jmatonak: (Default)
[personal profile] jmatonak


Okay. What the hell?

I don't actually (for once!) have any complaints about anyone's characterization.

It makes sense for Adelaide to do what she does... sort of. Adelaide has been through a lot, she isn't thinking clearly, and she just lost half of her command to a very weird disaster. So her action is understandable. Sad, but understandable. The idea that her death is necessary doesn't hold water, really, but for once the Doctor articulates that himself. ("You'll be around and inspire her.")

It makes sense for the Doctor to do what he does, and for similar reasons. We're meant to feel creeped out when the Doctor starts ranting about how time will OBEY him, and I have no problem with that at all. It's creepy.

(I realize there was a whole episode before the ending bit. It was a good Doctor Who monster episode. I liked it.)

But...

The Doctor convinces Adelaide that her death is necessary to the future, so well that she keeps on believing it longer than he does. But there's no external sign that he's wrong at the end of the episode, and therefore right at the beginning. If a bunch of flying space cockroaches had erupted out of the sky like in Father's Day, then we'd know that Adelaide's tragic death was actually something inescapable, and we'd have to live with it. Instead, we're left with the possibility that the world will be different, and possibly worse, because the Doctor saved some lives. Which is true. But you can say that about every time, and in fact about anyone doing anything ever.

It seems to me like this episode is arguing for paralysis and inaction. Let events play out, and don't interfere with destiny. The argument is weak, and at least the episode is relatively honest about that. I don't hate this, whereas I hate what happened to Donna in Journey's End.

The Doctor shouldn't be swanning about calling himself "Time Lord Victorious", but he shouldn't leave people to die in a fire, either. (This is an interesting callback to Last of the Time Lords, with the Master's line "I am a Time Lord. I have that right.")

It could be that the mysterious darkness coming to Earth for the next specials is the direct result of the Doctor rescuing Bowie Base One. I kind of hope it isn't, because that leaves the question of whether he did the right thing open, which I think is how it should be.

Date: 2009-11-17 02:16 am (UTC)
rahirah: (Default)
From: [personal profile] rahirah
Yes, I was ranting about exactly this! I'm perfectly willing to believe that saving Adelaide was a bad idea, but they didn't SHOW us that.

Date: 2009-11-17 03:18 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] catwhisperer42.livejournal.com
not reading, not reading, not reading...
waiting until Dec 19th...

Date: 2009-12-21 01:42 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] catwhisperer42.livejournal.com
Okay .. seen it now. Yes, I agree that they don't ever actually say whether or not the Doctor can stretch history. They do show that some minor things changed, but the main timeline stayed the same. Whether or not this was due to Adelaide's action isn't clear.
I don't know why the Doctor couldn't stick them somewhere else on the timeline .. far off in the future. They don't get to be home, but they are still alive.

I'm also reminded of an old 5th(?) Doctor episode where one of his companions is encouraging him to not deal with the monster of the week and just leave. He briefly takes her to the future and shows her that it has changed and that his interaction is necessary.
That said, the Doctor never knows what is *supposed* to happen, only what history records. So maybe he was *supposed* to take them somewhere else where they are needed, a la Babylon 5.

Profile

jmatonak: (Default)
jmatonak

January 2012

S M T W T F S
1234567
891011121314
151617181920 21
22232425262728
293031    

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Sep. 25th, 2017 02:59 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios