Skip to main content

I could stay and make coffee or something.


Doctor Who
The Tenth Planet: Episode Three


Episode Three lets the side down somewhat, after a very strong first half. A man wearing William Hartnell’s wig collapses, and that’s it for the lead character until Episode Four.

Ben: It’s the Doctor. He’s passed out. He’s ill.
Cutler: Look, I’ve got enough on my plate without worrying about him. Get him down to one of the cabins and look after him.

Which likely reflected Innes Lloyd’s position on Hartnell; get him out of the way, he’s a pain in the arse. This sets up the regeneration, of course.

Ben: He seems all right. His pulse and breathing are normal.
Polly: I don’t understand it. He just seems to be worn out.

So Ben didn’t notice he had two hearts? Maybe he didn’t back then. Bringing Hartnell back for a final story and only featuring him in three of the episodes seems like a major slap in the face, really. Even Colin was offered four.

With the Doctor out of the picture, and the Cybermen making only a cameo appearance, the story struggles to get a grip. Ben and the increasingly fraught Cutler become central, with the former even having to deliver exposition that the Doctor (apparently) told him before his stand-in fell over.

Cutler’s increasingly myopic mental state is presented with very little nuance, although I did find the order in which he presented the problems facing them amusing.

Cutler: One, my son has been sent up on a foolhardy mission and we’ve got to get him down. Two, another visit from these creatures is almost a certainty. And three, the Earth is being drained of its energy by this so-called planet Mondas whatever it’s called.  

Nothing like priorities. It’s at this point the story lurches into Dr Strangeloveterritory, but without the sense of humour or the wonderful characterisations. Cutler wants to break out the Z-Bomb (handily, they have one at the base), the doomsday weapon that “rightly primed, it could split that planet in half”. Anyone in possession of their faculties would cry-off such a decision, which is why everyone else tells Cutler not to use it, including the Secretary General, Barclay and Ben.

The Secretary General tells him he can’t use the Z-Bomb. Then Cutler asks if he can take any necessary steps to stop the Cybermen. Which the Secretary General gives him permission to do. Unfortunately, Cutler chooses to not to interpret this as “any necessary steps other than use of the Z-Bomb”. He also wants Barclay to ensure that the bomb detonates so that his son is safe, orbiting on the other side of the Earth.

It’s for Ben to steal the Doctor’s thunder regarding the fate of Mondas.

Ben: Yes, but he said that eventually it would absorb too much energy and burn itself out. Shrivel up to nothing.


Actually, I think it’s quite a good move to have the fate of Mondas announced in advance. It means that, when it comes, it’s not a deus ex machina. But it does result in most of this episode being occupied with Ben locked up, then attempting to sabotage the rocket that will launch the Z-Bomb (with Barclay’s aid; fortunately he helped design the base!) This involves more of Ben talking to himself, before embarking on the sabotage itself (with a Swiss Army knife). There’s a fine bit of stunt work when Cutler happens upon the sailor and launches him backwards over a railing.


We’re seeing the first sign of writers using Polly poorly, unfortunately. She has little to do, other than be instructed by Ben to try to persuade Barclay to help them. As she’s just a harmless bint, Cutler allows her to stay in the control room after she volunteers, “I could stay and make coffee or something”. That said, she’s willing to engage in moral debate (“one life against millions”) in attempting to convince Barclay that it’s more important to prevent the Z-Bomb from being used that saving Cutler’s son. Later, she hides under a blanket.


The Cybermen get no more than a couple of minutes of screen time, mown down by Cutler’s men who are using Cybermen weapons. It’s an effective sequence, with the now-familiar Cyber music, but they’re increasingly coming across as not-all-that, despite their being a more advanced, more intimidating bunch.

The episode ends on the rocket countdown; did Ben succeed in with his sabotage? Not all that gripping, but that reflects the episode as a whole.


Merely so-so. Hartnell is missed and, without the Cybermen, events revolve around nutty Cutler.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

She writes Twilight fan fiction.

Vampire Academy (2014)
My willingness to give writer Daniel Waters some slack on the grounds of early glories sometimes pays off (Sex and Death 101) and sometimes, as with this messy and indistinct Young Adult adaptation, it doesn’t. If Vampire Academy plods along as a less than innovative smart-mouthed Buffy rip-off that might be because, if you added vampires to Heathers, you would probably get something not so far from the world of Joss Whedon. Unfortunately inspiration is a low ebb throughout, not helped any by tepid direction from Daniel’s sometimes-reliable brother Mark and a couple of hopelessly plankish leads who do their best to dampen down any wit that occasionally attempts to surface.

I can only presume there’s a never-ending pile of Young Adult fiction poised for big screen failure, all of it comprising multi-novel storylines just begging for a moment in the Sun. Every time an adaptation crashes and burns (and the odds are that they will) another one rises, hydra-like, hoping…

Rejoice! The broken are the more evolved. Rejoice.

Split (2016)
(SPOILERS) M Night Shyamalan went from the toast of twist-based filmmaking to a one-trick pony to the object of abject ridicule in the space of only a couple of pictures: quite a feat. Along the way, I’ve managed to miss several of his pictures, including his last, The Visit, regarded as something of a re-locating of his footing in the low budget horror arena. Split continues that genre readjustment, another Blumhouse production, one that also manages to bridge the gap with the fare that made him famous. But it’s a thematically uneasy film, marrying shlock and serious subject matter in ways that don’t always quite gel.

Shyamalan has seized on a horror staple – nubile teenage girls in peril, prey to a psychotic antagonist – and, no doubt with the best intentions, attempted to warp it. But, in so doing, he has dragged in themes and threads from other, more meritable fare, with the consequence that, in the end, the conflicting positions rather subvert his attempts at subversion…

My name is Dr. King Schultz, this is my valet, Django, and these are our horses, Fritz, and Tony.

Django Unchained (2012)
(MINOR SPOILERS) Since the painful misstep of Grindhouse/Death Proof, Quentin Tarantino has regained the higher ground like never before. Pulp Fiction, his previous commercial and critical peak, has been at very least equalled by the back-to-back hits of Inglourious Basterds and Django Unchained. Having been underwhelmed by his post Pulp Fiction efforts (albeit, I admired his technical advances as a director in Kill Bill), I was pleasantly surprised by Inglourious Basterds. It was no work of genius (so not Pulp Fiction) by any means, but there was a gleeful irreverence in its treatment of history and even to the nominal heroic status of its titular protagonists. Tonally, it was a good fit for the director’s “cool” aesthetic. As a purveyor of postmodern pastiche, where the surface level is the subtext, in some ways he was operating at his zenith. Django Unchained is a retreat from that position, the director caught in the tug between his all-important aesthetic pr…

Must the duck be here?

The Favourite (2018)
(SPOILERS) In my review of The Killing of a Sacred Deer, I suggested The Favourite might be a Yorgos Lanthimos movie for those who don’t like Yorgos Lanthimos movies. At least, that’s what I’d heard. And certainly, it’s more accessible than either of his previous pictures, the first two thirds resembling a kind of Carry On Up the Greenaway, but despite these broader, more slapstick elements and abundant caustic humour, there’s a prevailing detachment on the part of the director, a distancing oversight that rather suggests he doesn’t feel very much for his subjects, no matter how much they emote, suffer or connive. Or pratfall.

Whoever comes, I'll kill them. I'll kill them all.

John Wick: Chapter 2 (2017)
(SPOILERS) There’s no guessing he’s back. John Wick’s return is most definite and demonstrable, in a sequel that does what sequels ought in all the right ways, upping the ante while never losing sight of the ingredients that made the original so formidable. John Wick: Chapter 2 finds the minimalist, stripped-back vehicle and character of the first instalment furnished with an elaborate colour palette and even more idiosyncrasies around the fringes, rather like Mad Max in that sense, and director Chad Stahleski (this time without the collaboration of David Leitch, but to no discernible deficit) ensures the action is filled to overflowing, but with an even stronger narrative drive that makes the most of changes of gear, scenery and motivation.

The result is a giddily hilarious, edge-of-the-seat thrill ride (don’t believe The New York Times review: it is not “altogether more solemn” I can only guess Jeannette Catsoulis didn’t revisit the original in the interven…

I don’t think you will see President Pierce again.

The Ballad of Buster Scruggs (2018)
(SPOILERS) The Ballad of Buster Scruggs and other tall tales of the American frontier is the title of "the book" from which the Coen brothers' latest derives, and so announces itself as fiction up front as heavily as Fargo purported to be based on a true story. In the world of the portmanteau western – has there even been one before? – theme and content aren't really all that distinct from the more familiar horror collection, and as such, these six tales rely on sudden twists or reveals, most of them revolving around death. And inevitably with the anthology, some tall tales are stronger than other tall tales, the former dutifully taking up the slack.

Can you float through the air when you smell a delicious pie?

Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse (2018)
(SPOILERS) Ironically, given the source material, think I probably fell into the category of many who weren't overly disposed to give this big screen Spider-Man a go on the grounds that it was an animation. After all, if it wasn’t "good enough" for live-action, why should I give it my time? Not even Phil Lord and Christopher Miller's pedigree wholly persuaded me; they'd had their stumble of late, although admittedly in that live-action arena. As such, it was only the near-unanimous critics' approval that swayed me, suggesting I'd have been missing out. They – not always the most reliable arbiters of such populist fare, which made the vote of confidence all the more notable – were right. Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse is not only a first-rate Spider-Man movie, it's a fresh, playful and (perhaps) surprisingly heartfelt origins story.

I don’t know if what is happening is fair, but it’s the only thing I can think of that’s close to justice.

The Killing of a Sacred Deer (2017)
(SPOILERS) I think I knew I wasn’t going to like The Killing of a Sacred Deer in the first five minutes. And that was without the unedifying sight of open-heart surgery that takes up the first four. Yorgos Lanthimos is something of a Marmite director, and my responses to this and his previous The Lobster (which I merely thought was “okay” after exhausting its thin premise) haven’t induced me to check out his earlier work. Of course, he has now come out with a film that, reputedly, even his naysayers will like, awards-darling The Favourite

There's something wrong with the sky.

Hold the Dark (2018)
(SPOILERS) Hold the Dark, an adaptation of William Giraldi's 2014 novel, is big on atmosphere, as you'd expect from director Jeremy Saulnier (Blue Ruin, Green Room) and actor-now-director (I Don’t Want to Live in This World Anymore) pal Macon Blair (furnishing the screenplay and appearing in one scene), but contrastingly low on satisfying resolutions. Being wilfully oblique can be a winner if you’re entirely sure what you're trying to achieve, but the effect here is rather that it’s "for the sake of it" than purposeful.

Never compare me to the mayor in Jaws! Never!

Ghostbusters (2016)
(SPOILERS) Paul Feig is a better director than Ivan Reitman, or at very least he’s savvy enough to gather technicians around him who make his films look good, but that hasn’t helped make his Ghostbusters remake (or reboot) a better movie than the original, and that’s even with the original not even being that great a movie in the first place.

Along which lines, I’d lay no claims to the 1984 movie being some kind of auteurist gem, but it does make some capital from the polarising forces of Aykroyd’s ultra-geekiness on the subject of spooks and Murray’s “I’m just here for the asides” irreverence. In contrast, Feig’s picture is all about treating the subject as he does any other genre, be it cop, or spy, or romcom. There’s no great affection, merely a reliably professional approach, one minded to ensure that a generous quota of gags (on-topic not required) can be pumped out via abundant improv sessions.

So there’s nothing terribly wrong with Ghostbusters, but aside from …