The Final Cut
The Final Cut is a bold and insightful podcast exploring the latest in film and television. Hosted by Professor John Cook and filmmaker Charlotte Bjuren, each episode dives into new releases, classic gems, and the stories shaping screen culture today.
CONNECT WITH US:
The Final Cut website: https://the-final-cut-podcast.b12sites.com/index#services
NEW ** Read our Film Blog Beyond the Screen
https://beyondthescreen72.blogspot.com/?m=1
Connect with Charlotte Bjuren
https://charlottebjuren.my.canva.site/
https://uk.linkedin.com/in/charlottebjuren
Connect with Professor John Cook
https://uk.linkedin.com/in/cook-john-a5830342
If you enjoy what I do, consider supporting me on Ko-fi! Every little bit means the world! https://ko-fi.com/finalcut72
The Final Cut
The Dark Side of Doctor Who: Trauma, Media, and Exploitation
Prepare for a journey into the darker corners of the Doctor Who universe as "Lucky Day" delivers one of the angriest and most politically charged episodes in the show's history. When Ruby Sunday agrees to appear on a popular conspiracy theory podcast, she unwittingly becomes the centerpiece of host Conrad Clarke's mission to "expose" UNIT as frauds who manufacture alien threats to justify their existence.
This Ruby-focused installment brilliantly examines the psychological aftermath of traveling with the Doctor. We witness a companion struggling with what can only be described as TARDIS-induced PTSD – constantly on edge, expecting monsters around every corner. The series finally acknowledges a question long overlooked: what happens to ordinary humans after they've fought "goblins and the gods of death"? Can anyone truly readjust to normal life after seeing what lies beyond our reality?
The episode masterfully flips contemporary conspiracy culture on its head. While real-world conspiracy theorists claim governments hide alien evidence, Conrad's mission in the Doctor Who universe is to "prove" aliens don't exist – a delicious irony that serves as pointed commentary on our post-truth era of echo chambers and disinformation. References to subscription news services and social media bubbles provide a thinly-veiled critique of how modern media can weaponize falsehoods.
Kate Lethbridge-Stewart steals scenes with her fierce protection of her father's legacy and UNIT's mission, even going to morally questionable lengths to defend the truth. Meanwhile, the circular time-travel narrative reveals how the Doctor's seemingly random search for "Belinda" in earlier episodes was actually triggered by events we're witnessing now – classic timey-wimey brilliance that rewards attentive viewers.
Subscribe now to join our weekly discussion of this fascinating season as it builds toward what promises to be an explosive finale. Share your theories about the mysterious coordinates and what awaits our heroes in 2025!
SUPPORT The Final Cut Podcast
Visit the Show on YouTube
🔔 Subscribe and turn on notifications so you never miss a video!
https://youtube.com/@thefinalcut722?si=ykKM2b25QandoxVk
☕ Buy me a coffee (support the show)
Or
https://www.buzzsprout.com/2470452/support
Visit the Final Cut Website
https://the-final-cut-podcast.b12sites.com/index#services
Spotlights fade, the curtains rise, new stories waiting behind our eyes, charlotte and John with the final say, breaking down the screens in their own way. This is the Final Cut, where the real reviews ignite.
Speaker 2:Hi and welcome to another episode of the Final Cut To talk about the fourth episode and it's called Lucky Day and the episode starts. We are back now in 2007, and the doctor and Belinda is coming down towards what looks like a New Year's Eve celebration and they encounter little boy Conrad who is eagerly telling his mother what he has seen. However, she doesn't seem to be that impressed. And then we are moving on later where he has taken up podcasting, which is good, and he is eager to expose the myth of the unit and particularly he wants to introduce Ruby Sunday, to expose in that way the method unit. But it was an okay episode, but it was a sort of Dr Light episode and with me today I have professor Cook. What was your experience of the episode?
Speaker 1:Hi, well, hi everybody, and welcome to another one of our Doctor who review podcasts. Yes, well, I enjoyed the episode, but I would say it's one of the darkest and angriest episodes of Doctor who ever. And it is an episode, as you've said, charlotte, that is Doctor Light and that you really have to concentrate on in terms of the political messages that it's trying to make. So it's an interesting episode and it is really part of a run of episodes that are quite outstanding, that are that are designed, I think, to be memorable. Now, remember that Doctor who, the new iteration of it, as co-produced by Disney Plus, only has eight episodes per season.
Speaker 1:So I think what we're starting to see is the idea that each episode must be kind of event television, that it must be very memorable, it must hit home and hit hard in order for people to remember it. Of course, one of the countervailing problems that Doctor who faces is perhaps not enough people are tuning in to these episodes. This current episode got overnight ratings of 1.5 million, which is actually a new low for for Doctor who. Now that will be boosted by streaming ratings that will be announced in a few weeks time, but generally the the viewership is not really terribly high, so the event television is kind of losing its momentum, but clearly, in intention wise, that's what what they're trying to do is to make every episode memorable and impactful and, and it certainly was memorable, and, and I think that the first episode reminded me of a bit about this previous episode, 77 yard.
Speaker 2:However, it does talk a lot about conspiracy culture. So what, what do you think they were trying to say here about conspiracy culture? And and can you see the link to the 77 yard that I was kind of spotting.
Speaker 1:Yes, absolutely. Um, there's two, two related points there. What we're beginning to see with the new RTD2 second run of Russell T Davis as showrunner with this Disney Plus deal, is there's a little bit of a formula creeping in, because the fourth episode of the second season mirrors in many ways the fourth episode of the first season. It's a Ruby Sunday focused episode. It has a strong political subtext to it as well. So in the 73 Yards episode from season one you had this idea that the companion is separated from the doctor and then has to live out her life. Companion is separated from the doctor and then has to live out her life and um, and in so doing essentially is, is, views and witnesses the rise of fascism with a, a future fascist prime minister. Here we've got the idea of conspiracy culture and conspiracy theory culture. Uh, same point in the season as previously a ruby focused episode that that makes points about political conspiracy and in fact at one point um it talks about, even uses the word fascism, but in this case it's actually about um.
Speaker 1:It's a lovely irony actually. Is that the real conspiracy theories think that the government's hiding aliens In the Doctor who episode? In this sort of flipped alternative fictional world. It's a conspiracy theory, that the government is not hiding aliens, that in fact it's all just false. So lovely. I mean lots of contemporary resonances about the echo chamber of social media and the disinformation sphere, even a mention of subscription to Albion News, which sounds as if it's a very nationalistic news channel, perhaps echoing the right of center news channels we have in the UK and also of in america with the likes of fox. So it's it's very much hitting contemporary buttons, but doing it in that alternative world of of the doctor who, who knew this, as they like to call it these days yeah, moving on a bit.
Speaker 2:Uh, so you talked a bit about this, what the people experience after they encounter the doctor. So it's this idea of like what kind of memories, what kind of trauma sometimes I guess they take these antidotes so they don't remember anything. Of course, as a psychologist I'm interested in this kind of you know that that. What kind of effect does have have met, having met, being in the tardies, have on one's son's life? How did you find that in the episode?
Speaker 1:Yes, well, again, there is a history of that in Doctor who, looking at what happened to the companions after they left the Doctor, going right back actually to the days of the fourth Doctor with Sarah Jane Smith, who had a little spin-off show. It wasn't terribly successful, but in 1981, she had a little spin-off show examining her adventures post the Doctor and in fact she returned in the David Tennant era of the rebooted Doctor who in 2006 with a sort of reunion episode. So we've had that kind of before.
Speaker 1:um, but what has not maybe been explored because you know, doctor, who tends to be a fairly light fiction, uh, historically at least, they they've not really explored this idea of ptsd that actually being with a doctor is extremely bad for your mental health because, as mentioned in this current episode, if you've experienced sort of monsters at every turn goblins attacking you and fighting the gods of death then you're inevitably going to be a bit jumpy, and so in that sense it's in a way giving a kind of psychological realism to a show that's not really been versed in psychological realism much in the past.
Speaker 1:So in that sense it's welcome and it does show, you know, albeit within the constraints of a generic 45-minute episode, it does show that Ruby Sunday has been marked, to a certain extent damaged, by her journeys with the Doctor, although again typically for Doctor who what appears to be just her having unnecessary jump scares. In the pub episode where a monster appears, it actually turns out to be the case that there is a monster outside, albeit in another twist, it turns out that that monster has actually been faked by conspiracy theorists.
Speaker 2:Yeah, I mean I always thought maybe I don't really want to go down there, but thinking of him, maybe what kind of sort of pastoral care can the doctor afford his companion? Also, that of him as a bit of I'm not saying a narcissist, but he's kind of a bit sort of, he can be a bit jumpy in his I think particularly David Tennant in his characterization of the doctor, is that he's he's not as this emotionally intelligent in a sense.
Speaker 1:Sometimes I feel to yes, well, that's picked up with Shitii Gatwa, who also has that kind of jumpy tendency and in that sense, you know, the younger iterations of the Doctor, the younger incarnations, tend to be quite childlike in some ways, and I think we've mentioned that before. But the problem with that is it does tend to make it for a very jittery atmosphere. So it was a nice way in this particular episode of exploring how that jitteriness would communicate itself eventually onto the companion who might struggle to to reintegrate into real life, quote unquote, if we can call it that. So, um, the episode was was a nice one in that respect, albeit it can only gesture at these things and in some ways it took a lot of psychological shortcuts because you know you've only got 45 minutes, the plot has to advance on. But it was a nice way of showing that, how a companion has to cope with life after the doctor.
Speaker 2:Yeah, yeah, and I mean in a long time. You can also think about maybe a very intensive I don't know, maybe after a very intensive relationship or something like that, the same kind of trauma or psd behavior. Maybe that is maybe reading too much into the script. Another thing I was thinking of what, what do you, what commentary do think like they offer on the influence of podcasting and media and that sort of thing? I mean particularly in terms of shaping the truth. I mean, having done podcasting for a while, of course there's something I'm kind of interested in in terms of that you watch maybe, what you sort of confirm your views. How do you find that?
Speaker 1:Yeah, the filter bubble of social media and confirmation bias and all that sort of thing. Yeah, it's explicitly mentioned and referenced in the episode itself the idea of the disinformation echo chamber of social media and contemporary fragmented media where essentially anyone can set themselves up online to have a presence. We're kind of doing ourselves actually in a meta way, albeit hopefully we're not sort of promulgating conspiracy theories. So the episode that's very much what the focus of the episode is, and it is that idea which I think is done rather well in the episode is that in so doing you can perpetrate the exact opposite of the truth and you can get hundreds, if not thousands, of people to subscribe to that. Almost at the flip of a coin people will believe the exact opposite of what actually is the case. So in the premise of the show, in that episode, it's the idea that UNIT is in fact just sucking up taxpayer pounds UK pounds rather than taxpayer dollars and is actually just putting out fake aliens to extort the populace.
Speaker 1:Now it's interesting if we think about when this episode was written. It's clear if you watch some of the background material that the Doctor who produces, not least the Doctor who Unleashed behind the scenes show that's shown, certainly in the UK, every week that a new episode is transmitted. It's clear that this episode could not have been written any later than late 2023, 2023, because it was shot in November 2023. So what that means is that this was actually written and conceived before Donald Trump came to office in the United States. But you can see that in the idea of online content being harmful, that already those discourses circulating, at least since the first term of Donald Trump and in Britain as well, with concerns about figures such as Tommy Robinson and Andrew.
Speaker 2:Brexit.
Speaker 1:Yeah, and I actually think, you know, although it's disguised, I think the character of Conrad Clarke is not dissimilar to I think it's a dig at Nigel Farage, actually and the idea that you know someone can upend the whole establishment and the whole system.
Speaker 2:And to clarify that Nigel Farage, for a viewer, is a leader of an ultra-right-wing party in the UK.
Speaker 1:The Reform Party, which has actually done very well recently in UK local council elections. But it's that idea that you know one angry man, if you like, can upend the whole status quo and, as Kate Lethbridge-Stewart, head of units, says, you know, upend everything that she and her father indeed worked for all their lives. So you can see that as a sort of resonance with Brexit, the idea that suddenly, you know, a groundswell of opinion allows a whole settled constitutional order to be upended. Interestingly, does this mean that Doctor who in this particular episode is more on the side of the establishment than the outsider? Traditionally, doctor who's always been a show about outsiders. The Doctor is the ultimate outsider and the Doctor's always had a problematic relationship with UNIT, which is in fact in the fiction of the United.
Speaker 1:Nations Task Force funded by the UN, but here the Doctor isn't there, and so in that sense the show kind of comes out in favour of the establishment in this particular episode.
Speaker 2:So when we move on to Conrad Clark, how did you, what did you make of Conrad Clark? Is he a villain or a victim? When he starts, when he's young, he appears more like a victim, and I almost thought that he almost would be like a companion if he was going to go on a trip with the Doctor and Belinda. But that is not what's happening, and instead he's sort of as Gwendolyn. He's turning into more and more a villain. How did you find his character?
Speaker 1:Well, his character is actually very lightly sketched in the episode. Again, it's only 45 minutes long. We don't have the backstory as to why he's become as evil as he's become. Um, the only sort of real psychological motivation that is put up is that that he failed an interview with unit and uh, eight years earlier and is therefore working out his frustrations and grudges. So again, you could maybe relate that to certain populist politicians who maybe couldn't be part of the mainstream and who therefore try and take out their revenge.
Speaker 1:Or employees, or employees, yeah, now to what extent he's a victim? I mean, I suppose you could read the episode as saying well, actually, a bit like Ruby herself, they're all victims of the doctor. It's as soon as they encounter the doctor that their lives are transformed, often for ill. But on the other hand, this character is shown to be a little bit of a villain right at the very start because in the cold opening for the episode, the little boy is already shown as being a liar. So when he goes to his mother in the New Year celebrations in 2007 and says Mum, mum, I've just seen somebody called the Doctor and Belinda, the mum gives him a slap and says Stop being a liar, so in that sense he's seen as a wrong-on all the way through and okay.
Speaker 2:So he grew up then and becomes the sort of podcaster trying to investigate the truth, but in the end of the episode the doctor chooses to confront him. Why do you think that was? What part did that have in the episode? Why do you think he did that? Why did he confront him?
Speaker 1:Yeah, I mean, for me perhaps the episode became a little bit too, attacking one figure again and again and again. In that sense that's why I said earlier at the start, you know it's quite an angry episode because that anger, the characters articulate their anger to this kind of conspiracy theorist and then, lo and behold, the Doctor reinforces it when he materialises, his tardis around Conrad and gives him a good talking to. So within the show it's the idea that the Doctor is angry because his friend has been betrayed, ruby has been betrayed by Conrad. So that's the motivation for it. But it starts to look a little bit like reverse bullying.
Speaker 1:You know, you had the scenario with Kate Lethbridge-Stewart allowing a monster to attack this man simply because she hates him so much, and it's mentioned in the script. Well, maybe you went a bit too far. And then you have the doctor sort of reinforcing it and full of contempt. So in that sense it almost becomes like a reverse form of bullying. But I guess the show wants to make its points very bluntly and very explicitly and the point is that, you know, forget the monsters of the week. The real darkness and the real villainy that has to be confronted is in our fellow human beings. So that's definitely a strand of it. Yeah, because then, moving on to Aruba's reaction to Connor's manipulation human beings, so that's definitely a strand of it.
Speaker 2:Yeah, because then we went on to this Rube's reaction to Connor's manipulation and that she is being exploited in a way, and I feel as if many episodes are about women being exploited or that type of. They seem to be sort of running a theme, but I don't know if she's. Do you think it's like a learning for her or is it like you know, it's just that she's so naive and maybe she hasn't been in so many relationships so she's so taken in by him, or well, how did you find that?
Speaker 1:Well, within the episode, she's clearly damaged goods because she's had this life with the Doctor and therefore she's quite vulnerable and therefore is able to be taken in by this character, conrad, who of course also takes in us, the audience. I don't think, unless you had read spoilers, I don't think any of us spotted that this was the way things were going to turn. Half the way through I actually thought, on first viewing the episode, that, well, conrad's actually going to be an alien or something and a monster. But it wasn't. The real monster was actually rooted in very human concerns around disinformation.
Speaker 1:So in that sense, ruby is groomed, if you like, and the audience, by extension, is groomed by this figure. You're right to say I mean it is picking up a strand that this is very much Doctor who for the so-called quote-unquote woke era, and so the only real human villains, it seems, that are permissible nowadays are white males.
Speaker 2:Yeah, I was a bit surprised over that because it's coming in and a lot of it is the same. I mean, we have come back on this as if to be a lot about male aggression, male. But then I thought maybe in the end there, when uh condor get bullying and that turns, the woman was turned into the bullying, turns into the bull, the bully victims turn into the bullying in the sense that maybe they're trying to say that actually, uh, it's, it's a white male.
Speaker 1:It's going to be like it becomes the reverse, but I don't know, um, yes, no, no I, I wouldn't say I think that's our kind of counter reading against it, but no, I think it's the idea that, um, uh, that that you know, if we think about it in representational terms, the woman hit back against the white male, that's Kate, lethbridge, stewart and Ruby herself, and then the black character, obviously Shudy Gat were playing. The doctor responds to the white male. So it's not a good time to be a white male in Doctor.
Speaker 2:Who? Yeah, but that's what I good time to be a white male in Doctor who. Yeah, that's what I wondered if it was a specific thread that you wanted there.
Speaker 1:I don't know. It's to do with the fact that this is very much you know Russell T Davis as second era of showrunner. Very much you know in sympathy with woke movements.
Speaker 2:This is what's causing the backlash a little bit among certain male fans. I agree with that in the sense that a lot of women are being manipulated, and I think there are new dramas about fake etc. Talking about female male manipulation, I was just surprised that all of them seemed to go on a similar thread, but maybe I was running into more than was intended. But I want to come back, though, to the real monster, which is supposed to be the shriek. What was your view of the shriek?
Speaker 1:Yeah well, you know, as I said, the real monster is the human beings. Yeah well, you know, as I said, the real monster is the human beings. And you know particularly the demonology of traditional white male culture. So Conrad Clark very much echoes the incel character in episode one, who also slightly groomed the Belinda character when she was. She was younger and then, uh, you know, we see his true colors in that episode. So, um. So the shriek in that sense is is simply um, the you know, the monster of the week. Um, it was done quite well. Um, what was quite interesting was the way in which, um, the special effects team then had to do a fake shriek yeah, I like that.
Speaker 1:Yeah, if you actually watch the behind-the-scenes making of the programme, you can see that they took a bit of care on that. They made the actual shriek as convincing as they could and then they sort of then asked an artist to remember what that was and then to reconstruct a rubber suit from memory. So in that respect it was designed to be what humans might try to do to fake a real monster, and that worked quite effectively. So the shriek is just, you know, just, your monster of the week. There is perhaps an element of repetition, maybe creeping in, of kind of unseen monsters that creep up behind your back, Because of course we had that last week with the well.
Speaker 2:Weird because there's different writers. I mean, it's not the same writer, are they?
Speaker 1:Different writers, same showrunner, however Russell T Davis. Yes, we should mention that this isn't a Russell T Davis script. In this week's episode it's written by Pete McTighe. But Pete McTighe works very closely with Russell T Davis. He's done a lot of work for Doctor who DVDs and indeed Tales from the TARDIS, which was a 60th anniversary series of mini-sodes in bringing back old companions, and in fact he's co-writing with Russell T Davis Beneath the Land and the Sea, which is a Doctor who spin-off which is going to be aired next year.
Speaker 2:Can we just move on then to talk about Kate? How did you find her leadership and what was her role in the whole story? In some ways she's the leader, obviously, of the unit, but how did you find her leadership and what was her role in the whole story? In some ways she's the leader, obviously, of the unit, but how did you think her narrative, her episode of ARC, whatever, went through?
Speaker 1:Well, if this were the real world, I suspect she would be sacked by now because she allowed a monster loose in unit headquarters to attack a civilian, albeit an armed civilian and quite a nasty piece of work.
Speaker 1:So in real life she would be sacked. But in the fictional universe of Doctor who, this was Kate showing her dark side, her mean side albeit there's a strong moral justification. And in some ways as well, the Doctor shows his darker, mean side at the very end when he gives the Conrad Clark character a good talking to in the TARDIS. But in terms of Kate, this was her coming to the fore and showing extremely strong, determined leadership. The fact is that she goes against the advice of her colleagues and allows the monster to be let loose in order to teach this Conrad Clark figure a lesson. It could be construed as a form of reverse bullying, of reverse torture, but I think within the fiction you're supposed to sympathise with Cade, largely because Conrad is such a nasty piece of work and also because he attacks her father, the eminent, famous brigadier, brigadier Lethbridge Stewart, who was a key icon in Doctor who history in the classic era.
Speaker 2:How did you think the way they talk is talking flashbacks. How did you find that? Did it enhance the story? Was that a good technique? I mean, I'm quite a big fan of the flashbacks. I like when they go back in time. But how did you find that?
Speaker 1:Well, of course, doctor who is the ultimate, you know, to use the euphemism timey wimey show.
Speaker 1:In this case, of course, you know, the series arc is that Belinda and the doctor are trying to get back to may, the 24th 2025, and they can't.
Speaker 1:So they use this thing called a vindicator I think it's called where they try and um, coordinate their, you know, get their coordinates, and in this case they go back to 2007, to new year's eve, 2007, and that's where they encounter a young Conrad Clark. So, in effect, the whole episode is actually set before our present day. So that's why, at the very end, when the Doctor confronts Conrad and Conrad mentions the name of Belinda the Doctor hasn't heard of Belinda yet because he hasn't met her yet. So the whole thing is set in the past, not just in 2007, but in a more recent past, and so in many ways it's Conrad who then provides the name that the doctor then goes in search of. When we meet him in episode one, he's looking for Belinda Chandra within the hospital. So the whole thing ties it all up, you know, in that timey-wimey way, when we meet him in episode one, he's looking for Belinda Chandra within the hospital. So the whole thing ties it all up, you know in that timey-wimey way.
Speaker 2:Yeah, and my final question is a bit more philosophical though how much does this likely be seen as a critique of parasocial relationship like that formed by fans? Because when I saw it initially I thought, oh, it's a podcast. It's a podcast, you know. Is it like about the relationship like it's almost like a critique of this fan follower episode relationship? How did you find that?
Speaker 1:Well, of course it may start with a podcast.
Speaker 2:Yeah.
Speaker 1:And podcasts are often a way, you know, we are just using our podcast to, you know, chat about the media, film and TV, perfectly innocent. But others do use podcasts to spread disinformation and you know, extremist politics. So, um, of course, the premise is that initially, um ruby accepts to go on this podcast because it's a podcast about, you know, aliens and apparently, you know, um conrad is interested in aliens. But of course, as it transpires, the whole thing flips and and in fact it it's just a front for him to pursue his political campaign, interestingly called Think Tank. So, you know, it's the idea of politics as ideology, you know, think Tank, and weaponizing ideology, as you know, a tank. So in that sense it's the okay, the. There is some nudging, I think, to the world of Doctor who fandom, but I don't think it's about fandom.
Speaker 1:So much in this episode.
Speaker 2:I was just wondering if it was like they didn't like fans podcast or fans views, whatever.
Speaker 1:But I might, yeah, as you say the only thing is that you could see it as maybe the revenge against those who put out podcasts saying that Doctor who's you know, rip Doctor who, which was actually.
Speaker 2:That's what I thought. Maybe it was like like it kind of peaked with or doing their own episode or show or something. I don't know. Maybe I'm, as I say, more.
Speaker 1:I think it's more about that is one end of the spectrum, but it's more about the extremist politics and that's what the show's about this week.
Speaker 2:Okay. My final question, then, is does this view, does this episode strengthen or dilute the mythology of the Doctor as mythic or messianic figures? Because I think that's interesting, whether he is a good or is a bad, I mean it's like, is he, how does? What kind of impact does this have on the myth of the Doctor?
Speaker 1:Well, within the mythology of Doctor who, he's a very good character. He's a pure good character. But he's a good character that can sometimes have unintended consequences and that his very presence in landing and playing around with people's perceptions of time and reality and the norms of their environment affect them. And we've had that touched on in the past and in in previous episodes. And and sometimes villains challenge the doctor by um, taunting him in this, saying you know how much he's, he's damaged um, those who, who, who've come into contact with him. There's a nice sequence within the giggle, uh, one of the david tennant 60th anniversary specials, where the character of the toy maker simply goes back into the Doctor's recent past with companions and discovers that half of them are dead as a result of having met the Doctor. So he's a good character and you know so.
Speaker 1:This isn't to try to do a counter reading that the Doctor is some sort of dark personage. I don't think that's. The production team are going that far, but they are exploring the wider mythos of Doctor who with this episode. So instead of just, you know, monster of the Week, doctor and the Companion trying to get themselves out of trouble, we look at the wider Doctor who family, if we like, and we look at Unit and we look at past companions Doctor who family, if we like, and we look at UNIT and we look at past companions and how past companions interact with UNIT. And this again is kind of setting us up for the spin-off series, the War Between the Land and the Sea that's coming next year, which is entirely focused on UNIT and how they fight an alien threat from the sea.
Speaker 2:Yeah, I thought it was a good episode, but do you have anything else you want to add to our listeners?
Speaker 1:Nothing except to say that I think this is a very good, strong run of Doctor who. Each episode with maybe the exception of the robot revolution which was kind of light and airy each episode I think has been very strong. Now the question is, of course, will this continue in subsequent weeks? We've had four more episodes left within this season. Next week's one is apparently, if we believe the trailers, set in Africa, in Lagos, although there seems to be an outer space element to it as well. So one is certainly seeing a buildup of tension and actually I would say, quality from week to week. The question is whether these next lot of episodes of Doctor who will be able to sustain that or not, as the case may be. But we'll be back talking about that, I'm sure, sure.
Speaker 2:Well, thank you very much for following us here and remember also, you can always, if you are on a podcast, you could text us or you can obviously comment on if you follow us on YouTube, and we will obviously be back next week. But thanks again and see you next time.
