‘Chris’ and
‘Chibnall’ seems to be two of the most emotive words in fandom at the moment,
particularly if paired together to create the name of the writer of this week’s
episode. Some ‘fans’ clearly won’t give him the time of day, but no matter what
Chris Chibnall’s faults may be (if any) he’s still a successful TV writer with
more credits to his name than just Doctor
Who and Torchwood. What I’ve
picked up on mostly this time is that those close to the production, or to the Doctor Who ‘brand’ seem to be going out
of their way to praise him, possibly in response to the fans who so vocally
hate him. It’s a no-win situation for anyone in my view. Those fans aren’t
going to change their minds. Chris could write the Who story to end all Who
stories and he’d still come out of it smelling like Glen McCoy.
I’ve cringed
at some of his Torchwood episodes,
but then in series one I was cringing at most people’s Torchwood episodes because a team of competent TV professionals appeared
to have gone ‘wow, we’re doing adult drama, lets put in heavy-handed sexual
references and force people to be uncompromising and argumentative to create
drama’. But I also really enjoyed the episodes Cyberwoman and Countrycide
which most fans seem to consider laughably bad. Chibnall's Doctor Who episodes so far haven’t impressed me massively; I’ve
found them uneven, with instances that jar and missed
opportunities - but then I can’t really say if that’s down to the writing or to
the general production. Dinosaurs on a
Spaceship continues this trend for me.
To start with, my comment
about Pond Life stands again - but I
appreciate that this is my personal opinion. I don’t like being given flashes
of other, untold, stories because I feel it trivialises the Doctor’s adventures
and it’s usually done in a dismissive or light-hearted way. I’d have been happy
to see the whole Nefertiti story and the whole Riddell story, for example – don’t
waste ideas, capitalise on them, create mini arcs if necessary.
I think the
review in DWM made a very prescient comparison with comic strips – this episode
was essentially a DWM comic strip adventure brought to life: lumbering monsters crashing around, spaceships,
history, big slightly silly robots. On the whole the supporting characters didn’t feel like real people,
but then the tone of the piece meant that they didn’t need to. This was fine
except for Rory’s dad Brian, who really needed to be more of a character and
less of a caricature. Solomon managed to be an interesting and well-realised individual, so why couldn't they all? The unfortunate side-effect of the writer introducing his
own ‘companions’ was that he tended to focus more on them so Amy and Rory were
relegated to supporting roles, which is a shame. The same thing happened to
Rose and Mickey back in 2006’s The Girl
In The Fireplace.
The big
robots are, of course, a comedic pair, conveniently played by a highly-regarded
TV comedy duo. I picked up Robert Webb’s voice first, and as soon as I did
several things clicked in my head immediately and were confirmed the next time
the David Mitchell robot spoke. My initial reaction was not favourable, I will
admit. It comes close to parody in making the baddies or monsters not scary, so
there’s no threat. Solomon is excellently played with real bite, yet these
daft robots serving him undermine him and it loses the episode some edge.
So, it’s got
a deliberately light-hearted title and most people seem to up for making this a
reasonably light-hearted (almost Carry On
in places) alternative to the dour tone of the season opener without making it
an out-an-out comedy or parody (which would be dreadful). The shame for me,
then, is that there’s a really strong and moving story sitting at the middle,
which develops the Silurian mythology wonderfully and offers more options for
them for the future. But it's undermined by the light-heared framework in which it's presented. It’s possible that this was an exercise in Douglas Adams’
concept that the show works best when comedy and horror are played side-by-side,
thus heightening the drama as the audience realise the seriousness of the
situation they’re smiling at. I feel that the light-heartedness got in the way of the drama, rather than
complimenting it. Amy’s high-five moment with Nefertiti, for example. How
uncomfortable was that, for so many reasons? It certainly wasn’t funny or witty
or charming.
I don’t have
a problem with the Doctor dishing out punishments the way he did with Solomon,
as long as it’s with good reason and the villain is clearly unrepentant.
Usually he gets out of acting directly because either the villain messes up or
some third party interferes and does the deed for him. He’s done the deed himself before from
time to time – he condemns Sutekh in Pyramids
of Mars and shoots the Cybercontroller in Attack of The Cybermen for example. Protecting the Earth or a whole race is one thing,
but having him play the vigilante role should be treated with caution unless
the show is going to take a very different direction.
I suspect
that as a kid I would have loved this episode far more, so I don’t want to
unfairly judge it when it’s not aimed at me solely it’s aimed at a wide TV family
audience. The dinosaurs looked wonderful and the production team resisted the
urge to have a hand-puppet pterodactyl menacing the Doctor or a T-Rex with a
tail that looks like it’s just shat itself. Overall I’d say this was a fun
episode with a little bit of something for everyone, and an interesting contrast to Asylum
of The Daleks, but like 2006’s Love And
Monsters I hope it’s an experiment they don’t repeat often. I enjoyed it
more on the second viewing, but maybe that’s because I was more comfortable
about the style and the content second time around. The dreadful innuendos and tonal inbalance in the episode still jarred though. If it's the worst this season has to offer, though, we shouldn't fare too badly.
There’s also
this thing about taking the Ponds home again each week so far. I don’t want to
comment on that in case it’s leading up to something. It leaves nice gaps for
books or audios to fill in perhaps in the future, perhaps..?
No comments:
Post a Comment