Doctor Who: Eldrad Must Die!
2013

Ratings1

Average rating3

15
JKRevell
Jamie RevellSupporter

This is, rather obviously, a sequel to the TV story The Hand of Fear. The opening sections of the story are rather good, with the TARDIS crew being drawn into mysterious events on a Cornish beach, and a decent cast of guest characters making the peril come alive. This is, however, somewhat let down by the fact that we know who the main villain is going to be (even were it not in the title, it's also revealed in the opening teaser segment), and, at least in broad terms, what's going on.

The plot does rely on more than the simple idea of another piece of Eldrad's original body turning up and having another go (was anyone else reminded of Vecna, or is that just me?). But again, it's pretty clear exactly what this complication is going to be from the moment the first possessed person speaks. We can add to this a somewhat implausible - and, one would think, rather unnecessary - connection with Turlough's past. Perhaps it's something the writers are planning to come back to in a future tale, and it will pay off then, and it does at least allow some fun here with scenes occurring entirely inside his head, but the strain on credulity does hamper things here.

The second half of the story, with Eldrad rather more out in the open, is also notably weaker than the first. As events become more fantastic, they lose the grounding that the first half provided, and too many people are possessed for there to be much in the way of interesting characterisation. Eldrad, when he finally appears, is voiced by the same actor as in the TV story, which is a plus, even if he lacks the subtlety of, say, Davros, and basically just goes on about not dying.

I'm being rather negative here, and, as I say, the first part is really rather good. The scenes with the beluga, for instance, are really quite clever. And there was always going to be a lack of mystery in a story that, by the nature of its villain, inevitably requires people to repeat that line almost from the beginning. Platt also does a good job of upping the ante, creating events more spectacular than '70s TV would allow, and without the expense of modern CGI. I'm torn between three stars and four, but I'm going to settle for the former.

November 22, 2017Report this review