Peter Davison
(1951- )
The fifth Doctor's era
|
|
Peter Davison(1951- ) |
The fifth Doctor's era |
A Review by Jen Kokoski 27/3/97
I started out loving Tom Baker for his wit and humor, but like many things, to many viewings finally killed my enthusiasm for his era. Upon watching as many suriving episodes and/or lost material as I could, two choices remain tied for my favorite Doctor of all time. Pat Troughton, the first quintessential zany timelord, and Peter Davison.
Both accomplished actors, neither had trouble adapting to the role or any character/actor they interacted with. But while Troughton dazzled with his mixture of clowning and brooding, Davison wooed with a charming smile and soft tongue. I admire Davison for his ability to share center stage with other cast members rather than having to dominate each and every scene or conversation as some previous incarnations did.
The series took a big chance going with a younger, more "heart throb" type actor for the role, but Davison's acting ability and skill pulled it off. It's very easy to believe he is "an old man trapped in a young man's body" or rather what the Hartnell doctor must have been like when Susan was only a glimmer in his mind's eye. Young, curious, adventurous and easily led around by circumstance and tragedy.
A Review by Michael D. Herman 14/6/98
Peter Davison was indeed my first Doctor. He was basically the wonderful actor who reeled me in like a trout on a line, gave me a new way of escaping the real world, and entering a new. Even though he is not my favorite Doctor, I decided I would review such an extraordinary actor anyway.
Peter took the role on, and seemed to be "at home" with his Doctor almost immediately. With his impersonations of previous Doctors and other little humorous quirks he managed a nice, mellow personality that made an easier change over from Tom Baker (another great ator). But I think the one aspect I liked most was the more humane quality brought to the character known as an alien in mind and in body for so many years.
I think this Doctor took a more serious and more mature tone with the stories presented. The companions became more complex, and interacted so much better in joy, sadness, and terror. The litle arguements thrown in between Adric, Tegan and the Doctor brought a new and interesting approach to the program. I believe Peter did a wonderful job playing an "old man in a younger man's body." He was childish, yet mature. Grumpy, yet fun.
Finally Peter brought part of himself to the role (as all actors do). I believe we were able to see the character from another point of view, whether deliberate, or accidental. And that is what got me hooked to the program. Then he regenerated!? Next review: Colin Baker.
Where did the mystery go? by Matthew Brenner 31/1/00
Here's an exercise I find instructive: Take a Doctor Who episode, any episode, and substitute a different Doctor. You quickly see how whole adventures would have turned out differently with another Doctor. For example, how would Jon Pertwee have handled the insane character who takes over the research dome in Kinda? I doubt that he would have meekly gone into his cage while hoping Adric could hatch a plot to free him.
Try it: it's a fun exercise. Imagining different Doctors in familiar settings can put a whole new spin on familiar stories. For me it leads to the conclusion that some Doctors were tougher than others. Or friendlier or funnier or faster. Or just plain better. It can also lead to the inescapable conclusion that some Doctors - when compared to their other regenerations - are pathetic.
Davison is a prime example. I used to like the Fifth Doctor until I put him in my little exercise. Then something shocking happened. I realized that all the time I had thought I liked him I was secretly pitying him. In fact, I wanted so desperately to like him, to believe in him as it were, that I refused to believe I couldn't stand him. I thought it was a trick hatched by the Master. But as time went by and I imagined him in one story after another, while imagining other Doctors taking over his stories, the truth became plain. His Doctor was 'crap'.
That is the word, incidentally, that Davison used himself when describing his portrayal of the Doctor. That's from The Completely Useless Encyclopedia, so I don't know how reputable the source is. But somehow I can imagine him saying it - if not about his entire tenure then definitely about certain stories.
He must have felt the same awful emotion that I did when reconsidering his time as the Doctor: pity. One cannot pity and respect someone at the same time ? even a fictional character in a TV series. I suspect many of Davison's fans lie to themselves. On some level they won't admit that the ultimate characterization of the 5th Doctor was 'crap'. Through no fault of his own, I should add, since Davison is quoted elsewhere - Howe's The Eighties - as wanting desperately to play the part with more humor and panache. But his erstwhile producer John Nathan-Turner was still reacting to the Williams-Adams-Baker era of the show: He vetoed anything that might remind fans ? and him ? of the past. That means if it was construed as too 'knowing', meaning an in-joke or arcane reference to history, myth, legend, or Doctor Who's illustrious past, then it was out. In keeping with Turner's desire to take the show in a more 'serious' and 'adult' direction, drama and action were to take center stage ? even above a 'jolly good story' as it were. The bottom line was to put the butts in the seats, or more like the buts on the edges of their seats, since Turner equated 'serious' science-fiction with an overwrought addiction to cliffhangers at the end of every episode.
Doctor Who jumped from one 22-minute storyline to the next, barely stopping for air before revving up it's audience for yet another exciting seat-of-the-pants cliffhanger. Just to get a sense of what it must've felt like, I watched Kinda, The Visitation and Black Orchid episodically over a period of a few days. The experience was like eating cotton candy: I kept putting huge mouthfuls into my face but there was nothing to chew on. Without reviewing these stories in detail or others of the period, let's just say that they attempted to tackle big issues in a way reminiscent of American science-fiction shows. It may have been science-fiction, but it was not Doctor Who.
John Nathan-Turner may be the most controversial name associated with show's long history. Whatever side you're on, there's no doubting that he was the Han Dynasty of Doctor Who: a thousand-year-long reign that brought much change, but not necessarily improvement. Like a Chinese emperor, this producer's power was immense. He chose the doctors, their companions, the story writers, the stories, and on and on... And yet he seemed more interested in images than in stories, in audience figures than in what legacy he - and the show - would leave. The legacy indeed is a million and one questions: Why the enormous emphasis on costumes? On cricketers, sweaters and shirts with question-mark insignias sewn on? Why must each Doctor be a 'polar opposite' of the preceding Doctor? Why was the importance of scripts - arguably the greatest triumph of Doctor Who and its greatest contribution to television - why was this emphasis thrown out? I'm sorry, but the previous producers and script editors would never have allowed a Visitation, a Timelash or a Time and the Rani to have made it past the edit stage, let alone production. And there are many more stories that can be added to that list.
What John Nathan-Turner lost sight of - in his battles for higher ratings, for Doctors who were different than their predecessors, for a show that was more serious - what he forgot in all of his influence was that too many clever little tricks can't replace great stories and dialogue and opportunities for the Doctor to shine. People may disagree, but I think every Doctor should aspire to one ideal in common: that he (or she) be totally open, curious, and welcoming of the alien and other. What was more wonderful than seeing the Doctor stride into a room or the bridge of a space ship, thrust his arm out and say a big "hallo!" or "Would you like a jelly baby?"
John Nathan-Turner has said he wanted a 'vulnerable' Doctor after Tom Baker, one who could 'get it wrong' occasionally, and in that he succeeded. Regressed is a better word. For that is what happened to the Doctor. In every way he shrank before our eyes. His stature was reduced to that of a pathetic loser. He was called an 'idiot' by other characters (and pretty nearly all of his companions) and he did precious little to convince us that he was not. He never seemed to have a clue as to what was going on, until right before the climax? And then he understood everything, perfectly, or so it seemed. He would say 'this is what happened' or 'that is what happened' and all one could do was nod one's head, providing one wasn't already nodding in sleep.
In his defense, John Nathan-Turner loves to say that the show doubled its ratings in the first year of Peter Davison's tenure as the Doctor. Instead of 5 million people watching, now 10 million watched. Which is all the more embarrassing because twice as many people saw shows like Kinda and The Visitation, which seemed to have no other purpose than to smear science-fiction and make a mockery of it. At the very least they saw that the joy of exploration was gone with this new Doctor. Within two minutes of landing on a new, unexplored planet, he is admonishing his companions to "keep close", "remember the TARDIS" and so on. No longer the symbol of adventure, the TARDIS is now the refuge, the place to run back to in a hurry. Gone is the sense of awe and mystery of the universe being basically good and wonderful with the occasional bad apple in it. To this TARDIS crew, it's all a bad apple until it can be proved otherwise.
The Fifth Doctor by Mike Morris 13/3/00
I suppose he doesn't do that badly out of fandom, Doctor number five. I mean, it's not that often that he's denounced as rubbish, compared to say McCoy or Colin Baker. But having said that, he's not often trumpeted from the rooftops as the greatest Doctor ever to grace the program. He seems to dwell in mediocrity; not overly-liked, but not overly-hated either.
It's tough, living in Ireland; Doctor Who fandom is a bit thin on the ground. So I'm often in the position of trying to convert people (generally unsuccesfully). I carefully select stories to show the unitiated, tried-and-trusted favourites that can't possibly fail. Examples; The Curse of Fenric, City of Death, Ghost Light, Inferno, The Caves of Androzani... no, wait a minute, delete the last one from the list. Caves bombs without fail. So does Kinda. Why? Because nobody (at least, nobody among the smart-arsed student population of Dublin) likes the Fifth Doctor.
He's dull. He's just like the bloke from All Creatures Great and Small. He's too damn nice. He's not as funny as Tom, or as manipulative as Sylvester, or as powerful as Pertwee. He's a wet vet.
Well, sod it, I'm a great fan of democracy, but I still think the Fifth Doctor was great. His era had some terrible clunkers, of course, but then so did all the others. You say Time-Flight, I say The Mutants, or The Dominators, or The Creature From the Pit.
I like his vulnerability, and the way he cares for his companions, and the way he sacrifices his life to save Peri in a way that none of the other Doctors ever would. I like the sadness that underlies his character, the downbeat ending to so many of his stories, the guilt that he feels that so many other Doctors would have quickly forgotten. I like his honesty, and his openness, and the fact that - ultimately - all he wants to do is play cricket, but feels compelled to wander around the galaxy helping people out anyway. I like his humility and his simple morality, and his determination to see the best in everyone. I like him, full stop.
What's more, although the Fifth Doctor's era wasn't perfect, it showed a definite maturing of the series in many respects. For a start, we got genuine character development for the first time in the series. Adric's death, for example, affected the Doctor in a very obvious way, as did Tegan's disgusted departure in Resurrection of the Daleks; so that, by the time of The Caves of Androzani, he's more concerned that Peri won't die than he is at catching the bad guys and bringing them to justice. His death is ultimately perfectly timed, because in Caves we finally see that this Doctor isn't suited to being an intergalactic hero and saviour of planets. People like that need to be used to death, to accept that people are going to get hurt. The Fifth Doctor doesn't have that ability, and that naivety makes him a beautiful, tragic hero.
The attitude towards the Doctor's comapanions changes hugely during the Fifth Doctor's era. For a start, they aren't companions, they're "friends", and he genuinely cares for them. He doesn't manipulate them, like the Seventh Doctor, or forget all about their welfare as he goes about saving the universe. He argues with them, as friends do, and when he makes up with them he spends a few minutes preparing an apology, and he sulks, and he doesn't automatically think of himself as being on a higher plane than them. He likes Tegan and Nyssa and Adric and Peri and Turlough, and they like him (rather than looking up to him, as Jo did with the Third Doctor). This is evidenced by the companion leaving scenes of the era; they're all far better than anything that came before, chiefly because of the obvious affection between the characters. The time's right for Nyssa to leave in Terminus, but that doesn't mean it's easy. The same goes for Turlough in Planet of Fire. Then there's Tegan's leaving scene, as she's confronted with the reality of what the Doctor's all about; it's simple, plausible, understated and beautiful.
Of course, it's true to say that some of the stories weren't up to much. The Visitation, Black Orchid and The King's Demons aren't much more than runarounds; they're more style than substance, they lack "weight". So what, is my response to that; Doctor Who isn't about weighty sci-fi, it's about twenty-five minutes of escapism every week. Did The Androids of Tara, or Nightmare of Eden, or Delta and the Bannermen, or The Time Warrior have "weight"? The dull old retreading of the same old mythology is far more offensive in my view, and there really isn't any excuse for that; that's the main failing of the era. But if it's a fault, it's an understandable one. The other failing - the beginning of Colin Baker style violence - is less forgivable, but it really only rears its ugly head in a few stories.
By the by, I've tried the "exercise" described in one of the reviews above (putting different Doctors in different eras); it's actually rather fun (I'd love to see Tom in a McCoy story). It hasn't changed my view that the Fifth Doctor was a good one. Yes, Pertwee would have sorted out the Mara problem in five minutes flat. But likely as not Hindle, Sanders, Aris and six or seven faceless characters would have been killed in the process, and then the Doctor would have made a tortured moral speech at the end before forgetting the whole thing. The Doctor's triumph in Kinda is that nobody gets hurt, and in fact Sanders and Hindle are notably better off, because he doesn't simply act without thinking things through first. As Panna says, "you can't help without understanding". That could nearly be the Fifth Doctor's epitaph, particularly as on the few occasions he breaks it (Resurrection, Earthshock) he ends up getting hurt.
You can't pity people and respect them at the same time? Why not? That implies that you can only respect the Doctor if he's an omnipotent superhero. Sorry, but the Fifth Doctor was plagued by doubts and guilt and didn't feel the need to dominate every situation he was in, and the fact that he triumphs anyway just makes him more admirable in my view. His final act is to sacrifice his own life to save his friend's - one he's only known for five minutes, at that. Well, sorry, but that gains my respect with ease.
The Fifth Doctor wasn't perfect, of course, but at least he didn't think he was. And can you really dislike an era that gives us stories as gripping as Caves, as strange as Kinda and Enlightenment, and as ambitious as Frontios?
The era may be understated and flawed, but there are moments of brilliance in those three seasons which more than compensate. There were attempts at a new interpretation of the Doctor, a new approach to storytelling, a new relationship with his companions.
And that's worthy of applause in my view.
In Defense of The 5th Doctor by Tammy Potash 7/3/01
Peter Davison had an unenviable task: succeed the beloved (though not by me) 4th Doctor, Tom Baker. Chosen by JNT for his work on All Creatures Great and Small as the troublemaking schoolboy, he was now handed a part of the Hero archetype. He has said he was given little input into how the role was to be approached. In the polls, he is consistently among the bottom tier. My fannish heart weeps, and I leap to a defense of my beloved Doctor.
I have Davison's autographed picture on my wall, framed, and have had since 1988. Meeting him and having it signed on the spot was one of the highlights of my career as a Whovian. He was my first: my best friend begged me 2 watch the show, and I reluctantly gave up elvira to give this thing a shot. What I saw was Logopolis.
I had long avoided the programme as a whole, because of the ads that played on my local channel. They were scenes from Pyramids, and the voiceover made the character sound like a congenital idiot, possibly in need of medication. "Who's the time-travelling, jelly bean eating (sic) mad scientist? Who? Yes, it's Doctor Who!" Ugh.
So, Logopolis. Here the 4th dr. (not that I understood this at the time, of course) was unusually somber and restrained, even melancholy. I watched him and his friend, the boy , Rick something, in a desperate struggle against another sinister man, with the Universe itself at stake. They were joined by a sweet young woman in a red velvet pantsuit, and a woman from Australia who mistook the TARDIS for an actual phone booth, and proceeded to be lost inside its myriad corridors. I liked Tegan on the spot, due to an unfortunate lack of directional skills myself. The ship did not surprise me, being trained by Snoopy's doghouse and Oscar the grouch's garbage can to accept things larger inside than out.
At the end of the epic battle, the man in scarf and hat lay crumpled on the ground. His friends gathered close as he lay dying. Then... the impossible. he vanished, and Peter Davison sat up and smiled. I was used to this on soap operas, but this was unprecented to actually kill the protagonist on camera and make the switch! And that smile! My heart melted. I was 10 years old. I had to watch the next episode. At school, I quizzed my friend on what I had seen, and thanked him for talking me into it.
Castrovalva: the new Dr. laid low. I felt for him, spending my time as I do frequently sidelined by illness. Adric was captured. I began to dislike the boy in the yellow clothes. The Dr. risked his life for Adric, facing the enemy of Logopolis again, and Adric never thanks him. Oh well. Tegan and Nyssa get more 2 do here than perhaps in any Dr. Who episode ever; the companions take center stage for much of the episode!
In Kinda, we learn that the Doctor is not always a man of action (take note, please, Shaun Lyon). This incarnation was sometimes a Zen monk, who could wait quietly in captivity and await rescue by his trusted allies, then again take a hand in events. Naive, charming, sweet, sometimes quick to anger and even quicker to apologize, he won my hearts. One by one, his friends grew, changed, and left, sometimes bettered by their time with him, sometimes not, but always affected. Adric met a ghastly fate in Earthshock, and I sat, stunned by his own stupidity and the Doctor's failure to save him. This was not Star Trek. Those who died had faces and names, and we had come to care about them, if not to like them per se.
New friends came and went. In Caves of Androzani, the 5th Doctor, always the most caring of his selves, made the ultimate sacrifice. He gave the antidote to his new friend Peri, knowing that the poison might prove toxic beyond even a Time Lord's ability to survive. And he did it without so much as a second thought! Not even a hint of indecision crossed his expressive face as he poured the liquid into Peri's mouth. In his delirium, his friends pleaded with him to not succumb. The Master mocked him. And his last thoughts were of Adric. As Colin Baker sat up, I was crying so hard, I could hardly see what he looked like, and I barely heard what he said. It was over, my Doctor was gone, and nothing would ever be quite right again.
Bland? Uninteresting? Those who say this simply don't understand the subtle depths of his performance.
In the novels, he would continue to have adventures, such as Goth Opera, by the unparallelled Paul Cornell. In Cold Fusion, he meets the only Doctor to surpass him in my affections: the 7th, Sylvester McCoy. Their methods could hardly be more different. To say more would be telling, so I will only say that all fans of PeteDoc should read these two books if no others, though only Imperial Moon fails to capture his portrayal and give new insights. The 5th Doctor will never truly die, not in my heart, nor in the hearts of those staunch few who loved him as did I. I even made my own verson of his costume and wore it to cons and renfairs. What's up with the celery? Well, watch Caves, and even that question will be answered. For now, I have to go read the relevant sections of I, Who and Licence Denied again.
Surely this actor and this Doctor need to be reassessed by fandom. The TARDIS awaits. He is tossing his cricket ball idly. It's time to go. Won't you join us?
The Most Alien of All by Tim Miner 18/4/02
From the reviews I've read on this site, it seems clear that many fans have a conflicted relationship with the Fifth Doctor. He was such a nice chap, and we like him - but something about him just doesn't feel right.
While listening to Excelis Dawns, I began to realize that the Fifth Doctor has taken a nosedive in my estimation of him over the years. This is interesting because he used to be one of my favorites. At twelve, the first episode I ever saw was Full Circle, and, within a few, short weeks, the funny man in the coat was replaced by an affable British fellow who always seemed to have nice things to say to people - no matter how villainous they were. I liked him. He seemed like someone it would be nice to take a trip with. He seemed like someone you might know in real life. So why doesn't he work quite right.
It's been said that Davison's Doctor was the most human of them all. I would agree with that statement. Cricket outfit aside, he certainly had the fewest quirks of any Doctor. He also had the most human problems, playing father to a TARDIS full of annoying young people - rather like a soccer dad carting his kids around in the mini-van. He was the most human - so, to the fan, that makes him to the most alien - to our idea of who the Doctor is.
For 18 seasons, we'd been given a multi-faceted portrait of who the Doctor is:
When compared against our understanding of who the Doctor is, the Fifth Doctor seems like a different person - not just a different persona.
He doesn't rush headlong into danger. He doesn't rig up a lot of gadgets. He doesn't seem to be driven by insane curiosity. He doesn't seem to want to fight evil at any cost. He doesn't drop names. He doesn't seem to be driven by a desire to see everything the universe has to offer. He lets himself get locked up and doesn't try to pick the lock. He doesn't tell madmen and dictators where they can get off. His companions aren't just along for the ride, they often dictate his activities.
What did he spend most of his time doing? Not looking for the wonders of the cosmos. Trying to get Tegan home (The Visitation) to see her Grandfather (The Awakening) or to see some of her future (Frontios) - (not that I blame him for trying desperately to get rid of her). Sometimes he's just hanging around being bombarded by positive ions! He's not a space hobo or space crusader - he's a chauffer! (Sure, the First Doctor claimed to be on a mission to get Ian and Barbara home in Season One, but does anyone feel it was really his first priority?)
I'm not in the camp that feels the Davison years were rubbish. Some of the stories are marvelous. They feature great Who concepts, characters, plots and monsters - but they don't feature the Doctor we'd come to know and love. In fact, I find myself wishing Hartnell had been in The Visitation, Troughton in Enlightenment and Pertwee in Mawdryn Undead. (Do you really think Jon would have let Turlough take up residence on the TARDIS?)
The faces, clothes and mannerisms changed from Hartnell to Baker, but not the motivation. It was possible to flow from one Doc to the next, because the essence was always there. The Fifth Doctor was someone else - and we've all met him. Think about someone from your early days at school who defined "cool". Someone who always knew what to say or do or wear - someone who always rebelled - someone who'd been were you wanted to go - someone who always got off scott-free - someone who you really admired - someone you always imagined going on to do the things you could only dream of. Ever bump into them at the mall with their kids in tow? They're tired and beaten down by life. They can barely remember what it was like to be crazy - and if you talk to them too long, they try to sell you insurance because you never know what's going to happen...
That was the Fifth Doctor. A pale version of the man he was - and would be again. A man who'd been presented responsibilities, accepted them and let them sap his strength. An alien from our affections all the more alien because he'd enjoyed our affections for nearly twenty years.
Maybe that's so many like Cave of the Androzani. Davison was finally permitted to become the man of action we know and love: commandeering spacecraft and risking his life for his companion. He gets his hands and his nice clothes dirty and he doesn't let the bully take his lunch money without a fight.
He remembers who the Doctor is - and reminds us how great it all was - and would be again.
Let's end this debate now...! by Joe Ford 26/7/02
It's long past time I wrote this review since it's an argument that was tired yonks ago. I couldn't let it rest however without having my say as this is a subject I have very strong feelings about. Peter Davison played the fifth Doctor in a bold move by JNT: that vet from All Creatures was to become our new Doctor. Could this possibly work out?
Well, no. Sorry but it just wasn't as successful as the innovative producer was hoping for. And in the end it was a three year experiment that dragged on and on... despite some excellent (see my Top Ten Davison adventures) stories with some excellent trademark JNT values (decent looking, music, location work, guest actors, writing). Unfortunately throughout the wonders of adventures like Black Orchid and Enlightenment we have a bland protagonist dragging them down somewhat.
However it's just not fair to make a genrilisation like that without some proof. Let's start with something that was totally out Davison's control and as such he remains blameless and yet it just highlights the problems with this era. It's the horrible baggage he lugged around in the TARDIS. Adric, Tegan, Turlough, Kamelion... four of my least favourite companions. Why? Tegan just moans and moans and unlike the love/hate Baker/Bryant of the next era this just doesn't work as more often than not she entirely overshadowed Davison with her moaning. How dull. Turlough started out promisingly (hell he tried to kill the fifth Doctor) but he just gets forgotten about and lost to moan also in dreck like The Awakening. Kamelion was so crap he only had a begining and ending story. Enough said. Adric (or at least Matthew Waterhouse) seemed to work alongside Tom Baker as if he was trying really hard to match the portrayl of the great man but with Davison he just doesn't bother. He is the most embarassing factor of any of his stories. The Davison crews just never work, they never get on, you never get the impression they want to travel together no matter how much they say to the contrary. A glaring error could have been fixed by 'Conflict equals drama' Eric Saward.
Every of the other Doctors had that wonderful quality of bringing drama to the situation with a dramatic outburst or a look of utter horror. Davison was so often subdued, not giving any gravity to the situations he found himself in. Even when he did get into the rant (Enlightenment with Striker) he's just brushed aside like an inconvience! Or considered mad (Snakedance!) Or thought of as an idiot (Kinda). Or like a raving child (Earthshock!). Colin Baker brought real drama to stories like Vengeance on Varos with his dramatic speeches... a quality lost on Davison.
He came across as being really naive. I'm sorry but this is a person over four hundred years old and in his fifth life... do you think he would seriously still be so moritified by the horrors of the universe. Tom Baker could always get across the severity of violence and horror of death superbly without getting on his soapbox ("There should have been another way!") or sounding like a right poof (Davros: "It is a universal way of life!" Doctor: "That I do not accept!")... yawn. A Doctor who doesn't belive in violence, how very boring. I'm sorry but if you're involved in violent situations sometimes you just have to be violent back... to not is just stupid... a little like the fifth Doctor actually. And yet he does use violence (Kinda, Earthshock, Resurrection, Planet of Fire) which makes him a hypocrite too. Oh he can look disgusted with himself (like when he 'kills' The Master) but it doesn't excuse his behavior after whinging on about others doing it! At least Colin didn't do that!
Just when did Davison find his feet. Season Nineteen (my favourite Davison season... four good stories!) saw him desperately clinging onto a character (Castrovalva he seems to have settled but then Four to Doomsday he turns into a hyperactive git, then he's wise'n'crochtety in The Visitation and then a nice fellow in Black Orchid... then an action hero in Earthshock... maybe the writing is to blame but Davison is all over the place. Season Twenty is just a disaster with Davison apparently having no character whatsoever... a string of terrible stories doesn't help but he just seems to be on the periphery of most smiling and shaking hands with people. What we needed was a Tom Baker, someone to inject a little life into these generic runarounds. Season Twenty One he settled a bit with two superb performances (Frontios and Androzani) showing some real teeth but the stories were still too hit and miss for my liking... he wasn't able to gain momentum like Baker did in Twenty-Two. I'd say Davison found his feet in The Caves of Androzani... his last story. Bravo.
Didn't he spend an awful lot of time wandering corridors. Now I realise that's a daft statement because a show with the budget restrictions of Who can only afford to make corridors and as such most Doctors did their fair bit of wandering but geez get involved with the action Davison!!! Castrovalva, Four to Doomsday, Earthshock, Arc of Infinity, Mawdwyn Undead, Terminus, Enlightenment, Warriors of the Deep and Resurrection of the Daleks were particularly bad in this regard. When a pretty corridor upstages our Doctor we have problems.
Aside from Sharaz Jek he had no real memorable bad guy to highlight his performance. A dire mistake which they corrected with Colin (Sil! The Rani! Davros!) but often helped previous Doctors (Sutekh, Delgado's master, Tobias Vaughn, Mavic Chen). The less said about Ainley's Master the better.
Gosh haven't I ranted on. Sorry do you want me to say some nice things about the fifth Dctor? Okay, his cricket moments were often fun (even the ball/spaceship thing and especially in Black Orchid), I loved his costume (except the hat), his last scene with Tegan, Nyssa and Turlough are all emotional highs for the era. His silent reaction Adric's death was perfect. Bidmead scripted Davison stories are great and unleash just some of the potential that was availible.
But these are just moments in a decidedly uneven era. I am not this harsh on anyother period of Doctor Who (even season twenty-four!) and some of my friends feel I'm unduly horrible about the fifth the Doctor (stand up Matt!) but I feel despite these touches of greatness putting Peter Davison in the central role was like walking into your local mall on a Saturday, completely naked... a big embarassing mistake. Fortunately, the show recovered. Thanks Colin.
A Review by Gareth McG 8/8/02
I hadn't planned on writing any Doctor overviews until I'd watched all their respective adventures in full but Joe Ford's dismissal of the fifth Doctor has stirred the passions enough to make me run to the defence of this incarnation. Mr. Ford appears to have sat down, listed everything he hates about Davison's Doctor and then expanded upon it. That's fair enough but what often happens with lists like these is that as they grow longer the critic starts nitpicking and indeed it's ridiculous to worry oneself about how someone performed in a corridor scene. After all how many truly memorable corridor scenes have there been in Doctor Who?
But what I really wanted to address is the character of the fifth Doctor. Mr. Ford grumbles on about The Doctor being a shadow of his former self. Let's compare Davison's debut story with the debuts of his immediate predecessor and his immediate successor. While both Tom and Colin Baker instantly take command of the screen without giving us a moment to get over the loss of the previous incarnation, Davison's introduction in Castrovalva is far subtler as he slowly but surely lets his audience get to know him. It's a refreshing change to the old-fashioned, opinionated arrogance that went before and after and on its own makes Davison's incarnation very worthwhile. Sure, it's a matter of personal taste but I've always considered it more admirable for a new face to retain an unassuming attitude rather than to go in and try to upstage everyone else which, for me, has always seemed a bit more insecure anyway. It's basic manners and that approach suited Peter Davison down to the ground.
So what I'm trying to get at here is that Davison had a very definite direction for his character - to make the fifth Doctor more vulnerable than any of his predecessors - and played it extremely well. Criticisms levelled at him would be merited if, say, his intentions were to play the character forcefully in the same manner as both Baker's but that was simply never the plan. Why do you think they got rid of the sonic screwdriver as early as The Visitation? Besides, my own observations on human nature have always led me to believe that as people get older they invariably tend to become increasingly unsure because they are more wary of the fragility of life. Is it any wonder that after years of witnessing his companions leaving him (often for better things) and of seeing people around him dying that The Doctor has become a little humbled?
Consider his reaction to Adric's death. He feels the pain but appears emotionally numb to it and keeps his feelings to himself. Only a man who has experienced very dark times could react like that. One thing for sure is that his reaction was not born out of coldness because Davison's Doctor always had a big heart, was always fair and decent and was always willing to look at things from other peoples perspectives. He empathised with Tegan's departure in Resurrection while at the same time questioning his own frailties and he was even willing to listen to Davros' motives for world domination in the same adventure. Call that "poofy" if you like, I prefer to read it as open mindedness born out of maturity, an open mindedness that none of his other incarnations ever had. In short he had a conscience and even if that left him wide open at times it didn't really matter because he was somebody who cared, somebody whom you could trust. It's fine for people to want The Doctor to be more than human but what those same people must realise is that that was never the intention for the fifth Doctor and I, for one, love Davison's portrayal just as it is.
The Nice Guy by Terrence Keenan 23/8/02
Um, upon first seeing the Davison Stories after gorging on the Big Kahuna, Tom Baker, I felt cheated. Mr. Gonzo had been replaced by Mr. Rodgers. Who was this bloke who would let others push him around like a rag doll? Who were these brats that he allowed into his Police Box?
No sir, didn't like him. And like an obnoxious fanboy, not knowing any better, I cheered his demise in Androzani. The weenie was gone, replaced by someone who looked like they could whup some ass in style.
Let's move forward:
I think Peter Davison did an amazing job under the most trying of circumstances, replacing Tom Baker. He never phoned in a performance, always gave it his all. And in his own, subdued way, gave a Doctorish impression.
The problem is that they didn't find more stories to suit his characterization. Castrovalva and Kinda are, IMO, his best stories, because they are tailored to his character perfectly. Unfortunately, many of his stories are not -- Earthshock, Terminus, Arc of Infinity, for example -- and because they don't fit the Davison interpretation, the stories drag the character down several pegs. Conversely, The Caves of Androzani works because we have Davison doing a much different version of the his 5th Doc in a very un-Davison story. For the first time, we see the fifth Doc as Davison wanted to play him, with style and verve. Even in duff stories like Snakedance, there are special moments that show Davison at his finest, such as the scene where he meets Dojjen and learns what the ritual of the Snakedancers mean, or in Arc of Infinity, where he plays Omega as a newborn in an adult body in a very convincing manner.
Methinks the problem came down to the production team of Saward and JNT. They were so dead against allowing the fun and brilliance of the Graham Williams taint what they thought DW should be, they set the tone for Davison's Doctor before he was allowed to do anything with it. (Blame for this also lands on Fan Advisor Ian Levine's head, who, form what I can tell, wanted Davison's Doc to be Pertwee reborn).
However, because Davison's performances are so good, he uses the preset limits and creates a well rounded character. He's sympathetic, caring and most of all, just wanted to enjoy the wonders of the universe with his friends. Unfortunately, the baddies keep getting in the way. And the limits on the character cause tragedy much closer to home. This is a Doctor who would be still thinking about Adric's demise, about Tegan's abrupt departure due to things "no longer being fun." This is a Doctor who would sacrifice his life for a friend.
Final Verdict?
Methinks that the Peter Davison/5th Doc years were good ones, in spite
of some rather unsound decisions. I think this is more a testament to the
man in the cricket outfit, rather than the men who created the template.
A Review by Rob Matthews 9/9/02
At the beginning of Castrovalva, the motley band of companions are dragging a Doctor who's still apparently only semi-conscious back towards the TARDIS. In a somewhat fumbled shot at the end of Logopolis the new, young mousy-haired Doctor had sat up looking rather sheepish, as if he was about to say something. That shot was chopped off the pre-titles recap for Castrovalva, where he's still very much in the land of nod as the story opens. A pile of burgundy clothes being supported by his friends. We still haven't been introduced to him, and once inside the ship he runs out of sight as quickly as possible, leaving his companions centre stage. Perhaps JNT wanted to build up the drama of discovering who the Doctor has become - after seven years of Mr teeth'n'curls we suddenly don't know him, and there's a good measure of suspense to be milked from the situation. Nevertheless, it seems appropriate looking back that this most unassuming of Doctors should have been introduced so evasively. After the magnetic, commanding Fourth Doctor who made other people look like satellites in his orbit, it's interesting to have a Fifth Doctor who you can't even find.
When Adric finds him in the depths of the TARDIS unravelling Baker's scarf it's a nice visual touch, as is his silent discovery that his hair's not curly any more. These details are more about the show adjusting to the disappearance of Baker than establishing the incumbent, but that's entirely the right thing to do. The last thing you'd want in this situation is to introduce the new Doctor with a bout of overacting, simply because he can't possibly beat the greatest over-actor British TV has ever seen. Davison is comparatively underplayed, and rightly so.
Unfortunately, this lasts only a couple of moments before he starts 'channelling' pre-Baker incarnations and doing crazy impersonations of Troughton and Pertwee. Overacting, in other words. Presumably this bit of business is there to let younger viewers know that there were other Doctors before Baker. Nevertheless, it's a shame Davison should have had to start off in the role by parodying his predecessors. It's an attempt to ground him in the show's past, I think, but one that detracts from the establishment of his own persona. Fortunately it doesn't last long.
Your heart tends to sink when you see him first try on those cricket togs. It's one thing about JNT's era I really dislike, the 'packaging' of the Doctor into a uniform. Don't forget, though, that Baker's Doctor tried on all kinds of 'uniforms' before plumping for the floppy-brimmed hat and ludicrous scarf motif, so the same sort of thinking was going on in the Letts/Hinchcliffe years. The only difference is that Baker had more flexibility within that motif, he actually wore a different waistcoat or jacket now and then.
For what it's worth, though, the cricketing look is quite a good idea. The Fourth Doctor was shown on a couple of occasions to be fond of the game, so it's quite nice and in keeping with the Doctor's character - like a trait of the earlier incarnation has been amplified in the new one. I have serious doubts as to whether that was intentional or not, though, and on the whole it gives a worrying impression that the character is being created from the outside in.
Still, amidst post-regeneration giddiness, a bit of lazing about in Zero Rooms and funny boxes, and having the wool pulled over his eyes by the Master, the new Doctor manages to establish himself as a likeable, if mild, presence.
Then comes Four to Doomsday, his second story but the first to be filmed. I don't know what behind the scenes pressures Davison was under, but here he comes across as undecided about how to play the role. He wants to be interesting and forceful, it seems, but he changes gear too often and doesn't seem that believable. His angrily referring to Adric as a 'young idiot' at one point is something we appreciate because we can't stand the little bugger, but it isn't really consistent with the Fifth Doctor as we've come to know him by the end of his tenure.
I remember reading an interview with Davison where he talked about making his preparations for his debut in the role. He said that he was considering all kinds of ideas about how to make his mark in the part but that before he knew it the cameras were rolling and he simply had to get the regeneration scene in the can. When I watch his first couple of seasons that's what comes across there too, a sense of unfocused energy. He has enthusiasm and passion but he doesn't know where he's going with it. He seems to be constantly running around the TARDIS console frantically trying to do something or other, and it gets boring. This isn't entirely his fault - it's at least partly due to the efforts the show was making around this time to be consciously 'sci-fi', which the makers of the show seem to think is best typified by scenes of the Doctor pressing loads of buttons to solve whatever problem's at hand.
Neither does Davison have that forcefulness we've come to expect of the Doctor. Which is fair enough, as clearly he's not meant to, and I do appreciate the effort to do something different with the Doc's characterisation. There are parts of season 19 where he comes across as just another companion, an equal with his fellow travellers - learning sleight-of-hand tricks from Adric in Kinda (can you imagine Baker being taught things by Adric?!), and getting into silly squabbles that Tegan has to take it upon herself to sort out in Earthshock. Black Orchid's a key Davison story because it's the only one where we get to see him playing that game he's meant to love so much, and where we get the impression he'd rather play cricket and lounge about at genteel parties. I mean, how often do we see the Doctor wandering around in a dressing gown? It speaks of a more naive Doctor, and a less ambitious one.
But ironically the show itself is at the same time becoming less naive and more ambitious. This is where Eric Saward started script editing and writing, and I'd say it's actually thanks to this oft-condemned miseryguts that Davison's tenure starts to gain some dramatic momentum. Ultimately Saward and Davison would telescope the Fifth Doctor into the most tragic of the lot.
At one time I'd have said this conflict only really starts to manifest itself towards the end of the season, with Earthshock. But good old Mike Morris has adeptly pointed out that the seeds of it in fact first appear in The Visitation. I still think of that story as rather bland, because its unconvincing-aliens-meddle-with-history-and-inadvertently-cause-famous-events plot isn't that original, and the pace can be charitably described as 'leisurely'. Nevertheless, the Terileptil villain is indeed a perfect counterpoint to Davison's Doctor. The Doctor's an affable gentlemen with a strong sense of morality that's so central to his character that it doesn't even come up. The Terileptil, meanwhile, is a thug ruled by a selfishness so thorough he doesn't even question it. It's a contrast that will recur, pleasant but slightly ineffectual Doctor versus increasingly harsh universe.
That's the eighties for you...
Anyway, then the Cybermen make their long-awaited return, in a story that's full of momentum and which establishes that these metal bastards mean business. They push the Doctor around, nick his TARDIS and cause Adric to die. Now this new Doctor has genuinely failed, and we can see he has no idea how to respond to the tragedy, doesn't seem to quite believe it.
A shame, then, that he and his companions so easily shrug it off after five minutes' grief in the awful Time Flight. Not long later, his most important concern is buying a newspaper in Heathrow so he can catch up on the cricketing news, which is grotesque if you're taking this at all seriously. The thing is, Time Flight's such clumsy rubbish we have trouble taking it at all seriously, and the Doctor's forgetting all about Adric seems no more ridiculous than, for example, the Master's uniquely pointless masquerade as Kalid, which he maintains even when no-one is there to see him except us viewers, or the pointless 'let's materialise the TARDIS around that concorde like we might have done in Logopolis' stuff.
Sad to say, Doctor Who can be truly shit at times. In ignoring how badly this story betrays the drama of Earthshock - not to mention the build-up the new Master got the previous season -, us fans are guilty of being very selective.
The Doctor leaves Tegan behind at Heathrow at the end of Time Flight. Not because, say, he doesn't want to put another innocent life at risk and so gently nudges her out of the TARDIS against her will. No, he has no scripted reason for doing it at all. It goes completely unexplained, just another thing about the story that makes no damn sense. Then, by a ludicrous coincidence (known as the Dodo Chaplet effect), he and Nyssa bump into her again at the beginning of the next season and she pops back into the TARDIS, no questions asked or answered. The Doctor doesn't seem too chuffed to have her back, but I could readily believe that's more due to carelessness in editing than anything - perhaps in the last scene they simply used the wrong shot for the Doctor's reaction, or Davison was about to sneeze and they cut it just in time. Whatever, there doesn't appear to be anything remotely intentional about it. Everything about Tegan leaving and rejoining the TARDIS is just bizarre, clumsy nonsense.
Still, at least the new season manages to pick up the threads from Earthshock. Another old enemy returns in Arc of Infinity, Omega, and the Doctor has no choice but to kill him. It's not overemphasised, but this Doc's hands are getting dirtier.
Thematic progression falls somewhat by the wayside in season twenty, though, thanks to JNT's decision to wallow in nostalgia for the anniversary year. The season does have some nice ideas, in Mawdryn Undead, in Enlightenment, even in that stinker Terminus. But they're bogged down by pointless references to the show's past. The Brigadier's presence in Mawdryn works well, but not the silly 'nyuck-nyuck!' Black Guardian. And the Black and White Guardians bring no thematic or dramatic resonance at all to the three-story Guardian arc that follows. Admittedly, I thought they were crap in season sixteen too, but that doesn't necessarily mean they had to be crap the second time round, not if the script editor had given some thought to them.
Yet I can forgive Eric Saward for not bothering to do that. They're a terminally hokey idea and don't fit in with Saward's universe. Indeed, their literally Black-and-Whiteness is patently at odds with the huge moral grey area Saward's writing inhabits. Perhaps, unable to accommodate them, he just decided to let them pass painlessly by, and dealt with them as perfunctorily as possible so no-one would clamour for their return.
The Doctor loses another companion, Nyssa, during this season. Her departure's really an isolated moment, not a natural outcome of the events of this particular story, but he looks pained and wounded when she decides to leave him - in fact, much the same way he did when Adric died. Perhaps this is where that Target novelisations line about his 'open face' came from - this Doctor doesn't disguise his hurt, perhaps can't. Nyssa claims she's enjoyed 'every minute aboard the TARDIS', which doesn't quite ring true, since she witnessed both the destruction of her home and the death of Adric while on board, and there's a sense of something left unsaid between the Doctor and Nyssa. I can't be the only one who senses a bit of a sexual spark between them? Intentional or not, that contributes to the feeling that there's unfinished business there.
Season twenty continues to roll around in its continuity pit, delving into the show's past with only the introduction of the untrustworthy Turlough marking any real effort towards originality. The season veers between diverting and abysmal, and contains no less than three bona fide stinkers - Arc of Infinity, Terminus and King's Demons. Aside from some far-too isolated scenes, mainly those I've just mentioned with Omega and Nyssa, it really doesn't move the Davison era forward.
The 20th anniversary special The Five Doctors gives us the opportunity to see how Davison stacks up against his predecessors. All of them except the Doctor, that is, and it's perhaps a blessing for Davison that Baker wasn't around to put him in the shade. As the story stands he spends a negligible amount of time on screen interacting with the earlier Doctors. He only really gets to speak with the first, who is of course not even the real deal. That said, he and Richard Hurndall tap nicely in to the Doctor/Doctor antagonism established by Troughton and Pertwee in The Three Doctors.
The scene where the Doctors read the tablet in the Tomb of Rassilon calls attention to the difference between Davison and each of his predecessors. Here the first three Doctors all try comically to upstage each other and be the one to translate the inscriptions first. Davison's not in the scene, but you just know that if he was he wouldn't be joining in with their antics. The two Bakers certainly would. (McCoy, incidentally, would watch from the corner because he'd be the one who carved the inscriptions in the first place). You could argue that while they're all squabbling, the Fifth Doctor is meanwhile getting to the bottom of the Death Zone mystery and proving himself more mature and productive than his forerunners. I don't buy that. He gets the most to do because he's the incumbent. If this was The Six Doctors, Colin Baker would do everything and Davison would be left faffing around. Still, he gets to re-establish his basic 'Doctorness' by running away from Gallifrey again. Though that itself is heavily contrived.
Warriors of the Deep opens season twenty one, badly. Perhaps it is a good script under all the bad acting, inadequate production design, incompetent direction and the pitifully shoddy realisation of the Myrka. But good grief, we shouldn't have to dig this deep into a story to find something worthwhile. Mike Morris wrote a great review of this serial and I have nothing but respect for his enthusiasm for our little show and his willingness to look past superficial problems, but I still can't accept that this kind of ineptitude is excusable. Yes, the show could routinely work miracles with three cardboard walls, a few actors, some well-written lines and a bit of dedication. That is in fact what makes me dislike Warriors of the Deep so much. There's no dedication at all, not from a set designer who clearly hasn't read the script, or from disinterested actors who'd be more suited to adverts for furniture shops (hee hee), or from a somnolent director who was probably too disinterested to bother with retakes.
But Davison tries his best. And that gives this serial the bizarre feel of watching rehearsals for a better story, Davison declaiming things at extras while waiting for the real actors to arrive and the production crew to get the lighting right. "There should have been another way" rings hollow because the story hasn't for a moment convinced us that we're watching something important happen. And with just a bit of effort from everyone else concerned, it could have.
Still, Davison does deserve credit for his efforts. It's a nice bit of character development if you're willing to look for it, and sets the tone for a punishing season for the Doc.
A quality Bidmead script seems to ignite something in Davison for Frontios, and more importantly, it ignites something in the rest of the cast too. Davison's at the best we've seen him thus far in this story, taking charge in a crisis as soon as he arrives on the planet, taking the piss out of Tegan, conning the Gravis into doing his bidding. He's having fun.
What's gone unremarked about his behaviour in this serial, though, is the maturity he shows. When the TARDIS is apparently destroyed he doesn't panic or complain, and adapts immediately to his circumstances. I like this, because for him to bemoan his predicament would show a complete lack of respect to the people of Frontios, who are stuck in that predicament anyway, and would have no sympathy for some fop who's lost his means of waltzing out of this hell. For him to lament the loss of his ship would reveal his empathy with the people of the Frontios colony as facile. It would suggest that while hard toil and a struggle for survival is fine for them, it would be frightfully ghastly for someone like him. Instead he makes no complaint at all. He knows he's no worse off than they are. He's capable of accepting the inevitable, and when the opportunity to rebuild the TARDIS is presented, it's a bonus. It's a very quiet low-key bravery, and if asked about it he would shrug it off, but here we finally see a formidable inner strength to his character. How long would it have taken the Third Doctor to adapt if his ship had been completely taken away from him before his exile?
Next, Resurrection of the Daleks. Hmm. Should I really go into this one again? Okay, his confrontation with Davros is one of my very favourite scenes, for reasons I've gone into in my own review of that story. Tegan's departure is an incredible moment too, poignant and abrupt. The serial (it's not really a story as such) illustrates forcefully how brutal and horrific this universe can be, and how weak and hypocritical this Doctor can be when pushed, alienating his friend by succumbing to the madness he's supposed to be fighting. Saward really hits the accelerator here, and there's a tangible air of doom and regret as the story ends. And again, Davison delivers a superlative performance. Between this and Frontios alone it's already his best season.
Planet of Fire follows up on these themes, albeit with rather less momentum. Another of the Doctor's companions leaves him, which the Doctor accepts with a forced cheerfulness which barely seems to mask his real feelings. And he fails himself again by letting the Master to die rather than make a move to save him. See mine or Mr Morris's review of season 21 for more on all that - alternatively... just watch the stories! In broadcast order, of course. There are some things you miss when you watch Who adventures out of context.
Caves of Androzani... Hell, do I even need to bother? It's magnificent, and Davison finally settles into the Doctor's skin. This is partly due to his having a new 'traditional' companion who sees him as an authority figure. A good deal of what makes Androzani an effective tragedy is that he dies just as naysayers like me are starting to admit that maybe he is The Doctor after all. But the terrible beauty of this yarn is that he has to die to prove it.
Looking back, it's surprising to discover that this Doctor was closer in conception to Tom Baker's than is commonly assumed. Both were essentially layabouts seeking only simple pleasures - whether it's the Fourth Doctor taking holidays with K9 or deciding to go fishing for fifty years while he's meant to be looking for the Key to Time, or Davison wanting nothing more than to play cricket or sit around shooting the breeze on the Eye of Orion with his friends. The Sixth Doctor, by comparison, was a man on a mission, eager to get things done - fixing the chameleon circuit, answering distress calls, investigating uncharacteristic behaviour on the part of his old friend Stengos, finding out what the deal is with Ravolox. It was unfocused and neurotic behaviour, really, because he was always on the lookout for something to apply his boundless energy to, always on the lookout for distractions - worthwhile distractions. But I think that's laudable, I like that about the Sixth Doctor. And of course the Seventh Doctor is famously proactive, in a more organised way. In fact, Doctors 5, 6 and 7 form a nice continuum of characterisation (albeit with the odd hiccup like season 24); More than with previous Doctors, it's like regeneration accelerates changes in the Doctor's personality that are developing anyway, or gives them a physical referent.
And the books and audios released since (at least the ones I've read and heard) have emphasised Davison as a relaxed, fun and rather lazy character, essentially just an effete variation on Tom Baker. In Goth Opera, Paul Cornell took one line from Caves of Androzani ("And I'm not a pain") and created a revisionist version of this Doctor around it. It worked well, better than Davison had worked on screen most of the time, but really PDAs can't put across what's most interesting about this Doctor - because what ultimately made him worthwhile for me was his death. That sounds sadistic of me, doesn't it? What I mean is that is was an act of totally unselfish heroism, self-sacrifice, that finally established him as The Doctor.
I think that's what I'm trying to say. He's best appreciated sort of after the fact. He looks a bigger hero in the light of what came afterwards for the Doctor, and it was completely apt when he turned up in Timewyrm: Revelation as representative of the Doctor's conscience.
PDAs can't add much to that. Yes, they can emphasise the fecklessness and humour that was always more suggested than present on screen, they can revise him along these lines until he's a sort of Bertie Wooster in space (when asked to remain behind and help the Mondasians rebuild at the end of Spare Parts he jovially replies "Ooh no, sounds like pure drudgery"), but without the yin/yang of Davison's gentle Doctor and Saward's brutal universe, you're just left with that mild and effete variation on the Fourth Doctor. As well as too many 5th Doctor-Peri adventures, all trying to plug a gap where there is no frigging gap, because if you watch that season you'll see that Androzani takes place immediately after Planet of Fire ('Makes a change from lava'), and that the Doctor and Peri are just getting to know each other.
The Fifth Doctor's certainly interesting as a point of comparison, and actually had a better development arc over the course of his tenure of any of the other Doctors. So why does he, for the most part, leave me cold?
I'm afraid it's the lack of charisma. Hackneyed comment that, but true. When I think of the best moments of the other Doctors, it's mostly scenes of either angry forcefulness, or tenderness - "But what's it FOR?!!", "They're still in the nursery compared to us!", "This senseless, evil killing", "Now Zoe, you and I both know, time is relative", "You and Sir George must have been very happy, before the cuckoo invaded your nest."...
I could go on.
Davison's best scenes, by a great contrast, are those where he's impotent and overwhelmed. His shock at Adric's death. His inability to stop Tegan leaving or properly deal with the fact it's happened. Being bullied by Davros even as he holds a gun to his head. Watching the Master die. And he really can't cope with tenderness at all, he's touchingly inarticulate when it comes to feelings.
That these are his best scenes is, I think, deliberate, and it was a very brave and original move to have the Doctor become so overwhelmed by the universe he's always trying to save. But outside of that trajectory, he's just not the kind of Doctor who can make bad stories entertaining. Incidentally, he might not have had the same impact in the role as Tom Baker, but in the long run that's probably been good for his career. Outside of the show Davison has shown a talent for playing characters who are fundamentally weak - and never mind that callow 'wet vet' role we know him for, his greatest performance on TV was in that 'At Home with the Braithwaites' series, in which he was marvellous.
A good Doctor then, and made intermittently great by a criminally undervalued script editor. Purely by default he's not one of my favourites, but I can see why he might be one of yours.
A Review by Matthew Dean 29/11/02
In recent months, I have renewed my on/off relationship with Doctor Who, watching my old videos and reading old books, as well as purchasing new material, particularly in the form of DVDs. Naturally this led me onto some of the numerous websites devoted to our favourite time-traveller, and eventually to the "ratings guide", upon which I have spent far too many hours enjoying the vast range of opinions expressed. For a while I have wanted to contribute something of my own, and have been toying with various topics, books and televised stories, always ending up ruling them out. Eventually though, it struck me, there could only be one choice for a first review, I would go back to the beginning of my love of this programme, it had to be Peter Davison's doctor.
I confess to being a fairly uncritical reviewer of the show in general, I like all the Doctors, and most of the companions, there are no stories I can really say I dislike, and find some of the vitriol I see directed towards various aspects of the show on this website somewhat strange. Nevertheless, Peter Davison is MY doctor; he is the first Doctor I really remember. Being born in 1976, I have vague memories of Tom Baker's final two or three adventures, particularly Logopolis. Growing up in Blackpool, I remember going to the Doctor Who exhibition which ran every year in the resort, and the final exhibit being some sort of reconstruction of the sight of the regeneration into Peter Davison, along with a TV screen playing the final moments of the fourth Doctors life over and over again. This, along with the five faces season which the BBC showed shortly before the beginning of season 19 got this five year old into a frenzy of excitement about the prospect of the vet from another of my favourite (at the time) programmes on TV. Like most kids at that time, the impact of the Star Wars movies had got me into any kind of Sci-fi I could get my hands on. I wasn't to be disappointed, I watched season 19 and was totally hooked, my interest reaching a frenzy with Earthshock, which, apart from being the most exciting thing I had ever seen on TV, also had Beryl Reid in it, who I recognised from a children's TV show at that time about some sort of talking cat from space (afraid I can't remember any more about it). This reason I am giving all this background will become clear in light of later comments I want to make.
The Fifth Doctor is criticised for being a bit wet, not really forceful enough, yet these very things are his strengths, he does not have all the answers, he is not omnipotent like some of his other incarnations. I like his calmness and the fact that he would rather be playing cricket. If I was travelling with the Doctor, it would want to relax some of the time, who wants to be rushing around saving the universe every minute of every day, the Doctor is surely entitled to relax some of the time. This Doctor cares for his companions, he constantly sees the worst of what the universe has to offer, yet remains convinced of the general goodness of people, at least until they prove otherwise. Na?e this may be, but so what? Isn't the fact that the Doctor retains these beliefs in the face of such events what makes these beliefs worth having, if the Doctor lived in a perfect universe, it would be too easy to believe people were good. The Fifth Doctor is said to be the most human, yet how many humans could retain respect for life, even that of your enemy, if they went where the Doctor goes, or saw what he sees. In a sense, this makes the fifth Doctor no less alien.
When I started to buy the videos in the early nineties, naturally I gravitated towards the Fifth Doctor stories, which I remembered so fondly; I have a reasonable amount of the stories, including classics like The Visitation and Resurrection of the Daleks. Indeed, Earthshock was the first Doctor Who video I ever bought. Recently I have watched all my videos again and made a surprising discovery, they weren't as good as I remembered. Indeed, I found myself enjoying the stories of the Sixth Doctor more, who I had despised when they were first on, and I have started to collect the Third and Fourth Doctor stories when necessary. I find the stories a bit weak, and the companions annoying, which I never did when I was five. I could barely sit through Snakedance, and as for Warriors of the Deep, my video fast-forward has had more use than would be expected. But that doesn't change the fact that the Fifth Doctor is my Doctor. These stories are twenty years old, they were absolutely great to me as a small child, my disappointment stems from the fact that I remember them so fondly, so of course they cannot live up to my childhood memory. With Pertwee or Tom Baker stories, I have never seen them before, so they have nothing to live up to. I think that when people review any Doctor Who story, they should try to bear in mind that it was fine when it was made, it was designed to be watched episodically, not all in one go, and it was essentially a children's programme, as a child, I certainly thought it wonderful.
Despite my slight misgiving about some of the stories, Peter Davison was never less than excellent in the role. In proof of this is the fact that he has remained a major TV star in the UK over the years since his departure, appearing in numerous shows. He was probably the most famous actor to play the Doctor when he was chosen (at least until Paul McGann), and, with his profile amongst the public, I can't help feeling that had he stayed for a fourth season, the BBC would have found it considerably more difficult to cancel/suspend the show. Not to take anything away from Colin Baker, but he was simply not a big enough name to avoid the hiatus.
To sum up then, the Fifth Doctor had his flaws, and the material Davison was given was not always the best, but I still think that if I had the choice, I would choose to travel with him, just shading out the Third Doctor. Some of the Missing adventures featuring the fifth Doctor are superb, and show him at his best, such as The Crystal Bucephalus, and The Sands of Time, and I hope to review them as well. Apart from anything else, my five-year-old self would never forgive me if I chose anyone else as my favourite Doctor!
A Review by Ronald Mallett 11/3/03
The decision to regenerate the Doctor at the end of Season 18 was part of a long program of reform instituted by John Nathan-Turner, the current producer. Within two seasons we saw massive improvements: the quality of the scripts under script editors Christopher H. Bidmead and Eric Saward rose, production values increased, cliched plot devices such as K-9 and the sonic screwdriver vanished, the numbr of companions increased, and we got a new Doctor.
Like all Doctors, the character of the 5th Doctor was designed to be as different from his predecessor as possible. The public had begun to grow tired of Tom Baker's bohemian performance - although very much subdued under Nathan-Turner's new regime. Just as the 5th Doctor's Victorian cricket costume and trademark stick of celery suggested, this new Doctor was youthful, energetic and beamed with a boyish enthusiasm. However it was a vulnerable charm that hid a rather deep wisdom. Still the 5th Doctor always seemed to be caught up in events that got out of his control and there was a sense of rising panic as an adventure progressed. He started out very pleasant and polite but degenerated into rudeness as the crisis neared its climax.
The 5th Doctor wasn't a crusading idealist like the 6th Doctor, or a dark manipulator of time like the 7th Doctor. Instead he came across as a sort of feckless drifter, frustrated by his amount of companions and other events (such as the Black Guardian's vendetta) which inhibited his freedom. At the end of The Awakening he complains about being manipulated and bullied by people and events! His era was blessed with some very good stories, good enough not to demand a dominating Doctor who all too self-consciously has to carry the show in the absence of top scripts (true enough of the mid-to-late Tom Baker and Colin Baker eras). The 5th Doctor allowed events to develop of their own accord and then rushed in at the end to save the day if he was truly required. He was very self conscious about being seen to be interfering in time (see the end of Frontios), which is something the later Doctors seemed to believe was their right!
As he was the first new Doctor I encountered (although very familiar with the 3rd and 4th Doctors thanks to a plethora of repeats on ABC) his era seemed stronger at the time than in retrospect. Part of this is due to Davison's uncomfortable performance but also because the basic premise of the character of the 5th Doctor is flawed. In my opinion the Doctor needs to be pro-active, confident and possess the aura of a hero who gives the viewers (particularly the younger children) a sense of security in the face of whatever might be encountered. This is also my main criticism of Patrick Troughton's performance as the 2nd Doctor, while he was clownish in order to project a harmless exterior that put his enemies off guard and served to hide a sharp mind, he was too overtly flappable (see the height his arms shoot up when a gun is pulled on him in The Two Doctors!).
Jon Pertwee recollected that he always played the Doctor, not only as a Bond type action hero, but as a confident adventurer that children could place their trust in. This is obviously just a personal preference I possess, as it is true I prefer the more heroic interpretations of Pertwee and Colin Baker to most of the others. Phillip Hinchcliffe in the DVD commentary of The Ark in Space claims he enjoyed Tom Baker's performance for exactly the opposite reasons! To Hinchcliffe, The 4th Doctor often seemed worried and therefore vulnerable. It's just a personal judgement. I have often found though, that fans of Davison's era are far more into story than character.
Despite all this, one could argue too that the annals of Doctor Who would be very much diminished if they were to lack the three seasons that featured the adventures of the 5th Doctor!
A Review by Stuart Gutteridge 18/3/04
The general feeling about the fifth incarnation of the Doctor is that he was the nice one. Granted there is a certain amount of truth in this statement, but there is more to him than just that. The fact that Peter Davison -- a "tv face" at the time (and indeed equally so now) means that there was pressure to make him markedly different to Tom Baker`s portrayal. Thus the result is not so much a nice Doctor, but more of a charming one, certainly the less alien qualities are brought to the fore. Breathless enthusiasm, a love for cricket, a more humane Doctor, with a sharp line in flippancy are some of his more endearing qualities.
There is also a sense of frustration too (notably at the end of Warriors Of The Deep, Earthshock and Planet Of Fire) coupled with the fact that he is indeed an old man trapped inside a young man`s body would suggest there is more to this incarnation than meets the eye.
A Review by David Rosenthal 23/5/06
Peter Davison's era started tough in Castravalva, his first story. He had amnesia basically in all of that first story. He just was in that zero cabinet and had nothing really to do. In his second story Four to Doomsday he had a bit more to do.
His greatest acting moments for me were in Earthshock, when he confronted the Cyberleader; in Resurrection Of the Daleks when he had a weapon pointed at Davros; and in his greatest story Caves Of Androzani.
It's too bad he couldnt havve had even more really meaty episodes like Colin Baker or some of the others had. He was a good Doctor. It just was tough for him because Tom Baker had left and he had very big shoes to fill. But Peter you were my third favorite and you were a good Doctor.
Passive Aggressive by Thomas Cookson 17/7/11
Other reviewers have nailed the fan sentiment about Davison's Doctor. He's not one of the first four big players. He might be a favourite pick of some, but generally it seems fans either want to like him or, as is often the case with the JNT years, they feel it's too impolite to hate on him.
Davison was a big missed opportunity for the show. In Season 18, the show had suffered an unexpected ratings fall after Season 17's record ratings. Tom Baker's departure in Logopolis got such poor ratings it's a wonder (and, I'd say a shame) they didn't just end the show there. But Davison was a high-profile actor (and a heart-throb) playing the Doctor, and in his first season the ratings shot back up to near what they'd been during Horns of Nimon. But after some ten million people tuned in to watch Time-Flight, I think the show immediately lost credibility. Classic Who would never get such ratings again.
Sometimes bad stories simply happen. I've often defended the Wiliams era but I can't deny the era has major problems. Season 15 actually does feel quite directionless after the solid start of Horror of Fang Rock. Season 16 has more of an ongoing theme and quest, but much like the previous season it suddenly loses all momentum by the fifth story and ends on a rather weak six-part finale. Season 17 I actually think is the strongest of the run, aided somewhat by the spike of City of Death, and I'm surprised how fans write off Horns of Nimon as 'not proper Doctor Who' when it's probably the most Hartnellian story of the colour era. But one thing the Williams era undeniably suffered was a fair amount of stories that felt unfinished. The Invisible Enemy, Destiny of the Daleks (the novelisation at least explains how Romana survived without the Doctor's anti-radiation pills) and especially The Invasion of Time, which more than any other story sums up the weaknesses of the Williams era in how the Doctor seems to breeze through the crisis completely unconcerned, leading to an absence of drama or tension. To be honest, Season 18 was a return to form for the show, giving the show a grandeur that it hadn't had since Talons of Weng-Chiang.
So it seems fair to excuse Time-Flight as 'one of those' stories. But the general public quite liked 'the Tom Baker show', but not only did Time-Flight make a mockery of JNT's mission statement to make the show 'respectable' again, it lacked any of the panache, humour or spirit that made the weaker Tom stories durable. Any life or humour to the thing seemed surgically removed. If anything, the story resembles one of those terrible, awkward workplace-orientation videos. The scene where the Doctor's companions are insincerely grieving Adric for a minute, and then crassly change the subject in the most blatant display of compassion fatigue ever, just shows up how the series has lost it's heart and soul.
Persistently, these amateurish Davison scripts feel unfinished and unfocused. Kinda is a narrative disaster. Hindle happens to go mad just as the Mara is awakening and frankly I wonder if the story would have been any different without the Mara in it. Watching this pretentious portrayal of reductio ad absurdum characters in a preachy lecture on religion and tribalism, after the frightening believability and morally ambiguous gritty realism of Warriors' Gate and Logopolis was chastening in the extreme. Likewise, Terminus is resolved by Nyssa happening to get the right dose of radiation, and the revelation that the Garm wanted free will all along, even though nothing beforehand hinted he was even that important a figure. Resurrection of the Daleks is probably the worst offender. It struck me suddenly that there's so little focus or heart to the story that it doesn't really feel like an actual Dalek story.
And Davison's Doctor himself loses out because of this weak characterisation and failure of craft and focus. He also suffers because of JNT's mandate to make his Doctor a complete contrast to Tom Baker, rendering him serious, vulnerable, fallible, passive, appeasing, to such a degree that Davison practically becomes the anti-Doctor. I cringe when JNT apologists make out that he gave the Doctor a 'darker' ruthless edge with Colin and Sylvester, when JNT had taken away that edge in the first place, and neither Doctor would seem so radical coming straight after Tom Baker. Davison wanted to bring some humour and edge to his character but again JNT refused to allow it, which sped up Davison's decision to leave.
The only Davison stories to really have the impact of Tom Baker's best stories, were Earthshock and Caves of Androzani. Both show Davison's Doctor to be more gutsy and confrontational than usual and to be able to apply quick thinking to an overwhelming predicament. Another good example of a Davison story is Enlightenment. Much like Caves of Androzani, its success is down to it being anomalously well-structured. In a period where Doctor Who was full of filler scenes, derivative continuity, extraneous companions (seemingly JNT believed that arbitrary additions to the lineup would inherently create audience interest), soapy bickering scenes, and moments of artificial moral indecision on the Doctor's part, Enlightenment is something truly special. It's a Davison story where every scene has a purpose and not a character or moment is wasted and each scene tops the last. It's more Turlough's story than the Doctor's, but it affords Davison's Doctor a real chance to shine, to be shrewd, and hold his own even against the Gods. As such it's one of the few stories of the humourless, directionless Davison era that's actually life-affirming.
But alas if there's one thing that's guaranteed about the good 80's stories, it's that it isn't long before that good work is undone and swallowed up by stories bad enough to cancel it's goodness out. Enough bad work can achieve corrosive critical mass. With JNT in charge, it often seemed as though good stories that promised a better direction for the show were outright overruled by the control-freak producer. As such, Davison's few moments of champ-hood would be quickly undone the next story. It isn't long after Davison's grand sacrifice in Caves to save Peri, that it's undone by the next unstable Doctor strangling her, a character conception which smacks of the narcissistic producer's equivalent of Munchausen syndrome (deliberate damage done to claim adulation for 'mending' it later).
I think the point where Davison's Doctor really stops feeling like a hero is Mawdryn Undead. It also strikes me as where Doctor Who ceases to be a family show, which is especially jarring after Adric and childish stories like Four to Doomsday, Time-Flight. The central 'villain' is a man who exists in a perpetual state of suffering for centuries, and wants to die. The Doctor's choice then becomes to either appease Mawdryn by committing euthanasia, or to reprimand him and leave him to his fate. Neither choice would make the Doctor come off well, and what's worse is the story has him do both. To my mind, it crossed the line of Doctor Who as a family show in a way even The Daleks' Masterplan, and Season 7 couldn't.
The Eric Saward era could generously be described as a BBC version of exploitation cinema with hints at angry, worthy social commentary. It's all there. The derivative plagiarising of popular classics, gruesome money shots, Terminus' misery-fest and tale of exploitation and dehumanisation, Warriors of the Deep's twisted humanity-hating ethos, Resurrection of the Daleks' sickening slaughter-fest with moments of fringe satire on police brutality, Planet of Fire's particularly disturbing hints of a perverse grooming relationship between Peri and her stepfather, Vengeance on Varos' commentary on the spiritually decaying, brutalising effect of the prison system, and Revelation of the Daleks' body horror and corporate satire. Perhaps it's no wonder the 80s is treated as exempt from serious criticism and instead fans focus their criticism on production faults and deflect attention onto specific design flaws, like the Myrka or Colin's coat, as though they're the main issue. Topped off with cold, leering directing and a volatile anti-hero prone to moments of neglectful apathy. Obviously the boyish, straight-laced Davison couldn't be more ill-suited to this genre.
Warriors of the Deep did the worst damage to the Fifth Doctor's character, making him impossible to root for. Placing the lives of the Silurians above the humans they're massacring, and ignoring the conveniently abundant gas that will resolve everything, for no other reason than to ensure the story ends on a self-serving set piece massacre that fandom was somehow fooled into seeing as 'iconic'. If the Doctor doesn't even react believably to a massacre happening around him, if his responses and stances are so delusional to what's actually happening, then there can be no possible drama anymore. Nothing that happens in any story can ever affect or motivate the Doctor. And with that, Doctor Who actively degenerates into an unworkable, corrosive anti-drama.
As for what happened, I think it's simply the Doctor inheriting the worst traits of Eric Saward's passive aggressiveness, and also JNT's worst narcissistic tendencies to court disaster and defy impossible odds in order to make himself appear the hero or victim against greater struggles, for his own sense of self-importance (but blame the BBC for giving an unqualified JNT the job and showing poor faith in him. A qualified producer ergo wouldn't have anything to prove). That's the only reason the Doctor goes out of his way to fail here in a way that taints the hero forever.
I've tried being generous about JNT's run on Doctor Who, and thought if he left after The Five Doctors, the show would have remained in a healthy state in the 80s. But now I think about it, JNT should only have done Season 18 and left there. His casting of Davison was probably his last good decision (killing off Adric doesn't count, since JNT introduced him in the first place), and a different production team should have inherited the actor.
What had made JNT's first season, Season 18, work was the presence of Barry Letts who'd been employed as JNT's overseer to be a guiding hand, and was probably the only one who could discourage JNT's worst decisions and could be diplomatic about it. However, this would have unfortunate repercussions as JNT aggressively reasserted his authority and blacklisted any past writers who he feared might undermine his authority.
Also, Christopher Bidmead gave Season 18 an overall direction and thematic cohesion. He was the kind of tedious perfectionist the show really needed in the 80's, and was responsible for the most visually memorable moments of Logopolis. He's often dismissed as the dull science lecturer of Doctor Who by fans; however, the Doctor and Romana breaking Meglos's time loop is one of the show's most whimsical moments. Tom's Doctor admittedly was neutered and appeared defeated in Logopolis, but he also appeared old and frail, so it made sense he'd now need a younger, more active successor.
But by Season 19, Letts and Bidmead were gone, and soon JNT's tyrannical, volatile, chemically run, control-freak management would drive away others who could have turned things around. He drove away Peter Grimwade, one of the best directors the show had at that point, over some lunch party that JNT wasn't told about, and even drove away Christopher Priest, a respected sci-fi novelist who wanted to write for the show and would have instantly gained the show extra sci-fi credibility.
And then there's Davison himself. He had said that even in his first season, stories like Time-Flight made him think he'd made a career mistake and prompted his decision to leave. He was impressed with Caves of Androzani, which made him regret leaving, but too late. The right producer would have done everything to keep a catch like Davison. JNT didn't. Davison's staying could have made all the difference.
Cricket and Celery by Lucy Dobson 19/9/21
With the Fifth Doctor, they deliberately set out to make a weaker Doctor, in contrast to the invincible Fourth Doctor. Making a villain so big that even the Doctor can't defeat them raised the stakes. But the problem with that is that they ended up creating an ultimately pathetic Doctor.
The Fifth Doctor's persona is unfortunately one that only works if you're going somewhere with it. A hero cannot be weak and easily defeated, unless you're planning to use this as a story arc to make him stronger. Doctor Who didn't take this opportunity, and the reset button was hit at the end of every story, keeping the characters underdeveloped.
The main characters in the Fifth Doctor's era were stubbornly underdeveloped and simple, which was especially frustrating as they had great scope for complexity, especially Nyssa. The problem was what the Whittaker 'fam' is finding now - too many companions leaves not enough time to develop them properly. Like the fam, the Fifth Doctor's companions never progressed beyond simple character bios, with no notable character development. Huge catastrophic things have happened to them all, so young, yet you wouldn't guess. Grief over Varsh, Tremas, Auntie Vanessa, Adric himself - just glossed over.
More could have been done with Nyssa being the sole Trakenite left in existence and her home destroyed or Adric being in the wrong universe and his whole family dead. It could have helped Tegan put her problems in perspective and grown all three as characters. Instead, Adric and Tegan were confined to dull bitch-spats with the Doctor and whining constantly, whilst Nyssa simply looked on.
The Fifth Doctor worked well in Earthshock because the Doctor genuinely feels powerless. He's basically lost the story when the Cybermen step onto the bridge. The Cybermen are a dominant, real threat, and the Doctor is powerless to stop the massacre happening right in front of his eyes, even when it comes to his companions. All three of the companions have guns held to their heads in Earthshock, and the Doctor can do little other than attempt to talk the Cybermen and Ringway down from murder. As we all know by now, Adric doesn't escape, and his death is eerily foreshadowed in the apparent hopelessness of the situation. The Doctor cannot rejoice in the small victory of outsmarting the Cyber Leader, as his companion is blown to atoms minutes later.
This should have been a turning point for Davison's Doctor, realistically. When he decides to become more ruthless and brutal, as a reaction against the inhumanity that led to the death of his youngest companion. But the magical reset button means that Adric is forgotten within 10 minutes of Time-Flight, rendering the whole experience meaningless. The Cybermen may have well as brutally murdered the poor kid, since the Doctor sure doesn't give a damm.
The Doctor's weakness in Earthshock is an interesting experiment, but it would work a lot better if it was a one-off. Do it too often and you run the risk of making the Doctor look pathetic. This isn't a sitcom, where you can do the same gags over and over again. Having the Doctor learn the same lesson and fail the same ways over and over gets tedious very quickly.
Warriors of the Deep and Resurrection of the Daleks attempted to portray the cynical nasty world that Earthshock envisioned: one where everyone is expendable and everyone dies. Where the monsters are ruthless and brutal and even the Doctor isn't enough to destroy them. However, Warriors of the Deep and Resurrection of the Daleks read more like sadistic killing fests where the Doctor, far from being powerless to stop the massacre, was just letting the massacre happen, presumably so he can take the moral high ground later. Resurrection is particularly bloody, to the point where it becomes about killing as many people as possible.
The Fifth Doctor was, generally, powerless. Shardovan sacrifices himself so the Doctor can escape. Pure chance meant that the Terileptils' base was the site of the Great Fire of London and that the freighter killed the dinosaurs. The Master is allowed to escape pretty much every time. The Brigadiers take care of Mawdryn. There's no grand plan to deal with the Black Guardian or Borusa. Everyone dies in Warriors of the Deep. Davros mocks the Doctor's inability to kill him. The Fifth was a Doctor that essentially allowed the events to happen around him, then lamented that they'd happened in the first place. There's rarely a plan to defeat the adversary of the week. He never learned from his mistakes, he was just doomed to repeat them again and again for the sake of the narrative of the weaker Doctor in the nasty universe that Saward pushed for.
His first story failed to establish him as a credible adversary. The main weakness with Castrovalva is that Part 3 would have made a great Part 1. Worldbuilding is exchanged for farting around in the TARDIS, meaning we arrive at Castrovalva itself far too late in the day to care about it or anyone who lives there. The Doctor has to settle into Castrovalva, begin to get better, notice something is wrong and work out what's going on in about 15 minutes, meaning that the threat to the Doctor is diminished. Davison being absent for most of it also means that the Fifth Doctor has a limited opportunity to establish himself. Put bluntly, this Doctor isn't a threat to the universe, but he's pitted against enemies who make him look even less like a threat, either by their dominance or similar pathetic-ness.
Davison's constant cheeriness is out of place in the nastiness of his era. He ends Castrovalva with a smile on his face, despite the fact that the Master is potentially dead, everyone who lived there has been erased from existence and Adric almost killed. He's larking around in the hold of the freighter with his arms wide open, fully aware that something on the ship planted a bomb to destroy Earth. Adric has been dead 10 minutes, and he's more interested in finding out the cricket scores from the paper. The Doctor is mildly indifferent to Nyssa's plight in Terminus. Lanzarote is a nice sunny holiday after the bloodbath of Resurrection of the Daleks and Tegan's departure.
I suppose that was sort of the idea; to pit a non-aggressive Doctor against an aggressive universe. But the Doctor ended up being a passive observer. The ending of Warriors of the Deep sums it up perfectly: the Fifth Doctor tragically and sanctimoniously declares in the midst of corpses that "there should have been another way", brushing past the fact that his own indecision led to the massacre.