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

I just hope my death makes more cents than my life.

Joker (2019)
(SPOILERS) So the murder sprees didn’t happen, and a thousand puff pieces desperate to fan the flames of such events and then told-ya-so have fallen flat on their faces. The biggest takeaway from Joker is not that the movie is an event, when once that seemed plausible but not a given, but that any mainstream press perspective on the picture appears unable to divorce its quality from its alleged or actual politics. Joker may be zeitgeisty, but isn’t another Taxi Driver in terms of cultural import, in the sense that Taxi Driver didn’t have a Taxi Driver in mind when Paul Schrader wrote it. It is, if you like, faux-incendiary, and can only ever play out on that level. It might be more accurately described as a grubbier, grimier (but still polished and glossy) The Talented Ripley, the tale of developing psychopathy, only tailored for a cinemagoing audience with few options left outside of comic book fare.

Dude. You’re my hero and shit.

El Camino: A Breaking Bad Movie (2019)
(SPOILERS) I was going to say I’d really like to see what Vince Gilligan has up his sleeve besidesBreaking Bad spinoffs. But then I saw that he had a short-lived series on CBS a few years back (Battle Creek). I guess things Breaking Bad-related ensure an easy greenlight, particularly from Netflix, for whom the original show was bread and butter in its take up as a streaming platform. There’s something slightly dispiriting about El Camino: A Breaking Bad Movie, though. Not that Gilligan felt the need to return to Jesse Pinkman – although the legitimacy of that motive is debatable – but the desire to re-enter and re-inhabit the period of the show itself, as if he’s unable to move on from a near-universally feted achievement and has to continually exhume it and pick it apart.

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…

It’s amazing what you can do when you don’t have to look yourself in the mirror any more.

Hollow Man (2000)
(SPOILERS) Paul Verhoeven very acutely critiqued his own choices when he observed of Hollow Manit really is not me anymore. I think many other people could have done that… there might have been twenty directors in Hollywood who could have done that”. It isn’t such a wonder he returned to Europe, and to quality, for his subsequent films. If Memoirs of an Invisible Man failed to follow up on the mental side effects of being seen right through found in HG Wells’ novel and (especially) in James Whale’s film, all Hollow Man does is take that tack, with the consequence that the proceedings degenerate into a banal action slasher, but with a naked Bacon instead of a guy in a hockey mask.

It’s not every day you see a guy get his ass kicked on two continents – by himself.

Gemini Man (2019)
(SPOILERS) Ang Lee seems hellbent on sloughing down a technological cul-de-sac to the point of creative obscurity, in much the same way Robert Zemeckis enmired himself in the mirage of motion capture for a decade. Lee previously experimented with higher frame rates on Billy Lynn's Long Halftime Walk, to the general aversion of those who saw it in its intended form – 48, 60 or 120 fps have generally gone down like a bag of cold sick, just ask Peter Jackson – and the complete indifference of most of the remaining audience, for whom the material held little lustre. Now he pretty much repeats that trick with Gemini Man. At best, it’s merely an “okay” film – not quite the bomb its Rotten Tomatoes score suggests – which, (as I saw it) stripped of its distracting frame rate and 3D, reveals itself as just about serviceable but afflicted by several insurmountable drawbacks.

I have a cow, but I hate bananas.

The Laundromat (2019)
(SPOILERS) Steven Soderbergh’s flair for cinematic mediocrity continues with this attempt at The Big Short-style topicality, taking aim at the Panama Papers but ending up with a mostly blunt satire, one eager to show how the offshore system negatively impacts the average – and also the not-so-average – person but at the expense of really digging in to how it facilitates the turning of the broader capitalist world (it is, after all based on Jake Bernstein’s Secrecy World: Inside the Panama Papers Investigation of Illicit Money Networks and the Global Elite).

He tasks me. He tasks me, and I shall have him.

Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
(1982)
(SPOILERS) I don’t love Star Trek, but I do love Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. That probably isn’t just me, but a common refrain of many a non-devotee of the series. Although, it used to apply to The Voyage Home (the funny one, with the whales, the Star Trek even the target audience for Three Men and a Baby could enjoy). Unfortunately, its high regard has also become the desperate, self-destructive, song-and-verse, be-all-and-end-all of the overlords of the franchise itself, in whichever iteration, it seems. This is understandable to an extent, as Khan is that rare movie sequel made to transcendent effect on almost every level, and one that stands the test of time every bit as well (better, even) as when it was first unveiled.

Poor Easy Breezy.

Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood (2019)
(SPOILERS) My initial reaction to Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood was mild disbelief that Tarantino managed to hoodwink studios into coming begging to make it, so wilfully perverse is it in disregarding any standard expectations of narrative or plotting. Then I remembered that studios, or studios that aren’t Disney, are desperate for product, and more especially, product that might guarantee them a hit. Quentin’s latest appears to be that, but whether it’s a sufficient one to justify the expense of his absurd vanity project remains to be seen.

What you do is very baller. You're very anarchist.

Lady Bird (2017)
(SPOILERS) You can see the Noah Baumbach influence on Lady Bird, Greta Gerwig’s directorial debut, with whom she collaborated on Frances Ha; an intimate, lo-fi, post-Woody Allen (as in, post-feted, respected Woody Allen) dramedy canvas that has traditionally been the New Yorker’s milieu. But as an adopted, spiritual New Yorker, I suspect Gerwig honourably qualifies, even as Lady Bird is a love letter/ nostalgia trip to her home city of Sacramento.

What about the meaningless line of indifference?

The Lion King (2019)
(SPOILERS) And so the Disney “live-action” remake train thunders on regardless (I wonder how long the live-action claim would last if there was a slim hope of a Best Animated Feature Oscar nod?) I know I keep repeating myself, but the early ‘90s Disney animation renaissance didn’t mean very much to me; I found their pictures during that period fine, but none of them blew me away as they did critics and audiences generally. As such, I have scant nostalgia to bring to bear on the prospect of a remake, which I’m sure can work both ways. Aladdin proved to be a lot of fun. Beauty and the Beast entirely tepid. The Lion King, well, it isn’t a badfilm, but it’s wearying its slavish respectfulness towards the original and so diligent in doing it justice, you’d think it was some kind of religious artefact. As a result, it is, ironically, for the most part, dramatically dead in the water.