Talk:Journey into Time (unreleased audio story)

Hi, just a minor reply to the statement that there has never been a character in Doctor Who known as "Mike." Captain Mike Yates was a recurring character during the Pertwee-UNIT era (also Rose's boyfriend in C21 Doctor Who is "Mickey.")

Although, it seems unlikely that either character would be featured in an adventure set in 19th Century America. (It would be a fun fan-fiction foray if they were, however.)

Djer ☎ 08:15, January 13, 2014 (UTC)Djer

Why is this connected to "Dr. Who"?

It certainly is clear from the sources that Cushing was to be the lead in this radioplay, but why have we connected it to the incarnation from the Dalek films? Nothing in the script as published in Bignell's magazine suggests this, and it does rather set things up in an alternate direction. And to even cite this page itself "it's decidedly certain that he would not actually have been playing the same version of the character in this series." - so I'm just curious as to what people think. Personally, I think we would be more accurate and better served by creating a section on Cushing's page about this produced but ultimately never released portrayal, and redirecting to that for the incarnation links here. JDPManjoume ☎ 13:50, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Hm. Well, certainly it's not quite the same Doctor as in Dr. Who and the Daleks.

But it really must be highlighted that although you can squeeze them into one continuity, it's also difficult not to notice, if you approach it with an open mind, that the Dr Who in Daleks' Invasion Earth 2150 A.D. seems to be from a completely different universe to the one in the first movie. The Dr. Who and the Daleks Cushing Doctor is a respectable citizen of the 20th century, a law-abiding "pottering professor" type. He has two granddaughters. The Daleks' Invasion Cushing Doctor appears to be a drifter in Time and Space alongside his single granddaughter and his unearthly-seeming niece; he seems to want to avoid detection by 20th century authorities, such that he kidnaps Tom Campbell, Hartnell-in-An-Unearthly-Child-style, at the mere approach of the police. And then, of course, there is the fact that the TARDIS control room looks completely different with no explanation.

Is the Journey into Time rendition of the Cushing Doctor really that much more different, then, from the variance already in evidence within his other appearances? More to the point, is this difference greater than that which exists between the Hartnell Doctor in An Unearthly Child, the Hartnell Doctor in Doctor Who in an Exciting Adventure with the Daleks, and the Hartnell Doctor in Who is Dr Who?? Generally, our policy has been to separate Doctor by apparent incarnation, not by "continuity", except for things specifically ruled to take place in a parallel universe or to fail Rule 4.

Mind you, it's not been proven that Journey Into Time fails Rule 4; it appears to be {{invalid}} simply because it fails T:OFF REL. I could see an argument that it really just features a typical 1960s EU version of the First Doctor, just recast for convenience's sake with an actor who happens to also have portrayed his own Doctor in other production. (There is a precedent for that.) Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 13:59, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

A fair point made there re. variations of a singular incarnation. You're quite right that I should've looked it more strongly from a production side... so I decided to dig out the script, and Bignell's magazine coverage on the topic of the radio series.

An interesting point noted in Bignell's coverage is that the script for the pilot was written under the intention that they would have Boris Karloff in the role of Dr. Who. By the time Hulke's script was completed by late May/early June, this was still the plan. To quote the mag; "Bates also explained that he had held up work on the production for several weeks pending the return of Boris Karloff to England. However, Karloff had apparently been ill and had elected to stay in Hollywood until the autumn." To give context to that point, the radio rights were signed over to Bates/one half of Stanmark Prod. on January 5 1966 for six months. Waiting for Karloff to return was already outwith that period of time, and they were dangerously close to the end of contract.

Bates then frantically tried to get Robert Coote onboard but evidently failed. The BBC seems to have granted an extension to September at this point on the basis that otherwise, their present situation - to quote Bignell's own words: "left them very little time to have copies made to distribute them to their potential clients". After this, Cushing was rapidly contracted in and the pilot was recorded before late July. (The magazine details memos on July 28 1966, where BBC staff indicated having heard the pilot and having been impressed by it.)

Though of course, for obvious reasons, we can't be sure how Cushing played it and how he viewed this version of Dr. Who... it seems to me that having a finalised script in place not only before Cushing's name was in consideration but also with the intention of a key production figure involved to use a different actor, and Hulke as the writer writing with Karloff in mind and not Cushing.

Looking at variations in the script itself from Cushing's Dr. Who as elsewhere, (though of course, I am aware variation alone doesn't dismiss any potential connection - such as you gave good examples of above - I thought it worth noting for consideration of what the intention was incase anyone has some doubts or concerns on the matter.)

• this Dr. Who and Susan come from roughly 4967 [story is in 1967, and he remarks that they're 3000 years out from their own time] which offhand reads closer to the original 'I come from the 49th century' idea that was ditched from AUC.
• they already have their TARDIS built like in DWatD, and it is a one-off build of his own creation but in a closer to AUC move, it is not a police box until they land.
• when it reforms its exterior to a police box, Dr. Who refers to it as something he's seen only seen in old photographs.
• I'd welcome someone else reading it to be sure I'm not dwelling into own subjectivity, but there's certainly nothing of the cuddly side of Cushing's film portrayals in the dialogue. Much closer to Hartnell's abrasiveness in AUC.

I'm certainly open to other people's thoughts, but having now looked over both Bignell's article about the production history and Hulke's script, I'm personally even less convinced of a linkage. JDPManjoume ☎ 13:25, 31 March 2021 (UTC)