaching irony, Lesterson.


Lesterson resurfaces when the Doctor returns to the lab. His transition to madness is now complete, and it’s an extraordinary performance from James, helped considerably by wonderful dialogue.

Lesterson: You must be absolutely quiet. They know everything that’s going on. They even know what you’re thinking.

He comments that one has to admire them, that they are marvellous creatures (which echoes the respect the Doctor has for their capabilities in earlier episodes) and that there is nothing that can be done.

Lesterson: They’re the new species, you see. Taking over from homo sapiens. Man’s had his day. Finished now... All we can do is marvel at the creatures who are now taking our place.


When he’s later accused by aggy Ben of being responsible for all this, he is utterly unruffled, disassociatively acknowledging the point (“Well, I could control it, you see”) and suggesting that the Doctor find out from the Daleks where their power supply is located (“Yes, you should ask the Daleks”). Then, in a stroke of chilling brilliance, he pledges allegiance to the new masters.

Lesterson: I want to help you.
Dalek: Why?
Lesterson: I am your ser-vant.

His mimicking of the Dalek intonation is even more chilling than the Daleks themselves coming out with the line in the second episode. And, as mentioned, his comes across as a somewhat grizzly joke on the Daleks’ part.

Dalek: We do not need humans now.
Lesterson: But you wouldn’t kill me. I gave you life.
Dalek: Yes. You gave us life (exterminates Lesterson)


The Doctor and the companions are characterised either intriguingly or generically. In the case of the latter, Polly is ill-served. Gone is the conviction towards doing the right thing she displayed in the final episode of The Smugglers. It’s replaced by screamer companion terror, needing Ben to protect her, and the attitude Ben previously held (asking to go back to the TARDIS).  That said, she is more mindful than Ben of all that the colonists have been through (“Think of all those poor people. All killed”) when the latter begrudges them a lack of gratitude.

The Doctor adopts a “needs of the many” morality (consistent with his prioritising the Daleks over Quinn’s incarceration earlier) and doesn’t agonise over sending Bragen’s guards to their deaths (as a distraction while he can get on with sabotaging the Daleks’ power supply). It’s surprising, as the show doesn’t often force the Doctor into a position where he is required to make such a decision. He’s usually allowed a get-out, either through someone else volunteering or events overtaking him. Even Bragen considers it to be too much (“I will not allow my guards to be sacrificed”).

And one might suggest that the method adopted to defeat the Daleks is borne out of vanity. Asked by Valmar why he doesn’t just cut the power, he replies “Because I prefer to do it my way”. His way leaves the colony even more crippled than it would otherwise be.

Valmar: You may have stopped the Daleks. But do you have any idea of the damage you’ve done to the colony?... Did it have to be this way?

A reasonable question. But this is a new Doctor, with a streak of anarchy. He’s not remotely contrite about what he has done.

The Doctor: I think we’d better get out of here, before they send us the bill.


There’s an interesting tug between a neat wrap up and a more open sense of “What happens next?” Quinn and Valmar burying the hatchet seems a bit too sudden (“We shall rebuild together”). But the weird final shot, where a crumpled Dalek’s eyestalk rises to observe the dematerialising TARDIS, appears to reject Ben’s assertion that it is “Just a heap of old iron now”. Perhaps because the “final end” is a few stories away.


Overall:


If it weren’t for the slightly threadbare rebels plotline, this would get full marks. Troughton makes a mighty debut, swinging from zaniness to etching out a moral code distinct from that of his predecessor. The Daleks make their most cunning and developed appearance, before or since, while Robert James’ performance as Lesterson is an unsung great supporting turn. 

Popular posts from this blog

If I do nothing else, I will convince them that Herbert Stempel knows what won the goddam Academy Award for Best goddam Picture of 1955. That’s what I’m going to accomplish.

Quiz Show (1994) (SPOILERS) Quiz Show perfectly encapsulates a certain brand of Best Picture nominee: the staid, respectable, diligent historical episode, a morality tale in response to which the Academy can nod their heads approvingly and discerningly, feeding as it does their own vainglorious self-image about how times and attitudes have changed, in part thanks to their own virtuousness. Robert Redford’s film about the 1950s Twenty-One quiz show scandals is immaculately made, boasts a notable cast and is guided by a strong screenplay from Paul Attanasio (who, on television, had just created the seminal Homicide: Life on the Streets ), but it lacks that something extra that pushes it into truly memorable territory.

Your Mickey Mouse is one big stupid dope!

Enemy Mine (1985) (SPOILERS) The essential dynamic of Enemy Mine – sworn enemies overcome their differences to become firm friends – was a well-ploughed one when it was made, such that it led to TV Tropes assuming, since edited, that it took its title from an existing phrase (Barry Longyear, author of the 1979 novella, made it up, inspired by the 1961 David Niven film The Best of Enemies ). The Film Yearbook Volume 5 opined that that Wolfgang Petersen’s picture “ lacks the gritty sauciness of Hell in the Pacific”; John Boorman’s WWII film stranded Lee Marvin and Toshiro Mifune on a desert island and had them first duking it out before becoming reluctant bedfellows. Perhaps germanely, both movies were box office flops.

Piece by piece, the camel enters the couscous.

The Forgiven (2021) (SPOILERS) By this point, the differences between filmmaker John Michael McDonagh and his younger brother, filmmaker and playwright Martin McDonagh, are fairly clearly established. Both wear badges of irreverence and provocation in their writing, and a willingness to tackle – or take pot-shots – at bigger issues, ones that may find them dangling their toes in hot water. But Martin receives the lion’s share of the critical attention, while John is generally recognised as the slightly lesser light. Sure, some might mistake Seven Psychopaths for a John movie, and Calvary for a Martin one, but there’s a more flagrant sense of attention seeking in John’s work, and concomitantly less substance. The Forgiven is clearly aiming more in the expressly substantial vein of John’s earlier Calvary, but it ultimately bears the same kind of issues in delivery.

Haven’t you ever heard of the healing power of laughter?

Batman (1989) (SPOILERS) There’s Jaws , there’s Star Wars , and then there’s Batman in terms of defining the modern blockbuster. Jaws ’ success was so profound, it changed the way movies were made and marketed. Batman’s marketing was so profound, it changed the way tentpoles would be perceived: as cash cows. Disney tried to reproduce the effect the following year with Dick Tracy , to markedly less enthusiastic response. None of this places Batman in the company of Jaws as a classic movie sold well, far from it. It just so happened to hit the spot. As Tim Burton put it, it was “ more of a cultural phenomenon than a great movie ”. It’s difficult to disagree with his verdict that the finished product (for that is what it is) is “ mainly boring ”. Now, of course, the Burton bat has been usurped by the Nolan incarnation (and soon the Snyder). They have some things in common. Both take the character seriously and favour a sombre tone, which was much more of shock to the

Say hello to the Scream Extractor.

Monsters, Inc. (2001) (SPOILERS) I was never the greatest fan of Monsters, Inc. , even before charges began to be levelled regarding its “true” subtext. I didn’t much care for the characters, and I particularly didn’t like the way Pixar’s directors injected their own parenting/ childhood nostalgia into their plots. Something that just seems to go on with their fare ad infinitum. Which means the Pixars I preferred tended to be the Brad Bird ones. You know, the alleged objectivist. Now, though, we learn Pixar has always been about the adrenochrome, so there’s no going back…

No one can be told what the Matrix is. You have to see it for yourself.

The Matrix  (1999) (SPOILERS) Twenty years on, and the articles are on the defining nature of The Matrix are piling up, most of them touching on how its world has become a reality, or maybe always was one. At the time, its premise was engaging enough, but it was the sum total of the package that cast a spell – the bullet time, the fashions, the soundtrack, the comic book-as-live-action framing and styling – not to mention it being probably the first movie to embrace and reflect the burgeoning Internet ( Hackers doesn’t really count), and subsequently to really ride the crest of the DVD boom wave. And now? Now it’s still really, really good.

I’m just the balloon man.

Copshop (2021) (SPOILERS) A consistent problem with Joe Carnahan’s oeuvre is that, no matter how confidently his movies begin, or how strong his premise, or how adept his direction or compelling the performances he extracts, he ends up blowing it. He blows it with Copshop , a ’70s-inspired variant on Assault on Precinct 13 that is pretty damn good during the first hour, before devolving into his standard mode of sado-nihilistic mayhem.

Twenty dwarves took turns doing handstands on the carpet.

Bugsy (1991) (SPOILERS) Bugsy is very much a Warren Beatty vanity project (aren’t they all, even the ones that don’t seem that way on the surface?), to the extent of his playing a title character a decade and a half younger than him. As such, it makes sense that producer Warren’s choice of director wouldn’t be inclined to overshadow star Warren, but the effect is to end up with a movie that, for all its considerable merits (including a script from James Toback chock full of incident), never really feels quite focussed, that it’s destined to lead anywhere, even if we know where it’s going.

When we have been subtle, then can I kill him?

The Avengers 6.16. Legacy of Death There’s scarcely any crediting the Terry Nation of Noon-Doomsday as the same Terry Nation that wrote this, let alone the Terry Nation churning out a no-frills Dalek story a season for the latter stages of the Jon Pertwee era. Of course, Nation had started out as a comedy writer (for Hancock), and it may be that the kick Brian Clemens gave him up the pants in reaction to the quality of Noon-Doomsday loosened a whole load of gags. Admittedly, a lot of them are well worn, but they come so thick and fast in Legacy of Death , accompanied by an assuredly giddy pace from director Don Chaffey (of Ray Harryhausen’s Jason and the Argonauts ) and a fine ensemble of supporting players, that it would be churlish to complain.

You ever heard the saying, “Don’t rob the bank across from the diner that has the best donuts in three counties”?

2 Guns (2013) (SPOILERS) Denzel Washington is such a reliable performer, that it can get a bit boring. You end up knowing every gesture or inflection in advance, whether he’s playing a good guy or a bad guy. And his films are generally at least half decent, so you end up seeing them. Even in Flight (or perhaps especially in Flight ; just watch him chugging down that vodka) where he’s giving it his Oscar-nominatable best, he seems too familiar. I think it may be because he’s an actor who is more effective the less he does. In 2 Guns he’s not doing less, but sometimes it seems like it. That’s because the last person I’d ever expect blows him off the screen; Mark Wahlberg.