Skip to main content

I’d rather fight a hundred of his sort than just one Dalek.


Doctor Who 
The Power of the Daleks: Episode Three


The third episode is essentially the battle of wits between the Doctor and the Daleks, the former attempting to out them or do for them at every opportunity while they gain ground by taking the path of least resistance.

The Doctor first tries to gain the upper hand through logic. If they are their servants, they will respond to any command.

The Doctor: Very well, immobilise yourself.

Which the Dalek apparently does, with a drooping eyestalk. Later, he attempts to dupe Lesterson (“I’d like to be friends”) in order to deactivate the Dalek. And it looks like he will succeed until he’s forced from the room.


Then he takes the opportunity to enter Lesterson’s lab but beats a retreat when faced with two armed Daleks.

The Doctor (to Ben): When I say run, run like a rabbit.

The Doctor of this story uses deductive reasoning sharply, concluding that whatever he does (destroy the Daleks and incur the reprisals of the colony or allow the Daleks to take over) the outlook is bleak.


The fall-out from this obsessive attention towards his nemeses is that Polly’s plight is ignored. Ben is worried about her and wants to find her, and he’s right to. But the Doctor dismisses his concerns, telling him that she is just exploring; “She is interested. I like that”. 

And, aside from some more tootling on his recorder, he’s dropped most of the more comedic flourishes of the first couple of episodes, establishing clear priorities. This is most clear in his comment on Quinn’s plight.

The Doctor: A little injustice is better than wholesale slaughter.

It’s an example of tidy plotting that Polly, whom he ignored, should be the leverage for stopping his action against the Daleks later; the message relayed to him being that she will be safe as long as he leaves the Daleks alone.


Meanwhile, the Dalek(s) run rings round Lesterson and generally prove highly adept at manipulating the colony under the pretext of servitude. When the Doctor leaves, the immobilised Dalek resumes its previous state.

Dalek: His order was wrong. I cannot serve human beings if I am immobilised. You gave me power. Your orders are right. I serve you.

Likewise, they tell Lesterson a load of porkies to get the materials they need for their production line, claiming they need them to manufacture a computer for meteorite detection. I like the near-trip up the Dalek makes when in conversation with Lesterson.

Dalek: A Dalek is bet-...  is not the same as a human.

So it’s a little disappointing that, after they play the trump card of revealing two more of their number at the climax sans weaponry, they revert nearly to type for demands of a cliffhanger. Surrounding Lesterson, they rant in unison “We will get our power”.


Throughout this, Robert James really sells Lesterson’s lack of discernment. Lesterson has his eye only on the horizon he thinks lies ahead, and from scene to scene he shows a complete lack of judgement. He smooths over Hensell’s concerns at the Dalek’s powers of reason.

Lesterson: Now there is no cause for concern, Governor. Wait until you see the amount of work it can do.

Which is just what a beleaguered governor wants to hear (later he comments “I have every confidence in Lesterson” and provides a permanent guard for the lab). And when told of the 100% accuracy of the Daleks’ meteorite detection he fixes on how it will be “an enormous saving for the colony” and no doubt bring enormous accolades for him too. Later, he exhibits the same failings with the Doctor.

Lesterson: You’ve done nothing but meddle and interfere since you landed on Vulcan.

Quite an accolade for the Doctor, but as soon as he offers friendship Lesterson buckles (“Very well. You may stay”). Notably, though, the Doctor makes a point of telling Ben that Lesterson is a first class scientist, and should not be underestimated.

The Quinn plotline is something of a damp squib after he reveals that he sent for the Examiner, because of the threat of the rebels. It provides Polly with slightly mundane motivation followed by kidnapping. Maybe she fancies Quinn? She pleads “Leave him alone” as he is marched off to confinement. Her kidnapping by Janley and Velmer feels a bit clumsy, though. Get a companion out of the way for an episode.  And the rebels’ short-sighted planning, not to mention the question of just what the oppression they are amounts to, involves using a Dalek gun (it “could win us the revolution”).


That said, the revelation that Janley is playing the rebels, working for Bragen, adds a layer of intrigue.

Bragen: I don’t want to take over a colony of rebels, do I Janley?

But it seems like a rather convoluted and risk method for attaining the governorship (he’s been promoted Deputy Governor just through a bit of clever arguing). Janley stirs them up, such that Hensell is undermined and loses his position. Then Bragen crushes them.

Bragen: The whole colony will be grateful and then I’ll be Governor.

Bragen has already shown his true colours in accusing Quinn of murdering the Examiner in order to blame it on the rebels and usurp the Governor. Which doesn’t take a lot of effort to come up with, as later Bragen (see above) reveals that this is essentially hisplan. It’s a consistent theme with the colonists, that personal goals blind them to the threat of the Daleks (because otherwise we the viewers wouldn’t buy into the scenario). Even the calculating Bragen doesn’t recognise what they are capable of, siding with Lesterson in order to keep the Doctor at bay (the real threat in his mind).


His scene opposite the Doctor lays his cards on the table, each calling each other’s bluff. He informs the Doctor that a body has been found in the swamp.

The Doctor: What is that to do with me?
Bragen: You’re the Examiner. Or maybe you’re not. Who are you?
The Doctor: There’s only one possible way that you could know I’m not the Examiner.

It appears that an impasse has been reached between them in respect of the consequences  of either telling the Governor their different truths.

Ben: He’d make a right Father Christmas, wouldn’t he.
The Doctor: I’d rather fight a hundred of his sort than just one Dalek.



Sustaining a scenario where the Daleks remain relatively impassive three episodes into the story is no mean feat, and Whitaker/Spooner largely succeed. Mainly because the battleground of the episode is an intellectual one between them and the Doctor, very much a rarity until Davros showed up to rant cerebrally. There can’t help be a bit of “I can’t believe they’re falling for it” because we know them so well, but for the most part the performances (Hensell, Lesterson) and the underlying motivations of the humans sell it. Most of the characters have ulterior motives and see the Daleks as only incidental or instrumental to their goals. The rebel plot remains lacklustre at this point; it can’t hope to be as compelling as the main thread, and it isn’t, with Polly’s kidnap coming across as filler material (and a holiday for Anneke). 

Popular posts from this blog

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.

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.

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…

Other monks will meet their deaths here. And they too will have blackened fingers. And blackened tongues.

The Name of the Rose (1986) (SPOILERS) Umberto Eco wasn’t awfully impressed by Jean Jacques-Annaud’s adaptation of his novel – or “ palimpsest of Umberto Eco’s novel ” as the opening titles announce – to the extent that he nixed further movie versions of his work. Later, he amended that view, calling it “ a nice movie ”. He also, for balance, labelled The Name of the Rose his worst novel – “ I hate this book and I hope you hate it too ”. Essentially, he was begrudging its renown at the expense of his later “ superior ” novels. I didn’t hate the novel, although I do prefer the movie, probably because I saw it first and it was everything I wanted from a medieval Sherlock Holmes movie set in a monastery and devoted to forbidden books, knowledge and opinions.

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.

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.

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.

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.

In a few moments, you will have an experience that will seem completely real. It will be the result of your subconscious fears transformed into your conscious awareness.

Brainstorm (1983) (SPOILERS) Might Brainstorm have been the next big thing – a ground-breaking, game-changing cinematic spectacle that had as far reaching consequences as Star Wars (special effects) or Avatar (3D) – if only Douglas Trumbull had been allowed to persevere with his patented “Showscan” process (70mm film photographed and projected at 60 frames per second)? I suspect not; one only has to look at the not-so-far-removed experiment of Ang Lee with Billy Lynn’s Long Halftime Walk , and how that went down like a bag of cold sick, to doubt that any innovation will necessarily catch on (although Trumbull at least had a narrative hinge on which to turn his “more real than real” imagery, whereas Lee’s pretty much boiled down to “because it was there”). Brainstorm ’s story is, though, like its title, possibly too cerebral, too much concerned with the consciousness and touting too little of the cloyingly affirmative that Bruce Rubin inevitably brings to his screenplays. T

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