Sadly, that was a bit of a disappointment after last week's slightly flawed but impressively atmospheric build up. Instead of an homage to 'The Island Of Doctor Moreau' this episode seemed to take a very surreal and cliched journey into 'The Dalek Horror Picture Show' and I was half expecting to see the hybrid Sec break into a rendition of 'Let's Do The Time Warp Again'. Nice spats, shame about the face.

And just as I thought I was getting involved in the plot, various story and directing decisions kept lifting me out of the episode. The locked off camera shots of the Daleks gliding about the sewer tunnels, whilst an attempt to give us something different visually, didn't quite work for me. They had an artificial quality to them that perhaps underlined the schizophrenia of the episode for me. A kind of bizarre artifice that kept cropping up ? the repetitive sequences of the Doctor and the Daleks in confrontation and their continual threat/avoidance to kill him; Solomon's speech to the Dalek ('War Of The Worlds' anyone or was that a nod to the assassination of Martin Luther King?) that seemed like an attempt at Oscar nomination and didn't really have any truth in it as a scene bar for the long awaited extermination; those odd dissolves of the marching human Daleks that tried to convince you an army was on the march; the curing of Laszlo that seemed to happen off screen after the Doctor has stirred up a few phials of something?I just found these choices a bit bizarre.

What you expected to happen?did happen, right down to the inevitable 'emergency temporal shift' of Caan at the conclusion of the story. For me it committed the cardinal sin of relying on the 'reset button' mode of storytelling. Tie up all the loose ends in the last ten minutes and bring the overall narrative back to square one as if the events over the last two episodes didn't really have any major effect on any of the characters lives or situations. I don't mind that kind of storytelling as long as it's an engaging and interesting journey back to the beginning. Here we get mass exterminations and genetic experimentation and the Doctor and Martha making a crass joke about 'the pig and the showgirl' as they nip off to pastures new.

The ultimate 'Rocky Horror' moment for me was the confrontation in the theatre. All of a sudden, the Daleks arrive on stage, bathed in smoke and bad lighting, and they cease being fascist xenophobes and just look like something out of 'Seven Keys To Doomsday'. All that careful build up in the first part of the story, with the flashes of 'Evil Of The Daleks', just dissipated away by reducing them to vaudeville props. It seemed such a 'small' scene to conclude what was originally something conceived as, and looking like, an epic. And logically it didn't make sense for Caan to order the two Daleks to kill all the slaves and then wait until they're blown up to decide to self-destruct the slaves anyway!

The best scenes in the episode were the attack on Hooverville and the 'Frankenstein' laboratory pastiche of the resurrection of the human Daleks. Both were epic, thrilling scenes and visually engaging. The destruction of Hooverville was especially spectacular. The story was also full of good ideas and humour. The two Daleks in the tunnel having a bit of a gossip about the hybrid and looking behind them to see if they're being overheard and the pig guards going up in the lift with their obvious impatience were amusing scenes. The nod to 'Are You Being Served?' with the Doctor's 'first floor?perfumery' quip and Tallulah's 'gammon strike' comment also managed to raise a laugh.

What also might have been better dramatically was perhaps to have had the Doctor's attempt to evolve the Daleks be thwarted not by the other Daleks, but by Martha sabotaging the mast (with the best intentions, as she'd be unaware of what was going on and would end up maintaining the Daleks original nature). But instead it fell back into the clich? of the other Daleks putting a spanner in the works which was crudely, if humourously, set up earlier.

Freema also got a bit more to get her teeth into this time and to see Martha putting together a plan to electrocute the pig guards (despite being a bit iffy on the science) was a great opportunity to show how resourceful the character can be. However, I think it's time the series moved on from the Rose references now and didn't keep resorting to using Martha's unrequited love in the face of the Doctor's emotional fragility as development. It's getting repetitive and isn't moving the dynamic between the characters forward enough.

This week, I'm afraid David Tennant turned into the 'shouty' version of the Doctor that I seemed to have trouble with in Series 2. On the occasions where he's here confronting hybrid Sec and/or the Daleks his indignation with them just gets played too broadly which is a shame as in the first three episodes of this year's series he's been pretty much on the mark and has provided a more contained display of anger and righteousness. I'm also slightly troubled by the Doctor's moral position here. In 'Genesis Of The Daleks' he doesn't commit genocide because he realises he'd be just as bad as the Daleks and that a greater good will come from their existence. Here, he merrily sides with hybrid Sec to change the entire 'raison d'etre' of the Dalek species without a qualm. A tad na?ve of him surely? Here, for Sec, it would seem humanity equals goodness but humans are also capable of evil, destruction and war.

Overall, it looked spectacular but the illogic of some of the plotting, some of the odd directorial choices and an over-repetition of Doctor/Dalek confrontation clich? made it a less effective episode than the first part. Its plunge into surreal 'Rocky Horror' B movie territory, whilst a template that is suitable to the material and its themes of mad science and 1930s Gothic noir, doesn't do any favours to the emotional power needed for the characters to operate in the scale of this story. It felt flat despite all the best efforts.

The Daleks are a triumph of design, a futurist alien vehicle that quickly became a pop culture emblem of swinging Britain, and from that point on a little piece of everyone's childhood. As an alien race, however, they're pretty bog-standard. Survivors of a dying planet stripped of their humanity and emotion and encased inside a powerful metal body: conceptually, you could barely get a cigarette paper between Daleks and Cybermen. Personality wise, all they ever really do is plot, kill, gripe about the Doctor and want to dominate the universe, just like 70% of Doctor Who aliens.

For this reason, I wasn't up in arms when Daleks In Manhattan tinkered a little with the mythology of the Daleks last week ? they're a decidedly limited concept anyway, so anything to make them a tad more interesting is always welcome. On the flip side, this week's attempt to spend 45 minutes delving into the psychology of what are essentially little tanks with laser guns for me resulted in crushing boredom.

Daleks In Manhattan was an entertaining Old Who style romp, maybe the closest in spirit and feel to the classic series as we've seen so far. By contrast, Evolution Of The Daleks was perhaps the flattest and most dispiriting slice of Doctor Who since Battlefield. It seems to be tradition now that Dalek/Cybermen two-parters consist of a fascinating first episode followed by an ineffectual run-around in place of a satisfying pay-off. I enjoyed both Rise Of The Cybermen and especially Army Of Ghosts, but was unimpressed by Age Of Steel and especially Doomsday.

Like the 'Cartmel Masterplan' episodes of the late 1980s, there was too much crammed clumsily into the limited running time, and what started in episode 1 as an interesting and satirical period piece degenerated into a hokey mishmash of Frankenstein, King Kong, Back To The Future, Ghostbusters and the 1930s Saturday matinee serials. This in itself wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing, but the pacing was so off that it all came across as a joyless series of misfiring set pieces with no one coming out of it particularly well.

The Doctor fared particularly badly, despite David Tennant's typically sterling work. Twice he offered himself for up extermination? once is careless, twice is just tiresome and dramatically flat. Quite what he hoped to achieve is beyond me, blind self-sacrifice being something of an unDoctorly trait. Since he constantly champions himself as the Daleks' worst nightmare, quite what good he would be to anyone dead is a mystery. Admittedly, the second time he was prompting the Dalek hybrids to rebel, but it was something of a leap of faith that they would, and an even bigger leap of faith that the real Daleks wouldn't just go right ahead and exterminate him anyway. And why was he so enraged and indignant when the Daleks killed all the pigmen and human hybrids? Was he expecting them not to? All things considered, it was pretty much par for the Dalek course. To make it a hat-trick of bad Doctoring, he stood back and allowed poor misguided Solomon to be exterminated. If anyone knows you can't appeal to the good in a Dalek it should be our Doc, so I have no idea what he was playing at.

The Daleks themselves sadly have regressed back to Remembrance Of The Daleks standards (albeit not so wobbly on their feet): lots of shouting about exterminating, but rarely actually getting around to doing any of it. The only reason the Doctor survived this episode was that the old fellahs have become such chronic procrastinators.

Not a great episode for Martha either, I'm afraid. She had been growing on me as a companion, but in this episode Freema Agyeman seemed to be struggling to convince with the dialogue she'd been lumbered with (both she and Miranda Raison as Tallulah wresting with diction problems during their scenes together). Her girlie chat about Rose was toe-curling.

Special mention must also go to the baffling moment in which the Doctor retrieves his sonic screwdriver ? apparently, unless I misheard the dialogue, Martha somehow managed to catch it half way down the Empire State Building. Really?

Another big up for humans here, yay for us! Apparently, if you give a Dalek a dose of humanity, it'll start questioning orders and being all nice and conscientious. All well and good, but if history has taught us anything, it's that there's nothing humans like doing more than following orders and committing atrocities. (The Doctor puts the disobedience of the robomen down to a shot of Time Lord DNA, but as that would have been impossible to achieve through mere electrical conductivity, we have to assume he's talking baloney).

In a better episode, this would all be nit-picking. Unfortunately, as dramatic television, it was terribly flaccid and unoriginal, with the Doctor yet again scaling a mast in a thunderstorm (see The Idiot Box) and a major landmark lighting up (see pretty much everything). Packed with ideas and plot threads, none of them were given sufficient room to breathe, resulting in one long 45-minute soggy squib.

Mind you, I did like the perfumery line.

"Gridlock" ? at times very impressive, beautiful even, yet tainted with frustration and a sense of "what might have been".

I've read many reviews on Outpost Gallifrey in the last year or two, and only now have I found it necessary to add my own thoughts to the mix. I've not felt compelled to write a review before this and I'm still not sure what has encouraged it now. Suffice it to say that "Gridlock" had the hallmarks of being a great story, in the mould of say "The Impossible Planet" or "Father's Day", yet niggles which seem to have developed over the last season or so have dogged what could have been a firm favourite.

Let's start with the good points then. The obvious first one is the continued excellence of David Tennant. Someone recently wrote in the press that he's dangerously close to becoming the definitive Doctor, and I have to say I agree with this estimate. Tennant conveys each facet of the Doctor's personality with equal ease. The humour he displays at certain points through his interactions with even the minor characters he encounters in his quest to reach the fast lane is balanced with the anger he shows at the "mood sellers" encountered early on in the episode. Tennant is excellent at the anger. We've certainly moved on from the Sylvester McCoy days? Whereas Christopher Eccleston's Doctor seemed to use anger as his raison d'etre, Tennant's Doctor is more sparing here, the occasional outbursts seeming more effective than a permanent coil of what seemed to be the Ninth Doctor's resentment at his life. Of course this is probably best explained within the context of the overarching storyline. Eccleston's Doctor had witnessed first hand ? or so we are led to believe ? the Time War. The anger, profound shock and frustration built up seemed to be mixed with a fear that maybe the power to regenerate had been lost. Now that the Doctor has changed again, there seems to be a new found optimism that things are returning to the Doctor's favour ? he can regenerate, he can defeat villains and monsters and so on. But this is digression. David Tennant has tapped into the Doctor's character so successfully and so effectively blends all aspects of this together in what is such a powerhouse performance, that you tend to forget he had nine predecessors. You simply cannot take your eyes from the screen when he's on as there's always something happening ? he's an electric presence, and yet alien at the same time. I know how he does it ? good acting, but it's a revelation every week. I'm reminded of feeling like I'm back at school again watching Tom Baker ? it's very strange. I must admit to trepidation when I heard Tennant was succeeding Eccleston; I was hoping we'd finally get an old Doctor again, and I still think the late lamented Ian Richardson would have made a superb Doctor, but there you go! When you watch the final scenes of Gridlock, when the Doctor talks about Gallifrey, you almost physically see inside his head and gain some sense of wonder, sadness and loss. Was I the only viewer who thought, "hang on, he's going to cry"? A powerful moment, beautifully acted, and beautifully written by Russell T Davies.

Add to this Freema Agyeman's performance and you start to see, if you've not already done so, why this Doctor and companion work so well. She's extremely assured as Martha, and a superb foil for the Doctor. Agyeman's confidence shines through in every scene, and the different dynamic to the Tennant-Piper relationship is highlighted by her greater pragmatism. Maybe I'm just cynical, but I can't help feeling that her faith in the Doctor is going to be shattered by the end of the season ? is she going to react to the Daleks in much the same way as Tegan Jovanka did, or will she become a victim of the expected end of season revelations and be treated in the same way as Ace in "The Curse of Fenric"? (Look it up newbies?). It's early days though and Agyeman makes Martha such a likeable character that again, you tend to forget Rose? My only concern is that Russell T Davies might reintroduce the family again ? I wasn't keen on the Tylers, and I'm not sure the Joneses will be much better, but let's reserve judgment for now.

Perhaps the other excellent point in the episode was the use of music. I know Murray Gold comes in for a lot of criticism on this site for his "intrusive" music, but I think in this episode he seemed to get the balance right. I'm a massive fan of his theme arrangement - an orchestral version was long overdue ? and here the use of hymns was a beautiful counterpoint to the action, without being overly cloying. All right "Abide with Me" was perhaps a little obvious for the final monologue, but the arrangements were simply exquisite and fitted perfectly. The visuals and the music at the end of the episode were simply excellent, and show how far the show has progressed under the modern stewardship. Full marks also for the stand-out turn by Ardal O'Hanlon as Brannigan; although he was really Thermoman in a cat-suit, he's always likeable, and it would be good to see him return. I'm not sure what everyone else made of him, and perhaps he should have been given a greater role to play within the story, but that's the problem with trying to complete a story in 45 minutes.

And there's the problem in a nutshell. 45 minutes. I was OK until about an hour after the episode, until my subconscious came up, tapped me on the shoulder and said "But what about the Macra?" I'm sure I must have missed something ? and maybe I'll have to watch the repeat, but I'm certain the Doctor just saved the people trapped on the motorway and left the Macra to it! Five minutes to save the world ? let's do what we can seems to be the motto now. All right, maybe the lack of fumes from the traffic would mean the Macra would die anyway, but it seemed that this aspect of the story was rushed. No doubt I'll have started a flame war on these pages now from the forum writers telling me to concentrate, but that's life? Patrick Troughton's Doctor ? or any other Doctor ? would have made sure that the Macra were thoroughly removed. It might have taken four episodes to do it, but the job would be done. My concern here is the speed at which the current stories run. OK, we'll never have six episodes of corridor running, thank heaven, but I think one episode is too short a length for a number of stories, and Gridlock was a case in point. Some stories are perfectly suited to one episode, "The Idiot's Lantern" or "Father's Day" for example, whereas two episodes was a perfect length for "The Impossible Planet / The Satan Pit". I just felt the balance was wrong here. It deserved a cliffhanger which would have allowed the action to move from the motorway to other parts of New York. A cliffhanger also allows of course for the dramatic possibility that the Doctor might not just throw a switch and win ? he might have to make sacrifices or really have to think about how best to defeat the monsters. The honour (and the great benefit for youngsters watching) is in the fact that sometimes it IS hard to defeat the enemies, but you grow stronger for doing so, and learn in the process. The Doctor shouldn't really be glib and be able to knock a solution up in five minutes.

Unfortunately I thought the re-introduction of the Macra was wasted. There was nothing really for the Doctor to "confront" as such ? villains or monsters always seem to work better when there's been the direct give-and-take between them and the Doctor. A faceless monster which had no interaction with the Doctor has only really worked a couple of times ? most notably in "Fury from the Deep", ironically again from the Troughton era. Much better perhaps to have reintroduced the Yeti or even the Ice Warriors?

The 45-minute format is too short I think to tell some of the stories which are being told. Far better I think for the production team to have the confidence now to push for 16 episode seasons, have say 6 double episodes with the occasional single episode story. So many of the stories written during the new series have deserved longer screen time, and I think that without being over-critical of Russell T Davies ? he who is the golden-egg laying goose ? his ideas deserve longer expression over two episodes. There are almost too many ideas competing for attention, and I think maybe an editorial re-think is needed. And if Russell's reading this, no-one has yet written a more tense half an hour in the new series yet than in "Bad Wolf" with Rose's supposed death and the reintroduction of the Daleks ? "We have your associate" is still the best line in the new series for me - written so well and delivered with such venom that it makes you feel 12 again, which is what it's all about.

Other negatives ? the nagging feeling to older viewers like me who barely struggled to escape the late 1980s episodes that it's all becoming a bit derivative. I know that's like saying the Grand National's derivative as it always uses the same course, but it's getting easier to spot the origins of each episode. "Gridlock" had a strong smell of "Paradise Towers" left on the shelf for just a bit too long, whereas I was thinking "It's the Unquiet Dead again" during "The Shakespeare Code". Let's have some more variety ? we're big enough and ugly enough to take it. We must cater for the younger viewers of course, and I know we're not going to get Chekhov at 7pm on a Saturday evening, but let's have a couple of real thrillers with some good cliffhangers, political thrillers, or a few more psychological dramas.
We're so nearly there. Just a few tweaks needed, and we can start talking seriously about Golden Ages?

Amidst all the pre-season hype, this Dalek two-parter was probably the story that interested me the most. Like most Doctor Who fans, young and old, I'm Dalek mad, and so when I saw Sec hone into view in the trailer at the end of "The Runaway Bride" I allowed myself a sigh of relief ? the Daleks would be back in Series Three. As if there was any chance that they wouldn't have been?

However, "Daleks in Manhattan" is light years away from the Daleks' previous appearances in the new series. The most notable differences are the historical setting and the tone of the story ? whilst this two-parter is a very dark tale, it doesn't feel 'climactic' in the ways that the two season finales or even the stand-alone episode "Dalek" were. It's much more akin to the pre-Davros Dalek stories on TV and many of the Big Finish Dalek audios; here the Daleks are evil. They're cunning. They're lethal. And they're up to something.

But they aren't trying to invade Earth or take over the universe.

"They always survive when I lose everything!"

The scenic historical setting is a masterstroke both in terms of storytelling and commercially. What better to help get Doctor Who over with the American audience than to have your principal villains run amuck in one of their biggest cities? Furthermore, the setting allows director James Strong to deliver some beautiful shots of thirties' New York: we see the Statue of Liberty; Central Park; and of course, the Empire State Building. Now there's one of history's best-kept secrets ? Daleks built the Empire State Building! Those bumps around the mast? Dalek Thay's bumps!

What does the production team the most credit though is that they were able to produce a story that looks like it was shot live action in New York. The scenes in Central Park particularly impressed me as the blending is seamless; I would hazard a guess that most casual viewers would have thought that David Tennant and Freema Agyeman were flown over to New York to shoot this one.

The shanty town of Hooverville is also set flawlessly against the backdrop of skyscrapers; the few establishing shots near the episode's start sum up one of the story's key messages perfectly: people are starving, yet skyscrapers are being built. Something is very wrong.

Similarly, the scene that introduces the audience to Solomon sums his character up equally well. One man has stolen bread from another to feed his starving family. The second man attacks him in retaliation. Solomon steps in, breaks up in the fight and breaks the bread. He then gives them half each.

Hugh Quarshie puts in a superb performance as Solomon. His scenes with David Tennant resonate marvellously; the two actors share a wonderful chemistry on screen. Solomon knows that there is far more to the Doctor than meets the eye, but he still trusts him. He knows that the Doctor is the man to help them.

In contrast, Helen Raynor uses the Daleks' lackey Mr. Diagoras (Eric Loren) to show us the flip side of the coin. Whilst those living in Hooverville have fallen into poverty, he has thrived. And he hasn't thrived though having a pure conscience.

He offers those living in Hooverville "A dollar a day!" to do some work down the sewers for him ? a slave wage even in 1930. A little later on, we see him order the construction workers on the Empire State Building to risk their lives working through the night and when they protest he simply retorts "I can replace you like that!", and he could. Such sentiments still carry a lot of weight even today, where unless you're a plumber you're easily replaceable. You do what you're told or you're out.

Mr. Diagoras also reminded me very much of a character simply called 'the Controller' from a 1972 Dalek story, "Day of the Daleks." The likeness was only strengthened in my mind when the first Dalek emerged from the lift, flanked by two Pig-slaves. Particularly during Jon Pertwee's reign as the Doctor, whenever the Daleks appeared on screen they always had brutish, mute henchmen to do their dirty work. In the 70s it was usually Ogrons, but here Raynor cleverly links her Pig-slaves in with the plot: they aren't just some transposable alien mercenaries, they are humans that have been experimented on and genetically corrupted by the Daleks.

"Behold your Masters!"

When Caan came out of the lift and first spoke, I could feel my brow furrowing. There is something about the Dalek voices in the new series that is so much more disturbing than in the classic series. At first I thought it was down to the outstanding voice talent of Nicholas Briggs, but in his Big Finish audios the Daleks don't sound quite this monstrous. Last night I realised it's not just the voice in itself; it's the mechanical noises that come with it. Whenever we see a Dalek in the new series, every twitch of the eyestalk and every flex of the sucker-arm is emphasised, loudly. It makes them come across as that bit more inhuman.

"Humankind is weak.
You shelter from the dark and yet you have built all this?
My planet is gone; destroyed in a great war.
Yet versions of this city stand throughout history.
The human race always continues."

And so when you hear a Dalek talk like a human, things go off the page in terms of creepiness. One of my favourite scenes in the episode is where Diagoras and Caan are looking out over all the splendour of New York, having an almost casual conversation about war and attrition. Diagoras doesn't seem phased by Caan at all; it may be that he has worked with the Daleks for a long time, but even so the way that he seems almost at ease with them is fundamentally disturbing. It is this that unwittingly leads to his downfall ? Caan is impressed with his "rare ambition" to survive and so selects him as the principal subject for the Daleks' "final experiment"?

Central to the story is the tragic love story of Laszlo and Tellulah. The haunting pre-title sequence showed us the Pig-slaves taking Laszlo away to become one of them, and so when we first meet Tellulah in the main body of the episode she is tormented by his disappearance. If he was going to leave her, then why would he tell her than he wanted her to meet his parents? If he is dead, then who is leaving the flower on her dressing room table each night?

Miranda Raison imbues Tellulah with a lot of gumption, but also a lot of heart.
We see her threatening the Doctor with a fake gun in one scene, and then crying on Martha's shoulder in the next. She has a lot about her ? for example, she can instantly tell that Martha has feelings for the Doctor and that he isn't interested, although she does get the wrong end of the stick somewhat, thinking that the Doctor isn't interested because he's gay, injecting a bit of humour into an otherwise grim episode.

"If I don't make this month's rent I'm in Hooverville.
It's the depression, sweetie.
Your heart might break but the show goes on, 'cos if it stops you starve."

And of course, she brings with her the music. It's rare that we get chance to have a musical number in Doctor Who, but in this story it works delightfully as it really helps the viewer get a feel for the period. The fact that's she's dressed very much 'for the Dads' helps too.

Her reunion with Laszlo is touching, and also surprising in many ways. When she sees what the Daleks have done to him she is obviously upset, but she isn't revolted. If anything, from that little smile she gives it's evident that more than anything she's glad he's alive.

And what of the Daleks?

"We must evolve! Evolve! EVOLVE!"

Although it is only hinted at gently, I get the distinct impression that there is dissent amongst the Cult of Skaro. Sec may be convinced that the Daleks have to evolve to survive, but the other three don't seem so sure. What makes Sec so terrifying here is that he's right, and he's not letting his genetic brainwashing cloud his judgement. In Dalek terms, he's a blasphemer, but because he's free of his conditioning, this time the Daleks could win!

"There are millions of humans and only four of us.
If we are supreme, why are we not victorious?
The Cult of Skaro was created by the Emperor for his very purpose ?
to imagine new ways of survival.
Our purity has brought us to extinction!
We must adapt to survive!"

The scene where Sec assimilates Diagoras not only into his casing but into his mutant form is a wonderful bit of C.G.I. for a TV budget; a proper behind the sofa moment. Those tendrils made me think of the infamous "Genesis of the Daleks" Part Five cliff-hanger and how it should have looked.

Sec's emergence is one of the best cliff-hangers that the new series has spawned. The unavoidable Radio Times cover completely ruined the surprise for everyone of course, but even so I don't blame Russell T. Davies for allowing it ? he has to guarantee ratings to ensure that the show's success continues.

"A life outside the shell. The children of Skaro must walk again."

The hybrid is absolutely horrific. It's somewhere between the Emperor Dalek that we saw in "The Parting of the Ways"; classic series Davros; and the Jagoroth from "City of Death"! Even Thay, Caan and Jast back away in fear.

The first woman to pen a Doctor Who TV episode since Scots playwright Rona Munro's "Survival", Helen Raynor has really done herself proud with this spectacular script. And after a Torchwood episode as good as "Ghost Machine", I expected nothing else. I sincerely hope that she is given a chance to write for the series again next year.

I also think that this story also showcases Russell T. Davies' remarkable skill and foresight as Head Writer ? he's thinking seasons ahead! In "Doomsday" he spared thirty seconds or so of dialogue to give the four Daleks an interesting back story. Now "Doomsday" didn't need the whole 'Cult of Skaro' angle in there; it was already packed to bursting with everything that was going on. But Davies popped it in there regardless, along with a sly little "emergency temporal shift" right at the death. And now those thirty seconds of dialogue have spawned this fantastic adventure. It really makes you think about the significance of all this 'Saxon' stuff?

No other show in the history of television does "utterly barmy" quite like Doctor Who - and pull it off. Were it any other programme, the disperate elements of Daleks in Manhattan would seem like the silliest thing in the world. And that's just the title.

Straight off, we're back in the good old Reithian tradition of 1960s Who, disguising subtle history lessons for all as popularist science fiction. Before this episode, I had never heard of Hooverville or really thought about the Empire State Building being built at the same time as the Depression. Well, you learn a little something everyday, don't you?

The Cult of Skaro, having escaped the battle of Canary Wharf at the end of the last series, are back and desperate for survival. Daleks are at their best when they are cunning, devious and ruthless, and once again we are back in the pre-Davros 1960s when they were just that. Even though the title was a dead giveaway, I still got butterflies when the first one came up in the lift. If that happens to a life long fan, then you they're doing something right down there at BBC Wales.

This instalment was barmy indeed. It was Doctor Who meets Chicago, complete with song and dance number, which I would hedge my bets will be released on the next Murray Gold album. Pig men, Daleks, songs, art deco and yet more in a long history of stupid people helping the Daleks. The supporting cast were great, despite the odd lapse in their American accents, particularly Amanda Raison as Tallulah ("three T's and an H") and Ric Griffin from Holby City (so that's what he did on his sabbatical away from the hospital).

The one word that sums up this episode for me is Fun. Fun, Fun, Fun, with a capital F. If the standard remains this high, Series Three of Doctor Who may well turn out to be the best of New Who yet.

Can't wait for next week.

So here we go... four episodes into the new series and what do we get.

Well, we get 1930s New York, the depression, the Empire State building, a sewer, a nice show, Daleks and pig men... oh, and a walk in a Cardiff park (possibly). We also get a 'human/ Dalek' somewhat pre-emptived by being plastered all over the cover of the Radio Times since Tuesday of that week. Actually, when I saw this cover in the Co-Op, I thought... "Well, at least it's not another animal head stuck on a human body, as has been the fashion this season, since the guy who'd designed the previous season aliens had obviously buggered off to work in Hollywood (probably). But you know... in a kind of way it is, the difference being, its an animal body (a baby octopus, on this occasion) papped on top of a human head!

Anyway... this was all pretty poor stuff. Season one's 'Dalek' did a fine job of re-introducing the Doctors arch rivals to a new audience. Supposedly, the most feared creatures in the universe, the Daleks had become a bit of a joke in the classic series. I seem to remember somebody whacking them with a baseball bat during the McCoy era and their eystick's snapped off, their guns got bent, and their top bits popped up on a spring (I might have made that last bit up, in fact I may well have imagined all of this in some wierd, fevered dream... or not!). In short... they'd become a bit crap. Then 'Dalek' came along, and suddenly they were all the things we'd always been told they were, but had never been given any proof. This episode successfully re-imagined the Daleks as hate driven, merciless, indestructible killing machines. The sequence where the Dalek takes out the two fireteams in the corridor with clinical, mechanical, efficiency was one of the best sequences in the first season (remember that great aerial shot, when the Daleks midsection rotated unexpectantly to fire in the opposite direction). The fact they didn't say much and often failed to respond when spoken too, added to their menace.

Unfortunately, these guidelines seem to have been forgotten. Now, if 'Daleks in Manhattan' is anything to go by, they're reduced to skulking/ trundling around in the Empire State building, in a threadbare laboratory filled with test tubes and bunsen burners!!! They have human swine (more animal heads... where's the imagination!) as slaves, indulge in uninteresting simple minded conversations (probably to pass the time) about half arsed nonsensical master plans and do bugger all in the way of exterminating anything!

Their 'Master' plan, in this case, involves 'hoovering' in some guy into one of their casings, gestating him for a bit, and then having him climb out (still wearing his suit and spats) while the music from 'The Omen' plays (sorry Murray... couldn't resist that one. I still like you're scores, however. they hold up well even if everything else is falling apart). And all this to create a (wait for it)... 'Human/ Dalek" (spoken with an American accent, I mean, couldn't he have gurgled a bit, or something. Our Trans-Atlantic cousins really are taking over everything!).

Forgive me, but I can't see the point. It's the casing that makes the daleks invincible, human/daleks would just get shot. Maybe it's to splice the two thought processes ... but that would introduce all the emotional conflicts the daleks were created to do without. Maybe it's to provide the Daleks with hands so they can handle all these test tubes in the background. Maybe that's the thinking that lay behind the creation of the pig men, except that Dalek 'Gay' failed to listen properly and mistakenly left them with trotters (if the writer can't provide an explanation for the human/pigs, then I quite happily will)!

Or maybe it's just a stupid idea!

Elsewhere we had the usual running about, some faux sentimentality (Lazlo's, 'Phantom of the Opera' bit), a motley collection of accents (some authentic, some pantomime), a dance routine apparently put together by the dancers, during the first take, on a bare stage, with an audience of ten, and some surprisingly dodgy FX. Some of the dialogue ( "Hands in the air... and no funny business!) was less then sparkling, and the whole thing seemed lacking in wit and energy. Tennant reigned it in a bit more then usual, but his occasional exaggerated facial expressions still scream "I'M ACTING!", and Martha continues to be nice, without any real development. She's just too non descript! The production itself managed the difficult feat of looking both lavish and threadbare all at once, and the direction, while not really guilty of doing anything wrong, seemed curiously flat. There was precious little action and literally no excitement.

I'm finding it depressingly easy to slag off this new season of Who. The production team are obviously trying, but the show just seems stuck in a rut. 'Daleks in Manhattan' while clearly meant to be serious, feels like a joke for all the above reasons. I want the show to be good (and there was more good then bad in the first two seasons), cos' if the audience drops off, it'll kill British television Sci-Fi stone dead for another twenty years. ITVs offering 'Primeval was hardly a pinnacle, yet in it's likeable, unpretentious, straight forward way it was preferable to this run of the BBCs supposed flagship. Maybe if the two shows had been pitched against one another, the ratings drop for Who (and I reckon there would have been a significant one) might have galvanised the production staff in a way that as far as I'm concerned, seems very necessary.

Maybe the concluding part will make amends, though the promise of more rampant 'pig' action doesn't bode well.

Oh Dear!!!