![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
NuWho Season 3
I was disappointed with Season 1 of New Dr Who. I thought the plots were frequently dull. I thought that all too often things happened to get characters from emotional point A to emotional point B without said events making much sense in the context of the wider plot or characters. I thought the comedy was frequently heavy-handed and the acting (even from the much revered Eccleston) often cheesy. I was disappointed by the lack of imagination on display at the world-building level.
For many years I had been pretty heavily invested in the original full-length Dr Who novels. The new series killed these absolutely stone dead. Some would say this was a mercy killing. Certainly their hey-day was long past. Perhaps as a result, I don't really compare new Who with classic Who and mourn its passing. I mourn the passing of the novels but new who could have been greater than the greatest thing ever and they would still have gone.
So, I got over my disappointment. I accepted that I would not be getting intricate and clever plots, fascinating new worlds or even particularly subtle character exploration and began to watch new who on its own terms. Every so often it serves up The Girl in the Fireplace or Blink which stand among my favourite Who episodes (such as City of Death, Pyramids of Mars, Caves of Androzani - highly regarded by all, and Vengeance on Varos and Delta and the Bannerman (less widely acclaimed - if not widely derided - but personal favourites none the less)). It probably helped, shallow creature that I am, that I find David Tennant very easy on the eye. Mind you, I find John Barrowman remarkably pleasant to look at and I'm not forgiving Torchwood its sins yet.
So, you know, I enjoyed Season 3. I didn't think any of the episodes were complete stinkers: 42 was dull, the Lazarus Experiment was padded, and the Dalek episodes lacked the verve needed to carry you through the absurdity. But from Human Nature onwards I would say the season has been pretty gripping with a definite sense of forward momentum and some real intelligence on display at one level or another. I would go so far as to say that "Last of the Time Lords" is a reset switch done right. If you are going to have a reset switch then for goodness sake, signpost it early on "here's our reset switch folks" so everyone knows the game being played today, make sure interesting things happen in the period to be reset and, most importantly, make sure that for the characters who matter the reset isn't thrown. It all actually happened, they remember it happening, they changed as a result and remain changed.
The Last of the Time Lords is Martha's episode and she really came into her own and vindicated much of what had happened before. I'm a little doubtful about Freema's acting. She does no-nonsense Martha very well, but I was less convinced by inspirational Martha and her puppydog Martha was terrible (mind you puppydog Martha was saddled with lines that would have challenged the cream of the acting community so I'll forgive her that). Martha's mission, taking a year, reminded me powerfully of Ace in Andrew Cartmel's New Adventure, Warhead. I remember how struck I was by the fact that the Doctor had entrusted her (Ace) with a task which involved spending a prolonged period away from his side, negotiating difficult and dangerous territory, a task which would require initiative, planning and ability way above the normal expectation of a companion (who can usually guarantee the Doctor will show up again in, at most, a couple of days time) and I saw it again here. This is a companion he really trusts to get things done, a trust foreshadowed, of course, in Human Nature/Family of Blood. I was cheering at the end when she told the Doctor exactly why she was leaving. She did it without rancour or bitterness but made sure he knew exactly why she was going and exactly how much he was responsible for that and for once in New Who the whole character "arc" made sense. Martha went to Never-never land with Peter Pan, but then she grew up and moved on because Peter Pan is ultimately a selfish child and will take you for granted if you let him.
Although I applaud the "Martha arc" I do wonder if it had to be quite so heavy handed, especially given her final speech. I find myself comparing it to the love affair between Grissom and Sarah Sidle in CSI. Most of the time you would hardly know this is happening. You see it developing primarily through conversations that are ostensibly about something else but nevertheless, if you're looking, you can trace their relationship changing and their opinions of each other developing. We didn't need puppydog Martha for that final scene, just some good acting and direction earlier in the season. Our first intimation of Martha's infatuation should have been in Human Nature, and it should have been conveyed entirely by Martha's expression on witnessing the John Smith/Joan interaction. But then RTD is dealing with a crowd who cried "Why didn't they walk?" in Gridlock (when, for once, the script actually answered that - the undercity was closed, the motorway was the only way out, walking on the motorway was a non-starter) so he perhaps should be forgiven for making a point he thought important repeatedly and in words of few syllables.
Of course, the downside of showcasing Martha in the final episode, is that we see less of Captain Jack and he is so irrelevant to the plot you kind of wonder why he's there. But then its seems pretty clear that the season was all about "cheating death" in one way or another and so thematically it made sense and, on a pragmatic level, puts the character where it's wanted for season 2 of Torchwood. "Lonely god" Doctor is also more appropriate to the theme than "Peter Pan" Doctor but I prefer the idea of Peter Pan Doctor so I'm going with that.
And the Peter Pan allusion is so apt. The Tenth Doctor is Peter Pan, childish, selfish, charismatic, infuriating, irritating, unthinking Peter Pan. His actions at the end of Family of Blood were not those of a "lonely god" but of a child throwing a tantrum because his game has come to an end. His companions and enemies become trapped in a state of childhood unable and unwilling to grow up but eventually the best of them leave him and mature. I even liked the "clap if you believe in fairies moment", especially taking the suggestion someone on my flist made that the Doctor merely acts as a focal point for the "telepathic energy" rather than actually absorbing and using it in some way.
So Season 3 NuWho: mostly dull plots, boring world-building, heavy-handed characterisation but surprisingly thoughtful, with more interesting twists and more interesting characters than last year and a genuinely critical approach to the central character, proper pay-offs for its foreshadowing and a character arc that actually made sense. I'll still be watching season 4 and not just because I enjoy reading what people have to say about it afterwards.
For many years I had been pretty heavily invested in the original full-length Dr Who novels. The new series killed these absolutely stone dead. Some would say this was a mercy killing. Certainly their hey-day was long past. Perhaps as a result, I don't really compare new Who with classic Who and mourn its passing. I mourn the passing of the novels but new who could have been greater than the greatest thing ever and they would still have gone.
So, I got over my disappointment. I accepted that I would not be getting intricate and clever plots, fascinating new worlds or even particularly subtle character exploration and began to watch new who on its own terms. Every so often it serves up The Girl in the Fireplace or Blink which stand among my favourite Who episodes (such as City of Death, Pyramids of Mars, Caves of Androzani - highly regarded by all, and Vengeance on Varos and Delta and the Bannerman (less widely acclaimed - if not widely derided - but personal favourites none the less)). It probably helped, shallow creature that I am, that I find David Tennant very easy on the eye. Mind you, I find John Barrowman remarkably pleasant to look at and I'm not forgiving Torchwood its sins yet.
So, you know, I enjoyed Season 3. I didn't think any of the episodes were complete stinkers: 42 was dull, the Lazarus Experiment was padded, and the Dalek episodes lacked the verve needed to carry you through the absurdity. But from Human Nature onwards I would say the season has been pretty gripping with a definite sense of forward momentum and some real intelligence on display at one level or another. I would go so far as to say that "Last of the Time Lords" is a reset switch done right. If you are going to have a reset switch then for goodness sake, signpost it early on "here's our reset switch folks" so everyone knows the game being played today, make sure interesting things happen in the period to be reset and, most importantly, make sure that for the characters who matter the reset isn't thrown. It all actually happened, they remember it happening, they changed as a result and remain changed.
The Last of the Time Lords is Martha's episode and she really came into her own and vindicated much of what had happened before. I'm a little doubtful about Freema's acting. She does no-nonsense Martha very well, but I was less convinced by inspirational Martha and her puppydog Martha was terrible (mind you puppydog Martha was saddled with lines that would have challenged the cream of the acting community so I'll forgive her that). Martha's mission, taking a year, reminded me powerfully of Ace in Andrew Cartmel's New Adventure, Warhead. I remember how struck I was by the fact that the Doctor had entrusted her (Ace) with a task which involved spending a prolonged period away from his side, negotiating difficult and dangerous territory, a task which would require initiative, planning and ability way above the normal expectation of a companion (who can usually guarantee the Doctor will show up again in, at most, a couple of days time) and I saw it again here. This is a companion he really trusts to get things done, a trust foreshadowed, of course, in Human Nature/Family of Blood. I was cheering at the end when she told the Doctor exactly why she was leaving. She did it without rancour or bitterness but made sure he knew exactly why she was going and exactly how much he was responsible for that and for once in New Who the whole character "arc" made sense. Martha went to Never-never land with Peter Pan, but then she grew up and moved on because Peter Pan is ultimately a selfish child and will take you for granted if you let him.
Although I applaud the "Martha arc" I do wonder if it had to be quite so heavy handed, especially given her final speech. I find myself comparing it to the love affair between Grissom and Sarah Sidle in CSI. Most of the time you would hardly know this is happening. You see it developing primarily through conversations that are ostensibly about something else but nevertheless, if you're looking, you can trace their relationship changing and their opinions of each other developing. We didn't need puppydog Martha for that final scene, just some good acting and direction earlier in the season. Our first intimation of Martha's infatuation should have been in Human Nature, and it should have been conveyed entirely by Martha's expression on witnessing the John Smith/Joan interaction. But then RTD is dealing with a crowd who cried "Why didn't they walk?" in Gridlock (when, for once, the script actually answered that - the undercity was closed, the motorway was the only way out, walking on the motorway was a non-starter) so he perhaps should be forgiven for making a point he thought important repeatedly and in words of few syllables.
Of course, the downside of showcasing Martha in the final episode, is that we see less of Captain Jack and he is so irrelevant to the plot you kind of wonder why he's there. But then its seems pretty clear that the season was all about "cheating death" in one way or another and so thematically it made sense and, on a pragmatic level, puts the character where it's wanted for season 2 of Torchwood. "Lonely god" Doctor is also more appropriate to the theme than "Peter Pan" Doctor but I prefer the idea of Peter Pan Doctor so I'm going with that.
And the Peter Pan allusion is so apt. The Tenth Doctor is Peter Pan, childish, selfish, charismatic, infuriating, irritating, unthinking Peter Pan. His actions at the end of Family of Blood were not those of a "lonely god" but of a child throwing a tantrum because his game has come to an end. His companions and enemies become trapped in a state of childhood unable and unwilling to grow up but eventually the best of them leave him and mature. I even liked the "clap if you believe in fairies moment", especially taking the suggestion someone on my flist made that the Doctor merely acts as a focal point for the "telepathic energy" rather than actually absorbing and using it in some way.
So Season 3 NuWho: mostly dull plots, boring world-building, heavy-handed characterisation but surprisingly thoughtful, with more interesting twists and more interesting characters than last year and a genuinely critical approach to the central character, proper pay-offs for its foreshadowing and a character arc that actually made sense. I'll still be watching season 4 and not just because I enjoy reading what people have to say about it afterwards.
no subject
I don't regard Pyramids particularly highly, yet I rather like Delta. But I'm weird.
So, you know, I enjoyed Season 3. I didn't think any of the episodes were complete stinkers
Here I have to completely disagree. True, there weren't any cases where every aspect of production was terrible (I'm in the middle of watching Timelash...), but I focus on the scripts anyway, and in that respect, almost the entire first half of the season, as well as the last Christmas special, was terrible. It wasn't so much the narrative, logical and aesthetic incoherence as the utter lack of originality. Of everything up to 42, I felt only The Shakespeare Code had anything new to say about things outside the continuity and established characters of Doctor Who, and it was still largely a reworking of The Unquiet Dead. I agree things picked up with Human Nature, but it and the equally good Blink were reworkings (although much better) of stories from other media, and the final three-parter was a big step backwards, but not quite to the levels of the first half of the series.
RTD is dealing with a crowd who cried "Why didn't they walk?" in Gridlock (when, for once, the script actually answered that - the undercity was closed, the motorway was the only way out, walking on the motorway was a non-starter
Heaven help me, I'm about to defend fandom: the problem with Gridlock (well, one of them) is that it's not coherent. What the 'exposition dialogue' tells us isn't what the 'world-building dialogue' tells us and more to the point, it isn't what the pictures tell us. We're told the undercity is cut off, that everyone else is dead and that the cars are recycling the same food and water (highly improbable, but we'll let that pass), but we're also told about people who've joined the traffic jam relatively recently, and we see the street vendors apparently living a life separate from the traffic jam (because the entire point is people don't get out, not even to stretch their legs). It's not surprising viewers get confused, because even the production team clearly were as well.
I didn't find Martha's arc interesting at all. It all seemed so pointless. In a series about people travelling through time and space, the character development should be about travelling in time and space, not teenage crushes. The best stories from series one and two (Dalek, Father's Day and Fireplace) had emotional character plots that could only occur in Doctor Who. I'd be tempted to add Human Nature to that list, although I'd like to give it a second viewing first. But, tellingly, none of these were written by Russell T Davies.
But I have yet to be convinced by any attempt, in any medium, to treat the regular characters in Doctor Who as 'real' people, which they manifestly are not, because they travel in time and space and go through the kinds of things that would cause normal people either to have a complete breakdown or become a hardened psychopath.
no subject
no subject
Funnily enough, I was thinking of Timelash when I wrote that... but the comparison seemed a little unfair. With the production values of modern who they had better not produce a Timelash equivalent. No, the early episodes weren't very original, but that hardly makes "terrible" telly. Dull, safe, conservative telly, yes, and of course one of the reasons people make dull, safe, conservative telly is to reduce the risk of stinkers. You and I may prefer "interesting failures" (I'm tempted to say "like Love and Monsters" here, but I don't actually consider Love and Monsters to have been a failure) but we seem to be something of a minority and, even if we weren't, I can sympathise we the tendancy of a prime time production team to try and avoid them.
the problem with Gridlock (well, one of them)
I'm not sure I'm any keener to defend Gridlock than you are to defend fandom, but the set-up makes sense to me (once you're on the level of letting food and water recycling pass). The Undercity is at the tail end of a process of turning into a Ghost Town as the population migrates to the Motorway and the promise of a better-life. The street vendors are desperate for trade and the last gasp of any business infrastructure. Once on the motorway there are only layby's every six months and its not clear that many of them allow you out of the Motorway's poisonous atmosphere. There is probably also a certain amount of social pressure NOT to stop in a lay-by and hold up the traffic behind you. It's thin in places, but coherent enough on a "don't think too hard" level.
the character development should be about travelling in time and space, not teenage crushes
YMMV. It was about more than teenage crushes. It was about the nature of being a companion; existing and operating within the Doctor's shadow. About how independence and ability are subsumed by his personality and ultimately can only really manifest in his absence. About, if you like, the way the character of the Doctor dominates the show, perhaps inevitably to the detriment of the character of the companion. At least that's how I read it, but then I'm stripping out much of the largely indefensible puppydog Martha stuff but part of the reason I object to puppydog Martha is that the really interesting parts of the story have little to do with it.
It would be really, really, really nice if get a progression from Rose (perfect companion, conceives of nothing more than being a sidekick), through Martha (thinks she wants to be a sidekick but learns she is better than that) to someone who is manifestly not a sidekick. I don't think we'll get it since it would fundamentally change the show into an ensemble show (which its not been since Ian and Barbara left) but its the logical place to go next.
no subject
But we're still licence fee payers (OK, to be pedantic, I live in a licence fee paying household; the principle is the same). Why shouldn't we get catered for too? I understand why the production team want to avoid total failures, but there's playing safe and there's playing safe. I felt series one and two had enough innovation and experimentation to keep my interest through the dry patches. Series three didn't. Maybe that's just personal taste.
Your defence of Gridlock makes sense, but I'm not sure it's what was on TV. However, as I haven't seen it since the night of broadcast, and have no intention of doing so in the near future, I'll take your word for it.
It was about the nature of being a companion; existing and operating within the Doctor's shadow. About how independence and ability are subsumed by his personality and ultimately can only really manifest in his absence.
Again, that would potentially be interesting, but it's just not what was said. Martha wasn't talking about that at all, she was talking about friends who'd had crushes on flatmates.
I don't think we'll get it since it would fundamentally change the show into an ensemble show (which its not been since Ian and Barbara left)
I think it was actually an ensemble show through the sixties, of necessity. The companions had to be able to hold an episode when Hartnell or Troughton was on holiday. True, the Doctor gradually moved further towards the centre stage throughout the Troughton era, but I think it was really only with Pertwee that the title character became the primary protagonist. Making him a near-immortal Time Lord in The War Games made him uniquely important in a way he hadn't been as a mysterious old man.
Funnily enough, the Tylers made it more of an ensemble show than it had been for a while, although not as much as it had been in the sixties. Note how Jackie gets written out properly, rather than just left behind.
no subject
I'll still defend Martha - her exit comes so hot on the heals of her finest hour I don't believe its a coincidence. Of course the intended meaning is up for grabs, but "the author is dead" and I'm more interested in my version than in teenage crushes - or rather not teenage crushes, Martha is in her early 20s and (mostly) acts her age.
no subject
I know. I used the phrase deliberately, because in that respect she doesn't act her age.
no subject
She enjoys it for a bit, then accepts it's not going to happen and moves on: seems reasonably adult to me.
no subject
This is what I was getting at, or at least, if it wasn't, its what I should have been getting at.