![[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
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).
no subject
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!
no subject
The completely dumb thing about what he's doing though, is that SJA is much more specifically geared towards a young audience. It's almost painful for me to watch, it's so tween-y!!
Yet idk about anyone else, but in RTD's Death of the Doctor 1 & 2, I felt like I got so much better of a handle on Eleven's personality -- the slightly charming but slightly caustic bits, especially, with the "you look baked" comment to poor Jo -- than I ever did in s5. How sad is that?
no subject
And yeah, even my kids were yelling at the TV about the relationship between books and trees!
^^^ I think this is in fact the point. Moffat often writes moments of insight, I find, in a way to encourage the audience to put them together for themselves before the Doctor gives the "answer." A really prominent example is in "Time of Angels" with the realization that all the statues are angels--he draws the viewer along to make the connections about one head versus two, etc. Sometimes the results are a bit clumsy, I'll admit, but I do appreciate that Moffat is trying to allow us to engage with Eleven on an intellectual level as well as an emotional one. I think it's also part and parcel of a number of "teaching" techniques he uses to guide the audience through and to train them to follow more complicated plot structures.
no subject
to encourage the audience to put them together for themselves
As a teacher in an age where kids are only too ready to give up before they've even started and expect answers to be given to them on a plate, I am absolutely in favour of that method. Although, as you say, it's a difficult thing to pull off well, especially in a show like this, where the age range of the viewers is so wide.