Skip to main content

Slag, ash, clinker.

Doctor Who
The Mutants

I don’t think anyone out there is lauding The Mutants as an unsung classic, except perhaps those invoking The Daleks by one of its working titles (but let’s not go there), or possibly those with fond memories of the Target novelisation (Terrance Dicks at his most spartan, but what a cover!), but I do feel it’s on the receiving end of more than its fair share of disdain. Sure, it’s threadbare, slipshod, with some terrible casting decisions, ropey design work (and effects), and – despite a typically idea-laden script from the Bristol Boys – unable to sustain its six-episode length. It’s also got Big Nose on particularly abrasive form. But, in its favour – and it’s a magnificent favour – it features the one and only Professor Sondergaard. And as we know, or should, Sondergaard ROCKS!


As with most Doctor Who stories, documented to the nines as they are, The Mutants comes replete with its own set of oft-repeated wisdoms, from how it’s an allegory for the fall of the British Empire to one on apartheid, to how it starts off like the average Monty Python episode, to the legendary, Olivier-like performance of Rick James (he’s shit). And then there’s Tristram Cary and his Marmite moog (I’m a bit in between actually, not sold the way I am with Malcolm Clarke’s electronic assault on the eardrums in The Sea Devils; sometimes Tristram works, sometimes he gets Cary-ed away and the result is an unpleasantly atonal wall of noise).


The attempts at political subtext feel rather quaint now, not helped by the overstated and silly uniforms and entirely uncommitted performances (it’s mystifying that this bunch, a corpulent commander leading disinterested assistants, could subdue a planet full of Solonian warlords for five minutes, let alone 500 years). The Doctor is even required to spell it out in the first couple of scenes (“Well, Empires rise and fallAnd if this is their idea of a reception, this one has obviously imploded”). Inadvertently, it also gives the bastions of the Empire a trace of good graces (they’re pulling out, now they’ve strip mined the place), so the Marshal is positioned as a bad egg spoiling an otherwise, if not upstanding, no longer overtly adversarial carton.


But The Mutants definitely has something. That’s generally an excuse used for not wanting to label something terrible as terrible, and certainly around the midway, things are looking a bit dicey.


By this point, we’ve experienced classic lines such as “Die, Overlord Die!”, with James Mellor’s Varan making a highly unconvincing badass warlord, so much so one could easily imagine Matt Berry playing him for laughs and proving more fearsome. But one gets used to the unabating clash of performance styles (or, in James’ case, no style at all) after a while.


Paul Whitsun-Jones plays the Marshal as both pathetic and spiteful, but he’s never really intimidating: more plain churlish. Ky (Garrick Hagon – latterly Biggs Darklighter) is a dashing chap who really ought to have swept Jo off her feet, and as guest heartthrobs go Hagon makes a good stab of it, when not having to spout guff like “We want freedom and we want it now!” And then there’s Geoffrey Palmer, bringing effortlessly stuffy cool to – just –  the first episode, and George Pravda bringing George Pravda to scientist Jaeger. There’s also a curious Eastern European thing going on, what with Pravda’s natural tones and the accent adopted by John “Lobot” Hollis as Sondergaard (who, simply, ROCKS).


Jaeger: There’s no proof at all that my atmospheric experiments have anything at all to do with these mutations.

Bob Baker and Dave Martin entreat not only against oppression, but also the erosion of our imperilled environment. The above line is one for the climate change deniers, although one might perversely get the wrong end of the intended stick and posit that in the The Mutants the pollutants do no ultimate damage, merely accelerating a natural process, to an ultimately positive end.


The Doctor here is still an activist, though (“Land and sea alike, all grey. Grey cities linked by grey highways across grey deserts… Slag, ash, clinker. The fruits of technology, Jo”). And, at times, given to loony stream-of-consciousness abandon (“The slightest accident in this stage of the proceedings and we’d all reverse instantly into antimatter. Blasted out to the other side of the universe, as a flash of electromagnetic radiation. We’d all become unpeople undoing unthings untogether. Fascinating”: indeed, just ask Omega).


Ky: The disposed, the outcasts, the terrorists, as the overlords label them.

Being the ‘70s, we could get behind terrorists and see them as justified. Ah, heady days. What works its retro best in The Mutants is the psychedelia, though. It doesn’t have the creative flair Michael Ferguson brought to earlier colour foray The Claws of Axos, mainly because Chris Barry doesn’t seem to be putting in very much effort. But some of the ideas can’t help but bleed though into the visuals, mainly evidenced in the cave scenes and the garish lighting thereabout, all reds and greens, and the CSO-rendered radioactive chamber (and then there’s the presence of Sondergaard – did I mention he ROCKS?)


We also have a suitably New Age plot about metamorphosis, not the rather mundane (but let’s face it, much more integrally told) metamorphosis of the later Full Circle, but a transformation into a more evolved life form on every level. This is all about uncapping potentiality, achieving transcendence. Ethereal glowing and telepathy become second nature (“Go Varan. Go to the place of sleeping. The place of darkness and night”). Although, admittedly, the story isn’t really selling the “beauty within” thing, since ugliness is ultimately discarded (so it is what’s on the surface that counts?), and shiny, happy-floaty Super-Ky isn’t suddenly above getting his hands dirty (“Die, Marshal. Let there be an end to the torture of my people”).


Sondergaard: Strange things are happening to Solos, Doctor.

And you have hippy-shaman Professor Sondergaard (who ROCKS), a very groovy, chrome-domed anthropologist dude who isn’t smart enough to worked out that Solonians have lifecycles (he needs the Doctor’s help, naturally) but digs beads and has a winning way with Mutts (he’s a regular pied piper come the third episode, and has a good line in reverse psychology; “Very well, I shall go on. And you shall stay as you are now, forever”).


In fact, he’s a much more engaging doctor than the actual Doctor in The Mutants, who repeatedly calls the Marshal “quite mad” and is really little more than a delivery boy (talking of which the whole “particle reversal” obsession of Jaeger, simply because the Doctor mentioned it and anything’s worth a try, is desperately weak).


The Discontinuity Guide would have you believe Geoffrey Palmer is the best thing in this (he’s not, Exhibit A being the pre-preceding paragraph), and that his death in the first episode evidences its overall deficiencies in quality. But they also let Rick James off the hook with the the excuse that he’s “given some of the worst lines in Doctor Who’s history” (he isn’t, he just can’t act for toffee), so their appraisal is somewhat suspect.


If Barry had been a touch more engaged, and the escape-and-capture, stir-and-repeat, of longer stories such as this had been limited, and the casting had been more judicious, and the music more moderate, and the effects more consistent… No, I’m not sure The Mutants might have been a classic, but classic moments do shine through, and James Acheson’s mutant designs remain iconic (not quite as much as that Jeff Cummins Target cover, but effective nonetheless). And, of course, Sondergaard ROCKS!












Agree? Disagree? Mildly or vehemently? Let me know in the comments below.

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…

Rejoice! The broken are the more evolved. Rejoice.

Split (2016)
(SPOILERS) M Night Shyamalan went from the toast of twist-based filmmaking to a one-trick pony to the object of abject ridicule in the space of only a couple of pictures: quite a feat. Along the way, I’ve managed to miss several of his pictures, including his last, The Visit, regarded as something of a re-locating of his footing in the low budget horror arena. Split continues that genre readjustment, another Blumhouse production, one that also manages to bridge the gap with the fare that made him famous. But it’s a thematically uneasy film, marrying shlock and serious subject matter in ways that don’t always quite gel.

Shyamalan has seized on a horror staple – nubile teenage girls in peril, prey to a psychotic antagonist – and, no doubt with the best intentions, attempted to warp it. But, in so doing, he has dragged in themes and threads from other, more meritable fare, with the consequence that, in the end, the conflicting positions rather subvert his attempts at subversion…

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…

Must the duck be here?

The Favourite (2018)
(SPOILERS) In my review of The Killing of a Sacred Deer, I suggested The Favourite might be a Yorgos Lanthimos movie for those who don’t like Yorgos Lanthimos movies. At least, that’s what I’d heard. And certainly, it’s more accessible than either of his previous pictures, the first two thirds resembling a kind of Carry On Up the Greenaway, but despite these broader, more slapstick elements and abundant caustic humour, there’s a prevailing detachment on the part of the director, a distancing oversight that rather suggests he doesn’t feel very much for his subjects, no matter how much they emote, suffer or connive. Or pratfall.

Whoever comes, I'll kill them. I'll kill them all.

John Wick: Chapter 2 (2017)
(SPOILERS) There’s no guessing he’s back. John Wick’s return is most definite and demonstrable, in a sequel that does what sequels ought in all the right ways, upping the ante while never losing sight of the ingredients that made the original so formidable. John Wick: Chapter 2 finds the minimalist, stripped-back vehicle and character of the first instalment furnished with an elaborate colour palette and even more idiosyncrasies around the fringes, rather like Mad Max in that sense, and director Chad Stahleski (this time without the collaboration of David Leitch, but to no discernible deficit) ensures the action is filled to overflowing, but with an even stronger narrative drive that makes the most of changes of gear, scenery and motivation.

The result is a giddily hilarious, edge-of-the-seat thrill ride (don’t believe The New York Times review: it is not “altogether more solemn” I can only guess Jeannette Catsoulis didn’t revisit the original in the interven…

I don’t think you will see President Pierce again.

The Ballad of Buster Scruggs (2018)
(SPOILERS) The Ballad of Buster Scruggs and other tall tales of the American frontier is the title of "the book" from which the Coen brothers' latest derives, and so announces itself as fiction up front as heavily as Fargo purported to be based on a true story. In the world of the portmanteau western – has there even been one before? – theme and content aren't really all that distinct from the more familiar horror collection, and as such, these six tales rely on sudden twists or reveals, most of them revolving around death. And inevitably with the anthology, some tall tales are stronger than other tall tales, the former dutifully taking up the slack.

Can you float through the air when you smell a delicious pie?

Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse (2018)
(SPOILERS) Ironically, given the source material, think I probably fell into the category of many who weren't overly disposed to give this big screen Spider-Man a go on the grounds that it was an animation. After all, if it wasn’t "good enough" for live-action, why should I give it my time? Not even Phil Lord and Christopher Miller's pedigree wholly persuaded me; they'd had their stumble of late, although admittedly in that live-action arena. As such, it was only the near-unanimous critics' approval that swayed me, suggesting I'd have been missing out. They – not always the most reliable arbiters of such populist fare, which made the vote of confidence all the more notable – were right. Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse is not only a first-rate Spider-Man movie, it's a fresh, playful and (perhaps) surprisingly heartfelt origins story.

I don’t know if what is happening is fair, but it’s the only thing I can think of that’s close to justice.

The Killing of a Sacred Deer (2017)
(SPOILERS) I think I knew I wasn’t going to like The Killing of a Sacred Deer in the first five minutes. And that was without the unedifying sight of open-heart surgery that takes up the first four. Yorgos Lanthimos is something of a Marmite director, and my responses to this and his previous The Lobster (which I merely thought was “okay” after exhausting its thin premise) haven’t induced me to check out his earlier work. Of course, he has now come out with a film that, reputedly, even his naysayers will like, awards-darling The Favourite

There's something wrong with the sky.

Hold the Dark (2018)
(SPOILERS) Hold the Dark, an adaptation of William Giraldi's 2014 novel, is big on atmosphere, as you'd expect from director Jeremy Saulnier (Blue Ruin, Green Room) and actor-now-director (I Don’t Want to Live in This World Anymore) pal Macon Blair (furnishing the screenplay and appearing in one scene), but contrastingly low on satisfying resolutions. Being wilfully oblique can be a winner if you’re entirely sure what you're trying to achieve, but the effect here is rather that it’s "for the sake of it" than purposeful.

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 …