The 1996 Doctor Who: The Movie is best remembered for The Eighth Doctor's announcement that he is "half-human". For years I dismissed this as 'poppycock' and assumed he was joking.In my head, it could easily be dismissed as flippancy and confusion brought on by the unstable nature of his regeneration.
However, since discovering (in the official BBC Doctor Who FAQ) that this statement is considered 'canon', I'd started to come around to the idea.
Why shouldn't he be half-human (on his mother's side)? It would help explain his obsession with the Earth and it inhabitants and why his granddaughter, Susan, went to school here.
Oddly, the more I thought about it, the less it bothered me; clearly his Gallifreyan genes are dominant, but it actually adds some credibility to the fact that out of the whole expanse of time and space he is always drawn back to Planet Earth and so enjoys the company of humans.
And just as I was becoming comfortable with this idea, Russell T Davies pulls Journey's End out of the bag and proves that The Doctor, "our Doctor", is 100 per cent Time Lord; which I guess means The Eighth Doctor really was in a disorientated state after his troubled regeneration and either didn't know what he was talking about... or (more likely given the context) was just having a bit of fun.
Of course, it's The Doctor's nemesis, The Master, who is more adamant about this Doctor's half-human nature... and he is clearly insane throughout this adventure - he also claims the TARDIS is his and that The Doctor has stolen his body!
Although, on screen, this was his only turn as the Time Lord, Paul McGann is one of my favourite Doctors - in fact, I'd possibly place him second after David Tennant. Not because of this movie - although it isn't quite as bad as many fans make out - but because of his brilliant Big Finish portfolio.
His adventures with Lucie Miller (Sheridan Smith), in particular, capture the humour and pace of modern Who - but stand as (mostly) excellent plays on their own. McGann has the energy, honesty and eccentricity for a perfect Doctor.We shouldn't forget that The Movie also saw the excellent Sylvester McCoy's last on-screen outing as The Doctor as well.
He is forced to make an emergency landing on Earth, while ferrying The Master's remains back to Gallifrey, after he was executed by the Daleks (sounding particularly squeaky) on Skaro (presumably during a period of peace between the Daleks and the Time Lords).
Arriving in San Francisco in the middle of a gun battle between Chinese gangs, he is gunned down as he emerges from the TARDIS and later dies on the operating table when surgeon Grace Holloway (Daphne Ashbrook) becomes confused by his two hearts.
Meanwhile The Master has turned into a mercurial snake-creature and slithered off to take over the body of paramedic Bruce (Eric Roberts). He realises this is only a temporary stop-gap as this human form begins to fall apart almost immediately and so is determined to take the Doctor's body - and future regenerations - for his own.
Roberts' portrayal of The Master becomes increasingly camp and pantomime as the story progresses, but shows early signs of the glorious madness that John Simm brought to the role in The Sound Of Drums.
If there is one thing that The Movie does better than the TV show, it's the baroque/steampunk redesign of the TARDIS interior; for once we get an idea of the vast scale and grandeur of the time machine - something, sadly, the new Who seems determined to sidestep.
There's also the issue of the confusion over the whole Eye of Harmony issue; The Deadly Assassin established that the Eye of Harmony is on Gallifrey and so the object in the TARDIS - although referred to as the Eye - is obviously just a link back to Gallifrey.
And that's symptomatic of this film's major flaw: it was clearly written by someone who knew something about the mythology of Doctor Who - enough to convince a television company (Fox) to make the film - but not enough to get all the details right. The script uses names and references from the show's long history, but a lot are off by 45 degrees, necessitating convoluted fan speculation to shoe-horn them back into the Whoniverse canon.
Because the film was being used as a "back-door pilot" for a possible American series of the show, which already had 30 years of history by that point, it's obviously trying to simplify (dumb down?) The Doctor's backstory and make him more accessible for a mainstream American audience.
It clearly didn't work, because the film tanked in the States and no series was forthcoming. In retrospect, we should be thankful, of course, because had it taken off in America, I doubt we would have had Russell T Davies' relaunch on BBC1 in 2005.
Wouldn't it be brilliant to see McGann return to the Whoniverse, even, if only for a brief two-Doctor moment with David Tennant, as with Peter Davison's turn for Time Crash (the Children In Need special) last year.
I believe the latest rumour is that he will appear in Time War-related flashbacks in one of next year's specials - but I don't know how much of that is based on fact and how much on wishful thinking.




"And that's symptomatic of this film's major flaw: it was clearly written by someone who knew something about the mythology of Doctor Who - enough to convince a television company (Fox) to make the film - but not enough to get all the details right.
ReplyDeleteNot true -- the fact is that the producer of the TV Movie wanted this to fall directly in line with the series after "Survival". Problem was, Fox and Universal, who co-produced with the BBC, had their own ideas of how to re-boot the story, and were very forceful in negotiations. BBC didn't care, as long as they got paid. Read the excellent book on the making of the TV Movie by Gary Russell. Looking back, it's amazing the TV Movie fit in with the series at all!
"The script uses names and references from the show's long history, but a lot are off by 45 degrees, necessitating convoluted fan speculation to shoe-horn them back into the Whoniverse canon."
This has been true in the classic series as well as the new series. There are countless examples, even within the classic series, of contradictory facts and storylines.
If you want to rationalize both statements as "canon" you could always presume the following...
ReplyDeleteTimeLord genes are dominant; ergo a TimeLord who mates with another species will beget another Time Lord. Meaning that, although he is "half-human", genetically he is pure Time Lord.
Meanwhile Donna had her genes spliced with Time Lord DNA and still retains many human attributes; like her human brain which had grown into it's current configuation, making it incapable of handling a Time Lord consciousness.
Meanwhile "Doctor 10.5" grew a Time Lord brain as it was instructed by the Time Lord genes and was capable of sustaining The Doctor's consciousness. Otherwise, that was a very nasty trick to play on Rose, leaving her with a half-human Time Lord whose head will one day (metaphorically) explode.
Thank you, Steve, for your erudite amendments to my opinions. I didn't know the "politics" behind the film and so was judging it by what I saw on the DVD :-)
ReplyDeleteOf course, I realise that Doctor Who's continuity has never been air tight, but I felt The Movie made more careless slips that we're used to!
PMikey, as always, quick in with a clever solution... ahh, the joy of Doctor Who: anything can happen (and then the fan community will retroactively tie it all together).
Thank you both!
Yes...read the fascinating book and realize how they wanted to make Borusa the Doctor's father and a whole heap of other rubbish.
ReplyDeleteIt did nothing to convince me that the people making it had any idea of what Doctor Who was actually about...
Compare this to the first episode (Rose) of the TV series and you'll see how to keep Doctor Who about WHO.
The Doctor is a member of the World Health Organization?!?
ReplyDeleteJust kidding...just kidding...
Part of the problem with American Televison is the networks catering to the lowest common denominators.
Instead of challenging their audiences' intelligents, the spoon-feed them with mind-numbing pablum.
Hence the assumption (by the networks) that the average view has zero attention span and retentive value, forcing them to try and wrap up as many niggling questions into a nice little package instead of slowly unveiling secrets over time (or even never answering the mysteries AT ALL!).
They just don't get the point that if you ever clear up to many mysteries about The Doctor, then it won't be "Doctor Who" any more, it will simply be "The Doctor".