The editing in this is notably terrible, so even if the plot was good, I have no way of knowing because of how horridly confusing everything is due to the disjointing experience of the editing. It shows since John Nathan Turner, the man who should have never touched Doctor Who, admitted these episodes were not edited until the night before the broadcast. Not only that, but the music is just awful. Absolutely dreadful. After viewing a re-edited version so I could actually comprehend what was happening, It's STILL dreadful. It makes logical sense, they tell the story fine. The problem is, the story they're telling ISN'T GOOD. The overall goal of the Rani is to gain an earthling to complete her menagerie so she can control universal evolution by having every life- form in existence to experiment on. How is this threatening? So she can create life. So? Is any character in this put at stake in any way in this? This is idiotic. This is not threatening or villainous. No one is going to suffer because of a new lifeform. Then they never truly explain certain things about her unnecessarily complex plan to rid of the Doctor. So he's put through a twenty year time loop, but why does this give her the Doctor's past incarnations? If she could put him land in this time loop, couldn't she just already put him in the vortex meant to trap him anyway and stop this whole stupid story? Another thing never explained is the fact of how the companions work. All the doctors are just supposed to be the seventh incarnation in his past bodies, which is confusing enough. But the companions are all supposed to be actually different people. Why? Why does she even need to capture every incarnation of the Doctor to trap him in the time vortex for all eternity, let alone ANY of his companions? Just through his TARDIS in there, the time loop isn't necessary. On top of that, they say there is a centralized focus for the time loop, and the Doctor literally says the town is not the focus. Then they just forget he said this, and never actually say where the focus IS. All these unexplained necessities make for a poor story. You'll wished you spent your 20 minutes watching a classic who episode rather than this awful mess.

Yes, you saw my vote. I rated it 10 out of 10. The story was incomprehensible garbage for the epic length of 10 minutes of screen time.........but it had very charitable aims -- raising money for the children in need. Since the show was in limbo at this time, this was our 30th Anniversary Doctor Who story. With the exception of the 1997 New Zealand Commercials, this was the only time that Tom Baker reprised his role as the Fourth Doctor in costume in a Doctor Who story since "dying" in "Logopolis". (Come to think of it, this is Davison's & Colin Baker's only ON-SCREEN reprise of their incarnations in costume after they left the show.)Jon Pertwee makes a final bow as the Third Doctor.It would have made lots of money if it had been released on video (now DVD)but I can see why many agreed to do it on the condition that it wasn't repeated or released in any way.For the Doctor Who collector, I would recommend watching it for the historical significance. However, I would not recommend this as an introductory show for a potential Doctor Who fan.....

I've been a Doctor Who Fan since Tom Baker and was unsure about Peter Davidson when he took over. It was never ever about the actors who tried their best to make the lead their own and Tom, Peter and Jon Pertwee all did a wonderful job. I don't feel embarrassed about this adventure but more angry and annoyed. I thought Sylvester McCoy was pretty dodgy as the doctor until I saw the feature film with Paul McGann and then saw him in the Scottish comedy Still Game when I realised he had the ungodly task of trying to work with poor scripts for the series. Turns out that Sly was actually an exceptional actor forced to make the best of a shockingly poor script. This is absolutely without any doubt no exception and it would seem that anything the late John Nathan Turner wrote or had anything to do with turned to sh}te. This segment in the Doctors long history once again treats the Doctor as nothing more than the court jester brought out to play the fool yet again and is best left to drift into the mists of time as the script is diabolical since the BBC tried to cram what should have been a 120 minute adventure into two five minute cans of worms. At best this is a pantomime and that's exactly how Kate O'Mara and John Pertwee treat their characters and manage to pull the best out of a bad job. Far too much has been crammed into such a short period of time as this and it's just like the parody of Star Wars in 30 seconds only not at all funny. I only hope that Russell T. Davies is a good enough writer to bring the Doctor out of the hole that has been mercilessly dug for him and so far seems to be doing a really good job. Be warned that this is without doubt undeniably awful and should only be viewed by the most die-hard insatiably curious amongst Doctor Who fans.

Fortunately, I am one, but for anyone else, this program is horrid. The story is so contrived and confused, it's impossible to follow. Hence, Don't try. This was written for one of those charity fundraising specials, and is just a showcase to see all of the living Dr. Who stories one more time. The big plusses are:1) final Jon Pertwee performance as the Dr.2) First time Tom Baker agreed to reprise his role since he left after his 7 year stint (sorry, his 5 Doctor's appearance doesn't count - that was filmed during his stint as the Dr for the "lost" episode Shada).As a reunion, it's nice. I don't think anyone else will get it.