ajbakeresq

A delight! An unexpectedly complex episode with some wonderful surprises, not least the appearance of Barbara Flynn, who, to people of a certain age, is associated with some of the greatest tv drama of all time - though quite who her character is is a mystery.

I have always wanted Dr Who to aspire to episodes which are pure mystery and strangeness. I've been watching since 1963. Why should they be explained? Of course this is, but it suggests an ideal of strangeness.

It's the only because this series is a six part whole that it can go so far - and the frantic tone might lead to a fourth chapter in a very different style. Yes, Who needs change and challenges. It's not a cost soap or escapist fantasy for people who want a safe artificial world, it's a mad romp that reflects the real world and allows itself to be imaginative.

I will say no more to avoid spoilers.

This is an adaptation of a Francis Durbridge tv serial, which was in six half hour episodes, performed live and not recorded. It's easy to see where the cliff hangers were even though it's very compressed. Durbridge stories are full of twists. It's well worth seeing the later BBC ones that do exist. But I'm mainly writing this to correct the very annoying point in the goofs. Fenton is a surgeon and so is not addressed as doctor. Surgeons are always addressed as mister.

I love J Creek but this one is disturbing. It's a good story, though too long, but it has a huge fundamental error.

The castle is in Scotland. There's a flashback to 1557. There's a reference to Queen Mary persecuting protestants - and the sinister torture chamber that gives the story its name.

Queen Mary who? Mary Tudor was Queen of England at the time, and persecuting protestants (though no more than Elizabeth persecuted catholics). Scotland was a completely different country.

Do they mean Mary Queen of SCots? She was a catholic but tolerant of protestants as they were a growing power and her son was a leading protestant.

Surely someone in the entire production team could have pointed out that it didn't make historic sense? Also - one character is described as a Lutheran and then as a right wing fundamentalist. I wouldn't have thought Lutherans were particularly prone to extremism.