Doctor Who: Twice Upon a Time (2017) written by Stephen Moffett and directed by Rachel Talaley
The Twelfth Doctor (Peter Capaldi) winds up in Earth's arctic at the same time as the First Doctor (here played by David Bradley though in the 1960s by William Hartnell). They both refuse to regenerate and might have gotten into an interesting conversation about it if a British World War I officer hadn't blundered into their meeting. Naturally, that's quite odd for the arctic in 1986. The Doctors begin to investigate and find that some crystalline people have been snatching other people on the brink of death for mysterious purposes. The adventure is afoot!
This Christmas special features several old standbys for Doctor Who--multiple Doctors, the regeneration (which is a farewell for one actor and an introduction of another), and tying off some loose ends. The two Doctors are fun together even though it is a bit odd to have a different actor playing the First Doctor (Bradley had played William Hartnell before in a TV movie about Doctor Who's early years). Bradley does a good job though the script goes out of its way to portray him as sexistly old-fashioned (mostly for comedic effect), something that rings false with what I've seen of the Hartnell episodes. The First Doctor's resistance to regenerating is also something shoehorned into the story (it had little basis in The Tenth Planet, when Hartnell's Doctor regenerated). It makes an interesting parallel to the Twelfth Doctor, so it's less bothersome. The rest of the plot is rather run of the mill for Doctor Who--fun but ridiculous. Some old companions (and one old nemesis) show up so Capaldi can have a farewell and some closure. Capaldi does a good job with his big final speech before regenerating. The one or two really beautiful moments are outweighed by a lot of weaker moments in the story. The whole episode feels a bit perfunctory and follows the recent trend of good actors trying to make the best of mediocre to poor writing in the show.
The new Doctor (Jodie Whittaker, who played the mom in Broadchurch) shows up for two minutes and tries to keep the TARDIS from falling apart. She has hardly any dialogue, just bits of action (though not picking out a new outfit as new Doctors often do). It's hard to make an assessment of her, other than it seems like a desperate ploy to be trendy and relevant by having a female take over a male role (which really isn't an assessment of her as an actress but of the situation in general). It looks like a politically correct choice rather than an artistic choice, which generally means we'll get bad art. I hope I'm wrong but only time will tell.
Overall, this hasn't inspired me to jump back into Doctor Who. I can't quite recommend it.
wonder if there is any truth to the rumour that this episode was going to have a scene showing the 12th and 1st Doctors saving Gailfrey in the 50th. The rumour is that 12 appearance in the 50th was going to be him starting to regenerate. In the trailer, there is a deleted line where 12 says, “we have an advantage”, 1 asks “what advantage?”. 12 says, “This time, there’s two of us.”
ReplyDeleteFunny enough, before this episode aired, I actually wondered if 1 encountered a future Doctor in the snow, during the time he separates from Ben and Polly and them finding him in the TARDIS during Tenth Planet.]
I think the real problem critics (including myself) had with Moffat's writing for the First Doctor is not so much the sexist dialogue, but because that is all he is. He is not warm, compassionate, or humorous, all the varied things Hartnell brought to the role; he is just treated as a joke for non PC lines to speak. Also where was his "Hmmm?".
And whilst we’re putting the boot into the episode, why didn’t 1 ever think to ask for Ben and Polly's safety? Why didn’t he express concern to 12 that they were leaving Ben and Polly at the South Pole when the TARDIS left the South Pole the first time? And why didn’t the recreation of the tenth planet show Ben and Polly boarding the TARDIS to witness the First Doctor's regeneration?
I remember one of the theories leading up to this episode was that Mark Gatiss' character was going to turn out to be Gilbert Mackenzie Trench, the designer of the police telephone box in real life. Looking back, considering there was some controversy over the character being the Brigadier's grandfather, with it first being reported following broadcast that the Haisman Literary Estate was pursuing legal action against the BBC regarding the character (Haisman's granddaughter made a public statement that this was not the case and ultimately, they asserted their control of the backstory of the Brigadier, stating that Archibald was actually the Brigadier's great-uncle), I think this could have been a better idea in hindsight, as it would have been a nice way to reference the real life history that inspired the DW show in the first place.
Strangely, in the deleted opening sequence which recreated scenes from the Tenth Planet, Barclay, portrayed by white actor David Dodimead, would have been played by a black actor. I don’t wish to sound racist/woke but of all decisions to recton, changing Barclay, of all possible characters, from a white man to a black man, seem like a weird choice to be the centre of it!
Same with TUAT suggesting regeneration was always golden light, despite the fact Polly mentioned no reaction to seeing the Doctor’s hand on fire.