S3E1 - The Redundant Vestiges of its Function: CITY OF DEATH

Hello and welcome to TARDIS Rubbish. It's been a while as we wait in the void between seasons of Doctor who. Today, we're going to take our Tardis back to 1979 as we look back on the classic Fourth Doctor story, City of Death, and at the console today. One of my oldest friends, he is a frequent contributor to the Secret Origins of Mint Condition podcast and Trash Compactor of mostly Star wars podcast. Welcome, John, longtime friend and even longer time Doctor who fan. Welcome, guy.

Hey, everybody.

And he is the former engineer of the Game of Rassilon RPG podcast and player in the Good Chaotic Actual Play podcast, which has its Episode zero out now. And by the time you listen to this, episode one will probably be available. It comes out October 16th. It is Michael A. Nixon.

Hello, everybody. I've been allowed back. Thanks again.

So, like I said, we're talking about a classic Doctor who story. I had always intended to talk about some classic stories since this, this show has kind of taken on the form of a reaction podcast. So we'll just call this a delayed reaction to a story that's 45 years old. But the reason I chose City of Death for this first one, aside from the fact that it's, I think one of the best Doctor who stories of all time, is how modern it feels. I think there are a lot of things in this story that makes it feel a lot like the new series. You know, I think a lot of that comes down to Douglas Adams, the script editor and writer of this episode. But anyway, let's start out with overall thoughts on City of Death. John, I gotta say, I'm actually most interested in your overall thoughts on this one because of your perspective as someone who came to Doctor who primarily through the new series. So what are your overall thoughts on this one? City of Death?

Oh, I like that. I like that. I like that I'm the only one who didn't really come from the original series. I, I will say I had a vague, you know, recollections of coming across Doctor who and PBS growing up and there was a familiarity to City of Death. I think I said before we started recording that I'd watched it at some point just a few years ago, sort of doing a wrap up of Doctor who episodes in between seasons and catching up with the past stuff. But even then there was a familiarity to it. And I think this is one of those, I'm imagining this is one of those series that they did rebroadcast through the 80s and early 90s into. Oh God, how much am I dating Myself here on pbs. So there was always this familiarity to it, but maybe that was actually just the style of it. I enjoyed it. I had to get myself into the mindset that this is 1979 British production values. But the difference was, the first thing I noticed is, wait, this was on location, this was in Paris. I. I enjoyed it and also felt like it did have a modern feel to it because it was a little bit of jokiness to it. A little. It was. My familiarity with Tom Baker is him being super serious as the Doctor. A lot of, you know, a lot of, you know, danger, like, oh, I am a Time Lord. I should look off into the distance and talk about being a Time Lord. That wasn't this serial. This was. He was actually a little more like, all right, well, let's go on holiday. Let's actually have an experience together. And I thought that was such a. Such a break for me. So it was totally, like. It was almost jarring at first. I was like, all right, so let's get into this. So, you know, to come down to it, it's. It's a fun. It's a fun throwback, especially if you can. Especially if you can get into the mindset of that late 70s European vibe. It's really there because you're watching. It's the bell bottoms, the. The. The outfits, everything else. You're like, oh, yeah, this is. This is hardcore 70s. It's France at that time. I would say that it's a good. It could even be a good entry point for Tom Baker as a Doctor, to sort of see what that's about. And it's really cool that the companion Ramona is not just a human. This time is another Time Lord, or as they called it back then, a Time Lady. But I think in more modern war, Joyce, it would be here all Time Lords. And I really liked that they were going around like equals, you know, let's go. Let's go on a holiday, walk around. Did anyone else notice, though, that they. Is it a British thing or Tom Baker thing? The way they were running around the city all the time. There was just a lot of random running scenes and they were really awkward. And I'm wondering, like, is this how the British visit Paris? They just sort of go there and hop along the intersections, you know, like, we're gonna go there. Wait, no cars. And like, come on, Doctor. Like, you're Time Lord, you sense time. You can weave and dodge the cars. It was very funny to me. I just. I just had to laugh. I was like, ye, yeah, this is, I think these are all the stereotypes about the British on holiday all wrapped into Doctor who. And I, I really thought that was a funny sort of side note. And if it was, as I was reading, like one of the first on location episodes, that's kind of cool. The sci fi component to it was really fun. The grand story woven to the idea even of the origin of the human race. So it went from something that was sort of like, oh, what happened with this explosion back millions of years ago to, oh, this is something that's been influencing everything with us. And this is where I'm gonna have questions for the rest of you. Did this play into the mythology and the storyline much as we go on? Because it's really seems like it's important to the Doctor. Hoover said that this, that the Jagarath would have been so fundamental to the development of the human species. So I would like, I can't wait to discuss all of that. But, yeah, fun, fun. Accessible, really cheesy. Really, really cheesy. So go into it. My advice is go into this knowing you're gonna have fun. Definitely Douglas Adams vibes. And I feel like it's before he really got going, knowing how to, like, really bring that into television in this classic way. I feel like this is sort of the beginning of that. And we get a cameo from John Cleese. You know, what more can you ask for? Being perfectly, perfectly stuck up and trying to judge the TARDIS as a piece of art. I mean, I thought that was such fun commentary on, like, you know, the artistic elite. And then, you know, the Doctor and Ramona just run into the TARDIS and make it vanish. That was probably my favorite moment of the entire episode. So to anyone who's looking to go back, this, this is a really fun place to go if you're looking for an entry into the fourth Doctor or just a taste of what it was like before 2005.

Yes. No, very. Yeah, a lot of stuff you said I want to come back to. But, Guy, your overall thoughts, but I'm also curious when, if you remember when you first saw this story.

Oh, I saw this when I was 11, 12 years old and I saw it in episodic format during the weekday at 5:20pm in the early evening, late afternoon on KTCA Channel 2, my local Minneapolis PBS PBS station. And what I, what I, what I, I, I. When I rewatched this, and trust me, I rewatched a lot of classic who. What I'm left with is the. It was so much fun watching it episodically. And now, you know, granted the way I was initiated with it, I got to watch it daily five days a week, Monday through Friday. And then they eventually changed it to like movie format on Friday nights and then and that just kind of ruined. They just truncated everything and just made it all one, one long episode. But what I'm struck with is that now new who you don't have that quirky cliffhanger that makes you want to see the next episode. And a lot of what we were given in entertainment these days is a lot of dumps. I mean television dumps. You can watch things all at once. And this seeing it again, I was just so like brought back to when I was watching it as a kid and it's so funny. I can, I can get away from the fact that the monster space looks like rubber never blinks. I can get away from the fact that they are running around Paris because it's I think the first time going elsewhere and they're showcasing Paris, although Paris streets I would have, I don't think we really did see the Lou insinuated but they never actually went to the Lou. They did definitely go to the Eiffel Tower because they, you know, they either take the, take the lift or they could have flown off of it. Which still the best sequence and scene of Doctrine Companion and just getting a sense of who these two people are and what they mean to one another. That little like back and forth between. Well, what do you think? We should go, we should head on out. You want to take a lift or should we fly? Flying would be too awesome. Let's take a lift. It just encapsulates the fun and it just juxtaposes what, you know, the seriousness elements of the piece. Julian Glover. Oh, so good. So flipping good. And he wasn't ott. He was just bored. He was just, and it was just glowed. He would have made a great doctor. He would have made a phenomenal doctor, I think. You know, I, I when Game of Thrones I, I remember seeing him in Game of Thrones and going, oh my God, Jolene lover. And he just gives it his all. He's, he glows. My take seeing this again. I love the four so classic who can get long? Kind of like this, this me classic who can get long. That being said, these half hour 25 minute episodes were tight. The padding with the running around the city, I didn't mind it. It actually was a nice like thread that just kind of wove everything together and added to the atmosphere. It Was really flipping well done. Well shot. I'm thinking a lot of those outside shots were like guerrilla filming. They just set up a camera and said, run and we'll try to distract the people that don't know what's really going on by not looking. Didn't work sometimes, but yeah, such a great. And especially the model work. I want that spaceship. I want the Jagger off spaceship. I want it hanging in my living room. I, I, I, I want it glowing and I want the, the middle part spinning. It's such a beautiful, beautiful design. And even, even the set work when they landed 400 million years in the past was really well done. It was of the time. Like Star Trek the Next Generation. That first season of Star Trek TNG were poor compared to what they had here in 1979. I felt, I thought that the landscape, it was really good. I thought that the camera work was really, really well done and the model work was spectacular. I love the fact that it's actual model work and yeah, that's, that's my take.

Love it. Yeah, I agree that, you know, watching the show serialized, you know, going episode by episode instead of cramming it in as one feature length is really the way to watch it.

Yeah.

And I agree, I think one of the great things about the serials when they work. And by the way, I think four parters are the sweet spot. Six parters, that's when you really start to feel it drag. Unless they do something like, you know, change the premise of the story after episode four Seeds of Doom, in which case. Yeah, right, exactly.

Even then, part five is still bad.

There's.

You're never, you're never going to fix it any, any way you hack it. Part five, still bad. Can't fix it, can't be done.

But I agree too, like one of the pleasures that I think we're all rediscovering as the speed of life and information and media just keeps increasing and going faster and faster and faster is like the idea that, you know, maybe there's some pleasure in delayed gratification a little bit. Not binge watching an entire season of a show. You know, maybe we watch it week to week and we get to think about it and talk about it and process it and then, you know, we get to save something fun for next week instead of, you know, mainlining it all directly into our veins. But anyway, there's a bit of a tangent, but, Michael, your overall thoughts on City of Death, I guess I'm like.

The, the furthest end of the spectrum from John Because I. I watch this thing like once a year. I love City of Death. Thank you for giving me my reason to watch it in 2024, because I basically, I've always had an excuse once a year to rewatch this thing since probably before the Game of Rassilon was recording. To the surprise of no one who is familiar with the podcast or me in general, Roman is my favorite companion. And this serial's a lot of the reason for that. Generally in Classic who I prefer a good. A good sort of like, what am I trying to think of here? Like, a good rule for Will Michael, like this companion is in the classic era particularly is, can they fly the tardis? Are they at some point able to fly the tardis? Are they taught to fly the tardis? Does the show treat that character as competent enough to also be able to fly the spaceship is kind of my barrier to entry for a lot of companions, which unfortunately means that I also like Susan, which is like, what are you going to do? Can't be perfect, can't fix everything. It does mean that I love Nissa, though, who's truly one of the best Romana as well. Tangent tank me. Who would have guessed? I love this one. Just. I think I've already said that I truly love this serial. I think it's amazing to see the show stretch the way it does for this four parter. This is the first time I watched it and really, like, my budget conscious brain kicked in for the first time ever watching this like this watch through and the way they parse out the location shoot to just really only be in like part one, a tiny amount of part three, a tiny amount of part four, and the rest is studios to the point where, like, part two and three are like four rooms. That's it down to like, one of my favorite gags in the entire serial is Duggan going, I'm about to jump out a window and then he just leaps out of frame. And they play the sound of a window breaking. And I'm like, this is. This is peak television right here. Like, this is the good shit. You know, you put your camera crew on a train, you get your two co stars who are either, you know it or not yet about to get married. That's gonna happen in their future. You've got like Douglas Adams basically, like, everything lines up in this serial and in such an incredible way for it to not just be a fun vacation for everybody, but also they're just casually grabbing, like you said guy, some of the coolest guerrilla filmmaking I've Ever seen. There's a shot in part one where just, like, the scarf goes over a section of gate and they just walk down through the Eiffel and you're like, or maybe it's part four, I can't remember anyway, and you're just like, oh, you know, they were just walking down the street and the director was like, hey, wouldn't it be cool if there's so much stuff and you're actually seeing. It's one of the rare times in who where you actually see the premise of the show in documentary format, which is the Doctor and Romana actually go to 1979 Paris, and real people in 1979 Paris around them are going, what the fuck are these? Who are these people? What are they wearing? Who is this? Get out of my way, scarf man.

Like, it was so French.

It's incredible. Like, and then you get, like, the actual Parisian thing of them reacting to them. And then simultaneously in the special, you also get some of my favorite background acting ever in the two cafe patrons who are cast, who are clearly British people cast to be the most French people ever. Just, like, in stripey shirt and beret, like, reacting to a gun in the background of stuff. It's perfect. Honestly, this serial, like, I could go on and on and on about it, and I will. I've been asked to. I'm here to do that. But it has everything. It has, like, a mask reveal shot. So nice. They literally use it twice. I checked. It's the same shot. They use it twice. It's the same shot, but, like, the most crash zooms you've ever experienced deployed as incredibly as the most crash zooms ever. There's. There's a crash zoom in part one to an evil door. It's like, hey, this door's evil. You're like, oh, well, okay, I guess the door's bad. Fuck. No, it's great. And then to your point, John, circling back on the, like, anticipating things in the future, this is. It's 1979. This comes out. 81 is not only the year that Hitchhikers goes out on TV. 81 is also the year that Julian Glover actually plays a Bond villain in a Bond movie. So this serial is just, like, it's. It's genuinely ahead of its time in a way that, like, only gets talked about. Like, it is actually fulfilling the, like, this thing's way ahead of its time deal. It's also very, like you said, Josh, like, very clearly the keystone to everything Moffat did in his era, Crack in time splintered across time. Like, there's just like whole arcs of his era come out of this serial. He was very clearly as big a fan of this thing as I was. I think he probably had a VHS tape and wore it out, I would guess. Anyway, yeah, I can ramble on and on and on, but I'm. I'm finally getting out of gas. So over to anyone else piggybacking on.

That last thing you said about how it influenced Moffat. I also think this story is really clever in a way that you don't necessarily expect TV from this era to be. Like, the whole plot with the Mona Lisa and the quote unquote forgeries and what the plan is and how tables turn. And also in a very Moffat way. Something I love about the cliffhangers in this story in particular is that they don't just close on a moment of peril that you know they're going to get out of immediately at the beginning of next week. Like, the cliffhangers change your understanding of what's happening in the story. The first cliffhanger is Julian Glover is actually the alien or one of the aliens that you saw at the very beginning that by that point it's sort of forgotten about and you're like, oh, wow. In the second one, all of a sudden, the Doctor decides to travel to the Italian Renaissance to, like, say, hey, to Leonardo da Vinci. Which as an aside, like, that's one of the ways that the story is fun, that it casually does things like that, that the show doesn't do that often. But you imagine if you actually had a time machine, you'd be doing shit like this all the time. It's like, hey, I wonder about this thing. Why don't we just go and ask Leonardo very casually, which again, is something Moffat does, and Russell T. Davies, but it's definitely something Moffat does all the time. These, like, throwaway lines were like, the Doctor marries Marilyn Monroe, the Tennant special. Last year they met Sir Isaac Newton and changed gravity to mavity. Little things like that that the classic show really didn't do all that often. And then at the end of the second part, you're like, wait, that's Scarlioni. But that's not Scarlioni. It's a different one. And he's here. What is going on? So, like, the cliffhangers are not like, oh, no, how's the Doctor gonna get out of this one? A little of that. But it's also what is going on here.

They were more surprised. Gotcha. Like, moments of, oh, it. It is. It's just it's, it's not moving the story along, propelling it at like from this to Mach 2 to the next, like, oh my God, I gotta get there. It's not. Yeah, it's not. It's not the Doctor Jeopardy or somebody in jeopardy. It's a revelation that is shocking.

I love that.

That's such a good observation.

No, yeah. And that's something that Moffat does a lot as well, especially when he does a two parter. Like the second part is another kind of story, something that Elizabeth Sandifer notes about Moffat. And I haven't been able to unsee it, but she basically says the key to making a successful two parter is. And you know, Moffat is really great at this, is that the second part isn't just a continuation of a two hour story that's split in half. It's like changing your understanding of what the story actually is. I think the way that she puts it is Moffat's favorite trick is getting the audience to figure out what kind of story they're watching. And then from part one into part two, he turns everything on its head and it's all of a sudden, oh, this is actually this.

This.

I thought it was this, but it's actually this. And this is an example of the classic series doing that. You know, John, it's funny you said something about this story feeling kind of familiar and that it was probably on pbs. It almost certainly was. And when you said that, it made me realize, like, there are a lot of facets of this story that are like classic PBS material.

Except it just dawned on me. I mean, it just hit me as you were saying that and something else the guy said before. It's not only that there's familiarity with the story and Doctor who and the pbs, and I might be going completely crazy here, but I think I also saw a version of the story in 1994. So this is next Generation. All good things there. I. And now I'm wondering, what do you think if this is an homage to it. You have the time splintering. Okay. There's a. There's a huge similarity there. This very background, this very thing that happened. I'm watching the episode and you see the Doctor go down into the amino acids and say, you are from this to dug in there. And then he wiped it on a scarf and then wiped it on, put it in his hand. And I was like, when does he clean a scarf? But you know, that's, that's neither here nor there. And I'm thinking, okay, well that's right out of cue in All Good Things. And then I'm looking at the background there and it looked so similar to that primordial scene in All Good Things with. I mean, even shot for shot, there's so much familiarity. The color tones, the scenery, everything. And then just the very idea of in that episode, it being a Picard in three different times, doing something that creates a singularity, which is the big question. And now I'm like, wait a second. This is essentially that. This is that exact sort of concept, but in Doctor who form. And I really now want to know if the Next Generation finale is in so many ways an homage to this, because it, those, those little things really now stand out. If you were to do a screen by screen comparison, do it in post post edit for this, I really wonder what that would look like because I think there's some really cool stuff there. And maybe this is the familiarity with this episode is because maybe this series itself did have so much impact on other sci fi and is that it was. It was early Douglas Adams where you really see him coming into his own in later shows. And that's really cool. But. Whoa, I'm having a moment with that. What do you. What do you all think?

That's a really, really interesting observation that I never would have thought of. But you're exactly right. It's the splintering personality that forms a singularity. Like the explosion. Well, actually, so in All Good Things, the reveal is that it's not the explosion that happened in the past, it's the explosion that happened in the future, which is like a really cool evolution of this very similar idea. But no, like, you're right, these are very similar premises. You know, it's funny, the thing that I kept thinking of, especially in that first episode with the like, wrinkles in time, where they would relive the same few seconds. I was thinking of the Next Gen episode Cause and Effect, where they relived the same one act of the show over and over and over again. They got calls in to the local TV station. They thought that there was something wrong with the broadcast because they kept seeing the same thing over again. Just talking about what a novel thing that was for TV. And I'm watching this from more than 10 years earlier and I'm like, it reminded me that doing that, reliving that same moment again and again. We take it for granted now, but back in 1979, like, that's some weird shit. That's some really like high concept out there. Stuff that is challenging for like, you know, an audience on BBC1. And I should mention, this show, I believe, was one of the highest rated Doctor who stories ever.

Yeah, episode four was six, over 16 million.

Right? Yeah. So a lot of people attribute it to the fact that during the first week there was an ITV strike, so no one was watching itv. But that doesn't explain how the audience, week over week, kept rising and rising. So that combined with the John Cleese cameo, it's just another reminder that Doctor who was not some, like, weirdo, cult sci fi show like Doctor who. You know, its proper place is one of the biggest things in British culture. And I think the humor of this episode is one of the reasons why it's so successful. Because, yes, it's a really clever story, it's a fun idea, it's a really unique concept, but it's also really funny. I think the characterization of the Doctor in this episode had a huge effect on Moffat and for me as well. This is my version of the Doctor where, you know, first of all, like, you get the sense that he is an alien. He's presented as an outsider, the way that he interacts with the other characters. This is the episode that's the source of one of my favorite lines. I mean, you're a beautiful woman, probably that remind you he might look human, but he's not human. And my favorite scene, I think, is at the top of the second part where they just captured the Doctor, Romana and Duggan, and they're in the living room. The Doctor is clearly in the weaker position here. He's a prisoner. He doesn't have any weapons, but he walks in that room and he dominates the room. He takes over the whole situation through wit and humor, but he gets pushed into the.

He gets pushed into the room and falls behind the chair. And the best, I think the other, the second best line is, I love your butler. He's so violent.

Hello. And then just to continue in with the scene, we're going to do the whole scene right now, folks. At home. The, the plant and payoff bit that I love in that sequence is the Louis Cans chair. Like, it's. That really stuck out to me this time. Like, he sits down in the chair, he just. He talks like Tom Baker's. Like, I love the chairs. Really well worn, it's very comfortable. I love, like, he sets it up, then they do the scene, they let you forget about it. And then Duggan picks up the chair to throw it at somebody and the Doctor goes, wait, it's a Louis Cans. Like it's, it's so modern and so classic at the same time. It's, it's, it's a perfect encapsulation of, like, why I think this serial works so well. And to be, like, to be the, like, corny fan. The, I think the reason that the, the ratings went up and Part four was so popular is like, it's, it's really good. This serial's, like, genuinely good. It treats the audience as smart. It is doing, like, it's, it's bridging that gap of, of TV in this time where it's not just like a stage play on film and it's not just radio with pictures. They're actually doing, like, televisual storytelling. Like, there's a gag, I think it's in Part two, or it's in Part two, where Romana's doing all this, like, background action once they're in the cellar, and they just let it play and let it play and let you notice it. And then five minutes into the scene, the Doctor goes, what do you think Romana's doing? Like, it's, it's, there's such faith given to the audience in this story. It rewards you paying attention. And those plans and payoffs are like, there are, there were bits like, it's, it's, what's nice about this serial is you actually have to put your cell phone down also, not to be that guy. But, like, this story doesn't work in a second screen context. Like, it actually is doing good tv, which is you have to watch it and you have to listen to it and you have to process it. Like it's doing the good TV things that I love. But at the same time, what's really interesting, watching it through this time as well, is I noticed there are bits of exposition that are almost like, big finish Ian in there. Allow me to make extremely clear what is happening on the television right now. Kind of bits of dialogue where I'm like, I can see that, Julian. What are you talking about? So anyway, I just think the serials really, really straddles that line very compellingly between, like, old and new, classic and modern, and to, to a way earlier point, digging it way, way up. I, I, it's wild. You brought it up as, like, a serious thing, John, because I was going to make the joke that, like, just 10ft to the right of all the stuff happening in Part four is Picard and Q having their conversation. Like, I imagine the camera just like, kind of panning over and catching, like, a bald guy in a red outfit and being like, oh, sorry, and then like panning back over. But this is, this is really that peak era where to your point earlier, earlier, like, this is the PBS run that Americans are actually familiar with. Like, this is the era of Doctor who that like my mom and dad know about. Right. When I say Doctor who, maybe City of Death and Tom Baker doing the little wave that I use as a gif all the time is the picture they get in their head, you know, or the photo shoot that they also did here where Tom Baker's doing the like forehand and he's got the gray coat and the. Literally that one. Yes, with the, with the paint palette. He has the paint palette pin on. So it was probably shot in Paris. Like, I think a lot of the, the iconography to the American audience in particular of Doctor who exists here in City of Death and then specifically to Star the Next Generation. They're very clearly huge fans of Doctor who at every level of Star Trek the Next Generation down to like, there are lcars displays that just show the names of the Doctors because they don't think you can read it. Like, they very clearly are fans. It's just a perfect time capsule. Like, I use this, I use this serial as like my introduction to any time I. The rare occasions where I have a significant other and I'm showing them classic Doctor who, this is generally the one I start with because it's a rom com, it's sci fi, it's action, it's, it's, it's classic, it's modern, it has all the stuff. And then just following up on something way earlier, John, like, all this stuff seems very important and the story is very big and very like revelatory. And also none of it ever comes up again. Like, that's the thing about Classic who is like, no, that story's over. We're going to the pirate planet now. Or whatever they're doing next. Like, well, actually that was the previous season, but anyway, yeah, I mean, we.

Still have the second series, I think shooties, so it could come up there. Oh, we thought they'd bring back suit deck.

That's true. Oh no. Scaroth's back and he's better than ever.

I mean, Julian Glover still is still around, so who knows?

They could de age him. And I'm in he wait and I guess.

No, I don't think they have to de age him. I think you run with it.

They don't have to de age a plate of spaghetti.

He's fine.

Yeah, just big old pasta on stage with all the gushing though. The, the. The lore of this particular season is that. And, and if you look at the credits, John, Nathan Turner is working on this show. He's been working on the show for about two seasons previously. And I guess the, the next series, the next season after this one is when he finally gets the reins as producers and he does away with all of the humor. It's a more serious approach to Doctor who. It's a more somber doctor. I mean, we finally get them a different outfit for the Doctor. It's maroon. And, you know, it's. It's just. It's a different field, which is why I'm just wondering if he was. I wish he was still alive because I would love to get a take or hear a take because I'm not really seeing anything because he passed away way too early. Why? What was it that was so Grady working on these. These episodes that he felt that the humor was just misplaced. Whereas I think. I think the humor was actually enhanced the story and made it more accessible. Even an audience today can find the joy of seeing this for the first time because it's a great. Like you said, I think Michael maybe said, this is a great stepping on point. Like. Like I feel Blink is a good stepping on point. This is a good show. Those are great for episodes to show something that's never seen Doctor who, but then they just throw it out in the next season. It's very interesting that they just did away with that.

It's probably the style of TV from then. And also sort of as they're figuring out the modern audiences, it's 79. So where's that line between humor and seriousness? One thing I got from Julian Glover's performance was I felt like he was having difficulty figuring out where the stage actor style should begin and end and how that translated to tv, which of course makes sense. Television is still relatively new. You know, you're only a few decades in and the dominant form of acting in the UK is by far theater. And theater acting has its own range. But this, his performance felt very much like it was somebody trying to figure out how to bring their stage acting onto the TV screen. And there are a lot of questions. Where. Where do you be serious? Where do you be funny? And I think I did read that for this episode, there was a mixed reaction. Like it was. It got really good ratings, but it was a mixed reaction from, you know, critics. There always is as to the humor value of it and that it was such a vibe change from using modern parlance from. Compared to where it had been that for some people was probably shocking. And that may not have been the British sensibility of the era. Whereas a US Audience is probably a little, you know, more akin to that. I always felt like seeing John Cleese in there. The British are so good at doing, like, that really off the wall type of wackiness in Monty Python. But there's a context for that and, you know, okay, we're doing this today, and then you have to be Hamlet. It's like the in between is the more difficult thing to navigate. Now we're there, but this is 79, so I can definitely see there being some, you know, back and forth there. And that's so interesting that, that the very people involved in the season will go on to say, nope, let's strip out the humor and make it, you know, much more serious again. I can see that vacillating back and forth.

I. I will say the theatricality in Julian Glover's performance is like, what I love about it. Like, two of my notes are literally like, he nails the what in Part one, like you wouldn't believe. And then for part two, he follows it up with, like, one of the best renditions of Doctor you've ever gotten in the show. Like, he's just, he's doing the work.

The other thing that John Nathan Turner tried to de emphasize was, you know, that the show had become the Tom Baker show. And when it works, you get City of Death. And one of the things I love about this story is the juxtaposition of the grandness of the premise with, as you mentioned, Michael, like, a lot of this story is just people in four rooms having scenes together. That only works so well because of the caliber of the actors. Like, you put Tom Baker and Julian Glover together in a room and it's like fireworks.

The casting's amazing. Down to, like, the 16th century henchman guy who just dips in for one episode or two episodes. He's so funny. Like, he's. He and Herman are just like amazing henchmen performances across this serial. Like, continuing the, like, Douglas Adams doing double oh, seven thing of this serial. Like, he really nails those parts. Like, the Countess is incredible. She's. She's so good. And then in part four, she busts out, like, what are you. Like, everyone's just like, on it.

Yeah, that's Catherine.

Catherine Shell. Yeah.

Yeah, I think she's.

She was also a Bond girl too. Like, 10 years before this serial. She was in 69 1. I don't remember the name of it off the top. Of my head. But yeah, there's. There are so many, like Bond connections in that way.

Yeah. And this is also like the actor who plays the scientist, Kradinsky or whatever his name is. I just want to know. David Graham, the actor who played him, I think passed away on September 20, so not that long ago.

Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait. That's Parker. David Graham. Isn't David Graham the guy who did the voice of Parker? Am I making that up?

The voice of Parker in what?

Thunderbirds.

Oh, yes. Yes.

Yeah. Oh, wow. I didn't even recognize him. That's amazing. That's him. Whoa. Oh, wow. Sorry. That just blew my mind.

And I think his performance is one of the things some people point to is maybe being a little over the top. But it should be mentioned that the accent he's doing is his grandparents Russian accent. They actually spoke like that. So that's what he was channeling in his performance. But I forget what I was talking about and it's going to come to me in a second and it's going to drive me crazy. Oh, yeah. About John Nathan Turner toning down the humor in the next season. From what I can gather, there was a lot of fan consensus that the show was getting too silly. And I think that, you know, this is the moment where the importance of the fans, the, like, hardcore Doctor who fans, the tale sort of starts to wag the dog a little bit, where Jonathan Turner, he's consciously trying to court those fans and respond to their concerns, which I think it would be hard to argue is partially one of the reasons why the show was eventually canceled. But you also have to put it in context. Like, you guys, I think this is one of the best Doctor who stories ever. But it comes out in a season where most of the other episodes, most of the other stories are, let's say, not as successful. I have a soft spot for Destiny of the Daleks, but I understand the criticism it gets. The story after. This is the Creature from the Pit, which, note for future me, show the clip of a giant hairy testicle menacing Tom Baker right here. Followed by Nightmare of Eden, which I like the model work, but I love Nightmare of Eden. It's not so great.

I think it's wonderful. I really wanted that machine that could jump into the picture.

Well, scientists, if you need to do research, we found the one Nightmare of Eden guy. We found him. I forget that one exists half the time. Good Lord.

Hey.

I also love Time Flight, so I.

Have a soft spot for Time Flight.

If Anthony Ainley's in It. I kind of like it. I'm the sucker for Anthony. I'm the one. Anthony Ainley, master fan.

So here we are, the Horns of Niman, rounding out with Shada, which I think is a masterpiece. But it has the unfortunate problem of the fact that it was never finished and never broadcast. Yeah, hard to argue that in that context the show's not really working.

So, like, weird parallel to see if any of this sounds weirdly familiar to current events. So there's a bit like right after this season, there's a big strike that halts production for like almost a year, maybe over a year. And when the show comes back, there's a renewed focus on hard sci fi, appealing to the fans. Going back to the core idea of Doctor who, which some nut job named Chris bid me thought was making the show educational again. And I like Chris Bitmead's writing. I don't think he's like, he's interesting in behind the scenes stuff, but like, I don't think the missing element of Doctor who was the lesson, like the Eduardo, the science. Like, I don't know, that's not it. And then sort of the thing we kind of, we've mentioned, but are sort of dance like season 18. Doctor. Elizabeth Sandifer, going back to her has this terrific visual image that I always go back to when I think of season 18. The way she describes it is the season after 17, the one more season of City of Death is when we're talking about 18 is where Baker gets the plum outfit. And for the folks at home, Anyway, season 18 is essentially like a box constructed around Tom Baker. And it's a jack in the box designed to wind him up and propel him clean out of the show. Like, that's what season 18 is designed to do, is to frustrate the lead into leaving. And it's like the first in a series of really wrongheaded decisions about fixing the show that end up not even really like being carried out on, like, not even like being executed. Like the team they build around, around Tom Baker, they, they really go hard on going back to like the original idea of Doctor who. So they, they build up the TARDIS team to be the biggest one since the first Doctor. That's why you get like Adric and Nissan and Tegan all in the ship, all yelling, all being so loud and mean all at the same time, because none of them want to be there much like Ian and Barbara. Like, there's all this weird hearkening back to quote unquote, the original concept that does not take into effect any of the lessons learned in the intervening 20 years or at that point less but still. So it just, I, I get a bad. You know, when you see the, the stuff on X, the everything site about like every studio bringing in like fan panels to vet the ideas, I'm like, we did this. You. You're gonna make more Ian Levine's. You sick fucks. What are you doing? Like, you're building an Ian Levine factory. You absolute psychopaths. Like, what are you thinking? Anyway, But I digress. The funny thing guy is, it is the same. It is like an early predictor of the same bad instincts you see mess up these like long running franchises like this. The like weird urgent to go back and preserve the old. When what you really need to do is, I mean, finding somebody as funny as Douglas Adams to write scripts, that is an impossible task. You have saddled John Nathan Turner with an impossible task of finding an equally good writer. Chris Bidmead and Eric Sayward were maybe not the guys, all due respect, like, maybe not the guys. Like, I don't know. But yeah, much like this sentence, there's a decline in quality.

The other thing too is that I very much get the sense that John Nathan Turner didn't think Douglas Adams was that funny.

Like, Jonathan Turner is a very problematic guy. I also want to say that out loud on the podcast, like, he's a bad dude and I don't want to praise him too much, but like the reason this serial is able to exist is also like, he was the producer who figured out they had the money to go to Paris.

Yes.

Like, as much as the guy is like reviled and like genuinely a bad dude, he is also responsible for arguably the best Tom Baker serial. Like he is.

That's true.

One of the keys that turns that they get on the train to Paris. Like so real tough.

Yeah. I also just want to say, while I do think just about every decision that was made in terms of changing the direction of the show in the following season, season 18, I think is was wrong for the long term health of the show and also wrong in terms of diagnosing exactly what the issues were. That said, I think season 18 is great.

Having said all the shit I just did, I too am one of the rare season 18 defenders. I don't hate it, but it is. It's a different show. It's so different. Like I. The funny thing guy is like, you're so right in that. Like they should have just continued doing this. But also I do like that.

No I love State of Decay.

You're right in that they should have just kept on doing this. The problem is, and I just had this thought, but then I remembered, I think that Elizabeth Sandifer says this very same thing. The problem is you need someone as good as Douglas Adams to do it. Right. The reason this works is because the humor is as good as its sci fi concepts. Right. Usually it's one or the other. I think the Bid Mead era and season 18 goes very hard on the sci fi concepts to the point where they are sometimes impenetrable. But I think Chris Bitmead thinks that his concepts are the star of the show. And now maybe, maybe at this moment where it was kind of the Tom Baker show, maybe you needed a little of that.

Yeah, I mean, also like Tom Baker's talking to the production team about like, my next companion should be a head of cabbage. Like he's not completely in his right mind either at this point in the show's product. Like, it's hard to pick a winner in 1979 other than Lala Ward for leaving. Like she's the one who got it right. I'll do one more year and then I'll book.

Speaking of Lala Ward and Douglas Adams, am I making this up or is Douglas Adams the one who introduced Lala Ward to Richard Dawkins?

Oh God, this is all going wrong for me. You're. This is all, wow, this is all.

Turning sour, which I also have this troubling thought. You know, guy you mentioned, John Nathan Turner passed away too young. So did Douglas Adams. And like, you know, sometimes I wonder, how do I put this in a respectful way? Sometimes I wonder whether these figures, whom we revere, how they would fare had they not passed away at the time that they did. For example, I have this unfortunate scenario in my mind where you could imagine Douglas Adams perhaps taking a bigoted right wing turn.

He's friends with John Cleese. He'd be on Twitter saying nasty shit. Like we. You can just say it.

He's friends with Richard Dawkins. Like that whole new atheist crowd 20 years ago. And like some of us were attracted to their whole shtick, but then it kind of devolved into some troubling, in my opinion, regressive, racist, bigoted, transphobic.

I don't know if opinion is required on those. It's just factually. Well, they're kind of shitty.

Well, that's the area I was wondering if we were going to go there with this, because it always stands out to me that Douglas Adams was Self described as a radical atheist and part of a very specific movement. You can almost identify the key members, Richard Dawkins, et cetera. And, you know, I've come across individuals loosely associated with that particular strain of thought. And it's really interesting to see how that influences both sci fi, as it went along for the. For those years, and how it eventually sort of fell out of vogue. One of the biggest reasons why people like. I mean, I even like John Cleese, who I really enjoy almost all of his work and I do, I follow him on Twitter or whatever you just called the platform a minute ago.

You mean X, the Everything site. We all call it that. That's how we all refer to it. Right.

You know, years ago I followed him along with, you know, like George Takei, you know, two now older actors, roughly the same generation, and they sort of took different paths. And the thing is that by the standards of this era, of this episode, all the way up to the late 90s, very, very liberal, very, very left. I think something happens to actors, producers, anybody involved in major entertainment production that as the period of time passes, that their work is at the pinnacle, that their style is in vogue. You either start to take yourself less seriously and enjoy what you've been and still pop out to do things and find value in your art, or you become sort of bitter about it. Everything should be the way it was. Guy, you were saying, like. Actually everyone was saying, like, bring Dr. Who back to what it was. People always looking backwards, looking backwards. I think that happens a lot in entertainment and the arts. People want to look back and they become really bitter as people start saying, hey, your style and even your views are not keeping up and people calcify so that it goes into the. Can even go into the political realm where it says, don't you tell me to change. Don't you dare tell me that what I said might not be right. Because they're used to being culture defining people, and now they're just not. And that's. And that's literally not that that happens to everyone. I think the beloved stars that stay beloved, sometimes it is because they're cut out early, you know, and that's what we call the JFK effect. Really tragic, really sad. And we look back on somebody and say how amazing they were, even if, you know, they didn't get to, you know, a full journey on this planet. But it changes the context. The stars I think of, who really have the staying power, and that can be Patrick Stewart, Dolly Parton, they just come to mind Right now. But a lot of figures who have cross cultural appeal, it's because at some point they stopped being like, oh, I'm not going to learn, I'm not going to update, I'm not going to change my views. And if you don't, your own career, your own view in the world is going to have a really hard time and embitterment is going to be a big problem for you. And, yeah, what is your next work going to be like? So don't do that with a TV show either. Don't, don't cling on to the past like, oh, we have to make it just like it was, any more than we have to go rip apart. Like, we're not ripping apart this episode because of its production value and effects. We know it was 1979, we know it was the BBC with its limited budget, making an entire podcast about just saying, oh, what, what, like, what mediocre effects compared to what we can do today would be pointless and silly. You could do it. Instead, we're all here recognizing, wow, what cool stuff they did with what they had back then and where the art was in that, not saying that we have to do it that way. Now it's recognizing what it was and how we got here. The actors, the producers, the directors, they need to do the same. And the writers and sadly, I think a lot just sort of hit their peak and then stop. So he can definitely, you know, hold Douglas Adams up as, like, we will never know where he would have gone. I think my, my gut on him is that he would have been lighter, he would have been able to change more with the times and been like, oh, well, this is cool. This is different, you know, not withholding the very. How shockingly controversial the trans topic has become in British societies. So if you're in the British entertainment scene, that's obviously a thing. But then again, look at David Tennant, you know, so there, there we have one of the all time, you know, doctors there just like unabashedly saying what's on his mind and being supportive and evolving viewpoints. So it doesn't, no one's locked into that. But I, I have a little bit of optimism about where Douglas Adams would have been because I, I get that change, you know, sense that even throughout his work he changed. Now, of course, we don't know what people's, you know, backgrounds are and we find out information about some of our favorite writers. Now I'm looking at you, Neil Gaiman, you know, and it's tough, it's tough Realizing that these people are so human and many of them are incredibly flawed, and you just hope that they can sort of evolve through that. I. I wonder, like, where many of these figures would have been. As my last sort of point, I didn't know anything about before this episode because this wasn't my era. Johnathan Turner. So I wanted to look him up. It's like, whoa, this is a sort of a wild guy with quite a history and liked wearing Hawaiian shirts, apparently, to conventions.

Buddy. You ain't kidding. Yeah, there's a lot.

Some people, some unkind people have suggested that the wardrobe of the sixth Doctor was an unintentional reflection of the producer's own style of dress.

And you know, that you never know.

Requires people to forget that the six Doctor was advertised at the time as totally tasteless. But enjoy your willful ignorance. Like what?

And talk about diversity. He was an out gay man without taste. Brilliant.

Brilliant.

That is barrier breaking.

We can do a whole. A whole episode on John Nathan Turner because that's a. He's a. At the very least, one of the most influential figures. I mean, he was producing the show for like nine years. Eight years. Nine years.

A long time.

The tenure of four Doctors. He created three Doctors. He was responsible for the casting of three Doctors. And, you know, the casting of Peter Davison paved the way for the kind of Doctor that David Tennant was. Michael. I know that you just guessed it on a podcast. All about time. Crash. I think it was in that episode where the writer and actor are speaking to the audience directly when they say that Peter Davidson was their Doctor.

You were my Doctor.

So the influence of John Nathan Turner, for good and bad, he did a lot of things that were good innovations and I think just as many things that were really not good ideas.

Yeah. Going back to like the. The funny Moffat parallels. I think there's also, like a weird coincidence in that Nathan Turner and Moffat's first go at casting the Doctor, they both wanted an old guy and ended up with the youngest person in the part yet. And then the second time, which is for the folks at home, is Peter Davison and Matt Smith. And then their second go at it, there was only one choice and they only cast. They only really considered that guy, which was Colin Baker, because Jonathan Turner met him at a party and was like, I love this guy. This guy's the next guy. And the second was Peter Capaldi. Who's fucking Peter Capaldi? Like, come on. There was this. Come on. If Peter Capaldi's like, I would like to play The Doctor now you let him. And then he goes on a weird diatribe about how it's like a spirit that left his body. But we can talk about that later. I have such a bug up my butt about Peter Capaldi's weird refusal to come back and play the Doctor because he likes let the character of the Doctor God and like it's no longer. And like dog, there's just pay the man, pay this man, pay this man.

Well, I have also heard, and this is nothing but hearsay with some, some clues that lends some perhaps credibility to it. But I've heard the BBC is responsible for asking Capaldi to go when Moffat went. And I don't think that he wanted to go. He was politely told to vacate the part so that the new showrunner was able to. Which once again is exactly the situation that John Nathan Turner found himself in. Except he by all rights should have left the show and he didn't and Moffat did.

You could like see the curse move from person to person person because Chris Chibnall's the boy in the yellow tie in the 80s. He's the fan on TV complaining about Doctor who and then he becomes the guy. Like you can watch the curse move between these people in real time.

It's crazy.

Like it's so strange. Like it is really all connected. It's very weird in that way. Like, like Chris Chibnall as a boy is yelling at the writers of Trial of a Time Lord and just not learning the lessons. Like he can't do it. It just, it's so weird. All right, the whole to, to. To go way, way back. Like in, in an age of way too many 10 part streaming shows about like how this movie or TV show got made. Let's watch the offer on Paramount plus put the gun in my mouth. I would absolutely watch a 10 episode series about John Nathan Turner. Like that would be nuts. Like that would. That would truly be a deranged. To get Russell Crowe in there. Let's get some wacky happen.

Yeah, just someone should do that. Like I would watch the hell out of that. It would, it would sort of be the rejoinder to the like William Hartnell, Verity Lambert hagiography of. Yeah. Of Adventures in Space. But you would have to like, I don't know because again, as has been hinted at, the picture that would have to be painted of John Nathan Turner would not be very flattering given that, you know, he may not have been directly guilty of sexual assault himself, but he certainly enabled it knowingly, you know, which is pretty upsetting. But going back to John, I agree with you. A thing about Douglas Adams is that present in, I think all of his work is this kind of irreverence for everything. He just, you know, one of the hallmarks of his writing of like the Douglas Adams style is commenting on how just absurd everything is. So we can't or shouldn't take ourselves too seriously. So I feel like he wouldn't have all of these hang ups about the different things people choose to believe or different kinds of lives that people lead or. I mean it just seems to me like when you have contemplated the absurdity of existence itself, you would probably be led to adopt an attitude of like it's all good, I mean all of it.

And that's where he stands apart from a lot of other people in that, in that sort of circle of thinkers back then is a lot of them were very self righteous. Many, many who I would even call self identified. I'm probably gonna get some hate messages over this one. But, but, but the self identity radical atheists were themselves very like theocratic atheists if, if you will, in terms of that. And, and somebody's writing when you, when you read that in their writing, whether it's fiction or nonfiction. And there's this like, we absolutely know this is the way it is in this way it is. And it's. And whatever is, the people are less adaptive to new ideas and are very, very sensitive and prickly about criticism. Thinking about Adam's career, he was always getting lambasted for not being funny, for being just hokey. The very reviews of this episode before, when I was prepping for this show, there were a lot of reviewers are just like, oh, sec. Oh, the humor was awful. Douglas Adams is just not funny. And this is 19 again, 1979. So obviously he had decades dealing with this. So he probably didn't take himself very seriously and knew how to cope with the onslaught of critical reviews, which leaves somebody in a better position. One hopes to weather that in all areas when you're dealing with new viewpoints and evolving viewpoints. So that's, that's sort of where I think that would have gone. And I get a sense that a lot of other writers in that era who are even beloved now were always one thing. And when they're popular, they're revered and then can't deal with the fact that the times change a little bit and they're no longer completely in line with that and that. And, and those who are just sort of like, yeah, well, I don't even know what's going on. I'm just writing something interesting and, and fun and what I want to write and not really caring too much about whether they're in the Zeitgeist or not. Those people tend to have less of a problem just with time. I mean, in this. So this is time. We're going around things. Things are changing. And every fan here of Doctor who, we have to deal with it every couple years. It's going to be a pretty radical change. We're going to get a new Doctor. And, you know, we deal with it and we go with it, and sometimes it's not so great, sometimes it's wonderful, and sometimes we just don't know what to think. But you go, you go along with it. And that's sort of the sense I get from this. And that's maybe why this is also such a good episode, because it doesn't take itself as seriously. As a result, it's not telling the viewers. It's like, there's no, like, sense I got from watching this show or from this series that, like, I had to think about this a certain way. It felt like it was leaning into the hokey enough that I could be like, oh, man, this is. This is meant to be hokey. And it's saying, yeah, we're serious. We're also not serious. Like, we're gonna have the dramatic moments. And that's, that's a really difficult needle to thread because either, you know, you can easily just waver a little bit and then all of a sudden you're just completely not serious and nobody will take you seriously. Or you can put the next season where everybody's sort of really rigid about it. I like shows that can exist in that middle ground. But there was this review that stuck out at me where it was, apparently, this is from Doctor who magazine. Vanessa Bishop said back in May 2001 that this is a Doctor who story that it's all right to laugh at. We must now accept that City of Death is funny because if we didn't, crackerjack style, sleuths, scientists and all would leave us knocking about near the bottom of all the story rankings. And I loved that little snippet of like, yeah, you're sort of given permission to laugh at it. Like, you're not told, like, hey, you gotta be serious here. Like, don't, don't mean it. We know that might have been funny, but don't, but don't laugh. I was laughing and I didn't feel weird about it.

Yeah, I mean, like, that's an interesting thing, though. Like the idea that. And maybe, you know, this was indicative of the attitude of Doctor who fans at the time, but this idea that you shouldn't laugh at it because I think they were afraid of not being taken seriously. But this episode is inviting you to laugh. It's not laughing because it's ridiculous or silly. It's laughing because it's trying to be funny. It knows it's being funny.

Inspired by John. I'm looking up other reviews now, and the like one from the Period by John Peele is complaining that it's a total farce. And the continual buffoonery is getting on my nerves. It's. It very much has that thing of fans being like, but you're not taking it seriously. And then that continues with one of our favorites, I think, on the podcast. Mr. Gary Russell himself, when he reviewed the VHS in 91, has this incredible line that I just have to read straight off Wikipedia, so please forgive me. City of Death, like most Douglas Adams material, is overrated and misses the mark for me. Falling between the stools of good pastiche and bad parody and making fairly unsatisfactory viewing, Gary Russell ended up, like, running Doctor who in the modern. Like he was a producer on Doctor who in the modern era. That's the Doctor who fan. Feel like if you wanted, like, to answer your question, it's like, oh, I got a bone.

Stick with Gary.

My show serious. And it's like, dog. Yeah, guy.

You. You're friends with Gary Russell, right?

Yeah, sorry. I'm a huge fan. I think he's great. What was I said, I think he's terrific and his contributions are innumerable.

Oh, that I didn't know.

Oh, yeah.

Like I said, I'm a huge fan.

Well, the next time you speak to him, say you were on a podcast where something came up and we have some questions for him. I would love to have him on the pod sometime.

Also, he calls me Shrek and I call him Donkey.

Okay, I will not ask any private time. Sorry. In the interest of wrapping up here before we move on to closing thoughts, there was one thing that stood out to me on this watch. Just because of everything that is happening with AI, like mid journey and everything. There was a line near the beginning of the first episode where Romana. I forget, are they talking about the sketch that that random Parisian was drawing?

And then, yeah, rare Romana. L. She. She advocates for generative AI or as the Doctor art exclaims, computer pictures, computer pictures, computer pictures.

They might as well be Painting by computer.

You sit in Paris to talk of computer pictures. Listen, I'll take you somewhere and show you some real paintings painted by real people. And I was like, thank you, Doctor. Thank you.

Yeah, it comes back up, I think, in the fourth episode of it, too. It sort of bookends it. There's. I noted that was like, oh, wow, they're taking a swipe at AI before they knew what AI art was, you.

Know, and that's another thing, actually, Michael, you said something about the gag with the chair and how it came up again later in the scene after you'd forgotten about it. The story is doing that all over the place, up to and including the running gag about how the Doctor is constantly chastising Duggan for, you know, wanting to hit everything and smash everything. And then at the end of the story, turns out that's exactly what's required to save the day. So it's sort of like one of the things. Again, Michael, you said that this episode is doing that I think goes unnoticed because it does it so well and so effortlessly is that it's really well constructed and it has all of those, like, setups and all of those payoffs, like, once again, not unlike a Steven Moffat story. So. Closing thoughts on City of Death, my friends. Anyone care to weigh in?

Loved it. Absolutely loved it. I can't even begin to tell you how many times I've watched it, and it keeps me thoroughly entertained. I think as now as I'm older, the humor hits a little bit more poignant. It's more funny because when I was a kid, I think the line about, you're a beautiful woman probably just, you know, went over my head. And now I just. And. And even though. Even the. The line with Ramona and Duggan about, you know, Duggins and they're in the cafe and he's saying that they're buried in a. They're buried in a wall. And Ramona's like, who are the art buyers? And he's like, no, the Mona Lisas. I see these moments shine through more now. I just think it's. I think it's. I think it's a 9.75.

Michael, you think you can do any better than 9.75?

That's perfect. 10 suck at Gary Russell. No, I'm kidding. 5.75 is perfect. It's an A. Yeah, absolutely. I think two things. One, this. We didn't talk about him nearly enough, but I totally agree. I think every Doctor who serial is improved by the inclusion of an archetype. I call God's perfect Idiot, which is Duggan to a T. Like, he's just so dumb and so wonderful and he's just, he's pure. Like, this scene where Romana, like, very sleek, slinkly, kind of gets into the cafe and then it cuts to Doug and just smashing the window in is pure comedy. Like, that's, that's what you want. Like, anyway, so. But my real closing thought is, like, I had this. It's really the first time that the end of a Doctor who serial, as playful and light as this one was, I found myself, like, kind of tearing up because there's that moment where they leave Duggan at the top of the Eiffel Tower, and then, you know, the Doctor and Ramona are all the way down at the bottom somehow, very quickly, and they, they. Tom Baker just stops and turns around and says, bye, bye, Doggin. And they walk off. And, you know, maybe this serial isn't, you know, hard science fiction and maybe it. It isn't serious enough, but it's beautiful and it's kind and to me, that's what Doctor who is. It's. It's beautiful and it's kind and. Yeah, so 9.75. Sure. Just minus 0.25 for me not recognizing David Graham, which is hugely embarrassing. So take everything I've said with a grain of salt. I didn't even know that was David Graham.

Yeah, you can't trust this guy. Anything he says, if he.

Anything.

Yeah.

John, any further closing thoughts or did you.

Yeah, I mean, I love that. I don't feel qualified to give it a number, so I'm gonna, you know, sidestep size up that one. I mean, certainly not in comparison to classic who episodes on. On their own, but definitely. I. You know, I think if I talked to all of you before watching it, I would have had a different experience, maybe an even better experience, because it is something that if you didn't watch it 40 coming 45 some odd years ago, it's really hard to understand the context in which it existed, from television production to storytelling to where it was in that evolution too. So in my mind, I'm still. I can't quite get away from ranking it against Modern who and Modern Television. So it'd be unfair to rank it. But did I enjoy it? Did I enjoy our discussion here? Okay, well, this is 10 out of 10, like, learning things, seeing the perspectives of it and loving it. And what I would leave is not so much a critique, but an amused observation. So I didn't realize this was One of the first times they were filming out of studio and on site, but it's Paris. And I was trying to think of a way to put it. I said, wow, I think I got it. This is the most British interpretation of Paris I've ever seen. Because it. Where was really Paris. Like, they checked off some boxes, you got the Eiffel Tower, they nailed cafe culture and they're like, oh, well, we spent a lot of time in that cafe. It's where our best thinking is done is somebody will randomly sketch you and apparently subconsciously identify you as a Time.

Lord and they'll hold you up with at gunpoint and nobody will care and.

No one really cares. It was great. They got it. But they chose the most British weather for Paris. You know, everything felt like, oh, they're just trying to make this London and grudgingly admit that it's Paris. And they even begin the episode like how unique this place is. The Doctor's going on and on and on about how this most unique culture and place there is, and they couldn't quite get that way. And I say, yeah, it's because they were just so British, they couldn't quite get it. Like I wanted. I really would love a. In another episode or another one, get a French Doctor who fan on to comment on this episode, especially a Parisian. I really want another perspective because I think it would be hilarious. But, yeah, that's. That's my final take on the episode, is that, you know, let's see Paris from. From French Doctor who fan perspective. And I really love to see what that's all about. But watch, watch it. If you're a Doctor who fan of the modern stuff, watch this and have, have a good time with it. Especially if you're a Douglas Adams fan. If you've read Hitchhiker's Guide, even knowing that, I think you'd watch this episode and say, oh, there it is. There's that humor, there's that irreverence and with reverence, with poignancy.

Michael, looked like you had one thought.

The risk of spoiling my last thought, yeah, there are two moments of the British Frenchness you're talking about that really struck out to me and I had to headcanon myself. It's the translation circuit. It's fine. The two of them are like the news on the TV in the cafe is in English, which is very odd. And then I think in part three or four, Tom Baker goes to the Louvre and talks to two cops in English, and they're just English policemen. They just go in, they let him into the Louvre. And I'm like, what the hell is this scene? Okay, I've kind of ruined my beautiful, poignant ending, but still. Yeah. The British Frenchness of it is so funny.

Yeah, I think you're right. It's the. It's the Tardis translation surrogates.

It just makes everything slightly more British. Yeah.

Yes, right, of course. Thank you all for joining us on this delayed reaction to City of Death. We will see you all again at Christmas for Steven Moffat's Joy to the World. Speaking of Steven Moffat, until then, we are tardisrubbish on TikTok, Instagram and YouTube. And please always remember, hate is always foolish and love is always kind.