The Idiot's Lantern

Sunday, 28 May 2006 - Reviewed by Paul Clarke

Having penned В‘The Unquiet DeadВ’ for series one, Mark Gatiss returns with more of the same for series two in the shape of В‘The IdiotВ’s LanternВ’. What is striking about the episode is that, in the classic series, it would have been unremarkable, whereas in the new series, so resolutely traditional is it in so many ways, it stands out as an oddity. So traditional is it in fact, that in many respects it feels almost wholly unoriginal.

Doctor Who has always worn its influences on its sleeve, but В‘The Unquiet DeadВ’ draws so heavily on both the seriesВ’ past and other sources that it that it feels less like homage and more like plagiarism. Wittingly or unwittingly, Gatiss draws upon various Doctor Who stories here; the disembodied megalomaniac executed for crimes committed who demands bodies and cries out В“Hungry!В” is hugely reminiscent of В‘Paradise TowersВ’, whilst the DoctorВ’s struggle atop and aerial to prevent his enemy interfering with a broadcast recalls В‘LogopolisВ’. The Doctor rigging up a MacGuffin to defeat the monster invokes large chunks of the Pertwee era, specifically В‘Spearhead from SpaceВ’ as the machine malfunctions at the last minute and the DoctorВ’s assistant has to hurriedly effect repairs. And it isnВ’t just Doctor Who that В‘The IdiotВ’s LanternВ’ draws inspiration from: nasty things coming out of televisions have been explored in various films from Poltergeist to The Ring, and the ending, in which the Doctor traps the villain on a betamax tape and then promises to record over it is straight out of The Mighty Boosh episode В‘The Priest and the BeastВ’.

В‘The IdiotВ’s LanternВ’ also suffers from lapses in logic. The faceless victims of the Wire are all very creepy, but why exactly does a creature that feeds on the electrical activity of the brain even manage to steal faces? The DoctorВ’s explanation is gibberish, and there is also the question of why the victims donВ’t immediately die of suffocation. The restoration of the victims at the end once the Wire has been trapped on the tape is equally nonsensical: does the creature, as the script claims, actually feed on the activity of the brains, which would devour it, or merely sequester it, which makes no sense in the context of GatissВ’ script? If the former is the case, then why do they get their faces and personalities back once it is trapped? ItВ’s a bit like imprisoning a cat in a box and expecting to magically resurrect any mice itВ’s eaten. GatissВ’ script also features one of the most cringe worthy overwrought lines of the entire season, as the Doctor discovers that Rose has become another faceless victim, and bellows, В“Now, detective inspector Bishop, there is no power on Earth that can stop me!В” It isnВ’t a plot hole, but it is another example of the Russell T. Davies school of В“tell, donВ’t showВ” writing.

And yet, despite all of this, В‘The IdiotВ’s LanternВ’ actually works. Largely this is because Gatiss has such a great love for the old series that he distills the ingredients listed above to actually make something guaranteed to please rather than something experimental, rather like cooking somebodyВ’s favorite meal. The episode perfectly fits its running time, with a beginning, middle and end, with no unexpected padding in the last ten minutes, and is perfectly paced so that it builds nicely from an intriguing mystery to a dramatic climax. The Wire, a ranting megalomaniac, is the sort of villain that people think Doctor Who always used to do, and works very well, partly because Gatiss gives it odd but striking speech patterns (В“HeВ’s armed and clever! Withdraw, withdrawВ” and В“The Wire is feasting!В”) and partly because Maureen Lipman is superb in the role, simultaneously portraying a nineteen-fifties television presenter to perfection, whilst delivering dialogue such as В“Hungry!В” and В“Feed me!В” surprisingly effectively, making the Wire rather creepy.

Setting В‘The IdiotВ’s LanternВ’ in 1953 also pay off well. This is an era rarely visited in Doctor Who (В‘Delta and the BannermenВ’ is the most obvious example, but that story set out to capture the rock В‘nВ’ roll spirit of the time and is a very different beast), and exploiting the coronation is a stroke of genius; in the twenty-first century, with multiple television channels and with the Royal family virtually just another set of tabloid celebrities, it must be fascinating for any kids watching to realize just how big an event both the coronation and the ability to watch it on television actually was. Gatiss captures the spirit of the times perfectly, with families gathered round the television, and the street party at the end, but he also looks at it from a contemporary point of view whilst questioning nineteen fifties stereotypes. Thus, Eddie Connolly is portrayed as a bully, and described as a monster for reporting the faceless people to the police, but heВ’s visibly afraid, motivated by fear of losing everything he holds dear. Which of course he ends up doing because of, not in spite of, his efforts, as his wife throws him out. Bristling with pride and patriotism, and desperate to maintain a stiff upper lip and appearances for the neighbours, heВ’s recognizable character type, but Gatiss never lets the viewer forget that this a man who obviously cares for his wife and son, even if he isnВ’t very good at showing it. So whilst he challenges the oppressive views of nineteen-fifties Britain, with ??? angrily telling his father, В“You fought against fascism! You were fighting so that little twerps like me could do what we want, say what we want!В”, Gatiss also adds a coda in which the Doctor pointedly asks the boy, В“New monarch, new age, new world? No room for a man like Eddie Connolly?В” and he and Rose send him after his father.

В‘The IdiotВ’s LatternВ’ has several other characters who work just as well, including Detective Inspector Bishop, who amusingly switches from being a typical hard-nosed copper to suddenly deflating and bemoaning, В“Twenty years on the force, I donВ’t even know where to startВ” when the Doctor asks him if he wants to be doing more to find out what is stealing peopleВ’s faces. The unfortunate Magpie, a man down his luck even before the Wire enslaves him and subsequently doomed, is not unsympathetic, frightened and wracked with guilt. But most important perhaps is GatissВ’ use of the regulars. Rose is well-utilized here, immediately questioning the fact that everyone has a TV aerial, and demonstrating the intelligence to follow the Magpie lead, albeit not the common sense to at least try and leave a message for the Doctor. She also, amusingly, gets to take Eddie down a peg or two, icily informing him, В“ThatВ’s the Union flag. ItВ’s only the Union Jack when itВ’s flying at seaВ” and later, В“Only an idiot hangs the Union flag upside down.В” Best of all, whereas in В‘The Unquiet DeadВ’, GatissВ’ gave us a Doctor who let the monsters in through gullibility and then had to rely on the sacrifice of a supporting character to save the day, here he is a man of action, dealing with the Wire as he hangs perilously off the transmitter aerial, effortlessly taking command of the police, and putting Mr. Connolly in his place, furiously responding to EddieВ’s, В“I am talking!В” with an angry cry of В“And IВ’m not listening!В” Gatiss also has fun with the increasingly annoyingly over-convenient psychic paper, deliberately taking things over the top, as the security guard at Alexandra Palace believes that the Doctor is King of Belgium.

В‘The IdiotВ’s LanternВ’ also looks great, the location filming showing nice attention to detail, and meshing seamlessly with the sets. Director Euros Lyn once more demonstrates his abilities as a Doctor Who director, but perhaps what is most astonishing about the episode is that even Murray Gold does a half-decent job, providing a dramatic incidental score that manages to build tension with resorting to the same tired riffs that have repeated throughout previous episodes.

Overall, В‘The IdiotВ’s LanternВ’ manages, despite being somewhat unoriginal in many aspects, to be hugely entertaining, and an enjoyably traditional nod to the past. Which isnВ’t at all unwelcome every now and then.





FILTER: - Television - Series 2/28 - Tenth Doctor

The Idiot's Lantern

Sunday, 28 May 2006 - Reviewed by Joe Ford

That was…unexpected. That was the lightest episode of the new series yet, lighter even than Boom Town and far more irrelevant because at least that episode had some things to say about the Doctor’s adventures. Mark Gatiss has always been famous for providing us with typical Doctor Who adventures your gran would love to watch with you on a Saturday evening (Phantasmagoria, Last of the Gadrene and The Unquiet Dead all fall under that category) and now he has proven that that is his forte. Unfortunately on this occasion, I was left wanting and for once it wasn’t because I wanted more from the story we got but because I want more from the series.

This is the third historical episode of the year (yes I know setting a story in 1950’s is hardly what you would traditionally coin a historical, what with your gran sitting watching with you actually remembering that glowing period) which has chickened out of exploring the past over some alien threat. I read in DWM that there was a complaint last year that the historicals lacked jazz and the result has been that this year you have a story set around disposing Queen Victoria (with warewolves), a story about the lovely Madame de Pompadour (with clockwork soldiers) and now a story set in the marvellous Hovis (I kept hearing that music in my head as this episode played on) street with an energy being that zaps you from your TV set. Tooth and Claw is by far the most successful of three because it devoted equal time to its surroundings and its plot, The Girl in the Fireplace was cleverly written but much of the atmosphere was lost on a SF driven plot and now The Idiot’s Latern fails to capture the toastiness of the era because it is far interested in some obscure and (frankly) boring alien threat. Why can’t we have a pure historical story? One which allows us to soak in the richness of history. I watched The Aztecs the other day and it was as gripping as any of the new series episodes and featured a culture as alien as Daleks or Cybermen. I wanted to see more of the jazziness of the era, more of the domesticity…but instead we end up on a transmitter with a monster screaming out “HUNGRRRRRRRYY!” Yaaaaaaawn.

Whilst I’m having a moan I would like to point out that Euros Lyn’s direction of this story was extremely jarring. The first scene out of the TARDIS is pure Grease, with jazzy music and sickly costumes and sharp cuts. Then there is the soap opera scenes inside the Connelly household, filmed at the most bizarre angles, so distracting I kept trying to angle my head so I could see the shots straight. Then we are into horror territory with the old woman silhouetted by the window and the Doctor trapped admist the shadowy domain of faceless beings. Finally its action set pieces, with rapid scenes cutting between Magpie and the Doctor on the tower as the story reaches its hectic conclusion. Now Lyn is a fantastic director and none of these scenes are bad, in fact seen isolation they are beautifully lit and stylishly shot. But there is an inconsistency of tone, which is very disturbing; I was never quite sure which genre I was watching. The director even finds a spot for a piece of film noir, with high angles shot through the ceiling fan and a long shot through a smashed window of the Doctor and the detective talking. Lyn interprets the schizophrenic script with as much flair as we have come to expect but I felt as if I was being pulled in a ten different directions at once.

Performances are generally strong but two of the most important ones are slightly off kilter, which contribute to the uneasiness of the episode. Mr Connelly was a bit OTT for my liking, okay so this is a guy who holds his household together with strong discipline but his constant cries of “I AM TALKING!” were more hilarious than they were dramatic. He keeps upping the eye boggling shouting throughout, although despite this I did feel for him when he was kicked out of his own home. I was really looking forward to Maureen Lipman’s performance in this episode, as she is an actress I have always admired, but she was never given material of her calibre. Anyone can stare at screen and scream “HUNGRY!” and “FEEEEEEED MEEEEEE!” and during her tiny scenes taunting the Doctor and Rose she is superbly menacing but there isn’t enough of these moments. It feels like a big name guest star wasted and that is never a nice feeling.

Billie Piper surprised me because she was able to give the loosest performance of the years thus far and it is astonishing how much fun Rose can be when she is not ignoring Mickey, emoting over her Dad or mooning over the Doctor. Rose is really spunky in this episode, from her clothes to her dialogue and I found this to be Piper’s most appealing performance since The Doctor Dances. I adored her “Shame on you!” and then that cheeky grin. I hope she keeps up this sense of fun. David Tennant continues to add layers to his already textured performance as the Doctor. Isn’t he dangerous? You just want to hug him all over when he springs from the TARDIS on that motorbike but when he discovers Rose without a face he turns nastier than we have ever seen him before, with eyes that could sour fruit and a vicious line of biting dialogue. When the 10th Doctor gets like this he is far, far scarier than any monster we have ever seen. His protective nature towards Rose is terrifying and I fear we may be seeing some nasty consequences of this darker side to his character soon. Tennant is still a manic ball of energy, impossible to take your eyes off and giving a mesmerisingly considered performance, choosing him to play the Doctor is still the best decision this production team have ever made.

Didn’t this episode have a touch of Matt Jones’ Bad Therapy about it…I mention it only because Jones is writing the very next episode. In Jones’ excellent New Adventure Bad Therapy (which is set in the fifties) there are black cabs roaming the London streets abducting people and blank faced monsters! The character of Tommy even reminded me of gay boy Jack who assists the Doctor in saving the day! Well only steal from the best I say! The blank faced victims were the scariest thing about this episode and something I have always found absolutely terrifying (anyone remember that horrific episode of Sapphire and Steel?). The make up (or CGI, I couldn’t decide which!) was horribly convincing and the scene where the Doctor is surrounded by them gave me the shivers. The black cab-stealing people from their homes was less interesting but it did lead to that marvellous sequence where the Doctor and the detective interrogate each other, with the Doctor slowly getting the upper hand throughout the scene. Oh and I must mention the scene where Rose realises the Wire is talking to her directly from the TV screen, that moment invoked a feeling of wrongness that really creeped me.

By far the most impressive thing about this entire episode was the performance from Rory Jennings as Tommy which was so on the mark for a child actor I felt like applauding. Doctor Who has a terrible track record when it comes to kid actors (let us all remember the Conrad twins and Matthew Waterhouse) but Jennings gave a warm, realistic and sensitive portrayal of a young man trying to break from his Dads shadow and help his family. I loved it when he turned on his father reminded him why he fought the war and frankly the only reason I was so wrapped up in the finale was because he was still involved. I would have loved to have seen him leap into the TARDIS at the end, it would be fantastic to see the universe from the point of view of a child, I should imagine those horrors would be all the more terrifying. Sod Adam, forget Jack (he’s got his own spin off show) and now Mickey is out of the way (saving the universe with his new boyfriend) we need a new fella in the show…and it would have been a smart (and interesting) move to see Tommy join the crew. Alas it was not to be but the acting on display still deserves recognition.

In fact it was the domestic scenes that I enjoyed most about this episode, a story that Mark Gatiss clearly relished writing but did not put enough through into. He’s all for atmospheric settings and crafted characters (both present here) but the alien threat is really poor here and the explanation and exploration behind it is handled in a insultingly cack handed manner.

The Idiot’s Lantern is not the weakest episode of the series to date (The Long Game, Father’s Day and New Earth were all less interesting) but it is something of a misfire for the series, some tasty ingredients but overall leaves a bitter taste in your mouth.





FILTER: - Television - Series 2/28 - Tenth Doctor

The Idiot's Lantern

Sunday, 28 May 2006 - Reviewed by Gareth Thomas

Oh dear... Doctor Who has often tried to mix social commentary and moral purpose with good stories, but here we saw the combination buckle under the pressure of being asked to do too much too quickly.

Think how discretely and poignantly Remembrance of the Daleks drew parallels between the inter-racial Dalek conflict and the latent racism/fascism of elements of post-war Britain. Then think how clumsy and bombastic The Idiot's Lantern was by comparison.

Eddie Connolly's character is not properly introduced or developed - except that he enjoys Muffin the Mule. We are just asked to accept at face value that, because he represents post-war British, working class, patriotic masculinity, he must be a crypto fascist/Stalinist bully. I'm sorry, but this is very lazy writing and deeply off-putting. The episode seems to have been a vehicle for the programme makers' prejudices about the ills of pre-1960s society - ills which the camp contemporary combination of the Doctor and Rose are able to cure through sheer force of smug, self-righteous personality.

As for the story - yeah, great. A good idea and well realised through a wonderful performance by Maureen Lipman. I'm not quite sure why draining electricity from the brain should leave people without their faces, but I guess it was a clever metaphor for robbing people of their personalities, which brings us back to the unimaginative critique of conservative 1950s society.

Rose had a good week, being more proactive and independent than of late - particularly in the scenes with Magpie - but it didn't really get her anywhere. She didn't contribute to the resolution of the problem, which was another too-easy techno-babble resolution. And the 10th Doctor seems to going through some of the insecure emotions of his predecessor - loss turns to anger turns to petulant self-importance and self-righteousness.

The pseudo-historical used to be a good means of exploring alternative situations, but in this episode it was just a vehicle for sloppy political correctness. Doing a critique of post-war Britain is one thing - and perfectly fair. But making it so simplistic and heavy-handed is an insult to the social conscience and historical traditions of the series.

In The Aztecs, when Barbara challenges the barbarity of the human sacrifice, we are certainly inclined to agree with her. But that point of view is at least balanced by the Doctor's insistence that you can't change history and that (by implication) you have to take cultures as you find them. Doctor Who today has traded this element of moral questioning for a less sophisticated cultural imperialism.

Next week's episode looks great, but haven't we been here before?!





FILTER: - Television - Series 2/28 - Tenth Doctor

The Idiot's Lantern

Sunday, 28 May 2006 - Reviewed by Geoff Wessel

So I was pretty interested in this from the preview last week, looked like it coulda been a little somethin' different. And then I saw who wrote it: Mark Gatiss.

Awwwww CRAP!

Sorry, kids, this is kinda gonna be the opposite question I asked of Steven Moffat earlier this season: will Gatiss repeat the suckage from "The Unquiet Dead"?

Well, thankfully, no, he didn't. But only just. Things started out right good, alien menaces travelling via TV transmissions and stealing faces, juxtaposed against the story of a family held hostage by an abusive father figure, the day before the coronation of Elizabeth II. OK, seems about right for this new breed of Doctor Who tale.

And I liked the Wire...when she/it was mimicing the personality of the TV presenter whose image it/she appropriated. When we got into "HUNGRYYYYY HUNNNNGRYYYYYYY" I wanted to stick spikes into my ear canals.

No, I was a lot more interested in how much of a cowardly bullying sell-out PRICK Mr. Connelley (sp) was. Thinks he's lord of his domain and did everything in his power to make sure everyone knew it. Until, well, someone who had no fear of him came along...

And the Doctor. Wow. That was actually quite an... angry performance from Tennant. I liked it. Quite a bit. For once the 4th Doctor comparisons really came to fruition.

Rose, of course, didn't really figure into the action past a certain point. In a way that's relieving sicne she's been annoying me the past couple episodes. But of course here she comes at the end because she still has unresolved Daddy issues so of course she puts them onto Tommy... blurgh.

And what's with the bad character continuity this season? Or do they really just not care about the kinda shitty way they parted terms with Mickey?

Oh, and "idiot's lantern," featuring TVs that suck off your face and suck out your soul? Real subtle there guys....for 1970.

As for next week...ALIEN WORLD?! CTHULHOID MONSTERS?! SIGN ME UP DADDY-O!





FILTER: - Television - Series 2/28 - Tenth Doctor

The Idiot's Lantern

Sunday, 28 May 2006 - Reviewed by Adam Leslie

This was a well-made В– if unoriginal В– Doctor Who adventure: a casserole of bits from last weekВ’s cyberman two-parter (a newfangled gizmo turns people into monsters), The Empty Child (a similar period setting) and the authorВ’s own The Unquiet Dead (a being without corporeal form manifesting itself in one of the utility services... I fully expect water monsters emerging from the faucets of the 1920s next year, Mark).

The build-up was all very well done, though. Maureen Lipman is always a welcome presence and hammed it up less drastically than Roger Lloyd-Pack last week, Rose has come back to life again now that Mickey has disappeared, and the whole 1950s period setting was all much more tastefully and authentically portrayed than in the obnoxious Delta And The Bannermen (possibly the most screen-kickingly bad Doctor Who story of all time, in my less-than-humble opinion).

For all its unoriginality, this was one of the scariest Whos for years. After the sanitised off-screen Auton invasion in Rose, itВ’s wonderful to see some real horror back on TV of a Saturday teatime. The scenes in which grandma was alluded to having become a monster scared even me, and the cage full of faceless people В– and later the faceless Rose В– would have had Mary Whitehouse foaming at the mouth in apoplectic rage. Always a good thing. That was terrifying Doctor Who at its best.

The rushed ending was a let-down though. The day was saved by a boy changing a fuse; the whole mast-climbing silliness deflated an otherwise thoughtful and very creepy episode; and the 45-minute constraint meant that the family issues were solved in a pat and convenient way, RoseВ’s В‘fatherlyВ’ advice being the least convincing heartstring-tugging so far.

So all in all, a brilliant made and very creepy episode that was let down by a botched ending and В– like the X-Files and some of the other New Doctor Who stories В– disappointingly demystified by the need for a sci-fi alien invasion explanation.





FILTER: - Television - Series 2/28 - Tenth Doctor

The Idiot's Lantern

Sunday, 28 May 2006 - Reviewed by Richard Walter

Well the Doctor has already met Lady Penelope this season so it was inevitable that he should meet Parker in the guise of actor Ron Cook playing the misguided TV salesman Mr Magpie. 1953 - Coronation year - and a quaffed Doctor brings Rose to New York to see an interview with Elvis although of course the Tardis ends up in London. Equipped with a scooter (the latest version of Bessie perhaps??) the two time travellers soon get caught up in the evil doings of the Wire magnificently performed by Maureen Lipman - quite obviously revelling at the chance to play a Doctor Who baddie. Being a Mark Gatiss script, there was an inevitable black theme to this story - indeed even the squint camera angles gave the story a weird atmosphere whilst steeped in 50s reality.

As the Wire consumes and feeds on her captive TV audience, Rose quite literally loses face and again we see that dark and troubled side of David Tennant's Doctor. This regeneration has a charming and mischievous side but rile him and . . . beware! As Mark Gatiss has pointed out, the climax of the Doctor and Magpie scaling the TV transmitter mast at Alexandra Palace had memories of Tom Baker's fatal fall in Logopolis and indeed a line was cut from the scene which would have been a nice little part of continuity with the past. Oh well - it wasn't crucial to the plot!!

Some nice vintage touches thrown in - footage of the Queen's Coronation, Muffin the Mule and the betamax tape - which was the Wire's downfall! This was a good sound story to tell in 45 minutes although the sub-plot of the manipulative, bullying and traitorous Dad was a little baffling - a political message being thrown in perhaps?

For me the favourite scene has to be the Doctor emerging from the Tardis on his scooter - maybe not quite as dramatic as when he crashed the ball during The Girl in the Fireplace on a horse but nevertheless a nice touch.

Season Two goes from strength to strength - I have enjoyed every story so far and find it hard to believe that we are past the half way mark!!





FILTER: - Television - Series 2/28 - Tenth Doctor