Doctor Who — The War Games (1969, directed by David Maloney)

Posted on October 4, 2025 by Jedadiah Leland

The War Games is an episode of firsts and lasts.

It featured the last regular appearance by Patrick Troughton as the Second Doctor. (Troughton would return for three guest appearances.) Having played the role for three years, Troughton feared getting typecast and felt it was time to leave. It was also the last episode to feature Frazer Hines (as Jamie) and Wendy Padbury (as Zoe) as companions. (Hines holds the record for appearing in the most episodes as a companion.) Finally, this episode was the last to be broadcast in black-and-white.

The War Games also featured a very important first. This episode featured the first appearance of the Time Lords and the first trip to their home planet. This was the first episode that showed the society that the Doctor fled when he stole his TARDIS and went to Earth.

At ten episodes, The War Games was either the second or third-longest serial in Doctor Who history, depending on whether or not you count The Trial of the Time Lord as just one long (and regrettable) serial. The serial opens with the Doctor and his companions apparently landing in No Man’s Land during World War I. As things progress, the Doctor notices anachronistic technology and Jamie is shocked when a redcoat shows up in a World War I prison. The Doctor discovers that an alien known as The War Lord (Philip Madoc) has determined that humanity is the most bloodthirsty race in the universe and that he has abducted soldiers from Earth’s bloodiest wars. They are fighting war games on The War Lord’s planet and the survivors will become the members of the War Lord’s army. Helping the War Lord is the War Chief (Edward Brayshaw), a renegade Time Lord.

(Just as with The Time Meddler‘s Monk, there’s a fan theory that the War Chief was an early incarnation of The Master. I don’t believe it, myself. The Master was far more cunning than The War Chief.)

Despite running for four hours, The War Games is a rare Doctor Who serial that doesn’t have any slow spots and the scenes where the characters cross from war zone to war zone are creatively realized. The serial starts out as if it’s going to be yet another dry historical episode and then it gradually reveals that all is not as it seems. I especially liked the performance as Jane Sherwin as Lady Julia, an ambulance driver in the World War I zone. (Jane Sherwin was also the wife of Doctor Who’s then-produccer Derek Sherwin.)

What really makes The War Games stand out is the final episode.

Having brought an end to the War Games, the Doctor is faced with the impossible prospect of returning the soldiers to their proper times. He is forced to call upon The Time Lords for help. Bernard Horsfall, Trevor Martin, and Clyde Pollitt appear as the Time Lords, who dematerialize the War Lord and send the soldiers back home with no memory of what happened. Unfortunately, The Time Lords are not just going to let the Doctor off the hook for violating their police of non-interference.

First, Jamie and Zoe are sent back to their original times, both with no memory of their life on board the TARDIS. The Doctor is then put on trial for having stolen his TARDIS and interfering in time and space. The Doctor argues that he has been fighting evil. The Time Lords accept his argument and then say that his punishment is to be sent to 20th Century Earth. He’ll keep his TARDIS but he won’t be able to use it. And, because the Doctor is well-known on Earth, he’ll have to regenerate. He’s given five faces and told to pick one. The Doctor refuses them all. The Time Lords pick one. “That’s the worst one!” the Doctor says before he finds himself spinning through space and time.

It’s a poignant ending to the Second Doctor’s adventures. The Time Lords do not come across as being as bad as the Doctor often made them out to be but it is easy to see why an adventurer like the Doctor would feel constrained by their society. That the Second Doctor called them for help despite knowing what the consequences would be not only shows how dangerous The War Lord’s plan was but also how the Doctor would always do the right thing even when it was dangerous for him to do so. The Time Lords could have just as easily dematerialized The Doctor as punishment for stealing his TARDIS. Jamie and Zoe are spared punishment but they lose their memories of the amazing adventures they shared. And the Doctor changes once again.

For viewers like me, who got to know Doctor Who from the episodes that were broadcast late at night on PBS, The War Games is a bridge between “old” Doctor Who and the classic era of Jon Pertwee and Tom Baker. In America, we didn’t get to see much of Patrick Troughton’s Doctor but what we got established him as one of the best to ever play the role.

Horror On TV: The Hitchhiker 5.6 “Renaissance” (dir by Bruno Gantillon)

Posted on October 13, 2023 by Lisa Marie Bowman

On tonight’s episode of The Hitchhiker, David Soul plays a greedy developer who runs afoul the Parisian underground. It turns out that thinking big is not always the fool-proof strategy that the developer thinks that it is. The cocky developer finds himself forced to confront his own dark side. Myself, I’m curious why the opening credits always feature The Hitchhiker walking through the desert but, since the 5th season began, he’s pretty much just exclusively been hanging out in France. Seriously, who is this guy?

The episode originally aired on July 14th, 1989!

Film Review: Murder on the Orient Express (dir by Sidney Lumet)

Posted on August 21, 2020 by Lisa Marie Bowman

There’s been a murder on the Orient Express!

In the middle of the night, a shady American businessman (Richard Widmark) was stabbed to death. Now, with the train momentarily stalled due to a blizzard, its up to the world’s greatest detective, Hercule Poirot (Albert Finney), to solve the crime. With only hours to go before the snow is cleared off the tracks and the case is handed over to the local authorities, Hercule must work with Bianchi (Martin Balsam) and Dr. Constantine (George Coulouris) to figure out who among the all-star cast is a murderer.

Is it the neurotic missionary played by Ingrid Bergman? Is it the diplomat played by Michael York or his wife, played by Jacqueline Bisset? Is it the military man played by Sean Connery? How about Anthony Perkins or John Gielgud? Maybe it’s Lauren Bacall or could it be Wendy Hiller or Rachel Roberts or even Vanessa Redgrave? Who could it be and how are they linked to a previous kidnapping, one that led to the murder of an infant and the subsequent death of everyone else in the household?

Well, the obvious answer, of course, is that it had to be Sean Connery, right? I mean, we’ve all seen From Russia With Love. We know what that man is capable of doing on a train. Or what about Dr. No? Connery shot a man in cold blood in that one and then he smirked about it. Now, obviously, Connery was playing James Bond in those films but still, from the minute we see him in Murder on the Orient Express, we know that he’s a potential killer. At the height of his career, Connery had the look of a killer. A sexy killer, but a killer nonetheless….

Actually, the solution to the mystery is a bit more complicated but you already knew that. One of the more challenging things about watching the 1974 version of Murder on the Orient Express is that, in all probability, the viewer will already know how the victim came to be dead. As convoluted as the plot may be, the solution is also famous enough that even those who haven’t seen the 1974 film, the remake, or read Agatha Christie’s original novel will probably already know what Poirot is going to discover.

That was something that director Sidney Lumet obviously understood. Hence, instead of focusing on the mystery, he focuses on the performers. His version of Murder on the Orient Express is full of character actors who, along with being talented, were also theatrical in the best possible way. The film is essentially a series of monologues, with each actor getting a few minutes to show off before Poirot stepped up to explain what had happened. None of the performances are exactly subtle but it doesn’t matter because everyone appears to be having a good time. (Finney, in particular, seems to fall in love with his occasionally indecipherable accent.) Any film that has Anthony Perkins, John Gielgud, Lauren Bacall, Sean Connery, Ingrid Bergman, and Albert Finney all acting up a storm is going to be entertaining to watch.

Though it’s been a bit overshadowed by the Kenneth Branagh version, the original Murder on the Orient Express holds up well. I have to admit that Sidney Lumet always seems like he would have been a bit of an odd choice to direct this film. I mean, just consider that he made this film in-between directing Serpico and Dog Day Afternoon. However, Lumet pulls it off, largely by staying out of the way of his amazing cast and letting them act up a storm. It looks like it was a fun movie to shoot. It’s certainly a fun movie to watch, even if we do already know the solution.

A Movie A Day #44: Let Him Have It (1991, directed by Peter Medak)

Posted on February 13, 2017 by Jedadiah Leland

The year is 1953. The place is Croydon. Derek Bentley (Christopher Eccleston) is 19 years old but has the mental capability of an 11 year-old. Unable to hold down a job and judged unfit for the national service, Derek drifts into a gang led by 16 year-old Christopher Craig (Paul Reynolds). When Derek and Craig are caught burglarizing a warehouse, it leads to a tense rooftop confrontation between Craig and the police. Derek has already been captured by the time that the police demand that Craig hand over his gun. Bentley shouts, “Let him have it, Chris!” Craig opens fire, killing one officer.

Because he’s a minor, Craig is only facing a prison sentence for killing the police officer. But, as a legal (if not mental) adult, Derek will be hung if he’s found guilty. Under the common purpose doctrine, it doesn’t matter that Derek didn’t actually shoot the gun. The only thing that matters is what Derek meant when he said, “Let him have it, Chris!” Derek says that he was telling Craig to hand over his gun. The Crown says that Derek was ordering Craig to open fire.

Let Him Have It is based on a true story. The case of Derek Bentley was one of the many cases that eventually led to the death penalty being abolished in the UK. Let Him Have It was released at the height of a long campaign to secure a pardon for Derek. That pardon was finally issued in 1998, though it was too late to help Derek Bentley.

Let Him Have It is a powerful and angry docudrama, one that reveals in searing detail how Derek was railroaded by the British legal system. In his film debut, Eccleston gives a powerful performance as Derek and he is ably supported by both Paul Reynolds and, in the role of Derek’s father, Tom Courtenay. Let Him Have It leaves little doubt as to why the case of Derek Bentley remained a cause célèbre for 45 years after his initial trial.

The TSL’s Daily Horror Grindhouse: The Sweet House of Horrors (dir by Lucio Fulci)

Posted on October 27, 2016 by Lisa Marie Bowman

Mary and Roberto Vivaldi (played by Lubka Lenzi and Pascal Persiano) would appear to have a perfect life, perhaps because they do. They’re young. They’re attractive. They’re in love. They’re rich. They have a really nice house and they have two children, a boy and a girl. What could go wrong, right?

Well, they could come home from a party and discover that their house is being burglarized. And the burglar could then proceed to graphically and viscously murder them, smashing in Robert’s head and, since this is a Lucio Fulci film, popping out Mary’s eye. In fact, the opening murder is so graphic and so disturbing that it’s somewhat surprising to learn that this movie was made for television.

Of course, what’s even stranger is that the rest of the film is oddly tame, particularly for a Fulci film. Perhaps they only had enough money in the budget for one graphic gore scene.

Anyway, the parents are now dead and the children are now orphans. At the funeral, the children shock everyone by playing and laughing. However, a few seconds later, they’re standing over the grave and crying. Some people would call this an inconsistency but I think it’s the most realistic part of the film. When you lose someone who you love, you do strange things. There is no one proper way to grieve. As someone who suffered through his share of personal tragedy, this was something that Fulci probably understood.

The parents may be dead but they’re not gone! Instead, they’re haunting the house. The children are overjoyed but their new guardian, Aunt Marcia (Cinzia Monreale, who was Emily in Fulci’s The Beyond) is not. Marcia freaks out upon realizing that the house is haunted and it certainly doesn’t help that she’s attacked by a gigantic fly in the attic. Her husband, the incredibly dense Carlo (Jean Christophe Bretigniere), doesn’t think anything strange is happening. Still, Carlo does agree that it would be a good idea to sell the house and move the children elsewhere.

Nope! The parents have no intention of letting that happen! Of course, the dead parents main concern to kill the man who killed them but, once he’s dead (it doesn’t take that long), they’re free to spend their time pushing a real estate agent down a flight of stairs, harassing Marcia and Carlo and eventually causing an exorcist’s hand to melt.

If you’re getting the feeling that both the dead parents and the living children are pretty obnoxious, that’s because they are. I mean, it’s one thing to not want to be separated. That’s something we can all relate to. It’s another thing to melt a man’s hand and then laugh about it. Add to that, neither Marcia nor Carlo come across as being particularly villainous. It’s not like they’re planning on murdering the kids for their inheritance or sending them to a Dickensian orphanage or anything like that. They just want the kids to stop conducting black magic ceremonies and they want to live in a house that isn’t haunted. No matter how much sympathy you may have for the parents or the kids, it’s hard to deny that Marcia and Carlo aren’t being all that unreasonable.

(It also doesn’t help that the film ends with the suggestion that the dead parents can stay with the kids regardless of whether the house is sold or not.)

And yet, I can’t help but like The Sweet House of Horrors. Even though it doesn’t make much sense and it’s hampered by a low-budget (just check out the floating flames that represent the dead parents), there’s a sincerity to The Sweet House of Horrors. The parents really do seem to love their obnoxious children and the film actually does provide some insight regarding the way that children use imagination to deal with grief. Like many of his later film, The Sweet House of Horrors is hit-and-miss but Lucio Fulci still comes up with a few good visuals, suggesting that his heart may have been in this film in a way that it wasn’t in some of the other films he made during the final years of his storied career. Just the fact that The Sweet House of Horrors tells such an openly sentimental story makes it unique in Fulci’s filmography.

The Sweet House of Horrors cannot be compared to such Fulci classics as The Beyond, The House By The Cemetery, The Black Cat, or Zombi 2. But still, it’s an interesting little film and provides a hint that, even during his decline, Fulci still possessed some of the talent that made his earlier films so iconic.

Cleaning Out The DVR, Again #8: Anne of the Thousand Days (dir by Charles Jarrott)

Posted on June 28, 2016 by Lisa Marie Bowman

After I finished writing my review of Rolling Thunder, I continued the process of cleaning out my DVR by watching the 1969 film, Anne of the Thousand Days. How does a film like Anne of the Thousand Days compare to a film like Rolling Thunder?

They might as well have been conceived, written, directed, and released on different planets.

I recorded Anne of The Thousand Days off of TCM on March 26th. The main reason that I set the DVR to record it was because Anne was a best picture nominee. It may seem strange to think that this rather conventional film was nominated the same year as Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, Z, and Midnight Cowboy. It gets even stranger when you consider what wasn’t nominated that year: Medium Cool, If…, Last Summer, They Shoot Horses, Don’t They?, Alice’s Restaurant, The Wild Bunch, Once Upon A Time In The West, and a long list of other films. In fact, if I wanted to, I could probably spend this entire review listing all of the 1969 films that feel like a more appropriate best picture nominee than Anne of the Thousand Days.

And yet, Anne was nominated for best picture. In fact, it received a total of 10 Oscar nominations, the most of any film that year. Tellingly most of the nominations were in the technical categories and the only Oscar that it won was for its costumes. Genevieve Bujold received a nomination for playing the title character and Richard Burton became the third actor to receive a nomination for playing King Henry VIII.

As for the film, Anne of the Thousand Days tells the oft-told story of King Henry VIII and his marriage to Anne Boleyn. Told in flashback as both Henry and Anne wait for her to be executed on charges of adultery, the film shows us how middle-aged Henry VIII first met and fell in love with 18 year-old Anne Boleyn. Standing in the way of Henry’s pursuit of Anne was the fact that 1) Anne intensely disliked him, 2) Anne was already engaged, 3) Anne’s sister was already Henry’s mistress, and 4) Henry was already married to Catherine of Aragon (Irene Papas).

Fortunately, Henry happens to be king and being king comes with its perks.

For instance, as king, he can order Anne and her fiancée to break up. As king, he can casually dismiss his former mistress. And, as king, Henry has the power that Anne finds to be the ultimate aphrodisiac. At first, Anne merely loves the fact that Henry is obsessed with her. But slowly, she comes to love Henry as a man as well…

The only problem is that Henry is still married and Catherine is still popular with the people. Even after Henry divorces her and marries Anne, the common people refuse to accept Anne as their queen. When Sir Thomas More (William Squire) refuses to recognize Anne as queen, Anne demands that More be executed. When Henry initially shows reluctance, Anne announces that she will not sleep with him until More is dead.

Needless to say, Thomas More is quickly executed.

However, Henry’s attention has already moved on to Jane Seymour (Lesley Paterson) and, desperate to get Anne out of his life, he arranges for Cardinal Cromwell (John Colicos) to frame Anne on charges of adultery and incest. With Anne facing a humiliating trial and the possibility of execution, Henry makes her an offer. If she agrees to an annulment, he’ll free her. However, their daughter — Elizabeth — will lose her claim to the throne…

It’s telling that Charles Jarrott did not receive an Oscar nomination for his work as Anne of the Thousand Day‘s director. There are a lot of technically good things about Anne of the Thousand Days but, despite all of the melodrama and sex and historical detail to be found in Anne, it never comes to life as a movie. The costumes are to die for, the sets are impressive, and the cast is full of talented British character actors but the whole movie just feels oddly flat. Try as it may, it can never convince us that either Henry VIII or Anne Boleyn is worth all the trouble.

Anne of the Thousand Days was obviously a big production, which probably explains all the Oscar nominations. But otherwise, it’s one of the more forgettable best picture nominees.

Guilty (Horror) Pleasure #23: Meridian (dir by Charles Band)

Posted on October 11, 2014 by Lisa Marie Bowman

You know how there are certain films that you just know you shouldn’t like but yet, you do? These are the films that you know you should reject but yet, right when you’re on the verge of condemning them, you suddenly realize that you’d rather watch them for a second or a third time.

For me, Meridian is one of those films.

Meridian presents a twisted take on the Beauty and the Beast fairy tale. Catherine (Sherilyn Fenn) and Gina (played by an actress who is credited simply as being “Charlie”) are recent art school graduates who have moved to Italy. Gina has come to Italy to work in art restoration while Catherine has inherited her father’s castle! That right — Catherine owns her very own castle!

I wish I owned a castle in Italy. In fact, the first person to buy me a castle in Italy (preferably one in Southern Italy) will get a special shout out from me on this site. Get to it!

Anyway, Catherine is pretty happy to be living in her very own castle. Not only does she have a lot of servants but one of them happens to be her childhood nanny (Hilary Mason) who, for reasons that don’t become clear until late in the film, is still very protective of Catherine. Catherine was a little apprehensive about moving into the castle because, when she was little, she used to see the ghost of a dead girl wandering about. However, with her nanny there to protect her and Gina visiting for the weekend, what is there to worry about?

However, one morning, Catherine and Gina discover that a traveling circus has been set up near the castle. Catherine finds herself intrigued by the leader of the circus, the mysterious Lawrence (Malcolm Jamieson). She invites Lawrence and all the performers to have dinner at the castle. With the help of magic, wine, and drugs, the dinner turns into an orgy with a nearly unconscious Catherine being taken by Lawrence’s twin brother, Oliver (Jamieson again). While atop of Catherine, Oliver reverts to his true form, as seen above…

Naturally, it all has to do with family curses and ghosts and all the rest. The morning after, Catherine wakes up with little memory of what happened. The performers are gone and Gina soon leaves the castle. Left with only her servants, Catherine starts to see the ghost of that dead girl again. And, of course, both Oliver and Lawrence show up once again. At no point does the plot make any sense but, then again, life is usually kinda messy so why should movies be any different?

So, look — there’s a lot of negative things that I could say about Meridian. Catherine is not a strong heroine, the film’s overly complicated plot is full of holes, and some of the acting is inconsistent. But yet, oddly enough, those flaws ultimately work to Meridian‘s advantage. It really is one of the most dream-like films that I’ve ever seen and often times it truly does come across like not only a fantasy but a fantasy that you might not want the world to know about. (Which, I think, would make it the epitome of a guilty pleasure…hmmm…) Working with what was undoubtedly a small budget, Charles Band tells his story with a lot of atmosphere and haunting imagery. Taking place in a beautiful country and featuring a beautiful cast, Meridian is a lot better than one might otherwise expect.

Meridian was first released in 1990. The version I saw was included as part The Midnight Horror DVD Collection, along with the original Prom Night and 6 other films, none of which were as good as either Meridian or Prom Night.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IXL08qyhSxM

Previous Guilty Pleasures: