Skip to main content

What does plinge mean?

Doctor Who
The Time Monster

Fifty years of The Time Monster. A cause for celebration? With no prior experience of the story, one might have been conditioned by The Discontinuity Guide’s perverse smackdown: “Like watching paint dry while being whipped with barbed wire: immensely dull and painful at the same time”. Of course, ripping the Pertwee era a new hole circa the mid-90s was very fashionable – Paul Cornell, the movement’s chief architect, was one of the book’s three authors – and you can find similarly jaundiced responses towards stories in the latter four Pertwee seasons, not least its predecessor The Mutants. Both bombardments are somewhat over the top, which is not to suggest they don’t have their problems. In The Time Monster’s case, its faults are particularly exacerbated by Paul Bernard’s unenthused direction.

Stuart: Suffering catfish!

I can quite happily argue The Mutants is underrated. I can’t genuinely suggest the same of The Time Monster. Or even plausibly present the case – to its deniers – that it’s half decent. It’s wonky, often dull, incredibly creaky, and leaves its potential largely unfulfilled (there are some very good ideas in here, a number of them nicked by Chris Bidmead, partial to plundering Letts and Sloman, a few years later). But awful? Painful? No, I won’t have that.

Jo: A real pippin of a dream.

Elizabeth Sandifer attempted to see the story’s positives while singling out the performers for a slating (“The acting is some of the worst in Doctor Who’s history”). She makes a good case for the thematic levels on which the script is operating. The problem, however, is that many of them collapse at the first hurdle, because there’s no sense of sense of smarts in either the execution or acting. Paul Bernard may not have been a rung up from Ron Jones as a visualist, but he’s all at sea conceptualising how best to realise the script. Hence, great flapping birds. One can but imagine the triptastic masterpiece Michael Ferguson might have made of The Time Monster; it needed a flashy stylist to boost its often rather flashy approach to ideas and storytelling (Episode One’s dream would surely have been an actual pippin under Ferguson); Sloman and Letts throw stuff in there mostly because it’s cool – or groovy – rather than because its coherent. The consequence is that The Time Monster comes a distant fourth when ranking their season finales.

Ruth: You mean, it’s a ridiculous piece of modern art.

I don’t agree the acting is some of the worst in Doctor Who’s history, but I will admit that, across the board, it’s some of the least engaged acting from a guest cast. Okay, that’s not quite fair. Ian Collier makes a decent stab at playing a ringer for the 118 Directory runners, while Wanda Moore’s militant feminist Ruth Ingram amusingly finds Uncle Terrance at his most reactionary (“Why are your men so spineless?”; “May God bless the good ship women's lib and all who sail in her”). No one else here is much cop, though, be it King Dalios (George Cormack), Krasis (Donald Eccles), Hippias (Aidan Murphy doing his best Marc Bolan impression), Lakis (Susan Penhaligon) or the Minotaur (Dave Prowse, who probably would have roared with a West Country accent if they’d let him). Ingrid Pitt is rubbish, of course, but she was in no way employed for her performance skills, as her costume diligently reflects.

The Master: Do you think I’m going to dance to the Doctor’s tune like some performing poodle?

This malaise infects the regulars too. This is, by some measure, the least worthwhile Roger Delgado performance. Which means he’s quite watchable, but also that he’s considerably less smooth, unflustered and superior than usual. Even his much-vaunted wooing of Queen Galleia isn’t all it’s cracked up to be. All the things you dig his version for are in retreat. Katy Manning is given too many opportunities to act against “herself” and shows her limitations in that regard. Although, Jo’s spontaneous laughter in response to the Brigadier’s “Really, Doctor. You’ll be consulting the entrails of a sheep next” is possibly the best moment in the entire story (Courtney’s beat of amusement at her amusement is priceless too).

Benton: Sort of through the crack between now and now, sir.

Benton is transformed into a baby, which is a bonus, as the less John Levene “acting” there is in a story, the better for the rest of us. As for his birthday suit surprise at the end, well it’s Captain Jack all over again. Or before. The Brigadier is particularly dim in this one, called on to disbelieve the reports of his Number Two (“You HAVE been drinking!”). There’s precious little point being head of UNIT if you’re not at least willing to entertain out-of-the-ordinary occurrences actually occurring (Dana Scully must have been taking notes). It wouldn’t matter so much if the Brigadier’s response tapped genuine laughs – my usual excuse for enjoying thick Brig – but he just seems irrationally and pointlessly contrarian here. Albeit, all the time-shift material (knights and roundheads and doodlebugs) is desperately weak filler, feebly and laboriously delivered, and so deserving of the Brigadier’s complete disdain.

Percival: What, pray, is interstitial time?

All of which is fairly by the by, though. What irks with The Time Monster is that the bits that should be some of the series’ most memorable are only so-so thanks to Bernard’s disinclination – or inability – to add any spark, oomph or sense of engagement. It seems as if about half of Episode Three is taken up with Pertwee slo-mo running on gravel. And then there’s Episode Four, with the recursive qualities of the TARDIS within a TARDIS, something Peter Grimwade visualised incredibly well in Logopolis; here, the concept is treated so matter-of-factly, it’s borderline mundane.

The Master: Come, Kronos, come!

Indeed, Episode Four should be the story’s highlight – in terms of ideas, it has the most going on – but instead, it the substance rather falls to the last two episodes, where finally, after all that preamble, we arrive in Atlantis. Complete with the least convincing “exterior” set this side of a Ron Jones’ prehistoric Earth. This is a more persuasive Atlantis, design-wise, than The Underwater Menace, but conversely, it’s also much less fun (plus, Julia Smith was a much better director, whatever that story’s particular design, er, foibles may have done to help undermine it).

The Doctor: Strange place it is, too. A place that is no place. A dangerous place where creatures love beyond your wildest imagination. Kronovores, time eaters. They swallow a life as quickly as a boa constrictor can swallow a rabbit, fur and all.

Sloman and Letts’ take on Atlantis is, let’s face it, tragically pedestrian, given all the New Age bit possibilities they could have explored. Sure, we’ve got crystals (they liked their crystals). That aside, though, they’re thoroughly fixed on it being, or being part of, Crete. Complete with ionic columns and a half-bull/half-man (this aspect is interesting, since it’s presented in a specifically magical fashion, and no one seeks to explain it rationally). Some actual “Cretan jazz” might at least have mixed things up a bit. There’s nary a whiff of Edgar Cayce and his take that Atlantis extended from the Gulf of Mexico to Gibraltar, and certainly nothing of his favoured time period (this takes place in 1500BC, as opposed to 10,000 years before that). Obviously, you’d need a Roland Emmerich budget to do a Cayce version justice, whereas this one finds it hard enough going trying to match I, Claudius.

Yates: You know, sir, the King Arthur bit.

That said, in larger Who lore, there is a Cayce parallel; there are three celebrated accounts of the demise of Atlantis – The Underwater Menace, The Daemons and The Time Monster – just as there are three stages of the civilisation’s break up per the Cayce readings: about 50,000 years ago, 30,000 years ago, and then a third and final upheaval 11-12,000 years ago.

Ruth: Are you trying to tell us that the classical gods are real?

The Time Monster’s villain/big-bad element had its precedent with Azal and will later become a stock-in-trade with Sutekh and the like: an ancient god is revealed to be an advanced (alien) being, in this case Kronos the Chronovore. What are we supposed to make of Kronos’ assertion that “I’m beyond good and evil as you know it”? It would appear to suggest the embrace of moral relativism, of the kind the Doctor would instinctively reject (instead, he’s on a Colony in Space-esque obsequious kick, “Mighty Kronos, may I ask one last favour of you?”)

The Master: Absolute power forever! And no Doctor to ruin things for me.

It’s a popular New Age idea, but also one used to invalidate many traditionally upheld (ie Christian) baseline values. Indeed, Kronos wouldn’t be an altogether bad fit for the Gnostic Luciferian (and Nietzschean) cause, under which one may perceive shades of grey eroding moral absolutes as a means to enabling nefarious elites to sup blood in plain sight. If one so chooses. Classic Doctor Who, even at the point the Doctor – or an aspect of him – is revealed as evil, isn’t announced as someone to get behind. The problem really comes to the fore later, in his (her) nu-incarnations, where he’s acting like a minor deity but we’re clearly still supposed to see him as a hero, and pine after him/her, however frequently the writers call his position out. As with much of The Time Monster, I get the impression it’s a line Sloman and Letts threw in without any intention to explore its ramifications, further underlining the extent to which the story represents a missed opportunity.

Jo: Groovy, isn’t it?

And yet, I can’t entirely bring myself to write off The Time Monster. It gets rather fogbound during the early stages (Episodes Two and Three), but it does pick up. And the daisiest daisy scene is a doozy (another revisited by the Bidmead era, in State of Decay. Did Executive Producer Bazza have a word in his shell like, or was it just coincidence?) Sandifer tried to have it that “Parts of this abomination are excellent”. I wouldn’t go that far; it’s never either excellent nor an abomination, even with TOMTIT. Go, Kronos, go!
















Popular posts from this blog

You were this amazing occidental samurai.

Ricochet (1991) (SPOILERS) You have to wonder at Denzel Washington’s agent at this point in the actor’s career. He’d recently won his first Oscar for Glory , yet followed it with less-than-glorious heart-transplant ghost comedy Heart Condition (Bob Hoskins’ racist cop receives Washington’s dead lawyer’s ticker; a recipe for hijinks!) Not long after, he dipped his tentative toe in the action arena with this Joel Silver production; Denzel has made his share of action fare since, of course, most of it serviceable if unremarkable, but none of it comes near to delivering the schlocky excesses of Ricochet , a movie at once ingenious and risible in its plot permutations, performances and production profligacy.

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.

People still talk about Pandapocalypse 2002.

Turning Red (2022) (SPOILERS) Those wags at Pixar, eh? Yes, the most – actually, the only – impressive thing about Turning Red is the four-tiered wordplay of its title. Thirteen-year-old Mei (Rosalie Chiang) finds herself turning into a large red panda at emotive moments. She is also, simultaneously, riding the crimson wave for the first time. Further, as a teenager, she characteristically suffers from acute embarrassment (mostly due to the actions of her domineering mother Ming Lee, voiced by Sandra Oh). And finally, of course, Turning Red can be seen diligently spreading communist doctrine left, right and centre. To any political sensibility tuning in to Disney+, basically (so ones with either considerable or zero resistance to woke). Take a guess which of these isn’t getting press in reference to the movie? And by a process of elimination is probably what it it’s really about (you know in the same way most Pixars, as far back as Toy Story and Monsters, Inc . can be given an insi

I can’t be the worst. What about that hotdog one?

Everything Everywhere All at Once (2022) (SPOILERS) It would have been a merciful release, had the title card “ The End ”, flashing on screen a little before the ninety-minute mark, not been a false dawn. True, I would still have been unable to swab the bloody dildoes fight from my mind, but at least Everything Everywhere All at Once would have been short. Indeed, by the actual end I was put in mind of a line spoken by co-star James Wong in one of his most indelible roles: “ Now this really pisses me off to no end ”. Or to put it another way, Everything Everywhere All at Once rubbed me up the wrong which way quite a lot of most of the time.

We could be mauled to death by an interstellar monster!

Star Trek Beyond (2016) (SPOILERS) The odd/even Star Trek failure/success rule seemed to have been cancelled out with the first reboot movie, and then trodden into ground with Into Darkness (which, yes, I quite enjoyed, for all its scandalous deficiencies). Star Trek Beyond gets us back onto more familiar ground, as it’s very identifiably a “lesser” Trek , irrespective of the big bucks and directorial nous thrown at it. This is a Star Trek movie that can happily stand shoulder to shoulder with The Search for Spock and Insurrection , content in the knowledge they make it look good.

He's not in my pyjamas, is he?

Bob & Carol & Ted & Alice (1969) (SPOILERS) By rights, Paul Mazursky’s swinging, post-flower-power-gen partner-swap movie ought to have aged terribly. So much of the era’s scene-specific fare has, particularly so when attempting to reflect its reverberations with any degree of serious intent. Perhaps it’s because Mazursky and co-writer Larry Tucker (also of The Monkees , Alex in Wonderland and I Love You, Alice B. Toklas! ) maintain a wry distance from their characters’ endeavours, much more on the wavelength of Elliott Gould’s Ted than Robert Culp’s Bob; we know any pretensions towards uninhibited expression can’t end well, but we also know Bob & Carol & Ted & Alice have to learn the hard way.

I think World War II was my favourite war.

Small Soldiers (1998) An off-peak Joe Dante movie is still one chock-a-block full of satirical nuggets and comic inspiration, far beyond the facility of most filmmakers. Small Soldiers finds him back after a six-year big screen absence, taking delirious swipes at the veneration of the military, war movies, the toy industry, conglomerates and privatised defence forces. Dante’s take is so gleefully skewed, he even has big business win! The only problem with the picture (aside from an indistinct lead, surprising from a director with a strong track record for casting juveniles) is that this is all very familiar. Dante acknowledged Small Soldiers was basically a riff on Gremlins , and it is. Something innocuous and playful turns mad, bad and dangerous. On one level it has something in common with Gremlins 2: The New Batch , in that the asides carry the picture. But Gremlins 2 was all about the asides, happy to wander off in any direction that suited it oblivious to whet

We’ve got the best ball and chain in the world. Your ass.

Wedlock (1991) (SPOILERS) The futuristic prison movie seemed possessed of a particular cachet around this time, quite possibly sparked by the grisly possibilities of hi-tech disincentives to escape. On that front, HBO TV movie Wedlock more than delivers its FX money shot. Elsewhere, it’s less sure of itself, rather fumbling when it exchanges prison tropes for fugitives-on-the-run ones.

He’ll regret it to his dying day, if ever he lives that long.

The Quiet Man (1952) (SPOILERS) The John Wayne & John Ford film for those who don’t like John Wayne & John Ford films? The Quiet Man takes its cues from Ford’s earlier How Green Was My Valley in terms of, well less Anglophile and Hibernophile and Cambrophile nostalgia respectively for past times, climes and heritage, as Wayne’s pugilist returns to his family seat and stirs up a hot bed of emotions, not least with Maureen O’Hara’s red-headed hothead. The result is a very likeable movie, for all its inculcated Oirishness and studied eccentricity.

There is a war raging, and unless you pull your head out of the sand, you and I and about five billion other people are going to go the way of the dinosaur.

The X-Files 5.14: The Red and the Black The most noteworthy aspect of this two parter is that it almost – but not quite – causes me to reassess my previous position that the best arc episodes are those that avoid tackling the greater narrative head-on, attempting to advance the resistant behemoth. It may be less than scintillating as far as concepts go, but the alien resistance plot is set out quite clearly here, as are the responses to it from the main players.