If 'The Aztecs' is Shakespearean, then 'The Crusade' certainly is and not just because part of the script is written in iambic pentameter. The acting throughout is exemplary, the characterisation superb, and the principle villain a truly repellent individual. If Whitaker's previous two-parters were light on plot, then this story suggests that that was a limitation of the story time available, rather than a lack of ability on his part. The entire story is virtually perfect, with convincing sets, excellent costumes and the aforementioned acting, most notably Bernard Kay as Saladin, Julian Glover as King Richard, Jean Marsh as Joanna, and Walter Randall as El Akir. In addition, Douglas Camfield's direction is superb, helping to make the story seem less set-bound than the equally impressive but slightly stagy 'The Aztecs'. Every actor in the guest cast acts with great conviction, and there is not one wooden performance. As in 'The Romans', even the minor characters are well served, from the obsequious Ben Daheer, to the snooty Chamberlain, the self-serving Luigi Ferrigo, and the rather angry Earl of Leicester. 

As the Lionheart, Julian Glover almost steals the show. He shows a range of emotions, and cuts a tortured figure, exhausted by the war that he has pursued but determined not to give up until he has seen Jerusalem. Given that he tries to marry off his sister in the name of politics and that he is, basically, invading a foreign land in the cause of religious persecution, I find it difficult to have much sympathy for him, but he is nevertheless a compelling character. The scene in which he and Joanna argue about her would-be wedding to Saphadin is fantastic, both characters brimming with anger and each actor totally convincing. The moment when Richard raises his hand to strike his sister and then stops himself is especially powerful. Despite this loss of control however, he can also be suitably commanding when necessary, as befits the leader of a large army. Richard's opposition fares just as well, and it is to Whitaker's credit that he manages to avoid racism in his portrayal of the Saracens. True, blacked up actors are now a thing of the past, but from a character standpoint, the Saracens are just as diverse as their English enemies. Saladin, like Richard, is a commanding figure, and in many ways seems wiser and more deserving of respect. He is thoughtful, and intelligent, and also merciful – he treats the captive de Preaux with respect and contemptuously dismisses El Akir's sadistic suggestions as to what to do with Barbara. He allows Ian to search for Barbara, noting that "the brave deserve their favours". On the other hand, his suggestion that if Barbara cannot justify her presence in his court he will dispose of her is delivered with just enough edge to be all too believable, implying that, when required to be, he can be just as ruthless as the Lionheart. In episode three, when Saphadin receives Richard's offer of Joanna's hand, he is cautious, realizing that it is a desperate last attempt to avoid all-out war but also prepared to allow the marriage if the offer proves genuine; again, Kay impresses during this scene, convincingly revealing Saladin's keen mind and, like Glover, demonstrating that this man also has the respect of his subjects. The other Saracens are just as convincing – Ben Daheer is clearly a regular man trying to make a living in a troubled world, whilst Haroun is a man whose world has been torn apart and who is desperate to avenge his wife and son, protect one of his daughters, and free the other. And then there is El Akir…

El Akir is one of the most unpleasant villains to appear in Doctor Who to date, and the implication as to what his actual crimes are, is surprisingly adult in nature for Doctor Who at that time. He is a murderer and a rapist, who slaughtered Haroun's wife and son and took his daughter captive, adding her to his harem. Randall (previously Tonila in 'The Aztecs') plays him as vicious and sadistic, without ever letting the character go over the top into pantomime territory and thus making seem him all the more evil. After Barbara humiliates him, he is obsessed with revenge for the entire story, relentlessly pursuing her and determined to break her spirit. I noted when I was discussing 'The Romans', that Nero's advances towards Barbara were performed in such a way as to make them seem comedic in spite of the implied sexual harassment and possible intended sexual assault; here however, there is no such lighter side to El Akir's obvious intent to rape and torture her. His line at the end of episode three ("the only pleasure left for you is death – and death is very far away") is utterly chilling. It is appropriate, in the end, that his death is very much a blink-and-you'll-miss-it affair – whereas Tegana got to go out fighting and ultimately chose to die by his own hand, El Akir gets no such final battle. A knife in the back kills him, as he threatens Barbara in his harem – he is an animal, and as such he is butchered. 

The regulars continue to shine amidst this impressive guest acting. The Doctor is his usual wily self in the court of King Richard, neatly avoiding being (rightfully!) accused of theft, and trying to stay one step ahead of the court intrigue that eventually overtakes him and Vicki. His final scene with Richard is superb, as he graciously accepts the King's reasons for continuing to support Leicester and outwardly blame the Doctor for the failure of his plans to marry Joanna off to Saphadin, and parts on good terms with him, reassuring Richard that he will see Jerusalem, which seems to give the weary King the courage he needs to face the coming battle. 'The Crusade' also has one of those eminently quotable lines about the Doctor, as Joanna tells him "There is something new in you. Yet something older than the sky. I sense that I can trust you". Vicki unfortunately is again relegated to sidekick, and gets very little to do, but remains her usual plucky self. And it is rather endearing when she tells the Doctor that the TARDIS feels like her home by now and that she can't imagine being anywhere else. Barbara of course faces the worst trials here, first kidnapped and forced to agree to entertain Saladin's court, and then of course facing the deeply unpleasant threat of El Akir's less-than-tender mercies. She continues to impress with her bravery, especially when she surrenders to the guards in Haroun's house, in order to save his daughter from discovery. The fact that Haroun obviously thought death to be better fate than slavery to El Akir makes her sacrifice and bravery all the more impressive. Ian too fares well, here getting knighted by Richard the Lionheart. He doesn't get any sword-fighting to do, but he does outwit Ibrahim and later the Earl of Leicester, thus allowing the TARDIS crew to finally escape and leave. 

I said that 'The Crusade' is virtually perfect – it has too problems. Firstly, Vicki's disguise as a boy would be more in keeping with one of the comedy historicals (and is of course magnificently sent up in 'The Plotters') and is rather unconvincing, especially given that it takes close inspection from both Joanna and the Chamberlain for anyone to believe that she is a girl. Say what you want about Maureen O'Brien, but she doesn't look like a boy. The second problem is Ibrahim, who provides comic relief and gets a couple of great lines ("my brother… a miserable thief"), but who is rather clichйd, coming across as an Arabic Fagin. These niggles aside, 'The Crusade' is one of the finest historical stories, and is heartily recommended. And I'd strongly recommend getting the Loose Cannon recon of episodes two and four to complement the BBC boxed set.

The First Doctor story 'The Crusade' has not survived whole: we now possess only the first episode and the third. The visual quality of these episdodes is variable, with the first being particularly bad, and the third marginally better. The soundtrack to both is good, as these things go. In addition to these episodes, there exist audio recordings (made during the original television broadcasts) of the second and fourth episodes. These are poor in quality, but they do at least provide us with evidence of the acting and music in the missing episodes. Enjoying 'The Crusade' is thus a struggle against problematic circumstances. Only if we had a complete recording of this thoroughly historical adventure would we be able to know properly what it is like. So any real enjoyment comes from individual scenes, performances, and other such elements, which allow us to see what the complete article may have been like.

One thing we do know would have been constant throughout is the look of 'The Crusades', and the design of sets and costumes, for example, does at least make looking at 'The Crusades' a pleasure. Little props that characters can fiddle with and small details in the background all contribute to a sense of time and history, although it has to be said that this is history as seen by 'Doctor Who', and there are doubtless inconsistencies and inaccuracies aplenty. The scale of television productions will always limit the scope and breadth of the visual environment, but the creative team get around this by using the compact nature of certain scenes to enhance tension and atmosphere. Lighting is used well, in small spaces, with flames and such things casting interesting shadows at all the right moments. And this is combined effectively with tight, controlled camera-work to create a Doctor Who story that looks, at moments, as though it had a far bigger budget than it did in fact have. There is nothing better on television than a really good close-up of someone looking angry combined with an anxious face filling the background; simple things, constructed with a little care, can have a huge effect. Sadly, it is not all this good, and there are frequently moments that jar with the professional look of certain scenes. The fight scene in episode one is one such jarring moment: a narrative muddle that is best completely forgotten about.

Although 'The Crusades' overall is not a marvel, some of the performances are positively cinematic. Some of the stuff on display here is not what you usually see on genre television. An exchange between Julian Glover and Jean Marsh in episode three is the best surving scene, in terms of writing, visual effect, and dramatic power. These two actors both appeared in Doctor Who again, but it is this scene in 'The Crusade' that I will now remember them for. Other actors, too numerous to name, also put in subtle and complex appearances, the weakest probably being (ironically) the show regular, Maureen O'Brien. It may be that Vicki is supposed to be fragile and delicate, but when set against the rest of the story, she just comes across as shallow and wet excuse for a character.

The Doctor, the most important regular of them all, is another kettle of fish. It is less that specific lines are delivered excellently, or that he is written for very well, and more that at specific and key dramatic moments Hartnell simply 'looks' just right. His facial expressions and body language convey a vast amount of information to the audience. Hartnell's Doctor is cunning without being devious, belligerent without being arrogant, and it is only a pity that he didn't have more to do, or that there wasn't more happening for him to react to.

And this is a problem, more generally, in 'The Crusades': very little seems to happen, from what I can gather from the surviving episodes and audio recordings. The first episode is poorly paced, and the second episode is full of ineffectual dialogue. The third episode feels more dramatic thanks to a couple of powerful scenes, but the story itself isn't compelling enough, and Barbara, a character full of potential, spends of lot of time apparently just looking on anxiously.

For the video release William Russell was filmed, in character as Ian, in three 'linking' segments. He looks back at his travels with the Doctor, as though reminiscing with a friend, and these little fillers, plugging the story's holes with little synopses, are pleasant to watch (if a tiny bit nostalgic in conception and a little shoddy in execution). Overall, however, 'The Crusades' suffers both for being incomplete, and for being far less entertaining than it might have been. Worth a watch, though, for the argument that links (through Glover and Marsh) 'City of Death' to 'Battlefield'.

A Hartnell tale that, admittedly, has a few problems (as most of his stories do since the series was, very much, "finding its feet" during this era). But, in several ways, it's also very much ahead of its time. And is, overall, a pretty enjoyable runaround. Considering when it was made. 

Its biggest problem, of course, is that it really does go very "cheesy sci-fi" in places. Even a little too much for 60s Who. We have references to "ray guns" and some really awful dialogue, in general. One aspect of the script that grates on me hardest that no one seems to remark on is the way the Commander must always call the governor "illustruous". It's bad dialogue delivered poorly and it really adds to that overall downright silliness of the way the story is executed. Then, of course, there's the notorious line about "arms falling into Xeron hands" that the Discontinuity Guide so loves to pick on (for ample reason - it is probably one of the cheesiest lines ever in the history of the show). 

Another really "cheesy" problem in this story are the Moroks and Xerons. Doctor Who's attempt to create Star Trek aliens by doing something wierd to their eyebrows or foreheads! Though such attempts are rare in Who (usually they try to be much more imaginative in their creature construction) the incredible cheapness of the make-up work that was done to "alienise" the characters is just plain laughable and it's very difficult to take any of these characters seriously because they just look so ridiculous. 

Our final major problem in this story is some of the very deliberate padding. There seems to be a lot more discussion between characters about what's happening in the plot than is genuinely needed. Not just some of the extended conversations that the TARDIS crew has about their plight, but those Xerons can really go on forever too, sometimes! It becomes blatantly obvious that the author put this sort of stuff in because he just didn't have enough story. Something that I can somehow tolerate in a 6-parter but when four episodes has this much unnecessary dialogue it really makes you wonder if the script was ever worth producing! 

However, for all its flaws, there's a lot about "Space Museum" to like too. 

Many have heaped praise on the effectiveness of the first episode. And it deserves that praise. Some of the creepiest black and white Who you'll find. And, though I love most of what "The Mind Robber" was about, it could learn a lesson or two from this episode about using cheap visuals to create surreal atmosphere. But what a lot folks don't seem to catch about this episode is the extra "layer" it adds to the whole story. 

This could have easily been a "the Doctor arrives on a planet and overthrows a tyranny" plotline and be done with it right there. But the fact that Glyn Jones threw in the whole extra premise of "slipping a time track" adds so much more sophistication to this tale. Many of 60s and even early 70s Who could stand adding extra layers to their plotline like this story did but this trend really didn't start to set in til years after Space Museum was produced. I loved late 70s and 80s Who because of its abundance (or even overabundance) of plot threads. Having so many stories told at once somehow made it "better" than a lot of other sci-fi T.V. Almost as if you got "more bang for your buck" because the plots were so thickly layered. But we didn't see much of this in older Who, thus making Space Museum seem almost ahead of its time, in this sense.

It was also the first story to really explore the nature of time rather than just use time travel as a device for the show's premise. Another nice layer of sophistication for the story. And though some of the conversations regarding destiny and free will do get a bit tedious, it's still neat to see the show become so philosophical during a time when it tried, more oftentimes than not, to just give us bug-eyed monsters and black and white morals. 

The other compliment that should go to Mister Jones for his script is the way he structures the societies he's created. Particularly the Moroks. As someone else remarked in their review, it was nice to get something a little different out of the millitant alien race. Rather than just being nasty intergalactic conquerors, they're intergalactic conquerors on a social decline. Thus giving a very different "flavour" to the whole story that, again, wouldn't normally be seen in the series for many years to come. 

We also get, in amongst all the cheesiness, some very strong moments in the storyline too. I loved how useful Vicki was in this adventure. Her and Susan were usually just meant to scream and trip over things but it's, pretty well her that saves the day this time by getting the Xerons to revolt. And, thankyou Mister Jones, for actually remembering she's from a future Earth society and might, therefore, have some technical skills. Rather than just use her for a few lame jokes about how the future might view life in the 60s like so many other authors did when they wrote Vicki. 

The confrontation between the Doctor and Lobos during the interrogation was also a really memorable moment. Again, something that makes the story a bit ahead of its time. The Doctor usually took these sort of situations quite seriously during this era rather than have fun with his tormentor like he did. And I rather enjoyed the sequence because it was played up a bit for laughs. 

In the final analysis, this story almost seems a bit "bi-polar". Jumping very suddenly from really bad to really good over and over. But, unlike some of the other stories the show has made over the years that went incredibly cheesy in places, there's enough sophistication to this tale to save it from being considered total trash. Even enough sophistication, for me, at least, to make it a story I rather enjoy.

Crap. Rubbish. Caca de toro. A lot in “The Space Museum” is—yep, I’m gonna give into the clichй—cringeworthy. I don’t mean the another-base-under-seige-please, a-good-companion-is-one-with-big-breasts, CSO-backgrounds-are-cool, Cartmel-is-a-genius crap. I mean the real, even-for-an-episode-of-Doctor-Who, deal. 

The guest stars almost uniformly make poor acting choices. Nerve gas described as dangerous is survived for the better part of a whole episode with the use of a flimsy, not to mention shared, handkerchief. The music from about the first half of episode two forward is questionably appropriate, at best. Vicki reprograms a security computer despite never having displayed the slightest inclination for such work before. Worse, how is she’s clever enough to reprogram a computer she’s never seen before, but too damn stupid to realize that the easiest, best hope for overcoming the time paradox was just to send one person back to the TARDIS to wait inside while the other three made their ways back separately? As if that weren’t enough, there’s the unbelievable gall of the final moments of episode four: the Dalek teaser at the end makes “The Chase” look like we’re gonna be in for a freakin’ epic. And don’t get me started on the explanation of the time loop that causes the central plot issue in the first place. 

So, yeah, I get why many don’t like this thing. Still.

I love this story.

Its subtle good far outweighs the obvious flaws. Taken as a whole, the very best thing about “Museum” is that it’s a direct answer to “The Aztecs”, a story I feel is massively overrated. Both stories are directly centered on the notion of “changing history”, but only this one gives an answer that would make Christopher Eccleston proud. Here the TARDIS crew is, in the Tenth Doctor’s words, “part of events". There’s no hypocrisy here: there’s a Doctor and his companion proud of influencing others to seize control of their lives. Vicki might as well be Rose. The Doctor and his TARDIS crew are here in full, unapologetic rebellion of the Time Lords. History damn well can and should be altered if helps some kids be better people and it saves our heroes’ hides.

And what better hides they are. “Museum” gives us strong performances by all the regulars. JNT should have been watching this episode before he blamed some of the problem of season 19 on a “crowded TARDIS”. Sorry, no, but a four-person crew works, in the right hands. The companion interaction, along with the solo journeys, are fair, equitable and what’s more, meaningful. I may not have liked the details of the time loop plot, but I certainly enjoyed its effects. A seemingly insoluble problem tends to take people to places they’ve not traveled, and for all its technobabble, the time loop certainly gives us an interesting Barbara, Ian and Vicki.

As for those guest stars, yeah, the script was there for them and the actors—not to mention the costume and make-up departments—blew it. But what we get is nevertheless intriguing to me. See, I guess I read the two groups—the Xerons and the Moroks as equally impotent, both needin’ a good, Doctorly kick up the backside. I like the idea that the status quo is being maintained on inertia more than reasoned action. This is a disused part of the stale, old Morok empire, and the contingent here are very little more than the dregs of the Morok military. They really are about as competent as modern-day museum guards. For me, it’s extremely satisfying that there’s no explanation as to why the Morok Governor is so mean-spirited; it’s been like this for so long he’s actually got no explanation to be as he is.

In a story that is about predestination paradoxes for our heroes, it’s altogether appropriate that the featured characters should be trapped themselves. To get out of their time trap, the TARDIS crew must make the two groups on the planet break out of this feeble (or what some reviewers have called “boring”) stalemate. 

The nature of that status quo appeals to me as an American. I read the whole situation as a loose metaphor for the American Revolution, with the Moroks being the kind of not-so-prime British officers serving in North America, the Xerons being Americans in the 1760s, Vicki being Sam Adams, and the rest of the TARDIS crew being the indecisive-but-ultimately-effective French. Maybe it’s a stretch, and I’m sure it’s not intentional, but that’s just what I saw in the story. Even if the writer didn’t intend that close a level of metaphor, I think the story deserves great credit for two key themes: a revolution ain’t a revolution until action has been taken, and an empire that forgets its history is doomed to fall. 

Most importantly, though, the episode gives an early glimmer of the “modern” Doctor. Gone is the crusty old, “You can’t change history,” Time Lord of season one. In his place is the man who inspires change. “My dear Barbara,” he serenely says as he’s facing death, “You must try and remember that in the short time we’ve been on this planet, we’ve met people, spoken to them, and—who knows?—we might have even influenced them.” 

This is the Doctor I adore, and I don’t mind having to wade through the crap to find him. Good thing Russell T. Davies apparently has a shovel, too.

"We must have changed the future... we must have done!"

The Space Museum is one of those adventures that has a nice set up, but what follows is rather less than expected. The opening episode sets things up nicely rather like an episode of 'The Twilight Zone'. The TARDIS materializes on the planet Xeros, but seem to have jumped a time track and have temporarily become out of synch with normal space-time. As they explore the museum itself, they make a shocking & startling discovery... future versions of themselves encased in glass, and set up as exhibits in the museum itself. Now it is a race against time to prevent the vision they witnessed from coming to pass.

Unfortunately, the episodes that follow don't exactly live up adequately to what the first episode sets up. The remainder of the adventure in itself is alright, but nothing too exciting or anything to give praise about. Not to say that it's bad, just average, and definitely could've been done better. How exactly, I really don't know. I will say that there are some good ideas. 

The idea of a museum in space is definitely an idea worth exploring in science ficition, as a means of seeing what strange and unusual alien items would be put on display. It is something that fuels the imagination beyond the boundaries of what we know and are familiar with on Earth. Setting the story on a planet with a museum on it is still very much in keeping with why the Doctor travels in the first place... not to fight aliens, but to gain knowledge about the universe.

Anyway, I must say that the Moroks aren't all that convincing as villains and the army of young Xerons just didn't seem too convincing as an oppressed people hoping to start a revolution. Although I do theorize that the reason most of Xerons are shown as young men is some sort of allegory on teenage rebellion against the oppression of adult authority. 

Each of the regular cast members do well with the material, but the person that really gets to shine the most is Maureen O'Brien as Vicki. She shows herself to be enthusiastic and a real go-getter. You can clearly see at certain points that she'd rather be doing something constructive and meaningful rather than stand around arguing and asking a whole stream of pointless questions (much like what Ian and Barbara were doing). Vicki simpathizes with the Xerons and it is she that helps to instigate the means by which future events are altered; by helping the Xerons with their revolution by reprogramming the computer system which allows access to the armory. 

The overall running theme is the idea of whether or not fate or destiny can be changed. It is something they all grapple with in the course of events, always with a certain about of doubt hanging over them as to whether the actions they take are the ones that will change their future or lead them down the very path that takes them to the very vision they witnessed at the start of the 4-part serial. 

All in all, there are some nice ideas, but they don't sustain themselves all that well. However, the adventure that would follow would be something that would start a chain reaction of changes that would ultimately ensure the show's longevity and ensure that nothing would ever be the same again.

Primarily, “The Smugglers” is a vehicle for establishing the Doctor’s newest companions, Ben and Polly. Following on directly from the end of “The War Machines,” the first episode starts with a lot of energy as the new additions to the TARDIS crew – Ben in particular – have trouble adjusting to the fact that they have just travelled in a time machine. Initially this is handled quite well by Hayles, but sadly Polly is convinced unbelievably soon and even Ben comes round to the idea far quicker than I feel is in keeping with his character.

The plot of this season-opening four-parter also leaves a lot to be desired. For the most part it revolves around several antagonistic factions of smugglers / pirates. Often this translates onto the screen as pure, unadulterated cheese – for example we have Captain Pike who, surprise, surprise, has a hook instead of a hand and a Church warden who, surprise, surprise, used to be first mate on a pirate ship before he found God! Moreover, Doctor Who’s production team may have changed considerably since “The Crusade” but they are still making the same mistakes – how on earth they expect us to believe that Polly, a beautiful woman, could be mistaken for “a lad” I have no idea! I’m willing to suspend my disbelief so far that I can believe that an alien from an ancient society travels through time and space in a Police Box, but there’s no way I’m having that Anneke Wills looks like a “lad”!

Believe it or not though, having now ‘watched’ “The Smugglers” twice (by playing the BBC Radio Collection’s release of the soundtrack in synch with John Cura’s telesnaps) I’ve actually become quite fond of it. It’s a harmless, light-hearted piece of melodrama that allows William Hartnell’s Doctor to have a little bit of fun! He gets to hunt treasure; Ben and Polly get to pretend to be wizards… it’s all good fun.

The serial hasn’t even dated that badly compared to some of its contempories – the pirate ship sets are realistic enough and scenes near the Church and on the beach (from the telesnaps) look pretty convincing. I’m just not sure how wise it was to call a black pirate “Jamaica”…