Hope you’re in the mood for some good eatin’, ‘cos I’m gonna roast a turkey! Season 24 is condemned almost universally as being one of Doctor Who’s weakest: excessive, poorly made and with a ridiculous tone that drives the series into a different but equally poor direction to the one it recently held. However, it always seems to me that Delta And The Bannermen gets of scot free, with many praising it for its intelligent teasing of science fiction values. I say intelligent, but I simply want to get into the swing of the sarcasm that’s going to characterise this review. This is because Delta And The Bannermen is my candidate for Worst Story Ever, one of the only moments to make me ashamed to be a fan. And I don’t like saying that.

Oddly though, it actually begins fairly well with a decently staged battle scene, with some good special effects and some decent pyrotechnics. What lets it down though? The same thing that let a lot of other stories down. Keff. McCulloch. There are so many opportunities to slate him here that in the interests of avoiding repetition I’m going to get it all out of the way now: he is actually Satan himself. His attempts at parodying 1950s rock and roll are revolting (appropriate, though) and this is the third story in a row where a sickening synthy version of the theme music has been jammed into the incidental music. And that’s saying nothing about the sickening synthy version of the theme music that is, in fact, the actual theme music.

Ken Dodd’s manic overacting is painful to watch and, as usual, every time Mel opens her mouth I get the overwhelming desire to plug it with my shoe. While I’m listing through the rubbish characters, then you have to love those comedy Americans! Just picture the forced rictus smile on my face as I wrote that. Stubby Kaye’s line of “Wales, in England” is just about bearable, but a cheap shot. Other than that, it’s dire; the acting is stagy and the dialogue – “it’s exposition, but it’s funny!” – is too crummy for words.

The Navarinos and their bus become part of a completely comedic, parodic universe for the episode that puts it at complete odds with the programme it’s supposed to be. Could you ever imagine the bus being hit by a meteorite and crashing on Sutekh’s rocket, or next to the Chula ambulance? No. Reason? Those two examples are intelligent, well thought-through ideas, and this one belongs on the scrap heap. That’s a big problem with this story: the complete lack of thought. We never get told why Gavrok wants to kill the Chimerons, we never get told why the baby grows like it does; the villains have no real motivation, and many of the other characters act bizarrely as well: see the cliffhanger to part two (the Doctor’s thinking just makes no sense). At least Don Henderson and Belinda Mayne play it straight, although Mayne is so poor that she must have blackmailed the productions staff into casting her. When she shoots the communication screen, Gavrok’s explanation that she “somehow” switched it off demolishes what little credibility he ever had.

The dancing passengers on the bus is another cringe-inducer, and Hawk and Weismuller continue to bury the episode. The special effects of the bus crash are straight out of Button Moon (a shame, as the effects are generally one of the few real good points about season 24), although it’s nice to see the TARDIS actually being used for one. It was always a simple tool for establishing setting but this was taken to an extreme in the McCoy years and to see the Doctor doing something other than piloting it to Earth is a relief.

I’d have to agree with Mel’s assessment: they picked a sucky location, a cheap, run-down package-holiday nest of putrefaction only redeemed slightly by the pleasant countryside around it. Give me a good old reliable quarry, any day. And I’ve nothing against the Welsh, I’ve lived with several in my time, but Burton is seriously annoying. Ray is slightly better (especially in those leathers, nudge nudge), but her exaggerated cute-little-girly characterisation grates. She could be OK, if only she didn’t open her mouth so much.

The Doctor gives the mechanic Billy free reign with a load of alien technology. Timeline? Aw, who cares, let’s rock!

Ken Dodd’s death, after all these jokey shenanigans, seems unnecessary and inappropriately nasty and mean-spirited (a lot like the death of Clive in Rose). If Malcolm Kohll had to pick such a nauseating tone as he largely does, he should at least be consistent.

At the party, Billy is dressed up in a cheap James Dean / Marlon Brando parody. This may seem minor, but in a sense it epitomises what’s wrong with the story: it proclaims to tease 1950s stereotypes while at the same time pandering to them. It doesn’t have the imagination to be truly satirical, and therefore falls short of its targets and ends up being that which it mocks. And for those cameo fans out there, Keff McCulloch can be seen in the band. Funny, if I was him I wouldn’t be so keen to show my face.

At the cliffhanger to part one, the Doctor gives himself away by a feeble sneeze, snapping the needle on my cliché counter. I’d only just mended it in time to lose it again at the sight of Keillor’s smoking shoes: they only just got away with that in the Meltdown episode of Red Dwarf, and that was a comedy programme. This isn’t. It tries to be, but you wouldn’t have heard me laughing. I’m not against comedy in Doctor Who, but a fairly important requirement of comedy is that it should be funny. The model baby is good, but with Mel in the room screaming it’s the sound effects I object to.

Goronwy, at last, is a nice piece of characterisation. His ambiguity is nice, and I like the theory that he may be an old retired Time Lord. It’s only a shame he’s played so camply by Hugh Lloyd.

Oh, and that DJ is entirely unnecessary. Bad review are certainly therapeutic, but I never enjoy slating my favourite show and I’d much rather watch a good episode than a bad one – but I must confess it was only the thought of tearing into it here that kept me going. The idea of an omnipresent threat rapidly approaching is a good one, by boring direction from Chris Clough and its unremittingly saccharine tone suck dry any sense of tension.

Belinda Mayle’s acting when Delta learns the Bannermen are on their way? Lame. David Kinder’s acting when he learns the Bannermen are on their way? Lame. Delta And The Bannermen? Lame. Ray’s catchprase of “He’s been ihyoniiiiiiiiiised!” is really getting on my nerves now and, although it’s not a new observation, those Bannermen really do look like a load of yuppies on an adventure weekend. The deaths of all the Navarinos leave an unpleasant taste, another example of the kind of action adventure this sometimes tries to be. It wants to have it both ways, and consequently succeeds in neither.

As far as part three is concerned, I was getting too sick of it to take notes. My interest was going the same way as my will to live. Gavrok and his Bannermen get stung by bees, and do you know what? I don’t care. The escaped Bannerman is a bit of a wuss really, and is it me or does he look a bit like Andrew Cartmel? The sonic cone on top of the TARDIS makes the end very very obvious, but at least it means the end is in sight. It could be worse: the story could be average length. For those who like this sort of thing, Sylvester McCoy cops a feel of Sara Griffiths when he’s marking out the boundary around the TARDIS. Hey, I need a bit of a laugh, I just watched Delta And The Bannermen. The ending is abrupt and rubbish, poor Ray gets left high and dry, and TURN THAT MUSIC OFF!

Season 24 is to be commended for attempting something new after the suicidal regime of old under Eric Saward, but it seems to be merely an instinctive panic rather than a measured response and nowhere is this better illustrated than Delta And The Bannermen. Much as it pains me to admit it, now that I’ve reviewed it I could comfortably never see it again.

I’ve always been a huge fan of multi-episode story arcs that take two episodes or more to fully develop the story they are trying to tell. The last season of Star Trek: Enterprise was mostly made up of two or three-parters. Having to wait until next week is always exciting. You just never give up guessing what will happen next week, and make the prospect of viewing part two or three even more exciting.

So, with the new series of Doctor Who in full swing, I anxiously await the two-part adventures. They bring the great memory of the original series, waiting until the next week to see what happens next. The first two-part adventure, “Aliens of London” and “World War III,” was a mixed blessing. The first episode was alright. The great suspense, acting, and production values were let down by needless fart-jokes. The second episode, however, was much better.

For me, the second two-part adventure was the one I’d wanted to see the most. As a historian, I always enjoyed watching the Doctor Who adventures that took place in the past. And, while I know that it’s science-fiction, I always look to see if the look and feel of the period is captured correctly. So, with immense excitement, I sat down to watch “The Empty Child,” and then “The Doctor Dances.”

“The Empty Child” washed all my concerns away within the first ten minutes. The period feels right, and the scenes of the London Blitz are exciting, and as historically accurate as you can get within a science-fiction story. The main story itself is also fascinating. The scenes of the empty child, and those he has infected, are terrifying. I never thought that the idea of a “disease as injuries” would work, but it does so brilliantly. And the eerie cliffhanger ending sends chills up the spine, and you wonder what’s going to happen next.

After “The Empty Child,” I thought that it would be hard to come up with a clever follow-up. But the second part of the story, “The Doctor Dances” not only does so, but it proves to be the best episode of the series to date. The visual effects, storytelling, and acting are all at their peak of success. The explanation of what is going on may seem awkward on paper, but works brilliantly on screen. The ending of the episode is really well-done for two reasons. Not only do we see an emotional reunion of Jamie with Nancy (who, it turns out, is not Jamie’s brother, but is actually his mother), but we get to see what has to be a first for Doctor Who: for once, no one dies. It is these fantastic elements that make this episode a classic.

Christopher Eccleston continues to prove himself to be a fantastic Doctor. After his dark turn in “Dalek,” I thought his performance couldn’t get any better. But he proves me wrong in this adventure. We not only laugh at his jokes, and are shocked by his revelations. At the end, we feel what he feels when he realizes that everyone will live at the end of this adventure: we are all filled with joy. His brilliance as an actor continues to surpass expectations for the character.

Billie Piper also continues to shine as Rose. She reminds me a lot of Sarah Jane Smith from the original series. She always seems to get herself into trouble, but manages to always make us laugh. Piper has proven that she can stand side-by-side with Eccleston, and is never over-shadowed by him. Not only that, but she is very attractive to boot!

The new character introduced to the show, Captain Jack Harkness, is very interesting. John Barrowman gives a great performance in the role. He’s not only funny and intelligent (for the most part), but proves that he is worthy of a leading-role in the spin-off series, “Torchwood.” I can’t wait to see what else he can bring to the character in the next few episodes.

In closing, I feel that “The Empty Child” and “The Doctor Dances” are the destined to become THE classic adventure of the Eccleston era. But the journey isn’t over yet. There are three more episodes left in the first series of the show. Let’s see how the Doctor will do when he faces his old enemies Margaret (from the first two-parter), and the Daleks in the series’ closing two-part adventure, “Bad Wolf” and “The Parting of the Ways.”

Almost a year after the new Doctor Who series aired in the UK, I’ve purchased the newly-released Canadian DVD box set so that I can finally have a look at this new take on the old Doctor. I’ve tried to avoid too much spoiler information, but it’s impossible to avoid all details if you spend any time on this website, which of course I do. Consequently, while I was looking forward to the new series, I was prepared to be disappointed as well. I’ve read about the Doctor swearing, the flatulent aliens, the same-sex kiss, the Doctor having romantic inclinations towards Rose, the belching trash bin, etc., all of which are things the original series never delved into, and are not necessary to make Doctor Who fresh and successful. So I wondered whether the show would be worth watching and whether my favorite show had become another failed modern remake, bereft of the charm of the original series, despite the high ratings and generally good reviews. 

Does it hit all the right notes? The answer is: mostly. As I opined to my wife after having seen the first seven episodes, the new show is generally good with objectionable bits. Obviously I like it well enough to have watched the episodes, and to watch the rest in time, but I can give few episodes gushing enthusiasm. It’s more of a restrained enjoyment for me. There's a lot of room for improvement on the show. I do think the new theme arrangement is outstanding, probably the best since the Troughton/Pertwee/Baker version. The special effects, while not 100% convincing in some cases, are light-years ahead of the original series. The music is generally good, though it overwhelms the dialogue sometimes and ought to be a bit more restrained. The 45 minute format seems to work quite well, and we get an occasional two-parter, so we’ve not lost cliffhangers entirely. 

Getting down to the story at hand, I have to say that “Rose” is generally quite good. I’ve watched it twice now, and it holds up well. It’s a pretty straightforward story. The Nestenes, having evidently lost their planet in the time war, are intent on taking the Earth for their own. The Doctor is trying to track them down and stop them. Rose Tyler gets dragged into events and like so many before her, ends up becoming involved in the Doctor’s life and travelling with him. 

I’ve read a lot of ‘there’s no plot’ comments about “Rose”. The introduction of Rose is the plot, is it not? The Autons are important, but they dominate the last third of the story rather than the whole episode. We skip the Doctor’s discovery of the threat and the way he works out how to defeat said threat, but admittedly we’ve seen that before, many times. As viewers, we can get straight to the business of defeating the Autons, or we can take a fresh approach and join Rose as she continues to encounter and learn about the Doctor while he’s on the hunt for the hidden Nestene Consciousness. I’d rather take the latter journey. The notorious plot contrivance of ‘anti-plastic’ is admittedly a quick way to finish things off, but dropping it on the consciousness is the equivalent of poisoning someone. As such, it’s a concept that’s sci-fi in name only. 

There are a number of good things about this episode. Showing us events from Rose’s point of view is exactly the right way to go about things. The quick view of her home/job/boyfriend/general daily routine is a very nice encapsulated display of her very ordinary life. Then we see the disruption of that life by the Autons and the plot gathers pace from there. This allows us as viewers to see events unfold from the outside along with Rose and identify with her rather than being thrown right away into the Doctor’s world. It’s not only appropriate to relaunch the series with a back to basics approach, but it doesn’t assume knowledge of prior stories. Both old and new viewers can follow along. Other nice touches in “Rose” include the use of Autons as the enemy of the week. Their use ties the new series in with the old right from the start, as do familiar sound effects like the TARDIS takeoff/landing sound and the Auton handguns. Rose’s use of the internet to gather information about the Doctor is a nice modern touch. Rose herself is a strong character, who gets scared, angry and confused, but also has it within herself to show some heroism when pushed. Billie Piper is quite good in the part. 

Some not so nice touches include over-use of domestic life, which starts to get ‘soap-opera’-like at times. It’s restrained here in the first episode, and even somewhat appropriate given the need to show the ordinary life that Rose will (sort-of) leave behind, but it becomes intrusive later on in “Aliens of London”. Admittedly it is something new that we haven’t seen with prior companions, but I’m not sure I want to see too much more of it. If you’re going to travel, go travel for goodness sake! Enough with Jackie’s gossipy friends and Mickey’s goofiness. Why waste time on that when we could be seeing the universe? I watch Doctor Who for imagination and escapism. not fictionalized depictions of ordinary life. 

Along those lines, the attempted seduction of the Doctor by Jackie was just silly. Introducing sex is an another attempt to make the show more ‘relevant’ and ‘adult’, much like Eric Saward’s tendencies towards including violence and high body counts were meant to make the show more ‘adult’. Both approaches come across as juvenile rather than serious. As do the flatulent aliens later on, but I’ll get to that nonsense when I review “Aliens of London”. The belch from the Auton trash bin is just as lowbrow and unwelcome. 

Moving along, all of the plot and supporting characters are meaningless without a good Doctor, so how does Christopher Eccleston stack up with all of the other Doctors? 

He’s a good actor, and very energetic. He’s a bit more cruel than past Doctors though. He’s very dismissive of humans in general, who have gone from ‘quite my favorite species’ (Ark in Space) to “stupid apes”. While the Doctor has criticized humanity in general in the past, this is certainly a harsher generalization and seems odd for the character. He does have character traits from past Doctors, reminding me of Pertwee on a bad day with his cutting remarks to several people and general short-temperedness. Skipping ahead a bit to “the Long Game”, his abandonment of Adam with the chip in Adam’s head seems especially cruel. Hartnell in the early days might have abandoned companions to their fate (as he suggests in "The Daleks"), but at least he had the excuse of trying to protect Susan. The Doctor grew out of that behavior trait, but seems to have regressed somewhat. 

Eccleston’s Doctor does have the manic grin of Tom Baker’s version, though his take to the character is miles from Tom’s approach. Eccleston’s Doctor takes the ‘big picture’ view of history or a threat that reminds one of Hartnell or Tom Baker. The way he forgets Mickey reminds me of the fourth Doctor’s seeming disregard for Laurence Scarman’s death in Pyramids of Mars, where the good of the race is so paramount in the Doctor’s mind that individual deaths can’t be dwelt upon. However, in contrast to his seeming callousness, the 9th Doctor is still willing to risk his life for others, which says a lot for the selfless side of his nature. In short, I think Eccleston is generally playing the same character as all the others, with many of the same character traits, but with much less patience and likability. I presume a lot of his short temper is due to his losses in the Time War, which is clearly the backstory to just about every episode so far. He has survivor’s guilt and a lot of anger perhaps. 

To wrap things up, “Rose” is a decent episode and a good start to the new series. It’s an improvement on the last few years of the original series, but does not hit the heights that the best serials of the old Doctor Who attained.

As I prepared to view the very first episode of the new Doctor Who series, my mind raced back to the late eighties. I still have fond memories of watching the original show with my Mom when I was young, and the show was on PBS. The excitement, thrills, and humor of the classic series will always fill my mind with times of joy. 

With that being said, the excitement I had for a new episode when I was five came back to this young man of 21. 

Questions began to pop up as well: Will it be as good as the original? 

Will Christopher Eccleston, the star of films such as "28 Days Later" and "The Others," bring the same spirit to the Doctor as his predecessors? 

Will the companion be of much help, or useless as usual?

But those questions and more were answered with an enthusiastic YES! The first episode, "Rose," is a fantastic beginning to the new series. From the very outset, it didn't feel like a new show, but a continuation of the original. The spirit of the classic series is still there, while also having a fresh style. The storytelling is also there; Davies' wrtiting is on par with some of the best in Sci-Fi, from Star Trek to Battlestar Galactica.

Eccleston is brilliant in the role. He brings to the role the excitement and humor that were trademarks of Tom Baker's era, while also bringing new dimensions to the role. Billie Piper is great as Rose Tyler. Finally, a companion who doesn't scream every five seconds, and is actually able to help every once in a while. Other cast members, from Camille Coduri to Noel Clarke, do fine jobs in their roles.

Of course, one of the most exciting things about "Rose" is that instead of inventing a new enemy to begin with, the creators brought back an old nemesis: The Autons, as controlled by the Nestene Consciousness. As with the original Doctor Who adventures "Spearhead from Space" and "Terror of the Autons," the Autons are still frightening, and the wonders of CGI render the Nestene Consciousness as a truly terrifying creature. 

As the episode ended, I sat back in true astonishment. The Doctor was back, and I couldn't wait for the next episode. The cast and crew have done a fantastic job of bringing a new dimension to Doctor Who, while still keeping the spirit of the original series. And with most modern sci-fi shows being too dark and humorless, it's great to have a show come along that doesn't take itself too seriously, and is suitable for younger children as well.

BRAVO!

Grade: A (On a scale of A+ to F)

“Oh my God! I’m a chav!”

Notes: Unless intuitively obvious or otherwise noted, what follows is opinion; as the ‘in my humble opinion…’ tag rapidly grows tedious. Some spoilers follow.

There’s no messing about. Doctor Who: New Earth is the first in the 2006 thirteen-part run of 45-minute episodes comprising Series 2. In the fleeting and welcome pre-credits montage, the latest Doctor (David Tennant) fires up his TARDIS. This is juxtaposed with shots of companion Rose Tyler (Billie Piper) bidding au revoir (?) to her loved ones – all two of them: Mickey Smith and Jackie Tyler (Noel Clarke and Camille Coduri). And then our two travelers are off, “further then we’ve ever gone before” promises the Time Lord. What ensues is a sequel of sorts to The End of the World (2005), and arguably one of writer Russell T. Davies’ strongest entries to date. It is, unsurprisingly, hurriedly-paced, effectively injecting the viewer with their weekly ‘hit’ of Doctor Who. By the outcome, one might very well feel visually fatigued. Indeed, largely due to this, New Earth feels like a mid-series story. There is no pause for an extended celebratory re-introduction, as the brisk opener readily attests.

In reciprocation to a mysterious message, from a familiar Face (voiced by Struan Rodger), our protagonists materialize in a distant and decidedly Welsh future, after the year five billion. There, they must contend with two primary plots, touchy-feely ‘zombies’, and various other story elements. The colloquialism ‘bursting at the seams’ springs to mind. Effectively, this is also Rose’s first televised visit to an alien planet (see suggested by Boom Town, 2005). By this point, I had almost forgotten that they existed in the Doctor Who universe.

Plot A, if you will, pertains to (at least) a trio of cats dressed as nuns. Go figure. In their clinic, the Sisters of Plentitude subject home-grown human vegetables to various interstellar illnesses and diseases, so as to devise illicit cures for their genuine patient population. Cue some old-school self-righteous indignation from the Doctor. Plot B concerns the return of another familiar character, Lady Cassandra [O’Brien] (Zoë Wanamaker), who is out for revenge (well… money). Her method? Possessing Rose’s body! During the course of the show, we witness Cassandra’s ever-changing form; she switches between human, a “bitchy trampoline”, an ethereal body-swapping vapour, and a mind-stealing entity. In the previous series, I felt Piper’s acting was very sincere and plausible (in stark contrast to the Doctor and his universe). Here, she impresses us further; with her depiction of “Cassandrose”1 (“I’m a chav!”) – suggestive of a fairly broad range. This extends to some amusing scenarios, although unfortunate lines akin to “it’s like living inside a bouncy castle” (and “Oh, baby! I’m beating out a samba!”) will, undoubtedly, remind avid viewers who penned the screenplay. Nonetheless, Piper’s performance is a highlight of this week’s episode. Her depiction of Rose is circumscribed to the very first few scenes, where – aside from an amusing elevator incident – she summarizes for us that she loves universe-trotting with her companion.

Wanamaker is also on form, although her Cassandra appears somewhat more ‘on the attack’ than interpreted previously, largely due to the dialogue. Referring to Rose as “that dirty blonde assassin” implies either warped rationalization, or Davies’ poor recollection of his own screenplays – the Doctor was the “blonde assassain” in The End of the World. Arguably, Rose is guilty by association, a scapegoat; as Cassandra does not recognize the “new new” Doctor.

Tennant is promising. As with the untitled Children in Need special and The Christmas Invasion (2005), my primary, trivial, criticism at this point in time, is that I find his occasionally-high-pitched voice irritating. Here, he is as quirky and eccentric as his previous outings implied; and morally self-righteous (“HOW MANY?!”) and self-mythologizing (“There is no higher authority”). I do not care for this “lonely God” business, though. Unfortunately, his outraged scenes do not develop the traditional ‘animal experimentation’ debate. From the given information, the moral of the story is ‘don’t keep zombies in cells in your basement detained via a simple and collective open-close switch’. Or something. However, as I noted in my Christmas review, this ‘superficial’ presentation of moral issues does allow the individual viewer to interpret them as he/she pleases. Regardless, a third fine and enjoyable performance from Tennant.

Unfortunately, our introduction to the detained ‘zombies’ heralds the onset of major absurdities in plotting. For instance, Cassandra no longer requires her “psychograft” for body-swapping. Furthermore, the Doctor’s solution to The Night of the Living Dead, as you will see, is blatantly impractical (whereas, of course, the rest of Doctor Who is not…). Nonetheless, it is all entertaining and engaging, with fine performances from the primary dramatis personae, and the supporting cast: Cassandra’s Welsh sidekick Chip (Sean Gallagher); and the Sisters Matron Casp, Sister Jatt, and Novice Hame (respectively: Dona Croll, Adjoa Andoh, and Anna Hope). As are the petrifold regression-ailed Duke of Manhattan and bespectacled Frau Clovis (Michael Fitzgerald and Lucy Robinson). James Hawes directs.

Is this production suitable for you?

The verdict: 3/5. Relentless, surreal, well-acted, engaging, and sometimes amusing; New Earth requires the suspension of disbelief. Not perfect, but another fun romp from the regular writer. An appropriate series-starter.

Target audience(s): General. Based upon my experiences, it is light-hearted and watchable enough for most viewers.

Certificate recommendation: U-PG. ‘Zombies’. A few minor sexual allusions children will overlook. Nothing major, and given today’s desensitized audiences, I feel PG is probably pushing it. Colourful atmosphere. (Being cheeky, that probably equates with an ‘18’ from the BBFC, who have not been desensitized since the Fifties… [But, then I am stereotyping somewhat])