When Romana goes fishing for the fourth segment to the Key to Time, the Doctor just goes fishing. While on the planet of Tara, both are taken in (somewhat against their will) by two ...
See full summary »
When Romana goes fishing for the fourth segment to the Key to Time, the Doctor just goes fishing. While on the planet of Tara, both are taken in (somewhat against their will) by two factions, both trying to achieve the throne of Tara. While Romana is mistaken for an android by Count Grendel, the Doctor and the Prince are drugged after the Doctor agrees to help repair his android. Written by
During one take of the scene where The Doctor is fishing, Tom Baker inadvertently tossed the antique fishing rod he was using into the water. Stunt arranger Terry Walsh had to dive in and rescue it. See more »
The problem with THE ANDROIDS OF TARA, a Tom Baker-era Who adventure, is that it's not really Dr Who. Sure, there's the inclusion of K9 for comic relief and a few robotic elements to the script, but for the most part this is a silly costume drama done on a budget which really saps authenticity from the final result. Some have said that this story rips off THE PRISONER OF ZENDA, although as I'm not familiar with that book I can't say.
In any case, it should be a heck of a lot better than it actually is. The Doctor and Romana end up on a medieval planet, where there's some conspiracy involved with replacing the current king with an android version. It's all hokum, of course, with the scripting particularly weak, a back-and-forth succession of characters being captured and freed, and so forth.
Tom Baker is having fun here, and Mary Tamm has undeniable charm. I'm a fan of K9 too, despite the silliness of his concept, and the guest star this time around is Peter Jeffrey, a guy who can be relied upon to deliver some entertaining acting. But I wish the android elements of the story had been played up more, instead of the endless political intrigue; that way it may have risen above average.
1 of 3 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?