Skip to main content

You’re not turning me into a fish!


Doctor Who
The Underwater Menace: Episode One


A much-maligned story, and one look at the design of the Fish People – in particular their water ballet – seems to confirm that its lowly reputation is justified. The premise, too, is seemingly brazenly pulp sci-fi, so it really requires the viewer to be on board with its absurdity to get the most out of it.

TUM was originally intended to be the second Trout story, swapped around because Hugh David didn’t fancy directing. He thought it couldn’t be realised convincingly (astute man) and it fell to Julia Smith to take up the reins. She, by all accounts, had a wretched time directing it, both in terms of the logistics involved and in dealing with a cast who made no secret of their contempt for the story and for her approach. Apparently it went £2,200 over budget (a couple of hundred being the most that would generally occur), so we’re not dealing with a cheap and cheerful little number that might occur with a Graham Williams era clunker.

It would be difficult to make an argument for an underlying serious intent behind the script; it betrays a haphazard mash-up of elements that you might expect from a Saturday matinee serial. There’s some tension between the crazed scientific principles of Zaroff and the superstitious devotion of the Amdo worshippers, but the identification a message underpinning this seems more of an afterthought (at the end of Episode Four) than a driving force.

Indeed, the overt insanity of Zaroff, THE mad scientist, seems almost metatextual. It’s not just Joseph Furst’s marvellously cracked performance that telegraphs this, it’s all over his dialogue and (anti-) motivation like an (his) octopus. Apparently, in the original script he wants to destroy the world following the death of his wife in a car crash. Which is rather anti-climactic motivation; much better that we have the Bond villain-on-steroids desire to go through with it for “the achievement”.

Prehistoric monsters!

Episode One, as with other introductory stories this season (The Smugglers and The Power of the Daleks), gives us a fair bit of time with the crew and their new recruit.  I’m not too struck with Ben’s cockernee overkill. Too often what is designed to be endearing chirpiness translates as gratingly broad. Jamie’s called “my old haggis”, while later he observes to Polly “you speak foreign. Go and talk to him. Ask him where we are”. 

The voicing of the thoughts of the crew as they speculate where they may be is the kind of experimentation of form that the series wouldn’t dabble in much beyond this story.

Polly: Please, let it be Chelsea 1966.
Ben: I hope it’s the Daleks. I don’t think.
The Doctor: Prehistoric monsters!
Jamie: What have I come upon?

Why Polly is now the one who wants to get back home (since it’s been consistently Ben harping on) is probably an indication of how the ball is being dropped character-wise. Certainly, this is where we really start to identify her as a screamer. Trout’s childlike expectation of what they might encounter is delightful.


The exploration of the coast line sees the companions head off without the Doctor, although they all end up together and captured deep beneath the ground soon enough. We see the first use in the series of Winspit Quarry in Dorset (later used in Destiny of the Daleks and Blake’s 7). Given the lack of subtlety of the rest of the story, the exploring section is quite open to any adventure/ tone.

The Doctor: Troglodytes.
Ben: What?
The Doctor: Ancient tribes from North Africa who lived in caves. Possibly, possibly. Where’s me diary?
Ben: Cavemen? Jamie, you better watch it. With that kilt someone might mistake you for a bird.
Jamie: What?

With this and The Highlanders there’s a playfulness with gender roles that would have been inconceivable during the Hartnell era.

Polly realising the date based on a coin commemorating the Mexico Olympics is a nice leisurely way of giving her an upper hand, and this kind of topicality was still relatively unusual for the series. Setting stories several years in the future tends to see the period they were made in become a great leveller (the UNIT era) in retrospect; TUM becomes loosely a present day story in terms of how we see Troughton’s era. At least it doesn’t – ahem – run with the Olympics reference like the shitty Fear Her. With regard to Polly “speaking foreign”, it’s one of those occasions where drawing attention to the issue only highlights the question of why no one has asked this before (as in The Masque of Mandragora).

Given the reliance on physical performance in this episode, it might have been more rewarding to have this returned to the archive than Episode Two. The Doctor gets in the way of a guard who is about to chastise Ara (canny, as she proves to be a useful ally), then tucking into Zaroff’s plankton.

The Doctor: Delicious! This is excellent! This is ambrosia! Sit down! Sit down!
Ben: What’s got into him?
Polly: I don’t know. I’ve never seen him go for food like this before. It’s usually hats.

I’m not sure that the legitimacy of the prophecy concerning the TARDIS crew is ever questioned, but there are certainly some inconsistencies in the presentation of Ramo. In the next episode he refers to the priest as superstitious, but he’s happy to go along with sacrificing the crew to Amdo here.

Ramo: The living goddess Amdo sees and hears all.
The Doctor: And she had a message about us? For you?
Ramo: Yes. She told us you would fall from the sky in time for our festival of the vernal equinox.

He also gives the Doctor “five minutes to make his point” which is a very modern phrasing. Sloppy scripting or a result of hanging out with Zaroff?


The Doctor’s extensive (omniscient?) knowledge has been evident so far this season both in his encounters with Cybermen and Daleks, and he is quick to identify Zaroff as the plankton propagator (I suppose not too many scientists are interested in that field, so they stand out).  He sends Ara with a message for Zaroff while the crew are trussed up to fall down a well as sacrifices. This is a pacy episode, wasting no time in throwing the companions into danger and revealing the main supporting cast.

Vital secret will die with me. Dr W.

More playfulness with the “Who” of the series’ title. With The War Machines, von Wer and now this, the series isn’t exactly leaping through the Fourth Wall, but it’s far more willing to nudge up against its own boundaries and artifice. It will pull back from that as the season progresses, but it’s an appealing take while it lasts.

Pay close attention to this eyes...

Furst’s entrance as Zaroff’s is as OTT as he will be throughout, his mangled English proving a delight (“I do not interfere with your sacrifice but I must first speak with that man”). His backstory is slightly impenetrable (he was believed dead, and the world believed he had been kidnapped with the East and West blaming each other). Trout’s admission that he had no secret is trumped by Zaroff completely not giving a shit; you’ve got to love him.

The Doctor: Now, here you are, the greatest scientific genius since Leonardo, under the sea. You must have a fantastic story to tell.
Zaroff: Perhaps I tell you some day. If you will live long enough to hear. Now this vital secret. What is it?
The DoctorI haven’t got one!
Zaroff: How dare you!
The Doctor: But I’m sure a great man like you wouldn’t want a modern scientific brain like mine to be sacrificed to a heathen idol.
Zaroff: You know I could have you torn to bits by my guards, yes?
The Doctor: Yes.
Zaroff: I could feed you to my pet octopus, yes?
The Doctor: Yes.
Zaroff: But you have sense of humour. I too have sense of humour! I need men like you! (Laughter from both) You come with me, aye?
The Doctor: I come with you.

That sense of humour is probably the last word in getting the most out of this story. We get a location on Atlantis (left of Gibraltar, south of the Azores, the Atlantic Ridge) which doesn’t fit with The Time Monster (clearly this is just one part of the vast submerged continent... ) and learn that the professor has promised to lift Atlantis out of the sea, a “sugar-coated pill” ensuring that he is accepted by the Atlanteans despite their antithetical attitude to his scientific principles.

Never trust a man with bushy eyebrows.

With Ben and Jamie sent to the mines, Polly seems quite okay with the genetic modification of workers until she’s told she will go under the knife. Colin Jeavons (Lestrade in the Jeremy Brett Sherlock Holmes), equipped with massively bushy eyebrows like all the male Atlanteans (the designer was just taking the piss with this and the Fish People), does good work as Damon ( a bit Peter Miles).

Polly: It’s breathtaking. Sorry, that wasn’t supposed to be a pun.
Damon: Some people get most upset when they find they’re going to have the operation.
Polly: You’re not turning me into a fish!

The climax involving Polly, about to be stuck with a great hypodermic, exists as censor footage. It’s a reasonable cliffhanger, I suppose; I certainly don’t want to see a fishy Polly. 


An eventful and amusing first episode. It’s not clear at this point what the tone is going to be, or where exactly the story is going. Zaroff might be a good guy compared to the Atlantean zealots, although he appears to have no moral qualms concerning the potential deaths of the Doctor’s companions. And the seriousness of the threat of sacrifice/physical augmentation is thrown into sharp relief by show-stopping appearance of Furst (as with the Doctor in The Highlanders, his dialogue only underlines his deranged performance). 

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.

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.

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 system when Burton did it (even…

I'm reliable, I'm a very good listener, and I'm extremely funny.

Terminator: Dark Fate (2019)
(SPOILERS) When I wrote my 23 to see in 2019, I speculated that James Cameron might be purposefully giving his hand-me-downs to lesser talents because he hubristically didn’t want anyone making a movie that was within a spit of the proficiency we’ve come to expect from him. Certainly, Robert Rodriguez and Tim Miller are leagues beneath Kathryn Bigelow, Jimbo’s former spouse and director of his Strange Days screenplay. Miller’s no slouch when it comes to action – which is what these movies are all about, let’s face it – but neither is he a craftsman, so all those reviews attesting that Terminator: Dark Fate is the best in the franchise since Terminator 2: Judgment Day may be right, but there’s a considerable gulf between the first sequel (which I’m not that big a fan of) and this retcon sequel to that sequel.

So you want me to be half-monk, half-hitman.

Casino Royale (2006)
(SPOILERS) Despite the doubts and trepidation from devotees (too blonde, uncouth etc.) that greeted Daniel Craig’s casting as Bond, and the highly cynical and low-inspiration route taken by Eon in looking to Jason Bourne's example to reboot a series that had reached a nadir with Die Another Day, Casino Royale ends up getting an enormous amount right. If anything, its failure is that it doesn’t push far enough, so successful is it in disarming itself of the overblown set pieces and perfunctory plotting that characterise the series (even at its best), elements that would resurge with unabated gusto in subsequent Craig excursions.

For the majority of its first two hours, Casino Royale is top-flight entertainment, with returning director Martin Campbell managing to exceed his excellent work reformatting Bond for the ‘90s. That the weakest sequence (still good, mind) prior to the finale is a traditional “big” (but not too big) action set piece involving an attempt to…

You guys sure like watermelon.

The Irishman aka I Heard You Paint Houses (2019)
(SPOILERS) Perhaps, if Martin Scorsese hadn’t been so opposed to the idea of Marvel movies constituting cinema, The Irishman would have been a better film. It’s a decent film, assuredly. A respectable film, definitely. But it’s very far from being classic. And a significant part of that is down to the usually assured director fumbling the execution. Or rather, the realisation. I don’t know what kind of crazy pills the ranks of revered critics have been taking so as to recite as one the mantra that you quickly get used to the de-aging effects so intrinsic to its telling – as Empire magazine put it, “you soon… fuggadaboutit” – but you don’t. There was no point during The Irishman that I was other than entirely, regrettably conscious that a 75-year-old man was playing the title character. Except when he was playing a 75-year-old man.

The more you drive, the less intelligent you are.

Repo Man (1984)
In fairness, I should probably check out more Alex Cox’s later works. Before I consign him to the status of one who never made good on the potential of his early success. But the bits and pieces I’ve seen don’t hold much sway. I pretty much gave up on him after Walker. It seemed as if the accessibility of Repo Man was a happy accident, and he was subsequently content to drift further and further down his own post-modern punk rabbit hole, as if affronted by the “THE MOST ASTONISHING FEATURE FILM DEBUT SINCE STEVEN SPIELBERG’S DUEL” accolade splashed over the movie’s posters (I know, I have a copy; see below).

This popularity of yours. Is there a trick to it?

The Two Popes (2019)
(SPOILERS) Ricky Gervais’ Golden Globes joke, in which he dropped The Two Popes onto a list of the year’s films about paedophiles, rather preceded the picture’s Oscar prospects (three nominations), but also rather encapsulated the conversation currently synonymous with the forever tainted Roman Catholic church; it’s the first thing anyone thinks of. And let’s face it, Jonathan Pryce’s unamused response to the gag could have been similarly reserved for the fate of his respected but neglected film. More people will have heard Ricky’s joke than will surely ever see the movie. Which, aside from a couple of solid lead performances, probably isn’t such an omission.

Look, the last time I was told the Germans had gone, it didn't end well.

1917 (2019)
(SPOILERS) When I first heard the premise of Sam Mendes’ Oscar-bait World War I movie – co-produced by Amblin Partners, as Spielberg just loves his sentimental war carnage – my first response was that it sounded highly contrived, and that I’d like to know how, precisely, the story Mendes’ granddad told him would bear any relation to the events he’d be depicting. And just why he felt it would be appropriate to honour his relative’s memory via a one-shot gimmick. None of that has gone away on seeing the film. It’s a technical marvel, and Roger Deakins’ cinematography is, as you’d expect, superlative, but that mastery rather underlines that 1917 is all technique, that when it’s over and you get a chance to draw your breath, the experience feels a little hollow, a little cynical and highly calculated, and leaves you wondering what, if anything, Mendes was really trying to achieve, beyond an edge-of-the-seat (near enough) first-person actioner.

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.