Comments | saxonb: TV EYE: Doctor Who S5 E13: 'The Big Bang'

saxonb

TV EYE: Doctor Who S5 E13: 'The Big Bang'

Jul 03, 2010 10:16

So here we are - end of the season, and I've found myself with rather mixed feelings about S5's big finale. There are certain aspects I loved, and yet there are others which I can't quite ignore. More rambling follows - and, as usual, fear the spoilers...

( 'You can do loads in twelve minutes. Suck a mint, buy a sledge, have a fast bath...' )

tv, doctor who

Comments 8

abigail_n July 3 2010, 14:21:04 UTC

This is actually a lot more congruent with my response to the season than I expected from an Old Who fan such as yourself. I think we deviate mostly in the intensity of our reactions - I agree that Amy was mishandled and needed to be a more accessible counterpoint to the Doctor's zaniness, for example, but I wouldn't have said that "Flesh and Stone" was the point where her characterization went off the rails. I'd place that point at the end of "The Beast Below," when she demonstrates an insight into the Doctor's character she has had no time or opportunity to develop. That's the point where her function as a plot device overwhelms her function as a character, and she never really comes back from it.

iainjclark July 3 2010, 19:11:22 UTC

While I agree that Amy's insight in 'The Beast Below' is slightly jarring (although it can perhaps be retrospectively handwaved by the crack pouring into her mind and her obsession with the Doctor)) I don't feel it makes her a plot device.

The script could easily have had the Doctor reach the required insight, just as most episodes do. The only reason it didn't, I would argue, is an attempt to focus on character. It's trying to show Amy's value as a companion, and her humanity. I suppose that's still a writerly device, but not quite in the way I'd normally read 'plot device'.

There's definitely something disjointed about Amy's arc in the season (not helped by Karen Gillan's sometimes good, sometimes blank-eyed performance), and it definitely suffers from jumping tracks a couple of times, but for me she does get back on track, and unlike Saxon I thought The Big Bang did pay off her acceptance of her imaginary friend in quite a powerful and emotional way.

saxonb July 4 2010, 08:44:46 UTC

I would agree with Ian about 'The Beast Below' moment not being strictly speaking Amy used as a plot device. I mean, it's all completely subjective anyway, and you can certainly view it as a bit of a leap that as an audience member you're either going to buy into or go "Hmmm" over, but it is a character-driven moment in a way that the end of Flesh and Stone isn't. It's Amy essentially earning her place on the TARDIS, proving herself, and showing that while the Doctor may be gigantically smart, he doesn't have all the answers and sometimes needs to be questioned (or openly defied - something it would have been nicer to see a little more of, to be honest). In a way, you could compare it to The Fires of Pompeii in S4, which is a similar 'companion proves her worth' story in that respect (and, in the end, a slightly stronger one, emotionally speaking) - and there's at least a couple of bits in that episode towards the end where Donna seems to be a hell of a lot more knowledgable about what to do in the event of a volcano than she ( ... )

tj_dragon July 3 2010, 21:03:52 UTC

I thought the idea behind Rory guarding the Pandorica wasn't to keep it safe in terms of structure (that said, it may be high-security, but being a prison it's much easier to open from outside - as proved by Rory), but to keep it safe in terms of location.
It could easily have been buried or transported somewhere inaccessible, shipwrecks are a big source of ancient finds. It could have just gotten lost and without the Stonehenge amplifier it wouldn't necessarily be easy to find. The point was it had to be somewhere Amelia could get at it. Of course this could have been explained better within the episode, but that's how I understood it.

saxonb July 4 2010, 08:49:17 UTC

Well, of course, there is the question of why you'd build a prison to hold the Doctor that could be opened pretty easily from the outside by the Sonic Screwdriver? I like your idea, though - it does make sense, it's just not there onscreen - and the main problem is, it's a massive, massive leap for a character to basically say "Yes, I will happily spend the next two thousand years doing this..." for no other reason than a nebulous "keeping it safe". A bit more justification would have made that work - without it, it just feels kind of insane. I enjoy water-tight plotting, and I'm not the kind of person who will nit-pick about the tiniest detail (because, hell, mistakes do happen...) - it's just that for me, The Big Bang just pushed the hand-wavy, 'let's not think about that detail too much' plotting way too far.

tj_dragon July 4 2010, 14:38:00 UTC

I see what you're saying, I may have filled in the gap of Rory's motivations.
I didn't think that it didn't make sense as I was watching, the main thing that struck me as odd was that Rory kept his Roman outfit on until the early-mid 20th Century. In fact it seemed like an emotional "must keep Amy safe" reaction, nothing to do with the Pandorica itself. That fits with his love for her and also has a redemptive feel to it. After all he was the one that nearly killed her (however unintentionally), and so it makes sense that he would be desperate to keep her safe in the hope of preventing her death.

As for the ease of opening the Pandorica I guess (and this is definitely me gap-filling, it's what I do apparently) that the Alliance probably includes all/most of the sonic tech races. With the Doctor inside there's no one else who would want to/be able to open the thing (even the Doctor didn't want to when he first found it). So it works, as long as he never gets out.

anonymous July 3 2010, 21:25:39 UTC

"it isn’t made clear in any way that Amy still has tiny vestigial memories of the Doctor that manifest as her imaginary friend"

I thought the Doctor made it clear that this would be the case when giving his goodbye talk to the sleeping Amelia. Also, when we next see the adult Amy's room it's still littered with her Raggedy Doctor paraphernalia

saxonb July 4 2010, 08:27:45 UTC

I didn't actually notice the paraphernalia still there - not saying it isn't, but I've watched the episode twice, and it certainly wasn't particularly obvious in the shot (could easily have been general, generic childhood things). What I was mainly saying with that comment is that there's a big difference between vague memories, traces and dreams (which is what the Doctor seemed to be talking about) and the kind of major fan-like obsession (and subsequent psychiatrists visits) that Amy ended up with as a result of her seven-year-old encounter with the Doctor. That's a very big leap - yes, you can still have it, but it does at least need to be pretty clear that the whole 'Raggedy Doctor' obsession still happened (and it isn't until Amy actually says that it did, which isn't especially clear or good writing). And is the imaginary friend she remembers the 'Raggedy' post-regen Eleventh Doctor, or does seven-year-old Amy end up with vague memories of the whole of her experiences with the Doctor? This is the problem with dealing with ' ( ... )