Skip to main content

Bodies are boring. I've had loads of them.


Doctor Who
Goodbye, Matt

I wish I had some investment in the departure of young shoeface. Back in 2010, if he’d done an Eccleston after his first season, I’d have been sad to see him go. But the nu-Who has become such an uninspired formula by this point, and his performance such a reflective whirl of OTT manic tics and mannerisms, that there’s little left to care about.

Now, if Steven Moffat was going, and Matt Smith staying, I might hold out some hope for the salvaging of the show, and the central character. But he isn’t. He remains at the reins, content in the knowledge that he has two series of identikit manic heroes often spouting identikit dialogue (“It’s Christmas!”).

His once deliriously inventive plotting has now become distressingly tiresome. His female characters, unsurprisingly given all his characters sound the same and not in an enthralling David Mamet way, amount to the same adolescent fantasy (“You clever boy!”) masquerading as progressive empowerment. His box of tricks is empty, but he still can’t let go. He keeps rearranging the parts, but to less and less impact. I’d suggest he’s like a struggling stand-up comedian, desperate to get a laugh, but I’m not sure he really cares. His ideas are now so banal (every episode is a mini-movie!) and so predicated on form over content. Mystery is the key, but he’s never satisfyingly resolved his yearlong mystery arcs; if you confuse and obfuscate enough, the viewer will hopefully forget what was set up in the first place. As long as there are enough whizzes and bangs, enough shouting and franticness and familiar faces or monsters, we should be distracted from the emptiness of it all.

Except awareness of this finally seems to be dawning on the previously infatuated print media. No one seems to have much cared for Season 8 (which turned out to be the anniversary season, one Moffat initially claimed would feature more new Who than ever before – why even lie?).

It’s the first season where I couldn’t single out a couple of standout episodes. I was never a fan of Russell T Davies vision for the show, nor his Doctors (Chris Eccleston was miscast, David Tennant bizarrely decided to play the character as a manic mugging mockney – which in turn has informed the Doctor’s manic mugging persona since), but he could be relied upon to produce something somewhere of worth each season (rarely penned by him, it must be said). I’d liked all of Moffat’s contributions during RTD’s executive producership. It seemed as if he put story first, and companions being besotted with the Doctor would come second.

The casting of the barely-out-of-diapers Smith didn’t seem like a positive omen. But within the first few minutes of The Eleventh Hour I was struck that this seemed like Doctor Who I could enjoy properly again. It wasn’t the “classic” series, but here was a Doctorish Doctor, one who  - despite his youth - was closer to the eccentric demeanour of Patrick Troughton than the flaccid earnestness of Peter Davison. And the run of fifth season stories was varied and distinct. There were bum notes; the inability to write female characters that aren’t archly self-reflexive frequently undermined Karen Gillan’s work, and the “Silence will fall” arc collapsed into an entertainingly giddy but incoherent finale. But in general I was on board; Moffat seemed to care about story, it was only his tendency to show off with his characters, like a class clown who thinks he’s funnier and wittier than he acutally is, that needed work.

 What followed hasn’t exactly sullied the fifth season, but it’s entirely tarnished Smith’s claim on being one of the great Doctors. (After his first year, I would have ranked him behind only Tom Baker and Troughton.)

Rather than learning from his mistakes, Moffat perversely chose to wallow in what didn’t. So he made a virtual co-star of a character only he really seemed to adore (River Song), upped the ante of postmodern gurning and quipping (rendering any notions of suspension of disbelief obsolete) and made Matt Smith an instant caricature of his more expansive quirks (the fez obsession, the physical comedy). Like a bad comedian (appropriate as Moffat’s initial success came as a comedy writer), he couldn’t resist repeating his (perceived) best gags until his audience sat stone-faced. Perhaps if he kept at it they’d come back round and find them funny again?

He resorted to basing his plot arcs on cheats, a big idea that he had no intention of following through with (the Doctor is killed, the Doctor gets married, the Doctor reveals his name, and now – John Hurt is some forgotten Doctor). But, like the boy who cried wolf, he’s failed to deliver one too many times. And then there’s the retconning. What made him revise Silence as Silents for Season Six? Was it pettiness at fans guessing his big secret (it was Omega all along?) or simply that he’d never worked it out in the first place and had such scant regard for viewers that he assumed they’d swallow any old horseshit (the latter, most likely).

Add to that the now de rigueur tropes of deus ex machina endings and the Doctor as saviour of mankind, noble lonely god, etc and you have a series without a life of its own; it’s a facsimile, made to be regarded, but lacking any inherent value.

Some of the individual episodes in the sixth year were strong (The Doctor’s Wife, The Girl Who Waited) but Moffat was generally far more interested in vomiting up the same gags over and over (the comedy Sontaran, who is admittedly sporadically amusing, the lesbian Silurian in Victorian London; are the Victorians she encounters more shocked that she’s a lesbian or a lizard, geddit?)

I’m not anti- comedy in Who; the Graham Williams era is probably my favourite of the show’s original run. But Moffat is so goddam lazy; maybe he’s so egotistical that he believes his own hype (quite possible, given the raves over Sherlock) and doesn’t realise that he’s no longer at the height of his powers. It’s astounding to learn that he actually intended for junior companions Angie and Artie to be regulars aboard the TARDIS until he was persuaded it might not be a good idea by those with a bit of basic commonsense. Where did his delusion come from? Because those Hartnell and Troughton era comic strip companions were top drawer?

With Season Seven, I struggle to come up with a stand-out episode. Moffat only provided one season over a span of two years and none of it proved especially memorable. The lure of a patchily redesigned Zygon (with pointy teeth), John Hurt and David Tennant hasn’t ignited much enthusiasm for the special. Worse, there’s zero enthusiasm for the eventual Season Eight (whenever that arrives). How can there be, with a showrunner who is running on empty?

I’m reasonably sure Moffat will pick a solid actor for the twelfth (or thirteenth?) Doctor, but it’s to no good end if the poor sod is induced to prance like a tit through his every scene. Part of the lustre of the old series was variety; changing producers, changing casts, changing styles. It’s understandable that a consistent visual tone is now sought, but the series is so bereft of ideas that its only option is to immerse itself in the kind of fanwank that spawned The Name of the Doctor. When it feeds of itself to that extent, it’s a harbinger that the days of mass audience appeal may be numbered. After all, this is exactly the path the series went down during the 1980s. 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

We live in a twilight world.

Tenet (2020)
(SPOILERS) I’ve endured a fair few confusingly-executed action sequences in movies – more than enough, actually – but I don’t think I’ve previously had the odd experience of being on the edge of my seat during one while simultaneously failing to understand its objectives and how those objectives are being attempted. Which happened a few times during Tenet. If I stroll over to the Wiki page and read the plot synopsis, it is fairly explicable (fairly) but as a first dive into this Christopher Nolan film, I frequently found it, if not impenetrable, then most definitely opaque.

She was addicted to Tums for a while.

Marriage Story (2019)
(SPOILERS) I don’t tend to fall heavily for Noah Baumbach fare. He’s undoubtedly a distinctive voice – even if his collaborations with Wes Anderson are the least of that director’s efforts – but his devotion to an exclusive, rarefied New York bubble becomes ever more off-putting with each new project. And ever more identifiable as being a lesser chronicler of the city’s privileged quirks than his now disinherited forbear Woody Allen, who at his peak mastered a balancing act between the insightful, hilarious and self-effacing. Marriage Story finds Baumbach going yet again where Woody went before, this time brushing up against the director’s Ingmar Bergman fixation.

You can’t climb a ladder, no. But you can skip like a goat into a bar.

Juno and the Paycock (1930)
(SPOILERS) Hitchcock’s second sound feature. Such was the lustre of this technological advance that a wordy play was picked. By Sean O’Casey, upon whom Hitchcock based the prophet of doom at the end of The Birds. Juno and the Paycock, set in 1922 during the Irish Civil War, begins as a broad comedy of domestic manners, but by the end has descended into full-blown Greek (or Catholic) tragedy. As such, it’s an uneven but still watchable affair, even if Hitch does nothing to disguise its stage origins.

Anything can happen in Little Storping. Anything at all.

The Avengers 2.22: Murdersville
Brian Clemens' witty take on village life gone bad is one of the highlights of the fifth season. Inspired by Bad Day at Black Rock, one wonders how much Murdersville's premise of unsettling impulses lurking beneath an idyllic surface were set to influence both Straw Dogs and The Wicker Mana few years later (one could also suggest it premeditates the brand of backwoods horrors soon to be found in American cinema from the likes of Wes Craven and Tobe Hooper).

James Bond. You appear with the tedious inevitability of an unloved season.

Moonraker (1979)
Depending upon your disposition, and quite possibly age, Moonraker is either the Bond film that finally jumped the shark or the one that is most gloriously redolent of Roger Moore’s knowing take on the character. Many Bond aficionados will no doubt utter its name with thinly disguised contempt, just as they will extol with gravity how Timothy Dalton represented a masterful return to the core values of the series. If you regard For Your Eyes Only as a refreshing return to basics after the excesses of the previous two entries, and particularly the space opera grandstanding of this one, it’s probably fair to say you don’t much like Roger Moore’s take on Bond.

The protocol actually says that most Tersies will say this has to be a dream.

Jupiter Ascending (2015)
(SPOILERS) The Wachowski siblings’ wildly patchy career continues apace. They bespoiled a great thing with The Matrix sequels (I liked the first, not the second), misfired with Speed Racer (bubble-gum visuals aside, hijinks and comedy ain’t their forte) and recently delivered the Marmite Sense8 for Netflix (I was somewhere in between on it). Their only slam-dunk since The Matrix put them on the movie map is Cloud Atlas, and even that’s a case of rising above its limitations (mostly prosthetic-based). Jupiter Ascending, their latest cinema outing and first stab at space opera, elevates their lesser works by default, however. It manages to be tone deaf in all the areas that count, and sadly fetches up at the bottom of their filmography pile.

This is a case where the roundly damning verdicts have sadly been largely on the ball. What’s most baffling about the picture is that, after a reasonably engaging set-up, it determinedly bores the pants off you. I haven’t enco…

He tasks me. He tasks me, and I shall have him.

Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
(1982)
(SPOILERS) I don’t love Star Trek, but I do love Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. That probably isn’t just me, but a common refrain of many a non-devotee of the series. Although, it used to apply to The Voyage Home (the funny one, with the whales, the Star Trek even the target audience for Three Men and a Baby could enjoy). Unfortunately, its high regard has also become the desperate, self-destructive, song-and-verse, be-all-and-end-all of the overlords of the franchise itself, in whichever iteration, it seems. This is understandable to an extent, as Khan is that rare movie sequel made to transcendent effect on almost every level, and one that stands the test of time every bit as well (better, even) as when it was first unveiled.

My dear, sweet brother Numsie!

The Golden Child (1986)
Post-Beverly Hills Cop, Eddie Murphy could have filmed himself washing the dishes and it would have been a huge hit. Which might not have been a bad idea, since he chose to make this misconceived stinker.

My name is Dr. King Schultz, this is my valet, Django, and these are our horses, Fritz, and Tony.

Django Unchained (2012)
(MINOR SPOILERS) Since the painful misstep of Grindhouse/Death Proof, Quentin Tarantino has regained the higher ground like never before. Pulp Fiction, his previous commercial and critical peak, has been at very least equalled by the back-to-back hits of Inglourious Basterds and Django Unchained. Having been underwhelmed by his post Pulp Fiction efforts (albeit, I admired his technical advances as a director in Kill Bill), I was pleasantly surprised by Inglourious Basterds. It was no work of genius (so not Pulp Fiction) by any means, but there was a gleeful irreverence in its treatment of history and even to the nominal heroic status of its titular protagonists. Tonally, it was a good fit for the director’s “cool” aesthetic. As a purveyor of postmodern pastiche, where the surface level is the subtext, in some ways he was operating at his zenith. Django Unchained is a retreat from that position, the director caught in the tug between his all-important aesthetic pr…

Twenty dwarves took turns doing handstands on the carpet.

Bugsy (1991)
(SPOILERS) Bugsy is very much a Warren Beatty vanity project (aren’t they all, even the ones that don’t seem that way on the surface?), to the extent of his playing a title character a decade and a half younger than him. As such, it makes sense that producer Warren’s choice of director wouldn’t be inclined to overshadow star Warren, but the effect is to end up with a movie that, for all its considerable merits (including a script from James Toback chock full of incident), never really feels quite focussed, that it’s destined to lead anywhere, even if we know where it’s going.