Doctor Who 10.03 - "Thin Ice"
Apr. 30th, 2017 11:05 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
lizbeeSuch is my fondness for the show this season that I'm almost ready to get a Twelfth Doctor DW icon. THAT IS THE LEVEL OF MY COMMITMENT.
I mean, I have a confession to make: I was doing other things at the same time I watched this, so I may have missed some nuances. But I don't think so, because it didn't seem to be a particularly nuanced story.
Which is not a criticism! It was a very simple Doctor Who story: a setting, a monster, a villain who represents the worst of humanity, a companion and allies who represent hope. Classic. But well executed.
Most importantly, it gets Bill through the whole "the Doctor is capable of terrible but necessary things" part of the companion learning curve without either destroying his essential goodness for the sake of making it Dark N Gritty, or making the companion stand by and look approving while he does terrible things. That's a tricky balancing act, and I liked the outcome.
ALSO, I don't think there's been such an overtly political historical since "The Empty Child" ended with "Don't forget the welfare state". Both episodes featured bands of orphans roaming London and encountering monsters, so the parallels aren't exactly subtle. But it also handled the issue of race better than "The Shakespeare Code", where the Doctor told Martha to just walk around like she owned the place: this time the Doctor acknowledges Bill's concerns, but we also get to see a true multiracial England.
ALSO ALSO, the Doctor punched a racist, and I like to think that, on the rare occasions when he gets into fisticuffs, he's thinking of Duggan.
Important fact: next week's episode fulfils my longstanding dream to set a Doctor Who story in a sharehouse. Everything is better with Bill Potts!
I mean, I have a confession to make: I was doing other things at the same time I watched this, so I may have missed some nuances. But I don't think so, because it didn't seem to be a particularly nuanced story.
Which is not a criticism! It was a very simple Doctor Who story: a setting, a monster, a villain who represents the worst of humanity, a companion and allies who represent hope. Classic. But well executed.
Most importantly, it gets Bill through the whole "the Doctor is capable of terrible but necessary things" part of the companion learning curve without either destroying his essential goodness for the sake of making it Dark N Gritty, or making the companion stand by and look approving while he does terrible things. That's a tricky balancing act, and I liked the outcome.
ALSO, I don't think there's been such an overtly political historical since "The Empty Child" ended with "Don't forget the welfare state". Both episodes featured bands of orphans roaming London and encountering monsters, so the parallels aren't exactly subtle. But it also handled the issue of race better than "The Shakespeare Code", where the Doctor told Martha to just walk around like she owned the place: this time the Doctor acknowledges Bill's concerns, but we also get to see a true multiracial England.
ALSO ALSO, the Doctor punched a racist, and I like to think that, on the rare occasions when he gets into fisticuffs, he's thinking of Duggan.
Important fact: next week's episode fulfils my longstanding dream to set a Doctor Who story in a sharehouse. Everything is better with Bill Potts!
no subject
Date: 2017-04-30 08:50 am (UTC)I felt like there were echoes of Martha being surprised by Black people in Elizabethan England, but it was made much better with the Doctor saying history has been white washed. There were also echoes for me with the second Amy Pond episode featuring the space whale.
The punching and the speech about Human progress measured by the value placed on a life were A+++ Doctor Who writing and I would like more.