Skip to main content

Melt them down. I’m going to melt the Daleks down to pools of metal!


Doctor Who
The Power of the Daleks: Episode Five


I’ve been praising Robert James’ performance in this story, and I’m going to have to continue repeating myself. His escalating hysteria is utterly gripping, particularly when faced with those who are actively seeking to undermine his credibility. James’ voice increasingly resembles a deranged Gussie Finknottle

Lesterson: I know what I’m going to do. Laser torches. Melt them down. I’m going to melt the Daleks down to pools of metal!
Janley: You won’t, Lesterson.
Lesterson: Do you think I care what you can do? Go on! Tell everybody I was responsible for Resner’s death. I don’t care. I’m going to wipe out the Daleks! Yes, tell everybody all about Resner’s death.

The revelation that he can no longer wield the threat of cutting off the Daleks’ power (which they can now store) sends him scurrying first to the Doctor and then Bragen. Both the Dalek present and then Janley and Bragen treat him as if he is losing it, alleging behaviour or instructions that he did not issue.

Lesterson: What are you doing?
Dalek: Laying the new emergency power supply as you ordered, master.

Whittaker and Spooner deserve credit for devoting as much time as they do to Lesterson’s deteriorating mental state, which in this scene reaches a place of tangible surreality. It’s probably not until Hindle in Kinda that we again see such a fully-fledged depiction of someone losing it. He claims, “I’m perfectly well”, which he clearly isn’t, but unlike those around him he does now perceive the enormity of the threat of the Daleks.

Janley: You ought to be in hospital. You promised you’d report there.
Lesterson: I promised nothing of the kind.

And then:

Bragen: Pity. It’s probably only temporary.
Lesterson: You’re trying to say I’m mad.


Bragen instructs that Lesterson be placed under restraint, and it’s this episode where the character comes into his own. Bernard Archard makes the most of the opportunity, and his scene opposite Peter Bathurst (Hensell) is a master class in cool menace. Hensell has returned from his trip and Bragen barely acknowledges him, returning to his writing after looking up from his desk. He informs Hensell of the imprisonment of the Examiner.

Bragen: As far as I’m concerned there’s nothing more to be said. So if there’s nothing further...
Hensell: Nothing further? Who the devil do you think you’re talking to? Stand up when you’re speaking to me, man!
Bragen: I prefer to remain seated.


Bragen is utterly confident that he has the upper hand, and the casual manner in which he undermines Hensell makes for a fine scene.

Hensell: I am the Governor!
Bragen: No, not now. I am.

Hensell’s death is only the third in the story up to this point (it becomes a Saward bloodbath in the final episode) and its impact comes from being so offhand. Bragen attaches a gun stick to the Dalek.

Bragen: I’ll arrange a demonstration for you. Do you still refuse my offer?
Hensell: I will not be intimidated.
Bragen: No, of course not. In character to the last, Hensell. Kill him.

It’s probably because much of the characterisation and plotting is so deft that a more typical Who villain line sounds somewhat clumsy. So “From now on, I’ll have complete obedience from everyone” seems like it’s been put in to underline what a villain Bragen is, rather than it being something he would actually say.


The Daleks are as cunning as ever, despite having recovered from their faux pas at the end of Episode four.

Dalek 1: No more than three Daleks are to be seen together at any one time.
Dalek 2: I obey.
Dalek 1: We are not ready yet to teach the human beings the law of the Daleks.

The “law of the Daleks” is mentioned twice in this story. Given the rampage they embark on in the final episode, I can only assume the “law” is akin to Judge Dredd’s; guilty of being humans, instant sentencing, which is death. They cannily decide to wait to make their move “until the humans fight among themselves. Then we will fight”.

We see the resurfacing of a Dalek having to stop itself from putting it’s foot in it too, fighting its “better” instincts when instructing Valmar regarding the static electricity cable.

Dalek: With static power the Daleks will be twice as... useful.

Their most memorable moment of the episode, more than the big cliffhanger, is the chillingly astute observation one makes after killing Hensell.

Dalek: Why do human beings kill human beings?
Bragen: Get on with your work.
Dalek: Yes, master. I obey.


With regard to the cliffhanger, there are a few clips of this sequence in existence, leading one to conclude that it would have been varyingly effective. Chris Barry inventively sells the appearance that there are untold numbers of Daleks spilling from a doorway, through the use of tight framing. But the cardboard cut-out Daleks used to add numbers behind the real ones confirms that the “less is more” approach the story has been taking so far is the more effective one. And, as with Bragen, having them revert to generic chanting undoes much of the good work that showed just how intelligent they are (“Exterminate. Annihilate. Destroy. Daleks conquer and destroy”).

There’s a bit of get-out writing concerning the specifics of the Daleks’ science; by drawing attention to what is apparently unscientific you can say, “It may seem like nonsense but they are very advanced”

The Doctor: They’re powered by static electricity. It’s like blood to them. A constant life stream.
Quinn: Static isn’t workable.
The Doctor: It is to the Daleks. They’ve conquered static, just as they’ve conquered anti-magnetics.


Aside from breaking out of prison, the Doctor doesn’t have very much to do here, although his attempts to elicit the correct tone to unlock the door by rubbing his finger around the rim of a glass is quite amusing. He’s also reunited with Polly, who seems remarkably well-informed about the Daleks’ natures.

Polly: Human beings can’t be friends with Daleks. They don’t have friends.
Valmar: I don’t see why not.
Polly: It’s a kind of hatred for anything unlike themselves. They think they’re superior.

It’s Ben’s turn to be absent from an entire episode, although it’s not as if Polly gets much to do on her return. But she does make it clear that she considers Ben to be a real man when she takes Kebble to task for pushing her around.


Fine work from Archard and James, such that the backseat taken by the regulars doesn’t feel like being short-changed. All of the action has been delayed for Episode Six but, due to the deliberate pace, it doesn’t come across as a story that has hit a dull patch. Even well-worn devices such as locking characters up haven’t managed to dilute it. Indeed, the machinations of Bragen justify the plot thread in this episode even if the rebels themselves lack focus.

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…

Well, we took a vote. Predator’s cooler, right?

The Predator (2018)
(SPOILERS) Is The Predator everything you’d want from a Shane Black movie featuring a Predator (or Yautja, or Hish-Qu-Ten, apparently)? Emphatically not. We've already had a Shane Black movie featuring a Predator – or the other way around, at least – and that was on another level. The problem – aside from the enforced reshoots, and the not-altogether-there casting, and the possibility that full-on action extravaganzas, while delivered competently, may not be his best foot forward – is that I don't think Black's really a science-fiction guy, game as he clearly was to take on the permanently beleaguered franchise. He makes The Predator very funny, quite goofy, very gory, often entertaining, but ultimately lacking a coherent sense of what it is, something you couldn't say of his three prior directorial efforts.

Right! Let’s restore some bloody logic!

It Couldn't Happen Here (1987)
(SPOILERS) "I think our film is arguably better than Spiceworld" said Neil Tennant of his and Chris Lowe's much-maligned It Couldn't Happen Here, a quasi-musical, quasi-surrealist journey through the English landscape via the Pet shop Boys' "own" history as envisaged by co-writer-director Jack Bond. Of course, Spiceworld could boast the presence of the illustrious Richard E Grant, while It Couldn't Happen Here had to settle for Gareth Hunt. Is its reputation deserved? It's arguably not very successful at being a coherent film (even thematically), but I have to admit that I rather like it, ramshackle and studiously aloof though it is.

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 …

My pectorals may leave much to be desired, Mrs Peel, but I’m the most powerful man you’ve ever run into.

The Avengers 2.23: The Positive-Negative Man
If there was a lesson to be learned from Season Five, it was not to include "man" in your title, unless it involves his treasure. The See-Through Man may be the season's stinker, but The Positive-Negative Man isn't far behind, a bog-standard "guy with a magical science device uses it to kill" plot. A bit like The Cybernauts, but with Michael Latimer painted green and a conspicuous absence of a cool hat.

The possibilities are gigantic. In a very small way, of course.

The Avengers 5.24: Mission… Highly Improbable
With a title riffing on a then-riding-high US spy show, just as the previous season's The Girl from Auntie riffed on a then-riding-high US spy show, it's to their credit that neither have even the remotest connection to their "inspirations" besides the cheap gags (in this case, the episode was based on a teleplay submitted back in 1964). Mission… Highly Improbable follows in the increasing tradition (certainly with the advent of Season Five and colour) of SF plotlines, but is also, in its particular problem with shrinkage, informed by other recent adventurers into that area.

Dude, you're embarrassing me in front of the wizards.

Avengers: Infinity War (2018)
(SPOILERS) The cliffhanger sequel, as a phenomenon, is a relatively recent thing. Sure, we kind of saw it with The Empire Strikes Back – one of those "old" movies Peter Parker is so fond of – a consequence of George Lucas deliberately borrowing from the Republic serials of old, but he had no guarantee of being able to complete his trilogy; it was really Back to the Future that began the trend, and promptly drew a line under it for another decade. In more recent years, really starting with The MatrixThe Lord of the Rings stands apart as, post-Weinstein's involvement, fashioned that way from the ground up – shooting the second and third instalments back-to-back has become a thing, both more cost effective and ensuring audiences don’t have to endure an interminable wait for their anticipation to be sated. The flipside of not taking this path is an Allegiant, where greed gets the better of a studio (split a novel into two movie parts assuming a…

Bring home the mother lode, Barry.

Beyond the Black Rainbow (2010)

If Panos Cosmatos’ debut had continued with the slow-paced, tripped-out psychedelia of the first hour or so I would probably have been fully on board with it, but the decision to devolve into an ‘80s slasher flick in the final act lost me.

The director is the son of George Pan Cosmatos (he of The Cassandra Crossing and Cobra, and in name alone of Tombstone, apparently) and it appears that his inspiration was what happened to the baby boomers in the ‘80s, his parents’ generation. That element translates effectively, expressed through the extreme of having a science institute engaging in Crowley/Jack Parsons/Leary occult quests for enlightenment in the ‘60s and the survivors having become burnt out refugees or psychotics by the ‘80s. Depending upon your sensibilities, the torturously slow pace and the synth soundtrack are positives, while the cinematography managed to evoke both lurid early ‘80s cinema and ‘60s experimental fare. 

Ultimately the film takes a …

What a truly revolting sight.

Pirates of the Caribbean: Salazar’s Revenge (aka Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales) (2017)
(SPOILERS) The biggest mistake the Pirates of the Caribbean sequels have made is embracing continuity. It ought to have been just Jack Sparrow with an entirely new cast of characters each time (well, maybe keep Kevin McNally). Even On Stranger Tides had Geoffrey Rush obligatorily returning as Barbossa. Although, that picture’s biggest problem was its director; Pirates of the Caribbean: Salazar’s Revenge has a pair of solid helmers in Joachim Rønning and Espen Sandberg, which is a relief at least. But alas, the continuity is back with a vengeance. And then some. Why, there’s even an origin-of-Jack Sparrow vignette, to supply us with prerequisite, unwanted and distracting uncanny valley (or uncanny Johnny) de-aging. The movie as a whole is an agreeable time passer, by no means the dodo its critical keelhauling would suggest, albeit it isn’t even pretending to try hard to come up with …

Believe me, Mr Bond, I could shoot you from Stuttgart und still create ze proper effect.

Tomorrow Never Dies (1997)
(SPOILERS) Some of the reactions to Spectre would have you believe it undoes all the “good” work cementing Daniel Craig’s incarnation of Bond in Skyfall. If you didn’t see that picture as the second coming of the franchise (I didn’t) your response to the latest may not be so harsh, despite its less successful choices (Blofeld among them). And it isn’t as if one step, forward two steps back are anything new in perceptions of the series (or indeed hugely divisive views on what even constitutes a decent Bond movie). After the raves greeting Goldeneye, Pierce Brosnan suffered a decidedly tepid response to his second outing, Tomorrow Never Dies, albeit it was less eviscerated than Craig’s sophomore Quantum of Solace. Tomorrow’s reputation disguises many strong points, although it has to be admitted that a Moore-era style finale and a floundering attempt to package in a halcyon villain aren’t among them.

The Bond series’ flirtations with contemporary relevance have a…