Survivors 1.04

[louisedennis]

So this week repeated last week's template of updating the original story in an inventive, original and, dare I say it, dramatically more pleasing way and then pulling its punches and serving up something that was, ultimately, far, far blander. I liked it but the show's lack of any real guts was painfully obvious.

Comments

[parrot_knight]

The blow to the head bit was very gung-ho Terry Nation, I thought...

I didn't watch the episode as closely as you, but am sympathetic - I am not as involved with this lot as I ought to be, and having built up Tom Price into such a dominant figure, the series doesn't seem to know what to do with him.

[louisedennis]

Several people have been saying since it started that its too bland and lilly-livered. I felt that this was the first time these structural problems were painfully obvious.

[reggietate]

I'd have to agree that the show doesn't have the courage of its convictions, which is a pity. And they're wasting Paterson Joseph as Greg.

It's entertaining, and the action scenes are good - and I loved Al going back for Naj - but there's still little sense of the struggle for survival the original had.

[louisedennis]

They do appear to be terribly scared of forcing their characters to make difficult decisions which was half the point of the original.

[reggietate]

Agreed. It doesn't have to be all gloom and horror (the original wasn't) but it definitely needs more bite.

Maybe it's just bad?

[sophievdennis]

Can I propose the simple conclusion that Survivors 2.0 is just badly written?

Too slow paced, too frightened by its own premise, and too weak in its characterisation to work as taught, ensemble drama ala BSG/Firefly - which is, in the end, the only game playable for this kind of setup. Shortening the episodes to to DW/Torchwood 45 minute format would help with the pacing, but the near total lack of interesting characters (Tom and ?Al excepted) is the real nail in the coffin.

And yes, will they please g*d find themselves some shotguns?!

I am bored by Survivors. For a show that should be get-you-by-the-guts gripping, that's pretty awful. Perhaps we should all just stop watching?

Re: Maybe it's just bad?

[louisedennis]

You're probably right. I thought the first three episodes had interesting bits and flaws in about equal measure but this episode had nothing much to offset the flaws with and, sadly, those flaws are endemic (the show is bland and gutless) - it's not just that this was a poor episode