An Adventure in Space and Time

Earlier this year, on the gentle prodding of IMDb user Theo Robertson, I decided that I would go back and watch Doctor Who from the beginning. This was interested to me since I can just about remember the image of Davison as the Doctor but really the actual moments I remember are from the era of McCoy and Baker (an era that brought the show to an end for many years); so watching the originals was interesting to me if for no other reason than I had never seen them. The timing was good because I was glad to have made that connection before all the 50th anniversary stuff kicked off.

All through the fuss and hype, I did feel like we were celebrating where the show was right now, not its roots and as a result I was really glad of this film for focusing on the origins of the show. As Theo will probably tell you better than I, the facts are dusted up in the sake of a good story and the film moves better for it. I disagree with Theo where he says this film presented it as some sort of great cultural moment – I thought the film did a good job of showing how throwaway it was, how little interest there was and how it is more or less a matter of good fortune that the characters caught the public imagination and made an impression that has endured for decades. The story is presented in an affectionate manner, particularly towards Hartnell, who is probably given a bit too much nostalgic cheer for what he deserves, but he is given his dues and is very well played by Bradley.

The tone of the show is affectionate and humorous; we are not spared the fluffed lines and the set malfunctions and yet these are given over to part of the charm. The supporting cast play up their outsider status in a pleasing way, although as Theo says, I'm not sure if Cox was told that his role was to inject energy and color into the film, but his performance is so overblown as to be pure caricature. Still though, it all works really well and with so much hype and fanfare for the current show, it was so nice to have something looking back with such gentle affection – I didn't even mind the appearance of Matt Smith as I thought that was a nice moment and more a nod to the origins than it was to the present.

As part of the 50th anniversary celebration of Doctor Who, the BBC has produced this movie about the origins and Bill Hartnell years of the TV show. Writer Mark Gatiss, a longtime Whovian, has dug through all the stories and legends and has produced a fine script.

The thesis of the movie is that Sydney Newman chose a novice producer, Verity Lambert, who proceeded to build an unlikely team: the first Indian director of the BBC; an actor frustrated at his lack of advancement; and the already worn out facilities at Lime Grove. Somehow she managed to hold this together long enough to create a series which has prospered for half a century, despite the best the suits at the BBC could do.

There's some fine casting in this one, especially David Bradley as William Hartnell. It's rather shocking to me to see him, clean-shaven and well dressed and he gives a fine performance as the William Hartnell of the standard story: old, collapsing under the impact of ill health, but unwilling to give up his claim to fame.

That's not precisely the reality of the matter. Doctor Who ran on a killing schedule during Hartnell's term: forty episodes a year, dialogue filled with scientific bafflegab. Almost anyone would have crumbled under it.

Still, the story as written is cogent and should please the series' fans. the production values are top notch and the actors are excellent and look like the ones who played the original roles. I'd like to give a shout out to the stand outs, but I'd have to name just about every member of the cast.

This movie probably won't appeal to people who are not rabid fans of the show, but for those who, like me, are, it's a great treat.

If I had to sum this up in one word, I would: 'Beautiful".

"One day, I shall come back..." I live in Australia, and this special was screened on ABC1 at 8:50PM on Sunday November 24, immediately after an encore screening of "The Day of the Doctor". I only got to see the first fifteen minutes or so before being told to go to bed, however I was recording it. When I watched most of it the next night, it changed everything.

It was only a few days ago that I watched the special in full for the first time. (It was the third time I'd sen it, however the first in one full sitting). I was home alone, so nobody got to see me crying.

That's what happened. The cast and crew of "An Adventure In Space And Time" have created a drama filled with action, emotion and, importantly, history. I congratulate writer Mark Gatiss for his success with the wonderful script. I feel he captures the essence of all seen in the programme as they were in 1963 perfectly. Of course it is an ultimate dream, I Definitely would do something like this, and he has made a work of equisite art of it. Mr Gatiss, your love letter to "Doctor Who" is truly 'fantastic!'.

The actors cast as roles are evidently well-thought of. I particularly liked Jesscia Raine's portrayal of producer Verity Lambert, David Bradley's performance as the original Who, William Hartnell; and also Sacha Dhawan's living performance as first director Waris Hussein. All capture what it must have been like during the pioneering days of the series. The portrayal of William Hartell by David Bradley is what made me cry. Hartnell had his hearts broken at least twice, and to see the man who began it all so sad, it nearly broke mine. I also liked the cameo roles from two original companions: actors William Russell and Carole Ann Ford, as the Guard and the Mother, Joyce respectively. Also, the surprise of seeing Matt Smith opposite the First Doctor is a highlight, showcasing that, although no one knew it at the time, the show would reach a golden 50-year landmark. Who'd have thought? These roles added to the spirit, the magnificence on how "Doctor Who" has touched the lives of millions of people.

In all, this docudrama fittingly celebrates the Fiftieth Anniversary of the world's longest-running Sci-Fi series. It's emotional, historical, educational, and inspiring. It made me cry, and I haven't done that since David Tennant left in "The End of Time: Part Two".

The cast and crew definitely should go ahead and recreate classic/missing Doctor Who stories. Why not? They've got the cast, the production values, the spirit.

Congratulations to all involved in the making of this special. It was definitely a highlight of 2013, the year of all time. A fitting way to celebrate the best television show on the planet, or indeed the universe.

11/10

When the success of a show is defined by its main protagonist for 50 years, then there is no better tribute then this drama movie. Based on true events, this movie/documentary focuses on the first actor and producer that defined and shaped the first doctor of the British television show Doctor Who. It shows how the production got started back in the 60's and how the actor William Hartnell (beautifully portrait by David Bradley) opened the minds of children and adults to fantasy and sci-fi.

It is however not entirely a happy story, for all good things must come to an end. Without spoiling it for everyone I would like to say that the end is very heart-breaking but filled with hope for the future.

In short, the movie was beautifully told with a fine pace. The acting was good conveying emotions at the right time. Furthermore, I'm very happy that this movie used almost no CGI and a lot of props which I think is becoming a lost art.

I give this movie an 8.

People I really recommend this movie if you want to see a good drama.

I was privileged to attend the premier at the National Film Theatre. The audience was asked not to give away any spoilers, so I'll respect that wish (not that I wouldn't have done so anyway, of course).

The programme was far more emotional that I had expected and the audience's reaction - laughs, tears and much rapt silence - showed I wasn't alone. Admittedly, the place was packed with Doctor Who fans, so it was hardly going to send any of them to sleep, but they could also have been counted on to be highly critical of any factual errors.

The time frame covers 1963 to 1966 and is as much a biography of William Hartnell, the first Doctor, as the early years of the show he fronted. The Doctor is played by David Bradley (no complaints from me about his crotchety but committed portrayal) and is pretty much throughout seen as ailing in physical health or mental agility, which seems like a true depiction but is rather unfortunate for his legacy as someone often described, in his earlier years, as a fine character actor. Hartnell's granddaughter, who was in attendance at the post-screening Q&A) referred to the fact that prided himself on remembering his lines, so his problems with this as depicted here should be taken into context, although it would have been a tall order for the programme to have tried to focus on any more of the man's life without overrunning its 90 minute time.

Many of the key production staff have key roles, although (as writer Mark Gatiss acknowledged during the Q&A) not all of them were included as to do so would have been made the programme too difficult to follow. Thus there is no David Whitaker, for example, but there is much screen time for the Sydney Newman, the Canadian Head of Drama at the BBC, amusingly played by Brian Cox. His pivotal role in appointing and supporting Verity Lambert, the Doctor Who producer, was one of the unexpected revelations here.

Without giving away any really key moments (and there are plenty of lovely surprises) the show is both reverential of the programme as well as poking fun at the ridiculousness of making a prime time science fiction programme on a BBC budget with no computer technology and live editing. Plenty more such contrasts abound: the daleks are both funny and awesome at the same time; Hartnell's crotchety but committed personality is shown to be a benefit and a hindrance.

If you are even slightly interested in Doctor Who I'm sure you'll love it as much as the audience who gave it a standing ovation. Young children would probably be unlikely to find much of interest in it but older ones with more than a 30 second attention span may well enjoy it. Considering that much of the story of the programme is known to many of us and that there are no deaths or love affairs involved (that's not a spoiler - surely you weren't expecting that?) it is to its credit that it managed to be so entertaining for a film-length duration.