Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
18 November 2017 at 08:18 #62435
Uh, Rory? This was the Children In Need clip. Children In Need is the BBC’s biggest fundraiser, for kids needing help with medical care/social care across the UK, and Doctor Who generally provides them with a really generous, fans-are-begging-for-it clip. Or even films a special scene, specially for them – such as David Tennant’s first scene as the post-regeneration Doctor.
🙂
[They raised £55 million, btw.]14 November 2017 at 11:27 #62419It was the promo scene for Bill that the BBC used; it was broadcast as a scene from the first episode.
However, it was filmed before the first episode, and when they did the final editing the promo scene just didn’t work. It didn’t fit within the main story of ‘The Pilot’.So it’s now a standalone scene: I suspect Steven Moffat has decided that its status is now ‘promo’, and they often don’t include those in the boxsets.
12 November 2017 at 21:15 #62413Well, that was a bad bit of colour balance, wasn’t it? 🙂
11 November 2017 at 14:26 #62404The news is negatively biased
Print that out, place it on the top of your laptop (or whatever you’re using to access the news). And do try taking a break from the news cycle if it’s getting you down – or if you can’t bear to do that, try limiting your access. You want proof that the news is negatively biased? The way that you’re having difficulty finding positive news stories is a good indicator.
Yeah, there’s a witch-hunt on at the moment in Entertainment and UK politics, and it’s a bit gruesome. Like most witch-hunts, there’s a lot of score-settling going on. It’s especially depressing because we entertainers are the clowns of society; our job is to let people escape for a while from the real world.
In case you haven’t found them, the BBC does a weekly video compilation of the ‘… and finally’ Happy news’ slots. Google BBC Happy News. Also try https://www.sunnyskyz.com/good-news and https://www.goodnewsnetwork.org/
I would also say that there’s times you just have to follow one good bit of advice: ‘one day’s evil is enough to deal with’. Tackle the things you CAN do something about, and try not to worry about the things you can’t.
Stay strong. 🙂
11 November 2017 at 01:46 #62399Won’t be satisfied unless all characters (Including aliens) speak with broad Yorkshire accents…
Every planet has a Yorkshire. Okay, I’m starting to get excited about this. 😀
10 November 2017 at 20:58 #62392Looks like she’s going to keep the accent.
10 November 2017 at 20:26 #62391I see that Bradley Walsh has had an extensive lecture on not saying anything. Nothing. Zilch. Zero.
About the only thing we learnt is that he didn’t have to audition; Chris Chibnall just asked him directly if he’d like to play the part.
10 November 2017 at 14:44 #62385@jimthefish and @Thane15
I don’t think there’s any overt sexist intent in calling Jodie Whittaker ‘Jodie’ whereas the Capaldi Doctor is ‘Capaldi’ or ‘Peter Capaldi’. Personally, however, I’m making a firm effort to train myself into referring to this incarnation as ‘the Whittaker Doctor’.
We’ve definitely become more informal over the years, and we now refer to people by their first names so much, it’s often the surname that we don’t know. But there’s still a faint echo of the days when men were accorded a respectful surname (possibly with an even more respectful ‘Mr’) but women and children were called by their first names. So ‘the Whittaker Doctor’ it is, for me. 😉
As to discussing the costume: Capaldi got a review of his wardrobe. As did Smith, Tennant, Eccleston, and all the Doctors before them. We’re still discussing Colin Baker’s costume (usually in terms of horror) thirty years after it was first introduced. My personal take would be that it’s just as sexist to insist that the first female Doctor *shouldn’t* get the traditional costume critique.
Discussing Whittaker’s personal clothing choices is another matter. But this is a costume, for a role. If we can’t discuss a costume because a female actor is wearing it, then we are treating the Whittaker Doctor differently to any previous incarnation. Just because she’s a woman.
9 November 2017 at 18:49 #62369We’re discussing it over on ‘BBC Approved Spoilers’.
Please don’t post pics on other threads: some people like to know as little as possible before the episode is broadcast.
9 November 2017 at 17:39 #62366If that was intentional then well-played.
It would make sense, wouldn’t it? ‘Eek! I’m a woman! Quick, what do they wear? What did Bill wear?’
9 November 2017 at 16:42 #62364I also like the shot: something very ethereal about it. Somehow Whittaker’s managing to look like she really has just appeared from another world.
9 November 2017 at 16:34 #62363smart bunch … no dress sense
Yes, the Doctor is back to proving that she comes from a race of people who genuinely think that gold eyeshadow and/or bow ties are a cool look. I bet the Doctor admires Mork’s dress sense. Either that, or she crash lands the TARDIS in a 1970’s church jumble sale. 🙂
I like it. It’s nicely androgynous – trousers that are actually culottes, men’s braces, stripey jumper that the TARDIS probably reknitted from one of the Fourth’s scarves. The coat also has a faint hint of Time Lord robe about it – though not in the Prydonian maroon and without the ginormous ceremonial collar.
Also serious arse-kicking boots. What every Doctor needs – and this one, probably more than most. 😈
8 November 2017 at 14:30 #62348Given that there’s been no definite announcement that he’s leaving, I’d guess that it’s currently ‘in negotiation’. Quite possibly Chris Chibnall wants a musical shake-up to go with the gender shake-up, and the two of them are seeing if they can go with what the other wants. I wouldn’t say ‘no’ to a musical shake-up; I’ve got CDs and CDs of Murray’s Who scores, and you can tell how much his music has developed and changed through the ten years. He always seems to have the most fun with the first year of the new Doctor, so if he can treat Chibnall’s Who as almost a new commission, that might be invigorating for his music.
Or it may just be money they’re arguing over. 🙂 Cutting down to ten episodes suggests that Chibbs chose quality over a cut in budget-per-episode – and after ten years, I bet Murray is now bloody expensive. Chibbs may be considering whether it’s time to employ some up and coming (and therefore cheaper) young composer.
But if Murray does decide that ten years is long enough, and it’s time to move on to new projects, that isn’t necessarily a bad thing. There’s a time on any project when you realise that you haven’t got anything left to say artistically; at which point, it’s time to move on. And let the next generation have a crack. 😀
But I will say that we had exactly these same rumours when RTD left and Steven Moffat took over. Murray may well treat a new producer as a new commission, and takes time to consider things.
3 November 2017 at 08:45 #62322Well done you! That’s very exciting. 🙂
30 October 2017 at 10:23 #62300You can’t. Fix other people, I mean. They can only fix themselves, and you can only fix yourself.
Glad to know you’ve been looking into stuff; that’s the first step. If you keep looking, something will come up. Which sounds a bit ‘if you build it, they will come’, but I’ve found that it’s often the way things work – and the route to get there is often not the one you thought it would be.
30 October 2017 at 10:16 #62299@janetteb and @pocket-timelady7
Big Finish Audio are bringing out The War Master in December – it’s being voiced by Sir Derek Jacobi, so it’s probably semi-canon that the Master during at least part of the Time War was Derek Jacobi’s Master.
I’m sure he’s delighted to get another go on audio, given that he had about five minutes on TV to actually play the Master. 🙂
29 October 2017 at 15:59 #62292Steven Moffat was pretty sparing of his final bows with Matt Smith – basically, Matt got both his main companions, but not the subordinate companions (like Rory). However, he did get just about every single possible monster that he’d fought.
I think the Grand Moff might well be a bit wary of the long goodbye to every possible companion that Russell T Davies did – it worked as a goodbye, but not when you’re probably going to be rewatching on DVD forty years later (with audio commentary). So I wouldn’t be shocked if what we get is Clara and Bill (Twelve’s two main companions), plus Peter Capaldi’s favourite monsters. Plus David Bradley. Plus, possibly, Susan. And a Special that is written to be rewatchable.
The BBC seem to be treating the return of the First Doctor as the big reveal; plus that some of the story involves moments of frozen time. To me, that suggests that the Big Villain is the Time Lords. Or a Time Lord. Or possibly even the Doctor… 🙂
29 October 2017 at 14:38 #62290@wolfweed – perfect, as ever.
@whisht, @jimthefish, @missrori
Thanks for your good wishes. I’ll have to see if the draft is any good on November 30th. 🙂
29 October 2017 at 14:34 #62288There are strong rumours that Jenna Coleman has done some filming – but they’re rumours. 🙂 So I wouldn’t necessarily presume that characters are not present just because they haven’t been announced. It’s not unknown for the Doctor Who team to film in the middle of a military base in order to keep their Christmas secrets, or on the top of buildings – smuggling the actors in under a blanket.
28 October 2017 at 22:51 #62279Yes, I’m doing NaNoWriMo this year. No, I haven’t done it before. I’ve got an idea that’s been running through my head for years, and I’m hoping that a deadline and online community might be the stimulus to take it from ‘in my head’ to ‘first draft on page’.
Do you have a Doctor Who gif for running around in circles panicking? Because it might come in useful. 😯
28 October 2017 at 20:25 #62277Given the number of writers we have on here: is anyone else bonkers enough to be doing NaNoWriMo this year?
27 October 2017 at 13:41 #62265Well, there you are, I rest my case. You can’t help how you feel can you.
Except my feelings are based on a programme I’ve seen; your feelings are based on a programme you haven’t seen yet.
I rest my case.
26 October 2017 at 19:30 #62261Sorry to hear it – obviously, I hope it turns out to be the promotion. Best wishes.
26 October 2017 at 11:23 #62258wonder just how many Whovians truly *like* the idea, or aren’t outspoken enough to say that they don’t.
I think many Whovians – even if they don’t like the idea – are willing to see it as an experiment. Gender-switching the Master to Missy worked magnificently; so time to try the same with the Doctor. Will it work? Well, until we try it we can’t know.
I have not liked her in anything I have seen her in.
I have loved Peter Capaldi in almost everything I’ve seen him in. He is a very fine actor. The one exception is his Doctor. I have no idea why his Doctor somehow doesn’t hit whatever makes ‘The Doctor’ in my head, but it doesn’t. Which is why I mentioned it; whether you like an actor or not is no real guide to whether they’ll be a good Doctor.
Peter Capaldi didn’t need one in Heaven Sent did he.
I hated Heaven Sent. Words cannot express how awful it is to have a Doctor that I didn’t like as the sole character for an entire bloody episode. It was dreadful. Agonising. I only watched it (a week late) because online chatter made me realise I’d missed a lot of plot points.
For me, I mean. I understand that the script and acting were excellent – but yeah, for me it would’ve been one heck of a lot better with even a temporary companion. That’s what I mean: if you don’t like the Doctor, a good Companion or two really, really helps.
24 October 2017 at 15:13 #62238You never can tell until you’ve seen the new Doctor (in more than one scene).
I was really looking forward to Peter Capaldi’s run – and yet somehow (for me) he never got beyond being some Time Lord who called himself The Doctor. Yet John Hurt was (again, for me) effortlessly ‘The Doctor’ in his single TV appearance. Weird. And I know a lot of people were NOT looking forward to Matt Smith.
Just keep gritting your teeth and muttering ‘this is an experiment – for the Doctor and for the audience.’ 🙂
Oh, and a good companion really helps.
23 October 2017 at 19:59 #62220A number of TV producers and Casting Directors have been saying that a stint in a soap is the ‘new repertory theatre’. That is, it tells people that this actor can work to a tight schedule, act to the script given and has a reasonable emotional range. It’s become the ‘real-life training ground’ for post drama school/drama degree, or takes the place of training for those actors who come into acting from another route.
So it may not be anything more than that.
23 October 2017 at 15:22 #62215Oh, great.
And the Graun BTL comments close in record time for a Doctor Who story – as people look at two young actors with extremely strong CVs and wide telly experience – and whine ‘Diversity casting!’
Sorry, who was it on here who was scared Chris Chibnall was going to go for ‘boring’ casting choices? Boring is the last thing they’re proving to be!
23 October 2017 at 13:20 #62213Looking at the original TARDIS team, as we have been doing, it was noticeable that they worked it by separating them for very specific jobs.
By the way, ‘Graham’ would go very nicely with ‘Campbell’. Or, indeed, ‘Stewart’.;-)
23 October 2017 at 09:50 #62207The original Hartnell team was Susan plus her two teachers. Wonder if Bradley Walsh is now Susan with his two students?
😈
23 October 2017 at 09:43 #62206Next question – are we going to crash land back at the university? I’m thinking that the casting of Mandip Gill and Tosin Cole is a little too old for ‘schoolteacher plus two pupils’, but would very nicely suit students (medical or postgrad) plus professor.
23 October 2017 at 09:34 #62205It’s also on the front page of the BBC news website (with pictures) and the Guardian website (with spoiler free headline).
Myself, I think you should just announce it on the news forum. It looks like people will only be able to stay spoiler free if they hide under a rock. 🙂
21 October 2017 at 19:38 #62201The Audio Commentary:
Some tributes to Verity Lambert – this was the first audio commentary (of one of her Who productions) to be recorded after her death. John Gorrie recounts how Verity dragged him into doing Keys of Marinus, and cut him down to size when he said he really wanted to do Oedipus Rex. (She said that if he was a very good boy, and did his Doctor Who directing really well, perhaps someday the BBC might allow him near Oedipus Rex).
Even though this was her first job as producer, everyone felt she was ‘a safe pair of hands’. She knew what she wanted for the programme, and the people on the ground (unlike ‘The Sixth Floor’) trusted her. Ray Cusick was aware of the BBC undercurrents – the Sixth Floor really hated SF. But the Daleks saved them – Ray might not have got the money, but he certainly got Verity telling him how wonderful his design had been and how successful it was.
John Gorrie finds it extraordinary that he’s talking about this programme forty-odd years later, and compliments the original cast, Ray, Verity and all the original team for creating something that is so loved.
Back to production details: John Gorrie says he’s hugely relieved to have had Ray Cusick along to explain how small the sets were (and how dreadful Studio D was) – he’s gone from thinking he did a terrible job on Keys of Marinus to realising that he’d forgotten how restrictive things were. He had no room, no height to do proper shots, no ability to stop when people did a fluff… he now realises that he did the best job he could given the considerable limitations. (Oh, and he insists that he did NOT direct an episode of Reign of Terror). For example, he couldn’t stop and reshoot when the Voord trips over the camera cable.
Interviewer: ‘The best disguise ever on television.’ John Gorrie replies: ‘This is, I’m afraid, unfortunate… it makes them [Ian and Susan] look awfully stupid.’ The script, at least, has them both being suspicious – but with that disguise, ‘suspicious’ really wasn’t enough.
Something to think about as we go into The Aztecs – Ray Cusick hates Joan Littlewood’s Oh What A Lovely War. ‘The entertainment business has done more to ruin history than everything else.’ John Gorrie argues back that historians, themselves, provide an equally distorted view. So, the Aztecs: distorted? Or as accurate as possible given the limitations of the day. 🙂
16 October 2017 at 14:40 #62190Yes, I hadn’t watched this before, either, apart from episode 2. I have no idea why I saw episode 2 but not the rest. I really enjoyed it – for a ‘filler’, emergency story it was a really good one.
The ending felt like Terry Nation had realised he couldn’t do his detective story in one episode, so had to take over half of part 6 – then he had to really rush the final bit with Yartek. The detective story was also pitched a little too old for most of the audience; the motive felt distinctly adult.
Yartek was drawing very largely on theatrical ‘suspension of disbelief’. The melodrama style ‘look, I will throw this large cloak over me and nobody will realise that I happen to be of an entirely different species from the person I’m impersonating’ suggests a non-too-bright meglomanic. Shades of Red Riding Hood and the Wolf: ‘My Arbitan, what big flippers you have …’ – though Doctor Who has a plentiful supply of non-too-bright meglomaniacs, including our beloved Master/Missy 🙂
Yes, the dialogue between Ian and Altos when they discover that Ian’s cunning plan is going to lead to an unanticipated enormous explosion is a good bit. Well done Ian. You spend six weeks looking for a way to repair the Conscience of Marinus, then you accidentally blow it up. 😀
Still, as the Doctor says, it was probably a good idea in the end. Mind control isn’t exactly the best way to run things – as episode 2 showed.
@craig – I believe The Aztecs is the next story, that it’s a four parter, and that we have time to do it before we tackle The Tenth Planet. I also believe that @blenkinsopthebrave may attack you with a mace containing a Key if we get this close to The Aztecs and then don’t watch it. 🙂
[Don’t panic. The attack with the mace will be so badly shot that it’ll be completely obvious it never went anywhere near you.]
16 October 2017 at 13:58 #62188It would depend how it was done. If you remember, Capaldi was in the 50th Anniversary episode (as was the First) and Moffat has never yet explained why that future Doctor appeared to help save Gallifrey. He explained the past Doctors, but never why it needed Capaldi Doc to complete the calculations. He just had him doing an awful lot of maths in his first series. 🙂
So if we see the Smith Doctor in the 50th Anniversary from Capaldi Doc’s side, so to speak, as Capaldi Doc joins all the earlier Doctors to try to save Gallifrey, that would be fine. The circle is complete; Capaldi Doc’s first appearance is also his last.
14 October 2017 at 19:13 #62166More audio commentary: warning – this particular commentary contains a lot of spoilers for the final episode, so don’t listen to it before you see episode 6. I will avoid spoilers in this post.
The retaken ‘Ian gets hit’ scene. Much better… John Gorrie also comments that it was noticeable that William Hartnell had much more energy when he came back from holiday. He also doesn’t seem to like the last two episodes’ setting: he found it rather dull compared to the SF settings of the previous four. Considering that Verity Lambert had to really persuade him to do an SF story, he seems to be a bit of an SF convert.
Yes, be the director’s mate. Henley Thomas (Tarron) was yet another friend of the director. Eprin is played by one of the actors previously suffering in the Voord costume. One of the judges is also a former Voord. There is general comment at the number of extras in the courtroom; very extravagant for Doctor Who in that period.
Bill Hartnell really loved Doctor Who; he didn’t like the other actors criticising anything, he wanted them to take it seriously and he said from the start that the series would run and run.
Yes, domestic violence. John Gorrie thinks he was firmly told that he mustn’t show the actual violence; it had to be shot from outside the door. William Russell remembered that when they did show Susan threatening Ian with scissors (Edge of Destruction), Verity Lambert was taken upstairs for a real dressing-down. There’s quite a few comments on the lines of ‘too grown-up a drama’; not enough to keep the kids’ interest.
14 October 2017 at 18:45 #62165More from the audio commentary:
Carole Ann Ford wasn’t exactly delighted at the prospect of furs. The ones in Unearthly Child had little biting insects hiding in them: lovely! 😉 And while she spotted the ‘rape’ subtext (and Francis de Wolff seems to have played it that way), it appears to have completely bypassed the director, John Gorrie.
The snow was polystyrene granules, tradename Jabbalight. Francis de Wolff was equally imposing in real life – a sort of 1960s Brian Blessed.
A lot of time was spent talking about rehearsal (as well as joking about Robin’s hot pants/thong/really short underpants); four days to produce half an hour. A two hour play would have three weeks. Nowadays the system is rehearse-and-shoot – but instant playback means current Doctor Who is much more film-like. I didn’t realise that the BBC’s rehearsal block (not yet built at this point) was Sydney Newman’s idea.
Ray Cusick does not like the ice caves, despite everyone else insisting they look pretty good.
Ah, the bridge. If Carole Ann Ford doesn’t look happy during that bridge crossing, it’s because she really wasn’t. 🙂 The epic fail is explained: the thing collapsed completely on the first take, tumbling Carole Ann Ford onto the studio floor. So I suppose it’s possible that Barbara’s reaction shot, where she’s staring down at the floor, was from that first take. Jacqueline Hill is looking to see if Carole Ann Ford is okay.
And in the final cliffhanger, John Gorrie admits that he really mucked up the shot where Ian was hit – or rather not hit, because we can see that the blow never went near him. Wrong angle. But they get to retake it next week.
14 October 2017 at 14:47 #62163Probably Steven Moffat didn’t want his tweaks to be categorised as ‘haven’t finished the script’, or alternatively, rather than tweaks, there were lines that couldn’t be spoken until Jodie Whittaker was official.
It may be also be some massive reveal that they want kept secret as late as possible. If I remember correctly, the Missy reveal was filmed on location, but the dialogue itself was ADR’d later. Given that Peter now can’t be fired for talking out of turn in an interview 🙂 it’s possible it’s even being kept secret from him.
13 October 2017 at 01:16 #62145The Great Easter Kerfuffle was complicated by the speed with which the National Trust changed their website – but Sky managed a before and after shot.
So not quite fake news. Poor old Cadbury was fairly embarrassed; while they’d sponsored Cadbury Egg Hunts at the National Trust/National Trust for Scotland, they’d been very careful in their own publicity to emphasise that their egg hunts were ‘at Easter’ (in fairly big letters).
Yes, the NAFTA idea was first floated in June – the Telegraph doesn’t have any sources mentioned for its recent story, but other papers did pick it up. That probably means someone in one of the Government Departments is at least discussing it with someone in the US Government – but how seriously, nobody knows. For obvious reasons, the Telegraph generally has fairly good Tory sources (their UK nickname is ‘The Torygraph’).
One of the political gossip blogs did suggest that it might be taken reasonably seriously over in Washington – because it might get the current US President out of a hole without doing serious damage to US trade. I believe one campaign promise was to renegotiate or get rid of NAFTA? Problem is, there isn’t really that much to renegotiate, and getting rid of it would be a bit daft – but the UK wanting to join would need NAFTA to be renegotiated (to include the UK), renamed (to include the UK) and then could be presented as a shiny new deal. 😉
Politics, eh? We shall see.
12 October 2017 at 22:43 #62141what if Americans invaded parliament and overthrow them?
You’d be politely informed that we’re perfectly capable of overthrowing our own parliament, thank you. Then we’d give you a bill for the tea. You still haven’t paid for that bloody tea. 😈
There’s a novel by Daphne Du Maurier, called Rule Britannia, that has the US invading Britain. The putative reason is Britain’s economic and military problems, caused by us leaving a common market alliance with mainland Europe. It was written in 1972, but has had a bit of a revival of late. Can’t think why. 🙂
11 October 2017 at 23:39 #62120Ray Cusick doesn’t seem very happy with the jungle set; he grumbles that he didn’t have very much room and had to spend a lot of money hiring the greenery. He’s also very unhappy about the creeping creepers. Then he mutters about the space being so restricted that they actually had to open a door to get enough room for the sound boom. Meanwhile John Gorrie, the director, remembers that the idol was late arriving, so he had to do camera rehearsals in which he explained that the camera would focus on the idol that wasn’t there yet… Ray Cusick also remembers that the poor resolution of the contemporary TVs could be used by the savvy set designer. It could cover ‘a multitude of sins.’
The studio was incredibly crowded and full of cables; William Russell and Carole Ann Ford remember that you definitely did not rush from scene to scene. You ‘crept’, very quietly and avoiding falling over cables. 😉
Nobody has any memories of working with Terry Nation. At all. Never met him. Except Ray Cusick, who has a bit of an edge to his voice, and Carole Ann Ford, who then hurriedly chips in with a story that is definitely not about work (it’s about Nation’s large, but dilapidated house). Then later William Russell also appears to know Terry Nation quite well socially and has a fairly detailed knowledge of Nation’s later stuff (but definitely not any Doctor Who). It all has a bit of a feel of ‘don’t mention the Daleks in front of Ray Cusick’; the two actors seem far more comfortable when they can redirect the conversation away from Daleks and talk about Terry Nation in any other context than Who; socially, his other work, anything.
John Gorrie seems totally oblivious to this possible subtext. 😉
11 October 2017 at 23:11 #62119So: notes from the audio commentary from the DVD.
Raymond Cusick resorted to ‘borrowing’ the very first wall set from another programme; he was also reprimanded for spending too much on the gorgeous set in this episode. The food was apparently practical – it was cheaper. 😉 Showing Barbara in the beautiful set and the others in the dingy set wasn’t complicated – the two groups of actors were on different sets on different cameras, and the director simply cut between the two. John Gorrie, the director, found the confines of Studio D annoying. He kept having to start with the set (boring) and have the actors enter, because there simply wasn’t room to start on the actors talking and then pull the shot back to reveal the set.
Robin Phillips is another friend of the director. He went on to an extremely successful and highly respected career as a theatre director in Canada.
Carole Ann Ford remarks that if the main TARDIS crew hadn’t got on with each other well, they couldn’t have made the programme, because they were under such pressure of time (‘intense’ is the word she used). The stress would have resulted in constant eruptions. She did sometimes find William Hartnell’s insistence on treating her as if she really was his fifteen year old granddaughter a bit annoying, but it’s pretty clear that she adored him. She also finds the eye monsters the creepiest of all the ones she worked with – she said they literally gave her nightmares.
The jars were not from Props 🙂 They were specially made. Given that John Gorrie gives an extensive lecture on the dangers of smashing glass, I wonder if they weren’t made from sugar glass and so he decided on-set that Barbara should only smash one; alternatively that there was only one sugar-glass jar. Raymond Cusick couldn’t remember what the jars were made of, so I suppose we’ll never know.
11 October 2017 at 22:41 #62118Okay, a replacement DVD has now made it through; the audio commentary is with William Russell, Carole Ann Ford, Raymond Cusick (designer) and John Gorrie (director).
All the special effects were made by Shorecraft Models. Ray Cusick had a budget for set design and another budget for special effects – so the Conscience of Marinus was designed in such a way that it could effectively be the set – but come out of the special effects budget. Model work was probably at Ealing, though neither the director or designer could remember. That suggests it went very smoothly.
Carole Ann Ford rather obviously loathed this story; she comments that Susan seems to be much younger than she should be and that she spends a lot of time either screaming or cuddling up to Barbara. Her faintly SF top was made by her mum.
The video cassette used for recording was incredibly expensive, which makes it more understandable that the BBC idiotically wiped so many pieces of TV history (not just Doctor Who). The cost mentioned for the cassette is about £2000 – to put that in perspective, a typical week’s wages would be about £10 to £20, and the star, William Hartnell, was earning about £300 a week. So the tape cassette for each week’s filming was probably costing as much as the budget for the entire cast.
John Gorrie obviously finds it rather strange that the kids loved Hartnell’s bad tempered old git (which sounds like he’d suffered a bit from Hartnell’s exhaustion). Notable that Carole and William spring to his defense – Carole Ann Ford likens Hartnell’s Doctor to the Wizard of Oz. William Russell remarks that he didn’t stop the filming when Hartnell fluffed his lines because he felt it was both eccentric and lovable – something that became part of the character. He mentioned that Hartnell didn’t seem to notice when he fluffed; in hindsight that suggests the first symptoms of his arteriosclerosis.
Proving that one of the best ways to get jobs is to go to drama school with someone who later becomes a director, John Gorrie cast all his mates in the bit parts. I’m sure they felt happier about that in later weeks (because their faces weren’t seen in this episode, he also cast them in the later episodes); this episode was apparently memorable for the wetsuited Voords fainting on set because of the heat in Studio D.
11 October 2017 at 17:23 #62116That’s real life for you. But the lack of commentary is now rectified. 🙂
11 October 2017 at 17:19 #62115Yes, indeed, the Doctor is back from his hols. It’s interesting to compare the obviously exhausted Billy Hartnell in the first couple of episodes with the bouncy Billy of this episode. On top of his acting form, obviously enjoying himself. By this time Doctor Who was a clear success; Bill Hartnell’s contribution to that was to act his socks off. He very much brought out the sheer mischief that’s still considered part of the Doctor’s character, as well as the Doctor’s sense of authority. And his rather condescending qualities, amply shown by the way he treats Barbara and Susan. Yes, sexism does seem to be a character trait…
I agree that by the time we reach the Capaldi Doctor, the Doctor has become considerably more mature (even if he often looks younger). Jacqueline Hill is also acting her socks off; Barbara comes across as the adult in the room in several of these scenes. Ian is this week the one in need of protection, and William Russell plays him as a bit lost. Ian likes to be the hero; being forced into the more ‘female’ role of passive rescuee really isn’t his thing. 🙂 Carole Ann Ford, who doesn’t have the experience of the three heavyweights, still manages a couple of nice touches. She makes the reunion with her Grandfather genuinely affectionate, and springs the trap on Aydan very well.
Costumes: @craig, I’d be really interested if @wolfweed can come up with any colour pics of those police, because to me they look like BBC Costume Department stock Victorian Police Officer costumes, with the collar badges redone. I know Terry Nation has a bit of a Nazi thing going; unsurprisingly when so much of his childhood was overshadowed by that particular evil. But while the local law is Kaftaesque, the police officer in the court itself is sympathetic and helpful. Likewise, Tarren’s mistake appears to be assuming the mysterious guy found in the murder location clutching the murder weapon was probably the murderer… and not realising he’s in a detective story, where said mysterious guy is never the murderer. 😀
The judges costumes seem to be Greek Orthodox priest/bishops, with the black hat extended to the size of a chef’s hat and the normal cowl replaced with the turkey twizzlers. The make-up doesn’t work well on a modern TV; I have to keep remembering that they were producing this for 12 inch screens, not something with a screen at least four times bigger. As it is, I could spot the ‘age lines’ on the second judges’ make-up.
I agree that Terry Nation was quite possibly mentally swearing that he’d used up a perfectly good four-episode idea in two episodes. This could have been a very good four-parter; it did feel a bit rushed.
And another nice cliffhanger…
10 October 2017 at 21:14 #62095You may feel like taking a break is ‘shutting out the real world’, but sometimes going cold turkey on the news cycle is a good thing to do. Pick a date, shut off your feeds and alerts, tell yourself you’re on retreat until a week or a month later. If anyone notices, just tell them you’re taking a holiday from the news.
I’m a bit of a news junkie, so I’ve done this a couple of times. I always come back feeling refreshed and better able to cope. And trust me; if major stuff happens, people will let you know.
Take care.
7 October 2017 at 16:35 #620544 October 2017 at 14:47 #62038Yeah, I think Chibbers could well be prepared to go there – and capable of writing it in such a way that the kids don’t understand the implications. As you point out, he wrote the Nefertiti/Solomon scene in such a way that it implied both ‘slavery’ and ‘rape’, with the kids much more likely to pick up ‘slavery’. But Nefertiti was a one-off character. Equally, he’s quite prepared to suggest that mother-love can turn some women into murderers who nearly start a war. But that, too was a one-off character. I think the closest we’ve come Post Gap to this scene in Keys of Marinus was Clara fighting off the Sheriff in Robots of Sherwood, and that was played very much for laughs.
I’m just not sure the BBC is quite ready for even implied attempted rape to happen to the lead character in a series watched by kids, the way Verity Lambert was willing to do with her lead character of Barbara. Even though the kinds of creeps the Doctor finds him/herself facing means that it would normally be almost a given. 🙂
3 October 2017 at 23:15 #62035The epic this week was getting to actually watch the episode. Between the DVD getting lost in the post, my YouTube app collapsing, and DailyMotion deciding to perpetually replay an ad about alien casinos without ever getting to alien snowscapes, I was beginning to feel like someone trekking across a sub-zero landscape peopled by greedy wolves, wanna-be rapists and soldiers in suspended animation (and plastic capes).
Anyway, this felt like the ‘vamp till ready’ episode. In Episodes 1 to 3 there was progression: either of the plot or the characters. As @craig says, this is a very light episode; more so even than last week, when we at least learnt that Barbara finds Ian’s sexism, sorry, over-protectiveness a little wearing. And that Susan is telepathic and appears to be blocking some painful memories. And that Altos thinks he has great legs. Or maybe Verity Lambert thought he had great legs. 🙂
One thing that has occurred to me is that people back in the early 60’s, when this episode was first broadcast, seem to be much closer to theatre than to our modern ‘ultra-realistic’ TV. The sets are really theatrical; they suggest rather than imitate. The other is that early Who seemed to be much more willing than modern Who to acknowledge that evil people sometimes rape/attempt to rape women. The word is never mentioned, and it’s portrayed in a way that means the kids won’t really get what’s happening beyond ‘the nasty man is threatening Barbara’, but there was also another rape (off-screen) in the Time Meddler.
Which brings up the question of whether Chris Chibnall is going to ignore rape. Or not. It’s not something that’s directly affected the Doctor before – being tortured, yes, being knocked on the head, frequently, imprisoned, even murdered. But now the Whittaker Doctor will appear to be a pretty young women – and will the show acknowledge that particular method of threatening women?
Admittedly anyone who tries to rape the Doctor is likely to end up singing Castrato for the rest of their (possibly very short) life, but it’s whether the Twenty-Tens can manage something controversial that the Sixties were brave enough to do.
@wolfweed – I saw at least two wolves. Both from stock film footage, but they were definitely there. And yes, Jacqueline Hill did appear to be looking in completely the wrong direction when they tried to do the exciting bridge collapse with Dramatic Leap. It didn’t help that they couldn’t seem to get the bridge to collapse. As you say, epic fail. 😀
The one thing that made me giggle throughout was the costumes. I went and checked whether they were filming this one at Lime Grove Studio D (a notoriously boiling hot studio when all the lights were on) and they were. It was the way everyone was supposed to be freezing cold, swathed in furs – and were all too clearly trying to find some way to get the furs to slip open, fall off, hang loose – anything to get some ventilation. Kudos to Francis de Wolff (Vasor), who is stoically suffering under a heavy costume, wig and fake beard.
1 October 2017 at 15:01 #62026Everything is fine so far
24 September 2017 at 00:28 #61974I dunno about George Lucas – but it was pretty obvious that Steven Moffat’s watched this one. 🙂 Though his Weeping Angels were cast using dancers who could hold absolutely still, not an extra who was clearly starting to tremble with the strain of holding the axe.
I’m really starting to dislike Arbitan and his friends. Okay, evil Voords, got that. But some of those traps are seriously sadistic. And exactly what kind of lunatic decides to bio-engineer a homicidal plant that grows fifty times faster than normal? Arbitan’s daughter seems nice enough, but Arbitan and Darrius themselves seem to be remarkably quick on the uptake when it comes to blackmail and nasty ways to kill people.
I take it Carole Anne Ford was also having a few days off? But it’s nice to see that Terry Nation was keen on dropping hints about the Doctor and Susan’s background. Susan has heard such a sound before, doesn’t know what it is or where she heard it, knows it’s evil. The hint is that it’s something to do with the reason she and the Doctor fled their home (at this point, of course, Gallifrey hasn’t been invented). It also plugs in a hint about why Susan is so prone to hysterical screaming; when Barbara mutters darkly about Ian’s determination to look after them, Susan points out that she likes being looked after – again, another hint that she and the Doctor are fleeing from something traumatic.
Susan, like her grandfather, doesn’t like goodbyes.
Unlike last week, which had a definite feeling of text and subtext, this episode does seem more Saturday afternoon thrills and spills. There’s a faint hint of meddling with stuff that might kill us, but the whole thing does seem like an early Indiana Jones.
I liked Jaqueline Hill’s acting when she was comforting Susan about the moving tendril – reassuring Susan that of course it hadn’t been trying to eat her, while her expression showed that she wasn’t all that sure what she was saying was true. Likewise, Barbara’s reaction to Ian’s ‘big brave man protecting poor little woman’ is spot on.
-
AuthorPosts
