I was looking forward to this episode but did have some trepidation for it . Doctor Who And The Silurians from 1970 ( Check out my review of it ) is in my opinion the greatest story from the classic series . It’s an episode of great drama that mirrors that of Nigel Kneale’s QUATERMASS serials from the 1950s . Probably my second favourite all time story is Inferno from 1970 ( yes check out my review of that ) that features a drilling project to tap a new source of energy from under the Earth’s crust . Seeing as the episode was to feature these old monsters with a plot device stolen from Inferno I was curious if Chris Chibnall had any ideas of his own . He did write 42 from series three which was a medley megamix of every film and TV story featuring a plot set on a spaceship . He did write a very original episode for Torchwood season one entitled Cyberwoman which has got to be one of the worst pieces of television ever created . So what would we be getting ? Derititive television or debacle ?
Thankfully we didn’t get debacle but we didn’t get anything outstandingly original either . Fans of a certain age will instantly recognise the inspirations for the narrative . The worker being pulled down through the soil is a cross between the opening of Attack Of The Cybermen and Frontois . A barrier surrounding a small village where no one can escape is a rip off of The Deamons as is the church setting to a certain extent whilst a character finding out his skin is turning green is a plot device from both Inferno and The Green Death . There’s even a line from the 1989 story ” There will be no battle here ” . I’ve always thought the strength of the programme is its originality . Maybe I’m being unfair and Chibnall is in fact the most post modernist writer in television today ?
Two serious writing flaws that can be laid at Chibnall’s door is that after Amy is swallowed by the ground the Doctor doesn’t seen very concerned . He’s not being callous or pragmatic but seems to know that Amy will come to no harm . He may be a Time Lord who can travel through time and space , regenerate when he is mortally injured and live hundreds of years but is he clairvoyant ? Of course not . Despite meeting the Silurians before there’s no logical reason for him to know he’s facing Silurians at this point , and even if he does what’s to stop him believing Amy hasn’t been killed either out of hand or during any process of being held hostage . Another flaw is possibly down to Moffat rather than Chibnall and that is everyone lives so far . One of the great strengths of both DWAS and Inferno is that nearly no on lived which made for great and gloomy Who
Perhaps the biggest flaw with The Hungry Earth is the new Silurian design itself . The original story might have had men in rubber suits and the sequel story Warriors Of The Deep was a step downwards but both were much superior where reptile design was concerned . The new Silurians have got whiplash tongues that can poison humans but are now missing the third eyes on their foreheads . You can understand the missing third eye since it’s a plot device . After all when the Silurian gets captured she could have easily used her eye to kill the humans . But that begs the question as to why she didn’t use her tongue to kill them instead . And having an electronic voice would have been preferable to having the ( Not very good ) actress using her own voice
In conclusion The Hungry Earth is a story that will appeal much more to fans who can’t remember the 1970s . Certainly it is something that 10 year old fans will love and has some entertaining moments and very high production values and is miles better than the 1984 tale Warriors Of The Deep . The unfortunate thing is those of us who loved the Pertwee era in general and his debut season in particular will be slightly disappointed . If however you enjoyed this episode wait until after next weeks conclusion then track down Doctor Who And The Silurians , Inferno , The Deamons and The Green Death , watch them and ask yourself if The Hungry Earth is a better story than all of the aforementioned ?
