Doctor Who 5/31.07 Amy's Choice
May. 16th, 2010 07:48 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
selenakAka the first non-Moffat episode this season I'm happy with, and boy, am I relieved about that.
It's also the first episode by a writer not employed during the RTD years (or before, so wiki tells me when I checked to be sure), new to the Whoverse, and the first compliment I'd like to pay is that he simultanously manages to feel fresh and well versed in continuity. Most important after last week, though, he made me feel Rory/Amy, and Amy as Amy, not Generic Companion #2454. I was a bit uneasy about the choice in question being presented as Rory = Dull "Normal" Life, Doctor = Adventurous Life (or between two men at all, and them being associated with only one lifestyle), but from the moment Amy faked out the Doctor with "the baby is coming", I was at ease. Why? Because a) it was an Amy, not a generic companion thing to do - Eleventh Hour established Amy's tendency to lie, and lie convincingly, which is adressed here and by Rory later - and b) it was a great put-down of "normal life = nightmare". In fact, both dream worlds - the village and the TARDIS - turned out to be nightmares, just in different ways.
Still on Amy, not only did this episode address the elephant (ahem) in the room unaddressed last week, in more than one way, and in conversations with Rory instead neither of them talking to each other - that she ran away the night before her wedding - but specifically connected it with the childhood/growing up thing other people have already commented on. You can be a child forever, but only if you keep running away. Which is not to say that marrying is the only way to grow up, of course (cancelling a wedding can be as well, as long as you face the music and talk about it, i.e. make a decision instead of running away from said decision). And Karen really sold me on Amy's realisation that she does love Rory and does want to spend her life with him.
Now, in terms of the Doctor's psyche: I was starting to have my suspicions when we had the first collection of pensioneers in the village. Outside of Moffat's own Children in Need sketch Time Crash, where Ten remarked on being in old bodies when being young in order to be impressive pre- Five, DW hasn't really addressed the implications the roughly reverse physicality of the Doctor's appearance versus actual age could have. What Nye makes of it here and what he lets the Dreamlord say connects to that "the old man picking up young people in order to stay young". There is something to it (though it simplifies and leaves out the Doctor's ability to connect with old characters like Wilf, human Yana or Adelaide pre-Time Lord Victorious moment), and so of course the "monsters" in one dream world are in the form of age, while in the other it's the TARDIS (home, beloved ship and means of eternal escape) turning to ice and a tomb for himself and his friends. And then there's the Dreamlord; DW has played with the concept of the Doctor's darker side embodied by a character before. Originally, that's who the Master was supposed to be, literally, not just symbolically, though the combination of Roger Delgado's untimely death and a change of Doctors meant the show never went that Jungian on screen. And then there was the Valeyard in Trial of a Time Lord, who was again supposed to be literally an amalgation of the Doctor's negative traits but something a let down as in demeanour and plan he was your avaraga muwahhahaing supervillain. Here, Nye comes up with something more convincing. The Dreamlord's scenes with Amy had not a little of Seven in them, specifically Seven in his manipulative pushing-Ace-to-face-something vein, and of course the costume and the different roles in village world - doctor, bus driver, shop owner - while commenting non-stop on the Doctor's short comings, that kind of dark whimsey, together with "there is just one person in the universe who hates me as much as you do" was a dead givaway. (Unless, dear viewer, you thought Moffat would bring back the Master this early after his last appearance and in an episode not written by himself.) It really worked for me where the Valyard didn't.
Unexpected twist shouldn't have been unexpected: that the TARDIS was another dreamscape. I mean, I read Neil Gaiman, plus the Dreamlord simply conceding defeat was an obvious hint it wasn't over, and I did expect some follow up, but the Doctor's action-plus-explanation still caught me by surprise and made me slap my head in an "of course!" manner.
Trivia: you know, Nye and Moffat, not that I don't appreciate the continuing Elizabeth I. references, but really, when we talk about the Doctor's fondness for redheads, would it have been too much to bring up the obvious one, i.e. DONNA?!?
Lastly: since the matter of the Doctor's name was brought up again to remind viewers, I think thatskywaterblue's speculation that he'll use his name to deal with the cracks in the universe in the season finale is in the right direction (though we the viewers won't hear it, because it's one of those things the show will never reveal, along with the reason why the Doctor first left Gallifrey, or the original Doctor/Master fallout). (Time of Angels also reminded viewers of the power of the Gallifreyan language, and there is that fanon about the Doctor having used his name to seal the rift in the Medusa Cascade, based on the Master's remark about the Doctor having closed said rift on his own in Last of the Time Lords and "your true name is hidden in the hairs of Medusa herself" in Fires of Pompeii.) Considering River knows his name, otoh, it might not be he, personally, who uses it...
It's also the first episode by a writer not employed during the RTD years (or before, so wiki tells me when I checked to be sure), new to the Whoverse, and the first compliment I'd like to pay is that he simultanously manages to feel fresh and well versed in continuity. Most important after last week, though, he made me feel Rory/Amy, and Amy as Amy, not Generic Companion #2454. I was a bit uneasy about the choice in question being presented as Rory = Dull "Normal" Life, Doctor = Adventurous Life (or between two men at all, and them being associated with only one lifestyle), but from the moment Amy faked out the Doctor with "the baby is coming", I was at ease. Why? Because a) it was an Amy, not a generic companion thing to do - Eleventh Hour established Amy's tendency to lie, and lie convincingly, which is adressed here and by Rory later - and b) it was a great put-down of "normal life = nightmare". In fact, both dream worlds - the village and the TARDIS - turned out to be nightmares, just in different ways.
Still on Amy, not only did this episode address the elephant (ahem) in the room unaddressed last week, in more than one way, and in conversations with Rory instead neither of them talking to each other - that she ran away the night before her wedding - but specifically connected it with the childhood/growing up thing other people have already commented on. You can be a child forever, but only if you keep running away. Which is not to say that marrying is the only way to grow up, of course (cancelling a wedding can be as well, as long as you face the music and talk about it, i.e. make a decision instead of running away from said decision). And Karen really sold me on Amy's realisation that she does love Rory and does want to spend her life with him.
Now, in terms of the Doctor's psyche: I was starting to have my suspicions when we had the first collection of pensioneers in the village. Outside of Moffat's own Children in Need sketch Time Crash, where Ten remarked on being in old bodies when being young in order to be impressive pre- Five, DW hasn't really addressed the implications the roughly reverse physicality of the Doctor's appearance versus actual age could have. What Nye makes of it here and what he lets the Dreamlord say connects to that "the old man picking up young people in order to stay young". There is something to it (though it simplifies and leaves out the Doctor's ability to connect with old characters like Wilf, human Yana or Adelaide pre-Time Lord Victorious moment), and so of course the "monsters" in one dream world are in the form of age, while in the other it's the TARDIS (home, beloved ship and means of eternal escape) turning to ice and a tomb for himself and his friends. And then there's the Dreamlord; DW has played with the concept of the Doctor's darker side embodied by a character before. Originally, that's who the Master was supposed to be, literally, not just symbolically, though the combination of Roger Delgado's untimely death and a change of Doctors meant the show never went that Jungian on screen. And then there was the Valeyard in Trial of a Time Lord, who was again supposed to be literally an amalgation of the Doctor's negative traits but something a let down as in demeanour and plan he was your avaraga muwahhahaing supervillain. Here, Nye comes up with something more convincing. The Dreamlord's scenes with Amy had not a little of Seven in them, specifically Seven in his manipulative pushing-Ace-to-face-something vein, and of course the costume and the different roles in village world - doctor, bus driver, shop owner - while commenting non-stop on the Doctor's short comings, that kind of dark whimsey, together with "there is just one person in the universe who hates me as much as you do" was a dead givaway. (Unless, dear viewer, you thought Moffat would bring back the Master this early after his last appearance and in an episode not written by himself.) It really worked for me where the Valyard didn't.
Unexpected twist shouldn't have been unexpected: that the TARDIS was another dreamscape. I mean, I read Neil Gaiman, plus the Dreamlord simply conceding defeat was an obvious hint it wasn't over, and I did expect some follow up, but the Doctor's action-plus-explanation still caught me by surprise and made me slap my head in an "of course!" manner.
Trivia: you know, Nye and Moffat, not that I don't appreciate the continuing Elizabeth I. references, but really, when we talk about the Doctor's fondness for redheads, would it have been too much to bring up the obvious one, i.e. DONNA?!?
Lastly: since the matter of the Doctor's name was brought up again to remind viewers, I think that
skywaterblue's speculation that he'll use his name to deal with the cracks in the universe in the season finale is in the right direction (though we the viewers won't hear it, because it's one of those things the show will never reveal, along with the reason why the Doctor first left Gallifrey, or the original Doctor/Master fallout). (Time of Angels also reminded viewers of the power of the Gallifreyan language, and there is that fanon about the Doctor having used his name to seal the rift in the Medusa Cascade, based on the Master's remark about the Doctor having closed said rift on his own in Last of the Time Lords and "your true name is hidden in the hairs of Medusa herself" in Fires of Pompeii.) Considering River knows his name, otoh, it might not be he, personally, who uses it...
no subject
Date: 2010-05-16 07:08 am (UTC)Given that the Dreamlord was talking about the Doctor liking redheads in a rather particular sense, though, I don't think Donna would have qualified for the comparison. If ever there was a platonic relationship between the Doctor and a redhead, it was that one *g*.
I also liked the character stuff with Amy and Rory and the dark Doctor a lot. Looks like Amy/Rory is going to head in the direction of Gwen/Owen, hooray!
no subject
Date: 2010-05-16 07:38 am (UTC)And okay, agreed on the platonicness of my freckled BFFs. Also, someone really has to write the Elizabeth/Ten tale, and I choose believe the Moff christened Liz Ten in honour of them. *g*
no subject
Date: 2010-05-16 07:47 am (UTC)*headdesk*
Clearly :). I think the sentence started out in my brain as '... in the direction of Gwen/Rhys where first we had the whole Gwen/Owen thing and then it turned out they really were a good couple after all.'
And okay, agreed on the platonicness of my freckled BFFs. Also, someone really has to write the Elizabeth/Ten tale, and I choose believe the Moff christened Liz Ten in honour of them. *g*
Indeed! In my head Elizabeth is still played by Cate Blanchett and it is all very pretty.
no subject
Date: 2010-05-16 07:58 am (UTC)I'd take any Elizabeth - Glenda Jackson, Helen Mirren, Cate Blanchett - though I admit the idea of the later on mental screen with David Tennant does indeed make for very pretty pictures. And sparkage, as it should. :)
no subject
Date: 2010-05-16 07:20 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-05-16 09:23 pm (UTC)he made me feel Rory/Amy, and Amy as Amy, not Generic Companion #2454
Definitely, thank God (or Nye the new ;).
"there is just one person in the universe who hates me as much as you do" was a dead givaway.
I wondered whether this wasn't some non-external foe, i.e. something that made each of them fantasise - certainly Rory and the Doctor's dream-slash-nightmare were suspicious, but this I didn't quite come up with: very clever, very Who (says this New Who fan *g*).
no subject
Date: 2010-05-17 03:57 am (UTC)Also, I'm glad you liked the episode as much as I did! (I feel weirdly out of tune with fandom(s) these last ten days. While I went "meh" about "Vampires of Venice" mostly for Amy and Amy/Rory characterisation reasons, every one else seemed to love it, whereas while I went "yay, omg, favourite ep of the season!" over the last Lost episode fandom at large hated it, and now I'm "yay!" again over the last DW ep that's the one that elicits an "eh" from various friends!)
Now without errors!
Date: 2010-05-17 08:17 pm (UTC)I loved everything but the romance aspect about it - that may be what irks by far not all but perhaps parts of fandom?
One of the reasons I'm taking this reasonably well is that I was bracing myself for this (kind of) episode - that so far, any romantic relationship drafted by Moffat has rubbed me the wrong way as sexist and reductionist, full of flat stereotypes rather than simple show-not-tell elements of affection and belonging with each other. I did love their beginning, yes, but ultimately, why would Rory/Amy, Eleven/Amy - or both! ;) - be any different?
There's also the point I made already in my blog: I prefer not to ship Doctor Who because it gives me nothing but grief, so it's not as if I dislike the executive decision of a choice against the Doctor...it just comes exactly 5 episodes to late for this fan, who fell in love with Amy/11 in The Beast Below. ;)
"While I went "meh" about "Vampires of Venice" mostly for Amy and Amy/Rory characterisation reasons"
Seriously.
This was better - we get a lot more from Rory and more from Amy, and what I see that is based on personality and character not related to love and the angst that one brings, I really appreciate.
That said, the strongest characterisation comes from - and through! - the Doctor: the story does fall into place in the end, with the trickster Dreamlord who knows all the secrets. Well-played, well-portrayed too!
Re: Now without errors!
Date: 2010-05-18 05:41 am (UTC)Back to the episode: definitely a great Doctor characterisation, and I'm really glad they got Toby Jones for the part.