Dimensions in Time Lungbarrow Survival |
Fox Entertainment Doctor Who aka. "Enemy Within", "The Fox Telemovie" |
|
| Story No. | 160 |  |
| Production Code | Made for TV movie | |
| Dates | May 14, 1996 (US) |
|
With Paul McGann, Sylvester McCoy,
Daphne Ashbrook, Yee Jee Tso, and Eric Roberts as "The Master". Written by Matthew Jacobs. Directed by Geoffrey Sax. Executive Producer: Philip David Segal. |
| Synopsis: The life of the seventh Doctor comes to an abrupt end after the Master returns to life after his (latest) execution. But the Doctor regenerates to find himself in love with his inadvertant killer (Daphne Ashbrook) and fighting the power of the Eye of Harmony locked inside his own TARDIS. |
"Temporal Orbit? What's a Temporal Orbit?!?" by Terrence Keenan 28/10/02
I can't help but love this movie. I think it's awesome, even with its incomprehensible story and the fanwank.
Let's deal with the fanwank issue first. When I saw this back in 96 and out of fandom at the time, I thought the nods to old TV show, the inclusion of McCoy, etc. were brilliant. It meant they weren't pissing on the fans. When I watched it this last time, I rolled my eyes at the Tom Baker scarf in the locker, but other than that, it wasn't all that bad.
The plot? Well, there is one, but the problems occur with the gaps in the story as it evolves. (How did The Master get into the TARDIS that first time? How does Grace know which wires will jump start the time rotor? How do Grace and Lee come back from the dead?; etc.) It's kind of obvious that the script is a hybrid of a few previous efforts (reported on in The Nth Doctor), with elements tossed together without a true sense of how they fit. Methinks a few rewrites could have tightened things up and filled in the gaps.
I don't understand why people were upset about the so-called "Americanization" of the telemovie. Pertwee did car chases throughout his five year run. At least the telemovie's chase looked like it was going faster than ten miles an hour. And the kissing? I thought it was great. Even 1000 year old Time Lords need to get their groove on. (All right, the fireworks behind the last kiss were a bit much, but it's not the end of the world). And who is to say that they might have had Davison do something like this during his run if they could have gotten away with it? Davison was the most "human" and "vulnerable" of the Doctors. Arguments about the snogging seem even more silly after Human Nature's release.
Now, onto the good stuff:
Paul McGann was a brilliant piece of casting. He makes the role of the Doctor his from the get-go, an interesting mix of Davison's humanity and T Baker's emotional whirlwind. It never seems forced as he switches from genuine humanity to righteous anger on a dime and back.
Daphne Ashbrook does a solid job as Dr. Grace Holloway. Shame she didn't go along for the ride. Her screamer moments are minimal, and she's convincing in her continuous attempts to deal with the strange events as they occur.
The TARDIS interior was amazing. The sterile white rondelled control rooms might have been tradition, but this console room had a personality that fitted its operator. The wood and brass console with it's old fashioned switches and levers, the pull-down Philco TV set and the dual columns are beautiful.
Eric Roberts's Master is good fun. Come on, now. Admit it to yourself. You'll feel better. Roberts has the charming menace required for the part, and his campy OTT turn in the climax was fitting for a role that does require scenery chewing abilities.
It might have been a bit much, but the quasi-religious imagery was a noble attempt and commendable.
The motorcycle sight gag was silly, but overdue. And, if they could have done it during the TV series's long run, they would have fit it in, probably more than once.
Okay, the story is lame. But there is enough to enjoy in the telemovie to make it worthy of much praise. The acting of the principals and the visuals are strong enough and showed the groundwork laid for a potential series.
A Review by Paul Rees 15/9/03
The 1996 TV Movie is, essentially, an infuriating combination of the spellbinding and the excruciating.
On the positive side, Sylvester McCoy brings a sense of gravitas to the role which he never quite managed before whilst Paul McGann makes for a convincing Doctor, settling immediately into the role. His companion for this story, Grace, is also very likeable and of the supporting cast only Eric Roberts' Master strikes a discordant note. The effects are simply awesome, and there is a polish and a sense of expanse in the TVM which had not been seen in the series hitherto: the new TARDIS interiors in particular are wonderful, providing us with a real sense of space. The religious imagery surrounding the Doctor's resurrection/regeneration is also well judged and effective.
There are, however, two rather irritating departures from the series' ethos: the Doctor is revealed to be half human (why? - and why had no one mentioned this before?), and he then proceeds to become romantically attached to his new companion. Apparently, this was done in an attempt to win over the American market, but it seems simply out of place and out of character. Very odd.
There are other continuity difficulties (for example, the Eye of Harmony was previously on Gallifrey, but is now in the TARDIS; and similarly, the Master turns into a snakelike creature, which seems to contradict what we knew previously about Time Lord physiology) but these can be explained away with a little ingenuity. Rather more problematical are the internal flaws in terms of the script: the plot is, quite simply, incomprehensible. For example, it is revealed that only a human retina can open the Eye of Harmony. But why on earth should this be the case, apart from out of pure expediency? Then, to cap it all, to resolve the situation the Doctor simply travels back in time to before the Eye opened (and thus to before his companions went to meet their maker). This approach would, needless to say, have completely mitigated any dramatic tension which a follow-up series might have had.
I desperately don't want to like the TVM, but when I watch it I find myself won over by it despite myself. If only the script were as good as the effects, it would be an all time classic. As it is, sit back and enjoy - but check your brain in at the door first. Just like the script editor apparently did. 6.5/10
A Doc badly born in the U.S.A. by Konstantin Hubert 31/5/04
After over 600 episodes from 1963 to 1989, a unique history and an unprecedented gap of 7 years, the longest-running science fiction series came back in 1996 with the so-called TV Movie and it is a pity to realize that this production was destined to become the 90s' biggest event in both hype and... disappointment. In the history of the programme the years from 1990 to 1999, the Nineties, will always be remembered for their absolute poverty when it comes to TV productions, of which the movie unfortunately monopolises the attention (Dimensions In Time is just a brief celebration). After watching the US-oriented Enemy Within, I figured out which its three purposes are: BBC cooperated with Universal to produce this movie in order to finish off the 7th Doctor’s era and to render the new Doctor the programme’s new mascot, which was to be featured in a new range of novels (I will mention the third purpose at the review's end). Therefore, if Sylvester McCoy's Doctor had expired during Survival, this clunker may have never existed.
Its frivolous scenario, devoid of beauty and depth, features Eric Roberts as the Master, the villain. What was the point in bringing back the evil Time Lord? He has exhausted all his incarnations and he should have been dead, finished by now. In Deadly Assassin after all the Master is struggling to survive having run out of incarnations. But the BBC preferred to bring him back and assign him banal aims in his repetitive and dull life: once again seize the Doctor's body for his own and destroy the world. The 8th Doctor's debut takes place in San Francisco, the day before New Year's Eve, 1999 and those responsible for the movie didn't lose the chance to share the very superstitious and hysterical belief that the arrival of year 2000 would have brought the end of the world. Indeed, the Master with his evil plans dramatically jeopardizes the whole planet and sets off a countdown to human extinction that will expire on the very first second of the new millenium, provided that he actualizes his desires...
Eric Roberts, when wearing sunglasses and a black leather jacket and with his character's scampish behaviour, grants the Master the look of an American tough guy and when clad in a lavish Gallifreyan uniform, he swaggers with the pride of the leader of a prosperous, dreadful empire. The image and actions of the Master contrast with his current state. Since he is dying, he should have been presented less powerful, less self-confident and not being able to alter the entire planet's molecular structure! The only battle between the two Time Lords occurs inside the TARDIS and if not for the dazzling high-budget special effects and the noisy, chaotic atmosphere, it would have fallen flat, one being the fact that the Doctor is chained, unable to move and is freed by the companion Grace Holloway only towards the end. In those scenes the Master and the Doctor symbolize Satan and the crucified Jesus Christ respectively, the two eternal opposing forces: one determined to destroy the world, the other to become its saviour and protect it. However, Christ is believed to have defended the world from Satan's moral and spiritual decline, from sin and without any use of violence. Moreover, if the Master annihilates Earth, he will inevitably annihilate himself as well since he is on Earth (what a blunder)... Seven years had to elapse for a new Who episode and the BBC not only sacrificed the show's Britishness by setting it in the U.S. but also more importantly produced one of the show's most lightweight moments.
Of the movie's highlight, the 8th Doctor, as the material on which to base an analysis is scanty, I will avoid drawing conclusions. I will only cite that he appears lively and friendly: a cross between the 5th and 2nd incarnations with an appearance evoking the 4th's. The movie starts off well, the first minutes being despite the 7th Doctor's very sudden assassination nice, decent but after the regeneration scene in the morgue of a hospital and when the 8th incarnation is ready to roam the streets, it goes downhill. His romance with the attractive but inappropriate (because of the age of the Doctor) and not girlish, companion Grace is really unnecessary and out of place. The Time Lord was never seen behaving like a Don Juan before, so why was his nature distorted during these very anticipated and critical moments of the series?
This brief romance isn't the only out of place aspect: the Doctor is seen offering jelly babies adopting the Fourth incarnation's habit, threatening a cop with Grace's help and twice riding very competently a police motorbike (who is he anyway a secret Hell's Angel member or Speedy Gonzales in disguise?). And while attending a meeting at the Institute of Technological Advancement, the Doctor clumsily and naively reveals to a professor he is not acquainted with that he is... human from his mother side, that he is a half-human! We deduce, to our astonishment, that he never was 100% Gallifreyan in the past, so shouldn't his humanness biologically affect and reduce his alien characteristics? Why should a mere movie, just 90 minutes, define so radically our Time Lord's nature? Unfortunately an inadmissible sign of disrespect to the show's 26 years. I admit Paul McGann, a sympathetic actor, animates well the newly born and seemingly at a loss 8th incarnation and saw a large chapter of Doctor Who's history tightly linked with his glorious name by doing almost... nothing. I am aware that my latter remark is cynical but why did BBC choose to transform this promising actor into an one-off Doctor? Why was an entire incarnation wasted? Hasty decisions without rationale.
The comparatively high budget makes Enemy Within stand out. Indeed, it is obviously of a much higher budget but the rich production values are apparent especially during the scenes inside the new flamboyant, spacious and impressive TARDIS with its church-like interior. In fact, if we exclude those scenes, then Enemy Within would have looked like an ordinary dodgy US movie. San Francisco is characterised by an amalgam of cultures and so we see blacks, Latin Americans, Chinese including Chang Lee and eventually one gets an impression of a typical US movie. The American elements inevitably overshadow the two British ones (the TARDIS and Paul McGann) and by distinguishing the unconventional Enemy Within from all other episodes of the series, render it a truly unique albeit not rewarding experience.
The strongest aspect of Enemy Within is frankly Geoffrey Sax's direction, which without any doubt tops that of most, if not all, episodes of the series. One immediately perceives the different style of the cinematographic direction when compared to the much simpler direction of the televised productions: more complicated and lavish scenes, frequent close-ups, at times masterful permutations of images and a more advanced technique of shooting. The combination of the direction with the high-budget effects result in the best and most interesting scenes, those inside the TARDIS, the battle between the two Time Lords. Even the sublime direction doesn't save the day when the plot is weak and without depth. As Bryan Smith points out in his review "the one thing that Doctor Who has always had going for it over all other science fiction programming is it's ability to tell good stories. It's that simple." If the telemovie unfolded on a planet other than Earth and if the enemy were not the saturated Master (don't misunderstand me, I like him, but even this legendary figure however has to bid farewell to the DW universe and besides audios and novels featuring a past Doctor can make up for his absence on TV) but an army of aliens, such as Cybermen or Sontarans, this movie would have most likely fared much better and most fans would have acclaimed the BBC's efforts to bring back the show, the third purpose of the movie. The BBC managed to resurrect the Master, kill off the 7th hero and give birth to the 8th but failed in its third purpose. No reason to complain since at the moment I am writing this review every fan knows that BBC cares for its popular programme and will mark its long-awaited return and the debut of the 9th incarnation in a few months.
To sum up, Enemy Within was simply produced to serve the three purposes I cited before and is an example of necessity beating quality and depth in storytelling. If frivolous high-budget Hollywood movies, such as Men in Black, fascinate you, it might please you, if you have a penchant for the series' sophisticated or low-budget albeit witty episodes you will be most probably disappointed.
Grade: 4/10
Am I drunk or just getting nostalgic? by Kathryn Young 20/10/04
It was 1996 and the Beeb had sold Doctor Who to the Americans. No don't start to cry. It turned out pretty ok for all concerned. Sylvester McCoy's Seventh Doctor dies and Paul McGann's Eighth Doctor is born. In the story he battles to save himself and the Earth from the Master (yes there wasn't all that much plot but that never stopped Doctor Who before, so just you be quiet).
I remember when it came out. I think I might have wept a bit. That poncy bloke with the long hair didn't grab me at all (forgive me, I was young, foolish and had never read an EDA). I missed Sylvester as the Doctor like the dickens and the idea of having an American Master was just too scary to contemplate. However, I found that just like green alien slime from the Earth's core, this story grows on you (but fortunately doesn't turn you into a hideous slavering monster).
The Beginning Sequence:
Now no matter what you may think of the rest of the movie, the first three minutes of the film did have a certain allure...
For one there was Paul McGann's accent: I once had a boss who was a Scousy (from Liverpool) and he had a lovely way of speaking - "Youwngiee. Geart hinto dat barr n peurr maei a vodka an doon gi mei ani gip" - so there must be a little something in me that just loves Paul's knockdown: Liverpool meets RADA accent. And Paul is so serious about it all. By the time he got through to the "it was a request they never should have granted" bit from the introduction I was in stitches.
Then there was the music: Someone was asking what stupid silly small thing makes Doctor Who spesh for you. And I have to admit I used to have a total wobbly every time I heard the seventh Doc "turntable techno" (and I still do). However this music is much more dramatic and serious. Even now after eight years I am still going - "yes yes yes - Doctor Who is back and he is going to kick Dalek butt" before I remember that that was all a long time ago and sadly it never happened. But this music is the sort of stuff that gets men across the Delaware.
All in all it was a great beginning. The only downside I think was that they hired the chipmunks to voice the Daleks, but it is good to see Alvin and the gang getting some work.
Next we come to good old Syl:
Sylvester McCoy looks like a complete tosser in this movie? Now I love Sylvester and have my axe always handy for those namby pamby little cowards who think it is cool to pick on the little fellow with the silly jumper, but I am going to do a Janet Fielding and say: "Whart was thart on hs haird?. Thairt haire kut dowes nowt soot heim". However there was a trade off in the fact that finally Syl was free of John Nathan Turner and his John Nathan Turneresque views on fashion: So no question mark jumper.
But Sylvester does play an integral part in this movie. He came from England - all the way across the Atlantic - to fall into some bin bags and die so that Paul McGann could take over the mantle. And, seriously folks, it was a lovely gesture. If ever there was a testament to how much Doctor Who means to people, it is a plucky little Scottish git traveling five thousand miles to "do what he thought was right" by Doctor Who. And that also makes this film spesh.
The Companions:
I admit I never really warmed to Grace. Yes she looked good in that blue dress and she has nice taste in music, but she seemed so boring - the cardigan of companions if you like. She wasn't popping out all over the place (and I don't mean out to the shop) like Peri, she wasn't totally obnoxious like Tegan, she wasn't a total wierdo like Turlough, she just "was". But I suppose she is ok. I can theorise it would be a very hard brief for an American actor to get lumbered with the job of being the Doctor's companion. Because of the unique origins of Doctor Who the whole concept might seem very alien (if you will pardon the pun) to your average American Daphne who has grown up on a diet of Leave it to Beaver and The A Team...
"So there is this guy who travels the universe in a phone booth accompanied by chicks who have a propensity to scream and sprain their ankle a lot... and every planet he visits looks like a quarry."
She must have wondered "now how exactly do I play this one?" If the series had continued I can just imagine the poor woman asking the director "so how do I react to the giant space frog again?" However the upshot of this is she just tends to act totally bemused as she tries to cope with this bizarre Englishman who has inserted himself and about thirty years of baggage and in jokes into her life. The look on her face after the Doctor has done his "these shoes, they fit perfectly" spiel is worthy of any good cartoon character and almost does a Tom Baker "let's break the fourth wall" - and that bit alone makes the film worthwhile. But when she is not playing "oh dear this is all too much, I need a couple of aspirin and a good lie down" she might surprise you...
Chang Lee. Finally someone to make Nyssa's acting look credible (even good). And even now I still have an abiding hatred for his cod awful jacket. His performance in this movie is a living testament as to why drama school is a good and necessary thing.
Anthony Ainley he is not:
"My name is not Honey" - wow. No offence to Eric, but he was just odd. Maybe it was the script - "I must have the Doctor's body, I need to explain the plot - right now". Maybe it was the high heels. Maybe it was the leather outfit: I have never ever seen a paramedic dressed as Neo from the Matrix. All the ones I have seen have stethoscopes and comfy clothes. And this annoyed me. Here we have this guy who looks like he has escaped from (insert suitable dark tv show or movie) and no one in the story notices a thing. I realise he has to be a bit menacing, but Anthony Ainley managed to do it with a few laughs and all while wearing crushed velvet pantaloons. Why does this guy have to go the full bondage? But to be fair Eric does some seriously evil smiling and just like Jack Nicholson at the Oscars he wears his sunglasses in inappropriate places.
Bruce:
I cannot believe they named the ambulance man whose body the Master nicks Bruce. I am sorry, but you cannot have a character in a serious drama (or even a sci fi) called Bruce. It is soo Monty Python territory. I reckon Eric hated it as well - first chance he gets he explicitly states he "is not Bruce".
These shoes... They fit perfectly:
There is a theory in drama. All you need is one really good bit and people will remember that, forget the crap bits and go away raving. Actually that is not really a theory. I just made it up. However it is true. Whenever I think about this movie I always remember the park scene. People complain that McGann was "The Doctor Lite" - the diet cola of Doctors, 'not quite Doctorish enough', and so forth, but you can't always be a planet destroying sad sack can you? Sometimes you have to take pleasure in the little things that make being the Doctor so much fun, ie shoes and having it off with Lalla behind the catering van during the filming of City of Death... that sort of thing.
And that brings us to Paul McGann...
I am going to say I thought he was wonderful. But then again I would probably watch a half hour show of Paul McGann reading the newspaper. I think McGann was as gobsmacked as everyone else was when he landed the role. He is not - erm - anything like any Doctor we had had before. When you think that here is a Scousy boy with a shaved head dressed up as a Victorian ponce with a long haired wig, even if you don't agree with his interpretation of the Doc, you have to say that this boy can act.
The Puzzling Bits...
Get that boy to an optometrist:
Every so often in the movie we see things from the Doctor's perspective. Now either that guy was totally smashed for the whole movie or he has a serious eye problem. It looked as if he was seeing the world from the bottom of a vodka bottle. People would lurch in and out of his line of sight with an alarming randomness. No wonder he couldn't pilot the TARDIS all those years - HE COULDN'T SEE THE BLINKIN' BUTTONS! Judging by this film it is a wonder he could even find the door. But this does explain why the poor boy was so skittish for half of the movie. You would be a bit worried if everyone was coming towards you like zombies from a bad Hammer horror movie too!
Fanwank carried to the ludicrous:
Where did he get the jelly babies from? I realise this is an important bit of total fanwank for the British creators, but not only did the sudden appearance of a bag of jelly babies have no relevance to an unsuspecting American public, it made no sense. The man did not even have shoes! How did he acquire a bag of anachronistic sweets? Did he pop out to the sweet shop before or after he realised he had medical probe inserted into his chest? Any why didn't he notice that probe before anyway. I really think I would pick up on a piece of "primitive wiring" with the dimensions of a coat hanger stuck in my chest right away! Are sweet shops even open at nine PM on New Years Eve in San Francisco? Did he make Grace stop off at a Seven Eleven on the way home to pick some up?
San Francisco was awfully flat. I swear remember reading something about hills in Tales of the City?
Conclusion:
If I had one chance to go back in time...
I'd go back, misuse my Time Lord powers and change history. Every time I watch this movie I am saddened at what might have been. It would have strange. It would have been different. For some it would have never been as good as the old series. But it sadly did not ever get a chance to "be" anything.
The DVD bit:
The DVD I have has some groovy extras. There are some interviews with Syl being his normal diplomatic self and trying to explain it all for the unsuspecting American public "there's this bloke and he travels through time and space in a big blue box... no really... it's good."
There is also a great interview with Paul McGann saying how he wouldn't go near a Doctor Who convention even if you super glued him to a Dalek, cos the fans are just too scary (just what had Syl been telling him, from what I heard Syl was the driving force behind that pool party).
Sometimes I wonder about McGann. Here is this big Scousy dude terrified of a bunch of people who like to dress up like the Doctor and discuss telesnaps... Ummm, how bad did you think it was going to get? Fortunately now he does do the odd convention and will continue to do them as, so far, no one has leapt on him yet and frightened him off. (Actually I have it on good authority they just took him out for afternoon tea and fed him cinnamon buns.)
The bloke who does this commentary has the wit of Oscar Wilde's turnip (but not the interesting turnip shaped like a thingy).
Why this movie is important:
Simply for the fact that if you pick up an Eighth Doctor Adventure story you will see Paul McGann's face slathered across it. A lot of people will say that the Eighth Doctor is a literary creation, but I reckon it would be nice to see the bloke who inspired it all, eh?
"These shoes... they fit perfectly!"
And besides, he is a lovely Doctor.
The Trial of a TV Movie (a defence) by Lance Bayliss 13/11/04
As those who might have glanced at my review of the novelisation of the TV Movie will gather, I have a great deal of enthusiasm for this production. I'm not beyond seeing its faults. But I certainly don't see that the "trinity of errors" that fans often go on about are any worse than anything the original BBC series inflicted upon itself.
But rather than debate these same old topics - you all know to what I am referring - I should like to examine this version of Doctor Who within the context of what it is rather than what it is not. What it is, (Dimensions in Time excepted of course!) is the only example of televisual Doctor Who for the 1990s. In a time when Doctor Who had effectively been relegated to novels and 'unofficial' video and audio productions, the TV Movie was seen by many fans as the last great hope for their series. Those of us who hadn't given up hope of the series return greeted the news of the movie in a perhaps over-inflated view.
This is why I feel people often magnify its faults. Even before watching it, many fans already had a vision on how they would see the series return. Therefore they entered it seeing the flaws, rather than simply watching it as it was. It's something that I fear might afflict Russell Davies new version as well. There will always be a certain contingent of fandom who won't like what is being done, and who will make it worse for the rest of us as a result.
The TV Movie is for my money everything that I would have expected Doctor Who to be, had it carried on into the 1990s. Sure, it's got a larger budget, but if the original series had still been on the air in 1995/1996 I fully expect that certain elements of it would have evolved into a form not dissimilar to what we got.
I must be a realist and mention that the final product doesn't really stand up. But then, neither does much of original Doctor Who when given a similar tooth-and-comb treatment. Almost every Who story has an unsatisfactory ending to one extent or another. Almost every Doctor Who story features helter skelter plotting methods: Even in the heyday of Tom Baker, stories like Pyramids of Mars don't really stack up when all four episodes are watched back to back, protagonists don't remain internally consistent from one episode to the next. The difference is that the TV Movie is subject to greater scrutiny due to its very nature as a relaunch of Doctor Who.
Which brings us to Paul McGann. No matter how often Doctor Who scripts may have gone awry in the past, the lead actors can almost always been counted on to make it entertaining. Many a dull "base under siege" tale in the 1960s was boosted by Hartnell's childlike ability to be honourable one moment and be overcome by whimsy the next (he always make me giggle). Or Troughton's way of turning a phrase so that it takes on more than one meaning. Tom's hilarious turns in much of Seasons 16 and 17 are often just attempts to liven up dull storylines. And no matter how much Terror of the Vervoids may sink into a "cartharsis of spurious morality", Colin Baker always manages to make me smile with his purile flipancy (the scene where he refuses to give Mel the seeds for example).
As so it is with McGann. Others have often painted him as being shown as a "stereotypical limey, fish out of water" type, but when you look at it, this is exactly what the Doctor has basically been in all 7 past incarnations, and probably will be again in the future. It's the small things of his performance that get me smiling. The way he follows Grace's gaze down at his clothing in the lift. The way he puffs out his cheeks when stopped mid-sentance by Professor Wagg. The shoes scene is overstated, but the final scene - the Doctor saying goodbye to Grace with only a distant look - is just about perfect. It's these tiny things that often make me melt when watching the movie. McGann, like all those before him, salvages a lacking script.
I shan't discuss Grace or Chang Lee, other than to say - honestly - that they are non-characters. Both manage well as possible 'regulars' had the American series gone on, but they really aren't up to much here. Eric Roberts however is nowhere near as poor as people often paint him to be. Mister Roberts is a method actor, and struggled to grasp the core of the character of the Master. Considering what he had to work with, I think he did rather well. His Master still retains an offhand manner that reminds one of the past ('Did she kiss as good as me?!' 'As well as you.') and that's good enough for me.
When Roberts later played a bad guy on the animated series "Justice League", the producers claim that they found him 'scary' when he came in to read, because he had so many different ways he wanted to play the role. In the event, he did all of them in recording. It was up to the producers to find a balance in post production between one scene and another, but as they say the end result actually enhances that evil character. One moment he's staid and normal, the next he shows such malice. So I feel it is with the Eric Roberts Master.
In closing (and I apologise for the length of my ramblings - Give one an open forum and he'll go on all day!!) I restate that everything that Doctor Who might concieveably be expected to be in 1996 was matched in this movie. It's a run around some overseas corridors. It retains a glib humour. It looks towards effects over plot, at times. If there's nothing else to be said about it, the TV Movie stands as a reliable stopgap. It ties up what went before, and promises a bright future. Nothing better can ever be said.
A Review by Finn Clark 25/5/06
The time is ripe for reappraising the 1996 TVM. It's no longer our Last Hope For The Future, but no less importantly it's no longer The End. Doctor Who survived, thanks to Russell T. Davies. These days, the TVM is that oddity from 1996 that writes out Sylvester McCoy between Survival and Rose. We can fit it into a greater context and hopefully see it more level-headedly.
I always kinda liked it, but watching it in sequence with its neighbouring Who stories was an eye-opener. It's not very good, is it? There's a lot to like in the production, but the script is bollocks. In fact it's the most incoherent gibberish ever to get through the Doctor Who TV production process, which is no small claim. The first half-hour is an extended epilogue to the McCoy era, albeit a charming one, with the real story only beginning once the Doctor and the Master have their new bodies. The Doctor decides he needs a MacGuffin (the beryllium clock - WHY???) and the world gets destroyed and saved by screenwriter whim. I nearly said technobbable, but we're not even given that much. Matthew Jacobs has some strange ideas about time machines, but, what's more, thought them so self-explanatory that justification was unnecessary. You'd have to tie your brain in knots to explain what happened. It's not beyond the wit of fan, but I'd sooner try to rationalise UNIT dating.
Russell T. Davies had a go at redeeming it in Boom Town and The Parting of the Ways, though.
It's interesting in a continuity context. Some of the 8th Doctor's traits were foreshadowed under Cartmel. The 7th Doctor mentions his family in Curse of Fenric and leaves notes for himself in Battlefield, which, although it's a much lesser cheat, could be seen as leading up to the TVM's (mis)use of time travel. Furthermore, McGann's kisses now seem to lead in to the Eccleston era, e.g. The Doctor Dances. The TVM even has our last mention of Gallifrey before the Time War, in a respectful homage that's a more fitting farewell than the messy Trial of a Time Lord.
However the Master being tried and executed on Skaro, to be taken back to Gallifrey? Huh? Whassat? Russell T. Davies's Time War can be interpolated into Dalek stories from Genesis onwards, and the TVM adds a further perspective to that. Dunno what it means, though!
Despite everything, I'm still fond of the TVM. It cares about its characters and works its little socks off to give them snappy scenes and a good joke or two. Its heart is in the right place, even if its brain isn't. "Half-human" indeed. It's amiable and good-natured. Most importantly, it feels like the work of someone who loves Doctor Who, rather than someone who thinks the show was a bit crap and needed more ass-kicking and macho one-liners.
It gets the Doctor right. He's compassionate, whimsical and Doctorish, with some wonderful moments ("I'll shoot myself" or "these shoes: they fit perfectly"). Back in 1996 we were full of praise for Paul McGann, but I'm inclined to give more credit to the script. The actor's having fun, but I came away with a stronger impression of Matthew Jacobs's Doctor than I did of McGann's. Probably his most distinctive moment is the bit near the end where he's showing off at the TARDIS console. Curiously McGann's performance spoke to me more of the Earth Arc Doctor than the "hello birds, hello sky" congenital idiot of the early 8DAs. His cold, pale eyes make him feel remote and distant. I'm thinking particularly of his unreadable expression as he looks back at Grace from the TARDIS doors before disappearing at the end.
In contrast, Sylvester McCoy gets hung out to dry! Lunatics have called it his best performance as the Doctor. Bollocks is it. The script gives him nothing to play with. There's nothing wrong with him here and McCoy gets to demonstrate his forte of physical acting, but it could be seen as a flaw that this movie's lead character is almost entirely passive and silent until he dies. Eccleston's first two minutes in the role gave him more to do.
Daphne Ashbrook holds the film together as Grace. If she hadn't been so strong and vivid, this would have been well-nigh unwatchable. Yee Jee Tso is also fun, but for me the star of the show is Eric Roberts. He may be camping it up somewhat, but how exactly is that inappropriate for the Master? Don't try to tell me that Roger Delgado and Anthony Ainley were never tongue-in-cheek. I might have liked this Master to be scarier, e.g. when killing Chang Lee, but Roberts is clearly having a ball and he's always fun to watch. He has charm and wit, which are important. I love his ad-libs and comedy byplay in the ambulance, for instance. His banter with Chang Lee always makes me chuckle.
Seriously, the Roberts Master may have his critics but things could have been much worse. Consider his shades. Sunglasses are great if you want to look imposing and impassive (e.g. the Terminator), but fortunately Roberts chose to play against them instead of relying on them. Imagine the Master being played as an American Schwarzenegger wannabe in black leather and shades, then shudder. I also enjoy watching the Master's gradual disintegration, from "I had trouble with the walking and the talking" all the way to becoming Dracula destroyed by sunlight. As an aside, no classic series story ever painted him more clearly as the anti-Doctor, with their personal stories paralleled at every point (resurrected together, acquiring new companions together, etc.).
On a production level, obviously the TVM is stunning. The "Oh My God" console room is still my all-time favourite, beating the Eccleston version by virtue of being so damn beautiful. Geoffrey Sax's direction is wonderful, with at least one sequence (the Doctor's regeneration intercut with clips from James Whale's 1931 Frankenstein and scored with a heartbeat) that's worth the entry price all by itself. Ooooh, that's good. Admittedly I cringe at Fat Comedy Guy's "Oh My God" shortly afterwards, but you can't have everything.
The incidental music is terrific all round, in fact. In what's surely a first for the show, three people get an "Incidental Music" credit. At its best it complements the visuals as well as anything we'd ever seen, though I'm not wild about the new arrangement of the theme music. It sounds nice and I like the twinkly piano bit, but it treats Ron Grainer's original as just another tune to be scored for an orchestra. The results are too melodious. It's just another American TV theme, not haunting or wailing. The trumpet section needs shooting, and as for the very end of the closing titles...
Interestingly not only do all four lead characters die and get reborn, but so does the whole world! You can't accuse them of not following through on their theme of resurrection and rebirth.
I like the resonances and ironies in the story. For example it's not bullets that kill the 7th Doctor, but simply being an alien among humans. I enjoy the religious imagery too. The kisses make me roll my eyes, but they don't matter. In 1996 Doctor Who fell into the hands of Americans and the results may not have been perfect, but Jean-Marc Lofficier's The Nth Doctor showed that things could have been much, much worse. It's a bit stupid, but charming.
An American Review by Billy Barron 24/9/06
I noticed that many posters are from the UK and mentioned the Doctor Who movie had good ratings there. However, Fox never gave it a chance to succeed in the US. It was barely advertised. In fact, I never knew when it actually was on and I'm a Doctor Who fan. Needless to say it was doomed in the US before it was ever shown. I didn't see it till years later.
However, if the marketing hadn't already doomed it, the product itself would have. The telemovie reminded me of the movie "Dune". Both are too hard for novices to get into and both make hard to swallow changes for the hardcore fan.
The beginning dragged and dragged and dragged. I like 7th Doctor and I say that. I can't see that the non-Who fan would have made it past that first bit without switching the channel out of boredom. McCoy did okay given the absolutely worthless script he was given.
I've always considered the Master to be the worst thing to ever have happened to Doctor Who. Eric Roberts, the most well-known actor here, drags the Master to new lows that I didn't know were possible. Finn Clark's comment about the Schwarzenegger Master is dead on.
Grace was an unusually boring love interest for an action film. I can't remember a single line or scene of hers really.
The plot, what little of it there was, took forever to unfold and then when it did it was pretty uninteresting. I still don't understand what happened at the end or nor do I really care.
I hated the trappings of Doctor Who which appeared here or there but missed the spirit. The jelly babies were a great example: the film was made for an American audience. Jelly babies were thrown in to draw in the old casual Who fan, but I wouldn't know what a jelly baby is without Doctor Who. Us Americans call them jelly beans.
Now to McGann: I don't get why he gets such raves in other reviews. To me, he was better than Peter Davison, but every other Doctor is light years ahead of him. His look is all wrong to me. He just seem to mope around quite a lot and didn't once excite me.
All in all, a complete debacle in my book. Definitely one of worst Doctor Who stories of all times. Fortunately for it though, The Web Planet and The King's Demons both exist and are much worse.
However, it may have been for the best it failed. Fox was completely the wrong network to run a Doctor Who series and might have damaged the franchise beyond repair if it had done more episodes.
The only good out of this movie in my book is that Russell T. Davies learned some lessons and made Rose everything a relaunch should be.
A Review by Nick Tosoni 19/1/07
I recently had the pleasure of watching this on YouTube a few weeks ago. While this TVM is loaded with so-called "inconsistencies", it still holds a nostalgic place in my heart, because this is the thing which turned me into a Doctor Who fan, 10 years ago. (I was only 9 at the time, and I didn't know any better.)
Where to begin, though? First, I'd like to say that the acting is very, very, good in this. Watching the TVM again, the scene where Sylvester McCoy died on the operating table nearly broke my heart, it was such a violent and needless death. He did very well with that, giving a great exit for his Doctor, even if his subsequent regeneration scene was a bit too comical-looking. (I can excuse all the "fanwank" of having the 7th Doctor in this movie just for that one scene.)
Paul, on the other hand, strikes the perfect note here, both dramatic and Doctorish. Everybody compares him to Tom Baker, and this claim is well-justified. When he gives his triumphant cry of "I... AM... THE... DOCTOR!" you believe it. (Offering the policeman jelly babies was a very nice touch. It's a crying shame these aren't in the New Series.)
Daphne Ashbrook and Yee Jee Tso were very well cast as Dr. Grace Holloway and Chang Lee, very well cast indeed. As for Eric Roberts' Master, though... well, the American accent was entirely excusable plot-wise, but he seemed kind of languid here. That, and the fact that his dark glasses make him look like Roger Waters (of Pink Floyd) struck me as hilarious.
Right, now that the main cast is out of the way, let's move on to the plot. The fact that the Daleks put the Master on trial was ludicrous, mainly because it requires too much explanation. In my opinion, it should have been the Time Lords putting him on trial, then telling the Doctor to dispense with the ashes/do as he pleases with them.
I find the Eye of Harmony stuff totally excusable. A note to all the fans: it's a remote Eye of Harmony within the TARDIS, which acts as a receiver of sorts to the real Eye on Gallifrey. Also, the Beryllium clock stuff is excusable, because the Doctor uses the clock's "chip" to fix the timing mechanism, which got blown out when the Master screwed up the console in the beginning.
As for the half-human element, at least it's only mentioned in passing and not explained further. (The "cloaking device" line, however, was kind of stupid, but then I think the Doctor was trying to express "chameleon circuit" in a way that an American mind could understand.)
Well, that's it. Doctor Who: The Movie. An exercise in nostalgia, told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing. Oh, well, at least I still like it after all these years. 9/10
Improving the TV movie: Eight things to change, four things to keep the same by Emily Monaghan 24/5/08
The TV movie looks good, but is rotten at the very core. Despite that, it's not beyond saving; it's certainly enjoyable, and it's the only time you will ever get the joy of seeing the Eighth Doctor on screen. Here are a few pointers, if they ever decide to give it a rejig. The below contains spoilers.
Eight Things to Change
Ditch the half human comment: why would the Time Lords invent a technology they couldn't use? Seriously, was this bizarre bit of plotting worth the stress it has caused since? They could easily have come up with something else (see: DIY science below).
Don't kill Grace: Grace's death is irrelevant and unnecessary. It adds nothing to the story; there's no reason she couldn't just fall and be knocked out (I believe the apologetic Gary Russell novelisation does something of this sort) Or, indeed, fall and land correctly. To my mind, the only reason they kill her is to bring her back to life, and it's the bringing back to life that I really object to. It's a huge injustice to all the other worthy and deceased people of the Doctor's acquaintance who couldn't conveniently appeal to the TARDIS' sympathetic side. It's a payoff for the naff "holding back death" line used throughout the film. Resurrection always cheapens death - see Torchwood to see it done well - but this was a cheap death to begin with.
But, as a coda to this, do kill Chang Lee. This Master isn't terrible, but with camp lines about "dressing for the occasion", snarling and actually descending into physical violence against the Doctor, instead of continuing the chess-style gentleman's war; he's not entirely himself either. That one moment of murder is perfect: a benevolent smile and true evil for evil's sake all wound up into one.
Don't muck around with time: Doctor Who has a DIY approach to science. We're suffering temporal warp ellipse cut out! What can we do?! Well, anything the writer likes, since neither he nor the audience has the foggiest what temporal warp ellipse cut out actually is. So when the black hole is about to destroy the Earth, he can theoretically solve it any way he likes, as long as he covers his tracks with technobabble. But he doesn't. Instead, he has to come up with a solution that directly contravenes one of the few laws that is fixed in this universe. Let's call it "the second law of time".
You can tell I'm an Adric fan, can't you. If resurrection-for-its-own-sake and turning back time completely were that easy, wouldn't the Doc have done it before?
There are a lot of reasons why the denouement should have been different. Why set the stakes so high that something truly drastic has to occur? If he goes back to the 29th , then a lot of things need explaining. Chang Lee's buddies haven't been killed, and neither has the Doctor. Is Bruce still alive, or has he vanished from time, or what? Not to mention letting Grace and Chang back out into a world where they still exist in a different form, which genuinely could cause trouble.
On the other hand, it does utilise time travel. The TARDIS is often little more than a plot randomiser; I've always had a fondness for episodes which engage with the possibilities and problems having that ability brings. And, as a supposed "backdoor pilot", and something intended for new fans to the show, putting something about time is an important piece of setup. So maybe this isn't an entirely lost cause - just give it a bit more thought.
Remove Frankenstein: look at me, ma! I can crosscut! After decades of static camera, Somebody Who Has Been To Film School has got their hands on the franchise, and decided to make it "cinematic". Sometimes it works (the shots of clocks, the general sense of pacy-ness). Sometimes it's just pathetically naive and obvious, such as here, with the Doctor's regeneration intercut with the "it's alive!!!" of the classic Frankenstein movie. Just because you can, it doesn't mean you should. The jury's still out on murder-to-Puccini however...
Why does the hospital have a trashed up wing? No, seriously. Nice scene with the mirrors and rain and chaos, but if it was a metaphor it was heavy handled and unnecessary; and if it wasn't, then what the hell happened there? Does your local ward have a room with smashed glass, broken dolls and rusty junk, just in case someone feels like expressing existential despair?
Don't let Grace save the day - because I'm just a normal Earth Girl too, and it's nice to know that when he turns up and it's down to me to save the universe, I'll know exactly which wires to twist...
Don't let the Doctor use the word vacation: I may be wrong, perhaps this word is used in English too, but it's always struck me as very American. Fair enough, he's a Gallifreyan, so it's all foreign, but it still felt false for me. I'd endured a lot by that point, my nitpick-radar was on full blast. Much better was the Master correcting Grace's grammar, which is perfect characterisation for him (and nice to see the Doctor doing the same in the recent Sontaran Stratagem).
Don't let Fox do it: this was always a bad idea. Fox hates fandom. Fox stays up late at night planning on how to do murder to good shows, annoy the loyal fans and kick puppies. Futurama? Firefly? As such, was handing the franchise to them really a good idea?
And four things to keep the same
The Doctor: can anyone fault him, really? Ageless, magical, packed full of that Doctor charm that lets him get away with anything. If I use the word "smile", do you know the one I mean? The beam that makes everything OK. The use of sleight of hand is a brilliant new addition to his character, while all the old ones - the mercy, the brilliance, occasionally the heroism - are in place. This ninety minutes launched a character which has successfully inspired the books et al that came after. He also namedrops with brilliant style.
The design: this film is beautiful in every single way. Someone has misread "bigger on the inside" as bloody massive, bigger than any realistic building could ever be, and the TARDIS is all the more lovely for it. Finally, we get to see the library we always knew must be in there somewhere! The lived-in bits are cosy; the mechanical bits are steampunked up, and it feels alive again. I also love the huge console room; after years of emergencies, the Doctor's obviously cottoned on that he can't afford to be too far away from it! Even the leaves feel terribly right. The costumes are gorgeous too - not to mention the leading man. Should the Doctor be good looking? In general, I don't think it hurts, or matters. Here in particular, even when the plot is shot to hell, the dialogue's dodgy and continuity and canon are completely out of whack, at least you have something nice to look at...
Keep the kiss: yup, you heard me. At least the first one. It cements his absolute joy to be alive. It's not so much love for her (she has just stuck a scalpel in his gut...), as love for everything. As such, it's an uplifting moment, celebrating life, not to mention being young and able to get away with it for the first time in centuries. Aside from the shock of looking in the mirror, regenerating must be a wonderful feeling, a sort of cosmic shower.
Plus, retain it out of pity for the strict purists. If they hadn't been so worked up about this, they would only have paid better attention to the dire miseries of the plot as detailed above, which are twice as unpleasant.
The first 15 minutes: Paul McGann, as I've already observed, makes a fine Doctor. It's just a pity for him that he passes good taste and smart plotting on the way in, because his regeneration is the point at which things go downhill.
It all starts so well! The theme tune! The building sense of menace, before the Master assumes both a form and knowledge of fashion! The Seventh Doctor getting a runaround that gorgeous redesigned TARDIS, and then redefining the cliche of "the Doctor meets trouble very soon after leaving it" by doing it instantly.
And what a departure! The classical death for a hero is doing something heroic. For one with the stature of the Doctor, this should be no less than saving his companions, the world or the universe - preferably all three. Even facing your fears is a noble way to go. But a medical botch up? How unpleasant for a guy who has faced off death a thousand times. It's a situation we can all understand, and as such more real than any alien nasty. No calm acknowledgment that the way has been prepared for; this is a traumatic and scarily realistic way to go, a series of nasty accidents. And it's very refreshing.
I've seen many comments suggesting the film would have been less alienating to start with an already-regenerated Eighth Doctor, much in the way the Ninth turned up and let us into the world gradually during Rose. Maybe that would have been better; pity to lose this bit though, as it's the only bit that rang true...
I can see Sylvester McCoy now, rubbing his hands with glee when he reads a few pages further on, and discovers he's escaped before the grot sets in.