The vital point is that internal logic is not a requisite part of the show. It's only in the latest iteration of the (much as I hate to use the phrase) franchise that they've paid loose attention to it. It's like the characterizations - its only since the new version that the female characters (or, arguably, any of the characters) have had any function or depth beyond being plot devices.
Yeah this is true - and I can definitely forgive inconsistencies in timelines etc between episodes. Inconsistencies in the vital nature of a particular species less so and major plot holes within episodes ditto, and I do think that consistency within episodes was better in earlier seasons of the reboot. I'm not actually anticipating the next two episodes to do much to change my mind; it may simply be that the show they're making and the show I want it to be (as someone who really likes consistency and internal logic) aren't compatible.
I'd agree with that. It's all the more annoying that it's improved so much over the version up until the 80's but at the same time it's also clear that a lot of the choices they're making after showing the first series of the revival were successful are based on marketing rather than story telling.
The weeping angels would be a good case in point. Lovely idea. And then, because they were so popular, they brought them back and over did them to the point of them becoming a caricature of themselves almost instantly, losing all force they had for being what they were intended to be: scary as crap. Now they're just another monster. :(
Reading through my flist and your comment stood out to me...
I feel exactly the same way about the angels. They were terrifying the first episode. Even in the second time, they were still freaky. This episode? Didn't scare me at all. There was none of the suspense or worry that I had the other times. Now, I wasn't particularly attached to the Ponds so maybe that plays into it (I like them but I don't love them, and this episode didn't even move me as much as Donna leaving did).
I've had timeline issues with these two since Let's Kill Hitler showed them in the same class at school because I worked out ages ago that Rory couldn't be 19 in The Eleventh Hour because he wouldn't have had time to do any training to become a nurse by then. He had to be at least 2 years older than Amy and then they stuffed that up. Since then I've just assumed their timelines are ridiculous and won't work.
Hmm, I know we saw them playing together in LKH, did we see them in the same classROOM? I'd buy him being a year older from that ep (thinking of the ages in the kid scenes), but two is really stretching it. Though in the teenager scene with Amy realising he's not gay, it almost seems like he's already studying at least pre-nurse stuff, he has a big pile of books there, and that has to be before Amy's 17 because, yeah, 11th Hour hasn't happened yet, they were already dating then. So maaaaaaybe you could stretch a combination of him being a year older than Amy and Mels and also they forgot to mention that he was put ahead a year in school or something. IDK, he got a special magical internship during last year of high school/around the holidays.
Yeah, the internal logic is dead. Not that they ever really had it, but I feel like I can now readily spot the flaws without them even trying to excuse them.
But seriously, the rooftop scene? They spent minutes staring at each other and not the statue of liberty, and the whole time the statue just stood there and did nothing. Which takes the tension out of, "don't take you eyes of them!" (I was actually laughing by this point, which, um, no) and also shows the "omg the statue of liberty is a statue!" aspect to be completely underused and pointless except for showing off.
So yeah, this isn't reall my show any more, sadly.
I think they're just getting lazy. There's been a lot this season especially where it feels like they came up with a concept they thought would be cool and just wrote the episode around that without putting in the effort to make everything make sense. It's painfully obvious with the angels when they have them moving in very public spaces, blatantly staring at each other, waving their arms around pointlessly, randomly snarling at people, when a moment's thought would make you go "you know, if they're this active they couldn't possibly escape notice in New freaking York." Because a statue frozen in a snarl is actually sort of noticeable. It's unusual. So is a plinth that's very obviously made for two statues (the lady and child) that has statues disappearing from it. None of them were on plinths in Blink - the closest to it was angels standing on ledges
( ... )
A lot of it is lazy, and there is a lot of grandstanding instead of actually thinky plots. And that's a pity, because I would have loved to see this concept used well a second time, and it just hasn't been.
There is so much potential! And yes, what you say about them looking at each other and clearly being so close to touching people and not doing it and all those lovely ideas that made it work the first time that fail so spectacularly now. Is sad.
Comments 9
Reply
Reply
The weeping angels would be a good case in point. Lovely idea. And then, because they were so popular, they brought them back and over did them to the point of them becoming a caricature of themselves almost instantly, losing all force they had for being what they were intended to be: scary as crap. Now they're just another monster. :(
This has no point. I'm just rambling. :)
Reply
I feel exactly the same way about the angels. They were terrifying the first episode. Even in the second time, they were still freaky. This episode? Didn't scare me at all. There was none of the suspense or worry that I had the other times. Now, I wasn't particularly attached to the Ponds so maybe that plays into it (I like them but I don't love them, and this episode didn't even move me as much as Donna leaving did).
Reply
Reply
Reply
But seriously, the rooftop scene? They spent minutes staring at each other and not the statue of liberty, and the whole time the statue just stood there and did nothing. Which takes the tension out of, "don't take you eyes of them!" (I was actually laughing by this point, which, um, no) and also shows the "omg the statue of liberty is a statue!" aspect to be completely underused and pointless except for showing off.
So yeah, this isn't reall my show any more, sadly.
Reply
Reply
There is so much potential! And yes, what you say about them looking at each other and clearly being so close to touching people and not doing it and all those lovely ideas that made it work the first time that fail so spectacularly now. Is sad.
Reply
Leave a comment