Doctor Who: 12th June

posted by Rob on June 13, 2010 01:08 PM

AllNinesDisplay.jpg

One word for you: 'fun'. Or three words: 'slightly mindless fun'. It's funny (at least to me) how much less plot holes bother me if I'm having fun. They'd better not be so big that I fall down them, but I think they matter less if you're being carried along with the story. Any time you're forced to think analytically then the plot had better make sense. So that's 1) if it's a mystery (so they're making you think to entertain you) or 2) when you're trying to figure out what the hell's going on (so they're making you think because they've screwed up). But if you're along for the ride emotionally, you're clear on what's happening and you're interested in how it turns out, taking a few liberties with logic (or ret-con*) doesn't seem so bad. It's like the difference between being unexpectedly asked to wash up after being cooked a nice meal or being unexpectedly asked to wash up instead of being cooked a nice meal. [spoilers ahead]

So did anyone watch Who Confidential? And did you note the bit where the writer, Gareth Roberts, mentioned that initially the disappearances (=A story) and the romance (= B story) were separate, but then Steven Moffatt suggested having the resolution to one also be the resolution to the other. Which is exactly what we were talking about last week when it didn't happen. Maybe he didn't dare tell Bafta, Golden Globe and multiple Emmy award-winning Richard Curtis, CBE, the same thing. But maybe he should have done.

*Not that I care, but Amy had access to a Tardis database with the plans for every house in Colchester (the world? the universe?). And the second-storey couldn't have been a recent addition (so the database included the council planning permission files too)? The doctor happened to have an earpiece with him when he was ejected from the Tardis which could communicate back to Amy even with the Tardis in limbo? That would have been handy on lots of other occasions too, especially if his companion were given an earpiece as well. The Tardis materialised sufficiently for the Doctor to saunter out but, thereafter, not for him to jump back in? When Sophie screamed they could hear it downstairs but not when the other victims screamed?

But, like I say, because everything else in the story was carrying its weight, I reckon the plot logic could afford to be creaky in a couple of places.

spacer

Comments: 5


Rob, thanks for posting the 'ret-con' link - I've never really understood what that meant. May the gods bless wikipedia and their insatiable quest for knowledge.

Loving the review as always. Yet, as I've already mentioned, I don't actually watch Who!

I think your reviews make me think about my own storytelling, mind; how effective it is, where I can improve etc.

Hence, my enjoyment.


I was impressed by how much Amy had learnt about the TARDIS in less that a season on travelling; she got past the look-but-don't-touch stage very quickly indeed.
That said I thought it was cracking episode overall, with a fantastic performance from both Matt Smith and James Corden. More like that please!
Also: Oooh Pandorica. Looks like a more exciting (and less predictable) version of the Genesis Ark!


It was fun, and I loved Corden (poor thing, with that Picard debacle), but I didn't buy the kiss. And why would mould from the collection of corpses - which had miraculously disappeared by the time they finally got upstairs, aside from the alien, which they didn't linger on, - almost kill him?
For me it was another of those almost-but-not-quite-joined-all-the-dots storylines.


..and the Doctor didn't actually use that thing he constructed in his bedroom, did he? It was supposed to detect aliens and failed miserably.


To be fair there wasn't any alien to detect; it was all an emergency pilot program. Very similar twist to 'The Girl in the Fireplace' where it was just repair droids getting confused. But yeah the mould was a bit odd. Oh well, James Corden needed a sick day, what better way to ensure it that super-mould?

spacer

Post a comment

We love hearing from our readers, but please stay relevant and pleasant. The comments are for responding to the specific blog post above. If you have any other queries, please contact Snowbooks via email. Off-topic or offensive comments will be removed without notice.

To screen out automated spam, please answer the following very easy question:

What colour is nice, new snow?

(please use all lower-case characters for your answer; no capitals)


Back to the blog »