It's impossible for me to predict how I will respond to re-watching a particular Doctor Who story. This is doubly true for classic era episodes. They tend to be self-contained, standing or falling on their own merits. One can re-watch the recent Moffat season and be swept along by the ongoing narrative of the 'cracks in time' or the developments in the relationship between Amy and Rory (both salvage the Silurian two-parter, or add heft to Amy's Choice).Image of the Fendahl is a decent story, one I've always enjoyed. Reviews of it tend to be quite positive. This time it sort of washed over me.
I still loved old Mother Tyler and her son Jack with their penchant for rock salt, proper tea and old world British paganism. Wanda Ventham is still stylish. The opening sequence with the hiker is suitably chilling.
All the theatrical little touches that Chris Boucher brought so successfully to Robots of Death are also present throughout the story (little bits of throwaway character stuff, witticisms, people making grand statements to the air). Somehow it seems more forced in a contemporary setting.
Edward Arthur's performance as Adam Colby seems more suited to the stage, as if he's playing to the back row. I like the line where he warns Mother Tyler about her varicose veins, but it feels like he's delivering it just to hear the sound of his own voice. I wanted Adam to be more dry with his off-the-cuff remarks. And I just didn't buy Scott Fredericks' Max as a power-mad leader of a coven. One could argue that it's just a more understated way of realizing the part, but it didn't sit well with me. When he finally asked the Doctor for the gun to commit suicide, I felt nothing.
Probably most damningly, the Fendahl never really cast the shadow of doom that I wanted it too. I felt like the danger was explained more than it was shown. Dr. Fendahlman's info-dump in episode 3 was logical and laid out the threat well but I didn't evoke much doom for me. While I liked the idea that Thea Ransome was destined to be the perfect host/victim, the scenario only translated into a lot of fore-head holding and fainting. Compare that to Noah in The Ark in Space where we felt his agony at losing his identity.
Don't get me started on the Doctor and Leela popping off in the TARDIS to investigate the 5th Planet. What as massive tension breaker! Bookend that with the jaunty way they just sort of pop the skull into a box and whisk it away for disposal at a later date.
I don't mean to be over-critical, rather I'm wrestling with why the story washed right over me. Perhaps I wasn't in the right mood. Maybe I had too much wine. Or too little.
Second sight is unpredictable that way. Let the re-watch continue!
Original viewing date: January 22, 1984
Wine: "Ravenswood", a fantastic red Zinfandel (I'm tempted to revisit this wine for Stones of Blood!)
Music: "Back on the Chain Gang" by the Pretenders.
As I said in my Enlightenment review (which nicely occured during my own Baker rewatch), the presence of the Doctor and Leela almost seems perfunctory. Take them out and it's a perfectly serviceable Hammer/Amicus horror story set in middle England-- you could even still use Wanda Ventham.
ReplyDeleteIt's also let down, again, by Graham Williams' tonedeafness to directors (or lack of budget to hire anyone other than people versed in sitcoms and sitting room dramas). George Spenton-Foster has some decent pedigree but he just seems out of his depth here.
Indeed. I think the story either required more deft direction or at least more violence/gross out factor. Otherwise the Fendahl's threat is pretty much neutered.
ReplyDeleteI was originally going to blog about my love of Hammer/Amicus since I didn't have much else to say, but then opted to park that for The Stones of Blood which has more overt nods.