BBC's Doctor Who

Hi, Thor.

Glad you at least liked "Marco Polo."

That serial's director - Waris Hussein - considers it his best work on DOCTOR WHO, plus a viewer comes to expect high-calibre writing from any script by John Lucarotti.

I'm curious, though, Thor - are you watching the "lost" serials via YouYube videos?
"Marco Polo" is not on DVD. And if you are watching the BBC DVDs, are you also looking at the special 'making-of' bonus features?

At this distance in time (and from a different nationality), you may dismiss early WHO as cheese but please bear in mind also that Hartnell's 2nd season had very high viewer ratings/figures.
Cheese or not, DOCTOR WHO was "hot" in 1965 - enough so that Amicus made 2 feature films of WHO with Peter Cushing.

I am also curious, Thor, whether all British television from this time period is painful for you to watch (meaning the early/primitive video tape technology of the times), or do you think that it is because WHO was deemed a children's programme?

You may want to check out some early video tape segments of THE AVENGERS from 1963 or 1964 (with Honor Blackman as Cathy Gale) to see if you consider those just as cringe-worthy or not as WHO?

Thanks for your thoughts, Thor.

If I may ask a partially-off-topic question: did Norway produce television programs on film or video tape or both during the 1960s?

Yes, we did. NRK (our BBC) was officially established in 1933, but their television branch came about in 1960, some years after its English and American counterparts. Some drama institutions at the time were the "Monday film" (either Scandinavian or imported) and "Detektimen" (The Detec Hour") -- a given crime show, also usually imported from abroad. Both of these lasted for many decades. Still exist, in a way, even though they no longer have those names.

In terms of self-produced drama, perhaps the biggest thing was "Fjernsynsteatret" ("The Television Theater") -- various stageplays filmed for broadcast. Much of it was rather stale, and cannot really be compared to the anthology shows in the US at the time (or Britain, for that matter). This was shot on videotape.

For 32 years, we really only had ONE NRK channell and that was it (unless you had cable). The only science fiction television series we have produced that I can think off of the top of my head is "Blindpassasjer" ("Stowaway") in 1978.

So in that respect, it's interesting to see how well-versed you were in Britain and the US at the time -- despite the 'cheap' production values by today's standards.

I thought that the finale was okay. I liked the pre-titles sequence a lot but, as with most of the recent episodes, promising beginnings lead to a rushed second half.

Too much utter gobbledygook to move the plot on. I am sure the plots didn't rely so much on made-up ideas to explain grand leaps in the plot.

I've just seen the episode "The Enemy of the World" and I was flabbergasted by the fantastic score here and there. Full-bodied orchestral music in a modernistic vein sounding kinda like Jerry Goldsmith. Nothing like the rather mean and lean scores of the previous episodes. No composer was listed, so I went to Wikipedia and saw......it was existing music by friggin' Bela Bartok! He, he, no wonder it was unusually brilliant.

Ouch. "Fury from the Deep" - evil seaweed inside evil bathing foam. Silliest WHO episode yet.

"The Seeds of Death" --- funny to see the ice warriors releasing a deadly seed over OSLO! Other than that, this was a pretty good corker of an episode, at least by early WHO standards.

Funny you should mention it, Cobweb, as I just now saw the last episode of "The War Games". This was actually a pretty decent serial, although it was stretched out about 4 episodes too much. I became unusually involved, emotionally, in the last few scenes as he stands trial and his transformation begins (although we don't see the end result) -- despite never really having connected to the doctor in previous episodes. Maybe it's something that happens automatically when you've stuck with a character for a period of time.

I actually like the 'base under siege' concept, as it relates to a sub-genre favourite of mine -- the "confined space drama". However, I would agree with you that the concept was repeated a bit too often during the fifth season, in particular.

While I do like several of the historical episodes, I think some of them became a bit boring and talkative at times. So the more full-on sci fi of the Troughon era actually appealed to me.

I do like those episodes that at least have SOME sense of scariness and seriousness in them -- despite the cheap production values. Stuff like the "Toy Maker" episode and the similar "The Mind Robber" are really far too camp for me. Or that "Fury from the Deep" with the evil sea weed in evil bathing foam.

I enjoyed both Dalek episodes - "The Power of the Daleks" & "The Evil of the Daleks". Loved the spidery monsters of "The Macra Terror". "The Faceless Ones" was pretty good, and both of the Ice Warrior serials. Both marathon serials "The Invasion" and "The War Games" were engrossing. And although it was a bit longwinded, I think "The Enemy of the World" was a nice change-of-pace from the 'bases under siege' concept. More of a political thriller with elements of LOGAN'S RUN.

In any case, looking forward to embarking on the THIRD doctor now -- Jon Pertwee's era. In COLOUR! 7 years down, 43 more to go.

"The Three Doctors" -- now that was fun! Of course, it's really more like the TWO doctors, since Hartnell is only shown in brief cameos on a television screen (he was too ill to have a real acting role). Still, it had to be a pretty big deal at the time.

Not necessarily 'creepy' (the only creepy creatures I've seen in DR. WHO so far have been in the 2005 reboot -- Angels, boy with gasmask face etc.), but effective enough. The serial benefitted from using stock music that wasn't just electronic pling-plong.

I have to concede that I've started to forget specific plotlines already, but I'm abreast with the various creatures throughout the series. I'm doing this marathon for CONTEXT rather than pleasure, after all.

It's a bit frustrating when you encounter 'glitches' in the narrative -- like the Doctor returning to Atlantis in THE TIME MONSTER seemingly oblivious of the previous trip to Atlantis in THE UNDERWATER MENACE. And two different explanations for Atlantis' destruction. On the other hand, I do love it when they reference previous adventures properly. That's what it's all about for me.

Hi, Thor.

You seem to value continuity above all else.

I recall disliking the references to previous stories whenever I first watched a DR. WHO serial.
These sort of allusions either 1) re-inforced how much more I enjoyed the previous referenced show than the current one I was viewing, or 2) reminded me of a prior story that I didn't care for much and 'blemished' my enjoyment of the episode in progress.

This emphasis on continuity took a high priority during John-Nathan Turner's reign as producer during the 1980s (and as a result many stories ushered returns of past villains/monsters, etc.)

By the 1980s, DR. WHO had a large international cult following and JNT wished to appeal to many fans.

Earlier, though, when the change in production teams occurred during the '60s & '70s, the producer and script editor most likely did not consult what their predecessors had done and basically re-vamped the series and brought their own sensibilities to the programme.

THE TIME MONSTER (which was co-written by producer Barry Letts with Robert Sloman) is a personal favorite of mine.
While you refer to the Atlantis situation as a "glitch", I don't think there yet existed that level of fandom nor cross-referencing past serials. In all likelihood, Letts simply wished to do his own version of the destruction of Atlantis and probably didn't bother to research if WHO had done it before. Also, THE UNDERWATER MENACE is not the sort of serial fondly remembered by most WHOvians, anyway.

Witnessing your penchant for continuity, I expect, Thor, that you should like JNT's tenure the most out of all classic WHO.

Looking forward to the 80's shows, Cobweb. Sounds like it's up my alley. Whenever I've seen an episode, I go to Wikipedia to see what other people (critics) have thought about it, and I'm continously astounded by how counter my taste runs to what I see there. The episodes I don't like are usually well-received, while the ones I do like aren't that popular. Weird.

By the way, does anyone know about any video interviews with Roger Delgado (The Master)? I recently saw his very last episode before he was killed in a car crash in 73, and I'm curious about how he was 'in real life'.

I searched around a bit, and it seems like no interview with Delgado exists -- neither video, audio nor text. Just a few fan letters and some press quotes. That's a shame, really.

"Invasions of the Dinosaurs" -- Worst.Dinosaur.Effects.EVER!