|
Post by Rachael on Jul 24, 2009 22:13:28 GMT -5
My first thought upon this episode was actually that the writers seem to still not be fully sure of what to do with the characterization of Jack. Why would Jack be willing to sacrifice his own grandson but not to so much as threaten the children of someone he was working against? That plot hole alone has kind of broken my brain. I don't think it's a hole, at all. It's all part of Jack the Martyr - he'll bear the burdens of the entire world, even things that he won't ask others to do. He'll do the awful thing that costs him his soul, and he'll do it over and over again for eternity.
|
|
|
Post by Rachael on Jul 24, 2009 22:15:42 GMT -5
She's very optimistic, isn't she? "When the histories are written...." Well, she's looking at it from within the 'Verse, right? If Jack is a 51st century human, then in Gwen's head, there will be somebody to someday write the history of that 'dark period.' Oh, I don't mean Gwen. That was Whatshisname's assistant, talking about how she wanted someone to remember what a good man he was.
|
|
|
Post by Rachael on Jul 24, 2009 22:21:09 GMT -5
Well, I disagree with becca's analysis - I thought it was an excellent story. Definitely a tragedy, yes, but I had no real problems with the way the plot was hung together. That's the way Torchwood and Doctor Who have always been - you don't always get a reasonable explanation for WHY something is or has to be the way it is, and I guess I've gotten over worrying. I can't count the number of times I said, during an episode of Doctor Who, "But that doesn't make sense! Why would the (fill in the villain) be so stupid?"
And I refuse to see Jack and Ianto as simply a gay couple and therefore worthy of preservation on television. Everyone died, almost - it wasn't about targeting Ianto because of a stereotypical "gay death" plot device. Everyone Jack cares about, excepting Gwen, is either dead, gone away, or will never speak to him again.
I was impressed. I don't know where they're going to go from here, and that's the biggest problem I have - it was sort of an apocalypse for the show itself, so how they're going to write themselves out of this corner is beyond me.
SO much better than Season 1, though.
|
|
|
Post by artemis on Jul 25, 2009 8:19:04 GMT -5
My first thought upon this episode was actually that the writers seem to still not be fully sure of what to do with the characterization of Jack. Why would Jack be willing to sacrifice his own grandson but not to so much as threaten the children of someone he was working against? That plot hole alone has kind of broken my brain. I don't think it's a hole, at all. It's all part of Jack the Martyr - he'll bear the burdens of the entire world, even things that he won't ask others to do. He'll do the awful thing that costs him his soul, and he'll do it over and over again for eternity. I understand your point, and I think Jack does have somewhat of a martyr complex (which would probably be easy to get watching so many people you love die over the centuries and having been the victim of so many awful deaths/etc oneself). But I still think that Jack has done enough morally questionable things not just in his life, but during the course of the show, that it isn't very consistent for him to (for example) not even have come up with a response to the "Because you're a better man" line. Being willing to make the sacrifice himself but not being willing to ask someone else to sacrifice a child they loved (if such an option had been available) would be very Jack, I think, but to me that's different, and a more comparable situation.
|
|
|
Post by artemis on Jul 25, 2009 8:26:46 GMT -5
The words "gay" and "straight" aren't really at all relevant when it comes to Jack - not even "bisexual". He's omnisexual, sort of - like everyone from his time period, according to the Doctor. Yeah, it seems that in Jack's original time period, people don't really even have a conception of "sexual orientation." And it seems like a pretty common SF theme, too - I don't only mean exploring whether everyone is bisexual, but more generally exploring different ways that sexuality and sexual identity (be it sexual orientation or not) could be if they weren't the way they are in our own society. Well, 30 centuries allows for plenty of evolution in any direction... It wasn't particularly far-fetched to me, as I've known a few people who were in situations that were similar to the way he described his relationship to his sister - normally being with one sex or the other, but meeting a single person of their previously non-preferred sex that they gave up their previous behavior and identity to be with. I certainly don't think it's common, but it does happen. Yeah, it seems like pretty much everyone did.
|
|
|
Post by artemis on Jul 25, 2009 8:28:37 GMT -5
Well, she's looking at it from within the 'Verse, right? If Jack is a 51st century human, then in Gwen's head, there will be somebody to someday write the history of that 'dark period.' Oh, I don't mean Gwen. That was Whatshisname's assistant, talking about how she wanted someone to remember what a good man he was. Oh, right. I was thinking about Gwen and her monologue to the videocamera, which was similar in tone to me. Personally I interpreted Miss Spears' speech as ... kind of just hyperbole, so I didn't even really think she was necessarily assuming there would be future stuff written about John.
|
|
|
Post by Queen E on Jul 25, 2009 8:33:24 GMT -5
I've been thinking about how this resolved, and then forgot to post my thoughts.
It's like, the end of Season 1 and many parts of Season 2 explored Jack as a Jesus figure, especially in the whole "3 days and he rises again" thing at the end of "End of Days" and the memory bit in "Adam," and thinking about that in conjunction with the idea of the Doctor as the Lonely God.
I think the sacrifice of Stephen by Jack, if viewed with those lenses, fits right in with that idea...if Jack is a Jesus figure, or a god figure...well, there's the other side of it: the sacrifice of the son.
|
|
|
Post by artemis on Jul 25, 2009 8:40:26 GMT -5
I've been thinking about how this resolved, and then forgot to post my thoughts. It's like, the end of Season 1 and many parts of Season 2 explored Jack as a Jesus figure, especially in the whole "3 days and he rises again" thing at the end of "End of Days" and the memory bit in "Adam," and thinking about that in conjunction with the idea of the Doctor as the Lonely God. I think the sacrifice of Stephen by Jack, if viewed with those lenses, fits right in with that idea...if Jack is a Jesus figure, or a god figure...well, there's the other side of it: the sacrifice of the son. Yeah, that makes sense within itself. I don't know if I agree, but then - I didn't really like how the writers made the Doctor seem godlike to Earthlings in DW S3, and yet somehow that totally didn't stop them from doing it. It also fits in with how Jack felt he needed to do penance (2000 years, apparently) for what happened with Grey, and that instead of trying to fight it he just accepted his fate. Which also fits in with his martyr attitude we've been talking about above... [BTW, Erin, your ticker is cracking me up. It reminds me of my old roommate who used to steal my food.]
|
|
|
Post by KMInfinity on Jul 25, 2009 12:37:13 GMT -5
Very grim. Not what I expected or wanted. I could have bought into it anyway, and respected CoE, except it felt very manipulative and unfocused.
*Picking up from my comment about Ianto in the Day 4 thread: I felt that there was much MUCH more to explore in a Jack/Ianto relationship that was worth more than the story resulting from Ianto’s death. It felt like a cheap writing trick for the sake of *shock* and because the writers got knotted up in storytelling and needed forward movement.
* I really liked Day One/Two but thought the execution of the 3-4-5 went downhill. I *get* the point, the focus, the story being told, but I didn’t much like it. Not because I wanted some *happy ending* or cliché hero win, but because I felt it hit the wrong notes, especially relating to how people become desensitized to the evil they do. For example: I’ve taught many Holocaust courses for 8th graders and I didn’t buy, at ALL, that the soldiers would be so easily on board with this plan.
*Becca’s 1st post here really sums up my attitude. A very dark story, didn’t fit with the Torchwood show I liked.
*There was too much suspension of disbelief needed. Which is okay in a slam bang adventure type story. But with this kind of heavy thematic storytelling, it hurts to have ridiculous plot holes. -the children as communication devices? What was uniquely significant about that except to kill off Stephen? -the screeching feedback through the children? Okay, scared away the 456, but did it destroy them? Because I’m thinking Stephen’s sacrifice was in vain as the 456 flee the solar system after dropping the killer virus behind… -Rachel’s excellent post exploring the whole *We want children* future scenario. The deal made no sense in the big picture, and no one commented or discussed that. -There are more...
*I really did NOT like Gwen’s *camera monologue* about The Doctor. Gwen’s comment that the reason The Doctor isn’t coming to save the planet is because he just can’t bear to look at humanity – this just flies in the face of what we know about The Doctor. It shouldn’t have been included in CoE at all. Okay, Torchwood has an admittedly darker view and DW a more hopeful take on life. But RTD’s explanation in his post-show “closer look* didn’t really make much sense. I find it significant that he even thought that there was some need to address The Doctor in this situation. Up until that moment, if I thought of it at all, I figured the Doctor was on some other adventure and out of contact. It’s not as if he has the official post of humanity’s guardian, on duty at all time. So I’m left to wonder why Gwen’s monologue bit was included at all.
This was not a win for me.
I was surprised when RTD commented about Torchwood S4 not being a sure thing with BBC. I just assumed it was.
|
|
|
Post by artemis on Jul 25, 2009 17:41:11 GMT -5
*Picking up from my comment about Ianto in the Day 4 thread: I felt that there was much MUCH more to explore in a Jack/Ianto relationship that was worth more than the story resulting from Ianto’s death. It felt like a cheap writing trick for the sake of *shock* and because the writers got knotted up in storytelling and needed forward movement. Yes, that's exactly what bothers me most about it as well. I'd much rather watch their relationship development than watch Jack cope with Ianto's death. And given the number of sites devoted just to their relationship vs. other TW sites, it seems like for a lot of TW fans, their relationship is the most compelling thing about the show. Not that I'm saying that writers (be it TV or otherwise) should shy away from controversial things just to not offend their fans, but rather that the way it was handled seems like such a small payoff for something that's so potentially alienating. Yeah, again, I agree. For one thing - why would they even tell the soldiers about the fate that would await their families if they didn't comply (as they said they had done)? That would have tremendously increased the number of potential leaks. John killing his family is one thing - he knew exactly what would happen to his daughters if he didn't take some sort of action to stop it (whatever that action may be). But why would the soldiers comply if they didn't fully understand, and why would the government risk making them fully understand? I also felt like the pirated TV channel story was weirdly thrust into the narrative for no apparent reason. Maybe BBCA cut some of that story - I don't know. But if not, I don't get why it was included. It seemed like they were trying to make some sort of point about grassroots resistance, but it was so clumsily made. Me, either, and yet it was so important to RDT that he put it in twice, including leading the episode with it. Agreed. No matter what RTD said in his interview, to me the monologue made it seem to me like Jack had left Gwen with the impression that the Doctor existed to save humanity from itself. Uh, yeah, okay then. I had actually forgotten about this till you brought it up. I thought it was very bizarre. I didn't understand why he, first of all, felt the two versions of the world were in conflict in the first place, and secondly, why he felt like it was so vitally important to somehow address the differences he said he felt between the two versions and try to reconcile them. As a writer, I know that even if I use the same characters repeatedly (much less two characters that are quite different people with quite different lives who only occasionally see each other), there are going to be thematic and tonal differences from work to work and often within the course of the work itself. That's just the way it is. His interview left me feeling like it was something that he as a writer had never reconciled within himself, which I thought was strange. Me, too. I had actually quite literally not thought of the Doctor at all. Indeed. And RTD's explanation only served to further confuse me. In addition to his wanting to reconcile the two versions of the world, he said that it was Gwen's way of venting her anger at her own species. Uh, aren't there other ways to say that? Why talk about the society being rescued by someone from another planet instead of just venting about the low depths that humanity can reach? It's not like there aren't plenty of examples. Eve Myles and John Barrowman said the same thing, right? I'm not sure if it's been renewed since the interviews were recorded...
|
|
|
Post by beccaelizabeth on Jul 25, 2009 20:20:42 GMT -5
Torchwood season 4: Everyone involved in making it says it depends on the ratings. Which were excellent. But it also depends on UK politics, economics, and how much money the BBC can get, where they've been told to spend it, and other such helpful unpredictables. Also Torchwood has changed channels, timeslots, and to some extent target audiences every season. RTD says this is its strength. But it makes predicting things really rather difficult. ETA: Of course having said that the internet tells me www.comicmix.com/news/2009/07/25/exclusive-torchwood-picked-up-for-another-season-by-bbc/I don't know their reliability or source.
|
|
|
Post by artemis on Jul 26, 2009 17:45:11 GMT -5
Torchwood season 4: Everyone involved in making it says it depends on the ratings. Which were excellent. But it also depends on UK politics, economics, and how much money the BBC can get, where they've been told to spend it, and other such helpful unpredictables. Also Torchwood has changed channels, timeslots, and to some extent target audiences every season. RTD says this is its strength. But it makes predicting things really rather difficult. ETA: Of course having said that the internet tells me www.comicmix.com/news/2009/07/25/exclusive-torchwood-picked-up-for-another-season-by-bbc/I don't know their reliability or source. In an edit to the post, it says the source is the American channel for BBC (they are vague on whether it is an employee there or a spokesperson). Skimming the comments was a bit interesting. Both there and elsewhere, it seems like almost all fans either absolutely loved CoE or absolutely hated it. And a lot of people seem to dislike Gwen.
|
|
|
Post by spacecat1974 on Jul 26, 2009 18:55:25 GMT -5
I like Gwen, though I liked Ianto more.
I've read elsewhere that this is it. They are planning on concentrating on DW in the future and getting rid of the spinoffs. Honestly, as much as I love Capt. Jack, I will miss the Sarah Jane Chronicles more.
|
|
|
Post by artemis on Jul 27, 2009 16:44:54 GMT -5
I like Gwen, though I liked Ianto more. Gwen is one of those characters that's OK to me - I don't overly like her nor overly dislike her. I was a bit surprised at the amount of vitriol she seems to have inspired, though I suppose with every show, there are people that hate any character. Huh, I thought I'd read that SJC had been renewed. Let me see if I can find out whether or not it has been... ETA Oops, I meant Sarah Jane Adventures. And yeah, it's been renewed for a third season - I found heaps of hits about the fact on Google (rather than the lone hit Becca found about TW). Having said that, I also found this link from today about John Barrowman at ComicCon saying that TW has also been renewed: www.tvsquad.com/2009/07/27/torchwood-approved-for-full-fourth-season-comic-con-report/
|
|
|
Post by Lola m on Jul 27, 2009 22:28:02 GMT -5
Ah, the eternal question. All those times the Doctor didn't show up . . . The kids that don't go because they know. But will the poor kids be allowed to ignore the order? Unlike the government kids? Wait a minute. This guy did live? I thought . . . Huh. Dude. The kids are, like, doobies? Kiddy crack pipes? Dude, that is messed up. You are at a tipping point. But what tipping point? Tip which way? We lost. Take Gwen home, tell Ianto's family. A moment of grace before it all goes to hell. Hmmmm. Jack, are you really this defeated, or . . . just getting room to move? Oh, Lois!! Head killer-woman is . . . feeling not so good about her bosses, perhaps? Ah, Frobisher. Time to find out how those on the "front line" end up. "Then, your daughters would know where they're going. Best not." I would hit him right in his "really very sorry" mouth. Ah, lovely fun snark as all their hearts are breaking. "That's what TW does. It ruins your life." Telling the story of Mr Frobisher - the quintesential middle man. Oh, he's going to kill the all and himself too, isn't he? And, I have to think . . . maybe it wasn't his fault. But it wasn't exactly not his fault, either. Ah, Gwen. "Then you didn't know him at all." Children in "the target area". "I protect the state." Then the one person you need is Jack Harkness. Whoa! And so they go and get him? Oooh, and they smack down old smarmy dude too, good! Seank those kids out! Sneak 'em! While the neighbors fight. Oh, and poor PC Andy. Damn. I didn't like smarmy guy, but maybe just shooting him wasn't the best idea. Analyzing the wavelength, on the other hand, is a good idea. Ah, this is when Gwen made the vid. Yeah, are you surprised they say "all of them"? Give and give and give and they'll take and take and take. And then, you know, take. Whoa. What is old-time assistant woman gonna do? She is looking positively murderous. Oh. One child or millons. And so they use the one they have right there. His grandson, right? In other words, he ends up sort of making the deal anyway, just in a very small, very very personal way? OK, now that smarmy guy was so very smarmy about it, I am glad they shot him. They can shoot him again, I think. And we see all the kids being grabbed, because these are the kids who'll be saved if they sacrifice his grandchild, yes? Oh, and of course, it flows thru all the kids. Well, Jack. You didn't just kill your grandson, you killed your daughter too. At least it very very definitely made the bad alien go bye bye. The public will want to know why the hell you didn't start figuring this out, how to defeat them and all, before. Oh, she got the contact lenses, didn't she. Oh hell yeah! Whoa. And "I'm the only one with the guts to actually say the things you all agree to do but don't acknowledge/admit" takes over? Eeep! Jack! On a hill, rather than on a roof, but still with the noble and the billowy coat and all. The planet is too small, all a graveyard. Yeah, I can see that. So, he's off to space travelin' again? All his fault? Hmmmm. I think . . . I think not all his fault, but also not not his fault. Can't just run away. Yeah, yeah he can. Of course, he could stick it out for their lives and then, you know, run away. It's not like he doesn't have the time. So it all comes full circle. The only one left is the one who was the newbie who introduced us to TW at the start.
|
|