0:00

Darwin would approve T-Mobile's network has

0:02

adapted to so many locales. Because T-Mobile

0:04

helps keep you connected from the heart

0:06

of Portland to right where you are,

0:08

on America's large 5G network. Switch now, keep

0:11

your phone and T-Mobile will pay it off up

0:13

the $800 per line via prepaid card. Switch

0:15

now, keep your phone and T-Mobile will pay it

0:17

off up the $800 per line via prepaid via

0:19

prepaid, or T-Mobile will pay it off up the $800 per

0:21

line via the $800 per line via service credit, $15, $1, $1, $1, $1, $1, $1,

0:23

$1, $1, $1, $1, $1, $1, $1, $1, $1, $1, $1, $1, $1, $1, $1, $1,

0:25

$1, $1, $1, $1, $1, $1, $1, $1, $1, $1, $1, $1, $1, Ready

0:29

to level up? Shumba Casino is

0:32

your playbook to fun. It's free

0:34

to play with no purchase necessary.

0:36

Enjoy hundreds of casino style games

0:38

like bingo, slots, and solitaire, anytime,

0:40

anywhere, with fresh releases every week.

0:42

Whether you're at home or on

0:44

the go, let Shumba Casino bring

0:47

the excitement to you. Plus get

0:49

free daily login bonuses and a

0:51

free welcome bonus. Join now for

0:53

your chance to redeem some serious

0:55

prizes. Play Shumba Casino today! No

0:57

purchase necessary, VGW group, void were

1:00

prohibited by law, 18 plus, TNC

1:02

supply. If you might suffer sunstroke,

1:04

might you not suffer some

1:06

similar evil from the rays

1:09

of the moon? Moon, you

1:11

mean. Exactly, what we call

1:13

lunacy, from the word lunar,

1:16

meaning the moon. Synthetic flesh.

1:18

He's catching, isn't he?

1:20

Violence. Look, I don't

1:22

know if you're crazy

1:25

or what, but anyway,

1:27

I don't care. Hello

1:32

and welcome back to Journey Through

1:34

Sci-Fi where we journey through the

1:36

many sub-chonras of science fiction on

1:39

screen. I'm one of your hosts

1:41

Matt. And I'm the other host

1:43

James and in this series we're

1:45

exploring the sci-fi sub-genre of mad

1:47

science and in today's episode what

1:49

will we be looking at Matt?

1:51

We are looking at some mad

1:53

scientists using their mad science in

1:55

pursuit of killers, serial killers roaming

1:58

the streets and the scientists taking

2:00

it upon... themselves to try and

2:02

suss out who's behind the crimes.

2:04

Yeah it's not quite the usual

2:06

true crime podcast that you're used

2:08

to. We've got a few sci-fi

2:10

tropes in here to say the

2:12

least and we are looking at

2:15

Doctor X from 1932 along with

2:17

time after time from 1979. Two

2:19

interesting ones to group together I

2:21

would say. Yeah a lot of

2:23

people have been messaging us about

2:25

Doctor X a kind of cult

2:27

classic maybe didn't get the famous

2:29

dessert. for the kind of mad

2:32

science movie it is and from

2:34

the time period it's from compared

2:36

to its contemporaries and then time

2:38

after time returning to h.g. Wells

2:40

in an indirect fashion I guess.

2:42

Yes we're back looking at h.g.

2:44

Wells straight off the back of

2:46

covering two of his most famous

2:49

books and the adaptations of those

2:51

on screen the Invisible Man and

2:53

of course the island Dr. Moreau

2:55

which we spoke about in last

2:57

time's episode. So should we get

2:59

started with Dr. X the... 1932

3:01

horror sci-fi with multiple mad scientists.

3:03

Yes, let's get all the scientists

3:06

together in a room and figure

3:08

out who's been doing the bad

3:10

things. All right, I agree to

3:12

lay off for 48 hours, but

3:14

I give you my word if

3:16

you don't succeed, I'll come in

3:18

here, seal every door, place everybody

3:20

on the technical arrest. Take fingerprints,

3:23

conduct a rigid inspection, I don't

3:25

care the whole world knows it.

3:27

I mean, six murders committed all

3:29

in the same circumstances. The evidence

3:31

points here. It is my theory

3:33

that one of us in the

3:35

past from dire necessity was driven

3:37

to cannibalism. The memory of that

3:39

act was hammered like a nail

3:42

to the mind of that man.

3:44

Shrewden brilliant. He could conceal his

3:46

madness from the human eye, even

3:48

from himself, but he can't conceal

3:50

it from the eyes of the

3:52

radio sensitivity. Who

3:55

has been doing the bad things,

3:57

man? Not Doctor X, not Doctor

3:59

X. Despite the name, the villainous

4:01

name, do I just think that's

4:03

a villainous name because that's the

4:05

bad guy from Action Man? I

4:07

forgot that he was called Doctor

4:09

X. Oh, that's what I associate

4:11

with Dr. X is he's got

4:13

like a green goo in his

4:16

stomach. He's got like open rooms

4:18

and you can squeeze the goo

4:20

out and stuff. Remember those? Yeah,

4:22

he's got an eye patch. He

4:24

was a pretty good mad scientist

4:26

actually. We needed to have a

4:28

look at Dr. X in the

4:30

action, 90s action man. Didn't he

4:32

have like a bald head, but

4:34

he had like a little pony

4:36

tail. He had bald head and

4:38

he had goggles and he had

4:40

goggles goggles. proper mad scientist look

4:42

to him. Yeah the iconic mad

4:44

scientist look definitely and yeah like

4:46

like you said this isn't what

4:48

you would expect it to be

4:50

perhaps I didn't really know what

4:52

to expect going into this and

4:54

like you said at the start

4:56

we were suggested this by a

4:58

few people who listened to the

5:00

podcast special shout to Dustin and

5:02

Megan who both sent us really

5:04

nice messages about this. going, watch

5:06

this film, I want to see

5:08

it in the Mad Science Series,

5:10

so here we are discussing it.

5:12

Yeah, and Megan in particular got

5:14

to see it on the big

5:16

screen, which is really interesting. I'd

5:18

like to know where Megan saw

5:20

that, because I don't know, this

5:22

just isn't, it just doesn't feel

5:24

like a very famous movie. So

5:26

to get re-released in a cinema

5:28

is really cool, and great opportunity

5:30

to see a film like that.

5:32

Yeah, it's had like an interesting

5:34

resurgence though, hasn't it, because in

5:36

2019, the UCLA film and television

5:38

archive and the film foundation did

5:40

this new restoration and they got

5:42

funding from George Lucas family foundation

5:44

to do it so they combined

5:46

the the repairing of the the

5:48

initial 35 millimeter and they've restored

5:50

this version and this version which

5:52

we're talking about is quite famous

5:54

for being in this kind of

5:56

two tone, two strip technique colour,

5:58

which gives it this really eerie

6:00

look, doesn't it? Yeah, it just,

6:03

it looks strange. It doesn't look

6:05

like good colour filming, but it

6:07

kind of works for a, for

6:09

a, um... stylistic mad science murder

6:11

mystery movie it fits right in

6:13

with that but I don't it

6:15

doesn't feel like you could just

6:17

make every movie you can't just

6:19

switch over to this it's not

6:21

a good kind of long-term color

6:23

process it seems like I don't

6:25

I don't think it caught on

6:27

did it no it only I

6:29

think it only lasted for a

6:31

couple of films for when Warner

6:33

were doing it. There was one

6:35

other film that was done before

6:37

this, but it did set it

6:39

apart from the other black and

6:41

white films being shown at the

6:43

time, but it just wasn't as

6:45

sophisticated as the technical in which

6:47

we come to know now. There

6:49

is something about this color palette

6:51

that does add something to this

6:53

specific film, these greens and browns

6:55

that you see in the color,

6:57

which give it that... we've already

6:59

said that gives it an ear

7:01

equality but there's something about I

7:03

mean our logo is green now

7:05

it seems very sci-fi to me

7:07

now yeah it's that alien looking

7:09

green like doctor x from action

7:11

man's gaping wounds full of go

7:13

it's a sci-fi green and i'll

7:15

just say as well that's really

7:17

cool that the restoration was was

7:19

funded by George Lucas very easy

7:21

and fun to dunk on George

7:23

Lucas and take the piss out

7:25

of him because of his silly

7:27

dialogue in some Star Wars movies

7:29

but he seems like a very

7:31

cool guy gave an awful lot

7:33

of his Disney money to charity

7:35

I think and does cool restoration

7:37

stuff like that cares about cinema

7:39

good guy. Yeah he loves films

7:41

just like us and this film

7:43

is also significant because obviously we're

7:45

talking about mad science in this

7:47

series and this has... an abundance

7:50

of mad scientists in, doesn't it?

7:52

There's, what is it, five mad

7:54

scientists in this, all told? Yeah,

7:56

yeah, of varying degrees of madness,

7:58

but certainly all a little bit

8:00

mad. In fact, Dr. X himself

8:02

is, I would say, the least

8:04

mad of the mad scientists, but

8:06

he's certainly conducting some of his

8:08

own mad science, and they're all

8:10

doing their own little mad science

8:12

projects as befitting. five mad scientists?

8:14

Yeah they've got this lovely sequence

8:16

where the police detectives are being

8:18

shown around this this school of

8:20

science is it a medical school

8:22

specifically that they're exploring. Yeah, I

8:24

think it is, I think it

8:26

is a medical school, but they're

8:28

not, they're not like practicing medicine.

8:30

Like, are they? They're kind of

8:32

just doing whatever the hell they

8:34

want. Yeah, it's like a research

8:36

school, isn't it? It's like a

8:38

research science that they're doing. And

8:40

they're all notable for having different

8:42

disabilities as well. And because each

8:44

one of them... has this kind

8:46

of iconography to them around them

8:48

as well. Like one of them

8:50

has a glass eye, one of

8:52

them is missing a hand, one

8:54

of them is going around in

8:56

a wheelchair. It's got all of

8:58

these, you can sort of identify

9:00

each of them by that, but

9:02

then also because there's so many

9:04

different scientists, you do kind of,

9:06

I kind of lost track of

9:08

who and who was doing which

9:10

experiments because they do kind of

9:12

go through all the different science

9:14

that they're doing quite quickly, don't

9:16

they? I feel like one of

9:18

them might not even be properly

9:20

introduced, I can't even remember, but

9:22

I think part of what contributes

9:24

to that is that most of

9:26

them don't matter what their sort

9:28

of field of study is. So

9:30

one, actually no, all of them

9:32

don't matter because I'd say even

9:34

the character where it does matter,

9:37

that's not, turns out to not

9:39

even be his actual real. field

9:41

of study. So we have a

9:43

killer. We have a killer on

9:45

the loose and it's believed to

9:47

be one of these five mad

9:49

scientists working at this place. But

9:51

as it turns out, that doesn't

9:53

really matter because the main sort

9:55

of chunk of the mad science

9:57

in the film is this, the

9:59

experiment that Dr X conducts, try

10:01

and figure out who the villain

10:03

is. And by that point in

10:05

the film, it doesn't matter what

10:07

they were doing in their own

10:09

research. what matters is they're all

10:11

strapped up to various gadgets and

10:13

watching a reenactment of a murder.

10:15

It becomes like early CSI, doesn't

10:17

it, with the kind of forensic

10:19

investigation that they're doing? Yeah, yeah,

10:21

but a 1930s sort of... Frankenstein

10:23

era, you know, electrodes crackling, that

10:25

kind of, yeah, that kind of

10:27

CSI, rather than computer-based, I don't

10:29

know, I don't watch a lot

10:31

CSI, don't actually know what they

10:33

get up to in that. Yeah,

10:35

I assume it's not exactly like

10:37

this, they don't have live beating

10:39

hearts in jars, like they're doing

10:41

this film, which have been, how

10:43

long has Wells been... keeping his

10:45

heart beating in the jaw. It's

10:47

like two years I think he

10:49

says in the film. Something like

10:51

that. He's very pleased with himself

10:53

for how long he's kept. human

10:55

heart alive in a jar. And

10:57

that's very Frankenstein-esque. It's sort of

10:59

leaning on all that kind of

11:01

stuff. Wells is also dead giveaway.

11:03

He's looking into cannibalism. That's his

11:05

field of study that he says

11:07

quite early on, which is a

11:09

bit of a clue. And then

11:11

we've also got someone who's looking

11:13

into how the moon can make

11:15

people mad. It's sort of lunar

11:17

studies. and then you've got, oh

11:19

what else are they looking? Is

11:21

one of them looking at some

11:24

brain grafting? Yes, something like that.

11:26

Yeah, and Dr. X himself is

11:28

essentially building a lie detector, but

11:30

he speaks about it in much

11:32

more grandiose terms about how, you

11:34

know, the human psyche can reveal

11:36

all kinds of secrets if we

11:38

push the right emotional buttons. And

11:40

he really is trying to push

11:42

those buttons, isn't he, when he

11:44

gets all the scientists together for

11:46

this interrogation. But... All of this

11:48

story is told through a comedic

11:50

lens as well as this sort

11:52

of serious dark friller. It's also

11:54

got this character of Lee Tracy

11:56

who is the Paparazzi guy. He's

11:58

the guy, he's the journal. who's

12:00

trying to find out what's happening

12:02

with these murders and trying to solve it

12:04

so I can put it in the newspaper

12:06

and get a headline and get paid. And

12:08

he's sort of this just bumbling character

12:11

throughout the whole thing. And I thought

12:13

he was he was an interesting addition

12:15

to this because again this is like

12:18

another pre-code film. So it's got quite

12:20

dark undertones. I mean it's got a

12:22

killer who is going around cannibalizing people.

12:24

Yeah. But on top of it you've

12:26

got... Lee Tracy going around and sort

12:28

of like falling over and having a

12:30

bit of a romance on the side.

12:32

What did you think about that

12:34

element in the film and how it works?

12:37

I really didn't like that character at all.

12:39

I found him very annoying. But I kind

12:41

of just ignored him. I tell you what

12:43

what pissed me off was that he kind

12:46

of he saves the day basically at the

12:48

end of the movie. He is the hero

12:50

of the piece. and I was just kind

12:52

of annoyed by that because I'd spent the

12:54

whole film just being like this guy again

12:57

and then I just felt a bit like

12:59

I'm a bit gutted that he becomes

13:01

the the hero of the movie in

13:03

the because the climax of the film

13:06

is amazing you've got like this experiment

13:08

going on and the the whole set

13:11

design looks so cool the big lab

13:13

that they're in there's like multiple individual

13:15

brilliantly designed labs that we see where

13:17

the different scientists work plus a kind

13:19

of spooky mansion feeling and a spooky

13:21

butler sort of holding all that together

13:23

and then a killer like on the

13:25

loose roaming around and then the comic

13:27

relief kind of like steps him and

13:29

like bops him on the head and

13:31

he falls off a cliff I just

13:33

yeah I just found it very handy

13:35

climactic and I was just annoyed by

13:37

him by him he's like He's like a

13:40

clown isn't he? He's got like a

13:42

he's got a handshake buzzer like it

13:44

just that feels like it has no

13:46

place in this film and the film

13:48

just keeps coming back to him it

13:50

that's like the main character. Yeah

13:52

I was quite interested by the fact

13:54

that he was he was a journalist

13:57

though and that sort of journalist

13:59

looking into a killer and trying to

14:01

crack the case a little bit

14:03

feels it feels like what's early

14:05

friller stuff isn't it? Kind of

14:07

but he doesn't approach it in

14:09

the way that we would expect

14:11

to do in this character to

14:13

in this story because I mean

14:15

not you know because he spends

14:17

off the film just like electricating

14:20

people's hands in a handshake but

14:22

also he doesn't want to do

14:24

it like he's trying to get

14:26

off the case because he's like

14:28

oh this is Shit, like, have

14:30

you got another story I can

14:32

report on? He's like calling his

14:34

boss and being like, yeah, I

14:36

don't really want to do this.

14:38

Is there another thing I can

14:40

report on? And he just gets

14:42

sent back out. He doesn't seem

14:44

that interested. He's just like, oh,

14:46

I'm just trying to earn, I'm

14:48

just trying to win a buck.

14:50

I don't care. It did kind

14:52

of a investigative journalist looking into

14:55

a mad scientist though, and writing

14:57

like a piece on them. It

14:59

made me think of, the fly.

15:01

from the 80s, like Cronenberg's fly,

15:03

because isn't Gina Davis trying to

15:05

do a profile on Seth Brundle

15:07

on Jeff Goldbloo? Yeah. And I

15:09

feel like that's a, that's like

15:11

a common, common thread that they've

15:13

got in these kind of things.

15:15

So I was looking at it

15:17

from that perspective, and this also

15:19

does have some similarities with the

15:21

fly in terms of the scientists.

15:23

doing experiments on himself. So it's

15:25

got that element to it and

15:27

the kind of like the body

15:30

horror that it gets into later

15:32

in the film itself. And it

15:34

feels like it is early body

15:36

horror, isn't it? In the same

15:38

way that you've got that happening

15:40

and stuff like Frankenstein and Dr.

15:42

Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, the idea

15:44

of the transformation. is in particular

15:46

in this is really sort of

15:48

leaning into all that kind of

15:50

stuff and the scientists as being

15:52

more than just a scientist there's

15:54

something else underneath that's going to

15:56

be unleashed later on in the

15:58

film. Yeah and in comparison to

16:00

those films we talked a lot

16:02

about how Those films were getting

16:04

into the transformation quite early because

16:07

it's a it's the selling it's

16:09

the main selling point of the

16:11

film Whereas this feels a bit

16:13

more traditional or it's like a

16:15

twist the transformation is the most

16:17

shocking scene I guess and it

16:19

happens at the climax of the

16:21

movie. So it feels more like

16:23

the appropriate place for a scene

16:25

like that to happen. And I

16:27

imagine this film would probably not

16:29

be marketed as a transformation movie.

16:31

It's a murder mystery so you

16:33

don't know that's coming really. So

16:35

it feels more... It is quite

16:37

shocking. I wasn't really expecting a

16:39

big transformation at the end of

16:42

the film. So it has that

16:44

kind of shock factor because you're

16:46

not just shocked by the visceral

16:48

body horror transformation, but also just

16:50

the... the surprise, the literally just

16:52

being surprised that it's happening in

16:54

the story. Yeah, because it was

16:56

it was a big surprise and

16:58

I remember when we were looking

17:00

at it and trying to think

17:02

of pairings for this one, we

17:04

were confused by some of the

17:06

write-ups on it because it's it

17:08

kind of leans into this idea

17:10

that it's about synthetic flesh and

17:12

it's about this. this sort of

17:14

transformation that happens. But again, that

17:17

doesn't happen until pretty much the

17:19

end of the film in the

17:21

last 10, 15 minutes of the

17:23

film. And this is not a

17:25

long film. It's an hour and

17:27

15 or an hour and 10

17:29

I think it is. When you're

17:31

watching it, you're right. It isn't

17:33

about that. It isn't about the

17:35

transformation. You've got this really eclectic

17:37

cast of different scientists and the...

17:39

like we talked about like the

17:41

hubris of scientists and doing these

17:43

experiments not really thinking about the

17:45

consequences and having so many scientists

17:47

all together and then also it's

17:49

kind of I suppose the way

17:52

that they're making these scientists look

17:54

they're trying to make them look

17:56

scary in different ways like the

17:58

one with the glass eye. Yeah

18:00

they're kind of that it's a

18:02

fear of un- regulated science, which

18:04

I think is still totally warranted

18:06

fear. What's interesting in the movie,

18:08

in the world of the movie,

18:10

is people are a bit wary

18:12

of Dr. X's medical school, because

18:14

they're just up there on this

18:16

cliff top, seemingly doing whatever the

18:18

hell they want, experiment-wise. But then

18:20

the police have evidence that one

18:22

of them is connected to murders,

18:24

a series of murders, and then

18:27

the police are still... Going along

18:29

with Dr. Xavier's idea, he goes,

18:31

well, could I just have like

18:33

48 hours to prove all my

18:35

guys are innocent on my own?

18:37

You know, do my own evidence

18:39

gathering for your murder case. And

18:41

the police are like, yeah, that's

18:43

fair. That is fair. We should

18:45

let you do that. That's mad.

18:47

you know it's just you have

18:49

these sort of worrying scientists who

18:51

are completely unregulated and conducting experiments

18:53

using human flesh they know that

18:55

they've had a tour of the

18:57

lab and they're still like okay

18:59

it seems fair enough that we'll

19:02

give you a chance to gather

19:04

your own evidence it's like okay

19:06

fair enough and it's not like

19:08

a nice happy lab either like

19:10

you say the way that it

19:12

looks Yeah, it's spooky as hell.

19:14

There's like a live beating heart

19:16

in one of these rooms and

19:18

all these crazy people talking about

19:20

these mad things that they're doing.

19:22

And these detectives are just like,

19:24

yeah, sure, you guys can handle

19:26

this. We want to stay clear.

19:28

There's two distinct locations, I think,

19:30

isn't there? There's the lab, there's

19:32

the medical research facility that Xavier

19:34

runs, which is on a clifftop

19:37

and looks like a spooky mad

19:39

scientist lab, you know, reminiscent of

19:41

Frankenstein's castle laboratory. And then do

19:43

they move to like a more

19:45

sort of swinging beachside property where

19:47

Xavier lives? Is that where the

19:49

actual experiment happens? I think we

19:51

see the individual labs in the

19:53

big research centre on top of

19:55

the cliff and then the bulk

19:57

of the movie with Dr. X's

19:59

experiment on the side. Is that

20:01

in his house, I think? I

20:03

think that Xavier's house is the

20:05

spooky cliff. Oh, is it, okay.

20:07

And then there's another one in

20:09

town. Oh, okay. Oh, yeah, right,

20:12

okay. Yeah, but again, it's like,

20:14

it's early, you're getting early filming

20:16

spaces, so it may not quite

20:18

translate in the way that we're

20:20

used to as well. They're still

20:22

sort of working all those bits

20:24

out, so I can see why

20:26

it does get quite confusing when

20:28

you're looking at it. with Faye

20:30

Ray. Yeah another another scene that

20:32

just felt completely out of place

20:34

in the movie I think every

20:36

time he their journalist had like

20:38

his own scene I don't know

20:40

I just felt like I was

20:42

watching a different film it was

20:44

very frustrating not just because I'm

20:47

you know sci-fi-minded and in particular

20:49

looking at mad science at the

20:51

moment so I wanted to get

20:53

back to those experiments but it

20:55

really felt like this movie was

20:57

about mad scientists coming together, experimenting

20:59

on each other and trying to

21:01

solve this murder mystery. And comic

21:03

relief just didn't feel necessary here.

21:05

And none of the other films

21:07

that we've looked at so far

21:09

from this period have felt the

21:11

need to have that comic relief

21:13

really have they. Yeah, do you

21:15

feel like this was a was

21:17

a deliberate attempt from the producers

21:19

to be like, okay, we need

21:22

to sort of dumb it down

21:24

a little bit? Maybe audiences won't

21:26

quite like all of this stuff

21:28

that's happening in here, because it's

21:30

quite a It's called Doctor X,

21:32

you look at that original artwork,

21:34

it's going to be a scary

21:36

movie. Yeah, I don't really understand

21:38

the decision-maker, but you know it's

21:40

after Frankenstein's been quite a big

21:42

success. I don't think that this

21:44

has had the cultural legacy of

21:46

like a Frankenstein, so I would

21:48

argue it's the wrong choice basically

21:50

going down that route, and it

21:52

feels a bit less. whole, you

21:54

know, it just feels like it

21:57

feels a bit sillier to be

21:59

honest than another movies at the

22:01

time that did did better. But

22:03

it does have that murder mystery

22:05

angle which we keep coming back

22:07

to. And it's kind of early,

22:09

poor, early, early, early Knives Out

22:11

kind of, I mean, Knives Out

22:13

is probably quite an interesting comparison.

22:15

It is, yeah. Because that has

22:17

elements of comedy, along with all

22:19

the other stuff that's going on.

22:21

But with this, it's this experiment,

22:23

this lie detector test that Xavier

22:25

has this pseudo science around the

22:27

fact that there will be psychological

22:29

signs. that he can measure with

22:32

his equipment and it's all done

22:34

with tubes going up with weird

22:36

liquids which can measure how you're

22:38

reacting to certain scenarios and also

22:40

I was really confused as to

22:42

why he's got a bunch of

22:44

wax figures. in this room? Like

22:46

he's set them all up. When's

22:48

he just knocked those out? When's

22:50

he just made a couple of

22:52

wax figures for this interrogation? I

22:54

imagine that that was just like

22:56

something he had from another experiment

22:58

that, you know, from a while

23:00

before, unrelated but repurposed and useful

23:02

for this. I can imagine a

23:04

mad scientist would have all sorts

23:07

of uses for stand-ins for human

23:09

bodies. It just seemed so bad

23:11

to me, but then so much

23:13

of this film is just absolutely

23:15

bonkers. What I loved was the

23:17

lie detector works by, like you

23:19

say, big tubes, and the more

23:21

their heart rate goes up, they

23:23

will eventually raise like a floating

23:25

block in the tube, and whoever's

23:27

tube... floating block rises to the

23:29

top first must therefore be the

23:31

killer. So it just like introduces

23:33

this, just introduces drama to the

23:35

experiment because heart rate can be

23:38

monitored however, right? I've got, I'm

23:40

wearing a heart rate monitor now

23:42

and it's just got a number

23:44

on it. Like that's not very,

23:46

that's not fun is it? Like

23:48

that's not as fun as a

23:50

tube filling with some sort of

23:52

liquid that's gonna reveal my guilt

23:54

if it fills to the top.

23:56

Yeah, fit bit doesn't quite have

23:58

the same impact does. it. But

24:00

yeah, it does have impact in

24:02

that moment. But then I think like

24:05

they're not looking at the

24:07

killer in the way that we

24:09

look at killers now because obviously

24:11

it's very early into the sort

24:13

of examination of serial killers and

24:16

how they operate and things like

24:18

that. And the idea that if

24:20

you're guilty, you're going to

24:22

really panic and you're going

24:24

to give yourself away like

24:26

that. But the sort of image

24:29

of... killers and psychopaths now

24:31

is that kind of disconnection

24:33

between normal human behaviour. So

24:36

nowadays I think you wouldn't

24:38

imagine them to panic in

24:40

that exact way. They just

24:42

think in a very warped way

24:44

to how the average person thinks.

24:47

Yeah, that's Dr. X's whole thesis

24:49

is that you cannot hide, you

24:51

know, your true intentions or whatever.

24:54

So his whole thing hinges on

24:56

that, which I suspect is not...

24:58

is not that functional of an investigative

25:00

technique. But it is fun and it

25:02

is cool. And I know they made

25:05

a sequel to this, but I don't

25:07

know if it became like, if he

25:09

became like a recurring character. But I

25:11

would love to see, you know, like a

25:14

TV show that is like, Poiro

25:16

or whatever, but set in the 30s.

25:18

So, you know, you get a

25:20

mad scientist who gets to behave like

25:22

a mad scientist and getting called in

25:25

by the police to solve a

25:27

new murder each time, but he does

25:29

it in. Poiro twirling his mustache

25:31

or Colombo asking annoying questions. You've got

25:33

Doctor X coming in and strapping

25:35

people to a new fantastical machine that

25:38

he's developed. Like that would make a

25:40

great detective series. Yeah, I think

25:42

in the sequel, again, you've got

25:44

a reporter character and he's teaming

25:46

up with a young doctor. Oh God,

25:49

so they just follow the reporter asset.

25:51

That's the worst aspect of the film.

25:53

But I think in that one, just

25:55

looking from the writeups, it's about synthetic

25:58

blood. So you're basically just... using

26:00

all of the things from this.

26:02

So a reporter, a scientist trying

26:04

to crack the case, and synthetic,

26:06

insert, body part here. I think

26:08

they've, I just feel like they've

26:10

learned the wrong lessons about what's

26:13

fun and cool about this film.

26:15

The best, the best bit is

26:17

the main test, isn't it, when

26:19

they're looking at wax figures and

26:21

there's people creeping about and there's

26:23

a reenactment of a murder, that

26:25

stuff, it's the murder mystery stuff

26:27

that's cool, murder mystery. genre mixed

26:30

with a mad scientist laboratory set

26:32

inside the lab. You know, that's

26:34

what's fun and cool about the

26:36

film. Not necessarily even this, I

26:38

mean the synthetic flesh scene is

26:40

amazing, but it's not the point,

26:42

I don't think. The lunar rays

26:44

will never affect you or me,

26:47

sir, because we are normal people.

26:49

Sure. But it affects strangely certain

26:51

neurotic types. Yes, the moon is

26:53

powerful. By twice a day it

26:55

lifts billions of tons of water

26:57

that washes the shores of the

26:59

world like an eternal old scrub

27:01

woman. So the horror is all

27:04

of that setting and it's even

27:06

in the fact that this killer

27:08

is called the full moon killer.

27:10

So he only kills people under

27:12

certain conditions and that feels very

27:14

supernatural doesn't it? And the idea

27:16

of the moon influencing people's behaviour

27:18

and... All of the things that

27:21

come with that, werewolves and galls

27:23

and goblins and again, going back

27:25

to the supernatural connection to mad

27:27

science that we keep coming up

27:29

against, especially with like these 30s

27:31

films. Kind of, but Dr. Xavier.

27:33

tries to ground it in a

27:35

scientific reality early on, doesn't he?

27:38

It's to do with his whole

27:40

psychological thesis that he's experimenting on.

27:42

He says that it's, you know,

27:44

he's got some past childhood trauma

27:46

that's linked to the full moon

27:48

and every time it comes up

27:50

he can't help himself and he

27:52

psychologically transforms. this moon killer and

27:55

must act on his impulses that's

27:57

that's the kind of that's his

27:59

whole idea of how the moon

28:01

killer's operating and he he doesn't

28:03

see it as supernatural he's very

28:05

rational he's a scientist he wants

28:07

to find this scientific explanation for

28:09

the moon killer but the idea

28:12

of like lunar lunacy which is

28:14

a great combination of words has

28:16

been around for a while though

28:18

hasn't it and yeah there is

28:20

something about like that lunar cycle

28:22

and human biology and behavior. There's

28:24

something in that, I think, about

28:26

how people change over different time

28:29

periods and things like that. But

28:31

yeah, just trying to ground it

28:33

in the science and keep it

28:35

away from all of these supernatural

28:37

elements which are so intertwined with

28:39

those kind of, again, it's like

28:41

the symbolism of the moon. A

28:43

full moon is a weird thing

28:46

to experience and see. Is it?

28:48

I don't know. It feels very

28:50

superstitious in old-fashioned. It's like... That's

28:52

me, ma'am. I'm superstitious in old-fashioned.

28:54

I see the full moon, I'm

28:56

howling out my window and losing

28:58

my mind. Do you know, I've

29:00

always... I'm not a religious person,

29:03

but I've always sort of understood

29:05

sun worship and stuff. Like, you

29:07

know, if you have nothing to

29:09

go on... why would you not

29:11

worship the sun? It's just this

29:13

massive orb in the sky that

29:15

gives all the light and heat

29:17

that you have access to if

29:20

you're kind of living prehistory. But,

29:22

and likewise, like, when the sun's

29:24

away, the moon's out and the

29:26

full moon will be the most

29:28

powerful version of that. But I

29:30

just, I do just think it's

29:32

all sort of superstition, right? Man

29:34

by Jumbo. Yeah. Every single listener

29:37

who has any interest in astrology

29:39

and star signs or anything like

29:41

that is... pointing a finger at

29:43

you right now, Matt, and going,

29:45

no. I don't know. Well, hey,

29:47

I'm sorry. I've got more bad

29:49

news to you if you don't

29:51

want me talking about astrology. But

29:54

amongst all of that. stuff. They've

29:56

also got the cannibal aspects and

29:58

the idea of having a scientist

30:00

who is also a scholar of

30:02

cannibalism is an interesting one and

30:04

it feels to me like Silence

30:06

of the Lambs. Again it's that

30:08

kind of connection to serial killers.

30:11

And again within the sort of

30:13

context of the movie it's like

30:15

it's just crazy that the police

30:17

are just going to allow... Xavier

30:19

to do his own experiments, but

30:21

it's like, here's the guy who

30:23

studies cannibalism and has a live

30:25

human heart. Give me 48 hours

30:28

and I'll figure out who the

30:30

killer is. Yeah, right. But I

30:32

suppose he's another, like, Wells. So

30:34

they do this thing. It's very,

30:36

it's almost like Scooby-Doo, isn't it?

30:38

Like they introduce him straight away.

30:40

It's like, here's the killer. Anyway,

30:42

anyway, let's try and figure out.

30:45

but it can't be him, but

30:47

then we get back to him

30:49

towards the end of the film.

30:51

So he doesn't really do very

30:53

much, I suppose, does he, Wells

30:55

for the bulk of the film?

30:57

He's kind of assisting with the

30:59

experiment, because they're so confident it

31:02

can't be him. I don't know

31:04

why they don't, because there's a

31:06

guy who's in a wheelchair and

31:08

can't walk. They don't write him

31:10

off in the same way that

31:12

they write off Wells. I suppose

31:14

he could physically strangle or someone,

31:16

or someone, but I mean, but

31:19

I mean, you know, you know,

31:21

Of course he gets up and

31:23

walks halfway through the film. Yeah,

31:25

I mean, that's a shocker, isn't

31:27

everyone's like, what, you could walk?

31:29

What are you doing? Nothing comes

31:31

of that. He's just like, yeah,

31:33

a little bit. Just a little

31:36

bit. But Wells, so Wells is

31:38

kind of just off to the

31:40

side as this assistant to the

31:42

experiment, because he. is not considered

31:44

a suspect, but we get back

31:46

to him at the end of

31:48

the film, we see this idea

31:50

of like dual personalities again when

31:53

he goes through this transformation that

31:55

we were mentioning earlier. Also there's

31:57

something to be said about this

31:59

idea of these great minds which

32:01

think in this completely different way

32:03

to most people. But in doing

32:05

that they also have a much

32:07

darker side to them. And we

32:10

saw this in Dr. Jekyll and

32:12

Mr. Hyde, where you've got a

32:14

scientist who seems quite upstanding, but

32:16

he's also got all of these

32:18

dark impulses. And you see that

32:20

in Silence at the Lambs as

32:22

well, don't you? With Hannibal Lecter.

32:24

He is a upstanding doctor. No

32:27

one thinks anything of him, but

32:29

he has this fascination with eating

32:31

people and absolutely loves loves it.

32:33

you've got that in here as

32:35

well with Wells who is he's

32:37

the most trusted scientist as well

32:39

because they trust him because they

32:41

think he couldn't possibly be you

32:44

you haven't got hands you can't

32:46

be out here strangling all these

32:48

people but he does have that

32:50

darker side and it's it's the

32:52

moment when he transforms into that

32:54

darker side which is that big

32:56

reveal and that amazing scene when

32:58

you see him become a different

33:01

person with this synthetic flesh that

33:03

he's created. Yeah, so how does

33:05

that look? What did you think

33:07

of the actual transformation itself when

33:09

he applies the synthetic flesh? It

33:11

just got more and more grotesque,

33:13

didn't it? Because it starts off

33:15

with him just getting out his

33:18

little hand from the cupboards, zapping

33:20

it, bringing it to life. and

33:22

then he's just like he's looking

33:24

at the moon and he's like

33:26

oh no yeah I'm getting the

33:28

urge and he's like grabbing all

33:30

this this like putty and just

33:32

slavering it all over his face

33:35

and just the way that he

33:37

sort of molds it to create

33:39

this different appearance for himself so

33:41

he's he's not just and he

33:43

says like this is my true

33:45

self this is what I really

33:47

am and I'm just bringing it

33:49

to the surface now with this

33:52

synthetic flesh. And this is who

33:54

I really imagine myself to be.

33:56

And there's just something so eerie

33:58

about that moment, the idea that

34:00

it is this different person. It's

34:02

like a... but for him it's

34:04

more than a disguise it's what

34:06

he really like. It's like Buffalo

34:09

Bill, it's like the Killer and

34:11

Red Dragon creating this alter ego

34:13

for themselves which for them is

34:15

actually their true selves like Dr.

34:17

Jekyll Mr. Hyde is actually Dr.

34:19

Jekyll so it's that duality that

34:21

dual personality of these of these

34:23

people, these scientists, and that's where

34:26

the madness is coming from, because

34:28

they've got this other side of

34:30

themselves which they can't keep under

34:32

lock and key for any longer.

34:34

Yeah, yeah, I thought he looked

34:36

like leather face once it was

34:38

all. Yeah, again, it's that imagery,

34:40

isn't it? It's a serial killer,

34:43

yeah, serial killers in cinema kind

34:45

of themes, both thematically and what

34:47

you're saying, like red dragon, and

34:49

also just visually looking like. Yeah,

34:51

leather face or even like Michael

34:53

Myers, Jason, all of that, the

34:55

mask, the application of the mask,

34:57

but the texture of the synthetic

35:00

flesh was was great, because it

35:02

looked gross, didn't it? It just

35:04

looked nasty. Synthetic flesh. And you

35:06

talked about how they kind of

35:08

vanquished him pretty quickly. That was

35:10

so sudden for me. They set

35:12

him on fire once they find

35:14

out that Wells is the killer

35:17

and then just push him out

35:19

of a window and that's it.

35:21

Yeah, yeah, again a little bit

35:23

disappointing because it's such a buildup

35:25

isn't it? The scene where he

35:27

transforms is great because it's pure

35:29

madness. He's just like pasting it

35:31

on and chantings in their dead

35:34

flash. You know, it's really iconic

35:36

and I can see why it

35:38

stands out in people's minds and

35:40

people... maybe think of this as

35:42

a synthetic flesh movie when I

35:44

don't really think it is because

35:46

it's such a great scene but

35:48

then to have him just yeah

35:51

just fall out of a window

35:53

get kind of like whacked by

35:55

the journey the annoying journalist and

35:57

then yeah falls off a cliff

35:59

and it's like oh there he

36:01

goes that's the end of that

36:03

that's disappointing because he has the

36:05

upper hand doesn't he's like he's

36:08

murdered does he murder the butler

36:10

who's the only yeah the creepy

36:12

butler who's like the only person

36:14

who could seemingly do anything at

36:16

that point to save everybody so

36:18

it's like oh shit like he's

36:20

got the upper hand everyone's for

36:22

some reason handcuff to their chairs

36:25

including dr x and the experiment

36:27

is underway But, and then it's

36:29

just like, the bumbling idiot just

36:31

rolls through and docks out a

36:33

window. And then the bumbling idiot

36:35

gets the girl at the end,

36:37

and it's just, yeah, that's where

36:39

we're going to end this film.

36:42

But I think for all of

36:44

that, for a film in the

36:46

30s, to be having this kind

36:48

of explosive ending, however quick and

36:50

fast it comes, I think all

36:52

the other elements in it are

36:54

so interesting, just this idea of

36:56

using science to track down a

36:59

killer. which of course becomes forensic

37:01

science and using all of those

37:03

imaginative concepts of this crazy lie

37:05

detector and trying to get psychological

37:07

responses out of the other scientists.

37:09

It's just like it's such a

37:11

crazy mishmash of a few different

37:13

kinds of genres and story structures

37:16

that I think it's like an

37:18

interesting case of mad science. And

37:20

also it's got five crazy scientists

37:22

in. What do you want? I

37:24

mean that's the best element for

37:26

me. It's the five different mad

37:28

scientists all involved in one big

37:30

mad science experiment to try and

37:33

uncover a killer that I love

37:35

that element of it. Yeah it's

37:37

five scientists and then one having

37:39

this dual personality. Again that's something

37:41

we keep seeing in these mad

37:43

science films and it's something that

37:45

we also see in time after

37:47

time, the idea of hiding another

37:50

side of yourself. Mm-hmm, and the

37:52

chase to pursue a killer. So

37:54

should we talk about Malcolm McDowell

37:56

as H.G. Wells in time after

37:58

time? Sounds good to me. Listeners,

38:00

are you looking for a shortcut

38:02

to better auto insurance for you?

38:04

Something that takes all the research

38:07

off your plate? Something that's easy?

38:09

Something that matches you with lower

38:11

rates? Something genius? That's where NurdWallett

38:13

comes in. Their Nurds already did

38:15

the work for you. Just answer

38:17

a few questions and tada! You'll

38:19

be matched with top insurance providers

38:21

in your area. Find the right

38:24

rate for you at NurdWallett.com. After

38:26

all, using Nurd Wallet is more

38:28

than smart. It's genius! Not all

38:30

applicants will qualify for the lowest

38:32

monthly parents to Nurd Wallet Insurance

38:34

Services Incorporated, California resident license number

38:36

OK923033. Darwin would approve T-Mobile's network

38:38

has adapted to so many locales.

38:41

Because T-Mobile's network has adapted to

38:43

so many locales. Because T-Mobile helps

38:45

keep you local. Up to four

38:47

lines, the virtual prepaid card will

38:49

have 15 days qualifying, unlocked device

38:51

credit, service, port in 90 plus

38:53

days, device, and eligible carrier, and

38:55

time the redemption required, card is

38:58

no cash access, and expires in

39:00

six months. Hi

39:05

listeners, hope you're enjoying the show.

39:07

If you want to support us

39:10

and get access to hundreds of

39:12

hours of bonus episodes, you can

39:14

sign up to our patron. We've

39:16

got discussions on all the latest

39:18

sci-fi films in cinemas, The Bad

39:21

Movie Bunker, and Patrons Picks, as

39:23

well as Minnie series covering your

39:25

favourite franchises. Patrons get to have

39:27

their say on what we cover,

39:29

both over on Patreon and right

39:32

here on the main show too.

39:34

So if you want to join,

39:36

head over to patreon.com/journey through sci-fi.

39:38

The time is 1893 and novelist

39:40

and inventor H.G. Wells makes a

39:43

startling announcement. Gentlemen, I am talking

39:45

about traveling through time in a

39:47

machine constructed for that very purpose.

39:49

The first to use the machine,

39:51

however, is Dr. John Leslie Stevenson.

39:54

Better known to history as Jack

39:56

the... And what was to be

39:58

a voyage of discovery in an

40:00

instant becomes a manhunt through time

40:03

from 19th century England to 20th

40:05

century San Francisco. So this is

40:07

directed by Nicholas Meyer, beloved director

40:09

of wrath of Khan, who will

40:11

go on to direct Star Trek

40:14

to the wrath of Khan. made

40:16

in 1979 and based on a

40:18

novel that hadn't been written? Is

40:20

that right? I'm not 100% on

40:22

that, but I know it was

40:25

based on, it's based on a

40:27

different novel, it's not based on

40:29

the time machine. No, but there

40:31

is a book called Time After

40:33

Time After Time, and I think

40:36

it was, it wasn't actually out

40:38

when the film came out, but

40:40

the author was friends with Nicholas

40:42

Meyer, I think, and said, what

40:45

do you think of this? Yeah,

40:47

what do you think this? I'm

40:49

sure there's a great way to

40:51

release a book as if there's

40:53

a movie already out, although novelisations

40:56

don't always do that well. Anyway,

40:58

it's kind of a retelling of

41:00

the time machine that we talked

41:02

about ages ago in our time

41:04

travel series, bringing back H.G. Wells,

41:07

but the fictional character H.G. Wells,

41:09

who is the main character from...

41:11

H-U-L is the time machine, right?

41:13

Yeah, and we've been talking about

41:15

H-G-W-S quite a lot so far

41:18

on the series. Obviously with The

41:20

Island of Dr. Moreau last episode

41:22

and The Invisible Man and just

41:24

how much of an inspiration to

41:26

other sci-fi writers he's been and

41:29

specifically the idea of like the

41:31

the mad scientist the the scientist

41:33

who has an invention that is

41:35

going to change things and the

41:38

moral dilemmas that you get from

41:40

that and the sort of ethical

41:42

questions that those bring up and

41:44

this is quite an interesting framework

41:46

for that because it's it's blending

41:49

historical figures with science fiction elements.

41:51

and creating again it's like another

41:53

it's another mishmash this feels more

41:55

like a than Dr. X was

41:57

perhaps. Dr. X was kind of

42:00

this murder mystery. Yeah, yeah. But

42:02

this feels very much like a

42:04

80s thriller film with Herbert H.G.

42:06

Wells pursuing the character of Jack

42:08

the Ripper across time into the

42:11

future and trying to track him

42:13

down and put an end to

42:15

his murderous ways. Yeah, yeah, it's

42:17

a. completely crazy plot, isn't it?

42:20

I was actually a little bit

42:22

surprised by how seriously the film

42:24

takes its own premise. Pleasantly surprised,

42:26

actually, because it's a silly premise.

42:28

H.G. Wells travels through time to

42:31

pursue Jack the Ripper. It's like,

42:33

that's a proper schlocky B movie

42:35

logline, isn't it? But that's not

42:37

what this is. It treats it

42:39

quite seriously. It has good performances

42:42

as well, really convincing performances within

42:44

that. extremely high-concept scenario that kind

42:46

of bring it to life and

42:48

make it feel quite real. And

42:50

again you've got this congregation of

42:53

learned men all getting together and

42:55

discussing science and big moral ethical

42:57

questions around it and stuff like

42:59

that. Like in the Time Machine,

43:01

HG World's original novel, this begins,

43:04

well it doesn't quite begin, but...

43:06

One of the early scenes is

43:08

of a dinner party where Wells

43:10

has got all of his colleagues,

43:13

all of his friends together to

43:15

discuss this machine that he's made.

43:17

But adding on the fact that

43:19

we've got Jack the Ripper roaming

43:21

around and turns out to be

43:24

one of these dinner guests, that

43:26

just gives it this whole extra

43:28

spin, which really does feel like

43:30

it's about to go off the

43:32

deep ends. but it keeps it

43:35

rooted in... I don't know, there

43:37

are, there are, there are, there's

43:39

a lot of fun to be

43:41

had in this film, but like

43:43

you say, it takes this premise

43:46

seriously at the same time, which

43:48

is a weird combination. Yeah, like,

43:50

there's, there's, there's, there's, there's, there's,

43:52

there's, there's, for Fish Out of

43:55

Water, Time Travel, humor, but it's

43:57

not in any way a comedy

43:59

movie. It's just quite naturalistic I

44:01

suppose in that here's a realistic

44:03

portrayal of what H.G. Wells would...

44:06

behave like if he was brought

44:08

almost 100 years into the future?

44:10

And when we talked about Wells

44:12

we were talking about his views

44:14

on society and his quite sort

44:17

of liberal nature and in this

44:19

they make references to free love

44:21

quite early on and things like

44:23

that so he's not completely shocked

44:25

when he enters the future and

44:28

is in this sort of utopian

44:30

world that he has in his

44:32

head which doesn't quite match up

44:34

to the real life. world of

44:36

1979, but there's still this this

44:39

hunger for knowledge that he's he's

44:41

going about throughout and he wants

44:43

to see if this future is

44:45

what he expects it to be.

44:48

But then you're juxtaposing that with

44:50

Jack the Ripper's character who is

44:52

going into the future to escape

44:54

capture and you're finding out how

44:56

actually the future... the Wells is

44:59

imagining with all of his utopian

45:01

views and views on society isn't

45:03

quite the case and it might

45:05

be more in line with Jack

45:07

the Ripper's view of what the

45:10

world is actually like. Yeah you've

45:12

got two friends essentially and this

45:14

is all set up at the

45:16

start of the movie when they're

45:18

playing chess and sort of debating

45:21

the nature of society one one

45:23

is hopeful and one is pessimistic

45:25

because he's a serial murderer but

45:27

believes that that that that you

45:30

know humanity is essentially bad and

45:32

just wants to be at war

45:34

with itself and then you've got

45:36

HG Wells this famous futurist who

45:38

has an optimistic outlook on the

45:41

future and then they're basically odds

45:43

for the rest of the movie

45:45

chasing each other around and fighting

45:47

and trying to catch each other.

45:49

And yeah, that's the main crux

45:52

of the film, isn't it? This

45:54

kind of like chase into the

45:56

future that's going on. But I

45:58

was so fascinated by the choice

46:00

of having Jack the Ripper in

46:03

this. Yeah, it's sad. It's such

46:05

a left-field choice. Yeah, yeah. But

46:07

it kind of works. And I

46:09

don't know why exactly it works,

46:11

because I was looking into the

46:14

sort of timelines of timelines of

46:16

things with this. Also the fact

46:18

that they call Jack the Ripper

46:20

so is last name Stevenson. And

46:23

it feels very much like Robert

46:25

Louis Stevenson. Were they friends? Were

46:27

Wells and Stevenson friends? I don't

46:29

think they were. I don't know

46:31

if they had that connection. I

46:34

don't think they did. But Dr.

46:36

Jekyll, Mr. Hyde, was obviously written

46:38

by Robert Louis Stevenson and Jack

46:40

the Ripper's persona has obviously been

46:42

like paralleled between that fictional character

46:45

and that real life serial killer

46:47

a lot. So... Dr Jekyll Mr

46:49

Hyde was written in 1886 and

46:51

that was only two years before

46:53

those murders in London in 1888.

46:56

So Jack the Ripper came after

46:58

the book after Dr Jekyll and

47:00

Mr Hyde and then there's they

47:02

never tracked down the killer. That

47:05

was the whole thing about Jack

47:07

the Ripper but there's been lots

47:09

of theories about who he could

47:11

have been and what his identity

47:13

actually was, who he was. But

47:16

it feels like it's kind of

47:18

almost shaped by the fiction around

47:20

Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde as

47:22

well and this idea of the

47:24

dual personality of a scientist of

47:27

a intellectual in Victoria and England

47:29

having this darker side because also

47:31

people have suspected that the way

47:33

that some of the killings happened

47:35

when Jack the Ripper was... going

47:38

around murdering people, they were quite

47:40

surgical in nature. So it made

47:42

sense that he was potentially a

47:44

doctor of some sort. So again,

47:46

you've got this kind of comparison

47:49

between these mad scientists, which we're

47:51

seeing, which have this darker side.

47:53

and the kind of ethical boundaries

47:55

about what they're doing and then

47:58

also their darker psychological urges that

48:00

they've got. And I feel like

48:02

that character, like he does fit

48:04

in with all these mad scientists

48:06

which we're looking at and specifically

48:09

Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, it's

48:11

got that real comparison to it.

48:13

And I don't think I'd put

48:15

the two ideas together beforehand, Jack

48:17

the Ripper and Mr. Hyde being

48:20

so similar, being Victorian England. but

48:22

also that fiction shaping people's perception

48:24

of that real-life historical figure. Yeah,

48:26

I think we talked about that

48:28

duality and this film is not

48:31

really that different in terms of

48:33

how it approaches the duality of

48:35

the characters and I think that's

48:37

the point of that chess scene

48:40

at the start where they're having

48:42

this sort of philosophical debate about

48:44

what the future is going to

48:46

be like. That's a question about

48:48

the duality of man. It's just

48:51

in this film it is... not

48:53

using the mad science to sort

48:55

of bring that out of one

48:57

character and show two sides of

48:59

one person. It's two sides of

49:02

humankind I guess as separate people

49:04

and opposing forces that chasing after

49:06

each other and at war with

49:08

each other. And that duality again

49:10

is coming in in the settings

49:13

because it goes from Victorian England

49:15

to San Francisco, which again seems

49:17

like a crazy choice. But it

49:19

works for this in some weird

49:21

way. So you've got HG Wells

49:24

running around San Francisco in basically

49:26

the 80s. Ordering a Big Mac.

49:28

Ordering a Big Mac. Oh my

49:30

God, that scene. I had to

49:33

text you immediately when I saw

49:35

that because I was... I was

49:37

like, what is happening here? And

49:39

then when he sees the advert

49:41

about Peptobismal, and he's just like,

49:44

oh, what's this? And just all

49:46

of these crazy little quirky things,

49:48

because he's still, Malcolm McDowell was

49:50

playing it as if, obviously he

49:52

is HG Wells, but these are

49:55

the kind of. reactions Age World

49:57

might have had if he was

49:59

in that future. And it feels

50:01

like it shouldn't work, right? Because

50:03

it's not a comedy and it

50:06

felt like it was going to

50:08

be a comedy when that sort

50:10

of stuff started to happen, but

50:12

that fish out of water stuff

50:15

runs its course pretty quickly. And

50:17

Malcolm McDowell's doing this really good

50:19

job of just... being H.G.

50:21

Wells, plodding through the future.

50:23

But then you've got David

50:25

Warner, who's very seriously playing

50:28

Jack the Ripper, who has

50:30

seized the opportunity to travel

50:32

to the future and continue

50:35

being a serial killer in

50:37

the modern day. And that

50:39

juxtaposition is so strange because

50:42

like... We see Malcolm McDonald's

50:44

experience of the future, which

50:46

is watching TV adverts and

50:48

enjoying Pomfretz in McDonald's. Meanwhile,

50:51

David Warner is experiencing the

50:53

future as a place where

50:55

he can run rampant as a

50:57

violent killer and reveling in this

51:00

opportunity. It's such a weird juxtaposition,

51:02

but somehow it all fits together

51:04

very neatly and without falling into

51:07

silliness at any point. Because he

51:09

makes such a thing about... you

51:11

can buy a gun anywhere here

51:13

and this place is made for

51:16

me and the violence is catching

51:18

all of these kind of

51:20

statements that David Warner

51:22

is making as Stevenson

51:25

just showing that kind

51:27

of alignment to that perverse

51:29

nature that he has and that

51:31

his outlook on the world and

51:34

it not being dissimilar to what

51:36

the world's actually like it's just

51:38

it's not Victorian England anymore these

51:40

things aren't suppressed in the

51:42

same way and you've got more coverage

51:45

of all of these terrible things

51:47

that are happening so when they

51:49

flick through the news they're seeing

51:51

all of these things about terrorism

51:53

and people being shots and murders

51:55

it's because suddenly all of these

51:58

things are in the public eye. Yeah,

52:00

do you think that, who do

52:02

you think is right about the

52:05

future then? Who kind of wins

52:07

the argument at the start of

52:09

the movie? Oh, that's an interesting

52:12

one, isn't it? Because obviously there

52:14

are dystopian elements in this time

52:16

period that we're showing, but also

52:19

there's all of these utopian ideas

52:21

that are just so different to

52:23

Victorian England. It's, I don't think

52:26

it's either one of those, is

52:28

it? in between both of their

52:30

viewpoints? Yeah, I suppose through Amy,

52:33

Mary Steenbergen's character, we're kind of

52:35

seeing some of the things that

52:37

H.G. Wells is supportive of in

52:40

Victorian times about women's liberation. And

52:42

I don't know if H.G. Wells

52:44

was really writing about free love.

52:46

I don't know if that's a

52:49

true thing about him. But obviously

52:51

then he's interacting with the post-60s.

52:53

post-1960s world that's experienced kind of

52:56

the hippie free love movement. So

52:58

I guess it's the film presenting

53:00

that both of them are right

53:03

and these different things to exist.

53:05

Again it's all about duality I

53:07

suppose and that's just the reality

53:10

of the world by 1979. The

53:12

world has caught up with me

53:14

and surpassed me. 90 years ago

53:17

I was a freak. Today I

53:19

am an amateur. The

53:23

future isn't what you thought. It's what

53:25

I am. Do you know that you

53:28

can go into a shop here and

53:30

purchase a rifle or a revolver? It's

53:32

perfectly legal. These people encourage it. Stop

53:35

it! So we've got this real world

53:37

setting that you're throwing these historical figures

53:39

into. That setting being San Francisco again.

53:42

Again, it's just so weird to me.

53:44

They go to all of this San

53:46

Francisco locations that everybody knows. and they've

53:49

got so many little pop culture elements

53:51

like the the Mickey Mouse phone really

53:53

drew my attention. Yeah. Oh just like

53:56

why is why does she have a

53:58

Mickey Mouse phone in particular? I

54:00

don't know, that really just threw

54:02

me out of it a little

54:05

bit, but again it's the Americanized

54:07

element of it all. But amongst

54:09

all of that stuff, you've got

54:11

this scientific, well you've got this

54:13

sci-fi element, haven't you, of the

54:15

time machine. And when we did

54:17

our time travel series, we talked

54:19

about methods of time travel and

54:21

how you depict that on screen.

54:23

What did you think about the

54:25

way they depicted Wells' time machine

54:27

in this iteration? Yeah, I really

54:29

liked it. It wasn't quite as

54:32

iconic as the sled from the

54:34

time machine, but I like that

54:36

it looked like a slightly updated

54:38

version, but still had this conceivably

54:40

Victorian construction. And it's got like,

54:42

looks like it's got like jelly

54:44

beans on the side, but it's

54:46

kind of, it's like a pod,

54:48

isn't it? It looks like a

54:50

tiny helicopter with no blades. I

54:52

like the dials, you know, all

54:54

that stuff, dialing in your date

54:56

and stuff. What I really liked

54:59

was the actual sequence of time

55:01

travel, the very psychedelic disco photography,

55:03

you know, with the sort of

55:05

shining refracted lights and what do

55:07

you call that, kind of like

55:09

repeating images, layering over each other

55:11

and photo negatives of Herbert. I

55:13

loved all that. I thought that

55:15

was cool. I was like, like,

55:17

like, time travel sequence. I thought

55:19

the time machine looked cool as

55:21

well. What did you think of

55:23

it? And how does it compare

55:26

to the sled? Because you love

55:28

the sled, don't you? The sled's

55:30

great. The sled with the way

55:32

it's got it, you move forward,

55:34

you go forward in time, you

55:36

move back. It's got those kind

55:38

of elements, but I think making

55:40

it look a bit more like

55:42

a carriage almost. wasn't quite what

55:44

I wanted for this, but it

55:46

still does look cool. It's a

55:48

cool time machine. It looks a

55:50

bit like a toy you could

55:53

buy in the 80s with the,

55:55

like you said, the little gems

55:57

on the side, just making it

55:59

look a bit more psychedelic. A

56:01

bit more buckroaches. Yeah. Battle cycliclet.

56:03

Exactly that. It's a bit more

56:05

colourful and that kind of matches

56:07

up with the special effects that

56:09

they're doing with all of the

56:11

sort of light prisms and the

56:13

sort of spectrums that you're seeing.

56:15

So it's got all of that

56:18

to it which I liked. I

56:20

got a bit confused if I'm

56:22

honest about how the key worked

56:24

and the automatic return and all

56:26

of that stuff. I understood the

56:28

key in the return but then

56:30

they throw it, there's a few

56:32

check-off guns that Herb has... built

56:34

into his time machine in this

56:36

version and some red herrings like

56:38

there's a big fuss about it

56:40

being solar powered then that's not

56:42

that's not part of it that's

56:45

not part of the plot that's

56:47

just a thing I said that's

56:49

an excuse for him to say

56:51

the line or for him to

56:53

talk about electricity and call Edison

56:55

the modern Prometheus did you catch

56:57

that Frankenstein reference but that's not

56:59

actually relevant so the key the

57:01

key just means like but by

57:03

default Herbert's machine will just come

57:05

back to his basement in 1893

57:07

every time unless you pop a

57:09

key in and turn the lock

57:12

with the key to lock it

57:14

in place in the future in

57:16

the past or whatever. So you're

57:18

in control of that like... automatic

57:20

return system. The thing though I

57:22

did not understand is the other

57:24

check-off's gun which is the vaporizing

57:26

equalizer which is an external plug

57:28

that obviously by the end of

57:30

the film it's like oh right

57:32

that's why that's there but like

57:34

an external plug that you just

57:36

yank out and if you do

57:39

that the pilot will float through

57:41

time, basically. But what that actually,

57:43

well zapped away, it seems like,

57:45

it seems like John is being

57:47

zapped away at the end of

57:49

the movie. But I think the

57:51

description at the start of the

57:53

movie is that without the vaporizing

57:55

equalizer, the subject will travel without

57:57

the machine, which implies that John

57:59

just travelled. somewhere wherever he set

58:01

the date and can't come back

58:03

but but may well be alive

58:06

and terrorizing the the population. I

58:08

don't know I've sort of understood

58:10

it as he's like in the

58:12

void like in the time void.

58:14

Yeah okay I think can't be

58:16

found there is an element of

58:18

that outside the time spheres. Hmm

58:20

as talk of time spheres. Yeah

58:22

again time travel always complicated when

58:24

described on screen but also like

58:26

the rules can be anything. and

58:28

having that kind of I think

58:30

the Chekhov's gun an allergy comparison

58:33

that you just had was exactly

58:35

right it's those kind of things

58:37

they throw in at the start

58:39

like this is how it works

58:41

this is all the exposition we're

58:43

gonna come back to this later

58:45

and then you might understand why

58:47

that's in there yeah absolutely so

58:49

he can zap him exactly he

58:51

needs to get rid of him

58:53

but I think like Herbert is

58:55

maybe our least least mad scientists.

58:57

He's doing, he's conducting mad science,

59:00

he's created a time machine. I

59:02

think most of the people that

59:04

built time machines when we did

59:06

our time travel series were mad

59:08

scientists in one way or the

59:10

other. But this one and also

59:12

Dr. X as well are kind

59:14

of the least mad people that

59:16

we've seen that are doing mad

59:18

science because they're very like, they've

59:20

got the head screwed on and

59:22

they're trying to solve murders. they're

59:24

very rational men who happen to

59:27

partake in quite mad scientific experiments.

59:29

I was thinking about this and

59:31

although he isn't mad in the

59:33

way that you would imagine, everybody

59:35

else thinks that he's mad. He

59:37

is literally in the future telling

59:39

people he's HG Wells or Sherlock

59:41

Holmes. And he's just nobody believes

59:43

him because it's just... So it's

59:45

crazy. So he is viewed upon

59:47

as this mad character by everybody

59:49

else. And that's kind of a

59:51

thing that you see in sci-fi

59:54

with scientists and people with big

59:56

breakthroughs. Everybody else is like, no,

59:58

it can't be done. This is

1:00:00

ridiculous. ideas are not realistic, you're

1:00:02

not living in the real world,

1:00:04

but these are people which are,

1:00:06

well they're not living in the

1:00:08

real world, they are using their

1:00:10

minds to think up different things.

1:00:12

And in this, I think the

1:00:14

moment where that really sort of

1:00:16

stood out for me was that

1:00:18

interrogation scene. and it just made

1:00:21

me think of the Terminator as

1:00:23

well. Yeah, yeah, yeah, I thought

1:00:25

of Terminator, yeah, Carl Reese and

1:00:27

Sarah Connor being interviewed by the

1:00:29

police and trying to tell their

1:00:31

stories of a doomed future. I

1:00:33

also really like him like bringing

1:00:35

in the name Sherlock Holmes, like

1:00:37

he thinks he's being clever but

1:00:39

it just makes him sound even

1:00:41

stupider. Because he's got no frame

1:00:43

of reference, has it? He doesn't

1:00:45

know that people would still know

1:00:48

about this all those years later.

1:00:50

But yeah, I love that. He

1:00:52

must know that Sherlock Holmes would

1:00:54

be a more well-known than H.G.

1:00:56

Wells. Although actually, no, he arrives

1:00:58

and he actually arrives in an

1:01:00

H.G. Wells Museum. So he's not

1:01:02

that famous, I think, in his

1:01:04

own time, yeah, as an author.

1:01:06

But then I suppose he's arrived

1:01:08

and realized that he is well-known

1:01:10

enough to have a museum. So

1:01:12

yeah, maybe Sherlock Holmes is a

1:01:15

good check. But you can't think

1:01:17

of another name. straight off the

1:01:19

bat. And he's sort of a

1:01:21

naive guy, isn't he? He's played

1:01:23

as a bit of a naive

1:01:25

guy. He's very smart and he's

1:01:27

got all these grand ideas and

1:01:29

philosophies about how the world should

1:01:31

be. But he's just like quite

1:01:33

honest and friendly. That's like, that's

1:01:35

his character. Which is good when

1:01:37

you compare him again, that duality

1:01:39

between him and Stevenson. Like one

1:01:42

is clearly a good character, one

1:01:44

is clearly a bad character. And

1:01:46

that makes that sort of fight

1:01:48

between them even more good versus

1:01:50

evil. So it's so important that

1:01:52

Herbert wins by the end of

1:01:54

it. But the whole thing is,

1:01:56

is that again, it's that time

1:01:58

constraint like the moon killer in

1:02:00

Dr. X. There are... certain times

1:02:02

when he's going to strike. And

1:02:04

in this, you use that age

1:02:06

old thing with time travel, where

1:02:09

knowing a little bit about the

1:02:11

future and trying to preempt what's

1:02:13

going to happen, and that really

1:02:15

comes into play when they're trying

1:02:17

to stop Amy from being killed

1:02:19

after they read that newspaper report.

1:02:21

So all of those elements really

1:02:23

sort of lean into this. Again,

1:02:25

it's the Hitchcock. ticking clock, the

1:02:27

ticking bomb underneath, so you've got

1:02:29

that sort of fret of what's

1:02:31

coming later in the film. So

1:02:33

you know you've got this time

1:02:36

constraint to it and that makes

1:02:38

it more of a thriller as

1:02:40

well because you're hoping, well you're

1:02:42

waiting for that to happen, you

1:02:44

know that something bad is going

1:02:46

to happen towards the end. Can

1:02:48

he stop the killer in time?

1:02:50

Yeah, that race against time element

1:02:52

is what makes it more like

1:02:54

a thriller like you were saying

1:02:56

when we started talking about it.

1:02:58

It is a thriller movie and

1:03:00

we have to stop him. We

1:03:03

have to stop him because he's

1:03:05

just going to keep killing people

1:03:07

if we don't stop him. And

1:03:09

the idea that Stevenson always wins,

1:03:11

so whenever they were playing chess,

1:03:13

Stevenson always wins because he can

1:03:15

read what Wells is going to

1:03:17

do next. Because, again, because he

1:03:19

is quite an open and honest

1:03:21

man, he is easy to read.

1:03:23

Herbert is an honest person who

1:03:25

speaks his mind and if you're...

1:03:27

deceitful and trying to manipulate people,

1:03:30

then you can take advantage of

1:03:32

that kind of a person I

1:03:34

guess. So it's kind of also

1:03:36

about her about having to start

1:03:38

to think more duplicously and get

1:03:40

one step ahead of Stevenson to

1:03:42

catch it. And also because that

1:03:44

darker side of Stevenson is being

1:03:46

revealed more and more through their

1:03:48

conversations, Wells is finally actually understanding

1:03:50

how he thinks. So he's able

1:03:52

to get into his mind. and

1:03:54

think about what he's gonna do

1:03:57

next, where he's gonna go, even

1:03:59

though a lot of the time

1:04:01

is him sort of like, it

1:04:03

seems like he's almost bumbling after

1:04:05

him, trying to catch up, whether

1:04:07

he's driving a car really. fast,

1:04:09

out of necessity, all of this

1:04:11

kind of stuff. He's trying to

1:04:13

track him down, but he doesn't,

1:04:15

he's not doing it in this

1:04:17

very, because David Warner's, Stevenson is

1:04:19

very calculated, he's very serious. So

1:04:21

it's again, it's another contrast because

1:04:24

you've seen Wells having a big

1:04:26

Mac and some palm Fritz and

1:04:28

a couple of tea. There's no

1:04:30

fish out of water sequence for

1:04:32

David Warner. He's like... we meet

1:04:34

him importantly i think the first

1:04:36

time we see him in 1979

1:04:38

he's wearing a suit from 1979

1:04:40

he just looks like a guy

1:04:42

from 1979 he talks like a

1:04:44

guy from 1979 he acts like

1:04:46

a guy from 1979 he's there's

1:04:48

no fish out of water element

1:04:51

there it's not humorous he is

1:04:53

a cold-blooded killer and he's good

1:04:55

at that whatever the time period

1:04:57

so what did you think about

1:04:59

his portrayal David Warner's specific portrayal

1:05:01

as Stevenson Well I just think

1:05:03

all three leads in this film

1:05:05

are so good because they're able

1:05:07

to sell this film as a

1:05:09

serious story because it's such a

1:05:11

barmy plot line and David Warner

1:05:13

there's there's a scary calmness about

1:05:15

him I think in the whole

1:05:18

film in that murdering is like

1:05:20

just not really a big deal

1:05:22

to him and that makes him

1:05:24

really creepy but not in a

1:05:26

kind of not over the top,

1:05:28

scary, pantomime way. I think it's

1:05:30

a great portrayal of a serial

1:05:32

killer who just sees killing as

1:05:34

like, his right, really, like, I

1:05:36

deserve to be able to kill

1:05:38

whoever I want, basically. Did you

1:05:40

find it interesting that Malcolm McDowell

1:05:42

is playing the good character in

1:05:45

this when he's so... Definitely, yeah.

1:05:47

Well, it made me wonder if

1:05:49

I've like not seen enough Malcolm

1:05:51

McDowell things, because I only associate

1:05:53

him with playing bastards really. Obviously

1:05:55

Alex from Clockwork Orange, but as

1:05:57

an older actor as well. him

1:05:59

in a lot of stuff and

1:06:01

he tends to play if not

1:06:03

an outright villain then like you

1:06:05

know somebody's mean boss or something

1:06:08

like that he plays bastards so

1:06:10

to see him play this sort

1:06:12

of emotionally open very honest guy

1:06:14

and like give a good performance

1:06:16

of that really convincingly playing this

1:06:18

version of Herbert Wells I was

1:06:21

shocked I guess I just I

1:06:23

didn't know that Malcolm McDowell could

1:06:25

give such a performance he's he's

1:06:27

great in it they both are

1:06:29

It was great. And then seeing

1:06:32

him interact with Mary Steenberg and

1:06:34

as well as Amy, I think that

1:06:36

softens him as well because she's

1:06:38

so like amenable and

1:06:41

nice-natured that when you see them

1:06:43

to the two of them in this

1:06:45

together, you can see that kind

1:06:47

of, they're like rubbing off on

1:06:49

each other, which is actually what was

1:06:51

happening as well. Yeah, literally, because they

1:06:53

got married after this, didn't they? They

1:06:56

had a real on and off screen

1:06:58

relationship, which I had no idea about

1:07:00

until I was looking at it up

1:07:02

afterwards. I would never have picked those

1:07:04

two as a couple. Yeah, well

1:07:06

you've got to, you've got to

1:07:09

assume Malcolm McDowell's not, Malcolm McDowell

1:07:11

off screen, you know? But it

1:07:13

shows you just like how investors

1:07:15

you get into certain, like, actors'

1:07:17

performances. And when they get typecast

1:07:19

into role, which is just like,

1:07:21

that's who they are, it's weird.

1:07:23

Yes, he's quite iconic. I think

1:07:25

it really just comes down to

1:07:27

his voice. He has a perfect

1:07:30

villain's voice, doesn't he? And he's

1:07:32

not doing the Malcolm McDowell voice

1:07:34

in this, he... like, tried to do a

1:07:36

real impression of H.G. Wells, but when

1:07:38

he heard H.G. Wells, real voice, he

1:07:40

was like, oh, that's shit. Like,

1:07:42

apparently, I've not heard H.G. Wells' real

1:07:45

voice, but there are recordings of him

1:07:47

and apparently he's got a very, like,

1:07:49

squeaky, high-pitched voice. He was like, that's

1:07:52

not very dignified. I did read about

1:07:54

that. I did make me laugh. I

1:07:56

did make me laugh. I did make

1:07:59

me laugh. voice throughout. It would

1:08:01

have taken, I mean, trying to

1:08:03

do this film seriously and then

1:08:05

adding that into the mix just

1:08:07

wouldn't have worked. I'm going to

1:08:09

talk about the greatest problem mankind

1:08:11

has to face. I do not

1:08:13

mean the greatest problem that any

1:08:15

man may have to face. Personal

1:08:17

problems are individuals, a different with

1:08:19

everyone else. But I mean the

1:08:21

greatest problem. that is before our

1:08:23

race as a whole. And that

1:08:25

is how we are to get

1:08:27

rid of the old governments that

1:08:29

we have worn out and that

1:08:31

we have grown out of. But

1:08:33

then Amy Robbins, so Mary Steenbergen's

1:08:35

character as well, is kind of,

1:08:37

she's leading the way with their

1:08:39

relationship in this as well. So

1:08:41

she's like taking it by the

1:08:43

reins. And I thought that was

1:08:45

an interesting dynamic as well, because

1:08:47

you've got this sort of... stiff

1:08:49

upper lip Englishmen from Victorian times

1:08:51

who is quite liberal in that

1:08:53

time and then coming to the

1:08:55

future and then him adjusting to

1:08:58

everything else here I thought that

1:09:00

was an interesting pairing of them

1:09:02

and again it kind of humanized

1:09:04

his character even more by putting

1:09:06

those two in a relationship. Yeah

1:09:08

it's a believable romance as well

1:09:10

probably because they were shagging off

1:09:12

screen but like it is it

1:09:14

is a good romance and like

1:09:16

it kind of the mid part

1:09:18

of the film sort of becomes

1:09:20

more like romantic comedy like they

1:09:22

seemingly kill off Jack the Ripper

1:09:24

off screen within you know less

1:09:26

than an hour and then you've

1:09:28

got just a chunk of them

1:09:30

having a romance having a romantic

1:09:32

comedy almost that then comes crashing

1:09:34

down when Jack the Ripper is

1:09:36

still active in San Francisco but

1:09:38

again it's just this weird thing

1:09:40

where there's... some crazy high concept

1:09:42

ideas and then I wasn't necessarily

1:09:44

expecting a romantic comedy in the

1:09:46

middle so there's some genre hopping

1:09:48

back and forth and yet the

1:09:50

whole thing hangs together. I really

1:09:52

do think because of the three

1:09:54

performances that are just so believable

1:09:56

as people dealing with with time

1:09:58

traveling H.G. Wells and Jack the

1:10:00

Ripper, like you need you need

1:10:02

absolutely premium actors to sell that

1:10:04

concept, don't you? Oh, 100% and

1:10:06

you can see why even though

1:10:08

this film like this film has

1:10:10

built up a cult following around

1:10:12

it. And it's a shame we

1:10:14

didn't get to cover it in

1:10:16

our time travel series, but I'm

1:10:18

really glad we've been able to

1:10:20

cover it here because in terms

1:10:22

of like film history, Back to

1:10:25

the Future was quite a bit

1:10:27

to this in certain ways as

1:10:29

well because it was a different

1:10:31

spin on time travel. I think

1:10:33

the creators are back to the

1:10:35

future watch this a few times.

1:10:37

I mean that would explain why

1:10:39

Mary Steenberg appears in Back to

1:10:41

the Future Free as Doc's love

1:10:43

interest. So... you've got this kind

1:10:45

of legacy of this film as

1:10:47

well and it just works really

1:10:49

well for this mad science concept

1:10:51

in addition because you've got this

1:10:53

duality of the scientist and the

1:10:55

wanting to do something to benefit

1:10:57

mankind and provide this new invention

1:10:59

this new scientific knowledge that is

1:11:01

is going to help people but

1:11:03

there is also this darker side

1:11:05

of humanity that is going to

1:11:07

misuse that and that's where you

1:11:09

get this split between good and

1:11:11

evil and the moral and ethical

1:11:13

questions of using this kind of

1:11:15

technology. Yeah, the misuse of somebody

1:11:17

else's mad science is an interesting

1:11:19

sort of... dimension that we haven't,

1:11:21

I don't think we've seen before,

1:11:23

someone getting their hands on the

1:11:25

mad scientist creation. Yeah, I think

1:11:27

that's going to come up surely

1:11:29

and it'll be business people trying

1:11:31

to make money out of these

1:11:33

scientific inventions and that's when the

1:11:35

mad science goes bad and becomes

1:11:37

more mad. So it's interesting to

1:11:39

look at these characters who are

1:11:41

the most... mad scientists we've seen

1:11:43

I think so far on the

1:11:45

series. Well some of them. Some

1:11:47

of them. Well I think the

1:11:50

main characters HGLs and DrX themselves

1:11:52

have kind of got their heads

1:11:54

screwed on pretty tight but next

1:11:56

time on the show we're going

1:11:58

to be going back to mad

1:12:00

science and the madness of the

1:12:02

scientists as well but being driven

1:12:04

mad by the science itself. We've

1:12:06

already seen that a little bit

1:12:08

in some of our earlier films

1:12:10

and we're going to take two

1:12:12

more films to look at people

1:12:14

going... totally bonkers as a result

1:12:16

of the scientific experiments. Yes, and

1:12:18

to do that we will be

1:12:20

looking at The Invisible Ray from

1:12:22

1936, and we are pairing that

1:12:24

with Dark Man from 1990. I'm

1:12:26

so excited to watch Dark Man,

1:12:28

James, because I'm a big Sam

1:12:30

Ramey fan, but until researching this

1:12:32

series, I thought I'd seen Dark

1:12:34

Man, and I've only just realized

1:12:36

that I had it confused with

1:12:38

the shadow, which came out a

1:12:40

similar time without a Baldwin. So

1:12:42

I'm really excited to see Dark

1:12:44

Man, a classic. Sam Ramey film.

1:12:46

Yeah there's some interesting tidbits about

1:12:48

that comparison as well which we'll

1:12:50

get into in that episode but

1:12:52

also I think seeing Boris Karloff

1:12:54

in a role that isn't Frankenstein's

1:12:56

creature and also Bella Legosie makes

1:12:58

an appearance in the Invisible Ray

1:13:00

as well so I'm looking forward

1:13:02

to discussing that. Legosie and Karloff

1:13:04

together yeah that's going to be

1:13:06

that I think that's kind of

1:13:08

going to cap off our early

1:13:10

30s and 40s period I think

1:13:12

we might have one more after

1:13:14

that but a good way to

1:13:17

to sort of approach the end

1:13:19

of that, he's having a film

1:13:21

with Karloff and Legosie on screen

1:13:23

together. Yeah, so keep an eye

1:13:25

on the main feed for that

1:13:27

when it drops in a few

1:13:29

weeks' time. Thanks so much for

1:13:31

joining us for today's episode of

1:13:33

Journey Through Sci-Fi. Please make sure

1:13:35

you subscribe to the show so

1:13:37

you can be up to date

1:13:39

when the new episodes drop every

1:13:41

few weeks. You can also find

1:13:43

us on social media or on

1:13:45

all of the social media as

1:13:47

I'm sure if you're on it

1:13:49

you can find us there and

1:13:51

you can come to our website

1:13:53

journey through sci-fi.com and if you

1:13:55

want a free and easy way

1:13:57

to support the podcast You can

1:13:59

leave us a review, five stars,

1:14:01

always goes down a treat. It's

1:14:03

a quick and easy way to

1:14:05

help new listeners of the show

1:14:07

discover it. And if you really

1:14:09

like what we do and you

1:14:11

want to support us even more

1:14:13

than that, you can come and

1:14:15

join us on patron at patron.com/journey

1:14:17

through sci-fi. We get all of

1:14:19

our bonus content and support the

1:14:21

show. That wraps up today's episode.

1:14:23

We'll be back soon. Darwin

1:14:27

would approve T-Mobile's network has adapted to

1:14:30

so many locales. Because T-Mobile helps keep

1:14:32

you connected from the heart of Portland

1:14:34

to right where you are on America's

1:14:36

largest 5G network. Switch now, keep your

1:14:38

phone and T-Mobile will pay it off

1:14:40

up to $800 per line via prepaid

1:14:42

card. Switch now, keep your phone and

1:14:44

T-Mobile will pay it off up to

1:14:47

$800 per line via prepaid via pre-paid

1:14:49

via prepaid, via virtual prepaid card, a

1:14:51

lot of $15 qualifying, unlocked, qualifying, unlocked

1:14:53

device credit, and $15. Marketing

1:14:57

is hard. But I'll tell you a

1:14:59

little secret. It doesn't have to be.

1:15:01

Let me point something out. You're listening

1:15:04

to a podcast right now and it's

1:15:06

great. You love the host, you seek

1:15:08

it out and download it, you listen

1:15:10

to it while driving, working out, cooking,

1:15:13

even going to the bathroom. Podcasts are

1:15:15

a pretty close companion. And this is

1:15:17

a podcast ad. Did I get your

1:15:19

attention? You can reach great listeners like

1:15:22

yourself with podcast advertising from Libsin ads.

1:15:24

Choose from hundreds of top podcasts offering

1:15:26

host endorsements or run a pre-produced ad

1:15:28

like this one across thousands of shows

1:15:31

to reach your target audience in their

1:15:33

favorite podcasts with Libsin ads. Go to

1:15:35

Libsinads.com that's L-I-B-S-Y-N- ads.com today.