caz963 | More Who Pontification

Current Mood: meh

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.

Threaded | Top-Level Comments Only

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.

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.

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.

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. :-)

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?

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.

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 :-)

Edited 2010-12-28 02:35 (UTC)

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.

Thank you. :-)

Style over substance, ha. I know that the common distinction used to describe Moffat vs. RTD is plot vs. characters, but I like this one better. Because for me, Moffat isn't even a good plot writer anymore. I think there has to be a minimum of character credibility as well as a bit of logic and consistency for the plot to work. For style, you don't need either.

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* :)

I meant "the others" as in RTD's companions :( Like, I love Donna - as you know, obvs - but sometimes I'm not sure how much of her personality is stuff I've projected onto her or built from a single moment. When I write her in fic I get horribly aware that My Donna has a bit too much tRB!Donna in her, and they're in some ways different characters. I just genuinely don't know if I could write 500 words or so about What Donna Is Like that was actually based on stuff that happened in episodes.

Which could just be me, sure, but then there's stuff like... well, I do think fandom tends to project some of our self-esteem issues onto her, or just assume that she has Body Issues when she might well not have anything of that sort.

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..."

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.

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.

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

Omg, is it really only a year? (She said, still bitter about Grace killing Seven...)

Oh, right - sorry, I misunderstood you. It was late...

I did see your post the other day about that and didn't get around to commenting, but I have to agree with whoever said that what Rusty did with those characters was actually quite skillful. Becuase even though what he gave us were sketches that were made with fairly broad strokes, he gave us enough for us to be able to find something to latch on to. And perhaps that means that we DO end up drawing parallels with our own lives to an extent, but that's what happens - and is meant to happen (?) - when you "identify" or empathise with a character, for the most part, isn't it?

Like you, I adore Donna and find her easy to like and identify with because, in my case, I do find things about her that strike chords with me. But the thing is that even with Rose - who I don't much like - and Martha - with whom I have nothing in common, really - I can still find those little things that tell me just a bit about who they are as psople, and it's that that - for me, anyway - is the important thing. I don't necessarily have to like a character to find them interesting (although it probably helps!) but I need to be able to see something in them that helps me to learn a bit about them. I think that Amy has, so far, been a plot device rather than a "proper" character. I've seen flashes of characterisation here and there - especially in Vincent and parts of the S5 finale, but those are both episodes that came at the end of the series, and I think it's a bit dangerous to leave the development of a major character until such a late stage. But hey, that's just my opinion and I know people out there who love Amy - and I'm still hoping that I'll be able to warm to her in S6.

I do agree that sometimes people end up "mary-sue-ing" their favourite characters, but then I suppose that's inevitable when what we've got isn't written down or more fully fleshed out as you might find in a novel.

Edited 2010-12-28 11:14 (UTC)

*holds up hands*

Yes, you're right on that one.

That's a good point - but I can't help feeling that with Moff, there's not just the desire to impress, but the desire for us all to sit up and take notice of how clever he's being.

Again, just IMO - I don't know the man and am just going on things I've seen and read. And regardless of that, I do think he's clever - he writes great dialogue, he's witty and while his plots don't always make sense to me, he certainly has the ability to tell a good story.

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?

I think there has to be a minimum of character credibility as well as a bit of logic and consistency for the plot to work.

And the thing is - Moffat's good enough to do both.

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?

Well, there's "impressing" in a way that's genuinely meant to move and entertain, and then there's "impressing" that seems meant to show off how clever and imaginative one is.

Not that I don't think Moffat wants to entertain -- of course he does. Yet it's like he gets wrapped up in creating plot, in a way that upstages character and emotion -- which to me are what gives a story weight and purpose. He *can* do some very moving stuff, and has done, but since becoming showrunner... I dunno. I've been entertained, but not drawn in emotionally the way I was by RTD. I got spoiled, I guess.

I definitely Mary-Sue Donna. Which, I'm sure, is part of my problem with what happened to her.

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!

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.

Threaded | Top-Level Comments Only

Page 1 of 3

More Who Pontification

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject