The caves of Androzani (1984)

Review
More about Doctor Who
More about this serial

Review

This a four-part serial, first broadcast on 8th - 16th March 1984. A brief and somewhat spoiler-ish summary of the plot: after landing on Androzani Minor the Doctor and Peri find themselves caught between warring factions who tend to shoot first and ask questions later. All of that becomes unimportant, however, when the Doctor finds out that he and Peri have caught a lethal disease, and that only he can save his young friend's life.

This is, basically, a story about what people want.

The Doctor wants Peri to live. That's it. Peter Davison and writer Robert Holmes show us a man who is haunted by the evil he's seen and the people he's lost, and who is desperate not to have this one more death on his conscience.
Sharaz Jek, one of the two villains of the piece, wants revenge on his archenemy Morgus, and sees the pile of the precious compound spectrox that he's sitting on only as a means to this end. Or rather, he wants his own suffering to end and believes that his revenge on Morgus will achieve that. When he first sees Peri and the Doctor, he wants them to remain with him as his prisoners in order to find relief from his pain and loneliness. As his journey progresses he is willing to let the Doctor go so that Peri can be saved, and in the end he only wants to die.
Everyone else just wants the spectrox, and the money and power that it gives them access to. Although Morgus realises that he has to get past Sharaz Jek to get to the spectrox, he doesn't care. His need is simply too great.

The good bits:

• the Doctor. This is partly because of Robert Holmes' writing - his Doctor is edgier than Saward's, and the show benefits from that - and partly because of Davison's performance
• the story
• Sharaz Jek and Morgus. Sharaz Jek is a well-realised 'Phantom of the Opera' tragic hero, and Morgus is an almost Shakespearean villain
• the acting. There isn't a bad performance in this serial, and there are several great ones
• the direction
• the incidental music
• the visual effects (except for the magma creature)

The less good bits:

• the magma creature. Suspension of disbelief is required to consider this awkward, armadillo-like creature with its stiff, chubby arms a serious threat. Luckily it's peripheral to the plot and we don't see a lot of it
• the relentlessly tough and violent mercenaries. (They're bad-asses, we get it already…)
• the cure for the disease that's killing Peri and the Doctor being bat's milk, as this conjures up some rather unfortunate mental images of the Doctor milking a bat
• the revelation of the hideous face behind the mask. This is a common problem in Doctor Who: the face is always revealed rather than left to the imagination, and in spite of the make-up department's best efforts it's never quite hideous enough

The puzzling bits:

• how did Sharaz Jek make those replicas of the Doctor and Peri in part one, and how and when did he make the switch?
• why didn't Sharaz Jek send one of his androids down into the caves to get the bat's milk, as the lack of oxygen wouldn't bother it? And if an ordinary android wouldn't be up to the task, why didn't he whip up another replica of the Doctor and send that?

The silly bit:

• Peri bouncing after falling into the spectrox nest

My verdict:

A must-see serial.

More about Doctor Who

An introduction:
Doctor Who reviews: introduction

More "brilliant!" Doctor Who:
Doctor Who reviews: brilliant!

More from the Peter Davison years:
Doctor Who reviews: 1982 - 1984

Similar stories:
Doctor Who reviews: space opera

Original version of this review:
06/09/10

More about this serial

Episode guides:
BBC Cult

Serial reviews:
Behind the sofa
Outpost Gallifrey

DVD reviews:
Outpost Gallifrey

Intro | Previous | Next | Appreciation | Chronology | Themes | DVD releases | DVD appreciation | Links | Menu | Exit | Meta | Talk

With the exceptions listed here, all content © 2006 D9D1E2.COM. Please read the disclaimer, copyright information and terms of use. On this page Transitional HTML 4.01 and CSS 1 are used. If you're seeing this text you either have CSS switched off in your browser, or you're using a browser that can't handle CSS. If you're using an older browser version, you might want to consider upgrading.