The Man Who Was Thursday is The Prisoner. You know, the 60s cult TV show, where Patrick McGoohan is imprisoned in a Welsh town that looks a bit like Italy, chased by big white balloons and shouts a lot? The Man Who Was Thursday is a 1908 novel by GK Chesteron, all-round clever man, philosopher, poet, writer, and debater. The Man Who Was Thursday takes contemporary views on anarchy and writes a book about it. The subtitle of the book is "A Nightmare". Well, this review is here to question whether it is a nightmare to read (though this was never intended) or a Nightmare in terms of the events, and just how close to The Prisoner it is.
I'll start with a brief overview. It's difficult to say if there'll be spoilers, because the book is so complex that on occasion even the blurbs start off accurately and by the end of the book you're left questioning them. There's no ending, as such, at least not a conventional one, for the book - so it's difficult to spoil it. But there will be plot revelations (though really big ones I've left the names out of). And so I would highly advise you to read it first (it's only 170ish pages) and then you'll appreciate this review all the more.
The book has one of the most incredible concepts I've ever come across. The title is awesome, first of all. I don't know a writer (except a friend of mine who claims he 'writes' books) who wouldn't love to write a book with that title. The concept of an anarchist council, with seven members named after days of the week, is fantastic. The room with guns lined up against the walls, and a vast white bomb-shaped room in which the council meetings are held are brilliantly visual. The moment when the dining table plunges to an underground base is awesome. The introduction to the characters of Syme (which is a great name) and Gregory, with his fiery red hair (appropriate), is also brilliant, and Gregory is fantastically over the top. It's the introduction that kept me reading. It's the kind of literature I enjoy, with dramatic speeches that would now be considered as 'over the top' - but it's "wordy" and developed and complex, and I love that. Gregory is like Henry/Harry from Dorian Gray - he's over the top with extreme views, but he puts them across like a gentleman. Syme is a calm character, and he disputes everything Gregory says, making you automatically like Syme, and dislike Gregory. There's the assumption that these two characters also dislike each other - but that's muddied later on and confused. The other great concept is that Syme, who is really a Police Officer, cannot tell the world that Gregory is really an anarchist, and so has forced Gregory, whom he tells the truth to, to keep his mouth shut about the fact the anarchists have just voted an Officer to join. Syme infiltrates the anarchists brilliantly, leaving fiery-haired Gregory in a state, with no one listening to his protests. It's a really clever start to the book.
And though a good book, it feels less clever and more like a comedy as it progresses. From the moment that Syme goes to meet Sunday - the book sadly goes, not downhill, but into a realm of basically - the nightmare. Things become strange, surreal, incomprehensible to some degree, and events are confused and complex. I love confusing, complex, surreal and strange stories. But this book takes it a little bit too far. The premise is simple enough, with Sunday plotting some kind of anarchy in France, but the whole thing just starts to get a little less exciting. The concept doesn't seem to be carried through as the book progresses. And then the comedy starts (after a brief spell of cleverness I'll get to in a minute), with mad sword fights and chases in hansom cabs, and a whole town chasing the supposed 'anarchists', and then the elephant. Yeah. An elephant.
The brief spell of cleverness I mentioned is the revelation that in fact - some of the men, it later turns out all the bloody men, are Police Officers! All appointed by a mysterious figure in the dark (and the revelation of who he was I predicted from the moment it was mentioned). The initial revelations that there are other Police Officers is clever, but it soon gets repetitive. And though we are treated to some wonderful revelations and really good characterisation of the anarchists/Officers, the revelations lose their effect.
Then comes the town chases in France, and the mad stuff, and the cabs, and the sword fight (which is actually written really well, and the stuff with the train arriving is actually full of tension). And then they all discover they're officers and confront Sunday - who goes onto steal a cab then an elephant then a hot air ballooon. Yeah. An elephant. The lead up to the end of the book is great. With the men invited to some fancy dress ball, the mystery and surreality are reinstated, and it really is fascinating. The references to the days of the week and the Bible are also quite clever. But then comes the actual ending.
What. The. Hell? Weird stuff happens, someone comes back and repeats a dramatic revelation we had earlier on in the book, and then Thursday/Syme passes out after weird stuff happens. Sunday, according to Wikipedia, is questioning the worth of his disciples. Right - now the real spoilers are going to start.
I understand that this book is mainly allegorical, or teaching us a lesson. Whether it be to tell us that anarchy is bad, or explaining how anarchy is the embodiment of a battle between God and free will (that's the theology side of me talking), or just there 'cos Chesterton got bored (unlikely), the book is confusing. The ending is not conventional, nor does it make any sense in terms of the real world. But then really, the book doesn't. It is the Nightmare that it promises, though definitely not to read it. Mad stuff happens, the world descends into chaos - and the only thing we can truly understand is Chesteron's message. Which is... I don't know. Its anti-anarchy anyway. There are loads of interpretations and I'm not sure what mine is yet.
The ending, for a conventional reader, begs many questions. Who is Sunday? Why appoint the men to be police officers? Was, then, the Thursday election planned so a real anarchist could be found? What good would that be? Do the anarchists really count as investigators of policemen? Why are Syme and Gregory such good friends afterwards? What's the significance of the woman? Was this all a dream? Why steal a bloody elephant? Yes. An elephant.
The point is, if you want my interpretation (stick yours on a postcard please), then it was a dream. It was a dream, or a nightmare, and a version of events of what would happen if anarchy is allowed to take hold. Chesterton probably meant something along those lines, and how God and his disciples, those he appoints, are there to tackle anarchy and provide peace. Sunday therefore probably is God in this allegory. The novel runs somewhat like a dream or nightmare. Events that don't make sense put together, using people that Syme (presumably the dreamer) knew in real life, like Gregory (or did he meet him in the dream too?). It would have been wonderful if the events were real - but I believe they're there to show an example. Everyone has nightmares, with random and unconnected places. This novel runs just like that.
Therefore - GK Chesterton is a genius. He has written, not only an allegorical novel delivering a message, not only a "boy's adventure" novel as one critic described it, not only something that gets you thinking - but he's made sense of a nonsensical nightmare, only to make it nonsensical again for the reader. He has written a nightmare. Which is awesome. Read this book for enjoyment, or study would probably be a better way of getting your teeth into it. But it is a book every person who likes literature should read. Just to appreciate the skill, the range, the mix of genres that's used. You don't have to make sense of it.
And if you want my advice, don't try to.
And so one more thing. The Prisoner. There are undeniable similarities, though I've never seen anyone mention it. There's a fancy dress ball in the novel (like Dance of the Dead in The Prisoner), an old man who drinks milk (like Number 2 in A, B and C), there's a bomb-shaped room (which reminded me of Fall Out), a surreal man know one understands (Number 1). Sunday is similar to Leo McKern's Number 2 - and the court of anarchists themselves have gotta be compared to the court in Fall Out. There are, for me, clear similarities, in both tone and features. You should definitely watch The Prisoner if you've read this book. (But then you can compare anything to pretty much anything. You could, for example, also compare the novel to the Florence + The Machine songs 'Cosmic Love' and 'Blinding'. Very tenuous links, but they're there.)
And you should definitely read the book. Though of course if you've read this review, there'll be no surprises, and those are genuine joy within the novel.
It's difficult to rate a book that isn't conventional, so I won't. But I really did enjoy it. Enough to read it again one day to try and get my head around it.
Tuesday, 15 January 2013
Tuesday, 1 January 2013
Are You My Mummy? Power of the Daleks Re-Imagined
This is the same feature as "Did you just say something about mummy?" but with a slightly better title. Ish. Essentially - this is the second installment of my very occasional 'watching Doctor Who with mum' blogs. Before, we watched Time and the Rani (as we're watching all kinds of Who and out of order), and now it's the turn of a fan film! We've picked one of the more 'professional' ones, and so this is the record of what happened when me and mum watched Power of the Daleks Re-Imagined.
I explain to Mum that the company who made Power of the Daleks had put on stage plays, and that Power is, first and foremost, a highly regarded story that was the first one of the Troughton era. I remind her the Doctor is not a re-imagined Second Doctor. Otherwise I think she'd be in for a shock.
Mum: So are all their stage plays with this re-imagined Doctor?
Me: Yeah I think so. We could play a game of spot the Doctor. It takes a while.
Mum: Right...
PART ONE
Mum: Is this based on the original?
Me: Yeah but modernised.
Mum: So they didn't use the original script?
Me: Nope.
Mum: It's all done very professionally. No wobbly sets.
The titles start.
Me: So do you know which of those is the Doctor?
Mum: No idea.
Mum: Quite good theme tune. I presume (seeing the picture) it's him.
Me: Yep.
The Doctor spouts some science stuff. Mum mouths her opinions. She's not impressed.
Mum pulls a face at the man saying "Yo".
Me: What do you think of the Doctor?
Mum: It's getting better... He reminds me of Sylvester McCoy.
Me: Really?
UNIT is discussed.
Mum: Why are they scared of UNIT?
The pod opens.
Mum: Is a Dalek gonna come out now?
Me: Wait and see.
Mum: What are they even doing there on the island? What are they digging for?
Me: I'm not actually sure.
Mum: They're just gonna open a door?
Me: Yep.
The Dalek is revealed.
Mum: Did they build their own Daleks? It's quite professional.
In Downing Street.
Me: Do you know who they are?
Mum: He's from Doctor Who.... He's a Dalek Operator.
Me: Well done.
Mum: How did they get him in it?
Me: I don't know. (I pause) And she's Lisa Bowerman, plays Bernice Summerfield.
Mum: Right..
She's not a Big Finish fan.
Mum: Script's a bit long-winded in places.
She notes the CGI holograms.
Mum: It's quite clever how they do that though. It's quite professional.
She even laughs a few times in the conversations following.
Mum: I'd like to see the original. You could make a better comparison then.
The Dalek "cliffhanger" arrives. I ask Mum's opinions.
Mum: Um... A bit dry. There's too many characters. It's not bad. The Doctor's ok, he's really like Sylvester McCoy.
We agree that his costume doesn't work.
Mum: But at least he's got a flowery shirt.
She's not following the story either, believing there needs to be more information at the beginning.
Mum: It feels like a very well done fan film. The effects are very clever - but you can tell it's a fan film. But that's good, that's the point. It's not meant to be totally professional. It's the kind of thing you'd watch and then want to skip to the end.
I've told her we're watching the whole thing.
Her rating for Part One is 8/10 for effects. 6/10 for everything else.
PART TWO
We discuss fan films and "am-dram" over the reprise. Agreeing that the effects are all well and good - but not helpful if the script doesn't work.
Mum: They're very good Daleks if they made those themselves.
Me: I think they're real ones they repainted.
Mum; I'm surprised they got away with using them .
I notice the Doctor looks into the camera.
Me: That didn't look great.
Mum hadn't noticed. She's pre-occupied with the spinning about of the Dalek.
Mum: Are the people not wondering where the Daleks came from or why they're there? Have they not noticed the Doctor yet?
The Dalek procrastinates.
Mum: But why has the Dalek not noticed the Doctor?
She pauses.
Mum: There are gaps in the story. And it's really annoying the Dalek hasn't noticed the Doctor.
Mum: What are they drilling for?
The guy in the hard hat and the flowery shirt has trouble working the drills. The Dalek turns up.
Mum: Ooh.
Me: I really like the Dalek eyestalks in this.
Dalek: We wish only to assist you.
Mum: Hmm. Don't trust that Dalek.
Mum nods as the Dalek explains what he's doing there, and how they want power...
Bragen (he's the guy in all black, a roll neck jumper and a beard, by the way) searches the Doctor and the Daleks on what looks like Outlook.
Mum: He's gonna find out what the Doctor and the Daleks are now.
Bragen and Hensell talk.
Mum: See I don't understand why they're worried about UNIT, if they're just a drilling company and I don't know what they're drilling for. There's lots of plot strands everywhere.
The Doctor deals some cards while he waits.
Mum: See the Doctor shouldn't do that. He is very Sylvester McCoy-ish though, did he base it on him?
The Daleks offer their help again. Mum doesn't trust them.
Mum: Who's he again?
Me: He's the security bloke (Bragen).
Mum: See you forget who everyone is in it.
In the cavey-thing.
Mum: Has he got a sonic screwdriver? Is it specially made, has he got his own version?
She squints her eyes to look. We're still non the wiser.
Mum: Where's his TARDIS? Do you get to see it?
Me: You'll see inside it at some point.
She raises her hands again in confusion.
Mum: There's lots of mysterious readings of things and half conversations. It's too mysterious, there's not enough answers.
Hensell (the guy in the shirt with a beard) questions Janley (the woman). Mum shakes her head in confusion.
The Daleks are Hensell's. Janley is an eco-warrior.
Me: Does that make any more sense?
Mum: Not really.
Mum: Who did they get to do the voices?
Me: Guess.
Mum: Is it Briggs?
Me: Yep.
Mum: They're real Daleks with real voices. The 'real' bits are really good.
We discover the "man in the red" is from UNIT.
Mum: Oh he's in UNIT.
Bragen talks again.
Bragen: Can you meet me in Access 3?
Mum: Why?
He draws a gun.
Mum: *gasps* Don't like guns in Doctor Who. Or swearing, there was no need for that earlier.
Me: Guns are in it quite a lot.
Mum: Yeah... but..
Access 3.
Mum: So why's he going to shoot him?
Bragen: I've received new instructions.
Mum: From?
Mum shakes her head in confusion.
Mum: I'm completely lost on the story.
Me: I think they all want the Daleks.
Mum: I'm confuddled. I wanna see the original. There's too many holes in it. But then you should be able to understand a story on it's own so...
So. At the end of Part Two, we're confused, lost, but appreciate the Daleks and the 'famous' people in it.
PART THREE
Mum's got the bit about the power for the Daleks.
Dalek: Daleks do not wage war, we achieve victory.
Mum: That's a good line.
The Daleks hear of the Doctor.
Mum: You see now, the Dalek recognises the name. But he didn't see him earlier. Do they recognise him when he changes, regardless?
Me: Most of the time.
The Daleks talk to Lesterson.
Mum: He's gonna get it.
The Doctor arrives.
Mum: Why don't they know he's the Doctor?!
The conversation continues.
Mum: He's growing on me.
Doctor: You know who I am.
Me: They do know who he is.
Mum shrugs her shoulders.
Dalek: You are to be Exterminated.
Mum: Ooh, first time they've said the word.
We debate over the Doctor being finite. She wins.
She still doesn't know who Bragen is.
The Daleks arrive through the portal.
Mum: Ooh that's a good effect.
Bragen announces he's been betrayed (Mum shrugs her shoulders as if to say it serves him right) and then shoots the Dalek.
Mum: You need to aim for the eyestalk.
She sees the TARDIS and points excitedly.
Mum: The Daleks are a bit slow though.
She picks up the "school playground and Spiridon" reference.
The Daleks arrive.
Mum: Oh dear, too late. That's a lot of Daleks.
We see the Battleship.
Mum: Very good sets.
And the helicopter.
Mum: How did they get a helicopter? Did they just film one?
Me: No they use it.
Bragen says he'll stay behind.
Mum: So he's not a bad guy?
Me: No cos the Daleks betrayed him.
Mum: Do they have to get in the helicopter before..?
Me: He triggers the Ray Phase Shift, yep.
Mum: Zappy, yeah.
The TARDIS makes an appearance.
Mum: Oh, the TARDIS - oh that's a bit... What a tiny little console.
Doctor: Things didn't quite go according to plan.
She laughs.
Mum: That was quite good at the end.
She rates it overall as.... 7/10. It's well done overall, the Doctor got better, the effects were good - but it probably only worked because of real Daleks.
But Mum does wish to say that she applauds the hard work and effort that's gone into the episodes.
Next time we should be watching The Caves of Androzani (I figured that might be a bit grim for Christmas), and the next fan film we'll watch is the 2009 American production "Fire and Ice". Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year :)
I explain to Mum that the company who made Power of the Daleks had put on stage plays, and that Power is, first and foremost, a highly regarded story that was the first one of the Troughton era. I remind her the Doctor is not a re-imagined Second Doctor. Otherwise I think she'd be in for a shock.
Mum: So are all their stage plays with this re-imagined Doctor?
Me: Yeah I think so. We could play a game of spot the Doctor. It takes a while.
Mum: Right...
PART ONE
Mum: Is this based on the original?
Me: Yeah but modernised.
Mum: So they didn't use the original script?
Me: Nope.
Mum: It's all done very professionally. No wobbly sets.
The titles start.
Me: So do you know which of those is the Doctor?
Mum: No idea.
Mum: Quite good theme tune. I presume (seeing the picture) it's him.
Me: Yep.
The Doctor spouts some science stuff. Mum mouths her opinions. She's not impressed.
Mum pulls a face at the man saying "Yo".
Me: What do you think of the Doctor?
Mum: It's getting better... He reminds me of Sylvester McCoy.
Me: Really?
UNIT is discussed.
Mum: Why are they scared of UNIT?
The pod opens.
Mum: Is a Dalek gonna come out now?
Me: Wait and see.
Mum: What are they even doing there on the island? What are they digging for?
Me: I'm not actually sure.
Mum: They're just gonna open a door?
Me: Yep.
The Dalek is revealed.
Mum: Did they build their own Daleks? It's quite professional.
In Downing Street.
Me: Do you know who they are?
Mum: He's from Doctor Who.... He's a Dalek Operator.
Me: Well done.
Mum: How did they get him in it?
Me: I don't know. (I pause) And she's Lisa Bowerman, plays Bernice Summerfield.
Mum: Right..
She's not a Big Finish fan.
Mum: Script's a bit long-winded in places.
She notes the CGI holograms.
Mum: It's quite clever how they do that though. It's quite professional.
She even laughs a few times in the conversations following.
Mum: I'd like to see the original. You could make a better comparison then.
The Dalek "cliffhanger" arrives. I ask Mum's opinions.
Mum: Um... A bit dry. There's too many characters. It's not bad. The Doctor's ok, he's really like Sylvester McCoy.
We agree that his costume doesn't work.
Mum: But at least he's got a flowery shirt.
She's not following the story either, believing there needs to be more information at the beginning.
Mum: It feels like a very well done fan film. The effects are very clever - but you can tell it's a fan film. But that's good, that's the point. It's not meant to be totally professional. It's the kind of thing you'd watch and then want to skip to the end.
I've told her we're watching the whole thing.
Her rating for Part One is 8/10 for effects. 6/10 for everything else.
PART TWO
We discuss fan films and "am-dram" over the reprise. Agreeing that the effects are all well and good - but not helpful if the script doesn't work.
Mum: They're very good Daleks if they made those themselves.
Me: I think they're real ones they repainted.
Mum; I'm surprised they got away with using them .
I notice the Doctor looks into the camera.
Me: That didn't look great.
Mum hadn't noticed. She's pre-occupied with the spinning about of the Dalek.
Mum: Are the people not wondering where the Daleks came from or why they're there? Have they not noticed the Doctor yet?
The Dalek procrastinates.
Mum: But why has the Dalek not noticed the Doctor?
She pauses.
Mum: There are gaps in the story. And it's really annoying the Dalek hasn't noticed the Doctor.
Mum: What are they drilling for?
The guy in the hard hat and the flowery shirt has trouble working the drills. The Dalek turns up.
Mum: Ooh.
Me: I really like the Dalek eyestalks in this.
Dalek: We wish only to assist you.
Mum: Hmm. Don't trust that Dalek.
Mum nods as the Dalek explains what he's doing there, and how they want power...
Bragen (he's the guy in all black, a roll neck jumper and a beard, by the way) searches the Doctor and the Daleks on what looks like Outlook.
Mum: He's gonna find out what the Doctor and the Daleks are now.
Bragen and Hensell talk.
Mum: See I don't understand why they're worried about UNIT, if they're just a drilling company and I don't know what they're drilling for. There's lots of plot strands everywhere.
The Doctor deals some cards while he waits.
Mum: See the Doctor shouldn't do that. He is very Sylvester McCoy-ish though, did he base it on him?
The Daleks offer their help again. Mum doesn't trust them.
Mum: Who's he again?
Me: He's the security bloke (Bragen).
Mum: See you forget who everyone is in it.
In the cavey-thing.
Mum: Has he got a sonic screwdriver? Is it specially made, has he got his own version?
She squints her eyes to look. We're still non the wiser.
Mum: Where's his TARDIS? Do you get to see it?
Me: You'll see inside it at some point.
She raises her hands again in confusion.
Mum: There's lots of mysterious readings of things and half conversations. It's too mysterious, there's not enough answers.
Hensell (the guy in the shirt with a beard) questions Janley (the woman). Mum shakes her head in confusion.
The Daleks are Hensell's. Janley is an eco-warrior.
Me: Does that make any more sense?
Mum: Not really.
Mum: Who did they get to do the voices?
Me: Guess.
Mum: Is it Briggs?
Me: Yep.
Mum: They're real Daleks with real voices. The 'real' bits are really good.
We discover the "man in the red" is from UNIT.
Mum: Oh he's in UNIT.
Bragen talks again.
Bragen: Can you meet me in Access 3?
Mum: Why?
He draws a gun.
Mum: *gasps* Don't like guns in Doctor Who. Or swearing, there was no need for that earlier.
Me: Guns are in it quite a lot.
Mum: Yeah... but..
Access 3.
Mum: So why's he going to shoot him?
Bragen: I've received new instructions.
Mum: From?
Mum shakes her head in confusion.
Mum: I'm completely lost on the story.
Me: I think they all want the Daleks.
Mum: I'm confuddled. I wanna see the original. There's too many holes in it. But then you should be able to understand a story on it's own so...
So. At the end of Part Two, we're confused, lost, but appreciate the Daleks and the 'famous' people in it.
PART THREE
Mum's got the bit about the power for the Daleks.
Dalek: Daleks do not wage war, we achieve victory.
Mum: That's a good line.
The Daleks hear of the Doctor.
Mum: You see now, the Dalek recognises the name. But he didn't see him earlier. Do they recognise him when he changes, regardless?
Me: Most of the time.
The Daleks talk to Lesterson.
Mum: He's gonna get it.
The Doctor arrives.
Mum: Why don't they know he's the Doctor?!
The conversation continues.
Mum: He's growing on me.
Doctor: You know who I am.
Me: They do know who he is.
Mum shrugs her shoulders.
Dalek: You are to be Exterminated.
Mum: Ooh, first time they've said the word.
We debate over the Doctor being finite. She wins.
She still doesn't know who Bragen is.
The Daleks arrive through the portal.
Mum: Ooh that's a good effect.
Bragen announces he's been betrayed (Mum shrugs her shoulders as if to say it serves him right) and then shoots the Dalek.
Mum: You need to aim for the eyestalk.
She sees the TARDIS and points excitedly.
Mum: The Daleks are a bit slow though.
She picks up the "school playground and Spiridon" reference.
The Daleks arrive.
Mum: Oh dear, too late. That's a lot of Daleks.
We see the Battleship.
Mum: Very good sets.
And the helicopter.
Mum: How did they get a helicopter? Did they just film one?
Me: No they use it.
Bragen says he'll stay behind.
Mum: So he's not a bad guy?
Me: No cos the Daleks betrayed him.
Mum: Do they have to get in the helicopter before..?
Me: He triggers the Ray Phase Shift, yep.
Mum: Zappy, yeah.
The TARDIS makes an appearance.
Mum: Oh, the TARDIS - oh that's a bit... What a tiny little console.
Doctor: Things didn't quite go according to plan.
She laughs.
Mum: That was quite good at the end.
She rates it overall as.... 7/10. It's well done overall, the Doctor got better, the effects were good - but it probably only worked because of real Daleks.
But Mum does wish to say that she applauds the hard work and effort that's gone into the episodes.
Next time we should be watching The Caves of Androzani (I figured that might be a bit grim for Christmas), and the next fan film we'll watch is the 2009 American production "Fire and Ice". Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year :)
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....
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
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.
Thursday, 22 November 2012
A Doctor Who Fan's Responsibility
An alternative title may be: Why Doctor Who Fans Shouldn't Say "I'm not going to watch it". But that's probably a bit too long for Blogger.
My one complaint when it comes to Doctor Who 'fans', is not their obsession, not their compulson to collect, nor is it their dressing up at conventions. It's the time when they don't behave like fans. We all have opinions... including me, if you follow this blog, or have flicked through any other entries I've written, then you'll realise that. My opinions tend to be quite strong. And no, I don't like every aspect of Doctor Who. I'm not a huge Tom Baker fan (shock!), or a huge David Tennant fan (shock!), but I can appreciate the merits of the Doctors and most of their episodes - even if they're not something I watch regularly. The point is - I try and give everything a chance. And when it comes to Doctor Who on TV, even if I think it'll be awful, I have to watch it. I hope, if I'm not optimistic, I'll be proved wrong, and if I am optimistic, I'll be proved right.
I realise that some classic fans don't like the modern series (mostly Matt Smith), and I realise some modern fans haven't even tried the classics. I don't have a problem with the latter, as long as they're open minded. And I appreciate that classic fans may not like the modern series - but they have to give it a chance. The thing I find really annoying are those who follow other fans, who make Figure Adventures, or do blogs, or write fan fiction and are quite good at it, and they take their opinions as their own. If someone says "oh I hated that episode. The whatever was rubbish - 2/10", then it's often followed by a row of comments saying "oh I agree, absolute rubbish, hated it". Maybe that's their opinion - maybe I'm being unfair. But often the ratings are the same, the comments are identical, and you often wonder whether these are their own opinions.
Whether it is the opinions of them, or the opinions of those who they follow religiously, the point is, it's the same people who say: "I've decided not to watch it". Or "if this is rubbish, I won't watch Doctor Who again". The latter comment is fair enough, it's giving it a chance - but you could argue their mind is made up. Doctor Who should be embraced - it may be hated afterwards, but you should give everything a chance, especially if you are a fan. There's no harm in trying something you think you might not like. And with the former comment, people who decide not to watch it from a trailer is the most annoying. I've seen it recently. I'll admit - I'm not confident about evil snowmen, snowmen aren't scary, they can't really be scary, there are other ideas to exploit, and in an opening episode for a companion it's a dangerous thing to try. But I'm going to sit down, with my party food and my paper hat, and watch The Snowmen at Christmas. I want it to be better than I expect. I will definitely watch it. But I saw one person say they won't be watching The Snowmen because dodgy snowmen on the trailer look silly. Yeah, they do. But you're a Doctor Who fan!
The other point I need to address is the dislike of Matt Smith. Lots like him but dislike the scripts, and I'm kinda with them on that one. They haven't been great for him, Amy and Rory's exit wasn't brilliant (in fact it was really quite poor), and the idea of a 'darker' Doctor is again, not quite going to work, I feel. But Matt Smith acts whatever he's given brilliantly. How is it not a delight to watch him just be brilliant? A fantastically Doctor-ish Doctor. So people should give him a chance, if nothing else.
There we have it. All those who don't want to give Doctor Who a chance - remember, you are fans. Not giving it a chance is what caused the viewing figures to drop in the 80s - and look where that got us (if you don't know where that got us, us as in fans, google it). Viewing figures are considered important by all those head Drama Commissioning people (probably) - so tune in. But the main reason should be: tune in because you are a fan. A Doctor Who fan. So there.
My one complaint when it comes to Doctor Who 'fans', is not their obsession, not their compulson to collect, nor is it their dressing up at conventions. It's the time when they don't behave like fans. We all have opinions... including me, if you follow this blog, or have flicked through any other entries I've written, then you'll realise that. My opinions tend to be quite strong. And no, I don't like every aspect of Doctor Who. I'm not a huge Tom Baker fan (shock!), or a huge David Tennant fan (shock!), but I can appreciate the merits of the Doctors and most of their episodes - even if they're not something I watch regularly. The point is - I try and give everything a chance. And when it comes to Doctor Who on TV, even if I think it'll be awful, I have to watch it. I hope, if I'm not optimistic, I'll be proved wrong, and if I am optimistic, I'll be proved right.
I realise that some classic fans don't like the modern series (mostly Matt Smith), and I realise some modern fans haven't even tried the classics. I don't have a problem with the latter, as long as they're open minded. And I appreciate that classic fans may not like the modern series - but they have to give it a chance. The thing I find really annoying are those who follow other fans, who make Figure Adventures, or do blogs, or write fan fiction and are quite good at it, and they take their opinions as their own. If someone says "oh I hated that episode. The whatever was rubbish - 2/10", then it's often followed by a row of comments saying "oh I agree, absolute rubbish, hated it". Maybe that's their opinion - maybe I'm being unfair. But often the ratings are the same, the comments are identical, and you often wonder whether these are their own opinions.
Whether it is the opinions of them, or the opinions of those who they follow religiously, the point is, it's the same people who say: "I've decided not to watch it". Or "if this is rubbish, I won't watch Doctor Who again". The latter comment is fair enough, it's giving it a chance - but you could argue their mind is made up. Doctor Who should be embraced - it may be hated afterwards, but you should give everything a chance, especially if you are a fan. There's no harm in trying something you think you might not like. And with the former comment, people who decide not to watch it from a trailer is the most annoying. I've seen it recently. I'll admit - I'm not confident about evil snowmen, snowmen aren't scary, they can't really be scary, there are other ideas to exploit, and in an opening episode for a companion it's a dangerous thing to try. But I'm going to sit down, with my party food and my paper hat, and watch The Snowmen at Christmas. I want it to be better than I expect. I will definitely watch it. But I saw one person say they won't be watching The Snowmen because dodgy snowmen on the trailer look silly. Yeah, they do. But you're a Doctor Who fan!
The other point I need to address is the dislike of Matt Smith. Lots like him but dislike the scripts, and I'm kinda with them on that one. They haven't been great for him, Amy and Rory's exit wasn't brilliant (in fact it was really quite poor), and the idea of a 'darker' Doctor is again, not quite going to work, I feel. But Matt Smith acts whatever he's given brilliantly. How is it not a delight to watch him just be brilliant? A fantastically Doctor-ish Doctor. So people should give him a chance, if nothing else.
There we have it. All those who don't want to give Doctor Who a chance - remember, you are fans. Not giving it a chance is what caused the viewing figures to drop in the 80s - and look where that got us (if you don't know where that got us, us as in fans, google it). Viewing figures are considered important by all those head Drama Commissioning people (probably) - so tune in. But the main reason should be: tune in because you are a fan. A Doctor Who fan. So there.
Sunday, 18 November 2012
Doctor Who Dark Eyes | Review
I'll start off with a confession. The only Eighth Doctor audio I've listened to, in full, is Blood of the Daleks Part One. Because I downloaded it for free on some special offer day on the Big Finish website. I've got lots of others, such as Neverland, Situation Vacant and so on - but I've never finished them. So to listen to Dark Eyes, a direct continuation from the Lucie Miller arc and the more recent Eighth Doctor series, may seem a bit odd. But Dark Eyes has so often been called a good 'jumping-on' point, and honestly the concept interested me a lot more than the other 8th Doctor stories have. So I've bought it. (And the Doctor's costume always interests me anyway, so that was an added bonus.)
I'll go through each part individually - so Part One. Imaginatively entitled The Great War and set in.. The Great War. And we meet Great War VAD Molly O'Sullivan. And we see The Doctor again. And a Time Lord. And we meet a nice VAD called Isobel as well. That's very nice. But it's what I expected. Part One of Dark Eyes is very much what I expected. Molly is the fiesty, Irish character I expected her to be, the Doctor is fairly predictable and not particularly dark - and I know there are dark moments but these are expressed in a normal angry 8th Doctor way. I don't think the 8th Doctor has the layers of darkness that the 7th Doctor has - the 8th Doctor is either happy or angry, and in Parts One and Two he flips between the two quite easily. Part One is mainly a story of the Doctor convincing Molly to trust him - the Daleks turn up when you expect them to, and it's a fairly linear storyline. When you get to the cliffhanger, it feels like it's stopped you half way through a story. Which it has, in a way, to be fair, but the story doesn't stay at WW1 for Part Two. The Daleks' appearance in Part One is short and fairly predictable, unimaginative, and they do what Daleks do best. Shoot things. There's no real menace or mystery - Dark Eyes: The Great War is simply a standard Doctor Who audio story, with no real twists.
Part Two is by far the best part. It allows the Doctor and Molly, rather strangely, to relax a little bit in between fighting the Daleks, and there are some lovely Doctor/Molly moments, and the Doctor gets to be happy for a short time. Which is nice - but again short lived and he's back to being angry. The best thing about Dark Eyes would have to be the sound design and the music. It's incredible, the music is brilliant in Parts One and Four especially, and the sound design is fantastic in Part Two. The underwater bits at Dunkirk are by far the best from the whole thing. It feels real, and not copied out of a text book. Molly's reactions to another war are, though obviously predictable, handled and written, and acted, well. Part Two is perhaps the most convincing, the most enjoyable out of all of the parts - though it still offers nothing exciting or imaginative, really.
Part Three I expected to be my favourite, I enjoy a companion-back-drop story - but the whole 'what happened to Molly when she was two' storyline is solved fairly quickly. Again, there are no twists, there's not really any excitement. It's exactly what you expect it to be. And perhaps the most disappointing thing, is that after three hours of Dark Eyes, the plot hasn't moved forward at all. Parts One, Two and most of Three are a lead into the end of Part Three (slightly) and Part Four, when something, though small and easily solved, happens. Dark Eyes is not a big story, it's a story that's simple, easy, that's been done before though not under as much scrutiny, and is linear. It refuses to let itself go from the blurbs that have been written almost, it doesn't have any twists. I only listened to Part Three today, and all I can remember is the ending - which shows how linear and unfortunately forgettable it is. Oh of course! I remember! Yeah Part Three tries to do something different - it has a fairly predictable and reused idea of nice Daleks, with a fairly predictable resolution that I guessed with no real difficulty. If you're well versed in the ways of Doctor Who, and perhaps recognise a Doctor Who's audio's penchant for inventing alien worlds with weird names and strange four-eyed aliens, then Dark Eyes is really nothing special. Part Three's attempts to do something differently only work once or twice, and for about a second. Then everything becomes that old age story telling device, that you can guess even from the front cover.
Part Four is perhaps the worst part. It doesn't use the sound design to give at atmosphere, like Parts One and Two did, nor does it offer an idea that, although reused, tries to be different. Part Four is simply the resolution. It has cocky, annoying Time Lords, and a plot resolution to the mission set by the Time Lords at the very beginning of Part One. There have been no changes to the plot, no added twists - and yet the writer still feels the need to remind us of the Dalek's plot every five seconds. The ending is also irritating. Basically - SPOILER - Molly leaves the TARDIS with everything never-having-happened. Not only is this the most useful plot device ever, but it means that Molly's care for the Doctor, although only shown a little, has no meaning earlier on. She doesn't stay to ask if he'll be ok. She just leaves. The day is saved, and the Daleks promise revenge. Like they always do. The only attempt at a twist in Part Four, which is that two characters are the same person, is a simple enough revelation that doesn't really enhance the action. It just causes more cocky Time Lord-ness.
So did I enjoy anything? Well, yes, actually I enjoyed Dark Eyes, and I wanted to know what happened. It interested me. But it didn't excite me as much as I wanted it to, it didn't offer any dramatic twists, and it didn't live up to it's potential. For Part Four, a world is shown to us where Time Lords can't regenerate. This is an AWESOME idea - and yet they barely use it. It's mentioned for five seconds - and then forgotten about, except at the end when it's again mentioned for five seconds. Molly has the potential to have a wonderfully complex background - but it's exactly what you know it will be. You've practically got the answers from Part One, and the whole 'dark eyes' idea seems... well, it's good, but gets a little tiring. Dark Eyes simply does not live up to it's potential. Toby Jones, an incredible actor, is just being... well, another rubbish henchmen who thinks he owns the Daleks. He's been augmented with Dalek DNA. It is practically the Curse of Fatal Death. The Doctor isn't given enough of an emotional journey, he just collapses occasionally and cries for Lucie. I feel a character like Isobel from Part One would have engaged with the Doctor more, talked to him about Lucie more. I don't like the idea of dwelling on dead companions much in stories - but there needed to be more of it here. It's too jolly I think. A big race around the universe, with the Doctor and fiesty companion Molly, in an exciting adventure with the Daleks! Yeah there's a bit of emotion, yeah it's always acted well, but it's... just a bit meh in comparison.
The acting is brilliant. The sound design, the music, they're brilliant. The dialogue is also, on the whole, rather good. It's just the plot, though it keeps me interested (probably in hope there will be a twist soon) - it goes nowhere, offers little excitement, and fails to live up to potential. The Time Lords are quite annoying, and the Daleks - well. I'm not their biggest fan, and I don't agree that following their appearance in the finale of the last lot of 8th Doctor audios they needed to reappear here. This could have been the story of the Doctor emotionally rebuilding - Dark Eyes is the story of a prolonged relapse, almost. He doesn't really heal emotionally because he isn't given the chance to. The Daleks prevent him healing. And they couldn't even prevent him healing with an imaginative plan.
I've attempted, in the past, to write Doctor Who audios. And I've always thought repeating the plot lots in dialogue, and using cliched-Dalek speak, and inventing planets with weird names and aliens are overused things to avoid. Dark Eyes uses them all, and it doesn't use the chance it had to give us a real character journey.
The most annoying thing of all is the ending. Because it feels so... lacklustre. Everything is undone, practically, lives are sacrificed, predictably, the Time Lord in the story gets shot, predictably, and the Daleks promise to destroy the Time Lords. Boring. But the most annoying of all the most annoying things within that - is that the Doctor did not need to be in this story. He is, ultimately, pointless. All he does, and to be fair all he is told to, is find Molly. He finds Molly, then follows the story around for the next three and a half hours. The Time Lords control it all, and whatever the Doctor does, the Time Lords would always win. He isn't even the main one who stops the destruction of all the Daleks, it's some incidental character we've only known for an hour. The Doctor does nothing, he's merely along for the ride. And that's irritating, because this could have been his story. It should have been. And I think we've missed out on his story of recovery, I think they could have done something really good with it.
Instead, we get a good (ish) story - but one that we've seen before. It fails, and has left me feeling disappointed. So I'm sorry, Nick Briggs and Big Finish, but Dark Eyes could have been so much more.
Paul McGann and new companion were excellent though. Great acting. 10/10.
But Dark Eyes, the story, itself: I'd struggle to give it a 5. And most of that would be based on Part Two.
I'll go through each part individually - so Part One. Imaginatively entitled The Great War and set in.. The Great War. And we meet Great War VAD Molly O'Sullivan. And we see The Doctor again. And a Time Lord. And we meet a nice VAD called Isobel as well. That's very nice. But it's what I expected. Part One of Dark Eyes is very much what I expected. Molly is the fiesty, Irish character I expected her to be, the Doctor is fairly predictable and not particularly dark - and I know there are dark moments but these are expressed in a normal angry 8th Doctor way. I don't think the 8th Doctor has the layers of darkness that the 7th Doctor has - the 8th Doctor is either happy or angry, and in Parts One and Two he flips between the two quite easily. Part One is mainly a story of the Doctor convincing Molly to trust him - the Daleks turn up when you expect them to, and it's a fairly linear storyline. When you get to the cliffhanger, it feels like it's stopped you half way through a story. Which it has, in a way, to be fair, but the story doesn't stay at WW1 for Part Two. The Daleks' appearance in Part One is short and fairly predictable, unimaginative, and they do what Daleks do best. Shoot things. There's no real menace or mystery - Dark Eyes: The Great War is simply a standard Doctor Who audio story, with no real twists.
Part Two is by far the best part. It allows the Doctor and Molly, rather strangely, to relax a little bit in between fighting the Daleks, and there are some lovely Doctor/Molly moments, and the Doctor gets to be happy for a short time. Which is nice - but again short lived and he's back to being angry. The best thing about Dark Eyes would have to be the sound design and the music. It's incredible, the music is brilliant in Parts One and Four especially, and the sound design is fantastic in Part Two. The underwater bits at Dunkirk are by far the best from the whole thing. It feels real, and not copied out of a text book. Molly's reactions to another war are, though obviously predictable, handled and written, and acted, well. Part Two is perhaps the most convincing, the most enjoyable out of all of the parts - though it still offers nothing exciting or imaginative, really.
Part Three I expected to be my favourite, I enjoy a companion-back-drop story - but the whole 'what happened to Molly when she was two' storyline is solved fairly quickly. Again, there are no twists, there's not really any excitement. It's exactly what you expect it to be. And perhaps the most disappointing thing, is that after three hours of Dark Eyes, the plot hasn't moved forward at all. Parts One, Two and most of Three are a lead into the end of Part Three (slightly) and Part Four, when something, though small and easily solved, happens. Dark Eyes is not a big story, it's a story that's simple, easy, that's been done before though not under as much scrutiny, and is linear. It refuses to let itself go from the blurbs that have been written almost, it doesn't have any twists. I only listened to Part Three today, and all I can remember is the ending - which shows how linear and unfortunately forgettable it is. Oh of course! I remember! Yeah Part Three tries to do something different - it has a fairly predictable and reused idea of nice Daleks, with a fairly predictable resolution that I guessed with no real difficulty. If you're well versed in the ways of Doctor Who, and perhaps recognise a Doctor Who's audio's penchant for inventing alien worlds with weird names and strange four-eyed aliens, then Dark Eyes is really nothing special. Part Three's attempts to do something differently only work once or twice, and for about a second. Then everything becomes that old age story telling device, that you can guess even from the front cover.
Part Four is perhaps the worst part. It doesn't use the sound design to give at atmosphere, like Parts One and Two did, nor does it offer an idea that, although reused, tries to be different. Part Four is simply the resolution. It has cocky, annoying Time Lords, and a plot resolution to the mission set by the Time Lords at the very beginning of Part One. There have been no changes to the plot, no added twists - and yet the writer still feels the need to remind us of the Dalek's plot every five seconds. The ending is also irritating. Basically - SPOILER - Molly leaves the TARDIS with everything never-having-happened. Not only is this the most useful plot device ever, but it means that Molly's care for the Doctor, although only shown a little, has no meaning earlier on. She doesn't stay to ask if he'll be ok. She just leaves. The day is saved, and the Daleks promise revenge. Like they always do. The only attempt at a twist in Part Four, which is that two characters are the same person, is a simple enough revelation that doesn't really enhance the action. It just causes more cocky Time Lord-ness.
So did I enjoy anything? Well, yes, actually I enjoyed Dark Eyes, and I wanted to know what happened. It interested me. But it didn't excite me as much as I wanted it to, it didn't offer any dramatic twists, and it didn't live up to it's potential. For Part Four, a world is shown to us where Time Lords can't regenerate. This is an AWESOME idea - and yet they barely use it. It's mentioned for five seconds - and then forgotten about, except at the end when it's again mentioned for five seconds. Molly has the potential to have a wonderfully complex background - but it's exactly what you know it will be. You've practically got the answers from Part One, and the whole 'dark eyes' idea seems... well, it's good, but gets a little tiring. Dark Eyes simply does not live up to it's potential. Toby Jones, an incredible actor, is just being... well, another rubbish henchmen who thinks he owns the Daleks. He's been augmented with Dalek DNA. It is practically the Curse of Fatal Death. The Doctor isn't given enough of an emotional journey, he just collapses occasionally and cries for Lucie. I feel a character like Isobel from Part One would have engaged with the Doctor more, talked to him about Lucie more. I don't like the idea of dwelling on dead companions much in stories - but there needed to be more of it here. It's too jolly I think. A big race around the universe, with the Doctor and fiesty companion Molly, in an exciting adventure with the Daleks! Yeah there's a bit of emotion, yeah it's always acted well, but it's... just a bit meh in comparison.
The acting is brilliant. The sound design, the music, they're brilliant. The dialogue is also, on the whole, rather good. It's just the plot, though it keeps me interested (probably in hope there will be a twist soon) - it goes nowhere, offers little excitement, and fails to live up to potential. The Time Lords are quite annoying, and the Daleks - well. I'm not their biggest fan, and I don't agree that following their appearance in the finale of the last lot of 8th Doctor audios they needed to reappear here. This could have been the story of the Doctor emotionally rebuilding - Dark Eyes is the story of a prolonged relapse, almost. He doesn't really heal emotionally because he isn't given the chance to. The Daleks prevent him healing. And they couldn't even prevent him healing with an imaginative plan.
I've attempted, in the past, to write Doctor Who audios. And I've always thought repeating the plot lots in dialogue, and using cliched-Dalek speak, and inventing planets with weird names and aliens are overused things to avoid. Dark Eyes uses them all, and it doesn't use the chance it had to give us a real character journey.
The most annoying thing of all is the ending. Because it feels so... lacklustre. Everything is undone, practically, lives are sacrificed, predictably, the Time Lord in the story gets shot, predictably, and the Daleks promise to destroy the Time Lords. Boring. But the most annoying of all the most annoying things within that - is that the Doctor did not need to be in this story. He is, ultimately, pointless. All he does, and to be fair all he is told to, is find Molly. He finds Molly, then follows the story around for the next three and a half hours. The Time Lords control it all, and whatever the Doctor does, the Time Lords would always win. He isn't even the main one who stops the destruction of all the Daleks, it's some incidental character we've only known for an hour. The Doctor does nothing, he's merely along for the ride. And that's irritating, because this could have been his story. It should have been. And I think we've missed out on his story of recovery, I think they could have done something really good with it.
Instead, we get a good (ish) story - but one that we've seen before. It fails, and has left me feeling disappointed. So I'm sorry, Nick Briggs and Big Finish, but Dark Eyes could have been so much more.
Paul McGann and new companion were excellent though. Great acting. 10/10.
But Dark Eyes, the story, itself: I'd struggle to give it a 5. And most of that would be based on Part Two.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)