My video on the issue of the BBC's support of Transphobia: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-aN4uc0HZrWE.html My video on the BBC's response to complaints of its reporting: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-skh81N5lcYY.html My short on why I'll continue to put up the note at the front of these: ru-vid.comHpwwzjzFXiE Shaun's 1st video, which includes some additional confirmed information: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-b4buJMMiwcg.html Shaun’s 2nd video, which follows how the BBC is trying to dodge accountability for all of this: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-qfjTG6SVjmQ.html Shaun’s 3rd video, following him escalating his complaints: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-fRn1UZ4fhdE.html Shaun's 4th video, covering the BBC's response: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-3F7GW7Ro4OQ.html Laura Kate Dale's protest speech outside the BBC offices: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-hBjGnWkwAjI.html
I'm actually kind of sad the absorbaloff was so bad because Elton and the other members of LINDA were so sweet and interesting over the course of that one episode they deserved to be more than a footnote in a joke about a bad villain
I mean, he was designed by a literal child for a blue peter competition. Id argue that the actor who played elton was awful, his acting was so stiff and one note it was distracting...
@@abigailxmarynah the dude who plays Elton is fabulous Actor. Watch Mad dogs. If you’re gonna blame anything blame the direction. I’ll never understand the hate for this episode though
Honestly I still don’t get the amount of hatred this episode gets. I actually quite like this ep because of the group and the mystery surrounding the doctor it creates. Yea the absorbalof does dampen the episode a bit but to call it one of the worst… bit harsh
I think Reapers would make more sense as 'vultures' opportunistically feeding off of paradoxes. It'd explain why they don't always show up while allowing them to work in largely the same way.
That's essentially established within the episode itself, which everyone seems to forget. "There's been an accident in time. A wound in time. They're like bacteria, taking advantage." They're not going to automatically appear at every paradox - they seek them out to feed off of the damage it's causing.
Apparently they were originally designed to look like the Grim Reaper (hence the name) with the idea being whenever someone has claimed to have seen Death visiting someone before they die it was really a Reaper come to close the paradox caused by a time traveller trying to prevent that person from dying.
The funny thing on the Wire is that it isn't even the first one off electronic villain that repeatedly says "Hungry!" in Doctor Who. Paradise Towers did it first...
Honestly pretty surprised not to see the Dregs from "Orphan 55" on here. I know you've mentioned in a few instances that they were a monster that did *not* benefit from being fully shown on camera in broad daylight, and I agree. They would've worked much better if they had been left shown in fleeting, incomplete glances, and just left for viewers' imaginations to fill in the rest.
I'd also say, if you took the Dregs out of that episode, the episode barely improves... in most of these, the tweak (or removal) of the listed villain is the fix the story needs (or would at least benefit from)
The Dregs are the only DW villain that I find outright offensive. Someone in that writers’ room should have taken a moment to ask “Are we really going to monsterize climate refugees?”
@@ianmcintire6696 There is a lot to be said for the heavy-handed nothing-burger messages of this era (and how it often leads to bad messaging).... and the Dregs may well personify one of the era's biggest problems
The Wire to be you can basically split in half. In the first half of the episode I think she can be quite intimidating, when she’s quieter. Not bone chillingly terrifying, but she has that calm polite posh sneer to her. All of that gets flushed down the bog once she starts screaming. It is *not scary*
Yeah, I got to The Idiot's Lantern today after starting a pre 60th binge and I forgot that the Wire was actually somewhere between fairly decent to good up until Gatiss or someone else thought she should should start spamming "FEED ME!!!" for the entirety of the 3rd Act... also while rewatching it I kept on being reminded of one of Jay Exci's and Stubagful's writing streams where they (in Jay's own words) "brought back the f***ing Wire!"
I agree. Initially The Wire was a great villain but they screwed up it later. I feel sorry for Maureen Lipman as they wasted her talent in the latter part of the episode.
It's like halfway through the writing, someone watched the original Little Shop of Horrors. Keeping up the calm demeanor would have added a wonderful creep factor.
The fact that I don't remember several of these characters (lion guy, guy you forgot to talk about initially, crispy zombies) even after you talked about them just makes your point even more for me.
I remember liking the idea of Dr Lazarus when I was younger. I think I was about 12 at the time and I've never been the most critical of CGI, so I think the bits before he transformed stuck in my head. I feel like my choice of weakest would be the Pyrovores, but I think that's just another case of 'the monster isn't as interesting as the other elements that surround it' and the Roman theming strained my disbelief at times.
Repost. I love The Wire, mainly because of the actress: Maureen Lipman. Who was having so much fun while playing the character, along with the concept of basing a character on a real life good person: Annette Mills (a children’s presenter back in the 40s and 50s) and turning her into something evil.
Maybe it's just me but I found the Wire creepy when it was doing the "polite nursery school teacher" thing, the repeaty shouty in the last part of the episode spoilt it for me.
The sure sign of a bad one off villain is when you watch the episode and are constantly thinking of an established monster that you'd rather see. There's a bunch of stories that aren't great, but I would have cut some slack if the bad guys had been the Sontarions or the Quarks. Random, additional thoughts: I like The Wire. I keep hoping some companion will find that VHS tape in the Tardis and accidentally set her free. The lion is awful, but they had to have a monster, otherwise people would realize that Lady Me is the monster and since Moffatt loved her, we needed a distraction. Shame it was a crap distraction.
I love whenever you rant on The Idiot's Lantern because growing up it was one of my favourite episodes! Great how people can have such different opinions.
The reason why I think the Reapers only appear on Father's Day and never again is due to the Doctor and Rose being there twice, which the Doctor explains as being dangerous.
@@ThetaSigma-vu1sk Which is they appeared. Rose seeing her later self is what caused them to turn up as it broke what had previously (and very recently) established.
Yes. There's two big paradoxes happening at the same time. the Doctor and Rose seeing future Rose, and Rose saving her father. I imagine each of these on their own would damage that point in time but it would be able to heal itself or only leave a scar like with all the other paradoxes in the show. Whereas both at the same time completely open the wound beyond repair.
So fun fact: up until the mid-Chibnall era, there was apparently some kind of editorial mandate on Doctor Who that every episode HAD to include a monster in some capacity. I get the distinct feeling that a few of these monsters are the result of this mandate meaning we had to crowbar something in.
Idea for a video: Top Companion family members! Jackie (and maybe Pete), Martha's parents and siblings, Sylvie and Wilf, Brian (skipping Amy's unknown family), maybe Clara's parents (though we barely see them, so maybe not), Bill's mom (a presence through her absence), Grace, and Dan's parents. I have definite favorites (*cough* Wilf *cough*), but it would be interesting to see your takes.
I'd like to see the Wire and Absorbaloff species reappear, at least to see how other individuals act. Can't fairly judge them based on a single showing. The Wire in particular has potential since we know so little about it/them. The idea of Reapers being a sort of "white blood cell" for time wounds was interesting in concept, but let down in execution. They should have been some kind of non-sentient force, making them actual monsters really detracted from them. And they absolutely should have appeared or been referenced to more. Torchwood would have been a good opportunity, what with the Cardiff Rift.
I think you can judge a monster off of one appearance, The Weeping Angels for example were an instant hit with their one appearance with Tennant. They didn't need multiple appearances to become interesting. Same with The Daleks, brilliant from their first appearance in both classic and modern who. The Wire is just awful😂
@@dustinakadustin We don't know anything about the Wire. They could've been good outside of the writing of that episode. Just like the Angels aren't always good in subsequent appearances. It's about the writing, and the Idiot's Lantern didn't have good writing.
I think the burnt reflections should have been there from maybe the end of the first act, and have the doctor figure it out, I mean. These 5 people are the only LIVING things in the Tardis, so it was REALLY obvious what these creatures are. Just suggest that with the tardis' systems you can't age or DIE in the tardis so these creatures are simply forced to live on long since their bodies burnt and formed into cancer and their minds turned to dust reforming and dying an endless, and the paradox of one touching it's former self would be cataclysmic.
Calling the Reapers "Langoliers: is spot on. It was the first thing I thought of. The Absorbo-whatever, always looked like a Fat Bastard knockoff from Austin Powers. "Get in my belly!" The simple way to deal with presenting a "perfect killing machine" is POV with a scroll text. Now we know a robot isn't going to need text, but at least it is less annoying.
According to the end credits, the guys from Journey to the Centre of the Tardis are called time zombies, which got a laugh out of me. Pretty terrible name.
Since ‘flux’ is technically one story, I’m surprised the ravagers didn’t make the list. But then again, that might’ve kicked off the Absorbaloff, and that kind of needs to be on the list.
"The Lazarus Effect" would have been 10x better if he'd just become an energy vampire that glowed (like he was regenerating, as a fun hint to what he is actually working on for Saxon) when he siphoned his victims. THAT'S a monster, why did they go so big?
One thing you always have to remember about the Absorbaloff is that it was designed by a kid, who has a yt channel now: @ChannelPup He made a retrospective about the monster a couple of years ago
I still think that's kind of the crew's fault for letting a monster literally designed by a child to be in a fully produced episode of Doctor Who tho lol. Maybe that idea would work better as extended media
@@WiloPolis03 They actually had previously done a "design a Doctor Who monster" competition for kids back during the Second Doctor's era. 3 different designs were chosen as the winners, the monsters would subsequently be built by the show's prop department, and the kids who won got to be photographed with them. The key difference is that they didn't put the monsters in the damn show.
@@someguy3752 Lmao exactly, like I said this would be cool if it was restricted to a comic or short story or something, but putting it in the show is a... questionable decision
@@WiloPolis03 Sometimes having kids design things for the show can be cool and fun. The devices the Paternoster Gang use in Deep Breath (Strax's tool when examining Clara, Vastra's carriage lock hat pin and Jenny's scanner gauntlet) were all designed by competition winners too
I feel like the Slitheen deserve an honorable mention. While they appeared multiple times, the reasons that the writers decided to include them in multiple stories stumps me.
Honestly, the actual reason the Slitheen turned up twice is because they'd almost completely run out of budget by the end of season 1 (RTD had never budgeted for Sci-Fi before and blew way more of the budget than intended on The End of the World) and re-using a monster suit they already had and setting the episode on present day Earth was the only way they were actually going to get the episode finished.
Reapers are only bad *because* they're a one off. But they don't have to be used for every paradox. The doctor described them as like bacteria taking advantage. So i think of it as when you get cut... you don't always get infected.
It’s amazing how many of these I had straight up forgotten about. Or maybe I didn’t “forget”, per se, but SELECTIVELY REMEMBERED episodes of the show that were better.
The Caretaker, I feel, mostly existed to introduce the Doctor to Danny Pink...and to throw him off by a guy who dressed himself up like the 11th Doctor. And then they decided to have the Doctor and Danny Pink butt heads. I didn't think about it but this killing machine that made it to number 1 is almost like the Daleks' special cousin.
Okay, right off the bat, I want to say (before I forget) that I love the new intro for the 60th Anniversary 💎🌌♥♥. I agree with you about Leandro (Leondro?), but (except for the fact that the _Doctor Who_ writers *tried* to make her a recurring villain, so that she doesn't fit the criteria you set here), I'd say "Me" is an even weaker adversary. Ashildr's character arc is implied clearly enough in the last few moments of "The Girl Who Died," as her facial expression darkens as the world changes around her. In that one closing scene, we can *see* the Doctor's intervention had turned from hope to bitterness. "The Woman Who Lived" didn't need to be told at all. Especially since they tried to make her into some sort of living "mystery box" threat through the rest of the series that ends up not paying off, at all.
For me the worst one off monster was the weird chicken thing from Vincent and the Doctor. They should've at least kept it invisible so there was more of a mystery if it was real or if it was only in Vincent's mind
Not seeing is generally better with monsters and in this case I definitely think it would have been better. There are other ways of "seeing" or rather revealing the invisible if needed. Throw flour on it or something to give us a basic shape but nothing more. The detailed views cut the tension/threat.
I thought the Reapers was actually a great idea. This physical threat that materializes when time is fractured. It opens up a lot of questions about the unknowns and the physics of the universe, which is cool.
my head canon about the reapers is that they’re more like bacteria that are getting in through a wound in time as opposed to beings that sterilise it which would explain why they don’t appear every time
Lazarus I remember watching and being confused what is going on. The 10th villian though I actually really liked and thought worked well with the episode, it was such an emotional story that having a comedic villian balanced it out IMO. I don't remember the villian much but what I remember is the sense of community you could feel of these characters had developed out of a common interest.
I don’t like the Idiot’s Lantern much but Maureen Lipman in this role is so iconic and camp and scary. I also don’t agree that the absorbaloff should make the list as it’s designed to be the epitome of dr who monster and the fact it’s shit is part of the metafiction. Whilst there is no right way to enjoy the show if you are looking for serious or realistic or non-camp, Doctor Who probably isn’t the show for you. I’d say being forgettable is the worst crime a Doctor Who monster can commit.
How do you feel about Diana Rigg's Mrs Gillyflower from Crimson Horror? I can see why people should dismiss her as a one dimensional cackling pantomime villain but after so many amorphous misunderstood monsters in s7 that's why I loved her.
I can't disagree with your list. I thought I would when you started talking about the Wire, because I remember the villain being good, but I'd forgotten just how annoying she got at the end. I think I edited that part out of my brain because I enjoyed the actress' performance so much, and I was excited to recognize her, even if it was "That's Rita's roommate from Educating Rita and I loved that movie!". I know she's done so much more, but there was a time I could recite most of that film from memory, I'd watched it so much. It's one of my favorites. But with the wasted potential in the back half of the Idiot's Lantern, I have to agree with putting her at #2. Thank you for sharing, Vera!
The skovox blitzer never really bothered me because it’s not really the focus of that episode. Not that it being crap is excusable, its just less offensive to me.
"Rosa", "The Witchfinders", and "Demons of the Punjab" all have the same problem stopping them being great. They didn't need the scifi stuff, they should've been pure historicals.
Another monster I think that could fall into the category of not necessarily being needed for the story was the Krafayis from Vincent and the Doctor given how much of the focus is on Vincent Van Gogh in that episode.
I’m going to disagree because that monster was thematically appropriate to a story about depression: a creature that nobody but Vincent could see causing chaos in his life.
It would be fair to argue that you didn't need that specific monster, portrayed in the way it was, but it did need some kind of monster for the reasons stated above.
@@CouncilofGeeks Agreed, although I think they missed a real trick by making it a giant alien budgerigar as opposed to a monstrous dog, as in the metaphor "the black dog of depression".
Series 11 has a big problem with historicals that are hurt by the presence of scifi villains. Demons of the Punjab is the one that frustrates me the most because the human story was great but the Thijarians are just kinda dumb throughout the whole thing and everything about them reeks of being a late addition to a script that initially WAS a pure historical. I really wish NuWho wasn't so against pure historical episodes honestly
@@booradley8895 yes but that was its thematic function in the story. That's why they made a point of only Vincent being able to see it, it's a manifestation of his sorrow and self-loathing
@@vuraxis953 But it WAS real and the doctor SAW it in the mirror. The thijarians were the grief people felt for the death of their loved ones. You can fit anything into the narrative of your choosing if you require to do so.
Series 7 might've had the weakest villains out of the revival. Some of them had some cool designs, but most of them were just goofy in stories that didn't warrant goofiness
If you accept individuals, I’d go with some of the Slitheen family from the two parter as worthy contenders. They get better the more they’re expanded upon, but those from the first story spend most of their time farting
I might actually have to give it to Cube Man. Not only is he hugely forgettable and bland, he also ruins the episode he appears in. I really like Power of Three apart from him.
I agree with you regarding most of the villains on the list who aren't necessary for the plot and could have been left out. However I disagree with you about the Futurekind. They do initially push the narrative forward by helping o get the main characters to the base wher ethe primary story develops. Their presence also helps to sell the idea that they are the main threat thereby distracting the audience from the big reveal and ultimately the real villain.
My most hated villain is probably gonna end up getting me kicked out the fandom...... Daleks. Overused and repetitive, they're only interesting when theres a big twist but usually its just "oh no, we have to fight the Daleks". Is there something in the contract that says every Doctor must fight them? I would be happy if they never appeared again.
Some say that the agreement between the BBC and Terry Nation's estate is that the Daleks have to be used at least once a year or the BBC lose the rights to them. I don't know how true that is, but some of the Dalek episodes in New Who have felt like they were just thrown in there for the sake of having a Dalek episode, so it wouldn't surprise me
@@ZoeMalDoran It's an urban myth. There were long stretches of Dalek-less episodes - even entire seasons - while Terry Nation was alive and well, so I'm sure he'd have kicked up a fuss while he was still around, but he didn't. What's more, Steven Moffat has stated that no such contractual obligation exists - and he should know, not just because he was a long-term producer of Doctor Who, but his (recently deceased) mother-in-law was Terry Nation's agent.
@@ZoeMalDoran Indeed, but I can't see why such a deal wouldn't have been struck while Terry Nation was still around to make money out of it. It evidently wasn't, and judging by Moffat's statements, it didn't apply to NuWho either. Incidentally, the copyright for the Daleks was jointly owned by Terry Nation and the BBC, so he didn't have exclusive rights to them anyway.
the wire is an antagonist who is particularly memorable to me if only because of my own particular childhood circumstances. i was not a doctor who fan until a few months ago, but everyone else in my family is a really big fan and has been for a long. as a child i remember being in the room while my mom was watching some episodes, and i remember it being really terrifying to me as a child because the image of the people with no faces was very scary to my 7 year old self. so i can't judge this episode objectively because of how strongly of an impact it had on me as a stupid idiot child
Always appreciate the "Nothing against furries". Hard agree on these for the most part, too. It's always dissapointing when you get to the end of an episode and feel like the writing was just kinda lazy.
Has anyone noticed that the Futurekind has the same description as the Haemovores from The Curse of Fenric? The only difference is that I like the Haemovores.
I really like your lists. As a small request can you do recurring villains, I would like to see why you don’t put the Daleks at number 1. If not that’s okay to thanks for the video
The villains from The Power of Three are so forgettable that I don't even retain any memory of the end of the episode. I've seen it 5 times at least and I remember scenes I liked and fun dialogue and what not, but if you asked me right now what the resolution is to this episode - I couldn't. The forgettableness is contagious 😅
It was hard for me to take the Absorbaloff seriously because he's played by Peter Kay. I see him and all I think is "Garlic Bread?" Doctor Who has had straight up comedians appear in the show since the classic era (Alexei Sayle as a DJ in "Revelation of the Daleks" springs to mind for no reason), but this one was hard to shake because of how popular Peter Kay was and is.
I know this is a drop in the bucket and you'll probably never read this, but I love you and I love the content you make 💖💖 I hope this comment feeds the algorithm a little for you and only off chance you do read this, You're incredible!
16:39 The worst part being that Doctor Who already has a villain that has that moniker! I've said it before when discussing Nightmare in Silver. But the Raston Warrior Robot should have debuted in Nu Who by now.
I actually never forgot about the Shakri, because from the end of the Power of Three I was expecting it to come back and pay off at some point. If you look at what happens in the story, a transdimensional being from Timelord mythology collects a bunch of data on Earth, tells the Doctor that humanity has to be culled for the sake of the universe, the Doctor threatens it into retreating, and it menacingly says that "the tally shall be met", so it still intends to go through with the cull eventually. It wasn't handled very well, and I guess the writers realised it and decided never to revisit the concept, but to me this felt like a set up for something bigger. Honestly, when the Monks storyline happened in series 12, I was convinced that was the payoff. They'd modeled perfectly believable simulations of the Earth and orchestrated a plan to make humanity give them control over them and create an Orwellian dystopia where they could stop humanity from getting out of hand. But no, they were their own thing and were never really given a clear motivation, that's just what they do I guess. And then Chibnall took over, and Power of Three was a Chibnall story, so surely that was when he was going to bring the Shakri back and pay off that set up, right? He even referenced the Eternals, the Guardians and the Toymaker, so that kind of being was on his mind. Maybe make them a season-arc villain? Hell, we've got kind of a Thanos-level cull going on with the Flux, cleaning the slate of the universe across time, perfect way of dealing with the humanity problem in a way the Doctor can't stop and that causes way more suffering than just nipping the bud in the 21st Century, so there's a potential for character drama for the Doctor maybe having made the wrong decision all the way back in series 7. But no, they never come up again, and with Chibnall gone I've accepted it's never going to happen now.
Totally agree about some monsters not being necesssary to their episodes. Perhaps you should do another ranking: "Top 10 Modern Who Episodes that should've had no monsters".
I'm glad you just went into the list stating it was the modern era of Doctor Who. My worst was when John Nathan-Turner was the showrunner. Hope you have a great day Ms Vera!!!
The Shakree or whatever he's called from the Power of Three should have been way better had that been a two parter. I remember watching it and coming back the next week, and the next episode was the one in the west. I remember thinking what happened to the second part. It's like Chibnall just gave up writing the resr of the story. Father's Day was one of my favorite stories.
Ah firstly, Vera, your cosplay in this one is great! But secondly, I like the idiots lantern but not because of the wire but how the dad was played & portrayed, and how the mum had the courage to kick him out. That was great story telling. Then 10s “Rubber sole! Swear by them!” lives rent free inside my brain and pops up every now and then for no reason.
So… long rant made short: I find it morally abhorrent that not even 90 seconds after that openly abusive man had exited the home the Rose is encouraging an abused teenager to “go to him” because “he’s your dad,” and the way the scene is presented makes it clear that the episode believes this to be a good thing for her to be doing. You can see me fully go off on this here: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-cHJLUoUmF6A.html
@@ColzoArt I get why Rose thinks it’s a good idea. What I don’t get and don’t forgive is the Doctor standing by and the empathetic music score signaling they the audience is supposed to think it’s a good idea.
The category of "monsters who totally didn't need to be there because the plot was already scary and engaging enough as it was"? I've got an AMAZING Classic Who entry for that list: "Inferno". We already had this BADASS, tense, scary, alternate-universe, existential holy-crap-the-Earth-is-LITERALLY-ENDING storyline _and_ a proper villain in the form of that arrogant scientist douchecanoe, and suddenly...random primitive cavemen like zombie creatures. WHY? It's _exactly_ the same problem as with the Futurekind in a story that's already scary because _the universe is ending_ . We didn't NEED them, and the rest of "Inferno" before they show up is really good. People, the world was literally ending, because of one dude's obsession with his own fame and glory. Isn't that scary enough of a situation, and enough of a monster, without putting in monsters that LOOK like monsters?
I usually agree with you... but get this please.... some of these villains are here- for one reason and one reason only..... the kids! RTD is a good enough writer to realise that "reapers" add little to the story - but they do a number of things - none of them are story or plot. We all forget that when DW returned to TV it had to prove itself as a restructure from old who - it had to sell to the audience. Filling it with monsters etc in the trailers and the "next week" segment would get the kids back next week. They also sell toys - and toys makes the series money. Not everything is story related - its put in there for marketing reasons - so we have to deal with that - monster of the week is not for us - it never was.
Another reason why the "loudly announcing what it's doing" didn't work in the caretaker is that they played it straight. In Voyage of the damned it's very much tied to the comedic part of the Angel Robots, and that maked it work.
Good list! I too forgot about your 4th and 1st place villains! The Wire did indeed start off excellent, and then got more annoying than when new Cybermen say 'delete' over and over, or when Daleks of any period spam us with too many 'Exterminates'!
to be fair is the killer robot announcing everything it does really that much worse than the Cybermen chanting "delete" or Daleks "Exterminate" we give that a pass cause it's their catchphrases but i my honest opinion it's just as bad
The “delete” I’ll agree with but not the “exterminate” as it’s not really announcing intent because it’s literally the only thing they do anyway. It’s practically a battle cry.
@@CouncilofGeeks I'd argue it's both for both cases, both "delete" and "exterminate" are used by each faction as a declaration of intent and also as a form of battle cry (plus "you will be upgraded" in the case of the cybermen) but even so personally at least I give both a pass because it's an iconic part of their design. Can't have a Dalek without exterminate and can't have a Cyberman without delete or upgrade being chanted. (also maybe because both those factions have and show a lot more personality than the killer robot so it isn't as noticable since it's not the only thing they say/do)
and to add for clarification I'm not disagreeing at all with the video or with the robot being at the top of the list just sharing a thought that popped into my head as the topic came up :P Love this video and your channel in general
I am typing whilst watching this..... but I can assure you - the villain from "Power of Three" - it is a FACT that the actor (whom I know so I know this is fact!) - the actor, Steven Berkoff HATED working on the episode. Berkoff is a playwright and developer of a specific style of stage acting - he only does TV and Film to fund his stage plays and work.(he was the bad guy in the original Beverly Hills COP and in Bond's Octopussy.) Remember this was a Chibnall script (and provably one of his better ones) - and Berkoff despised the lines he was given - tried to change them and stormed off the set calling them all a "bunch of incompetent w**kers!" .... they hadn't filmed the ending - nowhere near the amount of stuff he was to appear in - including some scenes earlier. So the editors cobbled together some magguffin "sonic screwdriver" ending and reshot some bits with Matt (you will notice a number of clear inserts where matt and Steven aren't even in the same shot)...... so yeah its true - Berkoff ruined what (according to those I work with who knew more about the real ending) should have been a good episode.... so because of him the ending tanks it.....cos the first 30 mins of that episode are awesome. Pity!
I'm pretty sure whoever designed Dr Lazarus had recently played Resident Evil 4. The game released in 2005, the episode in 2007, and he looks like a rip-off of one of that game's bosses.
It's a bit weird and I can't even put my finger on why, but the Abzorbaloff's design actually does it for me. Probably because I'm thinking of the early days Power Rangers villain terror toad, though.
Honestly expected the red-monster-thing (forgot it’s name) from The Runaway Bride to make this list. Like, from what I remember, all she does is scream.
Yeah but I’ll admit she fits the fairly camp feel of the episode and while I don’t care for camp villains sometimes they are at least appropriate. Same reason Max Capricorn isn’t on the list.
