Being happy at the end of an episode doesn’t imply bad times ahead as much as being happy at the start of an episode.
Andy 9 January 2006, 08:52 AM
2
Why do people carefully close the door before looking around to see what’s outside?
More could have been made of the scene where the Doctor loses his spoiler hand. Maybe ratings prevented the chopping off of the arm and blood being shown. The Doctor didn’t show any pain from the injury so any drama from that moment was lost on me.
I like the aggressiveness of the new doctor but I don’t know if he can be so morally righteous about removing the prime minister’s government because she shot the aliens for killing two people. It’s a fine line.
Also Rose was moaning about losing the Doctor when he was only kind of sick, and he didn’t seem to be in any immediate danger. I thought she was tougher than that. I would have kept the Doctor in the Tardis out of harm’s way.
Tom 10 January 2006, 06:38 AM
3
To be fair to Rose, she really didn’t expect the TARDIS to have moved. I’ve done similarly silly things sometimes. Her grief was I think mostly for the old Doctor. She may well have someone who looks vaguely doctorish in her house but he’s still not quite the same person and hasn’t had a chance to convince her yet.
I agree that there should have been some kind of pain, even if they’re not allowed to show blood (and I don’t think they are). It wasn’t very dramatic at all.
The argument between Harriet and the Doctor was one of my favourite moments — they’ve both got good points. Technically Harriet’s act was unprovoked, especially when you consider that only the Sycorax Leader killed anyone, and he’s already dead. If Earth’s going to get noticed by aliens, it seems a good idea not to go around committing war crimes.
Andy 10 January 2006, 09:18 AM
4
I like Harriet Jones, and although she has shown backbone previously, I was surprised that she would order the shooting down of a spacecraft that was no longer threatening the Earth. Keeping the weapon secret seems like a better idea for the long term defense of Earth. Keeping a low profile is better than being one planet with no spacecraft and only one gun.
I agree with the Doctor in that final conversation. As he had already delivered his judgement on the Sycorax and both sides were at peace, Harriet was in the wrong. She was too slow with her death star laser. The Doctor did not seem to view their actions as seriously as Harriet did. He knew that they couldn’t kill a third of the Earth’s population so treated them more like conmen than pillaging barbarians and let them off lightly.
Is the new Doctor’s hand a fighting hand or was he just making it up? Maybe he could have got himself a fighting leg too. Perhaps when he regenerates he could immediately cut off parts of his body while he has the most energy and grow more specialised body parts like eagle eyes or a typing hand.
How long is the gap since the previous episode? The doctor previously sounded like Harriet would be in charge for a reasonable length of time, but she seems to be on the verge of losing government. Does that count as her first warning? I’d like to see her in a couple more episodes.
Tom 10 January 2006, 01:11 PM
5
I think her idea is that with the Sycorax gone, Earth is “invisible” in the sense that they’ll never tell anyone else about it. I agree that holding the weapon in reserve would be a sounder plan.
I hope they play further with the “human race as monsters” idea. I’d like to see a story where the Doctor was actually defending aliens against humans.
If ‘Rose’ was set when transmitted, in March 2005, ‘Aliens of London’ was in March 2006 and ‘The Christmas Invasion’ is therefore Christmas 2006. It’s possible that the Doctor has changed history. It always seems like he’s not allowed to interfere unless there’s alien influence — perhaps Harriet’s use of Torchwood makes the whole timeline malleable. Or something. The way RTD talks in the commentary, Harriet gets the boot. It’s not as impressive if the Doctor claims to be able to bring her down with six words and then fails to.
Andy 11 January 2006, 10:37 AM
6
Plenty of aliens manage to find their way to Earth as it is. The Sycorax didn’t look like a worker bee scouting out good flowers for the hive. If I was the Sycorax, I’d be embarrassed by being defeated by such a backward planet and not mention it to anyone.
So somewhere between March 2006 and Christmas 2006, Harriet ran for Prime Minister, got the job, sent a probe to Mars, ushered in Britain’s Golden Age, killed the Sycorax and came under controversy about her health?
Tom 11 January 2006, 11:07 AM
7
The Mars probe could have been underway before she came to office. Given the deaths of lots of politicians, the election would probably have been pretty speedy. Maybe they only just reached the Golden Age.
I think we have to assume that most Sycorax are either massively devoted to their ancient combat rites, or not that interested in conquering planets. I tend to agree with you and the Doctor. Besides, if all Sycorax only speak Sycoraxic then I doubt there’d be much Earth-gossip anyhow.
Tom 12 January 2006, 03:02 AM
8
This page would seem to confirm my dating. I think.
Tom 5 July 2006, 10:05 PM
9
It’s ‘Critic Watch’, my semi-regular feature where I explain why I should be in charge of every major TV listing on the planet. Ahem. Doctor Who starts on the ABC in Australia this week, so Kenneth Ngyuen is reviewing;
“tin-can production values, British parochialism… Doctor Who fans will love it.”
Did I say explain? I meant rant. Whose production values is he comparing Who to? Superman Returns? Its only rival on TV these days is Battlestar — and it’s hardly a fair competition since Battlestar gets to use the same 3D models every week and has few practical effects. “Parochialism” is clearly the moment when Britain tells the USA that something happening over British airspace is none of their business. Fantasy, yes, parochialism, no. I doubt Mr Ngyuen would call Independence Day an example of US parochialism. But he might. Gah.
The worst condemnation is that only Who fans will like it. The family hit of the decade in Britain is only palatable for fans here? That’s… harsh. I’m not saying it’s not potentially true, but it’s a brutal thing to say to a TV show.
OK, I’m done. Ah, I feel better already.
Comment on this Review
If you want a pretty picture, go to Gravatar.com and get one.
Andy
9 January 2006, 04:23 AM
Being happy at the end of an episode doesn’t imply bad times ahead as much as being happy at the start of an episode.
Andy
9 January 2006, 08:52 AM
Why do people carefully close the door before looking around to see what’s outside? More could have been made of the scene where the Doctor loses his spoiler hand. Maybe ratings prevented the chopping off of the arm and blood being shown. The Doctor didn’t show any pain from the injury so any drama from that moment was lost on me. I like the aggressiveness of the new doctor but I don’t know if he can be so morally righteous about removing the prime minister’s government because she shot the aliens for killing two people. It’s a fine line. Also Rose was moaning about losing the Doctor when he was only kind of sick, and he didn’t seem to be in any immediate danger. I thought she was tougher than that. I would have kept the Doctor in the Tardis out of harm’s way.
Tom
10 January 2006, 06:38 AM
To be fair to Rose, she really didn’t expect the TARDIS to have moved. I’ve done similarly silly things sometimes. Her grief was I think mostly for the old Doctor. She may well have someone who looks vaguely doctorish in her house but he’s still not quite the same person and hasn’t had a chance to convince her yet.
I agree that there should have been some kind of pain, even if they’re not allowed to show blood (and I don’t think they are). It wasn’t very dramatic at all.
The argument between Harriet and the Doctor was one of my favourite moments — they’ve both got good points. Technically Harriet’s act was unprovoked, especially when you consider that only the Sycorax Leader killed anyone, and he’s already dead. If Earth’s going to get noticed by aliens, it seems a good idea not to go around committing war crimes.
Andy
10 January 2006, 09:18 AM
I like Harriet Jones, and although she has shown backbone previously, I was surprised that she would order the shooting down of a spacecraft that was no longer threatening the Earth. Keeping the weapon secret seems like a better idea for the long term defense of Earth. Keeping a low profile is better than being one planet with no spacecraft and only one gun.
I agree with the Doctor in that final conversation. As he had already delivered his judgement on the Sycorax and both sides were at peace, Harriet was in the wrong. She was too slow with her death star laser. The Doctor did not seem to view their actions as seriously as Harriet did. He knew that they couldn’t kill a third of the Earth’s population so treated them more like conmen than pillaging barbarians and let them off lightly.
Is the new Doctor’s hand a fighting hand or was he just making it up? Maybe he could have got himself a fighting leg too. Perhaps when he regenerates he could immediately cut off parts of his body while he has the most energy and grow more specialised body parts like eagle eyes or a typing hand.
How long is the gap since the previous episode? The doctor previously sounded like Harriet would be in charge for a reasonable length of time, but she seems to be on the verge of losing government. Does that count as her first warning? I’d like to see her in a couple more episodes.
Tom
10 January 2006, 01:11 PM
I think her idea is that with the Sycorax gone, Earth is “invisible” in the sense that they’ll never tell anyone else about it. I agree that holding the weapon in reserve would be a sounder plan.
I hope they play further with the “human race as monsters” idea. I’d like to see a story where the Doctor was actually defending aliens against humans.
If ‘Rose’ was set when transmitted, in March 2005, ‘Aliens of London’ was in March 2006 and ‘The Christmas Invasion’ is therefore Christmas 2006. It’s possible that the Doctor has changed history. It always seems like he’s not allowed to interfere unless there’s alien influence — perhaps Harriet’s use of Torchwood makes the whole timeline malleable. Or something. The way RTD talks in the commentary, Harriet gets the boot. It’s not as impressive if the Doctor claims to be able to bring her down with six words and then fails to.
Andy
11 January 2006, 10:37 AM
Plenty of aliens manage to find their way to Earth as it is. The Sycorax didn’t look like a worker bee scouting out good flowers for the hive. If I was the Sycorax, I’d be embarrassed by being defeated by such a backward planet and not mention it to anyone.
So somewhere between March 2006 and Christmas 2006, Harriet ran for Prime Minister, got the job, sent a probe to Mars, ushered in Britain’s Golden Age, killed the Sycorax and came under controversy about her health?
Tom
11 January 2006, 11:07 AM
The Mars probe could have been underway before she came to office. Given the deaths of lots of politicians, the election would probably have been pretty speedy. Maybe they only just reached the Golden Age.
I think we have to assume that most Sycorax are either massively devoted to their ancient combat rites, or not that interested in conquering planets. I tend to agree with you and the Doctor. Besides, if all Sycorax only speak Sycoraxic then I doubt there’d be much Earth-gossip anyhow.
Tom
12 January 2006, 03:02 AM
This page would seem to confirm my dating. I think.
Tom
5 July 2006, 10:05 PM
It’s ‘Critic Watch’, my semi-regular feature where I explain why I should be in charge of every major TV listing on the planet. Ahem. Doctor Who starts on the ABC in Australia this week, so Kenneth Ngyuen is reviewing;
“tin-can production values, British parochialism… Doctor Who fans will love it.”
Did I say explain? I meant rant. Whose production values is he comparing Who to? Superman Returns? Its only rival on TV these days is Battlestar — and it’s hardly a fair competition since Battlestar gets to use the same 3D models every week and has few practical effects. “Parochialism” is clearly the moment when Britain tells the USA that something happening over British airspace is none of their business. Fantasy, yes, parochialism, no. I doubt Mr Ngyuen would call Independence Day an example of US parochialism. But he might. Gah.
The worst condemnation is that only Who fans will like it. The family hit of the decade in Britain is only palatable for fans here? That’s… harsh. I’m not saying it’s not potentially true, but it’s a brutal thing to say to a TV show.
OK, I’m done. Ah, I feel better already.
Comment on this Review
If you want a pretty picture, go to Gravatar.com and get one.
HTML is not allowed — instead, use:
Leave a blank line between paragraphs. More complicated formatting can be found at the Markdown homepage.