The story itself, however, isn’t that fun, interesting, or exciting Both Doctors come from Cyberman-centric beginnings to their regenerations. The point of the show might be to do good in the face of racism, sexism, homophobia, and general aggression towards others, but there have been stumbling blocks. Though not everything has been Chibnall’s “They’ll see you for who you really are,” as said to a then de-White-faced Brown man in Nazi-occupied Paris. To say Doctor Who is now and forever has been the most left-wing progressive show on TV would ignore lots of the show’s history. Was Hartnell’s era “of its time?” Yes, but do I also have a Tom Baker episode behind that is “of its time?” Also, yes. Nonetheless, the overstated and generally unwelcome exaggeration of the 1960s politically incorrect Doctor doesn’t work. I’ll stick my hand up and say that, yes, there are moments where David Bradley’s wonderfully charming elements of William Hartnell’s Doctor penetrate my cold dead heart. “Twice Upon A Time” is a messy, convoluted, and most of all, very boring story of Doctor Who that I think many fans (even the loudest) will say tried to rewrite history. I said it last week, I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it once more, Steven Moffat had a persistent desire to make Doctor Who a show about time travel when it is just a show that features time travel. Where I think that blend of touching the classic series and Nu- Who works, whether you know it or not, is Captain Lethbridge-Stewart. The truth is, that isn’t going to gain fans, but it will put them off. The online wingback chair writers of Twitter might scoff in their small numbers and loud voices. Set at the south pole, “Twice Upon a Time” once again attempts to put weight on that classic era for which I have a few DVDs behind me, and yet still, I don’t think that works. Mark Gatiss’ Archibald Hamish Lethbridge-Stewart, despite being a character that appeared only once and in a story that is seen as unfavorable, will always be impactful. Nevertheless, even in one of his worst stories he can and will make you cry with a line that is just so simple. Those I’ll give as valid criticism to blanket his writing, and anything less isn’t being properly constructive. On a personal preference, I think he did some fantastic writing early on with Matt, but with Peter, he tried to be too introspective. “Yes, but what do you mean, ‘one?'” I can’t help but admit that Moffat’s final story in Doctor Who is very underwhelming, and generally, gives credence to those that criticized his work overall.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |