The Androzani Effect

[Andrew Curnow]

On another thread the other day, Jonno asked why I dislike "The Caves of Androzani" so much - so if this thread annoys/irritates you, you can blame him!!

So, why don't I enjoy watching the final Davison story, held in high-regard by the majority of fans, and voted the best story ever in DWM's 40th Anniversary poll? There are a few reasons - and can I just say, I've never liked it, not since I first watched it in 1984, so it's not a case of being determined to be different or anything like that.

First, the story. I'm pleased so many people enjoy it (the 80s fanboy in me loves that DWM's best ever is a JN-T tale) but for me it just doesn't feel like Doctor Who at all. I suspect I picked up on that back in 1984 - to a large extent the Davison era was 'my' era, so when his final story was one that is so different in style and feel and tone to most, if not all, of his era, it is perhaps inevitable that I didn't like it. But, in a nutshell, it's an unpleasant story about unpleasant people. I'm scratching my head trying to think of any other stories where there are NO sympathetic 'guest' characters, but I can't. But in Androzani, there's not one 'ally' for our heroes, nor even any characters who one can warm to, or side with, or even sympathise with. Jek's tale may arguably be a sad one, but as we see him in this tale he certainly doesn't pluck at my heart strings; Morgus is clearly out for himself, and not bothered about the cost in lives; Stotz is the same; Chellak is happy to send a soldier to his death if it covers up his own mistakes; Sallateen is thrilled to find that Peri and the Doctor are dying... I can't find it in me to care about any of them.

This means that our sympathies are supposed to lie wholly with the Doctor and Peri. Now I've recently seen a lot of criticism of "Castrovalva" on the grounds that it was poor judgement to expect the audience to care about two companions we've only just met (ie, Nyssa and Tegan take the lion's share of the action, in the first two episodes especially); if that's true, then how much worse is the situation in Androzani - we only met Peri in the previous story, and even then she didn't really steal the limelight ("Planet of Fire" is far more Turlough's exit story than Peri's debut). So why, really, should we have much in the way of emotional investment in her fate here?

Which leaves the Doctor. Now, don't get me wrong, Davison gives a stunning performance here, but what does it say about the Doctor? A couple of stories previous, Davros had mocked the Doctor, saying in effect that with his optimistic, 'good-guy', view of the universe, he was completely wrong ("you deny what is real"). Androzani seems to be saying the same thing, and clarifying that Davros was correct - here, the Doctor is faced with a brutal world, and brutal people all out for themselves, with not an ounce of nobility, of selflessness between them. And the Doctor apparently cannot hope to fight them (and doesn't even try, which seems to me even worse).

Again, I'm all for the show doing something perhaps a little bit different, and certainly for it 'confronting' the Doctor with what he does and thinks (the scene with Davros is a great scene, and the bitterness in the Doctor's voice at the end of the story when Tegan leaves him - "It seems I must, mend my ways" - is heartbreaking); but I don't think the final story of a Doctor is the place to do it, if the outcome is that the Doctor is proven to be wrong in his beliefs.

The other thing, again on a story level, and following on from the above, is that the Doctor's role in the story is so minimal. The gun-smuggling/Spectrox mining scenario is played out almost entirely on its own, while the Doctor is only concerned with getting back to the TARDIS with Peri. Again, I don't think it's a good choice for a Doctor's final story, where surely the focus should be very much on the Doctor himself.

Maybe it was Bob Holmes little joke at the show's expense, presenting a story where all the Doctor does is get locked up and escape (by the army in part 1, by Jek in part 2, by Stotz in part 3) but I'm afraid it irritated me in 1984, and still did last time I watched the story - because I always have that nagging sense of wanting the Doctor to actually escape so he can get on with fighting the good fight (as is usually the case).

There are other niggles, too (though not the Magma monster - I don't think it's that bad). For example, I always have the sense that fans are very forgiving of stories they like, overlooking things that in lesser stories they would tear to shreds. Part 1's cliffhanger is the perfect example - if Jek has a handy way into the heart of the army base, why hasn't he already sent the androids in to massacre the troops? Being able to steal the Doctor and Peri away is one thing, but why does he bother (and if he's so desperate for Peri, why does he waste time) making android copies of them for the army to shoot? It's as narratively pointless as the end of part 1 of "The Leisure Hive" but whilst the screaming Doctor is often moaned about, the firing squad scene seems to escape unscathed.

Anyway, I've gone on at far too much length, so apologies for that. I also ought to add, that having recently revised my opinion upwards of several stories I previously didn't rate at all (Silver Nemesis, Evil of the Daleks, Terror of the Autons) I'm planning to re-watch Caves for the first time in probably seven or eight years, and see whether I actually now quite like it. There are, certainly, some things I do like - I've always liked the fact that the fourth Doctor dies to save the entire universe, while the fifth Doctor dies to save just one person, almost a stranger to him. That's a neat touch when you look at the series as a whole.

But, enough waffle, what does anybody else think of the legendary Caves of Androzani? I shall be watching part 1 tonight, and will do my utmost to follow the advice of "If you can't find anything good to say, say nothing"!

[Carol Baynes]

It's a great piece of Dr. Who. Untypical of the Davison era, but ironic in that it plays to the fifth Doctor's strengths. He's a vunerable hero!

[Captain Tancredi]

I can see some of Andrew's point, though- I certainly didn't enjoy Caves in 1984 and I think it's taken a bit of growing up and understanding what Holmes and Harper were trying to do to appreciate it a bit more. Graeme Harper's directorial style jars badly with the subtleties of Peter Davison's characterisation and loses some of Holmes's satirical intent (see my Target review for some of the elements which seem to have been lost in the mix). But the literary model for Caves seems to be the Jacobean revenge tragedy, the key to which lies in its bloodthirstiness and the inevitability of a climax which leaves most of the characters to kill each other- there's an inevitability about the resolution of Caves which means that the Doctor and Peri are pretty much spectators for most of the story.

But Nicola Bryant hits the ground running, doesn't she?

[Paul Clement]

I'm with Andrew in as much as I feel that Caves of Androzani is a vastly overrated story. For me, the only instances I really enjoyed seeing was the Doctor's reactions in the closing scenes in episode 3 when it's clear to see just how important it is to him that he gets back to save Peri, and the way in which that is borne out by his sacrifice of his own life for hers atthe end. As Andrew says, the counterpoint between the fourth and fifth Doctor's regenerations is a good one, and it feels more in keeping with the two distinct characters each Doctor has. However, apart from that, there isn't all that much going for Caves from where I'm sitting.

[Captain Tancredi]

There's also the idea floated in DWB (I think) about fifteen years ago that the Fifth Doctor is for much of the time the one who gets vital things wrong (Adric, the Silurians, Tegan's departure) but finally, having led Peri into the middle of a bloodbath, gets it right and saves her.

[Andrew Curnow]

That's an interesting idea, although I suspect it might well be a 'seeing patterns in things that aren't there'. Interesting though.

[Jonno]

Hmm, I'm assuming you took your thread title from a Paul Cornell (IIRC) article in DWB some 20 years back about how Caves adversely affected S22 when Saward tried to replicate it - Peri being lusted over etc. etc. ?!

Caves is my favourite story of the 80s and probably Top 5 or thereabouts of all time. But I'll hold my hands up and admit that 23 years ago the younger fanboy in me rated Resurrection as my season favourite (as did the readers of DWM)! I am still fond of Resurrrection, but once I'd obtained Caves on video in the early 90s it shot up in my estimation.

I think most of the reasons I rate it so highly are the same ones that you dislike it so much, Andrew - I love gritty, "dangerous" drama (I watched the infamous early Spooks episode last night which had death by industrial sized chip-pan fryer - not nice) and bleak stuff - not all the time naturally, or you'd be thinking there's something wrong with me!

Back to Caves and I don't have a problem with the fact there's no sympathetic characters - it just makes the situation bleaker and more desperate for the Doctor and Peri, not to mention the fact that they are both dying too. It just ratches up the tension for me.

Sharaz Jek for me was right up there with the great single villains of the earlier days - Greel, Morbius, Sutekh, Davros and so on. I love the scene where he viciously slaps the Doctor and snarls at him.

It's a good story for female viewers too - all the male characters (including the Doctor) die but all the female characters (yes, all two of them!) survive!

I can't agree with your comment about it not feeling like Doctor Who - as the old argument goes, what does Doctor Who feel like? We usually applaud it for its diversity of style, even if some of those styles aren't to our individual tastes.

Good on you for giving it another go - I'll be interested to see if any of your opinions change!

[Perry Vale]

Part 1's cliffhanger is the perfect example - if Jek has a handy way into the heart of the army base, why hasn't he already sent the androids in to massacre the troops? Being able to steal the Doctor and Peri away is one thing, but why does he bother (and if he's so desperate for Peri, why does he waste time) making android copies of them for the army to shoot? It's as narratively pointless as the end of part 1 of "The Leisure Hive" but whilst the screaming Doctor is often moaned about, the firing squad scene seems to escape unscathed.

This was my biggest problem with the story, it's a bit ludicrous & makes very little sense. Personally I think it's a good story, but most definitely over-rated. The ep.3 cliffhanger is cool though.

[Paul Monk]

I like the story especially as Perry says the episode 3 cliff hanger. I love the fact that the 5th Doctor dies not saving the universe but saving the life of his companion. That's just very 5th Doctor.
However I can see a lot of Andrew's points and Androzani definitely sticks out like a sore thumb when you watch the the entire Davison run.

[Si Hunt]

When I was a kid I didn't like "Androzani" at all - back then, I based my opinion of a story largely on its "feel", and this one was grimy, dark and not very nice.

But as an adult, I've changed my mind. It's so refreshing to see Doctor Who being made so superbly - the dialogue, the characters, the music and the direction make it a joy to behold. Not that a story should be judged on how it looks, but the plot itself is not bad either, and to an extent the story is about the characters - Morgus, the corrupt politician, Jek the scarred survivor and the Doctor - the "good guy" about to make the ultimate sacrifice.

we only met Peri in the previous story, and even then she didn't really steal the limelight ("Planet of Fire" is far more Turlough's exit story than Peri's debut). So why, really, should we have much in the way of emotional investment in her fate here?

See, I find I can easily sympathise with Peri based on this story alone. Both Nicola Bryant and Peter Davison deliver great performances - they are simply innocents, dragged into what the Doctor calls a "pathetic little war". The point, to an extent, is that there is no-one sympathetic on Major. It's a grimy situation that runs away with itself and catches them both in it. Bryant's gasping, crying performance as Peri is breathtaking.

Androzani seems to be saying the same thing, and clarifying that Davros was correct - here, the Doctor is faced with a brutal world, and brutal people all out for themselves, with not an ounce of nobility, of selflessness between them. And the Doctor apparently cannot hope to fight them (and doesn't even try, which seems to me even worse).

And Davros was right - the world is brutal, but the Doctors fight is to save Peri, which he eventually manages to do. Perhaps in this, he shows that he can still pull a victory out the hat. This is his fight, in this story.

because I always have that nagging sense of wanting the Doctor to actually escape so he can get on with fighting the good fight (as is usually the case).

To me, "Androzani" (like "Revelation") is refreshing because it's different - it allows us to get to know different characters, and is a pleasant contrast to the usual formula of "Doctor meets rebels, overthrows ruling elite". With a hundred stories like that, I'm all for a more character-orientated piece like "Caves".

if Jek has a handy way into the heart of the army base, why hasn't he already sent the androids in to massacre the troops? Being able to steal the Doctor and Peri away is one thing, but why does he bother (and if he's so desperate for Peri, why does he waste time) making android copies of them for the army to shoot? It's as narratively pointless as the end of part 1 of "The Leisure Hive" but whilst the screaming Doctor is often moaned about, the firing squad scene seems to escape unscathed.

The war is one of tactics, more than anything. Jek rigs the execution to humiliate Chelak, which is a victory for him. On top of that, I think it's a great cliffhanger, and absolutely doesn't "cheat" due to the sneaky shot of Jek entering the cell at the end of Episode 1 that you can glimpse if you're paying attention.

Why isn't this thread called "Andrew Curnow Brings Down The Caves Of Androzani?"

Si.

[Andrew Curnow]

The war is one of tactics, more than anything. Jek rigs the execution to humiliate Chelak, which is a victory for him

That's just an excuse - nicking Chelak's prisoners from under his nose is humiliation enough, surely, without going to the time & trouble of copying them.

Why isn't this thread called "Andrew Curnow Brings Down The Caves Of Androzani?"

I thought you had the copyright on that! As Jonno spotted earlier, the title is indeed nicked from Cornell's famous DWB article.

[Jonno]

So, have you watched part 1 yet tonight?

[Andrew Curnow]

Ah, no. I didn't end up watching it last night (for reasons detailed on the Aargh thread in fact) and have been watching Life on Mars tonight. Tomorrow, definitely. Well, probably...

Going back to the issue of the "feel" of Doctor Who, you're right, Jonno, in that we always praise up the show's huge diversity. But I think in a nutshell that the sheer grimness, and the absence of the usual 'Doctor interferes in domestic affairs to help improve matters' backbone to the story, makes it very un-Whoy to me. At least, it certainly did at the time, and that feeling still lingers.

But I will watch it tomorrow.

[Si Hunt]

I think the biggest flaw is why Jek wants Peri to stay with him, and is so desperate to keep her beauty intact, when he can knock up an exact replica of her in ten minutes!

Si.

[Andrew Curnow]

Actually I don't have a problem with that element - he might be able to make a perfect physical copy of Peri, even one with a fair degree of 'character' (ie, like the Salateen copy) but he would still KNOW that she wasn't real.

Anyway, I watched part 1 last night on my old VHS (my goodness, you really can tell the difference going back from watching a DVD to a VHS - it looked like the lens had been smeared with vaseline). Got to go to work in a minute though, so I'll elaborate on that later! I will admit, though, that I quite enjoyed it. The long, two-handed opening spiel with the Doctor and Peri is very entertaining, and allows the Doctor to be very Doctorish (it reminded me a little of the start of "The Krotons" where the Doctor is talking about two suns and sulphuric acid).

[Paul Monk]

I think the biggest flaw is why Jek wants Peri to stay with him, and is so desperate to keep her beauty intact, when he can knock up an exact replica of her in ten minutes!

Maybe he once caught his winky in some circuitry. Those capicators can give you a bit of shock!

[Si Hunt]

Gosh!

Why is Andrew watching "Androzani" on VHS? Is it a nostalgia buzz? Or was Zel hogging the DVD player watching chick flicks?

Si.

[Anthony Williams]

or... does Andrew not own Androzani, as he hates it so much!?

Ant x

[The Secretive Bus]

I never used to like this story, mainly for the whole grittiness thang. But upon rewatching it recently I found myself thoroughly enjoying it because every aspect of the production (asides from the monster) is superb and played with 100% intensity. It's not really a Whoish sort of story, though that does mean it works as a great little drama in its own right.

[Rob McCow]

Maybe he once caught his winky in some circuitry.

Tee hee!

I reckon that Androzani is intense in the same way as Inferno, but it's still essentially Doctor Who. A lot of the stories in Season 21 are trying to be as intense as Androzani, but only one or two pull it off. The storyline of Resurrection of the Daleks for example is far more bleak, as is Warriors of The Deep. The body counts of both stories are far higher! The final fate of the Master in Planet of Fire is similar to that of Sharaz Jek too. Androzani certainly isn't out of place.

[Andrew Curnow]

does Andrew not own Androzani, as he hates it so much

Indeed, Monitor, indeed - I haven't succumbed to buying the DVD of this one. Yet...

[Dirk Gently]

You'll know if you upset Zel, you'll end up with it for your Birthday.

[Jonno]

Yet...

Given this subtle hint, plus his admission that he liked Part 1, I can sense that Andrew's wavering and is seeing the light!

[Andrew Curnow]

In the words of JNT, Stay Tuned!

[Andrew Curnow]

Watched part 2 tonight. I'll gladly admit that it was perfectly watchable - I suspect I'll end up retracting my criticism of the story sidelining the Doctor; in the same way as "The Hand of Fear" highlights the Doctor & Sarah at the expense of the plot, so I think with "Caves..." the story is secondary to the Doctor's journey alongside it. But we'll see.

Jek makes a strong impression, although in no way a sympathetic one, not even with his tale of being scalded alive. There were some nice little directorial touches - the slow fades from the line "Morgus' head" to a shot of Morgus head; Peri flinching at Jek's hand on her shoulder, and then doing so again later when the Doctor touches her. The only major criticism I would offer is that the scene between Stotz and Krelper seems just nasty and gratuitous for no reason. If it served some purpose, then fine, but it doesn't tell us anything about the characters we didn't already know - Stotz is mean & nasty, ooh big shock.

But, on the whole, it's a more positive response to the story than I've ever had before. I still can't see myself warming to it - I would say it's enjoyable but not entertaining, if that makes sense. I suppose it's just not really my type of Who, so although I may end up liking it as an example of a grimmer, gritter tale, I'm never going to end up loving it.

But, two episodes down, two to go - Stay Tuned!