Real Nerd Talk: 'Doctor Who' Goes Psycho Off the Rails
So listen, I don't know if you're watching Doctor Who on the delayed American schedule or on the "real" British schedule, a choice that involves mostly how comfortable you are with sun, sea and piracy, so I will warn you there are "future"-airing episodes that have actually already aired in the "past" (June 5, overseas) that are discussed beyond this point.
This season, I warmed up surprisingly well to the new Doctor! I was all, Matt Smith, whatever, but now mostly I love him. Not a David Tennant kind of love. But I'm into it. And I am feeling rather compelled by the series-long conceit of the unknown future "crack in time" issue. It's disturbing. I've even decided I don't hate Amy Pond, and maybe kind of like her, as this season's companion. At least she has spunk.
So when things went wildly off the rails in the Richard Curtis-written episode 210, "Vincent and the Doctor," I was PISSED. For one thing, there are only three episodes left of the season! We have to deal with Amy having totally forgotten the stupid and not that cute love of her life, due to the evil crack in time, oh and also the crack in time itself, in THREE 40-SOMETHING MINUTE EPISODES.
As delighted as I am to see Bill Nighy in anything, and I really was, this episode tossed the season's conceits and troubles to the wind, largely. (Oh, the Doctor was BRIEFLY sad about Amy not knowing why she was sad, big deal.)
AND THEN. And THEN. The unthinkable happens! (SORRY SUPER SPOILER.) The Doctor takes Vincent van Gogh into the future to show him how very famous he becomes! (Just writing that sentence made me fell 1000 times gayer than I already am. I KNOW.) And then the Doctor takes him back to his "real" time and dumps him there.
There is MUCH WEEPING. Much loud music! WTF.
Okay, I ain't buyin' it. The Doctor does not do this! He does not mess with timelines, potentially changing the course of history (art history, in this case, but STILL). That ain't right! How many times have we had to hear the Doctor scream about the primacy of timelines? And then this?
I CALL BULLSHIT.
Things were going so well! But I am so geek-mad right now. I could barely sleep over this. Thank you for listening.
I also call bullshit. How does a man who not like fiction, enjoy the most science fictionist of FOREIGN TELLY TV?!1!
The only fiction I consume is "science"!
Everything Choire consumes is fiction. He's just in denial.
"The Vampires of Venice" episiode was crackin', yo.
Blargh! I, for odd delayed gratification reasons, am keeping to the American schedule. So I am very sad that I cannot be a big nerd on this thread with all of you!
Also — I was sure I was going to hate Matt Smith, but I do not! I do kind of wish, however, that his line readings were less David Tennanty. I like a clean Doctor break! (If you go back and look at the Eccleston episodes now — he was so mean and scary!)
Christopher Eccleston's savage open-mouthed smile was/is indeed unnerving at best.
Ever see him in Shallow Grave? Ha, awesome.
I kind of love Eccleston best of the three. Does that make me a horrid person?
No! I love him too! A lot. I was quite sad when he left, but of course ended up loving Tennant. Ideally CE would have done at least 2 seasons.
I love him so much. I finally came around to Tennant, but he was no Eccleston. The profile on that man, it does things to me. Rather liking the new kid, oddly enough.
I've never wanted you more than now, Choire. I love it when you talk nerdy to me.
Seconded.
Thirded. Let me know if you ever switch teams.
Totally disagree. "Vincent and the Doctor" was one of the best episodes this season, if not the best (maybe behind "The Eleventh Hour"). It was beautiful and yes, cheesy, but still wonderfully done!
And I thought the beginning scene where Amy asks him why he's being so nice, and the slip where he calls Vincent "Rory," were just enough to keep the crack arc going.
The Doctor deflowered the Virgin Queen. Actions speak louder than all his words about not messing with timelines. That's what he does.
HMMPH.
Your point about the Virgin Queen is a decent one, I'll give you that.
Also the Rory thing was sad.
BUT BUT BUT.
Agreed that the Doctor always messes with timelines. They've been on a lot this season about what is and what isn't a "fixed point in time," like when they were negotiating with the underground reptile-humans a few episodes ago. Humans agreeing to share the earth with another species isn't important enough to be a fixed moment in time? Wouldn't that affect the future pretty drastically, like say, the entire human population fleeing solar flares in The Beast Below? I think all the fixed-point stuff has to be very closely related to the crack, since they've been going on about it so much. (Is it somehow having an impact on the way the Doctor interacts with time, or something?)
But I didn't have a problem with him bringing Van Gogh to the future. What's the worst thing that would happen? Even if he lived longer and painted more, it wouldn't really have a drastic effect. He would still be unappreciated in his lifetime. It's not like helping Churchill win the war 5 years early or anything like that.
My biggest problem was the TOTAL WASTE OF AWESOME BILL NIGHY.
THIS IS INSANE. This episode to me unfolded as though people who had never been asked to write a television episode, let alone a series arc, sat around stoned with Van Gogh's Wikipedia page and some Doctor Who DVDs and figured out how many times they could blow their own minds by incorporating his paintings into set design.
And I wouldn't be quite there with Choire's complaint that they took Van Gogh into the future if he weren't a famous person who killed himself. Now we have to believe either 1. killing himself was irrelevant to having seen himself famous in the damned future or 2. killing himself was a direct result of the depression of having to continue living a social outcast knowing his future success. And sure, the Doctor takes temporal risks, but generally for something that at least benefits him or saves lives, not just for the hell of weird subplot.
I don't think it was just for the hell of a weird subplot, though. I think he was letting Amy poke at the edges of what you can accomplish with changing time – it was her idea, and he was sure it wasn't going to have much of an impact, but he was letting her learn it for herself. I feel like they did something like this with Rose at some point?
Also, I feel like the whole "Yay, the Doctor can fix everything! Except, oh crap, he can't fix everything" attitude at the end was an echo to what the Doctor was already feeling in regards to the crack. (BTW, I didn't think this was a great episode, but I don't think it was completely pointless in the season arc, either.)
@optical_allusion – I think you're right about this. There's the episode (or 2) where Rose goes back and tries to save her father, which is what I think you're talking about.
LA LA LA NOT READING ANYTHING CAUSE I HAVEN'T SEEN THIS EPISODE YET.
It's downloading right now at home, m'kay? But I would like to express my total joy that you are writing about Dr. Who, and my express wish that you do so more often.
Okay, well, I have watched. And I was expecting something much more traumatic, based on your title up there. And while yes, it was as if the whole thing had been dipped in sugar, I don't think it was insanely out of line. Dr. Who can be pretty damn uneven at times, and if this wasn't the best/most logical episode of the season, well, it happens.
I love the way Amy Pond says "Doc-TURR." Amy Pond is just delicious.
Amy is my favorite companion so far. (Old fans: I only know the ones from Eccleston on; please don't get mad.) She's definitely the most consistently written of the recent companions – although Donna came close.
She's like Donna crossed with Rose. Best of both. I love her.
Alternative hed: "Oh Lord, The Tardis Are in the Doctor this Time"
A) Amy Pond = <3 <3 <3
B) So emotional when he brought van Gogh to the museum!
C) He messes with timelines all the time, like rescuing that family in Pompeii. His whole thing is that you can change the past pretty liberally, there are just a few pivotal moments that you shouldn't stop from happening
Richard Curtis wrote an episode of Doctor Who. You don't need to go any further to understand why it was a terrible episode. The man writes light, frothy comedies, not witty, dark sci-fi.
Not that Doctor Who's dark. But it was the wrong arena for someone whose biggest hit was Love, Actually.
There were other hints throughout this episode that Vincent wasn't the only person who needed cheering up, as the beginning segment has Amy wondering why the Doctor was being so nice to her. I have my suspicions that he's still trying to trigger some sort of Rory-themed flashback in Amy's memory; after all, he still has possession of Rory's engagement ring (foreshadowing the season finale?).
I don't think that the Doctor will succeed at getting Amy to remember Rory, which ties in nicely with the other major recurring storyline throughout this season (besides the Crack): in spite of his 900+ years and vast travels, Eleven is merely a really wise being and not an omnipotent god. There are still things in the Doctor's universe he can't explain, there are still plans that don't always work out, there are still limitations to his knowledge. I view this partially as a way for Stephen Moffat to bring back some mystery to the Doctor, as the latter half of the RTD/Tennant combo had the Doctor as some sort of lonely omnipotent god, and quite honestly, what's the fun of watching an all-knowing, all-powerful being run around the multiverse? Watching the Doctor fail or fall short is, to me, much more satisfying as character development and for storytelling techniques.
(In addition, I gaped at the last 5-10 minutes of the episode, as it felt like someone grafted, oh, "Gray's Anatomy" or "Scrubs" onto a sci-fi show, turning the entire episode into a 45-minute PSA about depression. I can see how the trip into the future with Van Gogh works, but only in the context of cheering Amy up. Other than that, it was jarring.)
I'm hoping for the impossible/sexy subplot where the Doctor gives in to her not remembering Rory and sleeps with her.
While it would be a better combination, if only because I think Smith is better-looking than Tennant, and Karen Gillan is the cutest companion since, well, Peri…no. The entire lurrrrrve saga with Rose grew tedious, and I'd rather not have a repeat.
I wasn't rooting for a love saga, just a little sex (as an alternative to a the inevitable unfulfilled longing). But desires like that are probably why Torchwood exists.
I also experience this show on my laptop rather than in some family-friendly 6:30 time slot, so my expectations are always off.
I hate you. Warnings aside, I figured it would be a spoiler I can live with, not something like this!
Still, I agree. This sounds like a serious lapse of Dr. Who cohesive logic.
Put another way, The Doctor messed with the head of a suicidally depressed person, somehow knowing he would wind up offing himself at the prescribed time anyway, just to make some kind of point to Amy about how they couldn't save him. Really? If The Doctor's going to mess with the sanctity of the timeline, he couldn't just lend Van Gogh some antidepressants from the TARDIS medicine cabinet?
But the really sad thing about the episode, for me, is now that Bill Nighy has played a supporting part on the series, he can never play the Doctor. C'mon, you know that would have been awesome.
Agreed. Was the trip to the musee just to prove to Amy that no matter how chipper you are you cant save a crazy person? And there was no crack.
I was introduced to this show during Tennant's season o' specials and breezed through his DVDs in a matter of months, so I didn't have time to get as attached to him as everyone else was. So, spoiler: MATT SMITH IS BETTER. You don't know it now, but you'll come around.
THAT SAID
I didn't mind the Van Gogh thing as much as the flippant way they disposed of Rory. The Van Gogh episode only exacerbated the Rory problem by almost entirely ignoring the biggest plot development of the season. It was obviously a one-off that just had a couple of "poor Rory" moments thrown in once they figured out when it would air.
Frankly, I think the "look you get famous!" thing was inevitable the moment they decided to portray Van Gogh – who was by all accounts creepy, unlikable, and deeply disturbed – in such a positive light. In order to end on an up note, they had to have a moment where they let him know his work will live on!
I suspect that in the original script, they explained about the artist's death being a FIXED POINT IN TIME (Whospeak for THE PLOT JUST WORKS BETTER THAT WAY, OK?), but they had to cut it in order to fit what minor ongoing-plot references they had.
I'm with you on the idea that they're writing themselves into a corner. There's just too much still unresolved for the season to end with any sense of finality.
I can see how the script-writers are writing themselves into a corner, especially given that the upcoming show, "The Lodger" (please let there be a David Bowie reference), appears to be a Doctor-solo episode. My hope is that the two-parter does not resolve every plot complication–I'm still a bit muddled about River Song–and that its developments drift into the Christmas Special and Season 6. My fear is that the script-writers will reach deep into their pockets, and pull out some timey-wimey deus ex machina mumbo-jumbo while Amy snogs a Weeping Angel while dressed as Little Boots.
I don't think they ignored the Rory situation – I think they were trying (not completely successfully) to put it in perspective. On one hand, there's only one character who even remembers that Rory exists (existed?), so it's not like they can talk about the problem. On the other, the Doctor still has no idea what the crack is or how to fix it, so it's not like they can go racing off on a rescue. And I see that on it's own as a pretty big corner, but an interesting one to get stuck in.
(P.S. I think Matt Smith is awesome, and I really enjoyed his slow transition from 10 to 11, but he has NOTHING on Tennant. At least, yet.)
I think the River Song subplot is going to be kicking around for many seasons to come.
@Optical: But that's just it: she remembers some random soldiers she met once perfectly, but now all of a sudden she's going to forget her own fiancé? That makes no sense, and the hand-wave that "it's because you're closer to the disturbance" makes even less sense. I can forgive them for making the rules whatever will be most interesting, but rules that require you to ignore huge plot developments are the opposite of interesting.
I absolutely LOVED this episode but I don't have a dissertation-length reason why. Just that a VVG-loving closeted gay 14-year-old me went "SQEEEEEE!" for nearly an hour.
I believe that The Doctor allowed van Gogh into the future because he knew perfectly well that it wouldn't alter history one bit. He was giving Amy a gift, perhaps in part to relieve his own guilt, while demonstrating that you can't change a suicidally depressed Dutchman.
If anything, this episode was kind of like the butterfly effect in reverse: bend the laws of the continuum and the only lasting change is a dedication on a painting.
It was awesome. I think anyone who has ever struggled with artistic production (which I assume is most of us) would know what was going on at the end was nothing to do with timelines and arcs and mental health but the profound uncertainty of the creative process. What would we do if we knew? It's a terrifying question for even the wee-est dabbler. And it is well-worth whatever diversion from your plot-fixated arc-situation. Arcs? Please, was there an arc in the Talons of Weng Chiang? Head out of the playbook and into the possibilities inherent in the show. Freedom to explore those possibilities is more important than keeping to a schedule.