Fox on the box

Actress Emilia Fox comes from a famous theatrical dynasty, but just how far back do her family’s acting roots go, and what was the scandal involving one of her ancestors in the 19th century? You can find out in tonight’s fifth episode of Who Do You Think You Are? beginning at 9pm on BBC One. She also discovers her great-great-grandfather Samson came up with an important invention in the 19th century. Born into an impoverished family, he began work at a Leeds textile mill at the age of eight, and went on to become one of the richest men of his time.

Meanwhile, there’s no getting away from Emilia’s relatives on the telly! Not that you’d want to as they’re all very well accomplished. Her dad, Edward, is probably best known for his role in Edward And Mrs Simpson and for attempting to assassinate French President de Gaulle in The Day Of The Jackal. Edward’s brother James made a terrific start to his acting career, appearing opposite Rolling Stone Mick Jagger in Nic Roeg’s seminal gangster flick Performance. I also remember James in a 1983 Film On Four written by Stephen Poliakoff and directed by Charles Sturridge, co-starring Bill Oddie’s daughter Kate Hardie, entitled Runners.

Emilia’s mum is Joanna David and you may have seen her helping the war effort in Yesterday’s repeats of Colditz or as a suspect in A Touch Of Frost opposite David Jason. Joanna was John Thaw’s long-lost love in my favourite Inspector Morse episode Dead On Time. Both mother and daughter were in Andrew Davies’ adaptation of Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice, Emilia playing Colin Firth’s fragile and wronged sister. Near the beginning of her career, Emilia won the title role in ITV’s version of Daphne Du Maurier’s Rebecca, gaining experience from Charles Dance, Diana Rigg and Faye Dunaway. More recently, she appeared in a Christmas version of Dickens’ David Copperfield with Bob Hoskins leading a galaxy of stars, again for the BBC, but her name is now synonymous with the forensic-pathology detective-drama series Silent Witness.

As Edward’s daughter has reached the pinnacle of the acting profession, so has James’ son Laurence. While Laurence’s aunt has guest-starred in Morse, he is a regular in spin-off series Lewis, playing the sergeant-turned-inspector’s intellectual sidekick Hathaway. And, of course, Billie Piper has married into the family becoming Laurence’s wife after meeting whilst touring a play together. I’m sure we all know the name of the series for which she’s most famous! Secret Diary Of A… no, not that one!! Anyway, they have a young son together, Winston, and the chances of him becoming an actor, I’d say, are pretty high.

Breaking the silence

I haven’t written about Doctor Who in this Journal for three months. I’ve not even mentioned the programme in passing! Give the man a medal!! With the second half of Series Six fast approaching, it’s perhaps time to take a little look at the present state of affairs. I wasn’t happy with the cliff-hangers of the last two episodes. Why? After a terrific and traditional two-part story in which The Doctor advocated living in harmony alongside our Doppelgänger cousins, just as he’d done in Doctor Who And The Silurians in 1970, he whipped out his sonic screwdriver and reduced Amy to sludge. The Time Lord had suspected that, for the last half-dozen episodes, his long-standing companion was a double, constantly checking to see whether or not the TARDIS registered her as pregnant. But, why couldn’t he practice what he’d been preaching… tolerance. Why couldn’t Doppelgänger Amy exist together with her flesh and blood counterpart? The audience was fobbed off with some lame excuse about transmitting signals. Confine her where this couldn’t happen would’ve been a more sensible solution but nowhere near as melodramatic as the shock value of seeing The Doctor seemingly bumping off his friend. Writer Matthew Graham, co-creator of Life On Mars and Ashes To Ashes, was asked to add this ending by show runner Steven Moffat to lead into the mid-season finale but, for me, only succeeded in spoiling The Rebel Flesh and The Almost People.

And so to the cliff-hanger of Episode Seven, A Good Man Goes To War, in which we learn the real identity of River Song. She’s none other than Amy’s long-lost daughter, Melody Pond. Doctor Who had been building up to this revelation for some time. Ever since River was introduced in 2008, in Steven Moffat’s two-part story Silence In The Library and Forest Of The Dead, the writer has been teasing us as to her true persona. The resolution is a bit of a cheat, in all honesty, as Amy had yet to be introduced to Doctor Who at the time of her offspring’s inception in the series. Karen’s character was still two years away. It needed to be something that was already in the many and varied worlds of Doctor Who for an audience to be truly taken by surprise. Something connected to The Doctor himself would’ve been best, where it doesn’t matter that Matt’s Doctor was also two years away when River was inaugurated because, central to the concept, the Eleventh Doctor is the same character as the Tenth. Maybe the familial connection, now established as mother and daughter, is a red herring to throw the audience off the scent of a much greater surprise, yet to come over the next six episodes. I hope so because, as it stands, the big mid-season denouement was nothing short of pure soap opera, which wouldn’t have been out of place as the climax to an episode of EastEnders! I wonder when I’ll write about modern day Doctor Who again? Soon, all being well!

Don’t bring Harry

BBC spy drama Spooks will come to an end this autumn on BBC One with a final six-episode tenth series.

Jane Featherstone, chief executive of Kudos Film & Television, the company who created Spooks, calls it “a fitting end to a much-loved show”.

The final series of Spooks will focus on Section D’s Head of Counter-Terrorism Sir Harry Pearce KBE (Peter Firth) and a guilty secret that could destroy his relationship with Senior Intelligence Analyst Ruth Evershed (Nicola Walker). Joining the established cast, Robin Hood’s Lara Pulver plays an ambitious and hungry new spook determined to make her mark! She replaces Beth Bailey, portrayed by Sophia Myles in the last season. Also on board, for its final outing, are (Borg Queen) Alice Krige and the excellent Jonathan Hyde, of Titanic fame, whom I best remember in BBC Two’s period courtroom saga Shadow Of The Noose.

Spooks is responsible for making household names of numerous actors including Matthew Macfadyen, Keeley Hawes, Shauna Macdonald, who went on to star in the superb British horror flick The Descent, Rupert Penry-Jones and Miranda Raison, recently seen in Sugartown, to mention but five!

“We’ve followed the arc of Harry and Ruth’s personal story,” said Featherstone. “I think the team have brought Spooks to a natural end,” she concluded.

Telly Visions: Romola Garai

Romola Garai seems to be popping up/out all over the place on television just recently! She’s been acting professionally since 2000 when she made her debut in The Last Of The Blonde Bombshells. The actress is perhaps best known now for playing the title role in Jane Austen’s Emma, a four-part adaptation broadcast two years ago on BBC One, opposite Michael Gambon playing her father Mr. Woodhouse. The cast also included Jodhi May and Christina Cole.

But Romola has most recently been seen on BBC Two playing Sugar, a young and intelligent prostitute seeking revenge, through a novel she is writing, against all the men who have abused her and her colleagues, in The Crimson Petal And The White. She has commented on her racy part of Sugar, a 19th century mistress, that “standing around in knickers and suspenders, waiting for someone to call action, is pretty cringe-making... By the end everyone on the set was like, ‘Please just put it away.’”

This week Romola is back on our screens in the six-part television drama series The Hour. Set in the BBC newsrooms of the mid-Fifties, and again on BBC Two, she plays Bel Rowley, spirited and ambitious, and facing the most exciting and daunting challenge of her life – running The Hour. Can her passion for the truth survive the political pressure the job will bring – and will her friendship with Freddie survive her undeniable attraction to front man Hector?

Do the Hustle

The creator of BBC One con-artist drama “Hustle” has said its newly-commissioned eighth series will be the last.

But writer Tony Jordan has not ruled out the possibility that “Hustle”, which first aired in 2004, could be revived.

“Do you allow the show to fade away or… quit while you’re ahead?” Tony asked Broadcast magazine. “You want to go out like James Dean in a fast car,” he added.

A BBC spokesperson confirmed the next series of “Hustle” would be the last “with the current gang”.

Goosebumps

The moment you’ve all been waiting for has arrived. No, not the passing of the Royal wedding, for which we’re all eternally grateful, not even the start of the thirty-second series of “Doctor Who”, the sixth if you’re a newbie, for which we’re even more beholden, but the day in which Claire Goose exposes her lovely lady lumps on television for the first time! It’s been a long time coming. She’s now 36, married and mum to Amelia. In the past, she’s posed for lads’ mags in her underwear, set our pulses racing in a nurse’s uniform, as Tina Seabrook in “Casualty”, but never before has she plucked up the courage to get her tits out. Tonight, in “Exile”, all that is about to change. It’s been described as her first ever nude scene despite wearing skimpy briefs throughout. Presumably she could’ve asked to keep her bra on if she’d felt too exposed but Claire trusted the director. It’s an important scene where the couple aren’t just having sex, something that’s seen earlier, but are making love for the first time. No doubt John Simm, her partner in the three-part serial, running on successive evenings at 9pm on BBC1, put her at ease and was very masterful!

Claire plays barmaid Mandy, a mother-of-two trapped in a lifeless marriage who embarks on an affair with a journalist called Tom (John Simm). Sacked from his job and dumped by his married girlfriend, Tom Ronstadt heads back up North to see his sister Nancy (Olivia Colman) and their father Sam (Jim Broadbent), a man nursing a dark secret but now in the grip of Alzheimer’s. Sam was originally due to be played by Pete Postlethwaite, who died in January. Jim heard the part had become available and thought, “if it was good enough for Pete, it’ll be good enough for me”! Jim’s mother had Alzheimer’s so he already knew a fair bit about it from her case. But, “Exile” is not a story about Alzheimer’s. It’s a psychological thriller about a man who can’t remember and another trying to get a secret out of him. “Exile” starts as a domestic drama, with some dark humour, but then turns into a thriller. So, there are plenty of reasons to tune in, not just the lure of seeing Claire in the altogether, although, admittedly, that is a major draw however brief, but the prospect of being entertained by some exciting television. Warden’s one to watch!

The courage of One’s convictions

British television is in a terrible state! Michael Grade recently claimed TV to be no worse or better than in the supposed golden age but I think he’s wrong. Well, he’s been wrong before! There isn’t much that’s worth watching and when the powers-that-be secure a drama that is… what do they do with it? They throw it to the dogs before it’s barely been given a chance to attract a following. I’m talking about the new eight-part science fiction series “Outcasts”. Clearly, viewing figures must’ve fallen off sharply during broadcast of the first few episodes because the show has been shifted, after what seems like indecision, to a post-news slot on Sunday evenings. Initially, the programme was transmitted at 9pm on BBC One on Monday and Tuesday in the slots vacated by “Silent Witness”. This schedule lasted a fortnight. With four episodes released, “Outcasts” was already halfway through. With four left, surely the schedule would remain the same? No! Episode five went out in its Monday slot but, the following day, new legal-eagle drama “Silk” got underway. Glancing at the following week’s listings, there was no sign of “Outcasts” either on Monday or Tuesday! That’s because it had moved again… this time to Sunday at 10.25pm, or thereabouts (programmes following the news always start late), to a slot recently used for weekly repeats of “The Apprentice”!

The explanation for the turmoil surrounding the broadcast of “Outcasts” is simple. It’s science fiction. Nobody’s interested. It doesn’t matter. Even though, when the genre is at its best, science fiction can go a long way in explaining the human condition, programmes with a truly creative streak are still treated with utter contempt. And thus, so is the viewer. How ironic the corporation choose to advertise their online catch-up service with the slogan “Your Very Own BBC”! My very own BBC finished years ago… if it ever started. There is a pecking order of subjects where scheduling falls by the wayside if, for example, Andy Murray has an “important” tennis match (even when the outcome is a certainty) or when a rich, privileged, couple are to marry! I dare the BBC to broadcast repeats of William Hartnell episodes of “Doctor Who” at peak time on their primary channel. Or, at any time on any channel! Hell, sell them to Yesterday, like “Colditz”, if you’re never, ever, going to repeat them. Put the series on instead of the next General Election. People hate science fiction so much, there might be a better turn out at the polling stations! Of course, the BBC are never going to repeat classic “Doctor Who” when they can sell the thing on DVD at £20 a story.

So, what is “Outcasts” about and is it any good? Watch it and discover for yourself! Does the show deserve better treatment? Am I making a fuss about nothing? I’ve seen the series described as “Spooks” in space. That’s probably because Hermione Norris is in it and it’s made by the same company. Daniel Mays is in it too, so perhaps it’s “Ashes to Ashes” in space. It’s made by the same company! Ashley Walters is in it. “Hustle” in space? Jamie Bamber was in the first episode. “Law & Order: UK” in space? Both made by the same company. OK, you get the picture. Actually, “Outcasts” is more “Survivors” in space, which isn’t made by the same company. It’s not as good as “Survivors” and I’m comparing “Outcasts” with the remake. Where it does score is in the very fact that it isn’t a reworking like so many. “Doctor Who”, “Survivors”, “The Day of the Triffids”, “The Prisoner”… all tell us when the golden age of television was. “Outcasts” is something trying to be new although it contains little that wasn’t made on the cheap in “Genesis of the Daleks”… in 1975. “Genesis” is one of the best “Doctor Who” stories though. Well, it’s a little late to start following the much-more expensive, shot in South Africa, “Outcasts”, if you aren’t already, as the series finishes this Sunday and I doubt very much that it has been re-commissioned. “Outcasts” has been cast out!

The Vital Statistics of “Doctor Who”

There’s interesting news for “Doctor Who” enthusiasts, as the television series approaches its forty-seventh anniversary, with the confirmation of a double world record for the programme…

“Doctor Who” star Matt Smith has been officially recognised as the youngest actor to take the role in the new edition of the Guinness World Records. The 2011 book also features another record for the hit show which is listed as the longest-running science-fiction TV series in the world. I’d never have guessed!

Smith, as we all know, made his debut as the Time Lord on New Year’s Day at the end of Part Two of “The End of Time” although, rather bizarrely I thought, his casting was announced in a special programme on BBC One almost a year earlier. He was just twenty-six when he filmed his first scenes last year, three years younger than Peter Davison.

“Doctor Who” has extended its own record for a lengthy run, having produced 769 episodes up to June of this year, consisting of 212 storylines plus a TV movie.

Telly Visions: Sophia Myles

When the BBC run a themed evening, the schedule often includes no more than two programmes related to the chosen subject! So, with this criterion in mind, Monday night is Sophia Myles night!! First of all, you can see her on BBC Three at 7:45pm, straight after “Merlin”, in yet another repeat showing of an early David Tennant episode of “Doctor Who”, “The Girl in the Fireplace”. The story, as you probably all know, is written by Steven Moffat, currently trying to sell the next season of “Doctor Who” to fans in two halves of seven episodes from Easter with the remaining six to air in the Autumn, and stars Sophia, rather elegantly, in the title role of Madame De Pompadour. I think she fits neatly into the Kate Winslet mould of actresses, which isn’t intended as a criticism but a compliment. There probably isn’t a better example to showcase what she does best, than this episode, although I do think the story itself is a little overrated. Maybe her role as Lady Penelope Creighton-Ward, in Jonathan Frakes’s awful live-action version of Gerry Anderson’s “Thunderbirds”, is another fine example of Ms Myles playing posh totty!

We’ve seen Sophia on our screens all too occasionally over recent years. She was in a reasonably memorable version of “Dracula”, broadcast later in the same year as her “Doctor Who” episode during the Christmas season of 2006. Marc Warren played the Count with Sophia Myles one of his conquests, Lucy. Her innocent friend, Mina, was portrayed by Stephanie Leonidas. Timothy Spall’s son, Rafe, brought solicitor Jonathan Harker to life, so to speak! He travels to Transylvania to sell Dracula a London property but never returns hence the arrival of “Poirot” actor David Suchet as archrival Abraham Van Helsing. This one-off special possibly helped secure Sophia a leading role in the short-lived Stateside vampire-show “Moonlight”. At least it ran for a full season! Michelle Ryan wasn’t as lucky with “Bionic Woman” while Tennant’s legal eagle comedy didn’t progress beyond pilot stage. Anyway, the lovely lady in question has returned to Blighty and can be seen afresh as agent Beth, alongside Peter Firth as Section D boss Harry Pearce, avenging the death of Ros Myers, together with Richard Armitage as Lucas, in the opening episode of Series Nine of “Spooks”, on BBC One at 9pm, the second of her two appearances this coming Monday evening.

All Change?

It’ll probably come as no surprise that I’m glad to see the back of “GMTV”. In Fiona Phillips and Kate Garraway, ITV1’s newly-defunct breakfast show spawned the two worst-ever female presenters on British television. I think they like to think of themselves as journalists despite lacking any of the traits that just might qualify them for such a position. It didn’t matter who Phillips was interviewing, Gordon Brown or Robbie Williams, she would always conclude with a “well, alright!” She might as well have said, “now shut up, you’ve had your three minutes!” And, Lord knows how many cups of coffee Garraway consumed before going on air each morning?! She always seemed to be on some kind of adrenaline rush, ecstatic over the most trivial of things. Recently Phillips was replaced by Emma Crosby. She wasn’t as bad as the other two but irritated me, quite early on, by not getting Peter Davison’s surname right. Not once, but twice! When he returned, some months later, to promote something new, Ms Crosby was still calling him Davidson. There really is no excuse. She spent most of the final morning leaving viewers straining to see whether or not she was wearing any knickers, so short was her skirt and so ungainly her position!

The trouble is ITV are replacing “GMTV” with something that promises to be equally as tatty, “Daybreak”. The new show’s presenters have absconded from BBC One in a flurry of media speculation but my expectations are not great. I’ve never watched an entire edition of “The One Show” but have seen Adrian Chiles on “The Apprentice” spin-off and he’s just so bloody boring I can’t understand why he’s on TV at all? I’m led to believe he’s some sort of football pundit so perhaps he’s the new Eamonn Holmes. God help us. Better make sure we’re all HD ready as television these days is completely unmissable. Judging from the trailers, Chiles’ co-presenter, Christine Bleakley, looks like being about as unwelcoming as her surname suggests. The changes are entirely cosmetic. It’s like changing a channel name from Virgin1 to Channel One where the output remains the same. What’s the point? And I hear that Kate Garraway is remaining anyway, to give us insightful interviews with all the Hollywood glitterati. Lorraine Kelly keeps her 8.30am slot too, although, after seventeen years, she was noticeably absent during the final weeks of “GMTV”. This last week saw pretty Myleene Klass confidently, but superficially, sitting in for Kelly which is only worth mentioning because I refuse to post a picture of either garrulous Garraway or the preposterously pretentious Phillips.

Starting Over

Charlotte Church is to try to revive her chart career - but admits she is “scared” of returning to the scene.

Charlotte - who was most recently seen as a judge on BBC1’s “Over the Rainbow” - will release her first pop album in five years before the end of the year.

Miss Church has revealed the title track of her new LP - and next single - “Back to Scratch” has new resonance following the break-up of her relationship with rugby star Gavin Henson.

Charlotte has pointed out, “It became the perfect song for my situation, so I sing it with a lot of conviction.”

What the news fails to highlight is that this will, actually, only be Church’s second pop CD. I hope she has better songwriters on board, this time, than she did on her debut. Her most well-known song, “Crazy Chick”, left a lot to be desired. The lyrics rhymed “therapy” with “PhD” while the music would’ve suited her voice better in a higher key!

Charlotte is undoubtedly a very attractive woman, and reasonably talented, but whether or not the record is musically challenging remains to be seen. I look forward to hearing it later in the year. In the meantime, if she’s looking for someone new to scratch her back…

No More “Survivors” Any More!

I’ve recently discovered the BBC has cancelled “Survivors” and I’m a little disgruntled to say the least! Apparently, the series was given the elbow back in April. There’s nothing like being first with the news!! I found out via a footnote to a magazine competition, of all places. I suppose the powers that be decided there might be an outcry if the cancellation of a science fiction series was announced publicly. Following the furore surrounding the “postponement” of “Doctor Who”, in 1985, the Beeb learnt quite quickly better to brush these things under the carpet, and the series came to a discreet conclusion four years later!

What’s ironic, in the case of “Survivors”, is that the British Broadcasting Corporation has only recently rushed to the aid of ITV’s science fiction show “Primeval” and saved it from the same fate. Why would they save a programme on a competing channel at the expense of one of their own? Strange! I’ve lately rewatched Series Two of “Primeval” and, in all honesty, it isn’t very good. (The worst episode was the one written by “Doctor Who” writer Paul Cornell!) Adding to the irony is the fact that both shows, the revamped “Survivors” and new creation “Primeval”, are the brainchildren of the same man, Adrian Hodges.

The BBC have made a habit of terminating fantasy shows before their natural conclusion. They invested in John Christopher’s trilogy “The Tripods” during the mid-Eighties only to cut it short after two series. Director Christopher Barry claimed the series was better than “Doctor Who”. It wasn’t but it was a nice try. The episodes set in “The City of Gold and Lead”, during Series Two, had beautiful production design. Those filmed on location were not as captivating, where usually the great outdoors aids realism, but the superior model work wasn’t enough to save the series.

A decade later and the treatment of Brian Clemens and Stephen Gallagher’s “Bugs” was appalling. Following episode seven of Series Four, viewers had to wait nearly a year to see the final three instalments. Episode ten ended on a cliff-hanger, with the kidnap of some of the team, only for the series to be cancelled so that we would never learn their fate.

“Survivors” suffered because of the delay in broadcasting the second series. It was supposed to go out last year. When it eventually reached transmission, in January this year, there was a further delay between the first and second episodes due to the BBC prioritising football over drama. Sport is more important than fiction and politics more important than sport in the gospel according to the BBC!

There was a time when dramas went out at the same time, on the same day, every week. Look at the scattered start times of the thirteen episodes comprising this year’s series of “Doctor Who”. In 1985 all thirteen began at 5:20pm and ended at 6:05. A bit early but regular at least! Every episode of the original “Survivors”, broadcast between 1975 and 1977, went out at the same time bar one. 37 out of 38 isn’t a bad strike rate!

I shall miss new “Survivors”. It was serious where new “Doctor Who” is frivolous. I’ll miss Julie Graham’s irresistible Abby Grant as she desperately searched for her missing son against the backdrop of the pandemic. I was already missing Robyn Addison as they killed off her character, Sarah, at the end of what turned out to be the penultimate episode. And, now, we’ll never find out where Tom Price was headed, having stowed away aboard the mysterious Patrick Malahide’s aeroplane!

In Time

Production started at the beginning of the week (Monday 12th July) on the 2010 “Doctor Who” BBC One Christmas Special in which the thrilling adventures of the Eleventh Doctor (Matt Smith) and newlyweds Amy Pond (Karen Gillan) and Rory Williams (Arthur Darvill) will continue in a fun-filled and heartfelt festive story.

In the grand tradition of “Doctor Who” Christmas specials, this year the show has once again attracted stellar guest stars as veteran actor Michael Gambon (“The Singing Detective”, “Cranford”) and mezzo-soprano Katherine Jenkins, in her first acting role, join the Time Lord for what might be his most Christmassy adventure yet!

Arriving on set for her first day of filming, Katherine Jenkins said, “I’m over the moon to be involved in the “Doctor Who” Christmas Special - I can’t quite believe it as it’s a part of the family tradition at the Jenkins household. I heard the news that I got the role on my 30th birthday and it was the best birthday present ever!”

About the story, lead writer and executive producer, Steven Moffat, commented, “Oh, we’re going for broke with this one. It’s all your favourite Christmas movies at once, in an hour, with monsters and the Doctor and a honeymoon and - oh, you’ll see. I’ve honestly never been so excited about writing anything. I was laughing madly as I typed along to Christmas songs in April. My neighbours loved it so much they all moved away and set up a website demanding my execution. But I’m fairly sure they did it ironically.”

Ben Stephenson, Controller, BBC Drama Commissioning, said, “Matt Smith and Karen Gillan captivated audiences in their debut series and the “Doctor Who” festive episode’s clever twist on the much loved “A Christmas Carol” will thrill BBC One viewers this year with special guest stars Sir Michael Gambon and singing sensation Katherine Jenkins joining Amy and the Doctor for an unforgettable present!”

Filming on this year’s “Doctor Who” Christmas Special continues until August.

Telly Visions: Ruth Wilson

It seems a little ironic that, a few years ago, Ruth Wilson made her name playing plain “Jane Eyre” when she is clearly one of the best-looking actresses working in television today! It’s the long red hair, searing eyes, and that thing she does with her lips that make her so striking. More than a regular femme fatale!! However, with the use of theatrical cosmetics, and unflattering costumes, an actor can be made to appear dowdy where, in the everyday world, makeup would be applied to enhance one’s appearance. It seems a shame to go out of the way to make a beautiful girl look less pretty. Jane Eyre, the character, is renowned for her inner beauty but television, being mainly a visual medium, has to express this loveliness outwardly so Ruth Wilson seems perfectly cast.

I discovered recently that Ruth and I have a number of things in common. Before her breakthrough role, she read history at Nottingham University. This is the same establishment of further education I attended, though my subject was music. Whilst there she participated in amateur dramatics, as some of us do with a theatrical inclination! If we ever cross paths at least we’ll have something to talk about!! She was born in the same month as me so we’re both Capricorns. And, she’s also a big fan of American soap-cum-murder-mystery “Twin Peaks”. That revelation may go some of the way to explain why she took one of her most recent roles…

Ruth Wilson is currently appearing in two television series. On ITV1 she is 313, appearing alongside Sir Ian McKellen in the six-part remake of the 1967 cult classic “The Prisoner”. She says she took the part because of similarities to David Lynch’s earlier surreal television series “Twin Peaks”. In last Saturday’s episode, “Schizoid”, Bill Gallagher, screenwriter of the new version of “The Prisoner”, even went so far as to quote “Twin Peaks” delight of food stuffs. Perhaps it was that which made Ruth think of her childhood favourite. I’m not sure how well the new series works. It quotes the original’s catchphrases in abundance but is colder and less colourful. The interiors of Number Two’s residence, for example, are shot in a manner similar to “Blade Runner”. It may all be going on in his wife’s medicated mind but Sir Ian assures us that, unlike the end of the original series, everything will be explained in this week’s final episode.

On BBC One Ruth is playing Alice Morgan, a psychopathic genius who has murdered her parents, in the six-part classy crime thriller “Luther”. Detective John Luther is played by Idris Elba while a whole host of famous names pop up throughout the run. Eighth “Doctor Who” Paul McGann comes to blows with the lead in the first episode while Third Doctor Jon Pertwee’s son Sean battles the police from within his prison cell in the following instalment. You may recognise Suzie (“Torchwood”) Costello actress Indira Varma as Luther’s wife with whom McGann’s character is having an affair. There’s a marvellously stylish moment, near the end of part one, where Luther is holding Alice over a bridge and she invites him to “kiss me, kill me”! He should’ve reluctantly unhanded Ruth at that moment and said “be seeing you”!!

Warden’s Watch: Doctor Who - Series Five, Episodes Four to Six

The new series of “Doctor Who” continues to be a mix of the good and the downright awful! Episodes four and five, “The Time of Angels” and “Flesh and Stone”, attempt to develop ideas from two of Steven Moffat’s earlier stories, the Weeping Angel statues from Series Three’s “Blink” and Alex Kingston’s River Song from the two-part library story of the Fourth Series. I like the former, not so keen on the latter! All this “sweetie” nonsense, and continued reference to “spoilers”, is a bit cringe-making. For heaven’s sake, it was only in the previous story, “Victory of the Daleks”, that the Doctor called one of the pepper pots “sweetheart”! Despite liking the statues in the Carey Mulligan episode, I’m not so sure it was a good idea to bring them back. The new story seemed to virtually ignore the original concept of what happens to an Angel’s victims. Less importantly, but nonetheless irritatingly, the Doctor loses his jacket to one of the stone beasties, at one point, then, unseen by the viewer, somehow manages to retrieve his tweed threads by the end!

The best scene in the Fifth Series, so far, came in the second part of the Weeping Angel yarn. I’d go so far as to say it’s the best scene since Jefferson’s eulogy to Scooti Manista, four years ago, in “The Impossible Planet”. I’m talking about the marvellous dialogue between the Doctor and Father Octavian upon the latter’s demise. Genuinely moving. The trouble is, it is almost immediately undermined by the ending of “Flesh and Stone”. New “Doctor Who” does this a lot. It’s afraid to capitalise on truly emotional moments. What does Moffat do? He has new companion Amy come on to the Doctor in the most ludicrous manner. We’ve been there before. Russell did all that ad nauseam… for five blooming years! I’d hoped we’d put such crassness behind us. At first I thought it was padding because the story had under run again, like the Dalek episode two weeks earlier, but its dubious purpose is to set up a ménage à trois between the Doctor, Rory and Amy exploited during the sixth episode, “The Vampires of Venice”, written by Toby Whithouse - the man behind “Being Human”, the “Doctor Who” episode “School Reunion” and the “Torchwood” episode “Greeks Bearing Gifts”.

And what a flippant beginning to the much-awaited vampire tale. It would’ve been amusing in any other drama but “Doctor Who”. We’d already had Amy as a WPC kissagram, in the opening story of the series, and so we return to the idea with the Doctor replacing the stripper at Rory’s stag night! I was hoping for some genuine gothic horror, just for once, but “The Vampires of Venice” is undermined before it has barely begun. Why does the series try so hard to be domestic just to appeal to the “EastEnders” crowd? Why doesn’t it simply be itself? It managed it for twenty-six years. I don’t buy into the notion it had to change to appeal to a modern audience. Only if said audience lacks intelligence! (There is a current series does domestic brilliantly, by the way, even though it’s ostensibly a supernatural drama. I won’t reveal its name here as I hope to devote a future post to it.) The vampires themselves were terrific looking, as you can see from the above picture - a scene reminiscent of the Haemovores breaking in through a vestry window in “The Curse of Fenric”, while their two leaders were portrayed suitably seriously until being revealed, predictably pseudo-scientifically, as “fish from space”! “They bite”!!

Warden’s Watch: Doctor Who - Series Five, Episodes One to Three

It’s “Doctor Who”, Tim, but not as we know it! The much-loved science fiction fairy tale is back and it’s still as beleaguered with problems as under its previous show-runner. On the plus side, gone are the gratuitous references to homosexuality which Russell T Davies forced upon his audience every episode - John Nathan-Turner was gay too, but didn’t see the series as the place to air a personal agenda - and, better still, gone are all the companions’ annoyingly-grating mothers. Rose, Donna, Martha - they all came with one! It’s already established, in “The Eleventh Hour”, that Amy’s parents are dead and that she lives with her aunt. We’ve never had that before in “Doctor Who”! I was also hoping new Executive Producer Steven Moffat would drop the season-umbrella idea, so poorly realised previously with Bad Wolf, Torchwood and Saxon, and keep the stories self-contained. But the crack in the wall in the first episode and again this week, at the end of “Victory of the Daleks”, coupled with Amy’s lack of memory concerning the events of “The Stolen Earth” suggest these ideas are the running themes of Series Five.

Upon his arrival, Mister Moffat indicated a desire for all things new. New Doctor, new short-skirted rather than trouser-wearing companion, ghastly new opening titles in which the actors names are almost unreadable, terribly uninspired new logo, the worst arrangement of the theme tune ever, new - better than the last one - TARDIS console room, new lick of paint for the old Police Box, and now five new impressively-oversized individually-coloured Daleks! But all these things are cosmetic. It doesn’t really matter that much which actor plays the Doctor, ask Tom Baker! What you really need are superbly-written scripts and both “The Beast Below” and the Dalek extravaganza were too short for their good ideas to be fully realised. We’ve been landed with the same format, ten stories over thirteen episodes, when we’d be better off with just six stories over those same thirteen instalments. The classic series’ four-parters were ideal in length, structured a bit like a traditional symphony. If you want superficial then forty minutes is fine but, if you’re looking for substantial, one hour forty minutes is preferable. There was never any need for this change in format when the programme originally returned in 2005. The one thing they should’ve retained they threw out with the bath water!

The “new” Executive Producer has held onto those blessed stallholders much beloved of RTD. We met them in “The Long Game”, we met them in “Gridlock”, we met them in “The Fires of Pompeii” and again in “Turn Left”, and up they popped most recently onboard the Starship UK. These villains return more often than the Daleks! The stallholder, one of many ideas “borrowed” from the JN-T era, was better realised by Peggy Mount in “The Greatest Show in the Galaxy”. Then there’s the obligatory gunk-tank, splattering all and sundry, firstly whenever there’s a Slitheen around, next getting messy in the canteen kitchen in “School Reunion”, and now hurtling down a tube into slime onboard, yes you’ve guessed it, the Starship UK! And where are the Doctor’s table manners? Compare the Tenth Doctor’s eating habits in “The Unicorn and the Wasp” with those of his successor in “The Eleventh Hour”. Both very very mucky!!! I did admire how writer Mark Gatiss managed to cram all three best things from Christopher Eccleston’s single year into a single episode, namely an historical figure, new-look Dalek and Blitz-ravaged London. Churchill was fun, the pepper pots buggered off too quickly and the Second World War setting always works in “Doctor Who”… just watch “The Curse of Fenric”!

aRTy without the Drivel!

The beauty of a “Doctor Who” Radio Times cover is that you can admire the visual without having to listen to what passes for a script in this day and age, not unlike watching Girls Aloud or the Sugababes on television with the sound switched off!

The opening couple of minutes of “The Next Doctor”, seen twice on “Children in Need”, showed exactly where Russell’s mind is at, regarding a possible future incarnation of the lead character… and I’m talking about the Doctor, not his companion! The next Doctor’s few lines of dialogue were enough to present its audience with an identikit version of the current incumbent of the TARDIS.

I believed David Morrissey would make an interestingly swarthy Doctor, well before I knew he’d been cast in this year’s Christmas Special. When I saw him as Colonel Brandon in “Sense and Sensibility”, at the very beginning of the year, I thought there’s your man!

But, folks, like Mr. Morrissey’s immediate predecessor and his predecessor before him (that’s Chris Eccleston, if you’ve lost me!) Morrissey’s Doctor is incorrigibly rude and very up his own bottom!! RTD’s Doctors will always be characterised thus so it doesn’t really matter who the eleventh Doctor will be…

More pertinent a question is whether or not the style of writing will change radically under a new leadership, if indeed there really is a new man at the helm of “Doctor Who”. Russell, it seems, is holding onto the reigns of “The Sarah Jane Adventures” which also refuses to move forward following the introduction of… yawn… a new family. Pretty as Rani is, she has yet to make her mark!

I’m ever hopeful “The Next Doctor” will surprise me. I know David Morrissey is simply playing what’s written, and following orders like John Simm before him, but I’m praying the new arrival will still shine, despite!

Three reasons to look forward to the “Doctor Who” Christmas Special include David Morrissey, the return of the Cybermen (even despite their bastardisation, it’s about time a familiar foe was featured in a festive instalment), and the fact that part of the story was filmed in College Green in my hometown.

Who Survives(?)

“Doctor Who” celebrates its forty-fifth anniversary today and there’s not a single programme on television to mark the occasion!

“The Bill” recently celebrated its twenty-fifth year, ITV slipping in a couple of special episodes just in the nick of time, before giving over most of its precious airspace to jungle idiocy. So, why can’t the BBC manage something similar, between dancing bouts, for its flagship science fiction series, especially now they claim it’s so popular once again? Too busy trying not to hurt the feelings of Jonathan Ross no doubt!

Ironically, the BBC are resurrecting Terry (Dalek creator) Nation’s post-apocalyptic “Survivors” tonight, based on his highly original novel and television series from the mid-Seventies. I don’t know whether I should be excited or give up the notion of ever seeing anything as remotely creative as television once was.

“Randall and Hopkirk (Deceased)”, “Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons”, “Doctor Who” and now “Survivors”… what are the chances of the latter being as good, second time around, considering the quality of those other revivals when compared to their originals? The changes to the structure of the programme don’t bode well…

Two of the three lead characters of the original first season of “Survivors” are now a politically-correct shade of black while the endearingly brilliant Talfryn Thomas, as Tom Price, has morphed into Mr. chunky-hunky Max Beesley.

The new “Survivors” is brought to the Beeb by the same team who sold ITV “Primeval”. Fun as that was, the present undertaking needs to be grim.

It’ll be interesting to see how “Survivors” fares in the ratings up against the aforementioned, oh-so-popular, celebrity lunacy. I won’t hold my breath. Or, perhaps I should, given the nature of the epidemic! People want fun and what better way to have it than see people humiliated down under, credit crunching on bugs. Hopefully, “Survivors” will be intelligent, at the very least…

“Survivors” is the closest we’re going to get to “Doctor Who” (1963-89) tonight, to which I wish a very Happy Birthday!

Dreamy Lady

The Second Season of “The Tudors” concluded recently on BBC Two and was promptly released on DVD on Monday, as was a set containing both last year’s run together with this latest offering. The total of twenty episodes reached a grisly culmination with the heartless execution of Henry VIII’s second wife Anne Boleyn. I think this was a shame! And, for all her stoicism, I expect she probably thought the same!!

Why do you think Anne’s death was a shame, Tim, I hear you all cry? Well, it means actress Natalie Dormer won’t be in the next series! History should’ve been rewritten in order to accommodate a lady with such gorgeous eyes. Some may think them narrow but that is part of her beauty. She positively smoulders.

Even when in danger of losing it, the girl kept her head! The doomed royal had Hans Matheson hear her last confession… that she hadn’t actually done anything wrong!!

Ironically, Hans, as the dastardly and corrupting Alec d’Urberville, in “Tess of the d’Urbervilles”, had donned preacher’s robes over on BBC One, whereupon one of our heroine’s milkmaid chums comments that he doesn’t look much like a man of the cloth…

Obviously, the producers of “The Tudors” thought otherwise. But, Hans could do nothing to save the lovely Natalie, despite the repeated postponement of her wanton slaying due to the late arrival of the axe man. And, I’m not talking guitar heroes here!

Warden’s Watch: Bonekickers & Spooks: Code 9

The BBC doesn’t seem to be having much luck with some of its latest fantasy-drama output! I watched the first episode of “Bonekickers”, “Army of God”, on BBC One, and decided that, amongst its many faults, the series’ title is four letters too long!! I didn’t watch any more, not feeling the need to dig deeper into this illogical archaeological nonsense. I tuned in, in the first place, because “Bonekickers” is written and produced by the same team who brought us “Life on Mars”, and that series’ excellent sequel “Ashes to Ashes”. And, because Martha’s sister, from “Doctor Who”, is in it! I can only presume “Bonekickers” is an attempt to replicate “The Da Vinci Code” for television with a touch of “Indiana Jones” thrown in for good measure. Unfortunately, it appeared ludicrous and, with the inclusion of a gratuitous decapitation of a Muslim, at the hands of ex-“EastEnders” actor Paul Nicholls, over the top… I believe a second series has already been commissioned!

Hot on the heels of the BBC One disaster, and switching to BBC Three, follows “Spooks: Code 9” which I haven’t really warmed to either, although, in this case, I have stayed with the series so far. That’s probably, solely, because Georgia Moffett plays one of the MI5 operatives! I am a fan of parent series “Spooks” and especially enjoyed its Fourth Season, when the show seemed to start all over again with renewed grit and determination. The spin-off killed one of its main characters in the opening episode, obviously inspired by the notorious demise of Lisa Faulkner’s character, Helen Flynn, in the second episode of the original. “Torchwood” had already copied “Spooks”, in killing off Susie, in its debut story so, by now, it’s all getting to be rather old hat. The remaining cast of hip young things with poor diction, in “Spooks: Code 9”, includes (from left to right) Andrew Knott as Rob, Georgia Moffett as Kylie, Heshima Thompson as Jez, Liam Boyle as Charlie, Ruta Gedmintas as Rachel and Chris Simpson as Vik… Only two more episodes to go, thank goodness!