New Doctor Who Discussion Thread, WATER ALWAYS WINS

I just found out by watching the trailer for In the Loop that he has a major role in that film, and I'm planning to see it when I get the chance (although I may have to buy the DVD, since I don't think it'll be in cinemas over here).

Lawrence Miles likes the new Torchwood.

Like Day One, Day Two is made of win.

So, I've been musing on Day One all day.

Did Lois remind anyone else of Tish Jones? I kept thinking to myself that Tish could have filled that role. It would be gratuitously fanwanky, I suppose.

You're right, she does remind me. On the other hand, Tish knows Captain Jack already, so even if she could get another government job after having worked for Saxon, I don't think it would have worked as well.

Another strong installment. Like Day Two, it's a little light on plot, but the episodes are so well-constructed that I don't mind it. The tension as Frobisher communicated with the 456 was almost unbearable.

I feel like in some ways Frobisher is almost the main character in this thing. He's certainly one of the most interesting.

See, I don't think he's all that interesting. At least it's fun watching mustache-twirlers laser Jack, but Frobisher and the current Prime Minister just sit behind their desks and sign extermination papers without a second thought. That's not interesting evil, that's just boring evil.

Frobisher didn't start out doing these things without a second thought, though. There's a subtle but real progression across the first three episodes, as he becomes more inured to doing bad things. It isn't telegraphed, thank goodness, but it's there. It's hard to imagine the hesitant bureaucrat of the morning of Day One, or the freaked-out father from the end of that day, coolly telling Jack that he knows his family is safe because Jack's a better man than he is. As his sense of responsibility and of the threat to Britain grows, so does his capacity for evil. I imagine we'll see Frobisher confronted with the need to commit a violent act personally in the remaining two days, to carry this theme through.

Maybe. But it was also on Day One when he signed the death warrants (figuratively speaking).

If you're right... well, I'm still not sure I'll find him interesting, but at least they tried to do something with his character.

I guess I'll get back to you tomorrow.

The conversation Frobisher has with the PM in the second episode is key.

Frobisher is trying to thank the PM for giving him the responsibility, and the PM replies with words to the effect, "All I've done is put you on the front lines. That makes you the first to fall."

Frobisher's reaction is interesting. It's as if he hadn't realized that he's now holding his own future in his hands, and now that he does he'll have to take steps to make sure that he's not going to fall.

Yes, and he's troubled by having to issue that order himself-- he wants the PM to take that decision away from him, and is visibly uneasy after he gives the word to Bridget.

Yes, I don't see him as a mustache-twirler by any stretch of the word. He's doing this because he has to not because he wants to-- and he quite clearly doesn't want to. Even the PM isn't quite a mustache-twirler; he's clearly reluctant as well, but he's in a hard spot.

As Brendan said, no doubt Frobisher will have to get his hands dirty before the week is out; I also expect that part of the resolution is going to come down to a choice that Frobisher has to make.

Well, I guess that solves the timeline problem of "The Dead Line" claiming to be in 2010, and "Children of Earth" claiming to be in 2009.

I hate you, Rusty.

I knew the ending was coming, since someone on Gallifrey Base was thoughtful enough to stick it behind a spoiler tag in the Day Three Ratings Thread without making it clear just what was being spoiled, but still, wow.

The discussion among the politicians crystallized the feeling I've been having for a couple days now, that this is a significant piece of television in a way that Doctor Who, for all its brilliance, has never achieved, and probably by its nature couldn't.

Plus Nick Briggs was pretty good.

Jesus Christ.

That was emotionally wracking, from the cabinet discussion onwards.

As amazing as these first four episodes have been, I must admit I'm still worried that the resolution may not live up to what's come before. I'm not sure whether the dissatisfaction from some people who have received their DVDs early is a bad or a good sign; based on the general tenor of their complaints, though, I'm leaning toward the latter.

Miles still likes Torchwood.

(I live in fear that he'll post a review of Day Five -- or the series as a whole -- over the weekend, and I won't ever see it.)

If he does, I'll save it for you.

The thing is, you know it's going to be classic.

Either the Torchwood finale fulfills the promise of the first four episodes -- and Miles gushes about how Rusty has finally come through -- or the finale craps out in the final act like the finales usually do -- and Miles has to rant and rave about the betrayal and failure of Torchwood's promise.

If this crapped out in the final act, it was because Gwen and Jack were out of character.

Jack, I can see being desperate enough to sacrifice Stephen. I would have liked to see him give Stephen the choice to save the world; people can cite "Small Worlds" all they want, but the girl wanted to leave. I still think he's a right bastard for running away, but I can also understand why he doesn't want to face Gwen again.

But Gwen... honestly, I expected her to ignore Jack and tell Rhys to get the word out. She's disobeyed Jack before in the name of the greater good, and I think she should've done it again.

That would've been a harder story to tell, though. People would have kept their kids at home, and the army would have had to kill adults to gather the kids. I'm not sure BBC1 would be happy with that kind of slaughter.

Fuck.

I knew, from the weekend at Shore Leave, some of the events of Day Five. But even knowing, in advance, where events were going didn't prepare me for the story getting there.

I had to stop the episode with Frobisher's murder/suicide. I knew it was coming. When he came out of the Prime Minister's office, when he asked for Requisition 31, I knew it was coming. And, knowing a little of what would come after, made it all the more shocking, because of the senselessness of it all.

The death of Stephen. The way that sequence was intercut was painful.

I don't know where Torchwood goes from here.

I can genuinely say that if Torchwood ended here, I'm okay with that.

I didn't quite know where it was going; I'd assumed that Requisition 31 was a suicide kit, needle and jar. I expected him to try to get the word out, then kill himself to escape the treason charges. When it turned out to be a gun, I still didn't see the murder part come into play until he walked into their room.

I guess I just kept thinking that people would want to expose the conspiracy, instead of keeping the government the same old dismal hellhole it's been since the day Harold Saxon suddenly disappeared under mysterious circumstances.

If Torchwood goes anywhere from here, I think it does without Jack. Gwen's accusations to the contrary, he didn't "run away" in "Utopia"/"End of Days". Here, he most certainly did.

(Not without reason--Jack crossed a line, and he knows he crossed that line. But as hard of a time he's having forgiving himself, I think the audience will have an even harder one.)

Am I okay with ending it here? I guess so. Or at least, the story of Torchwood Three. I don't think Captain Jack Harkness's story is over yet, and I want to see where that goes.

My problem with Jack running away at the end and Gwen's accusations is that he's already been running. He's been running for six months. I almost wish that they hadn't done the "Six Months Later" bit, that they'd found a way for Jack to bugger off in the immediate aftermath of Stephen's death.

The lack of exposure of the conspiracy bothers me. I can understand why it wasn't exposed, but the reason has nothing to do with the internal logic of the story and everything to do with the external logic of the Whoniverse. If the conspiracy were exposed, it wouldn't just take down a government. It would take down the entire system of government. The social contract between the government and its citizens would have been exposed as a lie, and the resolution would turn Britain, if not other nations, into something unrecognizable.

I want to see Jack again. Children of Earth is, essentially, "the fall of Jack Harkness." A redemption follows the fall. His story needs to continue somewhere.

But I never want to see Jack on Doctor Who again. He doesn't "fit" there any longer.

I don't see him as fitting on Doctor Who as a companion. But I think we could see him working at cross-purposes to the Doctor--not necessarily a villain, just someone trying to do the right thing but not how the Doctor wants to do it.

I think that story would work better with Jenny, if they ever brought her back.

I could see Jack go all Abslom Daak on the 456, hunting them down, hoping that the more of them he kills, the more the pain will lessen.

In the GB thread reacting to Smith's costume, I believe I have seen it attributed to every decade from the 1910s to the 1970s. And fortunately, Karen's there to pick up the slack, with hers attributed to the 1980s, 1990s, and 2000s.

I quite like the tweed myself.

*bounces through the thread*

Yes, I just saw the set photos from the Sun.

I'm not in love with the tweed, but given that he's supposed to be 900+ years old I suppose he's allowed to wear old foagie clothing.

The costume works for me. I approve.

I really wish I hadn't read Coop's thread. But I can't say I wasn't warned...

Oh well. At least I can console myself with the thought that there's no way it wouldn't be in the trailers.

Or DWM, or something. It's just episodes 4/5; I imagine the real surprises will be held back for the end!

So, The Waters of Mars has a new trailer. I am intrigued.

Also, hasn't he worn the orange suit before? The Impossible Planet/The Satan Pit, possibly? If so, would that indicate a similar chronological setting, or just an expense-conscious costume department?

Yes, he has. I'm assuming the former, for now; the design of the base control room (maybe three seconds into the trailer) seems rather similar to that of the base in Impossible Planet as well. But the latter wouldn't surprise me.

The same suit design (though differently colored, I think), showed up in "42" as well. Both stories were set in the 42nd century.

Interesting that the Doctor seems to have noticed the Event Foreshadowing for once...

Lawrence Miles speaks out on Torchwood.

Oh, and I particularly liked this bit in the sidebar...

To be honest, I'm not much looking forward to the film. I liked the book as a love story, I hated the book as science-fiction, and I wanted someone to do something at some point, rather than everyone being passive to the point of boredom. I think any changes the film could make to the story to make it work on screen can almost be to its benefit.

I started to read it, but then decided that I had better things to do than read a 30-page response to some 3-paragraph letters.

Maybe if he keeps on using that "The Fire in the Girly-Place" joke, someone will laugh someday.

My eyes glazed over somewhere about the middle; at that point, he was rehashing his old arguments with Paul Cornell and why the EDA authors didn't "get" Sabbath. However, the final paragraphs, where he recounts his one and only encounter with Ian Levine, is worth it.

So, Richard Curtis.

I don't believe that it will be a Blackadder crossover. I wouldn't mind a crossover, but I'd need Ben Elton involved. Blackadder wasn't as good when it was just Curtis writing it.

I don't know what I'd want from a Richard Curtis script. If they could find a way to cast either Hugh Grant or Rowan Atkinson as the guest star, I'd be in heaven. Now, I'm having this mad dream of Atkinson playing his "Curse of the Fatal Death" Doctor in a Matt Smith episode...

Richard Curtis. I'm intrigued.

I would just like to point out the implications of the change in thread title. Twice-weekly SJA!

Some of you may know that every year for the Simpsons Halloween episode, the production team give themselves goofy nicknames. It went by too quickly for me to be sure, but I think one of them was Don "He Will Knock 4 Times" Payne. Google confirms that he's a Who fan...

Despite the fact that the Doctor didn't do much of anything, that was very enjoyable. Clyde saves the day yet again!

"I'll explain later." I laughed out loud at that, even though it may well not be a reference to "The Curse of Fatal Death".

Well, if not, they're both picking up on the same tendency of the old show (especially Timelash as I recall).

My favorite humor bits were the opening of the first part, with the kids conspiring, co-opting Mr Smith and K-9, and the two computers bickering with one another.

"Your opinion was not requested."

I was expecting more Doctor action, but then I realized that, no, the Doctor is the guest star. And in that sense, the size of his role worked. He gave everyone the information they needed to solve the problems. He wasn't the hero of this story, he was just the catalyst for the resolution.

I thought the first part was a bit slow, and I was frankly bored with it. The second part had a better flow. And I was sorry that Nigel Havers had to give up his life to save everyone from the Trickster. As sacrifices go, I found myself mentally quoting the fifth Doctor: "There should have been another way."

It was pleasantly diverting.

I'm getting people together to watch "Waters" so I won't see it 'til Wednesday, but one of them hasn't seen beyond "Forest of the Dead", so I need to ask those of you who will not wait so long if it contains any spoilers for the end of Season 4 and beyond.

There's an extended reference to the events of "The Stolen Earth"/"Journey's End." It isn't entirely clear that it is a reference to a specific episode, though. And it doesn't communicate anything except "big Dalek invasion of Earth in 2009," which isn't much of a spoiler. "He will knock four times" also comes up again, but that's not too big either. I can't recall anything else.

I wasn't expecting much of "The Waters of Mars," as I was thinking it would be overshadowed by the imminence of The Finale. But in the uncomplicated crowd-pleasing way of specials it was fun. The monsters are really creepy (great makeup work), and Tennant's performance in the final scenes is phenomenal.

Are there recent SJA episodes that are actually any good?

Well, that's not fair. I'm sure it's all good-enough children's television. But I just watched about ten minutes of "The Wedding of Sarah Jane Smith" part two, and the poor dialogue just grates. The tenth Doctor is incredibly annoying when his lines aren't as tight as possible, and Tennant's performance is distracting in the the less bombastic directorial feel of SJA.

You're just mean. I thought "Prisoner of the Judoon" was good fun.

Though I enjoyed the beginning (a lot of great moments, such as the Doctor's realization and the GADGET upgrade), once the Doctor and Adelaide had their convo above the glacier, it really picked up and never let go. That Dalek flashback was nice, the airlock conversation was a corker, the Doctor's return was really good, and those final scenes...

And that trailer! Hot dog! Hit it out of the park again, Rusty.