Skip to main content

We’re the most intelligent race in the Universe.


Doctor Who
The Faceless Ones: Episode Six


 The final part unfurls its Malcolm Hulke colours more clearly than anything that has gone before. Now the characters can engage in conversations and, to some extent, reason. The villains are not allowed to be total villains, and justice is not served through their destruction. Indeed, it’s arguable that Blade and Spencer get off extraordinarily lightly by the standards of any era of the show.

The Director: What do you hope to achieve?
The Doctor: The chance to plead with you for the lives of 50,000 young people.
The Director: They’re only human beings.
The Doctor: What are you?
The Director: We’re the most intelligent race in the Universe.

I suppose this was only four years into the series, and such a claim might not have been quite so laughable then. But they’re so clearly not that much more intelligent than humans. Sure, they have superior tech, but it’s all to naught if they don’t have the dexterity to devise a fool (or human)-proof plan.


Even a Scouser is onto them (at one point she claims “Ah you haven’t got all the brains in London, you know”).


The Doctor’s judgement on replica Jamie is amusing, but he doesn’t pass similar comment on Crossland’s loss of regionality.

The Doctor: You’ve lost his Scots accent. I prefer the original.


He also manages to get these super-intelligent beings to admit that real Jamie’s in a safe place not far from there. Further cutting them down to size, he breaks with the blow ’em up approach of his stories so far and outwits them.

The Doctor: The special people up here feel more secure if their originals are actually in the satellite.
The Director: Be quiet.
The Doctor: The Director has nothing to worry about because his original, Detective Inspector Crossland, is actually on board.
The Doctor: (to Blade and Spencer) But, er, where’s your original? And where’s yours?


It’s a fairly crude scheme, but it does the trick. He keeps on chipping away, even as we cut to another scene then back to him as he’s being readied for copying.

The Doctor: Tell me, what happens if you disintegrate in the middle of my being processed?


The gambit of convincing them that the originals have been found at Gatwick isn’t overly convincing, but it’s just about excusable in buying enough time to actually find them.


And… they’re in cars. In the car park at Gatwick.  WTF? Perhaps the Director just had an overly optimistic view of the smarts of the rest of his species? But with fake ratface dissolving as evidence that they have indeed been found, the Director makes a fair point to his stooges.

The Director: You told me they were all hidden where they could not possibly be found until the life was drained from them.

I think this is the first time we have it spelled out that the process is gradual and that they don’t need to retain the originals indefinitely.


This turn of events means that internal divisions save the day, as Blade point his gun at the Director. And the Doctor shows that he is quite willing to negotiate with the terrorists who have taken planeloads of passengers hostage.


The Doctor: Stand by while I negotiate. I will guarantee your continued existence if you will return to Gatwick all the young people you have abducted.
Blade: What kind of continued existence would we have, Doctor?
The Doctor: In your former state, I’m afraid. Your scientists will have to think of some other way out of your dilemma.
Spencer: It’s better than death. We accept.
The Doctor: All right, we accept.

Trout isn’t set on dispensing justice, and he doesn’t define them as one the evils that exist in some corners of the Universe. The good guys don’t kill the bad guys. It’s Blade who shoots his leader dead.


The Doctor: I’m glad to see you alive.
Jamie: What do you mean?
The Doctor: I’ll tell you one day.


Given the rather messy situation, the Doctor might have been best to stick around and help mop up. But he leaves it to the Inspector. Presumably Britain will use the alien tech to develop their space programme during the Pertwee years.

The Doctor: Now, Ben and Polly and back to Gatwick.

Further evidence of the Hulkester at work is the Doctor proffering an olive branch; he will even try to set them on a course of self-improvement (does he do this before setting off to find the TARDIS?)

The Doctor: So long as you keep your side of the bargain, you may return to your planet unharmed. Perhaps your scientists will be able to find a way out of your dilemma. I may be able to, er, give them one or two ideas of my own.


Before the Ben and Polly’s exit comes my favourite line in the episode, maybe in the story. The Doctor and Jamie take their leave of the Commandant, who casually addresses the highlander.

Commandant: Goodbye, Scotty.


There’s also a snog between Jamie and Sam. She’s gagging for it, that Scouser. Puts Amy to shame.

Jamie: I better say goodbye.
Sam: I’ll see you around then.


Despite the half-arsed way that we arrive at the leaving scene, it manages to be quite affecting. It’s the same day that Ben and Polly left with First Doctor

The Doctor: You really want to go, don’t you?
Ben: Well, we won’t leave Doctor, if you really need us.
Polly: The thing is, it is our world.
The Doctor: Yes, I know. You’re lucky, I never got back to mine. All right then, off you go. Ben can catch his ship and become an admiral. And you, Polly. You can look after Ben.
Polly: I will. You will be safe won’t you?
Jamie: I’ll look after him.
Ben: I’m sure you will, mate.


Awww. Except for the bit about Polly looking after Ben. Because that’s all girls are good for isn’t it? The Doctor seems to have decided that they will become a couple while espousing some rather regressive sentiments.  She’d have been more liberated remaining in eighteenth century Scotland with F-finch.

While there are no shortage of lead-ins to the next adventure prior to this, the one here is fresh and attention-grabbing. Perhaps it’s due to the modern trappings, or maybe just the absence of any respite.

The Doctor: Well, I didn’t tell the others but we’ve lost the TARDIS. It was outside, but it’s not there now.
Jamie: You mean somebody’s stolen it?
The Doctor: I don’t know. That’s what we’re going to find out. Come on.


An enjoyable conclusion, which propels the story towards several unexpected destinations. There’s the odd clumsy plot development (the car park hiding place), but the conciliatory approach taken by Hulke is welcome.

Overall:


A rare six-parter where the best is saved for the last third. As a departure point for Ben and Polly, it’s lousy (particularly as the Doctor and Jamie remain on Earth as the next story kicks off). And Sam quickly becomes a source of annoyance. Ongoing adventures with Nurse Pinto and Detective Inspector Crossland aboard the TARDIS would have been much more appealing.

The escape and capture of the mid-section gives way to the revelation of more sympathetic villains than the era has been used to so far.  It’s just a shame Lloyd and Davis took their cues for the run of stories that followed from the most uninspired of the season (The Moonbase) rather than the more experimental approach here. 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

How would Horatio Alger have handled this situation?

Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas (1998) (SPOILERS) Gilliam’s last great movie – The Zero Theorem (2013) is definitely underrated, but I don’t think it’s that underrated – Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas could easily have been too much. At times it is, but in such instances, intentionally so. The combination of a visual stylist and Hunter S Thompson’s embellished, propulsive turn of phrase turns out, for the most part, to be a cosmically aligned affair, embracing the anarchic abandon of Raoul Duke and Doctor Gonzo’s Las Vegas debauch while contriving to pull back at crucial junctures in order to engender a perspective on all this hedonism. Would Alex Cox, who exited stage left, making way for the Python, have produced something interesting? I suspect, ironically, he would have diluted Thompson in favour of whatever commentary preoccupied him at the time (indeed, Johnny Depp said as much: “ Cox had this great material to work with and he took it and he added his own stuff to it ”). Plus

He’s so persistent! He always gets his man.

Speed (1994) (SPOILERS) It must have been a couple of decades since I last viewed Speed all the way through, so it’s pleasing to confirm that it holds up. Sure, Jan de Bont’s debut as a director can’t compete with the work of John McTiernan, for whom he acted as cinematographer and who recommended de Bont when he passed on the picture, but he nevertheless does a more than competent work. Which makes his later turkeys all the more tragic. And Keanu and Sandra Bullock display the kind of effortless chemistry you can’t put a price tag on. And then there’s Dennis Hopper, having a great old sober-but-still-looning time.

To survive a war, you gotta become war.

Rambo: First Blood Part II (1985) (SPOILERS?) I’d like to say it’s mystifying that a film so bereft of merit as Rambo: First Blood Part II could have finished up the second biggest hit of 1985. It wouldn’t be as bad if it was, at minimum, a solid action movie, rather than an interminable bore. But the movie struck a chord somewhere, somehow. As much as the most successful picture of that year, Back to the Future , could be seen to suggest moviegoers do actually have really good taste, Rambo rather sends a message about how extensively regressive themes were embedding themselves in Reaganite, conservative ‘80s cinema (to be fair, this is something one can also read into Back to the Future ), be those ones of ill-conceived nostalgia or simple-minded jingoism, notional superiority and might. The difference between Stallone and Arnie movies starts right here; self-awareness. Audiences may have watched R ambo in the same way they would a Schwarzenegger picture, but I’m

You were a few blocks away? What’d you see it with, a telescope?

The Eyes of Laura Mars (1978) (SPOILERS) John Carpenter’s first serial-killer screenplay to get made, The Eyes of Laura Mars came out nearly three months before Halloween. You know, the movie that made the director’s name. And then some. He wasn’t best pleased with the results of The Eyes of Laura Mars, which ended up co-credited to David Zelag Goodman ( Straw Dogs , Logan’s Run ) as part of an attempt by producer Jon Peters to manufacture a star vehicle for then-belle Barbra Streisand: “ The original script was very good, I thought. But it got shat upon ”. Which isn’t sour grapes on Carpenter’s part. The finished movie bears ready evidence of such tampering, not least in the reveal of the killer (different in Carpenter’s conception). Its best features are the so-uncleanly-you-can-taste-it 70s New York milieu and the guest cast, but even as an early example of the sub-genre, it’s burdened by all the failings inherit with this kind of fare.

But everything is wonderful. We are in Paris.

Cold War (2018) (SPOILERS) Pawel Pawlikowski’s elliptical tale – you can’t discuss Cold War without saying “elliptical” at least once – of frustrated love charts a course that almost seems to be a caricature of a certain brand of self-congratulatorily tragic European cinema. It was, it seems “ loosely inspired ” by his parents (I suspect I see where the looseness comes in), but there’s a sense of calculation to the progression of this love story against an inescapable political backdrop that rather diminishes it.

No matter how innocent you are, or how hard you try, they’ll find you guilty.

The Wrong Man (1956) (SPOILERS) I hate to say it, but old Truffaut called it right on this one. More often than not showing obeisance to the might of Hitchcock during his career-spanning interview, the French critic turned director was surprisingly blunt when it came to The Wrong Man . He told Hitch “ your style, which has found its perfection in the fiction area, happens to be in total conflict with the aesthetics of the documentary and that contradiction is apparent throughout the picture ”. There’s also another, connected issue with this, one Hitch acknowledged: too much fidelity to the true story upon which the film is based.

The game is rigged, and it does not reward people who play by the rules.

Hustlers (2019) (SPOILERS) Sold as a female Goodfellas – to the extent that the producers had Scorsese in mind – this strippers-and-crime tale is actually a big, glossy puff piece, closer to Todd Phillips as fashioned by Lorene Scarfia. There are some attractive performances in Hustlers, notably from Constance Wu, but for all its “progressive” women work male objectification to their advantage posturing, it’s incredibly traditional and conservative deep down.

You don’t know anything about this man, and he knows everything about you.

The Man Who Knew Too Much (1956) (SPOILERS) Hitchcock’s two-decades-later remake of his British original. It’s undoubtedly the better-known version, but as I noted in my review of the 1934 film, it is very far from the “ far superior ” production Truffaut tried to sell the director on during their interviews. Hitchcock would only be drawn – in typically quotable style – that “ the first version is the work of a talented amateur and the second was made by a professional ”. For which, read a young, creatively fired director versus one clinically going through the motions, occasionally inspired by a shot or sequence but mostly lacking the will or drive that made the first The Man Who Knew Too Much such a pleasure from beginning to end.

One final thing I have to do, and then I’ll be free of the past.

Vertigo (1958) (SPOILERS) I’ll readily admit my Hitchcock tastes broadly tend to reflect the “consensus”, but Vertigo is one where I break ranks. To a degree. Not that I think it’s in any way a bad film, but I respect it rather than truly rate it. Certainly, I can’t get on board with Sight & Sound enthroning it as the best film ever made (in its 2012’s critics poll). That said, from a technical point of view, it is probably Hitch’s peak moment. And in that regard, certainly counts as one of his few colour pictures that can be placed alongside his black and white ones. It’s also clearly a personal undertaking, a medley of his voyeuristic obsessions (based on D’entre les morts by Pierre Boileau and Thomas Narcejac).

What do they do, sing madrigals?

The Singing Detective (2003) Icon’s remake of the 1986 BBC serial, from a screenplay by Dennis Potter himself. The Singing Detective fares less well than Icon’s later adaptation of Edge of Darkness , even though it’s probably more faithful to Potter’s original. Perhaps the fault lies in the compression of six episodes into a feature running a quarter of that time, but the noir fantasy and childhood flashbacks fail to engage, and if the hospital reality scans better, it too suffers eventually.