I watched the Davison era in broadcast order for the first time, then
read up on their production afterwards. I thought things as a result
of these experiences.
- Davison's best performances come from scripts that aren't written for his Doctor.
- The wrong people were in charge, and learned nothing from their mistakes or successes.
- Doctor Who's production style wasn't ready for the best directors.
I will now expand on these.
Kinda
was
written for Tom Baker. Robert Holmes wrote the Doctor's dialogue like
he used to, but with a situation that uniquely worked for Davison.
Anyone who'd written for the show already simply wrote the Doctor
they were used to, the safety version that relies on the actor's
interpretation for effervescence. This is noticeable in Frontios
when
Christopher Bidmead gives the Doctor a situation where he can offer
immediate and vital help, which rarely happens. It allows the Fifth
Doctor a brief moment of heroism without fallibility, the one-note
characterisation (and costuming) that overrides most of his tenure.
His
companions suffer from this too, and their bickering reveals little
about them other than their already established characteristic.
There's nothing for anyone to bounce off, no fleshing out of anyone
beyond their spec sheet. This undermines a lot of credibility,
resulting in Tegan wearing the same clothes for an entire series,
seeming obsessed with airplanes to the point of insanity. The
Doctor's fallibility, likewise, leads to him insisting that the
Silurians are honourable in Warriors
of the Deep,
whereas clearly some of the Silurians are honourable in Doctor
Who and the Silurians,
but all the ones in Warriors
of the Deep are
just generic monsters. A lot of people are filling roles in the
story, rather than being characters in their own right. Davison does
a lot with the role, but when he gets a script intended for the
Fourth or a more typical Doctor, he does more.
In
Frontios
Bidmead
writes the TARDIS crew's bickering more as teasing, playing it for
laughs. It helps me imagine them as people who might travel together,
whereas the arguing and general lack of fun just makes me wonder why
Tegan, especially, bothers. Hence her departure doesn't work, because
it never seemed fun for her at any point. This is part of a larger
problem of consistency and realism. No one
in
the Davison era seems to react to events or speak like a real person,
which is a shame because some of the character arcs and departures
are potentially excellent.
Which
brings me onto my second point. Caves
of Androzani undeniably
works better when you've gone through the Fifth Doctor's life in
order, knowing everything that's happened to lead him to this point.
However, this strikes me more as dumb luck than design. Tegan and
Turlough's departures do add to the Doctor's, but they're both
attempts at pathos that assume the characters are something else. The
Doctor's death works in the moment, because of what's gone before,
but what's gone before doesn't work.
On
a purely character and story level this is because Eric Saward's
version of Doctor
Who would
only work with better writers and directors than those available.
Saward wasn't a good enough writer to pull off many of his own ideas,
and JNT made things harder for him. JNT was, as is clearly evidenced,
not good at storytelling, but was good at imposing casting and story
choices onto other people. He was good at publicity, he was decent at
budget balancing, but his hiring choices were frequently flawed and
his personality led to talented people not working on the show (Peter
Grimwade being the most notable example, Christopher Priest to a
lesser extent, and of course his preference not to use writers who
had written for the show). JNT also hired Saward on the basis of The
Visitation.
The
Visitation is
twenty-five minutes of story stretched out to a hundred, directed by
Peter Moffat with all the verve of a smaller-than-expected-jobbie
breaking the meniscus. There are a lot of good quips, but these
aren't enough to hide the fact that nothing is happening. The
structure is three episodes of padding to delay the finale, which
turns out to be a small scuffle. There's something in there, though,
to suggest that Saward as a writer isn't bad, but nothing about The
Visitation screams
'Let this man have creative control of the show for the next five
years'. And yet.
Both
Christopher Bidmead and his successor Antony Root suggested Saward as
a potential Script Editor for Doctor
Who for
a brief period before Root returned. Root did not return. Saward
worked on Season 19, but it wasn't until the following series he had
a chance to commission stories. JNT meanwhile, brought in Ian Levine
and took out the sonic screwdriver. The implication here is that
Doctor
Who is
a show catering to middle aged men who really like clever ways of
unlocking doors.
Earthshock
is
not about clever ways of unlocking doors. It's one of the unsung keys
to its success. Saward nails the pacing, and smooths over the cracks
in the story with stunningly effective confidence. 'It is when you've
got an alien machine over-riding your computer' is a line that, had
it occurred in the RTD era, would be pilloried, but here the sheer
nerve of such obvious bullshit makes it work. The production team are
tonally unified, Peter Grimwade put a hell of a shift in. The story
is a success and, as such, ruins Doctor
Who until
1987.
From it, we get the idea that bringing back old monsters is
intrinsically good. Oddly, the story would work nearly as well
with the Sontarans or Ice Warriors, the Cybermen are only necessary
by virtue of their surprise return, nothing else in the story
necessitates their appearance.
From it, we get the idea that bringing back things from the show's
past is intrinsically good. Thus, the Silurians and Sea Devils come
back in the sheer concentrated idiocy that is Warriors of the
Deep.
From
it, we get the idea that Doctor
Who is
at its best when it is dark and gritty.
This
idea has some merit if you look at fan polls, but it forgets that
without contrast between the stories the impact is lessened.
From
it, we get the idea that Doctor
Who works
well as a cynical action-adventure show.
Doctor Who cannot
make Earthshock
every
month. The production simply can't take it.
From it, Peter Grimwade gets chosen to direct the
ultimately-cancelled Dalek story for Season 20, and from there JNT
falls out with him for the flakiest of reasons.
The
fallout results in Season 22, essentially. Earthshock
and
Androzani
lend
credence to the idea that Doctor
Who should
always be like this, when clearly the impact of these is based on a
combination of surprise and rarity. If Doctor
Who was
like Androzani
every
week it wouldn't be Doctor
Who.
The nasty undercurrent that starts with bubbling aliens in Pudding
Lane increases until it becomes a stick to beat the show with,
without the well-meaning nearly-hero as a contrast to take the edge
off.
The
Doctor's story between Earthshock
and
Androzani
is
almost excellent. Davison's Doctor finally triumphing by saving
someone, Peri, who he doesn't even like that much. The problem is the
nagging sense that the story is only there by accident. This
undermines the arc more than absolute fuckery of Warriors
of the Deep (a
story that shows how difficult it is to balance dark and gritty with
Doctor
Who's
lack of good writers and directors, and JNT's insistence that the
production go ahead despite the end result being inevitably
compromised by a change in schedule).
Put
simply, the Doctor's arc is there if you want it, but the character
himself doesn't seem aware of it. Great as the cliffhanger to
Androzani
Part
Three is, there's no real recognition from the Doctor that he's lost
people, and this time it's not going to happen. It's all referencing
the immediate story, not the longer one. There's no acknowledgement
by the show of any intention to make the Doctor react against
himself, which is a huge open goal missed. This isn't isolated to
this particular part of Doctor
Who
though, it's just that with so many regular characters it really
brings it to the forefront.
Speaking
of Androzani
and
cliffhangers, Graeme Harper eh? Fucking hell. So much effort and
energy and yet he didn't actually get all his shots completed. The
Doctor was supposed to fight the Magma Beast, but they ran out of
time. Serendipity, really. Also reminiscent of Warriors'
Gate which
Harper directed bits of, when Paul Joyce's ambition got in the way of
How Things Were Done. Peter Grimwade was an effective director but to
do so he didn't endear himself to people.
Direction
which stands up now in the Davison era was done by people who ignored
conventions. British TV simply wasn't up to the standards which
Doctor
Who needed
to have to make the show soar. This isn't anyone in the production
team's fault, though. It's just how television was. Warriors
of the Deep might
have a script written by an edgelord with a PG-gore-horn, but it
could have looked
amazing
in the hands of Harper, Grimwade or Joyce. However, to make Doctor
Who you
needed to get the shots in the can and move on, and the BBC weren't
going to give the show the format, time or money to change this.
The
impression you get, borne out by the rest of the decade, is that the
BBC had no interest in making Doctor
Who an
enticing prospect for anyone to work on, allowing the show to burrow
and snuggle in its niche until it was too late. Thus you get
directors who just wanted to get the shots in the can, script editors
promoted too soon, and producers who arrived in the job sixteen years
too early. Everyone, however well-meaning, seems to have regarded
Doctor
Who as
something other than its best self.
It's a miracle that any of it was good.
-->
Some of it was even brilliant.
I should probably write about that at some point.
No comments:
Post a Comment