![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Entry tags:
More Who Pontification
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.
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.
no subject
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.
no subject
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.
no subject
I thought her whole speech at the end of SitL/FotD made that really clear. And there have been moments since then that really speak to how she feels about the Doctor [going psycho on the Dalek and her voice breaking as she does so]
>>She's a complete blank slate.
Not completely. She's a kind and gentle person to the point where she'll sacrifice herself for her family and hide the truth [about her illness] from Kazran in order to preserve his feelings. She volunteered herself for the ice, she _wants_ to be there so she's not completely without agency. And she has wisdom that Kazran doesn't possess because of the way he was raised [she tells him you don't need money to be happy which seems to totally confuse him] she's much the opposite of Kazran, but the way she is different from him helps him - River/The Doctor are kind of the same.
the major difference between RTD and Moffat's writing is that Moffat's characters don't outright blurt out what they're thinking, feeling, and motivated to do, and Moffat doesn't stop the plot for character moments. His character building and plot lines are weaved together. It's not a lack of characterization but a different way of showing it.
He's not perfect- no writer is- but lack of characterization is not a criticism I understand.
no subject
Moffat's characters don't outright blurt out what they're thinking, feeling, and motivated to do.
I don't think that Rusty's did either - if they had, we wouldn't have spent (and still BE spending) so much time discussing their likely thoughts and motivations, would we? And let's be honest - with actors like CE and DT who were so skilled, he didn't need them to blurt anything out - they were more than capable of showing it without words. (As is Matt - just to be clear!)
I will argue with your comment about character building and plot development though, because what I've seen mostly so far is plot development that bends characters to fit its demands, rather than a plot which allows the characters to be consistent.
But I won't argue with what you've said about River. While I do think that she's being used as a device to further the plot and create a mystery, I do think that there have been moments - those you describe and others - that speak of a genuine affection for the Doctor. One of my favourites was "Oh, Doctor. Why do I let you out?" :-)