I’ve always been a fan of this story ever since seeing the existing part four – The Final Test – on The Hartnell Years VHS release.  With 3 episodes missing it was also turned into a reconstruction by the magic hands of Loose Cannon and is, I think, one of their best recons.

So it was a bit of a surprise when over recent years I’ve seen the story fall from favour amongst fandom.  It’s funny how these things happen (and always makes me despair at the negative attitude of a lot of fans towards Moffat’s Doctor Who).  Stories which were revered are re-examined and re-evaluated by fans and sometimes their faults become more obvious and fans become less forgiving.  Conversely, stories which were traditionally seen as the dregs of the series are championed by larger and larger groups of fans.  This is why I can’t see the point of fans constantly complaining about ‘new’ Who.  Give it 10 years and suddenly they’ll be a bunch of fans who adore The Rings of Akhaten, Nightmare in Silver or In the Forest of the Night.  Others will emerge who are bored by The Empty Child.

The Celestial Toymaker was one of those stories which ‘received fan wisdom’ told us was wonderful.  It spawned a fan favourite in the Toymaker – a villain who has returned in comic strips, novels and audio.  He was even to return in the aborted Season 23 in a story now available for us to experience thanks to the efforts of Big Finish.  But suddenly, fans don’t like it any more.  Now I’m not saying ‘fan wisdom’ should ever be taken as verbatim.  Indeed, I strongly believe fan wisdom is a fallacy.  Our fan language (our ‘fanguage’, if you like) was moulded and set in the 70s, 80s and 90s by the upper echelons – fans such as Jeremy Bentham and Ian Levine.  Fans who ‘remembered’ the stories when they were broadcast; fans who wrote the articles in Doctor Who Weekly, Monthly and Magazine.  They told us what was good and what wasn’t.  The Celestial Toymaker was good.  The  Gunfighters was bad.  Genesis of the Daleks was good.  Revenge of the Cybermen was bad.  All of Season 24 was a travesty.  And so it went on.  Statistics like audience appreciation figures and viewing figures were wheeled out to prove points with little or no context.  In pre-internet days we knew no better.  It was only as these stories started appearing on VHS, and latterly DVD, that fans started to realise maybe we had been misled a little all these years.  Suddenly people were saying they enjoyed The Gunfighters.  There were even people not convinced by the glory of Genesis of the Daleks and – shock horror – someone even liked Delta and the Bannermen enough to make it their username online and have it as a theme for their 40th Birthday cake…

And it seems the poor old Celestial Toymaker has plummeted in favour.  But I still rather like it, although maybe more for the potential than for the realisation.

Negatives out of the way first.  The Doctor’s role in the story is terrible.  The whole trilogic game is dull as ditchwater and it is rendered even more ridiculous on audio with Peter Purves intoning lines like ‘2 moves on to 4 and 3 on to 8’ with as much drama as he can muster.  The absence of the Doctor is something the series has dealt with well on numerous occasions both before this story and since.  Unfortunately, I think the behind the scenes ructions and the possibility of replacing Hartnell as the Doctor, have led to a quick fix solution which isn’t very satisfying.

Dodo, in this story, is hugely irritating.  The script can’t make up its mind whether she is scared of the Toymaker’s domain or entertained by the games and fun.  She is ridiculously naïve around the Toymaker’s minions and it’s a wonder Steven doesn’t leave her to her fate when, even in the final episode, she’s is falling for Cyril’s tricks.

Whilst I like the games Steven and Dodo are forced to play, and the characters they play against, it is frustrating that, time after time, they win the game merely due to the mistakes of the other ‘team’.  There is a real sense of them merely blundering through each stage of the contest and winning purely by luck rather than ingenuity or cunning.  It’s a shame, because more could have been made of them sussing out the Toymaker’s  modus operandi and maybe playing him at his own game by the third or fourth episodes.  As it is, they approach each game as if it’s their first with Dodo even stating ‘I think I’m going to enjoy this game’ before embarking on TARDIS Hopscotch in the final episode.  It doesn’t make sense that they don’t learn anything from the earlier games and it undermines Steven and Dodo as characters.

So what do I like?  I think Michael Gough is great as the Toymaker and I can see why the character was a fan favourite for returning is various comics, novels and audios.  The concept of an all-mighty being that delights in playing twisted versions of familiar games is ripe with potential.  I know a criticism that’s levelled at this story is that the potential isn’t realised but I disagree.  The musical killer chairs is a great sequence with each chair killing in a different way; the version on the Loose Cannon recon of the demise of the King and Queen of Hearts is chilling, although admittedly we have no way of knowing how that was realised on screen.  I also rather enjoy the hunt the key/dancing floor games.  The idea of being trapped on a dance floor with no control over your actions has echoes of fairy tales such as Snow White (which saw the Wicked Queen put into hot iron shoes and made to dance to her death).

I also love the different characters the Toymaker sets against Steven and Dodo.  Carmen Silvera, Campbell Singer and Peter Stephens are all great, particularly Silvera and Singer who manage to give three very different characters in each episode.  Clowns are always spooky and the silent Joey and the slightly hysterical Clara work well, I think.  Sergeant Rugg and Mrs Wigg and their verbal battles are also lots of fun but the best of the bunch, for me, are the King and Queen of Hearts.  It is from these characters that we get more hints as to who these creations are.  Steven keeps asserting that they are just toys brought to life but I think the script hints to us that they are more than this.  They are previous victims of the Toymaker – ones who lost the games he forced them to play.  The King and Queen act autonomously, willing to sacrifice the Joker and the Knave in an attempt to win and be released from their servitude.  The Toymaker refers to them as ‘the Heart family’.  Could this actually be a family caught in his world – ‘the Hart family’ for instance.  Likewise, Rugg and Wigg.  I can see how Rugg or Wigg may have been caught in a deal with the Toymaker much as we see in the comic and novels which came later.  Cyril, too, with his cheating ways, could easily be a human desperate to escape and amoral enough not to care what happens to Steven or Dodo in his stead.  Look at his ‘yaroo!’ when he thinks he’s won, enough to forget his trap of slippery powder and fall to his death.  Those are the actions of a human, a desperate human.

It could be argued that these implications are aspects of character I’m applying after the fact.  Having read Divided Loyalties, read Endgame or listened to The Nightmare Fair, where different authors have extrapolated the concept of the Toymaker, his power, his minions and his world, maybe I’m retconning the characters and events of The Celestial Toymaker and seeing things that aren’t necessarily in the script as written or produced.  But then, does that matter.  Not really.

The climax of the story, with the Doctor restored but unable to complete the game lest he destroys himself along with the Toymaker’s world is a good ending too.  It is a battle of wits that fits the two characters, especially as they seem to know each other of old.  The concept, too, that despite the Toymaker’s world ending, he, as an entity, will go on to build new worlds, is also tantalising.  The widening of the Doctor Who mythos to include these ‘god-like’ entities is important as it isn’t something the series had ever really touched on before.  Whether retro-fitting the Toymaker into the same pantheon as the Black and White Guardians, as later fiction does, is a successful extrapolation is a discussion for another time but even just the titbits of information we are given here are enough to intrigue.

This is, of course, something that Russell T Davies seems to be running with in the 15th Doctor's first series after the return of the Toymaker in The Giggle.  It's interesting that the show is finally exploring some of the potential housed in The Celestial Toymaker that I saw myself.  I am also looking forward to the soon-to-be released animated version of this story which also looks as though it will be exploring the potential of this story.

A curio.

Thworping through time and space, one adventure at a time!

“The Celestial Toymaker: A Game Show in the Void, But Does It Play Well?”

The Celestial Toymaker begins with an ambitious concept: the Doctor and his companions are trapped in a surreal domain outside time and space, forced to play deadly games by the enigmatic Toymaker. While the premise teases limitless potential, the execution fails to deliver a satisfying or engaging narrative.

Rules of the Game: Pacing Issues and Missed Opportunities

The serial’s core problem lies in its overlong and repetitive structure. Each game, from the tedious chair-picking challenge to the nonsensical kitchen sequence, feels unnecessarily drawn out. What could have been an exhilarating two-parter is stretched into four episodes, testing the viewer’s patience. The games lack variety and stakes, undermining their potential to generate tension or excitement.

The Toymaker himself is another missed opportunity. Michael Gough’s (Alfred in the 90s Batman films!) performance hints at a fascinating, powerful adversary, but the character remains frustratingly passive. His vague Oriental-inspired villainy, complete with harmful stereotypes, has aged poorly, detracting from his intended mystique.

Pieces on the Board: Companions Left in Limbo

Steven and Dodo are positioned as the story’s leads during the Doctor’s partial absence (his invisibility was going to be used to write Hartnell out and replace him with a new actor, but was dropped because Hartnell’s contract was renewed), but they’re given little to do beyond reacting to the games. Their interactions lack depth, and their potential character development is sacrificed to the serial’s rigid focus on the tasks at hand.

Dodo’s overconfidence, which could be a compelling trait, instead comes across as grating, while Steven’s resourcefulness is largely wasted. The lack of meaningful development for either companion leaves them feeling static and underutilised.

The Playing Field: A Lifeless Setting and Uneven Performances

The visual design of The Celestial Toymaker is a significant letdown. The minimalist sets fail to evoke the surreal wonder and danger that the story requires, while the missing episodes leave reconstructions struggling to convey the intended atmosphere.

The supporting cast, with characters like the squeaky clown Clara and the unsettling Cyril, veer into the realm of the irritating and unintentional nightmare fuel. Michael Gough’s restrained performance as the Toymaker stands out, but even he is unable to elevate the lacklustre material.

Final Moves: A Lack of Tension and an Underwhelming Climax

The serial’s conclusion brings some light tension, particularly in the final moments of the Doctor’s Trilogic game. However, the resolution feels anticlimactic, and the Toymaker’s threat never materialises into anything tangible. The cliffhanger leading into The Gunfighters provides a brief spark of interest but does little to redeem the preceding story.

Verdict: A Concept with No Winning Strategy

The Celestial Toymaker is a rare example of a four-parter that feels too long, its potential squandered by lacklustre writing, poor pacing, and uninspired visuals. While the premise offers glimpses of creativity and ambition, the end result is a tedious and problematic outing that fails to live up to its promise. 

📝40/100

An intriguing but flawed experiment that leaves little lasting impression, The Celestial Toymaker plays all the wrong moves.

Weird story. I’m sorry to say that I think the original Toymaker is a bit of a rubbish bad guy, I’m glad this character has been given a bit of a redemption more recently. This story took slow pacing to a whole new level. There was zero threat, and the resolution was too simple, making the rest of the story a waste of time.

I had "missed" this one in my initial viewing of Classic Who thanks to the missing episodes. Long familiar with the reputation of this serial, I was never really in a rush to pursue it, further pushed by the fact I was never much of a Dodo fan.

Pleasantly, The Celestial Toymaker wasn't a miserable experience for me, but it was also just sort of a tolerable one. It's interesting to know how production around the Ark and with changing show runners as these things heavily inform the end result of The Celestial Toymaker. It does the story no favours, and once again Hartnell is just sort of awkwardly written out of most of these episodes, but Michael Gough is entertaining enough as the Toymaker. I don't love his outfit - it is very clearly evoking the very racist "mysterious Asian" trope, but the actual games Dodo and Steven are playing can be pretty creative and sometime employed an at least somewhat entertaining cast - the living playing cards were pretty fun for me, for example. I think this is also a pretty good use of Dodo, especially by the standards of this era. She is every much a part of this action as Steven, it feels. So, it was okay, but not something I'd be in a rush to revisit any time soon.

What does it mean to be young?

Poet Samuel Ullman once wrote that being young is a state of mind created by imagination. That being young means choosing courage and adventure over a love of ease. We only grow old by deserting those ideals.

Having said that, should we desire to be young? From a societal perspective, the loss of youth is always a focal point. Look at advertisements around you for every possible solution to stay young as long as you can. Youth is not only the world of imagination, or the world of adventure. Youth is the memory of days when everything looked better.

So think back to all those ads for anti-aging creams, sprays, massages. Those hook themselves on an innate human desire. Not to look young, but to feel young. To be in the days where everything was better. We want things to be better, so we want to feel young again.

At the same time, there is a gap between human society and their kids. Kids take a different role in society than grown-ups do. Kids are in possession of the youth that many desire. A world of budding potential and wonder for everything around them. An innate curiousity that can never be regained when lost.

But we don’t consider our world safe for that curiousity. We fear dangers of all kinds. Dangers exists, and while we grown-ups know how to deal with that, we don’t want our kids to. We don’t want fear to rule their lives. We shield them from the bad in hope that happiness and safety may rule their lives for just a little while longer.

But what does that do to that curiousity? We want kids to wonder about the world, but on the terms of adults. Safely. We will pick out what to learn, kids. So you just follow along. This reverberates throughout the life of a child. The idea of “Active Citizenship” is part of many schools across the world. Sometimes it is seen as its own subject. Sometimes it is seen as an inherent part of education. Schools often mention in their curricula how the little world they set up is a “Small scale version of society”. The idea is that this lets children prep and learn in a safe environment before going into the harsh reality. Again the idea that children take up a different role in society prevails. Maybe it even insinuates that children play no role at all.

So we strive to protect the owners of youth from the dangers of society. Yet those who have entered society long for youth. Does that mean that society and youth cannot co-exist? A pessimist would say yes. Yet maybe an obvious misconception has been overlooked: Once youth is gone, can it be regained?

People often mention how things “weren’t as good as they remembered” or that “This product was better in the past”. These are reactions to grasps at the past. But they are not the only possible reactions.

Sometimes, things we remember do live up to our idealized versions of it. Maybe that children’s book we loved had a hidden layer. Maybe that toy we played with still looks as cool now as it did then. Shimmers of youth will always remain. We just have to find those shimmers.

Yet sometimes we can’t find those shimmers ourselves. Maybe someone needs to push us a little to remember why we liked something. What made it special? Why were in intrigued with it? What made us wonder? What sparked our curiousity?

It is at times like those that we should remember that there are millions of experts of wonder and curiousity among us. Experts untampered by modern struggles. Experts who want to know all they can. It’s an opportunity for both to discover something. Either something forgotten, or something new.

Regaining youth is not impossible, but it is not done through salves. It is done by respecting children and the skills they bring. Feed their curiousity. Let them learn new things, and don’t be afraid to show them the whole picture if they can handle it. You don’t have to shock them, but you can challenge them. Don’t make them settle for the love of ease just yet. Take them by the hand and let them discover, and through their imagination, you might discover something about yourself as well.

That being said. Don’t challenge them with “The Celestial Toymaker”, because no amount of imagination can make up for the lack of it here. 1/10.