Dropped into Downton Abbey

Hello, dear listener, and welcome back to Flight Through Entirety. The only Doctor Who podcast unexpectedly dropped from the television version of this story. I'm Nathan. I'm Todd. And I'm Simon. Well, the doctors know where to be seen this week. Instead, it looks like BBC One have decided to screen an unseen prequel to serve them all my days, a prequel where there's no sign of Matthew Waterhouse, and where the plot seems strangely familiar for some reason. It's everyone's favourite episode 8 of series 3, human nature. So, this is slightly unusual, isn't it? We have had Doctor Who stories that have been roughly based on, or inspired by, sort of, big finish. I'm thinking Dalek. Yeah, and Age of steel. Yeah, right. They both get sort of credits, I think. You know, Mark Platt gets a credit in the closing credits because he's the inspiration for that. But this is just really a straight kind of retelling of Paul Cornell's 1995 New Adventures novel. Yeah, so in one fell swoop, they basically say the new adventures didn't happen. Yes, I did want to talk about Canon. I always do. I know it's all made up, but at the same time, it effectively is saying that the new adventures didn't happen by retelling the story. But hang on, like, in that novel, it's the 7th doctor in Benny, and this is not the 7th doctor in Benny. and there's some other differences too. Well, the doctors just decided to do it again. Yes. Why not, I suppose? Every time I become human, I end up falling in love with Joan Red going back to 1913 or 14. Yes. They are set at slightly different times. Cornell's novel set in sort of April 1914. So what, five, 6 months after this one. So perhaps both of them happened or neither, who knows? I mean, the canon thing is really of no interest to me at all. No, exactly. And what Canon really is, is what can you refer to in Doctor Who? And so this is a bit of a big Easter egg for all of us who are following the new adventures. we all were, weren't we? Oh, yes. That was what Doctor Who was at the time. Yeah, 1995. We just didn't have anything and we hadn't had anything for a long time. And the new adventures, like when I look back on them, I feel a sort of strange reluctance ever to read any of them again. But my memory is that there was some extremely good Doctor Who there. Yes. I've actually got quite a nostalgia for them and I've just started reading them all from the beginning because there are several that I never read at the time. or some sort of they get halfway through. And um, I mean, I'm only up to sort of, what is it? Andrew Cartnell's one, Warhead, whatever it's called, the 2nd of the Times crucible ones, of the cat's cradle ones, rather. And I do have a great nostalgia for them because I, there are some of them that I think were very, very good, or at least spoke to me at the time, and human nature was certainly one of them. And we, as some people in this room may recall, when the series came back in 2005, my future husband and I were deliberately avoiding any spoilers at all, any spoilers at all, even we didn't want to know titles, we didn't want to know who was in them. We wanted to try and revisit our childhood where it was just the episode titles in TV week and you went, oh, what's this? and you watched it. I remember that because we had to avoid you. Yes, yes. Well we had to avoid you. And I know there was much consternation at the time that we'd chosen this route, but however, we all worked through that. But when at the end of 42, the next time comes on and shot by shot it suddenly dawned on me. Oh my god, they're doing human nature. And I think it was the moment when you see him in academic garb and and Joan is the sort of the nurse and it really completely clicks. They're doing human nature and I was so over the moon because this one really, that novel really did mark a pinnacle, I think, of the new adventures books. I think, you know, 1995 was probably a pretty good year for the new adventures books sort of generally. And this one was actually re-released. You can actually still buy it on the Kindle. It was re-released as part of a thing called the history collection, which includes some new adventures and some BBC books and things. And Paul wrote another sort of intro. And he actually says that he was really fond of this novel because he thought his previous novel had been bad. So that was no future. Yeah that was terrible. Yeah, no, he said it was just sort of a tiresome collection of, you know, in-joke references to previous stories. And, you know, that was something that the new adventures could probably get away with better than the new series can because it's only being read by like 4000 people. Well, the print run was microscopically small. Yeah, that's right. That's right. With all due respect to our friends, you've written them. No, no. And it was being read by people who could pick up all of those references and things. But he had decided. And what he says is he wanted to get the doctor to fall in love and he couldn't really do that without kind of breaking the premise of the program. And so that was when the sort of Superman 2 idea hits him. He gives up his time lordiness. Yeah, to become human. Do you remember reading this song? No. By this time I was giving up on the new adventures. I read some of them, but then there were too many hit and misses. So then I just picked and choosed the authors and the ones that they said they were that were really good. And it was around this time that I decided not to continue buying them or reading them. I'd read Kate's and I knew that Paul's were good. So I can't remember if I even read this. I may have purchased it. Did you purchase all of them? I can't remember whether I think by then, Peter and I had consolidated our collection and were just buying one copy and I certainly don't own them now. I've got a box. reading Brian's copies. Yeah, I've got a box. They're not out on the shelf or anything like that. I have a box in the attic and this is the most embarrassing admission that I've made on the podcast, among many embarrassing admissions, but I actually got rid of all my target novelisations but kept the new adventures inexplicably. And I can't, you know, they are upstairs in the attic and I can't imagine pulling them down again. And the only way that I was able to, you know, read this was by buying it again. I wasn't even going to explain. couldn't find it. Well, I just wasn't going to be bothered and, you know, my Kindle was in my hand. What are you going to do? Well, you see, I got rid of the target novelisations too, because as soon as it became apparent that, you know, everything was going to be based on that wonderful thing called VHS. Everything that was extant. And then you had audios of the ones that weren't. The need for the novelisation sort of, for me, evaporated. And I'm a bit, you know, regretful about that because there is, in some respects, much more of a nostalgia about that than there is about the new adventures. But the new adventures are unique. So they in some respects are worth keeping. Yeah, because you can't buy them on DVD or anything. I belong to a group on Facebook, the Doctor Who Target novel people, and they are constantly hunting down sort of, you know rare copies or library copies or hardback. It's usually the wheel in space or something. Yeah, yeah, Paradise Towers. And like I've got a lot of sympathy for that. Certainly, I have great memories of the target novelisations including things like Doctor Who and the cave monsters, doomsday weapon, like all of these ones that were vastly superior to the frankly pertweet stories. Oh, what's up? I'm offended by it. No I love them. I do too. There's a whole lot of Twittery stuff going on at the moment where they're voting on the different covers of the different versions of the target covers. The original doesn't always win out, but sometimes it's like it's too much nostalgia. just go, I just love that cup. I'm sorry, let's have a confession here. The cover that you like is the one that you happen to buy. And with our age group, we would have been buying for some of those earlier ones, we'd have been buying the 2nd cover. Yeah, I had the 2nd cover of the Green Death and of... And we didn't have dinosaur invasion. Yeah, we didn't have the clack version of the dinosaur invasion for instance. And so they're the covers that you think are the best. In fact, I even had a Pyramids of Mars with the neon logo on it which was, didn't, you know, which I, of course, thought was much better than the, than this strange drawn one that was, I can't remember the original. But let's get back to this. So, the cold open. We're right into the adventure. There's things happening. The doctor and Martha are being pursued. We've got the watch, and then we cut to Mr. Smith and his dreams. It's actually a bit cleverer than you think because you think you're being thrown sort of in made arse rays at the very beginning, but it turns out that you're actually even further along. So you think you're starting in the middle of an adventure, but the adventure is actually, you know, it's months now after that. And how long have they been there? How long have Martha and the doctor been there? several months, several months. I know that she keeps saying there's only one month to go. Yeah. So yeah, I think it's supposed to be several months. It is mentioned, like it's 3 months or a term or something. Joan does mention how long they've been there for. But it sets up a lot of interesting questions because I was writing my notes going, well, how do they get the job and all this sort of stuff and then that, of course, is then revealed in the narrative as it goes along. This wouldn't work if the character of Joan wasn't so well written and performed. And I think Jessica Hines is just tremendous, giving the strength to the character of Joan, but also the vulnerability. And as viewers, we obviously have to accept that the doctoral this version of the doctor, Mr. Smith, can fall in love with this character. We've only seen it really once before in Stephen Moffat's episode with the girl in the fireplace, where there's sort of a love interest there. It's a love interest with the actual doctor as opposed to a simplified version of the doctor. So it does work so they are different in that regard, which is why it's quite beautiful, I think. I think too, that this, you know, the fact that this is being done with a 10th doctor, who is a romantic figure with a girl in every fireplace, who was in some sense in love with Rose during the series 2. So that makes this story very different from the novelisation where you've got Sylvester McCoy's doctor who is sort of silly and sort of sweet, but not at all a romantic hero, and where we haven't seen the doctor depicted in that way. Now we're used to it. You know, when Russell brings the doctor back, he's not the neutered public schoolboy of the classic series, which is how Russell actually puts it in the in the kind of series Bible. So we already have a romantic hero and we already, you know, we're travelling with a companion who is in love with a doctor who's attracted to him. So this isn't as series breaking an idea as it was when it was a novelisation. It wasn't a novelisation name. I keep saying novelisation. Let me I'll see whether to cut that out. No, don't cut that out. Yeah. But just can I add, sorry, just going back to the McCoy version though. The McCoy doctor is older, quote unquote. You know, he's someone who presents as in their late 40s, maybe even older by the time you get to the new adventures, and the Joan character in the book is portrayed as older. So it's sort of a more of a sweet later in life, kind of coming together of like minds, rather than in this, where you've got this young, handsome, you know, 30 something person. And so there is a different tone anyway. Are we reading Jonah's older than the doctor? than Mr. Smith? In the in the television? absolutely. I think she's a little older, but not terribly older. But I think I think they are coming to this later in life. You know, they're in their 30s and they're both not married and I think for that time, that is older. Well, she was married. She her husband died, right? Yes, but she's not married if she doesn't have kids. Like, yes, she has that past, but they are both older. Yes. And I like the fact that it gives David Tennant the opportunity to be completely different to his doctor, who is always so confident and talks really quickly, and here he's tongue tidy, he forced downstairs, he's clumsy, he's very, he's not the man that we know. And I think it gives him that opportunity to show a different side to his ability as an actor. I think too, that that is a very moffety scene, that scene with Joan and John Smith just kind of blirting for the 1st time. And um, the doctor's often really super confident, you know, like even with women, Matt Smith's doctor won't be, you know, Capoldi's doctor won't be, but but David Tennant's doctor is sort of sexy. Matt Smith work is more awkward. Yeah, yeah. So this is a very moffity scene. Yeah, well, he's awkward. Yeah. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Like that's Moffatt's sort of go-to sitcom thing. is men and women being awkward around each other. And Paul Cornell is obviously a friend of Stephen Moffat. And in fact, the novelisation includes a character called Mr Moffat, who is named after... Yes, that's hilarious, Stephen Moffat. So I think that that's a sort of very particularly moffity scene and it is really genuinely very funny, and it ends with the sort of fabulous slapstick falling downstairs. Can I just go back to Jane's performance? You sort of say how sweet and sort of wonderful. She's, in some respects, she's the only actor and character in it that you feel could be dropped into Downton Abbey and work because you know, Timothy Latimer is obviously supposed to be ahead of his time because he's obviously a bit psychic or whatever he is. And the other boys are a little bit, you know, differently played. They're not quite right. The headmaster is sort of a bit of a caricature. He's barely in it. And the doctors, well, the doctor, as John Smith, is a sort of style of performance, which I'll come to later. But Joan is the one that feels most like she is in a period drama. And I think that's why it works as well. The way she, the little tick she has, the way she doesn't quite look at the doctor, when she's talking to him and all that sort of thing, the modesty, the way she tells Martha off for, remember, you have to remember your place and so on. It's that sort of prim and proper, you know, the things are done a certain way, you know, and you should know that, and don't be so silly, dear, and all that sort of stuff. She grounds the entire performance in BBC period drama reality. Yeah, yeah. And let's talk a little bit about that because this is our 3rd story this season that's said in the past. And the last time you were here, Simon, you got what was sort of a period piece, once said in the 51st century. And this doesn't do. I think what has been the sort of standard way of depicting the past in Doctor Who, which is the theme park past, you know, we talked about this a great deal in our Shakespeare code episode that all we get are sort of very standard shorthand signifiers of the year 1599 to kind of locate us there, but the basic messages people were basically the same back then. And you were saying something before we were recording, Todd, about the Dalek 2 parter. to do with Martha. Well, just, you know, the Hooverville thing, it's set in a world where racial attitudes are different. Yeah, I mean, I was saying that this is the 1st time, right front and centre, that racism towards Martha is there from the boys and from the other characters, like the headmaster just dismisses her completely as a woman and whether or not that's a woman. Well, as a woman, as a servant, as a person, yeah. Yes, all of those things. The previous 2 times this season, we've dodged that in the Shakespeare code, sort of, you know, a bit of humour and then, you know, left behind and in the whole structure of the Dalek 2 parter. It's not there to be addressed. You know, we've got Hooverville where we've got Solomon is in charge, but would we see other white characters reacting to that the fact that there's a black man in charge? They don't address that. But here, it is there and the frustration, We see the frustration and the resilience of Martha Jones in these episodes. And as it goes along, I feel her angst and her frustration and it's great that it's actually in there and they're not shying away from it. Yes, I think in the earlier episodes, they're conflicted as to whether, whether we want to make a thing about her being a person of colour, or whether we're just trying to say, no, here she is and it's all fine, it's all normal, because of course everyone's sophisticated and, you know, that's the past. And despite the fact that we have gone back into the past before where it could have been addressed or it could have been noted, it wasn't. Well, it is noted in the Shakespeare code. Like she says, you know, I'm not exactly why. Do I need to be worried? And the doctor gives a very kind of white privileged response about, you know, don't be so silly, just walk around like you own the place. Yeah, you think, well, that's perhaps not an approach that... is available. Compare that to Rosa. Yeah, that's right. where both Towson and Mandeep's characters actually suffer from racism. Yes. And thin ice, I think, as well, brings it up and addresses it in a better way. But here, I think, you know, partly it's a kicking the puppy moment, like partly it's a characterisation of Bains and Hutchison as arrogant, horrible, you know, public schoolboy. But it's good characterisation for Martha because, you know, one of the things about Martha is the, you know, the 1st time we see her. She's looking after her family. She's on the phone, making sure that everything's all right for kind of Leo's birthday that night. And we know that she's patient and we know that she's caring and resilient. And so I don't think this story works if Rose is in it at all. You know, like I don't think we've seen rows in the past just dressing in sort of normal clothes and stuff with Queen Victoria and being kind of arrogant and dismissive of people in the past where Martha's put in a position where she's subservient to them and kind of has to wear that. It totally works. And she doesn't get to the doctor and you see that frustration and and then Joan herself is also very of her time in terms of her attitudes, you know. She asks about Martha and Martha says, I used to work for the family. He sort of inherited me. And Jane says, best remember your position. Yeah, you know? And all the way through, the headmaster just dismisses it all the time. But as I said, it's not just because she's black. It's because she's a servant. The servants are seen and not heard. and a woman as well. I mean, they're outside. And a woman as well. pub You know, like, I imagine that's because they're women. Yes, it's because they're women. But the headmaster's attitude is, you know, you don't even address like you don't even talk to me. And I think that's why the racism of 1913 is a different sort of racism because, you know, if you look like that, you're only going to therefore be a servant and therefore it sort of goes hand in hand. It's when, in some respects, racism becomes more aggressive, when there is an attempt to change the socioeconomic positions of people of colour. And that's where you get the aggressive racism of the 50s and 60s. Because these people are getting ideas above their station. Yeah. So while ever Martha's sort of deferential. Quote unquote. She'll be okay. Exactly. Although she is the victim of racism or she gets particularly targeted by Hutchison. Baines. Yes, yes. with that sort of standard association of black people with being dirty. Exactly, yes, yes. Yeah, yeah. It's good. I think it's really good. And I don't think it overwhelms the show. No, no, at all. It adds a texture to it. And I think if it wasn't there, you would have cause to say, well you've sort of whitewashed history if you want to put it that way. I actually like the fact that we're not trying to present the people of 1913 as the same as us. And I think that they come off as somewhat incomprehensible and a bit repellent as well. Well, apart from Tim, because he's the one that is from the present day who feels like he's been dropped into 1913. Yeah, yeah. But that works because that's supposed to, he's supposed to be, you know, a younger version of the doctor, you know, curious and, you know, so on. It never really properly gets explained why he can see things and guess things that are correct. Oh, there's always been, um, the doctor's always met the odd human who's sort of slightly psychic, slightly psychic or slightly obviously, you know, evolved to a to a higher form amongst all the other savages sort of thing, you know, that that's happened before. I wonder whether it's the effect of his possession of the watch kind of echoing back in time. Well, no. Oh, echoing back in time. Yes, I see. Because he does it before he gets the watch. Yeah, yes, you're right. No, quite possibly. That's a satisfactory excuse. Thank you. Thomas Sangster, of course, plays Timothy Latimer. I find him quite Gormless, really. It's a fine performance, like, but I don't, of the 3 younger males. Harry Lloyd is Baines, a son of mine, is by far the most captivating and standout for me, Tom Palmer, who plays Hutchinson. He could be anybody. Like he's competent. I think he does get a good acting moment next week. We'll talk a little bit more about Baines's performances, son of mine next week. He does fabulous upperclass twit, though, when he encounters the space. I say hello. Yes, no, he's brilliant. He is superb. Yeah, he superb. Yeah, really terrible. Because he walks the line between it being a caricature and it being a character. And I think, you know, you can get a, you can get away with a little bit of character. You need a bit of caricature to tell people instantly who this person is and he does that without it just being hammy. Just going back to Thomas Sangster. He looks very young. I think he's afflicted with the fact that he looks like he's 12. And even when you get to Game of Thrones, where he's quite possibly 23 or something. He still looks like he's like 13 years old. And he's supposed to be, he's quite clearly, he's supposed to be the same age as the other 2 boys. They're giving, no, they're giving him his Latin homework to do. There is no way. He is basically the trodden on junior member of the same former as them. I just assumed that he was bullied by them and able to be beaten by them because he was younger than them. Like the sort of fagging system in an English public school. Because, you know, the others are clearly being played by adults so that we can, you know, make them work for long periods of time during the day. They do have some background tastes next week who are clearly very young and again, we'll talk about that. But it does look like Thomas Angst is the only actual child playing a child here. But I just assumed that he was terribly bright and that the upperclass twits, Baines and Hutchison were terribly thick. So he could translate, because he's just been asked to translate Catullus, and, you know, a kid at an English public school before the war would have been doing Latin since they were very young, you know. And so I imagine he could do their homework. Fair enough. But I still think that he is, um, maybe I'm just trying to I'm just projecting part of my childhood at school in that, you know you are, even though you're in the same form as these people, you are the littlest, you are the youngest appearing and, you know even you are the younger because there can be like, you know, 18 months between these kids and that's a long time when you're when you're that age. Anyway, look, it's detail. But he, I think it's just going back to the original point. I think the actor has that floor where he looks like he's just going to look like a child his entire life until he looks like he's 50. I agree with you. I think that's part of my problem with casting him is that he looks just so young compared to the others. In the novel, he is called Thomas Dean, and he is younger than the other boy, and they beat him in the very 1st scene in which he appears, is being beaten by a knotted rope, and then they eventually hang him and kill him, and he is revived because he's got enough kind of residual generation, blah, blah, blah, from the watch. In fact, there's not a watch. No, it's not. It's a cricket ball. And Cornell says that it was Russell's idea to make it a watch and the reason that the watch works is because you can open it. And so you make a decision, you do a physical action, it opens special effect. Yeah, and that's visible. So the choice of what to do with it makes more sense. But the cricket ball is retained in the moment where John Smith has to save the Yes, from the falling piano. the baby and a woman from the from the falling piano, very much shades of Peter Davidson, and I just think it's a bit of the doctor shining through the mask that is on John Smith at that point. And just going back to what you were saying about those other differences about what happens to Tim. I mean, that is a very dark thing to happen. tongue and so on. I mean, you know, hanged, that it's no way in hell you'd be able to do that. No, absolutely. Yeah. I actually think I know why he's called Timothy Dean in the novelisation too. Because Paul Cornell went to a day event that I was at before writing this, and there were 2 boys there, Dean and Unarmed, and he promised to name characters in his next book after. Yeah, he did a lot of that. And Arnand does turn up as a character. and so and then Timothy's last name is Dean, which they obviously change for this. But I reread some of it last night. Famously, there's a character called Nathan Bottomley in the novelisation of human nature. You in human nature, right? Inexplicably failed to turn up in the TV show, even though I thought he was probably the best thing I've ever seen in the book. And our friend Sarah and our dear friend Lucy, who died last year. Both appear in the prologue that's written by Benny and, you know Benny spends some time drinking with the 2 of them and arguing and stuff. And so Paul does this a lot. And it's very sweet. And that's one of the things about those new adventures is we were kind of weirdly adjacent to them. Yes, we were. Yeah, in a way that we probably haven't talked about on the podcast before, but, you know, Kate Orman is someone that we've all known for decades and who was extremely good in all of her novelisations and then Paul, who creates some incredible Doctor Who, in that context, is someone who used to come out and visit and stuff like that. Martha is paired up with Jenny, the other servant in quite a bit of this episode. I think she's great. And so likeable. And when she meets her demise. It's actually quite affecting. Yeah, I think so too. And I think I maybe could have done without the scene of her cowering in the spaceship being menaced by Baines. I think that that's just about at the edge of what I think Doctor Who can do. It's nothing better than that nasty. Oh come now. Do you know what I mean? Like, it's like an arrogant privileged white kid threatening a servant in this sort of super gross way. and she's really sort of properly terrified and she's a character that we've grown to like. She's got this sort of lovely accent. There's that gorgeous scene where the 2 of them are out the front at the pub and Martha's talking and, you know, they run off to see the invisible spaceship land and all of that. She's terribly likeable. But doesn't that make it better? The advantage of having 90 minutes rather than 45 minutes to tell a story is that you can do those things with the characters. You can get to know them before they're taken from you. So you will have more, it will affect you more. That means you can have a more a deeper emotional engagement with the with the plot. You can do that and still have a fast-paced pre-credit sequence for the 1st episode because after that, it all the pacing then drops back into a sort of a more mellow sort of flavour before it then sort of ramps up again. It does exactly what you should be doing with a 90 minute story rather than a 45 minute story. And the advantages of that are just, I think, cannot be overstated. Well, I always talk about Greg and Petra in this context, you know by the time where you finished watching Inferno. You know Greg and Petra? Yeah, you've spent a month and a half with them. Three hours of yell about them. that's right. And you can't possibly get that in a 45 minute episode. Yeah. So otherwise, if it was a 45 minute episode. Jenny wouldn't have would have barely appeared. She'd have been in half a scene with Martha scrubbing the floor. Yeah, yeah. But it's great that both Jenny and Baines take the central roles of son of mine and mother of mine heading into the next episode because the other 2 characters are much more thinly written, which is the girl with the balloon. So she's called Lucy, I think. But she's daughter of mine, yeah. Yeah, yeah. And she skips along to some little music that reminds me of the girl from Remembrance. Yes, I thought that too. Yes. And then Mr. Clark, who owns a farm or... Has a big moustache. And that's about it. You know? And he sort of fobbed off to the side anyway, trying to find the Tartars. But there's still more characters in this than there are. Oh, yeah, but I'm just saying that those 2 are much more thinly drawn than Jenny and. I think for them, you know, Mr. Clarke, it's in the performance and the look and for Lucy, again, performance and look. And we'll talk more about them next week, I think when we sort of see them properly. One of the things I really love about this episode are all the little touches to the past or the future. Like I love all the little flashbacks when Timothy opens the watch to things that we've seen. I love the doctor's journal of impossible things with all the little sketches of rose, blue box, and obviously McCoy and McGann. Yes, McGann becomes canon at that point. Oh, he was always canon. Was that the 1st time we saw, we had reference to the original seer. proper reference beyond Daleks and Cyberman. Yeah. Well, so we decided that the 1st time there were real proper references to the old series was when Sarah Jane Smith comes back in school reunion. Of course. And we think, you know, there are hints at it, but the 1st sort of real proper statement that it's the same kind of continuity is there. But we haven't seen original series doctors and we do see sketches of them here. But we also get with Joan and the doctor when they're walking in the field and she's asking about his past. and Gallifrey and my mother was verity and my father was Sydney, of course, references to Veroti Lambert and Sydney Newman. Yeah. And so there's all those little touches. But that's more of an in-joke for our benefit rather than here is a sketch of Paul McGann. I think, too, that that is a lovely in joke and it's a very poor Cornell in joke as well. It is absolutely beautiful because it shows a real reverence for those 2 people who really did give birth to Doctor Who, and I love it a lot. I think it's, yeah, it's just one. One of the things in this story is the whole Martha visiting the TARDIS, and then she gets the whole, we get the whole explanation in flashback as to what's going on, and it all seems rather rushed and the family are after them. Did you see the face? I've got to then put this thing on my head and become part of the watch. But then she gets to look at the 24 reasons, you know, if something happens to me, The doctor has sat down and obviously had several minutes to be able to explain to her what to do. her not there. Correct. And it's something in terms of the structure that doesn't necessarily... In the original, the doctor gives Benny a note, a handwritten note with all of that stuff, you know. I really like that scene a great deal because I think Murray's music is amazingly atmospheric. It's really, really good. And there's a real kind of sense of dread. And it's partly those quick flashbacks to, you know, tenant gurning his face off in the chameleon arch, which why wasn't it called a transformation arch? I think they really skipped a potential Delta and the Bannerman reference there. I think that's very well directed. I think it's ominous. You know, it's sort of frightening and it is the place where we really find out the premise. It's impossible for us to watch this now without already knowing what's going on, but that's where we find out, isn't it? Oh, yeah. I don't have a problem with that. We come back to it, obviously, later in the episode because Martha needs to, is expressing her anxiety or her frustration with the doctor falling in love. You know, what about women? Had to fall in love with a human. That wasn't me. Oh, I literally went, well, I just literally did that when she actually said those lines. She could have just said, you had to go and fall in love with a human. Like it could have stopped. One of the problems I've got with this season is Martha in love with the doctor goes on and on and on. I don't have a problem with it in the 1st 3 episodes. She has a real moment in episode 3 at the end where she sort of sits down with the doctor and, you know, I feel that there's some sort of moment where she might be letting it go of it a bit, in the Dalek 2 parter, because of the structure of that story, to deliver on her, have 2 conversations, about being in love with somebody who's unavailable, with that fantastic joke in episode 5 that is into musical theatre. But at that point, I kind of feel like, okay, she's having this conversation. She's working it out of her system. And in the last 2 episodes, it sort of made a bit of a joke of in the Lazarus experiment. And last week in 42, I mean, Martha has a love interest and it's sort of like, I feel like she's moved on. And for me, at that point in this episode, just that line, just you know, that wasn't me, just irritates me. I just think the line's a bit on the nose and I think that Freema is well and truly capable of conveying that she's still in love with the doctor without us having to hear her say that. I don't mind her being in love with the doctor. I do think, though, that this does represent a real proper development in her relationship with a doctor, and it's certainly not a story that could have happened any earlier in the season. And I think the Lazarus experiment is really kind of the proper moment where the doctor stops being dismissive of her and is openly appreciative of her. And here, the fact that he trusts her enough to look after him for all of these months, that he knows that she's reliable and responsible and caring, like that's good. That makes her being in love with him a bit less. Um, you know, a little bit more tolerable because if she's in love with him. She's at least in love with someone who likes and appreciates her. And that smile that Tenant gives at the end of the recording where he says, oh, and by the way, thanks, and we freeze frame on that smile, which is a lovely, you know, sort of genuine seeming tenant smile. We don't see his teeth or anything. I think that that helps a bit. But I do agree that that bit of dialogue, I think is on the nose. And, you know, when you're in production, you're not going to be able to see that you're too close to things, it's only from a distance, then, you know, I think the conversation she has next week works perfectly fine without having that better dialogue in there. I just think it's, it was an unfortunate choice for the character and I just think it was tedious. And so every time it happened, I would, you know, roll my eyes and and then, yeah, throw out it because I just thought it was doing rose again. Because Rose falls in love with the doctor, especially the tenant doctor. I think it weighs the character down, but I've actually not minded weighs the program down. fair enough. I've not minded it as much this time round. Like, I can see where they're coming from and what they're trying to do with it, but this is the 1st time that I'm quite irritated by that, but it's not a big deal. No, it's not a big deal. But you know, on the flip side, she does get to slap the doctor. Like, in this episode, which I think is just hilarious, like mother-like daughter. Although I think this time it's earned, whereas I think 2 weeks ago, I think it's not quite earned. Yeah, and it's just done for effect and I have a problem with that but that's a conversation for another time. So let's talk about the dance? Yes, the climax. So the village dance? On the 11th of November. 1913. Yeah, so, I mean, obviously. Yeah, yeah. So this takes place over 2 days. I think it starts on the 10th of November. like he in, you know, I think the Joan and John Smith have that conversation about going to the dance, the initial one that ends up with him falling down the stairs. It's the day before. And I do like where he gets that little moment of doctor-ish sort of sexual confidence to invite her to the dance after rescuing the baby from the falling piano. Yes, yes, yes. That's the moment when he does it. But it is very chaste and wholesome dance, which is entirely appropriate, I guess. Did you recognise the there's a veteran, presumably he's a Boer War veteran because there's a few references to people fighting in the Boer War, including the headmaster and Jones' 1st husband. Well, husband. And he's the one who gets sort of vaporised by Baines. But he was evil mob boss Largo in the Blake 7 classic shadow from early integrity. Are you talking about the guy in the wheelchair? No. Seeking the nation's? Yeah, I don't think he's in a wheelchair though, is he? Is he? I think he's standing at the door. Yeah, yeah, yeah. I can't remember. But yes, yeah. Oh, in this episode, he's standing at the door. Oh, standing at the door. Martha just walked straight past him. Yeah, forget it. Yeah, this is the... I've had enough of this... this is the 1913 crap. Yeah. You know, I'm a woman from 2007. I'm not going to do this anymore. I really like that. Her and Jonah, my MVPs of this episode. Even that the dialogue exchange. He says, you know, back entrance or servants entrance or something I think. And she says, yeah, no, I don't think so, mate. I don't think so, mate. But the beautiful thing is she doesn't even slow down. No. And it is. She's had enough of all your 1913 crap at this. Exactly. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. And so we have, you know, all of the family, I think the little girl has been sitting there at the dance being bored and resentful for quite some time, which I think is sort of super hilarious. And then everyone else sort of converges on it with the lobster guns. They're very strange guns. They are indeed, aren't they? Yeah, I've never thought of them as lobster. They do kind of, they do look like the kind of guns that would have turned up in, you know, mind warp or something. I gather that there was some idea that they were actually an animal in in a sort of frame that finds the sort of disintegration thing, but perhaps that just didn't properly make it to screen. But yeah, like they look like sort of giant lobsters. Yes. And we get all the scarecrows attacking... I'm sure the guns seemed like a good idea at the time. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Well, you know, like Doctor Who at this time actually does quite a good job of trying to differentiate things like spaceships and guns and stuff, like to try and, this is the prop from last year that we've just spray painted. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Exactly. But I love the cliff. I love this whole cliffhanger whereby the doctor isn't there to save the day. John Smith is flailing. Martha is the one that they know. And there's dialogue that he has at the end there. like your friend or your lover. Your choice. I can't even do it half as good, but it's just... He's really good. Fantastic. I do want to spend some time next week. Yes, I'm saving it for next week. He's really tripping. All of that, it's sort of slightly low scale, isn't it? But it is super interesting because the doctor's absent and because a decision is being given to someone who really has no idea and I don't think we could even be confident how he would decide. No, how are we going to get out of this? Yeah, yeah. Yes. I think that's what that's what makes it strong. And it's so exciting that, you know, the universe isn't about to be destroyed or something. You know, it's so much better than it's just about this. I also love the fact that the next time on Doctor Who, when you watch it, actually doesn't give anything away for next week. The way it's cut together is very clever. Yeah, it cheats horribly, but we'll talk more about that next week. Because it uses sequences from the end of the episode, right? But I do like that because quite often next times give quite a bit away. Whereas, whereas I just felt watching and I'm going, yeah, I like the fact that it's a misdirection in the way it's cut together. I just think that the whole thing does have a classic series cliffhanger feel to it. a better classic series cliffhanger feel where you it builds up in the last few minutes to the cliffhanger itself. It's sort of a bit logical. At the same time, it's it's delightful because it is a contrived moment. And when it's all resolved next week, you could cut out the three 4 minutes surround it and the story would have just continued. You know, without this contrivance in the middle of it, which also gives it a very comforting feel. Comforting in a Doctor Who kind of work, comforting that this is how things are done. There's a confidence in this production in terms of the performances in terms of the dialogue, the music, and the design that for me makes this episode up to this point in this season along with Shakespeare code, my favourite 2 episodes up to this point in the season. I just think this is really strong. It's not my favourite thing ever. Like I'm going to give it 8.5 out of 10, but I think it's a really solid episode of Doctor Who. Well, dear listener, this fruit cup isn't going to drink itself, so we're going to grab a paper cup and a chair while we wait a week for Mr. Smith to make his terrible decision. We'll be back next week to check in on the family of blood. In the meantime, you can find us wherever you get your podcasts and you can keep up with us at flightthroughentirety.com. Flight through entirety on Facebook and at FDE podcast on Twitter. You can also find our series 11 flashcast, Jody Interterterra at Jody Interterra.com and at Jody Interterra on Twitter and our James Bond Commentary Podcast, Bondfinger at bondfinger.com, at bondfinger on Facebook, and at bondfingercast on Twitter. Until next time, remember not to let me eat pears. I hate pears. Thank you very much for listening and good night. See you soon. Till next time. That was Flight Through Entirety, starring Todd Beelby, Nathan Bottleley, and Simon Moore. Theme arrangement by Cameron Lamb, Strings performance by Jane Orberg. This episode, dropped into Downton Abbey, was recorded on the 18th of August 2019 and released on the 3rd of November. The Chameleon Arch was originally invented by Terence Deeks, who intended it to be used by John Pertwee's doctor, so he could become human and vote for Edward Heath in the 1974 general election. It is very needed to mention that I was in it. That was really all. I'm in one and I can't remember which one I'm in. I don't have a cold in one of them. You died of what? A cold. Not in that one, but in another one. Is that because of Voltana or something? I get Voltron. I don't know. What a story. Martha is paired up with.