Wednesday 26 December 2012

The Snowmen | Review - Spoilers Ahead!

This blog will be full of spoilers. Lots of them. So if you haven't seen this episode - leave now. If you have - welcome.

I could also call this blog 'Why I love Clara Oswin Oswald/Jenna-Louise Coleman'. A large majority of it will be singing her praises. But I will try and give the episode a full and developed review as well. So I'll start with the general opinion I have. It was an OK Doctor Who episode. It wasn't great, and I wasn't really a fan of the actual monster/villain/snow storyline. But considering that this episode only really served the purpose of introducing Clara, I should judge the episode on that. Perfect. I thought that The Snowmen was a perfect introduction episode for a companion, possibly one of the best ever. If ever you want to introduce a companion, future Executive Producers, watch The Snowmen. It is a perfect example. It's perfect because of lots of factors. One is Clara/Jenna. Another is the Doctor and her relationship with him. Another is the relationship they have. And another is the fact Steven Moffat didn't mess about when getting Clara as a companion. But more of that later.

The whole 'army of ice/snow' thing and origin of something which might become the thing that controls the Yeti but might be after that but might be powerful but might be not powerful but might still be Wilfred Simeon didn't work great for me. Supposedly, the Intelligence is the Great Intelligence, and this is how it came to being. Which is fine. But I felt that Moffat, who rarely brings back classics as pure classics anyway, missed an opportunity. Or at least, didn't do the Intelligence justice. Their story of origin was essentially just last year's Christmas Special, a wishy-washy reason about a lonely boy dreaming of.. world conquering.. Either way; it's a wishy-washing-not-really-proper concept, and so for an origin for the Intelligence it's strange. I felt the explanation of the Intelligence and being Simeon's dream was all over the place basically, the storyline of it was typical Christmas Who (not very good), and the whole evil globe bit just... Didn't work. The monsters weren't great. The storyline with them, therefore, wasn't great. However - their presence, and the idea of evil snowmen, and certainly Richard E Grant - was great.

So if we move on from the Intelligence, and perhaps imagined they were replaced with some other, stronger, plot, then we can see a perfect episode. The way the Doctor and Clara meet is typically accidental - but I like it. The best thing about The Snowmen, is it introduces a new companion properly, and yet acts as a parody of previous companion-meeting episodes. The Doctor normally messes about, and on saving the world invites someone with him. But this is different. The Doctor, from the very first brief meeting with Clara, can see himself travelling with her. He wants to get to know her, and because of her curiosity, he knows the same applies to her. That means they can just agree to go away together. The Doctor wants to travel with Clara, he immediately likes her, and she immediately likes him. They don't need big long conversations about the consequences of leaving home - they just agree 'cos they're mates (or a little more). The idea of the Doctor falling in love with Clara to move on works quite well, I feel. I would have completely rejected the idea of love in Doctor Who before, but with the Doctor so distraught after losing Amy (a feeling I don't share), it makes sense that the only way he can move on is if he actually kind of falls in love with someone. And River Song? What about her? He's finally got someone who looks the same age as him.

The Doctor gives Clara a key incredibly early on. That makes it more poignant than giving it to her later (and I mean, who actually likes the stupidly over-acted scene in '42' where Martha gets the key?) and it means something. The Doctor acts brilliantly around Clara. He cares a great deal for her - and the fact he, I should think, fancies her from the word go means that any 'getting to know you' stuff isn't that necessary. There's a mutual friendship, perhaps a mutual attraction, and Clara acts not only as the Doctor's friend - but also the kind of therapy he feels he needs to move on. It was great having Vastra there to not only help the Doctor realise he needs to move on, but to push that idea of a parody further. Vastra is almost narrating the Doctor's
recovery process, and notices when he meets someone new. Clara is a source of hope. And she's brilliant.

Clara is cocky and sarcastic, but I don't find her annoying, because she's acted so well and with a great deal of charm.  Jenna-Louise Coleman was initially a terrible choice for me. I completely take that back and apologise. She is one of the best companions ever. She is the 'feisty' companion, but with something extra, with an extra dynamic between the Doctor and her. You could compare 11/Clara to 9 and 10/Rose - but with them it was more an unspoken love. 11/Clara are just having a laugh, and falling for each other as they go along. So it's minimal but present - perhaps that's why I don't mind the 'love' story.

The new TARDIS is amazing. The spinning circley bits, the console, the lighting, the balcony, and that amazing shot where the Doctor and Clara walk into it - it all looks incredible. It is as good as the original TARDIS. In fact, it is the original TARDIS - but more modern and with less clocks... The new title sequence isn't great, unfortunately. It is wonderfully colourful and mad, and it reflects the 3rd Doctor's titles in that sense. And there's a face!! The face is brilliant, though brief, and it' good to see it there. The vortex thing which is played for the credits and after the logo in the opening is great. If the titles were mad, but kept contained in the vortex, then they'd be great. But the planets and stars and weird ashy things and confusion don't work for me. There's no place for it, it's just a mad colour rush - and it fails to achieve what it needed to. They don't feel like Doctor Who titles. The new music, which is only for the opening it seems, is good, with wonderful 80s sounding whooses and sound effects. But it is just a remix - so not full marks there.

So overall: this episode is only great because of the characters. Richard E Grant and Ian McKellen, though not used that much, are great. Vastra, Jenny and especially Strax are brilliant, and all of Strax's lines are fantastic. The "I've been run over by a cab!" line was fantastic. For the first time in ages, character and script have come together brilliantly. The new companion is wonderful, and the look of the episode was amazing  (the cloud, the TARDIS, the Victorian streets, all brilliant). The only thing that let it down is the slightly out of place stuff with the Intelligence. It's just not that great, and is a bit all over the place. But purely for the companion - this episode is pretty damn good.

10/10 for Clara - and I look forward to the incredibly exciting (it appears) Series 7 Part 2....

Friday 7 December 2012

Did You Say Something About Mummy? Time and the Rani

DID YOU SAY SOMETHING ABOUT MUMMY? (the line is of course taken from Vampires of/in Venice) is a new feature on this Blog, that includes me, sitting down with my mum, watching various Doctor Who episodes. We'll be watching out of order, we won't watch all of them, and then I'll record her comments and various things of interest here.

Our first story is Time and The Rani. I've never seen past Part One of this, I couldn't cope, so it was a new experience for both of us. I told her that this was Colin Baker's final story. For those who believe it is, there may be some spoilers ahead...

PART ONE

Me: so this is Colin Baker's last story.

Mum: So you've never seen it before either?

Me: Nope.

The episode begins.

Mum: Oo er. Aha! It's right at the beginning. Oh no, i thought it was right at the end! But that's ok. I like Sylvester McCoy

Me: This is the story Colin Baker didn't come back for.

Mum: so they put him (McCoy) in a wig? *laughs loudly* You couldn't tell.

Yeah. She's serious.

Me: This was voted something like the second worst story of all time.

Actually, it was the third worst, followed by Timelash and The Twin Dilemma, but never mind.

Mum: Really?

The Rani appears.

Mum: She's a Time Woman-y Lord isn't she?

I nod my reply.

The Seventh Doctor appears.

Mum: He's very different here. Very young and enthusiastic, very 'ooh yes', whereas by the end he was 'meh'.

Me: But that was deliberate, not because he'd got bored.

I then fill mum in on the Darker Doctor idea.

Mum: How long did he do this for?

Me: Three years.

Me: Are you looking forward to seeing Bonnie Langford as Mel?

Mum: Yeah... she'd been with Colin Baker most of the time?

Me: For six 25 minute episodes.

Mum: Oh right.

Me: What do you think of the 1987 graphics?

Mum: It's amazing.

That was sarcasm, obviously.

Then the Rani dresses up. I look at Mum. I actually don't think she's realised... that or she thinks the Rani dressing up is a good plot device.

When Real Mel appears, she still says nothing. Clearly thinks it's just a good plot device.

Mum: Were they in an old quarry somewhere?

Me: Mhmm.

Mum: I love watching old Doctor Whos. There appears to be a handy cement tunnel. That's useful.

Then - at last...

Mum: She's doing a good impression of Bonnie Langford. *laughs* Bouncy bouncy.

Yeah. She's serious.

She laughs at the Doctor's Napoleon outfit.

And then louder when he dresses up as Tom Baker.

Mum: Was that Tom Baker's coat? Haha, Jon Pertwee, very funny.

She's serious.

She laughs louder as he dresses as Peter Davison.

Mum: They were having a bit of fun with this one. Haha, Patrick Troughton!

Mum: So by rights she should blow up? But she won't.

Me: You never know.

Mum: It's very good, makes a change seeing a new one. You've not seen the next bit?

Me: Nope.

Mum: Why not?

Me: I don't think it's very good.

Mum: I really like it, if you look past the terrible 80s graphics.

Me: They're not bad, actually.

Mum: yeah. (then she later repeats) It's very good.

She's serious.

PART TWO

Me: Should he have stayed like this, or become a Darker Doctor?

Mum: I don't know, there are bits of 'him' in it. He's only silly for the first two minutes, he becomes more 'Sylvester McCoy' later on. I don't think it's one of the worst stories.

She later adds: I like Sylvester McCoy he's good. I keep forgetting you met him.

Mel is saved by water.

Mum: She's supposed to blow up! Haha, lucky for her!

Back in the Rani's pad.

Mum: Is he pretending that he doesn't remember her? ("Mel")

Me: No.

Mum: Ah.

The Tetrap arrives.

Mum: Ooh. The scream'd be enough to scare him off. Blimey.

Mum leaves the room while the Doctor and Mel wrestles. I think this was more coincidence, but I wouldn't blame her. She returns a few seconds later.

Mum's silent for the rest of the episode, except for pointing out when the cliffhanger will be.

Me: What do you think so far?

Mum: I like it, it's really good, it's keeping me quiet. I'm completely into it. What do you think?

Me: It's ok.

Mum: Do you not like it?

Me: Meh... I'll show you the best one one day, you'll hate it. You seem to like all the ones everyone else hates.The best one isn't very Doctor Who-y.

Mum: This one's Doctor Who-y. I like all the ones like that; Keeper of Traken and Logopolis. I love them.

I agree.

PART THREE

The cliffhanger is resolved.

Mum: I knew he was gonna turn up.

We return to Mel.

Mum: Bonnie Langford's actually good.

Me: Yeah, she's better than a lot of people think.

Mum: I just assumed she'd be really bad.

Me: She gets worse, in this season.
Mum: I need to watch some of those, there are serious gaps in my education.

The Tetrap turns up again.

Mum: His helmet looks really plastic-y though.

The Doctor trips Beyus up.

Mum: Aha. Is he a baddy really then?

Me: I don't know.

Beyus and Faroon have a heart to heart.

Mum: I think he's in on it.

The cliffhanger comes.

Mum: *gasps* We're absorbed, we're keeping quiet.

PART FOUR

Mum: We''ll have to watch more of these.

Me: We'll do The Caves of Androzani next.

Mum: That's the worst one?

Me: No, the best one. Peter Davison's in it.

Mum: Oh right.

Me: I hated it the first time I watched it but I like it now.

Mum: I really like this one. I don't see why it's one of the worst ones, Sylvester McCoy's really good.

Me: Yeah, it's not as tacky as I thought it'd be, it's less silly.

Mum: She's (The Rani) really good.

Me: Oh yeah.

Mum: After that (Androzani), we'll have to watch the worse one.

Me: I've only ever got through fifteen minutes of that.

She is again, silent throughout the episode.

She gives it a round of applause at the end.

Mum: That was really good! Really enjoyed that, jolly jolly good.

She gives it an 8/10

As you read, next time we'll be watching The Caves of Androzani. You can share any thoughts on this commentary on the Comments section of Blogger, or on my Twitter, @cookiemonsta_eg. I'm hoping that after Androzani and Dilemma, we'll watch a few fan films (the 'we're trying to be professional' ones) and I'll write up the thoughts on those.

Monday 3 December 2012

The Picture of Dorian Gray | Review

The Picture of Dorian Gray, by Oscar Wilde. It's, if you don't count a read-out-of-order Great Expectations, the first 'classic' novel I have ever finished, and certainly the first one I've read by choice. It was probably Big Finish, with their announcement of a Dorian Gray audio series, that reminded me to read this, and initially I expect it was hearing about the concept of the book that interested me. It is, though not a completely original idea, a very strong idea and it is a new take on an older idea, that of 'selling your soul to the Devil'.

This review won't contain any spoilers, and I find it difficult to criticise something written so long ago. I aim to watch the movie made a few years ago (which I can see myself disliking because it's meant to deviate from the plot of the book), and I'll be able to offer a more complete opinion of that. But - for now it's the book, and I will try my best to review it well.

It is a typical 19th Century novel (although this is the first one I've finished, it's by no means the first one I've started, and I have knowledge of lots of other novels of the period), and it revels in being, to a modern reader, over the top and elaborate. For me, the 'over the top' side to it adds richness to it. It's delightfully full of words and language, it's easy to follow and it's fascinating. It's not just the characters that are fascinating, but it's also the descriptions. We aren't told action as it unfolds, but it's shown initially by the reaction of the character, and then explained later on through speech, as or as some insignificant sentence amongst the description. The descriptions also describe thing is in incredible detail, fully conveying the idea of the importance of 'beauty' with the book.

The characters are wonderful. Lord Henry, or Harry to his mates, is fantastically over the top and elaborate, with pretty outrageous views even for modern day. He's a character that is practically the embodiment of controversy, and this book and its author carry a lot of that. Dorian Gray starts off as an over the top, emotional 'boy', and his speech does change and develop, he does become more mature in how he speaks, and less irrational. However, through the descriptions, in which we are given an insight of how he thinks, and through the underlying theme of what he says and occasionally how he speaks, there are always hints of emotion and the 'boy' that he looks like. The trick of never-ageing is only really used once, when someone threatens Dorian many years after a certain event. It's also something that isn't really mentioned. People accept Dorian's eternal youth (that's not a spoiler, the blurb will tell you that much), and they think that a man of his position, and his lifestyle, will of course look young forever. Lord Henry believes he has some secret - but doesn't question it, because - well because basically he probably enjoys staring at Dorian's face all day.

The other character of note (though they are all full, developed, and wonderful to read about) is Basil, the painter. He is the 'innocent' character, whereas Henry is all for sin, and Dorian is somewhere in the middle of the two. He provides the 'angel' side of the arguable angel/Devil symbols of Basil/Henry. He, again, is a full and well written character, and the care he has for Dorian is really quite touching. It's even more touching when the book develops and the stakes are raised. That's the other thing. It is a fairly linear story, albeit with some strange and complex ideas, but there are twists along the way that change the way you perceive things within the book.

The thing that I dislike in books is when you skip years within the space of a page, or in between a chapter. Dorian Gray does this a lot. First it skips a month, then a large section of years. It didn't annoy me as much as I thought it would, though the 'catch up' chapter, in which Wilde describes Dorian Gray's escapades and indulgence in various beautiful things, is quite long. In fact - very long, and it drags out, with long, elaborate sentences, describing historical items in great detail. My eyes did blur a couple of times while reading that chapter, but the action soon picks up again after, and the gap of years is referenced and also included well in the rest of the book.

A few other things to mention then. The references to other works of literature, such as Hamlet and Romeo & Juliet, are brilliant. There are a lot of references to, not just beauty, but also sophisticated things, literature, history, poetry, music. It is a highly sophisticated book, with properly strong ideas. I can see why it caused controversy at the time - and I've no idea whether the book I read is the 'full' version with all the controversial bits still in (not sure I did), but I can find various controversial items in there.

I'm not sure if this is the book for everyone. I loved it, but then I'm interested in literature, and the idea of 'beauty' is something I'm currently trying to pick out for my English coursework, so the theme of Dorian Gray was something I was interested in. It's also a book that's ahead of its time. It talks openly and daringly about things, it portrays Victorian life fantastically, and it shows you inside the head of the character, while still developing all of them. The story moves along well, there's a suitable amount of action, and it's all contained and believable. If you like developed, classic books - then this is for you. If you prefer lighter books - this is not the book for you. As um, the characters do like to go on... And on...

I really, really enjoyed this book. I finished it - so that's proof. I'm not sure whether I'd tackle Wilde's 'Importance of Being Earnest', but I'd definitely read Dorian Gray again. It's my kind of book, and I loved it.

I don't really rate things 10/10 that often, and there is the long 'catch up' chapter to consider so - 9.5/10

And something to watch out for: the end of the chapter where Dorian faints in the garden. The last few sentences of the chapter are truly chilling.