By special request:
So what does naughty Uncle Rusty have in store for us? Is this on the cards yet again?
Categories: arts & entertainment, fun & hobbies
Otterday! And Open Thread 
100 books by women in 2016 
Today was a singing day -
Follow
Following
Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
Hoyden About Town 
OK, here in Australia everybody with cable should have seen the Day Three episode, in a few hours we’ll see Day Four (which DEM has already seen in the UK).
So an embargo on discussing Day Four until 9:40pm AEST, mmkay?
I’m liking it that RTD is showing us a reminder of Jack’s ruthless side from his days as a conman – it’s been a while since we’ve seen it, and his own discomfort with the reminder is well played.
I’d just like to say (as I’ve been saying on twitter all week) ZOMG!!1!!1!! WTF!!!!1!!1!
I really don’t want to give anything away so maybe I’ll come back after you guys have watched episode 4. I don’t think anyone will be shocked if I said that I’m absolutely dying to see the last episode!
I’m loving some of the background character development. Giving Jack a daughter was a great idea, and Ianto’s family are awesome.
Enjoy episode 4! If I didn’t have to hurry off to work I’d be watching it again on the iPlayer.
Fortunately I have no work to go to.
{Frantically crossing everything until 9.40 Austime}
And to answer your question above, I’d say yes. Oh YES…
Day Four: Technically this was an excellent episode. So well written, such excellent characterisation… but my main reason for enjoying the show is gone now. 😦
I’m completely devestated. I can’t believe I’ve become so attached to a fictional character, but there it is. This didn’t even feel cathartic. It’s just horrible. 😦
Well that was considerably darker than I’d expected, and I can forsee a major problem with the selection of children. Given the notorious propensity for middle-class British parents to fudge (okay, CHEAT) to get their kids into a good secondary school, if you’re telling people that kids are being collected to give them an “anti-voices” shot but starting with the worst schools in the area, you’re going to have middle-class parents fighting to get their kids on those buses while working-class parents who are more skeptical of the government will be more likely to keep them at home.
I’m just grateful the cabinet cow didn’t go full nazi and say “we’ll send those who won’t be economically productive … so let’s start with disabled kids in the special schools”.
Was never really able to get into Ianto, but it was certainly a bit of a shock losing him like that (and I regret that we’ll never see those tight jeans again).
Wha…? What? WHAT????!!!
Bugger.
But yes, an excellent episode. And it adds a whole new dimension to the debate about school league tables that’s been going on lately. 😉
I’m wondering if the goo that the big bad is blurting everywhere is significant. Does it point to a weakness that could be exploited, or is it just gratuitously icky special effects?
Maaaaaan! Children of Earth is pretty much my introduction to Torchwood, so I don’t have too much to add to the conversation about character development.
But the discussion that happened in COBRA? Exactly what I love about a good sci fi. Very uncomfortable to watch, especially when they started replacing the word “children” with “unit”. Ick!
I suppose there’s always the chance that it will all turn out to be a test by the aliens and everyone in the building will miraculously wake-up in 24 hours – but if that happens then the writers deserve a damn good kicking and a reminder that this isn’t supposed to be children’s television.
[I’m just grateful the cabinet cow didn’t go full nazi and say “we’ll send those who won’t be economically productive … so let’s start with disabled kids in the special schools”.]
yeah, that’s exactly where I thought she was going. Throwing the oppressed and unproductive under the bus.
if that happens then the writers deserve a damn good kicking and a reminder that this isn’t supposed to be children’s television.
As much as I know that that would be awful — I would be happy if it happened. I’m pretty damn sure that it won’t though. This is for real. 😦
I liked Torchwood better when it was bad.
Is it? I’ve been wondering for a while whether the whole thing is a test by the aliens to see if humans are morally developed enough for ‘First Contact’ (if so, bad news guys – you might be waiting a while). Sure the squirty thing in the tank is AN alien, but is it THE alien?
Main evidence against that theory so far is the gratuitous murder of poor old Clem.
If twelve children were enough in 1965, why do they need so many now? It keeps saying “you yielded in the past, you will do so again”. Is it looking for a point beyond which humans will not go?
I am very frowny about a lot of this. I admit to waiting until the end to really dig into what they’ve done with Clem, but so far, it feels like Yet Another PWD = Metaphor / Seer trope, you know?
It’s unclear to me even now if Clem’s mental health condition was caused by his link to the 456, or if it was why the 456 didn’t take him. His link is why I’m not going “Oh hey, people with mental conditions are totally like children!” in response to him being the “one man” who is affected by the 456’s message.
Barrowman’s acting is toned down a lot in this series.
Hah! Just looked it up. Jack’s a wobblie!
I have to say I felt quite a chill when they were talking about the bottom 10% of schools… because those are the schools that I attended as a kid. It was a wonderful examination of the banality of evil, and if I wasn’t feeling so utterly gutted right now I’d write more about that.
*nodnod* Beppie,
I thought the scripting where people would refer to the children as “units”, and then stumble back and forth between children and units was also part of that.
I found the “schools” scene particularly chilling. Not the least because I could easily imagine some of Brown’s cabinet behaving in exactly that fashion. I think it really hit a chord with a lot of people here in the UK.
I don’t know how many Oz viewers picked up the not-so-subtle parody of Jacqui Smith, the recently ex Home Secretary.
The final act was so good but so terrible at the same time. I wish they hadn’t done that.
Has anyone else been wondering whose phone Jack had that footage forwarded too?
I had the feeling Lois was thinking the same thing. I, too, was holding my breath for them to talk about throwing disabled children to the wolves, but they stuck with asylum seekers instead.
The alien did get in a good dig about how human don’t seem to do terribly much about it when the daily infant mortality on Earth is monstrously high.
I read the “less…. able… children” bit as being subtly saying children with disabilities, learning difficulties, etc.
Other people have not, but I have to admit that in the place I was watching it at, we started shouting at the screen at that point so there may have been something right after that bit that clarified it more.
Hence the introduction of Ianto’s sister, living on a Welsh estate. Chances their local school is one of the bottom 10% … pretty high (unless they go to a Welsh-language intermediate which tend to perform better). It’s a ridiculous benchmark for future personal achievement as prior to puberty (primary school) kids are pretty much indistinguishable from one another in terms of achievement but it’s certainly a good way of making sure that “people like us” are alright, unless it backfires as I’ve previously suggested. Welcome to the class war.
I spent the last 15 minutes shouting ‘DON’T DIE IANTO, DON’T DIE!!’ But that’s because I’m a bit soppy. It also annoys me that the wibbling around Jack and Ianto being a couple was just a set up to make the death more dramatic rather than leading on to something.
What occurred to me watching Lois’ reaction to the school thing was that the bottom 10% of schools in Britain probably have a higher proportion of ethnic minority children in them. And she’s the only POC in the room. “People like us” is multi-dimensional.
I suppose the only upside of Ianto going is that we might get to keep Lois.
Lois: Totally trained by Donna, yes?
Don’t forget the POC man on the committee who came up with the first proposal for a random draw, Kirstente.
Yep, DEM, you’re right. Completely slipped my mind. And now I come to think of it there was another one too… I should probably have thought a bit more before that comment.
Has anyone else been wondering whose phone Jack had that footage forwarded too?
Given the crossover-laden finale to the last series of Doctor Who, I wouldn’t like to speculate.
Isn’t Sarah Jane Smith a reporter?
Well, fair to say the ‘special relationship’ is toast in the Torchwood world.
It also annoys me that the wibbling around Jack and Ianto being a couple was just a set up to make the death more dramatic rather than leading on to something.
I said to mr tog (paraphrased) – “I should have picked up with all the couply stuff that Ianto was going to end up in the Refrigerator” and he had a very interesting response “if Ianto had been a girlfriend we would have picked up on it right away, but we thought RTD was doing social commentary”.
Okay, couple of problems from the feminist perspective – the two glaring ones for me being the “I wouldn’t do that to you” statement and decisions being taken unilaterally by male heads of family in a ‘damned if you do, damned if you don’t’ position. (Will reserve specifics until after Aus viewers get to catch up.)
Unhappy, but not shocked about Ianto. (Why does one of the SBS newsreaders look so much like him? Why?!)
I used to think Gwen was incredibly annoying, but this series has really showed off her strengths. Regarding the filipino child joke, I think the writers were attempting to make a point about child exploitation, albeit in a clumsy way. Doesn’t excuse it though. (Plus, in terms of narrative continuity, it totally through me out of the story. Didn’t seem like something Gwen would say in the course of ordinary banter)
Also Rhys is really annoying me. Maybe something good will come out of Ianto dead, namely Gwen ditching Rhys to console Jack, then ending up with Andy. Please goddess.
Oh, and my biggest problem with all this: Alien technology that humans are helpless against, and no one calls the Doctor. Right.
Regarding the filipino child joke, I think the writers were attempting to make a point about child exploitation, albeit in a clumsy way. Doesn’t excuse it though. (Plus, in terms of narrative continuity, it totally through me out of the story. Didn’t seem like something Gwen would say in the course of ordinary banter)
Yeah, I think you’re absolutely right here. They were attempting to show that everyone is dismissive of certain groups of people, willing to exploit them, willing to make jokes that reinforce their status as “other”. But the connections were not made as strongly enough (and I agree it seemed very OOC for Gwen).
I’m still completely devestated about Ianto. I want him back. 😦
According to the radio, the Ashes are currently being played in Cardiff. Is anyone else wondering if Jack would shag his way through two cricket teams?
Just watched the 5th episode. I was less than impressed by their attempt to explain away the absence of the Doctor. Also, *sob*. Will write more after 9:40 AEST.
Agree with DEM about the feminist problems. Thoughtless anger making stuff.
My only thoughts for now (and they may change later):
If RTD and his team were capable of writing such a good, solid, five-episode miniseries, why the hell have they waited this long to demonstrate that on Torchwood? I’m sad that we could have been getting something this good, and yet we got stuck with Exposition Blowfish and Fight Club for Weevils.
Well, I think that up until now, all of Rusty’s time has been taken up by Doctor Who, so he had to leave Torchwood up to others.
Having said that, I’ll take Weevil Fight Club and Exposition Blowfish over this any day. Technically, CoE is better than anything they’ve done before… but I find absolutely no enjoyment in those last two episodes, no matter how good they were.
I’m hearing that from a lot of people, Beppie. *nodnod* I’m seeing people say “I watch Torchwood for the campy space alien fun!”
And… I dunno. I thought the trailer made it pretty explicit that this was going to be a very dark, gritty season. And after Tosh’s “You’re breaking my heart” at the end of last season, I think we knew how dark they were willing to go.
Ah well. I think it’s partly that I never watched Torchwood because I particularly liked it, I watched it because I was doing it with friends. They’re both devestated.
(Alternately, it’s been a shite week. Maybe Torchwood: The Angsting just suited my mood.)
Mr Flocking has asked me to “go on the internet and see if anyone else thinks that was terrible”. It was well done, very dark etc, but the fates of Frobisher and Stephen in particular left a bad taste in the mouth.
Well, the show has always had an element of tragedy, right from the first episode. But it always balanced that out with both the campy goodness and a certain degree of hope. Sometimes is swung more towards the tragic, and sometimes more towards the comic, but there was the sense that it would keep swinging.
But now… there’s none of the hope left. It’s firmly wedged in the tragedy end of the spectrum, and it looks like it’s staying there. It’s painful, and not in the good way that makes me want to see more — in the bad way that makes me really wish I had not seen it. And it’s a real shame, because it really did go to some really interesting places, especially, as I said above, in relation to the banality of evil, but I feel like all the really scary social commentary ended up buried beneath the pain of Jack’s personal tragedy, and was less effective for it.
I didn’t expect, or need, a 100% happy ending, and a bit of personal tragedy was necessary — but it went overboard with it.
I’m not sure how they can come back from this having gone *so* dark. Particularly in terms of Jack’s character.
DEM – The ‘I wouldn’t do that to you’ thing annoyed the hell out of me too.
@ Flocking101:
Particularly with Frobisher, I couldn’t understand why he didn’t just nod to the PM and then call his wife ASAP once he got out telling her to hightail it somewhere miles away from home, turn off her phone and leave it at home, and not phone him until 3pm at the earliest to tell him where they were.
OK, maybe the PM would have outmanoeuvred him and already had a watch&snatch team on his daughters, so maybe such a plan would have been doomed to fail, but at least an attempt to do something of the sort would have made some sort of sense. Then he could have committed suicide after they were taken to give us that element of tragedy, without the extra weight of killing his wife and children first. Although we all know that exactly that sort of “end of the road” thinking leads to men choosing the family murder-suicide route all over the world with depressing regularity, so it is believable from that point of view.
And not a mention of blogs/facebook/twitter spreading the news about the children being taken from their schools? And the govt trying to block those avenues of communication and how that works out? NetFail, RTD.
Beppie, that’s absolutely right. Even when the PM gets his comeuppance, that’s canceled out with that especially nasty character (can’t remember her name) taking advantage. For all the good bits, ultimately there’s no sense of justice, no sense of fun, and no hope.
Oh well. Bring on “The Waters of Mars”!
Is anyone else seeing RTD winding up his pitch for a “Captain Jack v. The Universe” spinoff?
Well, I guess we wont be seeing a series 4 then…
I was never into the campy side of Torchwood and thought it just showed it’s kiddie tv origins so I didn’t mind the excursion into darker territory. I just wanted it to be BETTER. Admittedly, I don’t actually care about the personal life of the characters – I’m sure they have them but I’d prefer to only find out about them through the lense of their worklife. As I’m only interested in their science fiction-y jobs so Dai Twerp and co. have always left me cold. The ideas have always had real potential and I’ve been disappointed that they never did a Blakes 7 with Jack (where the guy leading the good guys was in fact, a BAD guy!) and emphasise his moral ‘otherness’. You still have the opportunity for Gwen’s normal sense of right and wrong to bounce of it and bring along the viewers (as in “Adrift”) but without all the pointless baggage and spectacle for its own sake. I’m sure explosions are fun to do but they’re not that interesting in themselves. It worked as a one-off special with Children of Earth but mainly because it only happened where relevant to the plot for a change.
This story worked because the reactions felt true. As Mick mentioned earlier, almost everyone’s response to the goverment’s reaction was “They would too, the bastards…” though I could have done with a bit more detail of Johnson’s motivation to explain why she just mindlessly followed orders for the first four episodes. Would anyone really do that? Would the army really go into housing estates and drag away British children because they’d been ordered to? Soldiers are citizens and they’d damn well have some questions about being deployed on home soil (especially with the continuing legacy of operations in Northern Ireland – something that would make them less willing to repeat those mistakes rather than more willing). “It’s an emergency” can only go so far, especially when the public are being kept in the dark that an emergency even exists. I was kind of hoping we’d see a police vs army standoff up at the estate a bit beyond Andy getting stuck in.
Flocking101 – And that character taking advantage doesn’t actually make sense as she’s been filmed saying equally horrible, if not worse, things. But I suppose that was by Lois, and that footage may have been lost?
Is anyone else seeing RTD winding up his pitch for a “Captain Jack v. The Universe” spinoff?
Nah, I think he’s just ending things so that Moffatt gets to play with Jack if he wants to (there are rumours of a TW S4, but I honestly can’t see how they’d do it). And if there was another spinoff… well, he’d need to create yet another new set of characters for us to care about, because Jack on his own doesn’t work — like the Doctor, he needs someone human (or human-like) as an access-point to his character. And if he was going to do that… it just seems a bit pointless to have killed almost everyone off, only to start again.
It also seemed odd to me that the government didn’t plan better for the possibility that less than 100% of the children in the lowest 10% of schools would turn up. Why not go into more schools rather than dragging kids from their homes? It would have been far less likely to cause confrontation and panic parents.
Tigtog, yes, it was the way that he seemed to instantly snap without (on screen, at least), attempting to think of some way to defy his masters or get a warning out. One would expect more from Her Majesty’s Civil Service – perhaps they should have sent in Sir Humphrey Appleby…
This is so absolutely and completely the Doctor’s fault for getting rid of Harriet Jones.
Kirstente – I assumed that footage was on the computer that Rhys presumably had to give up at the start of ep 4 – I guess they didn’t have time to make a backup copy…
And the golem-ish glee (there’s no other word) of the civil service technician when describing what would happen to the child at the centre of the resonance was just NASTY. Mind you, I wasn’t particularly comfortable with the whole “children are the property of their parents” vibe that reduced the kids to ciphers throughout. About the only humanising incident was the “we want a pony” freak out by Frobisher’s daughters, which was hilarious. For all we know, with the situation explained to him Stephen might have volunteered, but he was never given that chance. Jack just imposed his pater familias authority on the situation over the clear objections of his daughter. Should he get credit for being the one government agent willing to sacrifice their own family? No, I don’t think so. It wasn’t his choice to make. It was a true “damned if you do, damned if you don’t” situation (well done that writer – they’re not easy to do or tackle).
@ DeusExMacintosh:
To be scrupulous, I think Jack would have used an available child belonging to anyone else in that room in exactly the same way, so his pater familias status added pathos, but wasn’t actually the point.
It wasn’t his choice to make. It was a true “damned if you do, damned if you don’t” situation (well done that writer – they’re not easy to do or tackle).
And that ties into the whole banality of evil thing: Hannah Arendt talks about how totalitarian regimes effect “the murder of the moral person in man”, by creating situations to which there is no moral solution (the example she uses– very relevant to this TW– is a Jewish woman forced by the Nazis to choose which of her children would be killed — if she didn’t choose one of them, they all would be killed). Anyone who tries to act ethically is killed first (Ianto — 😦 😦 😦 ), and then the people who are left lose their humanity because they are deprived of their ability to act ethically.
See, for me, the show stopped being fun at Adrift, which I’ve ranted about extensively so won’t bore y’all with again. (In summary: People with disabilities are not your very special metaphors, thank you.) And Adrift is when Jack became “bad” for me. So, sacrificing the nearest child? He’d already done it – and not just 40 years ago when he was all depressed and “willing” to, but just last season, when he decided the best way to treat children with trauma was to lock them up in an underground bunker that hadn’t been repainted in forever and kept away from the rest of society for their own good. And that was endorsed by the show as the “right” thing to do.
I agree with all of the other criticisms, which are many and varied and all valid. I think, though, that since I hated Jack, I have a different take on what he did with Stephen.
Not that I want to dismiss the feelings of people who view this very differently. I remember how gutted I felt when I watched “Adrift”, so I imagine it’s much the same.
There was also some other logical problems with this last episode (besides the committee cow taking over despite the existence of dirt on her as well). Once it was clear the aliens were in effect ‘addicted’ to the kids, why didn’t negotiations restart? They’re not going to destroy the human race and wipe out the sources of the drug they need, now are they? You stop, call their bluff and say “we’re not handing over the kids, but if we can find a non-harmful way of harvesting or manufacturing these chemicals we’d be happy to talk trade with you.”
And why couldn’t someone in the cabinet just say “Yes, we made the choice before and it was wrong. This time we choose differently.” You can’t be forced to do the wrong thing simply because you’ve done it before.
@ Flocking101:
See, that’s another thing – why did Rhys have to reappear at that time at all? Why couldn’t they just have had a go/no-go plus a “compromised” signal that would have taken only a few words to transmit, so that they were less likely to have been tracked? Rhys could have stayed out of sight with his head down as an asset-in-waiting.
ETA: Honestly, do they not think that there is a significant crossover audience with Spooks, who just might maybe have taken on some of the emphasis on “tradecraft” re dealing with hostile surveillance? And who know that Torchwood has access to oodles of alien technology that is way difficult for your average earthling to reproduce/intercept?
@ Flocking101:
Cagematch: Sir Humphrey vs Captain Jack – place your bets!
@ DeusExMacintosh:
I hadn’t thought of that at all, but you are so right.
Cagematch: Sir Humphrey vs Captain Jack – place your bets!
Cagematch: Sir Humphrey vs Captain Jack vs a Weevil. Brow-beaten by Sir Humphrey’s negotiation technique and constant sexual harassment by Jack, the weevil commits suicide.
I’m pretty sure it was the former. Given what the aliens wanted with the children, I think Gwen’s theory about him being just a shade too old were on the mark.
I’m ok with both Jack’s and Frobisher’s actions in the sense that I’m ok with them being in the story, but that’s because I don’t get the impression that I’m meant to be ok with them in a moral sense.
I have some sympathy with Jack, because there weren’t any alternatives that I could see, other than letting the 10% get taken – though I would have found it a powerful twist on the trope if Alice had agreed. (Both sympathy and that twist come from one of the things I most despised about Frobisher being that he found the sacrifice of the children tolerable until his own were among them).
I can forgive both of those. The second, because they can’t cross over every story that it would be logical to call him – for example, Sarah Jane vs the Ancient Lights – also, because the Doctor being in it would get people watching who really are too young for the story. The first, because this is major enough that it should kill one of them – though I’d rather it had been Rhys.
Can they do it without Jack is the question? They’ve sometimes seemed to equivocate over whether Jack or Gwen is the lead character, so could Gwen form the core of a new team? Perhaps with Lois, who rocks (and who is damn useful for their work), and perhaps with Johnson (who would be a damn hard sell for Gwen, but they’d need a badass, and she’s at least shown a willingness to betray the state for the people*).
Failing that, Gwen’s a shoe-in to UNIT if she wants to keep defending the Earth.
* Which I liked. The idea of the ruthless warrior fighting for an organisation because she considers them better people than her – and turning on them when she finds that they’re really not – appeals to me. Though I wish the writers hadn’t decided to make her cry at the sacrifice of the adorable blue-eyed, blond-haired moppet.**
** I also kinda wish the moppet had lacked at least one of those characteristics.
hellonhaortylegs
A thousand apologies, hellonhairylegs.
@ SunlessNick:
Yes, considering that his mother had the same dark hair as Jack, why not cast a kid who looked more like him as well?
@Beppie:
But acting morally isn’t solely about reduction of harm, it’s about choosing to do what is right. The moral response in both of these cases is to refuse to choose, accepting that you’ll probably die together as a consequence. In the case of Torchwood there was also a lesser-evil ethical (though not moral) option of a randomised lottery that included COBRA-members families, but the government decided to discriminate based on utilitarian factors rather than risk their own children.
I remember similar issues raised in a movie called Fail-Safe, black and white from the height of the cold war (only a couple of years after the Cuban crisis). Due to a series of technical accidents a misdirected American bomber successfully drops an atom bomb on Moscow despite frantic efforts to stop it. Trying to negotiate with the Russian Premier on the ‘hot line’ the US President becomes convinced that the only way to stave off nuclear war is to accept a similar level of harm to his own country. Well worth catching if you can so I wont spoil the gut-wrenching twist in the tail. It was on daytime TV when I saw it – put me right off lunch.
Well, it depends on what you consider to be a “moral” response — what governs your ethics? Compassion? Kantian moral maxims? Utilitarianism?
I think that all of us use different ethical models at the same time, and that usually when we try to work out what the “right” thing to do is, we’re trying to work out where all those models converge and don’t contradict each other. My reading of Arendt is that she’s talking about putting people in situations where there is absolutely no way of acheiving that convergence, ensuring that which ever option they choose, it will be extremely wrong according to one of the models that they employ.
hellonhaortylegs
A thousand apologies, hellonhairylegs.
Typos are the threads that bring the intertoobs together :). Though I have to admit the first thing I thought when I read it was “I have an aorta in my legs?”
What I got from the series as a whole was that the writers were confusing good television with dark television. By the end the carnage tally was very high, without enough of anything else to make up for it. Also, at the end we’re left with Gwen, who for the first four episodes was made of win, and then went right back to annoying Gwen in the fifth and Rhys, who I’ve always disliked. After a promising beginning it all kinda collapsed in a mess of chaotic emotional messages, caricature and gaping logical errors. (Still better than the season two finale though :P)
@Beppie, I’m not really following some of what you’re saying, so ignore this if you’ve already covered it, but when I read “the banality of evil” in the context of WWII and the concentration camps, I read the reality of evil, the everyday, everyperson nature of evil. While this is an interesting concept to explore in the government reaction, and the revelation that the 456 were essentially drug dealers, it didn’t really work, at least for me as an audience member, in this setting or this story. In other words, while it irritated the audience, it doesn’t seem constucted in a way to really cause much in the way of reflection.
Hellon — the banality of evil stuff I’m talking about is more in relation to the actions of the humans rather than the 456 — the 456 exploited the human capacity for banal evil, but it’s the humans that I see as the banal evil ones in this instance — the “good men” like Frobisher. I see the 456 as a type of demonic evil (I actually have a whole chapter of my thesis about the relationship between demonic and banal evil, and this fits in so well with that — except that it’s not YA fiction). Anyway, the stuff I was saying about the “murder of the moral person in man”, that’s actually something that runs throughout Arendt’s work — in both her theory of banal evil, and her earlier (later repudiated) notion of radical evil.
You know one thing that’s both great and completely heartbreaking about what Jack had to do in Day Five (something that I’ve read in a few different commentaries now, I didn’t actually think of this myself), is that in spite of what Gwen said about the Doctor turning away in shame, in this instance, what Jack did is EXACTLY what the Doctor would have done — it’s a smaller scale of what the Doctor actually did do. So many times on Torchwood, Jack does stuff that would make the Doctor ashamed if he knew — and yet this, the most devestating thing he’s ever done, it’s exactly what the Doctor would do.
What I got from the series as a whole was that the writers were confusing good television with dark television.
A common mistake.
Not a feminist or even geek matter, but I did find myself giggling at the idea of an NHS, BMA or similar admin type facepalming after Torchwood, because they were planning a vaccination push (I was thinking swine flu for the winter).
And they they are planning one. Just makes me crack up a little.
Oh, Nick, what timing!
On another note — I’ve seen some suggestions around the place that Gwen might have recruited both Lois and Agent Johnston, to begin with. And I’ve gotta say– in spite of everything — all-woman Torchwood ftw, y/y?
Y. With bells on. Torchwood’s been all-woman in the past, hasn’t it, the 19th-century lesbian couple? (Was that shown briefly in Doctor Who, or Torchwood?)
I’ve seen people saying about the place that “obviously” Torchwood couldn’t be rebuilt from where they left it, but it seems to me a rebuilding around Gwen recruiting others could be totally on the cards. I’m wondering if some of the writing-off is based around Gwen being pregnant – but Rhys seems an obvious choice for full-time child carer.
I actually thought this miniseries didn’t have all that much feminist fail in it. The first 2-3 episodes you had Gwen leading Torchwood against the Evil Woman (sorry, missed her name) leading the folks who blew up Jack, Jack fridged for most of it – rather a nice reversal of the usual tropes, I thought. And then, Lois and Bridget infiltrating and stitching up the government.
Y. With bells on. Torchwood’s been all-woman in the past, hasn’t it, the 19th-century lesbian couple? (Was that shown briefly in Doctor Who, or Torchwood?)
Yes! Emily and Alice, from “Fragments” in S2 of Torchwood.
I was a bit worried, since we no longer have Tosh, that there wasn’t going to be much chance for Bechdel-test passing, but Rusty really delivered on that front. Whatever else one might say of him, he really does make a genuine effort to create good, strong female characters who interact with each other and move the story forward.
The first 2-3 episodes you had Gwen leading Torchwood against the Evil Woman (sorry, missed her name) leading the folks who blew up Jack, Jack fridged for most of it – rather a nice reversal of the usual tropes, I thought.
Also I like that Johnson (the Evil Woman) was Shown The Error Of Her Evil Ways by Gwen, using information provided by Lois.
And I’ve gotta say– in spite of everything — all-woman Torchwood ftw, y/y?
Well let’s see. We need someone inexperienced, who can ask questions the viewers need answered: Lois. We also need the one experienced and hardened to the alien: Gwen, and not just by default, because she’s faced far more than I suspect is normal for a Torchwood operative; Johnson might be too, depending on her history. Speaking on Johnson, if we want someone with sins and shadows in her past, she’ll have a ton of them. Between Gwen and Lois, they have investigation covered; between Johnson and Gwen, they have bruising covered.
They need a doctor and/or scientist, true, and I’d insert my usual rhapsodies about Martha, except I don’t think they could get Freema Agyeman.
If they need someone otherworldly, there’s that precog girl Jack consults (who also has a lot of shadows in her past I’m betting, especially seeing as she hasn’t aged in more than a century).
Wouldn’t it be enchanting to have a shred of confidence the BBC would consider it?
Some fans have reacted to the death of Ianto by hurling wild accusations at the scriptwriters (homophobic is an interesting one). Here James Moran responds: [link]
People (not here, I’m sure, but obviously elsewhere) forget that actors have careers to nurture and like to move on from supporting roles after a while to try and carve out their own bigger roles somewhere else. Given the nature of Torchwood, when an actor decides to not renew their contract for the next season, it’s pretty much a given that they’re going to end up dying in a scene full to the brim with narrativium.
Gareth David-Lloyd deserves praise for a job well done in creating a character that so many people felt strongly about, and nothing but well-wishes for the next phase of his career. I look forward to seeing him play a character with less sidekick to the part, and I bet he does too.
Did Gareth David-Lloyd leave the show, or did the show leave GDL?
Being that I get my gossip third hand, I was under the impression that no one had wanted to leave the show, but that their characters had died because it upped the tension (re: Tosh & Owen).
I have no idea, but does intention matter? Joss Whedon made basically the same argument when he killed of Tara, and that decision *still* pisses me off not because it wasn’t reviting tele, but because it didn’t happen in a vacuum. There are very few queer couples allowed on t.v. that isn’t coded explicitly queer. When one of them dies, they don’t die in a vacuum. They die in a world where Dead/Evil Lesbian is a cliche, for example.
YMMV. I’m not invested enough in the show to really talk about it effectively. To me, Ianto was a dull character who was just getting interesting and then died. Very sad. 😦 But I know I would have been enraged at it been Lois, because so many WOC with a speaking role on Torchwood have died.
I dunno. I certainly don’t feel like writing to the James Moran. Unless he was involved in “Adrift”.
James Moran was not involved with “Adrift”. And the way people have been treating him is unacceptable, and I can see that even though I was incredibly invested in Ianto as a character, and I think that killing him was a terrible decision that actually lessened the impact of the message the show was trying to convey. But, making it personal like that and hurling abuse at him? So not cool.
James Moran did not betray his fans, his fans betrayed him.
You’re right, Beppie. I didn’t mean to sound like I was “Oh, it’s okay for fans to threaten his life!” or whatever. That stuff is scary, and totally unacceptable, to say the least.
I’m not really used to creators being so available for fans to go at like that – I’m used to “I’m going to make angry LJ posts about how angry I am!” that the creators are unlikely to ever see, and was responding with that setup in mind. I should have spoken more carefully.
Being that I get my gossip third hand, I was under the impression that no one had wanted to leave the show, but that their characters had died because it upped the tension (re: Tosh & Owen).
It’s hard to read between the lines, because for PR everyone always says how very much they’ll miss everybody else and the show, because it’s part of being a professional actor, and only idiots burn their bridges. That said, it’s very very rare for any actor to stay in a supporting role in a drama for more than 2-3 seasons. It’s asking for stereotyping and that closes off other work opportunities, especially when the drama is considered a niche show because of its genre.
Sitcom actors are different – everybody accepts that they are playing a character, and nobody expects that their comic character is really like them and is all that they can do. Dramatic actors have to work harder at playing different parts to show their range.
It’s particularly hard when you have actors like Naoko Mori who is also a West End musical star and an accomplished comedienne (remember AbFab?), and GDL who fronts a blues band and is studying for a philosophy degree, to know exactly where they see their careers moving on to. Burn Gorman after Torchwood hit the West End as Bill Sykes in Oliver!, took a very career-wise period drama role in a Wuthering Heights TV production, and will appear in the next Ricky Gervais comedy series – he’s making sure no-one compartmentalises him!
This is what actors do.
I do see your point about the Dead/Evil Gay/Lesbian meme, but what else could they do with Ianto if GDL wants to spread his wings? Have him break up with Jack and leave in a huff while the rest of the team defies death every day? How would that work?
Anna, I didn’t get the impression that you were endorsing that sort of behaviour at all!
I do see your point about the Dead/Evil Gay/Lesbian meme, but what else could they do with Ianto if GDL wants to spread his wings? Have him break up with Jack and leave in a huff while the rest of the team defies death every day? How would that work?
Have him leave the team to rebuild Torchwood One in London.
what else could they do with Ianto if GDL wants to spread his wings? Have him break up with Jack and leave in a huff while the rest of the team defies death every day? How would that work?
Horrified at what Jack did to Stephen, Ianto says “I need time”, and leaves Torchwood. Open for him to come back at some point in the future, but writing him off the show.
Due to events in Children of Earth, Torchwood: Cardiff (Is that TW3?) is disbanded. Ianto accepts a job elsewhere, perhaps back in Torchwood: London, resurrected because of what happened. Again, allows for him to come back if he wants to, or have guest roles, but writes him off a show focused on Cardiff.
“All of this death has made it clear to me what I want, Jack. I want to be with someone who is with me. You won’t even say we’re a couple. I want something else. I love you, but I’m going to Canada to live with Anna, who will feed me ice cream and let me organize her books and research her thesis. Maybe there I’ll meet someone who will want to be in a relationship with me.”
I know I probably sound like I’m second-guessing the decision of the writers, which I don’t mean to. I’m frowny at Tragically Dead Gay, especially after the constant reminders that they were a couple. I feel they could have handled the “let’s write Ianto off the show” better, although this backseat driving thing is a lot easier than writing effective television.
(Beppie – Coolness. *smile* I’m just wanting to be clear about sorta where my thoughts are here, which I’m often afraid I’m not.)
“All of this death has made it clear to me what I want, Jack. I want to be with someone who is with me. You won’t even say we’re a couple. I want something else. I love you, but I’m going to Canada to live with Anna, who will feed me ice cream and let me organize her books and research her thesis. Maybe there I’ll meet someone who will want to be in a relationship with me.”
This made me LOL. 🙂
Joss Whedon made basically the same argument when he killed of Tara, and that decision *still* pisses me off not because it wasn’t reviting tele, but because it didn’t happen in a vacuum.
Wait, he says Amber Benson left? Because that’s not what he said at the time (he made the “only choice for the story” argument back then) – which I translated as cheap shock value to make up for not having a strong narrative drive for Willow to go off the rails.
No, I meant the “it was necessary for the story” argument. I haven’t seen anything about whether or not GDL wanted to leave.
As I recall, Joss’ was “We would have killed anyone Willow was dating”.
Beppie/Anna – quite right, him leaving because of the sacrifice of Stephen could easily have been made to work. And the idea of Ianto going off to Canada to eat ice-cream also made me LOL.
Someone threatened the writer for killing off Ianto?! It’s a tv show for God’s sake!
Given the nature of Torchwood, when an actor decides to not renew their contract for the next season, it’s pretty much a given that they’re going to end up dying in a scene full to the brim with narrativium.
Well it sure beats moving to Brisbane.
People are apparently leaving flowers at the Cardiff Tourist Office.
*sniffle*
I recommend Cupidsbow’s “Touch Wood” series on CoE.
Thanks for the rec, Lauredhel!
I recommend Even the Damned by Dameruth. (Jack/Ten, PG)
Could we have a re-post of the “Relativ” Jack/Ianto youtube clip to cheer us all up, please?
Absolutely 🙂
https://www.youtube.com/embed/VFru1LBVleA?version=3&rel=1&fs=1&showsearch=0&showinfo=1&iv_load_policy=1&wmode=transparent
I was thinking that for this week’s Whoydensday we might just have a cheer ourselves up post, with things like video and fic recs (while the serious discussion can still be directed here).
Bring Out Your Dead by xtricks:
The entire post is completely respectful towards the writers, but I think it articulates really well why so many fans feel betrayed and hurt (NOT that that justifies threats and abuse), and why this feeling is completely valid — it’s not just a matter of “the writers need to do what’s good for the story” — because the show is MORE than just plot.
That post is the same kind of response that was directed towards Tara’s death on Buffy (and was dismissed as “calling Joss homophobic”) – compounded by Joss expecting props for not telling that kind of story, even after he had.
Yeah… this kind of makes me want to not watch Buffy now.