I'm going to complain about the new Doctor Who.
|
Oh, don't worry. I'm not going to complain about Matt Smith. Although there's a whole lot there I could complain about, everyone else is doing that. Everyone else is so hard at work coming up with myriad complaints and nit-noid problems with Matt Smith. I had a bit of an epiphany about that when I unexpectedly woke up this morning.
I think all this complaining about Matt Smith is distracting us from the huge, gigantic, behemoth, gargantuan elephant in the room that no one wants to talk about. Call it a self-inflicted perception filter if you wish. But as the Doctor has discovered so clearly, so repeatedly, and so early into this new season, even if it has a perception filter over it, the uncomfortable reality is still there whether you like it or not.
|
 Nope, not complaining about him. |
And whether we like it or not, the writing sucks. Bad.
 Doctor Who Head Writer Steven Moffat
|
Believe me, it pains me to say that. Pains me greatly. Steven Moffat wrote some of my all-time favorite Doctor Who episodes. What more is there to say about 'The Empty Child' besides 'absolutely brilliant'? While some fans feel differently, I loved 'Girl in the Fireplace'. I'll even admit that I have little action figures of those gorgeous clockwork men! The 'Silence in the Library' two-parter, two of the best Donna episodes ever written! It gave so much depth to her character and actually made her likable. I didn't much care for Donna, until those episodes.
Then there was 'Blink'. Ooooh, such a great episode. So self contained, so brilliantly told, so terrifying and yet harmless. A fantastically concise story (something I could learn from...) A spectacular shining example of what Steven Moffat seems to excel at - taking something so ordinary, be it statues or dust particles in the air, and turning it into the terrifying extraordinary.
|
Yet again, I'm sorry, I'm so sorry... but I don't see any of that in the new series. Oh, they're trying their best to give us exciting visuals. Over the past two weeks, they even brought back the Weeping Angels. And the Daleks! A Doctor Who staple! How could they mess up the Daleks?
Well they did. Don't even get me started on that Dalek episode. That episode was oh so easy - and oh so heartbreaking - to tear apart into a million and one little pot-hole-riddled pieces. It was so heartbreaking, in fact, that I delayed watching the latest episodes for fear that they'd be just as disappointing. I honestly wanted to love the new Doctor Who, I tried so hard to love it because I adore Doctor Who! I love it, and yet that Dalek episode... reduced to nothing but eye candy, robbed of all the beautiful depth I've come to know and love. It hurt.
But back to the Weeping Angels. Despite the rave reviews this recent two-parter has been receiving, I think it's an even better example than 'Victory of the Daleks' of what's gone so terribly wrong in the new season. So I'm going to focus on that. Let the plot hole spelunking begin!
One note before we begin: as River says, 'Spoilers!' If you haven't seen the latest episodes to air in Britain, you might want to turn away now and come back in a few weeks. Consider yourself fully warned.
Annoyance Numero Uno: Perception Filters Can't Make Up For Laziness
We're only five episodes into the new season, and already it feels like "perception filter!" has been mumbled in quick exposition more times than it was ever uttered in the past four seasons! It's a cheap and easy plot device to excuse the Doctor's inexplicably sudden case of The Stupids. It's wearing a bit thin for me. The perception filter was a brilliant device used by Russell T. Davies in the Martha Jones finale to explain away how Britain had come under the spell of their new charismatic leader, Harold Saxon. But bear in mind, when the Doctor went to create his own perception filter - something he supposedly hadn't done in a long time because the universe didn't seem to have much use for them - it took the Doctor quite a long time to build his own. And this is the Doctor we're talking about! Granted, he had no Tardis and only had the bits and bobs he and his team could scavenge. But um, I thought the Weeping Angels were in a similar state in our story? One lone Weeping Angel scrapping along on a rescue mission?
|
 The Tenth Doctor building his perception filters. |
Yet now, every two bit alien - even those dying on some planet, starving for lack of whatever-the-heck-radiation was mumbled quickly in passing, in a complete state of disarray - can suddenly whip together a perception filter in nothing flat, thick enough for even the Doctor not to notice? He noticed it comparatively quickly in the season opener, in Amy Pond's house with Prisoner Zero. (Bearing in mind, Prisoner Zero had several years to create his.) The Doctor's relative slowness in recognizing Zero's perception filter was explained away by the Doctor's muddled post-regeneration brain. What is there to explain why it took him so agonizingly long - longer even than with Zero - when facing the Weeping Angels? Is there something wrong with the Doctor? Yet again, did he catch a case of The Stupids? Is there a galaxy-wide epidemic we should all be worried about?
It sure would explain a lot of his ridiculously idiotic behavior, though; leaping to radical conclusions, bumbling along into mortal peril, letting his companion wander off without a worry or care in the world, acting contrary to his established character, needing some noobie to save him from murdering a helpless creature in 'The Beast Below' episode. I could go on and on! He's just not being very Doctor-like, is he?
Speaking of the Weeping Angels, things were so glaringly, obviously bad with the two most recent episodes that I kept having to pause playback multiple times to have a bit of a nerdfest rant. Normally my parents can't interpret much of my rantings, since I'm the one referred to as the 'Doctor Who Encyclopedia'. But oh, this time, they understood me loud and clear. Which brings me to number two, and it's a big number. With a lot of little fiddly subsections.
Number Two: What Happened To The Weeping Angels?
Sure, the Angels were still visually very scary. A lot of things over the past five episodes have been very visually scary, stunning, and beautiful to look at. The production design department's doing an A-Okay job. But nothing seems to be propping up the visuals. Meaning, where's the story? Where's the continuity? Where's the deeper meaning beyond just what looks cute? Has Doctor Who turned into a bubbly blonde sorority girl, all exterior stimuli and no interior substance beyond saline and silicone? Please don't tell me the Doctor's being possessed by Heidi Montag! I'm not sure my little nerdy soul could take it! Never mind just plain scary, that's one helluva reason to make any Angel weep...
 The stuff that Weeping Angels' nightmares are made of.
|
The mythology of the Weeping Angels didn't just magically appear two weeks ago. It's had a long time to simmer in the fan world's consciousness. We know the rules quite well, as established in the original episode, 'Blink'. My first major complaint about the Angels has to do with what was eventually their most exciting undoing in that fantastic first episode.
Looking at them. Or, to be more precise, the Angels looking at each other and therefore turning to stone.
|
Their name should make this painfully obvious. That's what the whole 'Weeping' part is all about. As my beloved David Tennant once explained, they're not weeping, they just can't risk looking at each other.
|
Well that sure got chucked in the bin quite quickly, didn't it? Not a single Angel in that cavernous cavern covered their faces. Except when it was visually pretty, of course. Nearly every single Angel in that 'maze of the dead' was looking in the general direction of a handful of other Angels. According to the mythology as established by Mr. Moffat himself, that would kick the quantum lock into gear, and thus, ta da! They're rendered inert. Or did he forget that teensy little fact? Wasn't that the brilliant "trick" that the Doctor played on them at the end of 'Blink'? While the four scavengers were trying to break into the Tardis, there was an Angel on each of the police box's four sides. Thus, when the Tardis was gone, they were left to look at each other for all eternity.
|
 The Doctor's trick on the Weeping Angels in 'Blink'
|
It was never explained why all of a sudden, all these starving Angels could ignore that supposed solid fact of their basic anatomy. If you don't believe me, go back and watch the scene where Amy is struggling on the ground of the forest, feeling around for her lost communicator. You can clearly see in that scene a handful of Angels all looking at each other. If this story made any sort of sense at all, Amy then would have been perfectly safe.
Yet they kept on moving, they kept on looking, they kept on living.
Number Three: Are Angels Selectively Deaf When it Suits the Plot?
Which brings me to a rather nit-noid complaint, but a complaint none the less. It really bothered me that throughout the entire episode, Matt Smith's Doctor would suddenly - and very loudly - explain to everyone in his vicinity exactly what their plan was, what they were all going to do, and precisely how they were going to do it.
All with the Angels - and Angel Bob - right there to listen in.
It was never explained away that they couldn't hear. There were no mumblings about an "auditory perception filter." In fact, going back to that scene with blind Amy walking through the sea of Angels, the Doctor very loudly told her - and the Angels - that she couldn't see, that if they figured out that she couldn't see she'd be dead, and that she had to 'walk like you can see'.
Um, the Angels were right there. You'd think at that point they might have caught on to the gag.
I can hear you now. "But they're stone! Maybe they can't hear?"
Sorry. Skip forward a few seconds. Amy's fumbling on the ground, repeatedly saying, "I can't see, Doctor! I can't find the communicator!" It's only when she says this that the Angels all start moving in on her. Could they have maybe just seen that she was fumbling around? (And thus, seen each other...) Well, I'll give you another example.
 The Doctor talking to Angel Bob on his communicator. |
The Doctor talked straight to them during the "thrilling" conclusion. When they were all standing right in front of him, he spoke right to them. Now, Angel Bob had to use the communicator to speak to him. But they understood him throughout the show - when it was convenient, of course - even when his communicator wasn't in visible use.
But then again, if you think about it, the communicator was never really switched off, was it? Angel Bob could say "Hello!" whenever he wanted. No one had to turn on a switch, yet he was always there. Thus, couldn't Angel Bob at least have been listening in the entire time? So even if the other Angels were all stone and thus couldn't hear, Angel Bob still could. Ta da! Big glaring plot hole.
|
Number Four: Yet Another Sudden Change in Modus Operandi. And Basic Alien Anatomy.
Which brings me back to Angel Bob. Um, why exactly did "the only psychopaths in the universe to kill you nicely" start snapping peoples' necks? That was never explained. Suddenly, for no reason, Matt Smith's Doctor describes the Angels as the 'most malevolent creatures in the universe", despite the fact that in the past, the Doctor has always said otherwise. (Besides, I thought the 'most malevolent' title belonged to the Daleks? Or is it a rotating thing, where all the bad guys of the universe get together for a picnic and decide to take turns on who can be the most malevolent for a while? Is there a crown involved? Or at least a pretty sash? 'Miss Malevolent'?)
Anyway. Originally, the creatures lived off of the excess energy left behind when they would "zap you into the past and let you live to death." That never had anything to do with the four Angels in 'Blink' being scavengers; rather, it had everything to do with who the Weeping Angels were and their own basic anatomical needs. Why did that all of a sudden change? Couldn't these starving Angels have used a little bit of that excess energy right about then? It was never explained, never even so much as addressed. We're just expected to sit there, shut up, turn off our brains, and be thrilled by the eye candy.
So sorry for not playing along...
I guess, in the end, that's my biggest complaint. That's what sums it all up. I could keep pointing out the myriad plot holes both in this episode and the previous three. (Hello! How were the angels sucked into the crack when they turned off the gravity plating? They all acted as if they were in space, with all the air rushing past, as if they were being sucked out of a blown portal like River was in the very beginning. But, um, they were on a planet... If the crack had the energy to suck them all in, I doubt gravity plating could counteract a spacial anomaly!) But seriously, all these fan girl nit-noid plot holes aside, I really think it all comes back to one key point.
Conclusion: Doctor Who is shallow.
Crap, it is Heidi Montag after all! Bollocks...
Like I said, Steven Moffat's always been exceedingly good at taking the ordinary and transforming it into the terrifying extraordinary. He's very, very good at coming up with spectacularly scary visuals. But in the past, those visuals had something serious behind it, a story that could back it up. Some meat behind the pretty, fluffy potatoes. It wasn't just seeing the stone angel come to life with its horrifying teeth that was so scary - it was the story behind why they were doing it. It wasn't just the sight of clockwork men in 'Fireplace' that was frightening, it was what they were trying to do to Madame de Pompadour and why. It wasn't just the talking skeleton in the space suit that was visually scary in 'Library', it was the cleverness of the Vashta Narada, the dust particles coming alive and eating every last shred of your body, leaving nothing but bones behind in a skinny minute.
Yet now, everything is being reduced to nothing but a pretty image with nothing behind it. At first inspection, you're scared by what you see. But the minute you turn your brain on and start thinking, start analyzing, the image melts. The enchantment fades as you're suddenly snapped out of the Doctor's world and back into yours by the glaring plot holes staring you in the face.
The bottom line is, it's not enough to put a monster on the screen and go, "Oooooo, it's scary!" There has to be a reason why it's scary beyond just a menacing facade. There has to be enough logic and thought and storytelling to back that scary image up with real psychological terror. Otherwise it ends up just being a picture. A two-dimensional, flat, lackluster, shallow image, with no real logical reason as to why it should keep you up at night cowering under the blankets. Without that logic to back it up, the monster is ripped away from its motive, thus rendering it rather useless and floppy.
I'm thoroughly disappointed. Not just because I love Doctor Who, but because I thought Steven Moffat was better than this. I could make lists like this about all of the episodes this season, and believe me, I have. It's so thoroughly disappointing.
|
I never thought I would ever say this, but I miss Russell T. Davies. Oh, I had my problems with him. Toward the end he fell into the same visual trap that seems to be eating Steven Moffat alive. During the big finale I kept getting the feeling that the story became a kind of collection plate for every idea Russell ever had but never got to use. "Oh, I never got to use that idea for aliens whose heads looked like cacti! I'll throw that in now, that'll be pretty!" Yet again, visual eye candy over substance. He wanted to use that idea for a cacti-headed alien whether it was a natural progression of the story or not. Sure enough, after watching Dr Who Confidential, my instincts were exactly right: that's precisely what happened. He never got to use that cacti idea, so that got chucked in too.
|
 Davies' cacti-headed aliens from 'The End of Time' finale.
|
 The crack that shows up on the side of the Starship UK at the end of 'The Beast Below'. Click to enlarge.
|
But I could at least look past that, because for all his failings, he'd written plenty of deep, meaningful stories. He'd woven plot twists in where we didn't expect. I'm still impressed by how the disappearing bees at first just appeared to be a running gag, then turned out to be a major clue in the end. That's a pretty good reference point for this season's recurring theme of the crack in Amy's wall that keeps appearing throughout the universe. The bees started out as a joke, something mentioned in passing. It was handled with subtlety and wit. The crack? Look back over the episodes, you'll see that every time we see the crack, they literally pause the action, cut to some unrelated scene, give you some ominous music, and focus on the crack for a few seconds. That's hardly subtle or witty, that's hitting you upside the head with it, shoving it in your face and screaming, "This is IMPORTANT!" I can think of a million and one ways that could have been handled with more grace. And yet here we are, being treated like morons.
|
Yet again, I thought Steven Moffat was better than that. I thought Doctor Who was supposed to be better than this. It was meant to have heart and soul, but most of all, it was meant to have a brain. It was meant to have intelligence and meaning. Something a bit deeper than most sci fi shows ever dream of attempting.
But here we are. Doctor Who has been reduced to the intellectual equivalent of 'Sarah Jane Adventures'. I'm just not sure if my hearts can take it anymore. This is oh so much worse than any complaint anyone could ever have with Matt Smith. Actors can be replaced, but once a show has lost its soul? Its mind? What then?
I'll probably still watch the remaining episodes in the hope that things might improve. But I'm not holding my breath. That said, I'm not sure how much longer my attention will last. I'm making no promises. I used to love how happy and exhilarated I'd feel after watching an episode of Doctor Who. But now I just feel sad. Sad about what it was and what it could have been, but just isn't.]]>
