Doctor Who
Apr. 23rd, 2005 09:27 pmSo I've been saying this off and on in comments for the past month, most recently on Tim's journal, and I figure I should set it down properly here at least once, and then I can shut up on the topic.
Here's how it is: I never watched Doctor Who as a child. At least, I don't think I did. I certainly never imprinted on it. I have some vague memories of Pertwee and McCoy, but I never hid behind the sofa. I don't think I ever even hid behind my hands. My nostalgia level for this show is approximately zero.
On the other hand, I do remember loving a BBC children's drama called Dark Season. That--Behemoth and the mind control, and all of it--creeped me out like you would not believe. I didn't find out until much later who it was written by, not until after Queer as Folk had been and gone, but on the strength of the memory I watched Bob and Rose (ok) and The Second Coming (excellent). I've missed Casanova entirely, but I'll be getting hold of the DVDs of it and Queer as Folk at some point purely because they come with Russell T Davies' name attached.
So I went into the new Who with a curious mix of feelings. I didn't really know what Who was, and somehow everything beforehand had led me to expect--well, maybe not another Second Coming but at least something intelligent. Something that was fun, and had fun with skiffy tv tropes, but was worth thinking about. Something, in other words, that was a bit like the less-dark bits of Buffy, but with the scope of Farscape and filtered through a British sensibility.
That's not what we got, and it took a while for everyone to get the message through my skull that it's not what Doctor Who is ever going to be. You can call it a family show if you want, but that's a euphemism. It's children's TV. That's not an automatic criticism; there are some children's shows I like a great deal and can still rewatch today, including the aforementioned Dark Season as well as Press Gang and ReBoot. The problem is that Doctor Who seems, on the evidence of the first five episodes, to wobble between the cartoonish and the actively juvenile. Do I have to mention the pig?
And yet ... the far-future episode wasn't bad, you know. It wasn't wonderful, but I liked the scope of it (until they felt the need to reassure the audience by returning to the present at the end), and the dialogue was pretty sharp, and it looked good. And the Dickens episode, well, that was weaker, but it still had a nice debate between the Doctor and Rose about whether it was right to let desperate aliens appropriate human corpses, and Rose was shown to be wrong. There have been other bits like that, too--bits where it's felt like a slightly more ambitious show has been trying to break through the covering of latex and comedy flatulence. I thought for a couple of weeks maybe it was Russell T trying to work within the format, that he was going to build up and pull a 'Becoming' (or at least a 'Prophecy Girl') at the end of the series, but then he went and wrote 'The Aliens of London'; so maybe such scraps have always been part of Who.
It's not a terrible show. On its day, it can be quite fun. Tonight's episode, in fact, I quite enjoyed. It was about as subtle as a brick, but it was funny without being silly and, dammit, I actually felt involved at the end of the episode. I'd even be looking forward to next week, if I hadn't seen the clip that Richard and Judy showed yesterday. So even though it's not really for me, I can start to see why people enjoy it. What I resent a little--and this is the thing that needles at me enough for me to be posting this--is that everyone seems to be hailing it as good, and worthy of serious attention. It's not, not by any sensible measuring stick. Forget the occasionally ropey but mostly actually not bad effects, never mind the formulaic but improving scripts, it's just not smart enough--not sharp enough, not willing enough to go after the interesting angle rather than the cheap gag. It is, for instance, not a patch on Dark Season. I don't want to offend anyone, but it feels to me like lowest common denominator fare.
Because the corollary to the above is that this one show, given the fuss made over it, will do more than any other single thing to define the Great British Public's image of sf as sci-fi for the next ten years. It's not being handled as a children's show; it's being handled as an Important Cultural Event. In fact, if episodes like 'The Aliens of London' have occurred with any frequency in the history of Who, I suddenly understand why that Public tends to dismiss sf as silly and nonsensical and not for them. This is not about sf having to be po-faced--much as I love Carnivale and (the new) Battlestar Galactica, I also wouldn't give up Farscape or Hitch-Hiker's for the world, and you can hardly say Mutant Enemy shows take themselves seriously the whole time--but it feels like we just got to the point where, maybe, some people were starting to accept that sf drama could be for grownups, and I can't help thinking this is going to set everything back two steps, without even taking one forward. Irrational? Almost certainly. But there it is.
And now, a poll.
[Poll #480618]
Here's how it is: I never watched Doctor Who as a child. At least, I don't think I did. I certainly never imprinted on it. I have some vague memories of Pertwee and McCoy, but I never hid behind the sofa. I don't think I ever even hid behind my hands. My nostalgia level for this show is approximately zero.
On the other hand, I do remember loving a BBC children's drama called Dark Season. That--Behemoth and the mind control, and all of it--creeped me out like you would not believe. I didn't find out until much later who it was written by, not until after Queer as Folk had been and gone, but on the strength of the memory I watched Bob and Rose (ok) and The Second Coming (excellent). I've missed Casanova entirely, but I'll be getting hold of the DVDs of it and Queer as Folk at some point purely because they come with Russell T Davies' name attached.
So I went into the new Who with a curious mix of feelings. I didn't really know what Who was, and somehow everything beforehand had led me to expect--well, maybe not another Second Coming but at least something intelligent. Something that was fun, and had fun with skiffy tv tropes, but was worth thinking about. Something, in other words, that was a bit like the less-dark bits of Buffy, but with the scope of Farscape and filtered through a British sensibility.
That's not what we got, and it took a while for everyone to get the message through my skull that it's not what Doctor Who is ever going to be. You can call it a family show if you want, but that's a euphemism. It's children's TV. That's not an automatic criticism; there are some children's shows I like a great deal and can still rewatch today, including the aforementioned Dark Season as well as Press Gang and ReBoot. The problem is that Doctor Who seems, on the evidence of the first five episodes, to wobble between the cartoonish and the actively juvenile. Do I have to mention the pig?
And yet ... the far-future episode wasn't bad, you know. It wasn't wonderful, but I liked the scope of it (until they felt the need to reassure the audience by returning to the present at the end), and the dialogue was pretty sharp, and it looked good. And the Dickens episode, well, that was weaker, but it still had a nice debate between the Doctor and Rose about whether it was right to let desperate aliens appropriate human corpses, and Rose was shown to be wrong. There have been other bits like that, too--bits where it's felt like a slightly more ambitious show has been trying to break through the covering of latex and comedy flatulence. I thought for a couple of weeks maybe it was Russell T trying to work within the format, that he was going to build up and pull a 'Becoming' (or at least a 'Prophecy Girl') at the end of the series, but then he went and wrote 'The Aliens of London'; so maybe such scraps have always been part of Who.
It's not a terrible show. On its day, it can be quite fun. Tonight's episode, in fact, I quite enjoyed. It was about as subtle as a brick, but it was funny without being silly and, dammit, I actually felt involved at the end of the episode. I'd even be looking forward to next week, if I hadn't seen the clip that Richard and Judy showed yesterday. So even though it's not really for me, I can start to see why people enjoy it. What I resent a little--and this is the thing that needles at me enough for me to be posting this--is that everyone seems to be hailing it as good, and worthy of serious attention. It's not, not by any sensible measuring stick. Forget the occasionally ropey but mostly actually not bad effects, never mind the formulaic but improving scripts, it's just not smart enough--not sharp enough, not willing enough to go after the interesting angle rather than the cheap gag. It is, for instance, not a patch on Dark Season. I don't want to offend anyone, but it feels to me like lowest common denominator fare.
Because the corollary to the above is that this one show, given the fuss made over it, will do more than any other single thing to define the Great British Public's image of sf as sci-fi for the next ten years. It's not being handled as a children's show; it's being handled as an Important Cultural Event. In fact, if episodes like 'The Aliens of London' have occurred with any frequency in the history of Who, I suddenly understand why that Public tends to dismiss sf as silly and nonsensical and not for them. This is not about sf having to be po-faced--much as I love Carnivale and (the new) Battlestar Galactica, I also wouldn't give up Farscape or Hitch-Hiker's for the world, and you can hardly say Mutant Enemy shows take themselves seriously the whole time--but it feels like we just got to the point where, maybe, some people were starting to accept that sf drama could be for grownups, and I can't help thinking this is going to set everything back two steps, without even taking one forward. Irrational? Almost certainly. But there it is.
And now, a poll.
[Poll #480618]
no subject
Date: 2005-04-23 08:30 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-04-23 08:30 pm (UTC)(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:I liked the pig!
Date: 2005-04-23 08:34 pm (UTC)Re: I liked the pig!
Date: 2005-04-23 08:37 pm (UTC)Re: I liked the pig!
From:Re: I liked the pig!
From:Re: I liked the pig!
From:Re: I liked the pig!
From:Re: I liked the pig!
From:Re: I liked the pig!
From:Re: I liked the pig!
From:Re: I liked the pig!
From:no subject
Date: 2005-04-23 08:35 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-04-23 08:36 pm (UTC)(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:no subject
Date: 2005-04-23 08:37 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-04-23 08:43 pm (UTC)(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:no subject
Date: 2005-04-23 08:44 pm (UTC)The new series lives up to the style of classic Who, which is why afficionados are pleased, and why I'm not bothered.
no subject
Date: 2005-04-23 08:54 pm (UTC)If you are interested in seeing the best of Dr. Who, ask around. There were some seriously good storylines, but the programme always had a yo-yo relationship to both age of audience, and to quality.
no subject
Date: 2005-04-23 09:06 pm (UTC)One problem with older Who is that I find it embarassingly hard to suspend my disbelief for bad special effects. It's like I can cope with state-of-the-art effects from when I was 14, even though now they look ropey, but anything more primitive than that and it causes a mental blockage.
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:no subject
Date: 2005-04-23 08:54 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-04-23 09:02 pm (UTC)(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:no subject
Date: 2005-04-23 09:20 pm (UTC)Buffy may be for older kids but that doesn't mean Doctor Who is for children. If it were, it really wouldn't be scheduled for 7pm Saturday. Doctor Who is for little kids, big kids, grannies, mums and dads and people who play the National Lottery. It has achingly bad in-jokes about Iraq which, while not remotely deep, wouldn't occur on CBBC. It's wholesome television for nice, wholesome families who watch Richard and Judy to sit down and enjoy together. Now, Richard and Judy may represent low brow to you but it sure aint Trisha - now that's lowest common denominator television.
It really seems to me that the problem for you isn't that Who represents the lowest common denominator - just the average.
no subject
Date: 2005-04-24 11:10 am (UTC)(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:no subject
Date: 2005-04-23 09:23 pm (UTC)Yes, absolutely spot on.
I think I like it even less than you. I can see why some people find it enjoyable, but I just don't. Unlike you, I probably won't bother watching any more of it if I can help it.
no subject
Date: 2005-04-24 09:23 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-04-23 09:37 pm (UTC)Cause that would be me.
You are categorist, that's what you are.
no subject
Date: 2005-04-23 09:49 pm (UTC)(no subject)
From:no subject
Date: 2005-04-23 09:43 pm (UTC)But I refuse to watch any Who that doesn't feature Tom Baker and his scarf.
no subject
Date: 2005-04-23 09:44 pm (UTC)No, tonight's episode wasn't subtle but to be honest I'm not really watching Dr Who for subtlety.
It was fun. So I'm happy.
no subject
Date: 2005-04-23 09:45 pm (UTC)(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:no subject
Date: 2005-04-23 10:04 pm (UTC)I wasn't allowed to watch "that rubbish" when I was a kid and simply don't turn the telly on these days so never stumble across it. I had intended to make a special effort to see the new Who but was working on the day of the first episode and just keep forgetting about it since.
no subject
Date: 2005-04-23 10:26 pm (UTC)I just watched that Dalek clip. Daleks. That aren't wobbly. And fight smoothly and quickly. OMG.
* DSKY falls over.
Oh why do I have mini-con next Saturday and have to miss it?
WHY GOD WHY!?!
no subject
Date: 2005-04-23 10:46 pm (UTC)(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:no subject
Date: 2005-04-23 10:28 pm (UTC)I never saw Who as a kid. The first time I saw any was a couple of years ago at Sciffy, so I was already about 20. (It was the Spearhead From Space, if anyone's interested. And imho, the dummies were *way* scarier, but that's a side issue). I liked it. Oh, and I saw the Comic Relief one. Then, in the lead-up to the new Who, Sciffy started showing random arcs that we had on dvd or video. So I've seen a number of random Doctors, not all, but quite a few, in little, usually 6 episode, storylines. I still liked them. They varied a lot, but they were enjoyable.
Comparing that rather scatter-gun approach with new Who - I haven't seen anything as juvenile as the farting aliens in the old stuff. It may be there, haven't caught it yet. Plenty of dodgy-looking monsters and not-great effects, yes. On the other hand, new Who moves noticeably faster and manages to get me on the verge of tears fairly often. (Am a sucker for people crying on screen, or high emotion in general). Old Who seemed far more pedestrian in that regard - the 6 ep arcs let them stretch things out, and there was always lots of talking and not so much action.
I still want to see lots more old Who. I found it enjoyable, I liked the characters they come across and the different Doctors' idiosyncracies. The Companions and how they were treated... well, some of it made me cringe slightly, though not enough to spoil it. I didn't see anything hugely deep and meaningful about a lot of what happened (and certainly not much like Buffy's 'themes'), but it wasn't really childish either. Still loads of fun, and I kinda liked learning about the development of the Daleks, dotted over various different Doctors' storylines.
The pig was quite bad. The zipper-aliens were worse. The ending of that first part, with everyone standing about? Really reminded me of old Who, but felt utterly silly and out of place here, since new Who is normally much more active. Tonight's ep almost made up for last week's. Almost. Am looking forward to the Daleks.
no subject
Date: 2005-04-23 10:34 pm (UTC)(no subject)
From:no subject
Date: 2005-04-23 11:40 pm (UTC)And, well, I like bits of the new Who. I hate other bits. So I'm going for 'like' purely arbitrarily.
no subject
Date: 2005-04-24 09:26 am (UTC)(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:no subject
Date: 2005-04-23 11:41 pm (UTC)Also, Morv, are you seriously over 25? that's scary.
no subject
Date: 2005-04-24 09:26 am (UTC)(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:My favourite Doctor Who review
Date: 2005-04-24 01:20 am (UTC)Re: My favourite Doctor Who review
Date: 2005-04-24 09:28 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-04-24 02:10 am (UTC)However - the Who talk has been done enough by other people.
I've one thing to say...
Why has no-one, and I mean no-one, taken you to task for ReBoot. It sucked beyond telling dude. Plus - when on earth did you ever watch it? Surely it was after your time.
(Good call on Press Gang tho)
no subject
Date: 2005-04-24 07:47 am (UTC)(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:no subject
Date: 2005-04-24 02:38 am (UTC)It's a programme for families. Its intended audience is an intergenerational one, of adults who remember enjoying it as children, and their children. I am not convinced it is any stupider than Dr Who was when I was a child (in fact, I've watched a couple of episodes of the accompanying nostalgia series on BBC Three, and it's definitely not any stupider). I see the entire sensawunda of the universe playing across my daughter's face. They have to have warnings that it may not be suitable for children under eight. What's not to like?
no subject
Date: 2005-04-24 09:31 am (UTC)(no subject)
From:no subject
Date: 2005-04-24 04:32 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-04-24 09:36 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-04-24 05:47 am (UTC)Avoid all Pertwee episodes, fond as I am of them, Pertwee utterly undermined the anarchy of they Doctor.
no subject
Date: 2005-04-24 07:56 am (UTC)As to anarchy, he wasn't Tom Baker or Pat Troughton, but I thought there was a fair bit of it - especially in the way he treated officialdom generally and the Brigadear in particular.
no subject
Date: 2005-04-24 08:49 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-04-24 09:17 am (UTC)(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:no subject
Date: 2005-04-24 08:58 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-04-24 09:33 am (UTC)(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:no subject
Date: 2005-04-24 09:09 am (UTC)The former show, you can make your own judgement. The latter looked like it was degenerating into a standard six-episode chase drama, but has taken a turn down an unexpected lane already.
Based on the general reaction of other critics, I'm not making time for the Doc. I am making time for Fugitives. This choice probably says more about me than the programmes' qualities.
no subject
Date: 2005-04-24 09:31 am (UTC)(no subject)
From: