Sunday, 4 April 2010

So, 'Who' episode one - what did you think?

The following was posted on Digital spy:

A solid episode that seemed to be a greatest hits compilation of Stephen Moffat's and Russell T Davies' most successful Who conceits:

1. The monster that can only be seen by peripheral shadowy vision rather than straight forward sight ('blink' and 'forest of the dead')

2. a ward of hospital patients possessed and issuing the same phrase ('The Empty Child')

3. A female who's relationship with the doctor is blighted by 'bad' or 'out of order' timing ('Girl In The fireplace' and 'Forest of The Dead')

4. Modern forms of tele-conference to resolve global alien threats ('World War Three' and 'Journey's End')

5. Newly regenerated doctor gives rousing inaugural speech from on high to chastened alien race in smart space-ship ('The Christmas Invasion')

6. Series story arc kicked off with vague allusion to coming darkness given in overly grandiose language (Series Three, Series Four, Specials)

This is, in no way a criticism. I'm sure it's easier to take cheap shots than to write a professional episode of anything. This was a typical setting the stall out and that's fine, with much besides that was new and promising: Matt Smith: Karen Gilliatt; An almost 'Avenger's' sense of rural Britishness; the teeth of Prisoner Zero people; the fact that the absurd sequence of The Doctor refusing a series of ordinary foods to finally arrive at Fish-fingers dipped in custard both read and was shot like a children's picture-book, hence suggesting to the viewer that anyone who the child Amelia ever mentioned it to would instantly dis-believe her and believe the story of the 'raggedy doctor' simply an invention to detract from her late night fridge-raiding..... and next week looks more exciting, perhaps a more radical departure, but always still 'Who'.*

* Jerry (Cleethorpes, England).

No comments: