Doctor Who: The Idiot’s Lantern

London, 1953: the day before the coronation of Queen Elizabeth II sees a record increase in television ownership, but there are strange things happening in houses with new televisions, and people are disappearing…

Cast and Crew

David Tennant as the Doctor
Billie Piper as Rose Tyler
Maureen Lipman as the Wire
Ron Cook as Magpie
Jamie Foreman as Eddie Connolly
Debra Gillett as Rita Connolly
Rory Jennings as Tommy Connolly
Margaret John as Grandma Connolly
Sam Cox as Detective Inspector Bishop
Ieuan Rhys as Crabtree
Jean Challis as Aunty Betty
Christopher Driscoll as Security Guard
Marie Lewis as Mrs Gallagher

Written by Mark Gatiss

Directed by Euros Lyn

Originally aired on the 27th of May 2006 on BBC One in the United Kingdom.

Synopsis

London, 1953: the day before the coronation of Queen Elizabeth II sees a record increase in television ownership, but there are strange things happening in houses with new televisions, and people are disappearing…

High Points

  • Rose’s comments on the Union flag.
  • Pretty much everything Maureen Lipman said.
  • The Doctor turning the tables on DI Bishop.

Low Points

  • Despite her being a high point, there were just a couple of points where Maureen Lipman overacted a tad.
  • On occasion, Eddie descended a bit too far into stereotype.

The Scores

Sucking the life out of people through their televisions… didn’t we see that in Batman Forever? This is significantly better-handled than that though, and has a nice fresh shine on it. Four out of six for originality.

The effects were a problem, as there was the difficult task of showing people without faces. It seems they went for the postprocessing option, which at times looked excellent and at times looked like someone had sat on the smudge tool in Photoshop. The same for the life-sucking effect as well. The red lightning was rather nice though. Three out of six.

A very nice story. It’s good to see that the TARDIS isn’t entirely accurate still, despite the occasional precise landing we’ve seen recently. The enemy’s motivation becomes clear and understandable, and there’s a nice simple line between good and evil. We don’t always want this of course, but it’s very suitable this week. Seeing Mark Gatiss on the credits at the start gave me high hopes, as from last series we know he’s a good writer. He did not disappoint. Five out of six.

I was wondering if I should criticise Jamie Foreman’s acting, but I think that was just excessively stereotypical characterisation, and he did what he was asked to do very well. Maureen Lipman cannot really be faulted; again it looks more like she’s doing what she was asked to do and doing it perfectly. Six out of six.

There’s not a huge amount of emotional response here. The evil television thing is a little scary, but too overblown to really feel like it could happen. I found myself getting more involved in the situation of the Connolly family — which, come to think of it, may well have been the intention. Four out of six.

Period production is difficult, but they did pretty well. Alexandra Palace looked as it might have done during its heyday, and I didn’t notice any modern buildings creeping into any background shots, although some of the masonry paint in the Connellys’ street looked a bit too modern. The music is classic Doct Who stuff, and deliciously inappropriate at points. Four out of six.

Overall, a very enjoyable yarn, but I can’t help thinking that it could’ve benefited from a bit more length. Five out of six.

The Idiot’s Lantern (a good title, actually) receives a grand total of thirty-one out of forty-two.

17 replies on “Doctor Who: The Idiot’s Lantern”

  1. Low Point
    I had a problem for the fix for all of the people who were incarcerated by the police. How did they get their faces back? Magic? Did the beams work the other way? They should have shown something to explain their return to normal. All in all I thought this was an ok episode.

    I did like the bit with the video tape, though.

    • Re: Low Point

      I had a problem for the fix for all of the people who were incarcerated by the police. How did they get their faces back? Magic? Did the beams work the other way? They should have shown something to explain their return to normal. All in all I thought this was an ok episode.

      I did like the bit with the video tape, though.

      We get quite a bit of dues ex machina on Doctor Who, so a lack of an explanation is as good as getting a contrived one.

      • Re: Low Point

        We get quite a bit of dues ex machina on Doctor Who, so a lack of an explanation is as good as getting a contrived one.

        Indeed. I think it wouldn’t feel quite like Doctor Who without the deus ex machina bits.

        That said, the whole "faces getting stolen" bit seemed a bit contrived all on its own so I guess I can buy the fix. I have to admit, I saw that coming.

        • Re: Low Point

          We get quite a bit of dues ex machina on Doctor Who, so a lack of an explanation is as good as getting a contrived one.

          Indeed. I think it wouldn’t feel quite like Doctor Who without the deus ex machina bits.

          That said, the whole "faces getting stolen" bit seemed a bit contrived all on its own so I guess I can buy the fix. I have to admit, I saw that coming.

          I agree, once Rose was in jeopardy it was obvious that everything would be all better at the end. Still you’re emotionally involved in the show because Rose has no face, but you still know it will work out.

          While it is Dr. Who, a litttle less dues ex machina would be a good thing, even IMHO contrived explainations.

          • Re: Low Point

            While it is Dr. Who, a litttle less dues ex machina would be a good thing, even IMHO contrived explainations.

            I usually don’t mind, but this one was a bit much. I think it would have been better if the Doctor had sent DI Bishop back to the holding area with one of the TVs from the shop. It also would have given DI Bishop more of a hero role at the end.

      • Re: Low Point

        We get quite a bit of dues ex machina on Doctor Who,

        (and three other people follow up and repeat the same mistake)

        AAAAAAIIIIIIEEEEEEEEE. That’s mental chalkboard-scratching in my book!

        It’s deus, people, deus ex machina. As in, "god in the machine." It’s, like, Latin.

        • Re: Low Point

          AAAAAAIIIIIIEEEEEEEEE. That’s mental chalkboard-scratching in my book!

          It’s deus, people, deus ex machina. As in, "god in the machine." It’s, like, Latin.

          Hold up, I got it right in my reply.

        • Re: Low Point

          deus ex machina. As in, "god in the machine." It’s, like, Latin.

          Actually "god out of the machine" or "god from the machine", from a plot device in ancient plays where a "god" would be lowered down on some rigging gizmo (the "machine") and step out to make things right.

          Not to be confused with "ghost in the machine"

    • Re: Low Point

      I had a problem for the fix for all of the people who were incarcerated by the police. How did they get their faces back? Magic? Did the beams work the other way? They should have shown something to explain their return to normal. All in all I thought this was an ok episode.

      I did like the bit with the video tape, though.

      The videotape was good — tape over her. :)

      I have seen face stealing on one other tv show, the episode of Star Trek TOS where the little boy with superpowers tries to take over the ship. As I recall the crew members who had their faces erased at least acted like they were uncomfortable. Good. :) What kept going through my mind: grandma’s hungry? How is grandma breathing? Lack of breathing would have *me* tap-dancing on the bedroom floor …

      Is grandma breathing out of her ears? Does she haves noses on her kneeses?

      :/

      Other than that, and the special effect fuzziness that the reviewer noted, this was certainly a fun episode. I suspect the little boy will grow up to be involved in Torchwood somehow, but I’m starting to see Torchwood everywhere.

      I loved the more assertive Rose ("mom dated a sailor"), and the Doctor’s reaction to being KO’d by the punch. This episode had some decent laughs. :)

      -Joe

      • Re: Low Point
        [/quote]

        I suspect the little boy will grow up to be involved in Torchwood somehow, but I’m starting to see Torchwood everywhere.

        -Joe
        [/quote]

        Is there a Torchwood reference in each episode this year, like Bad Wolf from last year? Is it confirmed anywhere?

        • Re: Low Point

          I suspect the little boy will grow up to be involved in Torchwood somehow, but I’m starting to see Torchwood everywhere.

          -Joe
          [/quote]

          Is there a Torchwood reference in each episode this year, like Bad Wolf from last year? Is it confirmed anywhere?

          [/quote]

          I believe I have seen three or four: the episode with Queen Victoria and the werewolf and the Christmas special spring to mind. As I recall Torchwood is also mentioned in the Cybermen episodes. The writers are definitely pushing the concept. :)

          -Joe

          • Re: Low Point

            I believe I have seen three or four: the episode with Queen Victoria and the werewolf and the Christmas special spring to mind. As I recall Torchwood is also mentioned in the Cybermen episodes. The writers are definitely pushing the concept. :)

            -Joe

            The torchwood in School Reunion would likely be the agency that sent Sarah Jane[sp] to the school. In the cyberman episode Rose’s dad mentions torchwood while speaking on his phone/pods.

    • Re: Low Point

      I did like the bit with the video tape, though.

      I liked the part where adds rather proudly, "It’s Betamax!"

      Great geekster inside joke :)

  2. Annoying continuity thing
    This is nitpicking, but it bothered me a lot…

    When Mr. Magpie leaves the shop to head for the TV tower, he gets directly in his truck and drives there as fast as possible and then starts climbing the tower. Okay. The Doctor and the boy, however, come out of the shop, have a bit of a chat, go back *into* the shop, the Doctor rummages about for parts, then they run *on foot* to the TV station while the Doctor *builds* a Betamax VCR *on the fly* (including a tape) – but this isn’t what bothers me, because he’s the Doctor. No, what bothers me is that when they get to the TV station, the Doctor runs up to the TV tower and somehow has gotten there at almost the same time as Mr. Magpie – close enough to reach the top of the tower at the *same time*.

    Sigh.

    It’s internal continuity based strictly on observable flow of time and it bothers me.

    • Re: Annoying continuity thing

      This is nitpicking, but it bothered me a lot…

      When Mr. Magpie leaves the shop to head for the TV tower, he gets directly in his truck and drives there as fast as possible and then starts climbing the tower. Okay. The Doctor and the boy, however, come out of the shop, have a bit of a chat, go back *into* the shop, the Doctor rummages about for parts, then they run *on foot* to the TV station while the Doctor *builds* a Betamax VCR *on the fly* (including a tape) – but this isn’t what bothers me, because he’s the Doctor. No, what bothers me is that when they get to the TV station, the Doctor runs up to the TV tower and somehow has gotten there at almost the same time as Mr. Magpie – close enough to reach the top of the tower at the *same time*.

      Sigh.

      It’s internal continuity based strictly on observable flow of time and it bothers me.

      I think Magpie was climbing really slow. The Doctor zipped up the tower quick.

    • Re: Annoying continuity thing

      This is nitpicking, but it bothered me a lot…

      When Mr. Magpie leaves the shop to head for the TV tower, he gets directly in his truck and drives there as fast as possible and then starts climbing the tower. Okay. The Doctor and the boy, however, come out of the shop, have a bit of a chat, go back *into* the shop, the Doctor rummages about for parts, then they run *on foot* to the TV station while the Doctor *builds* a Betamax VCR *on the fly* (including a tape) – but this isn’t what bothers me, because he’s the Doctor. No, what bothers me is that when they get to the TV station, the Doctor runs up to the TV tower and somehow has gotten there at almost the same time as Mr. Magpie – close enough to reach the top of the tower at the *same time*.

      It’s only worrying to those who have never had to deal with BBC Commissionaires. The Doctor has his magic pass, sorry, psychic paper, he can wave at them. Magpie has to deal with each one individually and, even when you’re legitimate, it takes time as they examine your card. Even using the portable TV to suck their faces off will slow him down. And have you seen the road up to AP? Not the straightest or shallowest of highways.

      Anthony – Formerly BBC staff member 228622A. BTDTGTTS

      • Re: Annoying continuity thing

        This is nitpicking, but it bothered me a lot…

        When Mr. Magpie leaves the shop to head for the TV tower, he gets directly in his truck and drives there as fast as possible and then starts climbing the tower. Okay. The Doctor and the boy, however, come out of the shop, have a bit of a chat, go back *into* the shop, the Doctor rummages about for parts, then they run *on foot* to the TV station while the Doctor *builds* a Betamax VCR *on the fly* (including a tape) – but this isn’t what bothers me, because he’s the Doctor. No, what bothers me is that when they get to the TV station, the Doctor runs up to the TV tower and somehow has gotten there at almost the same time as Mr. Magpie – close enough to reach the top of the tower at the *same time*.

        It’s only worrying to those who have never had to deal with BBC Commissionaires. The Doctor has his magic pass, sorry, psychic paper, he can wave at them. Magpie has to deal with each one individually and, even when you’re legitimate, it takes time as they examine your card. Even using the portable TV to suck their faces off will slow him down. And have you seen the road up to AP? Not the straightest or shallowest of highways.

        Anthony – Formerly BBC staff member 228622A. BTDTGTTS

        Best. Answer. Ever. I yield. :-)

Comments are closed.