Doctor Who and violence: How much is too much?

The Deadly Assassin was a hugely violent story in the Classic Series. But did it justify its violence with strong storytelling?

(Photo credit: Doctor Who/BBC.

Image obtained from: official Doctor Who website.)

Violence and death are common themes in Doctor Who. But when is the right amount to use in a story, and when is it going too far?

I’ve got a confession to make. As much as I love the story now – even describing it as one of the greatest Doctor Who serials of all time – I’ve got to be honest. The first time I watched The Caves of Androzani…I wasn’t a big fan of it.

Oh, don’t get me wrong, I liked it. It was well-made, and had some fantastic cliffhangers. But the violence overshadowed it for me, at least the first time.

This isn’t a criticism of the story itself. More of what the violence reminded me of – the unpleasantness of some of the weaker stories from that era. I had seen a few stories already from the same period when I watched Caves for the first time, and the violence generally stuck out for me. In a bad way.

Which is kind of funny, really. I’m a huge fan of both the Philip Hinchcliffe era and horror in general. Both are generally known for featuring plenty of violence. The Hinchcliffe era certainly got away with a surprising amount of graphic violence at times.

So what made the violence of that particular period so different from that in the mid-eighties? Well, in the Hinchcliffe era, the violence in the show was associated with horror. True, genuine horror. It was supposed to provoke a reaction of fear or even shock when it happened. Therefore, the violence and death had some weight within the context of the story.

Kira’s death in Kerblam! was probably one of Series Eleven’s most shocking moments. Did the moment serve the story well?

(Image credit: Doctor Who/BBC.

Image obtained from: BBC Press.)

Violence in the modern era

And even today, death and violence are still an important aspect for Doctor Who. Even if (or usually when) it happens off-screen, it serves a purpose. To shock, to have weight. Or even sadness.

One of the best deaths in Series Eleven was Kira’s in Kerblam! Along with being shocking and horrifying, it was tragic, too. She was such a sweet and likable character, so when she was suddenly killed off, it was a death that hit hard. Especially as the other characters were right outside her room when they saw.

Another great death (and one that often gets overlooked) is Lynda’s in The Parting of the Ways. Coming across as perfect companion material, what made her death so shocking was that it looked like she would be saved just in the nick of time. That the Doctor would be able to get there and save her before the door had been cut wide open by the Daleks.

So when Daleks instead appeared right outside her window and exterminated her, it’s a moment that’s both cruel and shocking. Especially since, like Kira, Lynda was quite the likable character.

And that’s when violence in storytelling is important. It should have weight. It should be important to the story. Because without it, it just comes across as unpleasantness for the sake of it. Whether it’s for horror, or for drama – or even for a sense of style (and I mean true style, here) – it needs to serve a purpose beyond just shock value. Otherwise, it loses that very value.

(Moving away from Doctor Who, this is what I enjoy about ultra-violent films like RoboCop and Dredd. The violence is repulsive, but it’s also either awesome or, in some cases, even funny.)

Resurrection of the Daleks is probably one of the most violent stories of the Classic Series. Was it too excessive, in this case?

(Image credit: Doctor Who/BBC. Image obtained from: official Doctor Who website.)

Going too far?

For me, one of the worst examples of Doctor Who having violence purely for the sake of it was Resurrection of the Daleks. Hearing that it’s being novelized made me think of the story, and how extremely violent it was. It’s not a bad story, and it does have a few strong characters.

More from Winter is Coming

But it’s also filled with a body count that often lacks impact. The opening scene of Resurrection establishes exactly what kind of story we’re getting: a large number of people we don’t know suddenly getting gunned down, including a random innocent bystander. It’s not just an indication for the rest of the story, but also, what the next season was going to be like.

Revelation of the Daleks, Eric Saward’s second Dalek story, was far stronger. It was also filled to the brim with violence but, unlike Resurrection, along with having a little horror, it was also strangely comedic. The characters also stand out a great deal more, too.

How much violence Doctor Who has is a choice that comes down to both the writer and of course the showrunner. (And maybe the BBC, too.) Obviously, it still needs to be a family show, and the violence shouldn’t be up there with some of the most visually extreme horror movies.

But death and violence will always be important aspects to the series. So long as it’s handled right, and continues to serve an important purpose in the story, then it should remain so.

How important do you think violence should be in Doctor Who? Where there any moments you thought it was handled particularly well? Were there any that you thought went too far? Let us know in the comments below.