I know I'm not the first to state it, but she spent all those years keeping away from Who due to the treatment of women in many of its storylines and representations- and I'm on her side about most of those- and she's embraced many feminist causes since leaving Who, then all she talks about in the DVD commentaries is hair and fashion. It's amazing; just once, I'd like to hear her have a good rant about having to wear a ridiculous costume for a particular environment and what that shows about the people running the show at the time and then for her to get in to the specifics.
Clearly the source of all this was her personal bitterness and feelings of inadequacy because Peter would never touch her leg!
I think Janet Fielding would agree with you about her hair, she spends a good portion of The Visitation commentary pointing out the rat on her head!
Like you and Miah, I've never heard that Tegan was supposed to have been written out.
I always thought Tegan looked her best in her last few stories. They 'sexed her up' good and proper towards the end. Seems to be a hallmark of JNT as producer, doing the right thing just as the character leaves the show.....:rolleyes:
I know I'm not the first to state it, but she spent all those years keeping away from Who due to the treatment of women in many of its storylines and representations- and I'm on her side about most of those- and she's embraced many feminist causes since leaving Who, then all she talks about in the DVD commentaries is hair and fashion. It's amazing; just once, I'd like to hear her have a good rant about having to wear a ridiculous costume for a particular environment and what that shows about the people running the show at the time and then for her to get in to the specifics.
I imagine she wasn't allowed to much and keep on topic about the story they were discussing. Though i'd be interested to hear her opinions I don't think listening to a rant wouldn't make good listening for a commentary!
To be honest I think she is quite vocal about those issues, on commentaries when it is appropriate and there is a Girls, Girls, Girls doc about the eighties companions when she has a lot to say. Quite a lot of people on here usually moan about her being overly negative on commentaries!
On The Visitation, they all seem to be in a very good mood and having fun on the commentary so it fits in with that atmosphere - it's worth listening to just for Davison and her talking about her trance acting!
To be honest I think she is quite vocal about those issues, on commentaries when it is appropriate and there is a Girls, Girls, Girls doc about the eighties companions when she has a lot to say. Quite a lot of people on here usually moan about her being overly negative on commentaries!
On The Visitation, they all seem to be in a very good mood and having fun on the commentary so it fits in with that atmosphere - it's worth listening to just for Davison and her talking about her trance acting!
I think we'll just have to differ, then; I'm not stating that she doesn't occasionally say something about the treatment/representation of women, but she must mention hair and fashion many more times than anything else (when she says anything at all).
As to the documentary you've mentioned, I haven't seen that, but, then again, it is on a McCoy release (IIRC)- I only get those when they're at bargain basement prices.
Yes, her general tone is a bit negative- isn't that just her ?- and, perhaps, she has chosen to 'not rock the boat' or has been told to shy away from anything that may be controversial. Either way, it's a shame, because, as I put before, I think she has some valid points and I'd like to hear them in relation to appropriate stories, rather than just as generalisations. (I recognise that others prefer an entertaining commentary to an informative one.)
I know I'm not the first to state it, but she spent all those years keeping away from Who due to the treatment of women in many of its storylinesthen all she talks about in the DVD commentaries is hair and fashion. .
I've just watched Earthshock for the first time in 30 years and yes Janet does talk about her hair constantly on the commentary. Its annoying but also hilarious! ( I seem to remember the same preoccupation in other commentaries ). The thing you have to keep remembering is they are "actors darling" cos even Peter doesn't take the stories too seriously.
Starting this a tad earlier than normal as I'm not about much in the morning and I was itching to get it started!
But yes, here it is, the one I've been looking forward to the most, my fave Doctor and the first Doctor I properly ever watched!
Why do I like Davison so much? Well, he was just an all-round nice chappy, who could in fact just be reckless and get himself into all sorts of scrapes.
It isn't just Davison himself that make for a great era. There are only two stories from his era I dislike. As I've mentioned before, Terminus, because it's as dull as ditchwater and Frontios because it's a bit bleak and just not as good as the others! Aside from those two, I adore every single story in Davison's Era, yes, I even like Time-Flight!
And in his last adventure, we had The Caves Of Androzani, voted top story in the last DWM poll! Saying that though, I'm voting Season 19 as my favourite Season because Androzani aside, some of the other top-rated Davison stories are in this Season, like The Visitation, Kinda, Earthshock and I love Black Orchid too. )
Hello daveyboy just to say I love this thread. Its one of my favourites ever:)
The first season where i was a proper cant get enough fan.Peter Davison is fantastic as the Doctor, very different to Tom. More vunerable, quite heroic & full of boyish charm. None of the characteristic eccentricity of his predecessor or the garish appearance of his successor.
Just watched Earthshock for the first time since it was first shown and it was as good as i remember. I love the taut direction,the dark clanking sounds in the tunnels and the freighter,how menacing the Cybermen look and sound. In the special features Peter Grimwade is seen as hard going but Kudos to the man what a fantastic atmospheric story.
If it was made nowadays the serial would probably be drowned in incidental music ( a bugbear of mine of the new series) and the Cybermen would just convert everyone without a mention.
Absolutely loved 19, so much anticipation after a long 18 month break. Earthshock was my favourite for this season by a mile with Visitation coming in second. !
Yep Season 19 for me too. I really liked all of the Season
( well TimeFlight is a little naff but nothings perfect ) although Earthshock should have been the season finale.
I've just watched Earthshock for the first time in 30 years and yes Janet does talk about her hair constantly on the commentary. Its annoying but also hilarious! ( I seem to remember the same preoccupation in other commentaries ). The thing you have to keep remembering is they are "actors darling" cos even Peter doesn't take the stories too seriously.
Yes, they're good fun, generally. The newness has worn off now, though- not surprisingly- and Janet Fielding has had plenty to say, just not on those commentaries.
Hello daveyboy just to say I love this thread. Its one of my favourites ever:)
The first season where i was a proper cant get enough fan.Peter Davison is fantastic as the Doctor, very different to Tom. More vunerable, quite heroic & full of boyish charm. None of the characteristic eccentricity of his predecessor or the garish appearance of his successor.
Just watched Earthshock for the first time since it was first shown and it was as good as i remember. I love the taut direction,the dark clanking sounds in the tunnels and the freighter,how menacing the Cybermen look and sound. In the special features Peter Grimwade is seen as hard going but Kudos to the man what a fantastic atmospheric story.
If it was made nowadays the serial would probably be drowned in incidental music ( a bugbear of mine of the new series) and the Cybermen would just convert everyone without a mention.
Thanks, I'm pleased and surprised is still going!
Season 19's popullarity has been ecmeneted but I love Season 20 as well, Terminus aside. Really did and in fact, still has, the feel of being an anniversary year.
As far as the drowning of music goes, I love it, there isn't enough of in in recent Series but that's another issue.
It's interesting that the Peter Davison era seems to be quite popular on this forum. I've always enjoyed Peter's era, probably 2nd only to Tom's.
Do you think that the Peter Davison stories are a more accessible "classic" who, to modern day viewers? Maybe the Timecrash link has made him more in tune with "New Who"fans? Or are there a large number of people on here of the age group where PD would have been "their" Doctor?
It's interesting that the Peter Davison era seems to be quite popular on this forum. I've always enjoyed Peter's era, probably 2nd only to Tom's.
Do you think that the Peter Davison stories are a more accessible "classic" who, to modern day viewers? Maybe the Timecrash link has made him more in tune with "New Who"fans? Or are there a large number of people on here of the age group where PD would have been "their" Doctor?
Yeah, Davison does seem quite popular, but with Tom Baker's Era, as I've said previously, it may have been because there was a big thread on the Hinchcliffe Era recently, may have contributed to it's slow reaction.
But your other points are probably quite valid ones.
Watched Earthshock again the other night. Its a great story but one thing puzzles me.
Why when the Cybermen were breaking out of the silos were they wrapped in clingfilm? Is it just to heighten their impact or have I missed something ?
Watched Earthshock again the other night. Its a great story but one thing puzzles me.
Why when the Cybermen were breaking out of the silos were they wrapped in clingfilm? Is it just to heighten their impact or have I missed something ?
The stories were predomninantly 2 or 3 star, but even those 3 star ones tended to be extremely dull. So many stories set on drab spaceships, little humour, the Master returning again and again, each time more pantomime and pointless. Stories taken so seriously and yet not holding up to scrutiny. Kinda is hailed as a masterpiece because it used some Buddhist words. It's an average story that wears its erudition pretty clumsilly.
Davison lacked charisma in the role and is personally my least favourite of all the Doctors.
The companions in this period were distinctly weak: Tegan was a misconceived harpy, a weak feminist stereotype whining and moaning about the amazing life opportunity afforded her by the Doctor. Nyssa was pretty but dull as dishwater, as characterless as that straight backed stance she always stood in. Turlough started out interestingly initially but quickly just became a formulaic male companion who would scowl but do what he was told. Adric - let's not even discuss him. But killing him did at least allow them to get something memorable out of this era, saving a dull story (Earthshock) that replaced drama with action and pacing with endless camera cuts... but still nothing was happening.
And they all wore the same clothes day in, day out.
Production-wise: it's all been said before, frequently by the principle members of said production team and cast themselves. Not up to scratch. Sure, some of that was for financial reasons, but Doctor Who always had that problem and previous regimes did better work with the same lot.
Are there things I like about this era? Yes, Caves of Androzani. I hate to be so predictable but it would be stupid to deny the brilliance of that story. Watching that story is like watching a different show to the rest of Davison's run.
I previously thought Four to Doomsday was a good story too but I recently rewatched it and it isn't.
Kinda is hailed as a masterpiece because it used some Buddhist words. It's an average story that wears its erudition pretty clumsilly.
I didn't even know Kinda did use Buddhist words! I think it's a great story because the story is great and it's well done. Hindle is a brilliant character, the scenes with Tegan in the "dark places" were fantastic and - just everything about it was great. Well, except the stupid snake but you can't have everything.
Davison lacked charisma in the role and is personally my least favourite of all the Doctors. [/QUOTE]
I agree with some of what you put in your post but this I totally disagree with. This is not dissing your opinion in anyway, everyone has a reason why their least favourite Doctor is their least favourite Doctor(I don't like Doc 9 for being too bossy and grumpy for example).
I think sometimes Davison's Doctor is given a bad time because of reason's outside his control. Following Tom Baker was never going to be easy and you have to think that if Davison hadn't played the Fifth Doctor, I still think he would have been a similar character. There had to be contrast, you couldn't have another funny and amusing Doctor like Tom Baker in the role at that point.
Say Colin Baker had been the Fifth Doctor. Would it have worked as well? Would the Doctor's behaviour in The Twin Dilemma seem even worse after the antics of the Fourth Doctor in later Seasons? IMO, yes it would. And considering in the Trial Season there was humour from Colin Baker's Doctor that equalled anything Tom Baker did, it would have brought accusations of him being a copycat Doctor.
So that's where Davison's Doctor nicely bridged those two Doctors. I can't see how he lacked charisma when the popular description of his Doctor is a 'sensitive charming' one.
I agree that more humour would have been nice but that was down to JNT at that time being over-sensitive to humour thanks to Tom Baker overdoing it in Graham Williams time. There again, if he had been funnier, I think the impact of his performance in The Caves Of Androzani would have been lost.
I agree with some of what you put in your post but this I totally disagree with. This is not dissing your opinion in anyway, everyone has a reason why their least favourite Doctor is their least favourite Doctor(I don't like Doc 9 for being too bossy and grumpy for example).
I think sometimes Davison's Doctor is given a bad time because of reason's outside his control. Following Tom Baker was never going to be easy and you have to think that if Davison hadn't played the Fifth Doctor, I still think he would have been a similar character. There had to be contrast, you couldn't have another funny and amusing Doctor like Tom Baker in the role at that point.
Say Colin Baker had been the Fifth Doctor. Would it have worked as well? Would the Doctor's behaviour in The Twin Dilemma seem even worse after the antics of the Fourth Doctor in later Seasons? IMO, yes it would. And considering in the Trial Season there was humour from Colin Baker's Doctor that equalled anything Tom Baker did, it would have brought accusations of him being a copycat Doctor.
So that's where Davison's Doctor nicely bridged those two Doctors. I can't see how he lacked charisma when the popular description of his Doctor is a 'sensitive charming' one.
I agree that more humour would have been nice but that was down to JNT at that time being over-sensitive to humour thanks to Tom Baker overdoing it in Graham Williams time. There again, if he had been funnier, I think the impact of his performance in The Caves Of Androzani would have been lost.
I also agree with much the previous poster put and disagree with that point.
For me, frustratingly, Davison had tremendous potential that was hardly realised.
I wasn't too sure about Christopher H Bidmead's story choices, but the underlying direction he gave the series- there actually felt as if there was one- was easily preferable to what came in the rest of the 80s (and witness how much more interesting Davison's Doctor was in the Bidmead-penned Frontios than he was in the rest of Saward's time as script editor- and I include The Caves of Androzani in that, despite the production itself being on a different level to anything else during JNT's time as producer); in some ways, the general trend was downhill for Doctor Who in the 80s and, in retrospect, the (high number of) calls, from within the Appreciation Society, for JNT to go after Season 18 were correct.
(The series did need a change of direction after Graham Williams' tenure and while some changes were for the better- eg more emphasis on drama, different incidental music- many were not- uniformity in design changes, the lack of sparkish humour that made the series feel bland and the general stylised staginess.)
I voted for season 20 as I loved the Black Guardian stories. I like all three seasons though. I loved the character of Tegan as it was refreshing to see somebody question things rather than just being a yes person.
A while back I was watching a 5th Doctor story (I can't remember which) and wondering why I wasn't enjoying it. Subjectively, the story was probably as good as a middling Tom Baker story like Planet of Evil, and I still enjoy middling Tom Baker stories, but I was just incredibly bored by the Davison story. And the conclusion I came to is because those middling Tom Baker stories are enlivened by Tom Baker, and often his excellent companions. Even if the plot isn't very interesting I enjoy watching that character onscreen. The same goes for most of the Doctors, to a greater or lesser extent. And it struck me that the same wasn't true of the Davison Doctor. If the story was boring he did nothing to lift it. He was just another character in the story. Now, don't get me wrong, i'm not laying all the blame at the door of Davison; it's the script editor's job too to ensure that the Doctor has his interesting quirks and 'moments of charm' and is basically an interesting character.
This is why I say that, for me, he lacked charisma. If the script was dull, he was dull.
Also, he was too much an actor playing a role (the same criticism I have of David Tennant); there wasn't enough of himself in there. Most of the people who have played the Doctor were really doing a fantastical, exaggerated, idealized rendition of themselves (Both Bakers, Pertwee, Smith, McCoy, Troughton, arguably Hartnell). They weren't acting much. Davison never believed himself to be the Doctor. A good Doctor requires a certain Doctorish personality in the actor, in my opinion; it isn't enough just to act. This is the reason i feel Matt Smith falls so much easier into the lineage of the first 8 doctors than any of the other 'modern' ones.
For me, frustratingly, Davison had tremendous potential that was hardly realised.
I wasn't too sure about Christopher H Bidmead's story choices, but the underlying direction he gave the series- there actually felt as if there was one- was easily preferable to what came in the rest of the 80s (and witness how much more interesting Davison's Doctor was in the Bidmead-penned Frontios than he was in the rest of Saward's time as script editor- and I include The Caves of Androzani in that, despite the production itself being on a different level to anything else during JNT's time as producer); in some ways, the general trend was downhill for Doctor Who in the 80s and, in retrospect, the (high number of) calls, from within the Appreciation Society, for JNT to go after Season 18 were correct.
(The series did need a change of direction after Graham Williams' tenure and while some changes were for the better- eg more emphasis on drama, different incidental music- many were not- uniformity in design changes, the lack of sparkish humour that made the series feel bland and the general stylised staginess.)
I can agree with most of that . I think I've mentioned previously that Tegan especially not changing her costume was not right. Even allowing for the fact Doctor Who is a sci-fi programme and not a normal drama, most people in their right mind would want to change clothes after a while, especially work ones. I never thought was that dedicated to her job!
Strangely enough I'm not that keen on Frontios though I did enjoy Davison's slightly different portrayal in that one.
A while back I was watching a 5th Doctor story (I can't remember which) and wondering why I wasn't enjoying it. Subjectively, the story was probably as good as a middling Tom Baker story like Planet of Evil, and I still enjoy middling Tom Baker stories, but I was just incredibly bored by the Davison story. And the conclusion I came to is because those middling Tom Baker stories are enlivened by Tom Baker, and often his excellent companions. Even if the plot isn't very interesting I enjoy watching that character onscreen. The same goes for most of the Doctors, to a greater or lesser extent. And it struck me that the same wasn't true of the Davison Doctor. If the story was boring he did nothing to lift it. He was just another character in the story. Now, don't get me wrong, i'm not laying all the blame at the door of Davison; it's the script editor's job too to ensure that the Doctor has his interesting quirks and 'moments of charm' and is basically an interesting character.
This is why I say that, for me, he lacked charisma. If the script was dull, he was dull.
Also, he was too much an actor playing a role (the same criticism I have of David Tennant); there wasn't enough of himself in there. Most of the people who have played the Doctor were really doing a fantastical, exaggerated, idealized rendition of themselves (Both Bakers, Pertwee, Smith, McCoy, Troughton, arguably Hartnell). They weren't acting much. Davison never believed himself to be the Doctor. A good Doctor requires a certain Doctorish personality in the actor, in my opinion; it isn't enough just to act. This is the reason i feel Matt Smith falls so much easier into the lineage of the first 8 doctors than any of the other 'modern' ones.
That story wasn't Terminus was it? I could undertstand it if it was.....
I know what you are saying because I have felt this was with other stories and other Doctors. I've often mentioned Planet Of The Daleks in the past. Watching this, the story is not a good one and as with you, it didn't have anything Doctorish in it to lift the story. Pertwee in this story was too damn straight and over moralistic, one of the many reasons I'm not a fan of his Doctor.
What I will say though is that Davison in himself is apparently a more reserved person that Tom Baker and I think it came across in his Doctor as a contrast very well. There were times though when he needed to be Doctorish that he did it quite well, such as standing upto the Mara-possessed Aris in Kinda or Captain Striker in Enlightenment.
Strangely enough I'm not that keen on Frontios though I did enjoy Davison's slightly different portrayal in that one.
I agree- it has that leaden quality of most of the Saward period, with the first part being particularly tedious when they're getting the battery, but Davison's Doctor is the way it should have been and would have have been had Bidmead stayed on.
It was also the only story in which Davison's Doctor got to really make fun of Tegan (which stopped the last part being so po-faced) and should have been happening a lot more.
I agree- it has that leaden quality of most of the Saward period, with the first part being particularly tedious when they're getting the battery, but Davison's Doctor is the way it should have been and would have have been had Bidmead stayed on.
It was also the only story in which Davison's Doctor got to really make fun of Tegan (which stopped the last part being so po-faced) and should have been happening a lot more.
Yes, I think Davison's mocking of her as he pretended she was an android was worthy of anything humour shown in The Caves Of Androzani. I agree, I think this should have been the ay to go with him and I think Davison himself would liked to have played it that way more as well but thanks to JNT he didn't. :rolleyes:
Watched Earthshock again the other night. Its a great story but one thing puzzles me.
Why when the Cybermen were breaking out of the silos were they wrapped in clingfilm? Is it just to heighten their impact or have I missed something ?
The Cybermen first broke through plastic in Tomb of the Cybermen and discovered they liked it, so from then on they kept wrapping themselves in it at every opportunity so they could break out again.
The Cybermen first broke through plastic in Tomb of the Cybermen and discovered they liked it, so from then on they kept wrapping themselves in it at every opportunity so they could break out again.
The Cybermen supposedly had no emotions, but they sure liked a bit of bondage.....;):D
Comments
Clearly the source of all this was her personal bitterness and feelings of inadequacy because Peter would never touch her leg!
I always thought Tegan looked her best in her last few stories. They 'sexed her up' good and proper towards the end. Seems to be a hallmark of JNT as producer, doing the right thing just as the character leaves the show.....:rolleyes:
I imagine she wasn't allowed to much and keep on topic about the story they were discussing. Though i'd be interested to hear her opinions I don't think listening to a rant wouldn't make good listening for a commentary!
On The Visitation, they all seem to be in a very good mood and having fun on the commentary so it fits in with that atmosphere - it's worth listening to just for Davison and her talking about her trance acting!
I think we'll just have to differ, then; I'm not stating that she doesn't occasionally say something about the treatment/representation of women, but she must mention hair and fashion many more times than anything else (when she says anything at all).
As to the documentary you've mentioned, I haven't seen that, but, then again, it is on a McCoy release (IIRC)- I only get those when they're at bargain basement prices.
Yes, her general tone is a bit negative- isn't that just her ?- and, perhaps, she has chosen to 'not rock the boat' or has been told to shy away from anything that may be controversial. Either way, it's a shame, because, as I put before, I think she has some valid points and I'd like to hear them in relation to appropriate stories, rather than just as generalisations. (I recognise that others prefer an entertaining commentary to an informative one.)
I've just watched Earthshock for the first time in 30 years and yes Janet does talk about her hair constantly on the commentary. Its annoying but also hilarious! ( I seem to remember the same preoccupation in other commentaries ). The thing you have to keep remembering is they are "actors darling" cos even Peter doesn't take the stories too seriously.
Hello daveyboy just to say I love this thread. Its one of my favourites ever:)
The first season where i was a proper cant get enough fan.Peter Davison is fantastic as the Doctor, very different to Tom. More vunerable, quite heroic & full of boyish charm. None of the characteristic eccentricity of his predecessor or the garish appearance of his successor.
Just watched Earthshock for the first time since it was first shown and it was as good as i remember. I love the taut direction,the dark clanking sounds in the tunnels and the freighter,how menacing the Cybermen look and sound. In the special features Peter Grimwade is seen as hard going but Kudos to the man what a fantastic atmospheric story.
If it was made nowadays the serial would probably be drowned in incidental music ( a bugbear of mine of the new series) and the Cybermen would just convert everyone without a mention.
Yep Season 19 for me too. I really liked all of the Season
( well TimeFlight is a little naff but nothings perfect ) although Earthshock should have been the season finale.
Yes, they're good fun, generally. The newness has worn off now, though- not surprisingly- and Janet Fielding has had plenty to say, just not on those commentaries.
Thanks, I'm pleased and surprised is still going!
Season 19's popullarity has been ecmeneted but I love Season 20 as well, Terminus aside. Really did and in fact, still has, the feel of being an anniversary year.
As far as the drowning of music goes, I love it, there isn't enough of in in recent Series but that's another issue.
Do you think that the Peter Davison stories are a more accessible "classic" who, to modern day viewers? Maybe the Timecrash link has made him more in tune with "New Who"fans? Or are there a large number of people on here of the age group where PD would have been "their" Doctor?
Yeah, Davison does seem quite popular, but with Tom Baker's Era, as I've said previously, it may have been because there was a big thread on the Hinchcliffe Era recently, may have contributed to it's slow reaction.
But your other points are probably quite valid ones.
Why when the Cybermen were breaking out of the silos were they wrapped in clingfilm? Is it just to heighten their impact or have I missed something ?
To keep them fresh- obvious, really.
(It was just a gimmick.)
The stories were predomninantly 2 or 3 star, but even those 3 star ones tended to be extremely dull. So many stories set on drab spaceships, little humour, the Master returning again and again, each time more pantomime and pointless. Stories taken so seriously and yet not holding up to scrutiny. Kinda is hailed as a masterpiece because it used some Buddhist words. It's an average story that wears its erudition pretty clumsilly.
Davison lacked charisma in the role and is personally my least favourite of all the Doctors.
The companions in this period were distinctly weak: Tegan was a misconceived harpy, a weak feminist stereotype whining and moaning about the amazing life opportunity afforded her by the Doctor. Nyssa was pretty but dull as dishwater, as characterless as that straight backed stance she always stood in. Turlough started out interestingly initially but quickly just became a formulaic male companion who would scowl but do what he was told. Adric - let's not even discuss him. But killing him did at least allow them to get something memorable out of this era, saving a dull story (Earthshock) that replaced drama with action and pacing with endless camera cuts... but still nothing was happening.
And they all wore the same clothes day in, day out.
Production-wise: it's all been said before, frequently by the principle members of said production team and cast themselves. Not up to scratch. Sure, some of that was for financial reasons, but Doctor Who always had that problem and previous regimes did better work with the same lot.
Are there things I like about this era? Yes, Caves of Androzani. I hate to be so predictable but it would be stupid to deny the brilliance of that story. Watching that story is like watching a different show to the rest of Davison's run.
I previously thought Four to Doomsday was a good story too but I recently rewatched it and it isn't.
I didn't even know Kinda did use Buddhist words! I think it's a great story because the story is great and it's well done. Hindle is a brilliant character, the scenes with Tegan in the "dark places" were fantastic and - just everything about it was great. Well, except the stupid snake but you can't have everything.
Davison lacked charisma in the role and is personally my least favourite of all the Doctors. [/QUOTE]
I agree with some of what you put in your post but this I totally disagree with. This is not dissing your opinion in anyway, everyone has a reason why their least favourite Doctor is their least favourite Doctor(I don't like Doc 9 for being too bossy and grumpy for example).
I think sometimes Davison's Doctor is given a bad time because of reason's outside his control. Following Tom Baker was never going to be easy and you have to think that if Davison hadn't played the Fifth Doctor, I still think he would have been a similar character. There had to be contrast, you couldn't have another funny and amusing Doctor like Tom Baker in the role at that point.
Say Colin Baker had been the Fifth Doctor. Would it have worked as well? Would the Doctor's behaviour in The Twin Dilemma seem even worse after the antics of the Fourth Doctor in later Seasons? IMO, yes it would. And considering in the Trial Season there was humour from Colin Baker's Doctor that equalled anything Tom Baker did, it would have brought accusations of him being a copycat Doctor.
So that's where Davison's Doctor nicely bridged those two Doctors. I can't see how he lacked charisma when the popular description of his Doctor is a 'sensitive charming' one.
I agree that more humour would have been nice but that was down to JNT at that time being over-sensitive to humour thanks to Tom Baker overdoing it in Graham Williams time. There again, if he had been funnier, I think the impact of his performance in The Caves Of Androzani would have been lost.
I beg to differ - he had oddles of charm imho.
I also agree with much the previous poster put and disagree with that point.
For me, frustratingly, Davison had tremendous potential that was hardly realised.
I wasn't too sure about Christopher H Bidmead's story choices, but the underlying direction he gave the series- there actually felt as if there was one- was easily preferable to what came in the rest of the 80s (and witness how much more interesting Davison's Doctor was in the Bidmead-penned Frontios than he was in the rest of Saward's time as script editor- and I include The Caves of Androzani in that, despite the production itself being on a different level to anything else during JNT's time as producer); in some ways, the general trend was downhill for Doctor Who in the 80s and, in retrospect, the (high number of) calls, from within the Appreciation Society, for JNT to go after Season 18 were correct.
(The series did need a change of direction after Graham Williams' tenure and while some changes were for the better- eg more emphasis on drama, different incidental music- many were not- uniformity in design changes, the lack of sparkish humour that made the series feel bland and the general stylised staginess.)
This is why I say that, for me, he lacked charisma. If the script was dull, he was dull.
Also, he was too much an actor playing a role (the same criticism I have of David Tennant); there wasn't enough of himself in there. Most of the people who have played the Doctor were really doing a fantastical, exaggerated, idealized rendition of themselves (Both Bakers, Pertwee, Smith, McCoy, Troughton, arguably Hartnell). They weren't acting much. Davison never believed himself to be the Doctor. A good Doctor requires a certain Doctorish personality in the actor, in my opinion; it isn't enough just to act. This is the reason i feel Matt Smith falls so much easier into the lineage of the first 8 doctors than any of the other 'modern' ones.
I can agree with most of that . I think I've mentioned previously that Tegan especially not changing her costume was not right. Even allowing for the fact Doctor Who is a sci-fi programme and not a normal drama, most people in their right mind would want to change clothes after a while, especially work ones. I never thought was that dedicated to her job!
Strangely enough I'm not that keen on Frontios though I did enjoy Davison's slightly different portrayal in that one.
That story wasn't Terminus was it? I could undertstand it if it was.....
I know what you are saying because I have felt this was with other stories and other Doctors. I've often mentioned Planet Of The Daleks in the past. Watching this, the story is not a good one and as with you, it didn't have anything Doctorish in it to lift the story. Pertwee in this story was too damn straight and over moralistic, one of the many reasons I'm not a fan of his Doctor.
What I will say though is that Davison in himself is apparently a more reserved person that Tom Baker and I think it came across in his Doctor as a contrast very well. There were times though when he needed to be Doctorish that he did it quite well, such as standing upto the Mara-possessed Aris in Kinda or Captain Striker in Enlightenment.
I agree- it has that leaden quality of most of the Saward period, with the first part being particularly tedious when they're getting the battery, but Davison's Doctor is the way it should have been and would have have been had Bidmead stayed on.
It was also the only story in which Davison's Doctor got to really make fun of Tegan (which stopped the last part being so po-faced) and should have been happening a lot more.
Yes, I think Davison's mocking of her as he pretended she was an android was worthy of anything humour shown in The Caves Of Androzani. I agree, I think this should have been the ay to go with him and I think Davison himself would liked to have played it that way more as well but thanks to JNT he didn't. :rolleyes:
The Cybermen first broke through plastic in Tomb of the Cybermen and discovered they liked it, so from then on they kept wrapping themselves in it at every opportunity so they could break out again.
The Cybermen supposedly had no emotions, but they sure liked a bit of bondage.....;):D