More Who Pontification

[caz963]

Having rewatched A Christmas Carol earlier, I've had a few more thoughts and think I might have been able to put my finger a bit more firmly on why I'm rather ambivalent about it.



Which is - why the hell didn't Eleven do anything about that whole army of "surplus population" that Kazran had downstairs in the freezer? I can imagine Ten's righteous indignation and his insistence on finding a way to get them all out while simultaneously saving the space-liner or whatever it was. But Eleven hardly seemed to notice they were there. Which is odd, when he doesn't consider that he's ever met anyone who's unimportant. Or do they not count because he's not met them all?

I always try to be even-handed when it comes to what I write down about this - and any other - TV show. I like to look at all the angles and to try to work out why I think like I do, and when it comes to post-RTD Who, I'm trying really hard not to keep harping on the past, because after all, change and the need to move on are some of the concepts at the heart of the show. I try to concentrate on the elements I enjoy and to - well, not ignore the parts I don't, but shall we say, put them to one side and not let them spoil my enjoyment of the rest?

But the more I think about this version of A Christmas Carol, the harder I'm finding it not to think WTF? about many of its constituent parts. The plot didn't really make much sense and I found that I didn't really care all that much about any of the characters or what happened to them.

I mean, we're asked to believe that Karzan, admittedly a bit of a git, is inhumane enough to allow 4003 people to die just because he doesn't feel like helping them. Okay, so Scrooge didn't care about anyone other than himself, and we're able to infer that his actions have almost certainly led to deaths indirectly - but what Kazran is prepared to do is tantamount to single-handedly perpetrating a massacre.

I've already said how much Moff's insistence that time can be rewritten is starting to bug me, so I'll skip Eleven's manipulation of Karzan's life and memories and move on to this; isn't he bothered that letting Abigail out to play once a year is rather cruel? I know he's got bigger fish to fry (!) but that just feels so... wrong. Did he know she only had eight days to live which was why he didn't try to free her permanently?

And then - there's no such thing as isomorphic controls.

WHAT?! He knows there are! What about the Master's laser screwdriver in S3? And I'm sure there have been other examples through the years (even though I can't think of any right now!)

Also - the TARDIS can tow a planet to safety - why not a starship? *g*

I've posted at length about what I perceive to be the differences in style and content in Rusty's DW and Moff's DW - and this episode brought it all back to me. I said somewhere in a comment recently that it seems to me that one of the principal differences is that for the former, the plot is the most important thing, and Moff shapes and uses his characters to satisfy its demands; whereas RTD is about characters and their motivations and so his plots (such as they are!) grow from them and the way they think and act.

The thing about Dickens is that he was a great character writer. Love him or hate him (and I love him) it's impossible to deny that he created memorable characters, some of whom have become part of our national culture and consciousness, Ebenezer Scrooge being a prime example. I do have problems with many of his "heroines", I admit - most of whom tend to be whiter-than-white, long suffering, rather colourless characters, who are there to suffer, for the hero to protect and/or fall in love with and not much else. It seems that Moff did more than borrow the title of his first Christmas special from Dickens - he borrowed the blueprint for the heroine too, as Abigail Pettigrew was as Dickensian a female character as her name suggests. She was pretty and perfect and suffering and there for someone to fall in love with... oh, and it turns out she was dying, too.

But really - like Amy in S5 - Abigail was little more than a plot device. And rather an obvious one at that.

Even though Michael Gambon gave an incredibly nuanced performance as the older Kazran, I didn't really believe in his redemption. With Scrooge, we get to see the effects of the ghosts' revelations and I suppose in theory, the familiarity of the story should have helped us to believe in the effects that the Doctor's revelations [should have] had on Kazran. But... it didn't.^*** And there was absolutely no reason given me to believe that he was going to change his ways permanently and go home and defrost everyone in the cellar and return them to their families.

So there it is. I just hope that S6 is going to deliver something that feels more "substantial" than this and much of S5. Of course, this was a Christmas episode, very much a standalone - but that can't really excuse the lack of decent characterisation and the increasing reliance on "smoke and mirrors" plotlines which at first glance make me think "ooh, that's clever!", but which, an hour or so later, have me scratching my head.



***I'm not going to start in on whether it's lazy or arrogant or whatever to expect your audience to draw on its knowledge of another story and its characters in order to make yours work. I know this happens all the time in fiction, as stories often follow similar paths and have certain resonances that we recognise; but I also believe that an author needs to do his/her job properly by creating characters and stories that can stand on their own as well as in relation to something else.

Comments

[nostalgia-lj.livejournal.com]

I can see how people don't like Amy, but I admit I don't get the idea that she's less developed or reactive than the others.

[caz963.livejournal.com]

You're right - Amy isn't less well developed than the others. I'm beginning to realise that they're all poorly developed :( - with the possible exception of Eleven although I'm wondering how much of what I'm classing as "better developed" is due to Matt's performance.

[topaz-eyes.livejournal.com]

Interesting, because I just read another review of A Christmas Carol that reached a similar conclusion. And this reviewer has skewered RTD for his indulgences in the past, so clearly it's a fundamental flaw in Moffat's writing.

In the light of Nine and Ten, Eleven's callousness towards Abigail's fate and the other people in the freezers is deeply disturbing. I don't know if the Classic Doctors would be so dismissive of them or not, but it is clear Eleven (and Moffat) treats characters as pawns, not as persons in their own right.

[caz963.livejournal.com]

I had that review open in another window to read when I'd finished this - how odd! Having read it now, I absolutely agree with what he says about the "monstrous emptiness" at the heart of CC.

It really does come down to whether you like your drama to be character-based or plot-based. I can appreciate a good plot but if I don't care about the people concerned, then I'm never going to be more than luke-warm about it.

[nostalgia-lj.livejournal.com]

In the light of Nine and Ten, Eleven's callousness towards Abigail's fate and the other people in the freezers is deeply disturbing

"The Prosecution would like to call the Ood as its first witness..."

[sue-denimme.livejournal.com]

Once more, we are firmly on the same page. :-)

I think I've put my finger on why the era of Eccleston/Tennant/RTD worked so well at hooking me in, and that's that while RTD's plots may have been all over the map as far as technical quality, still the *emotions* were real. The plots were basically a reason for the characters to feel those emotions. And that, for me, makes the difference between being mildly entertained for a little while and being completely *blown away*.

Whereas the Moffat era so far seems to be more "let's impress the audience" and less "let's make the audience care about the characters". Nothing wrong with that, I guess, but being the type of viewer I am, it feels to me like a letdown.

I found A Christmas Carol (the Who one, not Dickens) enjoyable on an eye-candy level. Matt Smith was fun to watch, and I loved Katherine Jenkins' singing (this was the first time I'd ever heard her). But that was pretty much it.

Still, hey, not a lot of Amy in it! Definitely a plus in my book. :-)

[caz963.livejournal.com]

while RTD's plots may have been all over the map as far as technical quality, still the *emotions* were real.

*nods*

The plots were basically a reason for the characters to feel those emotions.

Yes - and they also grew out of the fact that certain characters would act in a certain way. I'm not blind to the fact that Rusty had his faults, but I find I can forgive his excesses because he gave me characters that I cared about. They weren't perfect either, but most of the time, it was apparent why they were the way they were, but so far, Moffat's characters are bent to accommodate the demands of the plot and so I don't feel that they're "people" in their own right.

I said in my post yesterday that I think that the only thing really holding the episode together was Matt. Gambon was magnificent with what he was given to work with, but it wasn't enough to carry the story.

[nostalgia-lj.livejournal.com]

I think that's a bit unfair, in that I think all of Doctor Who (all of telly, really) is about trying to impress the audience. It's just about how you try to do that.

[felis-nocturna.livejournal.com]

Hi! :-)

I've been lurking here for quite a while now and I'm enjoying your Doctor Who posts immensely. (They really brightened some of my days last month!)

I just watched the Christmas Special and want to add a very big THIS to everything you wrote in your last two posts.

To pick just one thing: I mean, we're asked to believe that Karzan, admittedly a bit of a git, is inhumane enough to allow 4003 people to die just because he doesn't feel like helping them. That is exactly the thought I had during the episode. I just didn't buy it and for something like that to feel like a plot device, when it's a crucial element of the story and one of the central characters? Not good.


PS: I linked to your post in my own rather short entry about the special, I hope you don't mind?

[caz963.livejournal.com]

Hi - and welcome! I don't mind lurkers, but it's even nicer when they pop up and say hello :-) I hope you'll jump in more often now you know I don't bite!

I said when I posted yesterday that while I enjoyed the episode while I was watching it, afterwards I started to wonder what I'd actually watched. I'm becoming increasingly convinced that Moffat's strength is his ability to blind us to the fact that what we're watching is a triumph of style over substance.

Or maybe I'm becoming increasingly bitter and twisted as the anniversary of Ten's demise approaches...

ETA: And no, I don't mind at all :-)

[radiantbaby.livejournal.com]

Which is - why the hell didn't Eleven do anything about that whole army of "surplus population" that Kazran had downstairs in the freezer? I can imagine Ten's righteous indignation and his insistence on finding a way to get them all out while simultaneously saving the space-liner or whatever it was. But Eleven hardly seemed to notice they were there. Which is odd, when he doesn't consider that he's ever met anyone who's unimportant. Or do they not count because he's not met them all?

I don't know, the Doctor can often be a bit myopic in situations like this, I'm afraid (honestly, in this case, I think he was mostly focused on saving Amy and Rory and anyone on top of that was just bonus). For example, in the new series, you have Ten not helping or really caring about the Ood's plight in tIP/tSP. And I know that there's more examples even from classic Who, but I'm blanking on them at the moment.

He (the Doctor) tends to focus on those around him much of the time and sometimes forgets about the other people who might also be in need. Think of all the people who've died/have been hurt just because they weren't people he knew (or the ones he just felt moved to help on that day, for some reason). He's quite flawed that way. It's part of his alien-ness, methinks.

Plus, sometimes I think he can make small changes, but he often leaves humans/aliens to their own devices on the bigger, cultural things. I'm sure he believes that Kazran will have changed enough to release the people in storage, but then he might also believe that is something that the humans need to learn from.

(Sorry, I'm probably not making much sense, as I'm sleepy)

Also - the TARDIS can tow a planet to safety - why not a starship? *g*

Well, that falls into the usual bit where the TARDIS doesn't get used because it would solve the issues in most, if not all, of the stories. So, you have to sideline or de-power the TARDIS to make the story work. That's classic Who. *shrug* :)

[nostalgia-lj.livejournal.com]

I tend to assume that the Doctor not fixing every problem in an episode is him acting on some sort of Magical Time Lord Knowings that we can't understand. Or it's like he says in the cafe in Remembrance, that throwing a stone into a pond causes ripples that can be hard to keep track of.

[caz963.livejournal.com]

I put my hands up to the Ood thing - it was really late when I wrote this and I'd forgotten.

You're right about the Doctor being myopic at times - and of course, he can't fix everything. It's just that this was a Christmas episode which we'd been led to believe was going to be fluffy and feel-good - and it was, on the surface.

Plus, sometimes I think he can make small changes, but he often leaves humans/aliens to their own devices on the bigger, cultural things. I'm sure he believes that Kazran will have changed enough to release the people in storage, but then he might also believe that is something that the humans need to learn from.

No, you're making sense :-) But the thing is in the original, we saw enough to know that Scrooge was going to change his ways permanently, and I don't know that we did here.

I was being just a tad facetious with my TARDIS comment ;-)

But isn't this insistence that time can be rewritten a bit like using the TARDIS or the sonic to resolve tricky situations?

[topaz-eyes.livejournal.com]

in the new series, you have Ten not helping or really caring about the Ood's plight in tIP/tSP.

That's true, but he acknowledged that was wrong and he made up for it in PotO.

So much about the Doctor is living in the moment, and that's fair, we often don't see the big picture when there's an immediate problem. But was there even one line from Eleven to Sardick about the other people in the freezers at the end? I think that sort of acknowledgment would have gone a long way. I don't know.

[ooxc.livejournal.com]

I naively assumed that all the other people would be released when Scrooge/Kazan came back - or are you picturing him zooming around with the shark forever?

[caz963.livejournal.com]

Well, no, because presumably Abigail will croak on him at some point so he'll have to come back down to "earth" so to speak!

[hooloovoo_42]

Having finally watched it, about all I can say was that it was passably average. The storyline(s) were incredibly hackneyed, but it's Christmas and it's DW. I agree that the lack of Amy was a bonus. The young Kazan looked like Rory to me and was a nice kid (just like little Amelia). But the rest of it was pretty much steampunk tat. Keep the punters wide eyed for an hour on Christmas Day, put a bit of emotion in there and it's all eminently forgettable.

The odd bit of "let's scare the children" stuff with the bit about the spides in the closet was typically Moffat.

Really, it was about the level I expect of DW now, although it is a one off, rather than the series with some kind of plot arc.

I don't think I could be bothered to watch it again.

[caz963.livejournal.com]

I admit, I'm not so bothered by the hackneyed storyline - as you say it IS Christmas, and also, Moff is on record as saying that he deliberately wanted to provide something different in tone to last year's specials - for obvious reasons. If you can do the hackney-ing well, and maybe provide a new insight or do something different with it, then all well and good. I don't think that happened here, though.

It was fun and Matt was really good. It was when I started actually thinking about it that the rot set in!

[goldy-dollar.livejournal.com]

Great thoughts! I think it's interesting that, even though we come from different parts of the RTD-era fandom, we're both having similar reactions to the Moffat era. (Which for me is enjoyment without much emotional connection to the characters.)

But really - like Amy in S5 - Abigail was little more than a plot device. And rather an obvious one at that.

YES. I don't know/really think that Moffat is sexist or intentionally trying to be when writing Who, BUT there is an increasingly problematic trend that most of his female characters are written to serve the plot. Even River, who is arguably the most interesting of his female characters, serves as a way of moving the plot forward - her entire character is about the ~mystery~ rather than who she actually is (do we really have any inkling of what River wants or what she feels for the Doctor and why?). Abigail is all the things that irritated me about Amy and River's plotlines but MAGNIFIED TIMES 100. At no point did Abigail have much agency of her own or give voice to what she wanted - she was carefully constructed as a piece to move along Karzan's story and development. She's a complete blank slate.

I think Moffat is very clever, but he's almost too clever? There's a sense of him trying to impress upon us as an audience about how clever he is and I think the result is that the characters sometimes feel a little... empty? I had to forgive RTD a lot during his reign, but I could accept floating Jesus Ten if that meant we got great character scenes like Martha's "I'm getting out" speech.

[caz963.livejournal.com]

enjoyment without much emotional connection to the characters.

It's the same for me.

Moff has promised that we'll get to know exactly who River is in S6 but in the meantime, yeah, she's as much a plot device as Amy is/was.

In many ways, Abigail is as much the classic Dickensian heroine as the classic Moffat one - there to serve the plot and look pretty.

I think Moffat is very clever, but he's almost too clever? There's a sense of him trying to impress upon us as an audience about how clever he is and I think the result is that the characters sometimes feel a little... empty?

*nods vigorously* - I felt the same after watching The Big Bang for the first time. Like - "ooh, that was clever! Wait - what actually happened?... That didn't make sense!"

I can forgive Rusty a helluva lot for the same reasons as you. He gave us characters we cared about and could empathise with - and most of all he gave us Ten. I doubt he'll be able to do anything EVER that will make me forget that.

[bitwhizzle.livejournal.com]

I feel the same way, and you put it so succinctly! :)

I'm tired of Moffat making up his own rules and breaking old rules, and making the Doctor suddenly act and react differently to situations where we would expect him to act a certain way. I'm all for character development, I would NOT want Twelve to be JUST LIKE Nine or Ten, of course not!, but we could see HOW Nine and Ten arrived at the emotions they developed and decisions that they made. I feel like that's lacking in Twelve, another reason why he hasn't really grown on me.

The same technical items you noted ("time can be rewritten", no isomorphic controls, etc) are things I noticed and irked me. As well...the fact that old Kazran TOUCHED young Kazran kinda drove me bonkers! After all we learned from Nine and Ten about not f'ing with the timeline, etc., Twelve just FLOUTS that!

And yes, I agree that so many characters are ending up as plot devices for an obvious story that Moffat just HAS to tell, but can't fit into the time he's given, so he has to take shortcuts. I'm rather disappointed with that, especially since Blink is one of my FAVOURITE episodes, and I was expecting stories of the same caliber.

Going back to your original peeve, I'm not sure what to think about the Doctor not appearing to care about all of the other people in stasis. Again, Twelve just seems to DO things with no explanation sometimes, and I don't like that.

And I still have one question: In the beginning, was Abigail really just "nobody of any importance" to Kazran when the Doctor rolled in? Going back to his young self, kiddo seemed infatuated with her anyway, but...I don't know why.

I'm so frustrated with the way the show is going, that I have no urge to re-watch to find my answers. It only frustrates me more. :P

[luinel-anduril.livejournal.com]

I love how you point out that Elevensies is really Twelve. I wonder if Moff is writing him that way on purpose. Surely the Dream Lord is the Valeyard.

[luinel-anduril.livejournal.com]

I really agree with everything you say here. The interesting thing is that in the past Moff always managed to make me like RTD's characters even more, but now he seems to be writing the Doctor completely out of character. Case in point: the Beast Below and Vampires in Venice. I cannot get over how he willfully caused the extinction of an entire species because they were changing women who wanted to have a better life. Of course he shouldn't have let them sink Venice, but he could have helped them rebuild.

[caz963.livejournal.com]

To write someone OOC you have to have given us an idea of exactly what is IN character for them... and part of my problem with Eleven is that I don't really know what that is, yet. I think he's repressed, he's cagey, he lies, he's got a quick temper and of course he's pretty bonkers. But like I've just said in a comment upthread, I can't quite see how he relates to Nine and Ten - Ten was very different to Nine in many ways, but we could at least see where he'd come from.

It's a while since I watched Vampires, but I thought that Eleven did offer Signora whotsit the chance to go somewhere else and she turned him down.

[kilodalton]

Great points.

Did he know she only had eight days to live which was why he didn't try to free her permanently?

Doubt it. As per usual with Moffat's Doctor, I doubt he even noticed. He tends to write the Doctor to be pretty dim:

* He harps on the temporal instability of the fireplace for a solid minute at the beginning of GITF and then at the end ... is surprised by the temporal instability of the fireplace.
* It takes him almost 2 hours to realize that books are made of paper in SITL/FOTD
* It takes him a ghastly amount of time to realize that the one person that all of his sworn enemies have in common hatred is ... him? in TPO/TBB
* Everyone and his mother noticed the little countdown thingy on Abigail's fridge ... he doesn't even notice that it's counting down?


whereas RTD is about characters and their motivations and so his plots (such as they are!) grow from them and the way they think and act.

THIS. I know you're not a Rose/TenToo fan, but Davies wrote in his book that the beach scene took him a month to write and rewrite and rewrite, mainly because he couldn't see Rose acting the way he needed her to act. So he kept on trying and getting input and lines from everyone from Julie Gardner to David Tennant until they all felt that everything was in character.

.... would Moffat spend a month obsessing on a scene because the characters aren't acting in-character enough? (Lol).

[caz963.livejournal.com]

I do remember reading that about the beach scene - and I think that he wasn't completely happy with what he ended up with, although I seem to remember he felt better about it once he'd seen Billie's acting choices.

My problem is that I still don't know quite who Eleven is yet, so I can't always tell whether he's "in character" or not. Maybe Moff is deliberately making him more of a puzzle to the audience. Kids are generally not as bothered by all the "character stuff" as we grown-ups are, and I get the feeling that he wants to steer things back towards that demographic. I'm not saying that's a bad thing - I started watching DW as a kid in the seventies, after all, and back then I was definitely more interested in the stories and the enemies etc than I was in figuring out why a character acted a certain way.
But he's a good writer. Can't we have both?

And yeah, even my kids were yelling at the TV about the relationship between books and trees!

[wendymr.livejournal.com]

Here from who_daily, and you've said pretty much (only better) than I said myself in my LJ a couple of days ago. I agree entirely with your expression of the difference between RTD's and Moffat's writing - and I'm on the side of having characters who act in character on a consistent basis, rather than acting any which way because it suits the demands of a plot.

And this:
Of course, this was a Christmas episode, very much a standalone - but that can't really excuse the lack of decent characterisation and the increasing reliance on "smoke and mirrors" plotlines which at first glance make me think "ooh, that's clever!", but which, an hour or so later, have me scratching my head.

is something I've been thinking pretty much since GITF. I've found plot holes in all of Moffat's episodes in S1-4. They really do seem much less clever on second viewing, and it's got worse over time.

Above all, though, what disappoints me about ACC is what it's told the audience about the Doctor: that he appears not to care about injustice and walks away from hundreds of people who need his help. Compare that to Ten in New Earth - cheesy and full of poor science as it was, it had a Doctor to whom ordinary people mattered. And, as others have commented, while Ten may have abandoned the Ood in S2, he wasn't happy about it at the time and made up for it later. Here, there was no mention of the other frozen people, or any reason given why Eleven couldn't save them. Very poor.

[caz963.livejournal.com]

I'm on the side of having characters who act in character on a consistent basis, rather than acting any which way because it suits the demands of a plot.

Me, too.

I know people moaned that Rusty was crap at making plots make sense - and there are times when I can certainly agree with that - but there's been this "Emperor's New Clothes" attitude towards Moffat in some areas of fandom, as if he's not guilty of the same thing sometimes.

I said when I watched Sherlock earlier this year that I felt that THAT was the DW that Moffat really wants to write, because to my mind, Eleven's seeming lack of concern for the other frozen IOUs would have fitted Sherlock Holmes perfectly.

And yeah, I'm the Doctor and I cured them! might make me wince... but at least Ten's hearts were in the right place!

[chloris67.livejournal.com]

Which is - why the hell didn't Eleven do anything about that whole army of "surplus population" that Kazran had downstairs in the freezer?

That is exactly one of the issues I have with the episode! In my scribbled notes from last night I have that as one of my major questions. Eleven just doesn't seem to even care! As is his usual pattern he focuses fully on one, single person without even noticing anyone else. His world feels very small. Which can be intimate but it can also be claustrophobic.

I've already said how much Moff's insistence that time can be rewritten is starting to bug me

And that's my other main issue! Stop rewriting time Moffat!

[caz963.livejournal.com]

I kept telling myself "it's a Christmas episode and it's a standalone" while I was watching and then writing both my review posts - but these holes still bug me.

The Beeb has been showing one of DT's Christmas episodes per day this week - today was The Next Doctor, which is one of my least favourite of all the specials, but, giant CyberKing notwithstanding, I still felt it hung together better than ACC.

I DID enjoy A Christmas Carol while I watched it - it was just that once I started to actually think about it, the house of cards started collapsing.

[sensiblecat.livejournal.com]

First, to play devil's advocate...Yes, I think the whole thing was a triumph of style over substance, and for that reason hugely successful, because we live in a culture that laps up that stuff. It was almost an Xmas Special written by computer to be as cliched and superficially appealing as possible.

Before we call SM out on this I think we must acknowledge that he is under huge commercial pressure, arguably even more so than RTD because the show is on the verge of breaking into America and moving outside its cult TV niche there. And hundreds of jobs in Wales depend on its success. So, while I accept the original criticisms, I also think we have to recognise the reality of Moff's workload and not be too precious about it.

Having said that, I do have some real issues. One problem with the Whoniverse is that, with a little hand-waving, anything is possible. You have to have some rules or there's no dramatic tension. For example, if it's okay for time to be rewritten, why not go back to before the ship went anywhere near Karzan's planet, or before Abigail gets ill? The first, at least, would be far more efficient than relying on one old man to change his mind.

The points about the lack of righteous indignation about the global situation on the planet have already been made several times. Again, consistency is the problem. You can have Eleven as an alien who doesn't get the human stuff, but when he says things like "Nobody is unimportant," there's an expectation that he'll follow through, that we'll see some values being acted out there. It's inconsistent to lavish care and attention on Karzan yet use Abigail as a means to an end. I felt uncomfortable about that whole character arc with its syrupy idealisation of women.

Another related issue is how closely the Xmas specials are integrated into the characters' development, and whether they act as a bridge between series. Certainly TCI and TRB did so quite beautifully - each set out to answer one very specific emotional question and that story mattered as much, if not more, than the Monster of the Week plot. (Subsequent Specials were less successful, more celebrity-driven, even in RTD's day, and I think TCC has if anything pushed that unfortunate trend further).

I also think SM is guilty of some reductive and muddled thinking about children, and the difference between child-like and childish. He wants to restore some of the emotional opacity of a Gandalf figure, or a fairy-tale wizard, but the fantasy environments such characters inhabit tend to be much more black-and-white morally than anything we see in DW.

[caz963.livejournal.com]

Your point about the show being "on the edge" of breaking in the US is a good one, and one I admit I hadn't properly taken into account. It's been obvious, this past year, that the Beeb is working terribly hard to move it towards the mainstream in the US this past year, harder than it seems to me they've ever done.

I agree completely with everything else you've said. And the lack of consistency does surprise me, because Moffat is a very good writer. It's a sweeping judgement to make, I know, but like I've said before, I have this idea of Rusty as a kind of manic, seat-of-his-pants, Beethoven type, with Moff as a better organised, worked-it-all-out-in-his-head-beforehand Mozart type. I could be completely wrong, of course!

I think that kids - certainly older ones - can cope better with moral ambiguity than some adults believe that they can, and it's a good thing to be showing them that NOT everything is black or white. DW has always had that element, and it's one of the few places in "kids'" TV (and I don't really like calling it a kid's show - but that's where Moff seems to want to pitch it a bit more) where there is the opportunity to display that there's not always a simple solution and that some things come at a cost. At its best, DW has always been throught-provoking and has tackled some fairly serious issues - it would be a great shame if that were to be lost.

[green-maia.livejournal.com]

Hi, I'm here from chloris67's journal.

You explain a lot of what I dislike about Moffat's writing in general and the Christmas special in particular.

But the more I think about this version of A Christmas Carol, the harder I'm finding it not to think WTF? about many of its constituent parts. The plot didn't really make much sense and I found that I didn't really care all that much about any of the characters or what happened to them.

My reaction exactly.

I mean, we're asked to believe that Karzan, admittedly a bit of a git, is inhumane enough to allow 4003 people to die just because he doesn't feel like helping them. Okay, so Scrooge didn't care about anyone other than himself, and we're able to infer that his actions have almost certainly led to deaths indirectly - but what Kazran is prepared to do is tantamount to single-handedly perpetrating a massacre.

Yup.

I've already said how much Moff's insistence that time can be rewritten is starting to bug me

Moffat's insistence that time can be rewritten drives me INSANE.


The thing about Dickens is that he was a great character writer. Love him or hate him (and I love him) it's impossible to deny that he created memorable characters, some of whom have become part of our national culture and consciousness, Ebenezer Scrooge being a prime example. I do have problems with many of his "heroines", I admit - most of whom tend to be whiter-than-white, long suffering, rather colourless characters, who are there to suffer, for the hero to protect and/or fall in love with and not much else. It seems that Moff did more than borrow the title of his first Christmas special from Dickens - he borrowed the blueprint for the heroine too, as Abigail Pettigrew was as Dickensian a female character as her name suggests. She was pretty and perfect and suffering and there for someone to fall in love with... oh, and it turns out she was dying, too.

Yup.

[caz963.livejournal.com]

*waves* Welcome!

It annoys me rather that so many people who slag off Rusty's use of the deus ex machina don't seem to be as bothered by the idea that time can be rewritten. To my mind, that's the biggest DeM of them all!

[olsonm-raymond.livejournal.com]

Hi Caz! I agree that this episode was a little thin. I think we were supposed to assume all things that they skipped over. A bit of cheating on Moffat's part. He has a lot of good qualities but he needs to learn to keep it simple so we don't have to imagine all the good parts.