Sunday, March 2, 2008

LUST IN SPACE

I sat down last night and watched a VHS tape about the issue of sexism in the original Doctor Who series. The title appropriately enough is Lust in Space.

The mockumentary was rather boring in its execution. What should have been a revealing treatment on the very real issue of 'cute young things' accompanying the good Doctor on his voyages through time and space, ended up being an excuse to have a goofy framework structure.

The prosecution in an extraterrestrial space station decide that a courtroom inquiry is needed to establish whether the Earth-based television program Doctor Who was exploitative of women. I guess these aliens are not too familiar with our culture. Seems odd to me they are worrying about a series which was made for "the Box".

Within this setup are good interviews -- via telescreen -- with various people who worked behind-the-scenes on Who in addition to several of the actresses who played the Doctor's companions. This was the strongest element of the doc; you almost wish the producers had realized, after editing, that the show would be best served by jettisoning the lame framework story. Two actresses, Sophie Aldred (Ace), and Katy Manning (Jo Grant), are beamed into the station to interact with the space court, but this comes across as an excuse to connect the two incohesive story lines.

There are a few good jokes made during Lust in Space's 55 minutes, but they hardly make the goings on any less tough for the viewer.

I am not suggesting for a moment that the doc should have had Alistair Cooke as host, but a more dry approach would have been nice.

This screening last night reminded me of the 1973 Disney flick, Robin Hood. This animated delight has animals playing human characters. Now, I love animals, but I don't like them playing people in the movies for some odd reason. It's silly.

Animals should play animals.

Besides... everyone knows no cat can talk dat good.

1 comment:

Greg Woods said...

ummmm, well I've got 33 animals in this house right now that would disagree with that statement.