The Doctors Talk 'Who'

Den Of Geek published an interview with David Tennant and Matt Smith. Am I the only one who'd like to get John Hurt's opinion too? But anyway.

The interview is about the usual things.

How their Doctors get along with each other in the script:

DT: I think the fun is in the gap between the two. We've been finding joy in recognising the same thing, or having the same thought...
MS: ... or having a completely opposite thought. You know, why are you reacting like that...?

And we get reassured that the anniversary special is quite story-driven. It's always a good thing when the story stays in the focus of an episode. And if Moffat hadn't been telling us zingillion times that his main aim was to write a great story for the special, then I would have been a lot more worried about 'The Day of the Doctor's plot. But it's good to get reassured.

[...] actually what Steven has come up with is a way of moving the story on, and changing, changing the Doctor's very journey. And that's in a way not quite what you might expect. It could just be a celebration, but it's a lot more than that.

And they also talk about the different things each companion (Rose and Clara) bring to the show, how it was for David Tennant to come back, if there is some sort of TARDIS etiquette (nice idea) and Matt Smith's plans for the future.

'The Star Is The Show.'

The Guardian is using an interview it made with Jenna Coleman as an introduction to Doctor Who. Or are they just trying to give a summary of the past events? 

Maybe the most humorous part  is them stating that the announcement of Peter Capaldi

"shared a hysteria in common with the announcement of a new pope, ended in August when Peter Capaldi was unveiled on primetime television as the new pontiff – sorry, 12th Doctor."

But the actual interview is rather lovely. The most quoted bit has to be 

"I just read the script the other night. I'd been putting it off for ages and ages, because once you read the last page, that's it, the story is over. So I read 10 pages on the tube and I stopped, and then I picked it up again the other day and finished it. I was an absolute mess, an absolute wreck. But it's good; it's sad, but it's what needs to happen. It's perfect."

 And Jenna Coleman also mentions a few things about her past, how she ended up acting and being cast for Who, her personal experiences Who's frantic fandom, and what other things she is involved with ATM. 

The Extended Trailer

This one is almost twice as  long as the one from this morining, and also a bit more spoilery. But in a good way. 

One thing which came to my mind while watching the trailer is that Moffat said that he wants the special to "be the first step on the next journey. So looking at the trailer in this way, what if Moffat is bringing back Gallifrey. The idea would fit. After all, John Hurt's Doctor seems to be the one who destroys, sorry, time-locks it, and it takes two other Doctors to stop him, because they have figured out another way of ending the Time War, one which does not require the end of Gallifrey... At the same time I hope I'm wrong. Because it would make the story of the 1oth Doctor a bit dodgy, given the fact that one of the last things he does is to make sure that Gallifrey stays timelocked. And if we change this, then the Time Lords do not need the Master to bring their home planet back into exitance,  i.e. the Master does not conquer the earth, the whole radiation stuff never happens, because of what Wilf does not go into the chamber and does not end up knocking 4 times... Unless the Mighty Moff has another far less logical, timey-wimey solution for the plot. Let's wait and see.

The Leaked 'The Day of the Doctor' Trailer

What does not leak these days? Well, I'm far from complaining, because this way the trailer, which was supposed to air this evening, or maybe on Sunday, could not be stopped to make its way to the internet several hours earlier than the actual air date would have originally suggested. It's either that the lovely Beeb has screwed up a few things again, or someone with a TARDIS travelled to the future and did not mind to cause a tiny paradox...

So, ladies and gentlemen, here is the eagerly awaited masterpiece. And it's a good one.

The First 'The Day of the Doctor' Clip

Seriously, if you want to enjoy the 5oth aniversary without being spoiled in advance, you may not want to read this post and/or watch the video. Then again, it's not exactly giving away the special's synopsis, but deals with mere speculations. 

Back to the eagerly awaited news. While, as requested, the #SaveTheDay hashtag has been trending the Beeb released a 14 second clip of 'The Day of the Doctor' featuring an, according to Clara, impossible painting.

So, the question is, why does Clara think that painting is impossible? To bring some light into this matter, here is a screencap of the aformentioned picture. What can we see?

Not much at first glance... That's the least pixel-y image I could find, and as I was not happy I decided to  refocus, resharpen and recontrast the original a bit and this is the result:

I know, not CSI worthy, but still better than the first one.

Is it just me, or does the burning tower look a lot like the Citadel of the Time Lords back in good old Gallifrey. And the reason for Clara recognising it is that because she has been basically part of the Doctor's timeline, she of course has to know how the most prestigious building of the Doctor's home planet looks like. 

The more intriguing question is, why is it burning? Has it something to do with the Time War? And why should Queen Elizabeth I be linked to it? She may know about it because she used to be a love-interest of the Doctor. But why paint a picture about the Time War?

'The Day of the Doctor' Marketing Campaign Is On

Once a wise man said it never rains, but pours. So the official Doctor Who marketing campaign of the BBC has started yesterday evening and we still can't see the end of it. 

It all started when yesterday the guys responsible for the BBC Wales twitter account tweeted:

 I.e. we'll get  a 'The Day of the Doctor' trailer this weekend. After the Comic-Con trailer disappointment this summer (they got an exclusive trailer, in fact so exclusive that it didn't even made it to the internet) this is more than just.

Additionally, there are some rather interesting interviews with the Fab Four of Who and Joenna Page. And if you prefer watching rather than reading them (because it's worth it) you can do so, by clicking on the names.

We have Steven Moffat talking about writing 'The Day of the Doctor', the reason for bringing the Zygons back, John Hurt's Doctor, and how it was to have two, well, actually 3 Doctors on set at the same time. And last but not least, how and where he's planning to spend November 23rd.

Matt Smith, David Tennant and Jenna Coleman chat about  the great time they had filming the special, the chemistry on and off set,  and how it was like to film in 3D.

And then there is Joenna Page *mild spoiler alert, seriously* who is Queen Elizabeth I in this year's special, just in case you didn't know. Actually, the whole interview should come with a 'mild spoiler alert' sign. But once you know that Queen Elizabeth I is part of the story, it's not difficult to come  up with what some part of the special will have to be about. After all, Elizabeth I has some sort of a reputation in the Whoniverse. Her describing the actually freezing picnic scene made me giggle. Because that's yet another thing Who is quite famous for and they seem to have been eager to keep up the tradition.

And last but not least, this is a friendly reminder that the BBC is asking us with this video to get #SaveTheDay trending on twitter. I think a note on Who's official site would have done it all the same...

UPDATE: And yet another Strax's field report. This time about the Zygons. Is it just me or am I getting too old for this?

The Escape Artist - Playing Football

Now we are getting somewhere. 

I'm sorry for my last week's review not being an awfully nice one. However, I wouldn't change a single world of it. Because all of it is true. I still think last week's episode was too much action/too many introductions to in-jokes and hints. And too little time to appreciate them. At the same time I'm pretty aware of that at least some of that stuff had to be there in part 1 in order to lie the grounds of making part 2 the well, not exactly masterpiece, but it still manages to be better than some of the other stuff presented right now on TV. And yet episode 1 saw too many hints hinting at too few actual surprises.

Nevertheless, this week we got the time to catch our breath between takes. Unlike last week we remembered that watching TV does not need to feel like running a marathon. 

We also got all the tiny references which were laid there to pick up last week. And this time we did not know their meaning but felt it too. A bit.

Like Will freaking out about Danny not coming home straight after school. And the fact that his son finds himself sitting next to his mum's murderer on the bus is not really helping teenagers to win an argument  about personal freedom... only in real life.

Wolstencroft also makes sure to tick off the 'add some emotion' box. Somehow, the moment when Will is repeatedly calling his wife's number only to listen to her voice on the answerphone was the most touching moment of the series so far.

And luckily, Maggie did not repeat Will's mistake of refusing Mr Foyle's handshake. 

We also got that green apple reference, and oh my dear, is Foyle having an affair with his witness? His attachment to her seems to get stuck on a professional basis, though. 

Then there were those hilarious scenes  at that Japanese restaurant in the mall, them talking about "football". Loved the illusions. Besides it seems that Will and his lawyer friends are going to get  some trouble because of that blond woman - what's her name. Talking about names... or rather about the loss of them. It seems I'm not the only one who is struggling with the names Wolstencroft has chosen for his characters. It's just a 3 episode series... not likely to get another season.  This means even the folks writing for the Guardian do feel OK referring to the characters using the actors' names. Admittedly, it's tempting.

And finally,  Wolstencroft also gives us a cliffhanger. Some sort of. After all, when you're exposed to the stuff written by the Mighty Moff your definition of  'a cliffhanger' dramatically changes. Well, not only that, I guess. But that's something for another post. 

So, given the fact that this episode is not written by the mastermind when it comes to frustrating cliffhangers, I guess Maggie doing what Will Burton did in episode number 1, and Foyle having not awfully terrible chances of getting away with it yet another time ATM, is as close to a cliffhanger in this series as things can get. 

Interestingly, the strange thing is, and I'm not sure if Wolstencroft has been aiming to achieving this effect, that one can easily imagine something like this happening in a real court. And by this I don't mean the still highly surrealistic situation of the actual case, but that in the end the one having the better lawyer/defender wins.

'The Escape Artist'

Just a short note. If you happen to be searching for 'The Escape Artist' online this is the page you may be looking for. And yes, I hope I'll be able to provide a link for 'The Day of the Doctor' similarly fast.

According to the twitters, it's good. Enjoy.

UPDATE: And the link-collection for part 2.

The BBC Teasing Sherlock

After ages of waiting, thanks to the BBC  the Sherlockians have some new material to analyse and to speculate about.

Yes, it's just a screencap, so this wouldn't cause a too big stir in any other fandom. But it's been almost 21 months since the last episode, and we haven't been getting exactly a lot of news regarding season 3 ever since. So imagine if this would happen to your most favourite TV show, then you may start to grasp the gravity of the situation.

So, what does the picture tells us? Not much . Only that I'm hilariously happy to see John without his moustache and where did Sherlock put his scarf?

And just in case you've been wondering, there is still no sign of an air date. Not yet.

Tom Baker and Peter Davison on 'Who's Past

One of the most significant signs of Who's 5oth anniversary being not too far away anymore is that the papers have started conducting interviews with some of the actors who left their mark on this show.

This is The Guardian featuring Tom Baker commenting on his time on Who. Leaving those fan-ish debates on 'who is the best Doctor' aside, to many people Doctor Who would not be the same show if at one point in time Tom Baker didn't have played the mad man in the blue box. Just in case you don't believe me, take a look at the final of DoctorWhoTV's recent poll on the most popular Doctor and decide for yourself. A hint, it's not Matt Smith vs David Tennant.

And if you've ever been interested into Peter Davison's take on the show, on its past and its future,  then make sure not to miss this interview by the Telegraph. Maybe the most interesting question he gets asked is his opinion on a female Doctor:

It’s not as if genders are interchangeable on Gallifrey [...] I don’t like the idea of the Doctor having a sex change - it’s not as if you would have a female James Bond.

And I know a rather big number of Whovians who'd wholeheartedly agree. 

The only thing about which I have to disagree with him is that I don't think Rose was the first companion which the writers got right. Sarah Jane Smith has always felt like a proper companion to me. In a way, she felt much rounder than Rose, because Rose hardly ever seemed to doubt the Doctor's decisions.

The Cost of Living in This Brave New World

And yet another, long overdue post dealing with the real world. Blame the world for being this busy and the BBC for being not. 

If by now you the name Edward Snowden does not ring a bell for you then you are either my spell-checker, or you have been living on a different planet for the past 5 months. After all, the coverage it got on the news has been overwhelming, to say the least. 

And while those nice people on the news tried their best to say what happened, somehow they didn't manage to inform the even nicer citizens of the world what Snoweden's revelations mean to us. 

Luckily, one of the recent articles in The Guardian makes a great job in provide answers in this matter. It's a rather longish one, but I have seldom seen a this easily comprehensive summary of how the publication of those top secret documents affects us. Give it a try.

So, what does it tell us? Mostly, that the world's secret services are an enormous and powerful organisation, and as such, you really do not want to mess with them. Because if there's stuff they do not know about, they'll soon have the technology to change this.

The only thing regarding the Sonowden documents which hasn't failed to take me by surprise is the fuss it stirred. Because, we do not really need those documents to learn that people, and therefore anything operated by people, lie. And most of us have suspected even before anno Snoweden that every step you make on the internet can be reconstructed, somehow; that for us mere mortals there is no such thing as a bug-proof 'line'; that your mobile is basically a device developed by the government to check the position and activities of its citizens 24/7. Giving information to the government is the cost we pay for living in this brave, new, even though constantly monitored, world. So, tap the 'connect to Wi-Fi' button and be nice. You may be watched.

Re-Watching 'The Reichenbach Fall'

Yes, there may be better days to re-watch an episode like that. 

Anyway. Here are some things which came to my mind while watching Thompson's masterpiece. 

• You know you're a Sherlockian when you know that it wasn't 18 months since John's last appointment. Well, at least not in *real* time. The BBC was kind and did not make us waiting 18 months. Not quite.

• Come on, there are TWO people all these people should be thanking for. Sherlock for solving the case, and John for keeping people from killing his rather annoying friend. 

• Just in case you didn't know, that thing with the gum, the diamond and the fire-extinguisher doesn't work in real life. Sadly, up to my  knowledge they haven't featured this in Mythbusters yet. Feel free, to correct me if I'm wrong; not about the not working, but about the Mythbusters bit. Does anyone feel like giving them a call?

• When the little girl starts screaming at Sherlock... It get's me. Every time.

• How can Moriarty be sure that Sherlock won't share the cab with John this time?

• Sherlock uses a Mac? Thompson, why are you doing this to me? It muse be Sherlock's as in season 1 John's laptop used IE to open a page. This couldn't have been possibly any worse.

• Watching John's struggle in Kitty's flat when Moriarty makes him listening to his part of the fairytale is so painful.That moment John cannot help himself but to consider the odds. At the same time he hates himself for doubting his friend. That's why he is so upset. He hates that this man makes him doubt Sherlock's loyalty for a splitsecond. By the time he flickers through Kitty's scraps of *evidence* he has made up his mind of what's going on. And now he is only afraid that this time Sherlock may not escape this web Moriarty has created for him. Because he, John Watson, has no idea what Sherlock could do.

• The fact that after the big showdown at Kitty's flat Sherlock decides to leave John on his own without giving a convincing explanation shows how much he trusts him.

• The only thing Sherlock does out of character in 'The Reichenbach Fall' is him asking Molly for help. Taking Moffat's level of trolling into account and the fact that it's so obvious, it may not be wrong to assume that that is what he referred to as the clue to how Sherlock survived the fall. Oh, and it being so obvious is the reason why everyone is 'missing' it. We are rather speculating about rubber balls (possible) and Rhododendron Ponticum (wrong, come on, just look at the other side effects) than accepting the obvious: it was Molly and apart from that we don't know.

• I'm sorry, but am I the only one bothered by Sherlock and Moriarty wearing their winter coats while the broad-leafed trees are standing beautifully green in the background? Not to mention the sun beaming from the sky? Hold on is this a clue?

• And we present the only correct way to respond to someone saying 'you're insane': 'You're just getting that now?' Awwww, Moriarty. I'm going to miss you. 

• After reading about Sherlock's suicide Mycroft takes the same thinking position as his brother used to do... they are brother's after all. And some part of him knows it's a fake.

• Oh_my_dear1#: John's 'I'm actually not that angry' when Mrs Hudson is going on and on about Sherlock's bad habits, which he is all probably missing now really badly, made me smile.

'The Escape Artist' - A Broken World

I have to admit the idea behind the plot is quite intriguing: There is this fantastic defender who helps winning a suspected criminal, Liam Foyle, his hopeless case. And then, somehow the criminal ends up killing his defender's wife. This alone is a really challenging (not to say unrealistic) set-up and if this had been produced in the US I'm sure FOX or BBC America would have made sure to make a whole American season out of it, which equals 24 episodes. Instead of 3.

And to be honest, in this case I'm not sure if the Americans had been that wrong. After all, the first part of this trilogy feels rather rushed. It feels exactly like the introduction of a book. You get the setting, you understand the action. And my dear, there is a lot of action going on. So you know what things mean to them, but you aren't given the time to feel it too. The story does not get the time to sink in. It does not get the time to do its grim sparkle.

If this would have been an American production I guess by the time Will Burton loses his wife, in episode 5, they would have made sure we sit there blinking back tears. And as the credits roll in, our brains would slowly start to kick in thinking what can be the motivation behind a deed like this? How can a denied handshake have such consequence?  This way, we only do the thinking.

Then again, maybe the rushed feeling is just one part of the actual problem. Somehow, the story does not feel right. In addition to the obvious lack of closure, it's not exactly helping that its plot is highly unrealistic: First of all, why should have Foyle never used his own computer to access those adult sites? He was living on his own, well, if we don't count the birds. He paid for the content. Why not access it as well ? Additionally, why on earth should Foyle's sick mind come up with the idea of killing Burton's wife? That refused handshake cannot have been such a big incentive... Why should he accept to go to jail for it? What's more, why should Maggie defend Foyle? Yes, Maggie may be the second best out there, but still, she and Will know each other, what's more, she was talking to his wife. Isn't there a paragraph saying something about a personal conflict? Or does this only apply to American doctors, lawyers and investigators? But the cherry on the imaginary cake of surrealistic situations is that Will's wife decides to spend that night at the cottage... I know these days couples do not talk. But how could she miss something was going on... Besides Will certainly knew about his wife's plans for the weekend. So why not mention that lunatic he had to defend at court the other day?

So  actually, I do not know why the world Wolsstencroft created for his series does not feel right. Is it really broken or is this just what one may call the result of lazy plotting?
 

All in all, this was an puzzling introduction. It's a pity that it wasn't a puzzling story as well.

Losing a Bit of Magic

You made me forget myself
I thought I was someone else.
Someone good.  - Lou Reed, Perfect Day

Usually, I'm writing about stuff which is somehow related to Doctor Who, Sherlock, or both. But I hope you don't mind if this post will be an exception. It deals with the real world for a change. It deals with the death of Lou Reed.

If you are anything like me, you may not have spent a lot of your time listening to his songs. At least, I'm honest enough to admit that I didn't, even though there are some pieces written by him I love more than I could put down in words, as well as many others which simply do  not speak to me. But my dear, those which speak have a great story to tell, and every time I'm so eager to listen.

I always thought it to be strange that a stranger, a guy who is several times my age, has a better idea of what love means to me and of what *my* personal 'Perfect Day' would look like than most of the boys I have dated.  That was the gift of Lou Reed. His words have manage to touch the heart of people he never knew, and never will. That's what he left behind, and that's why he is so dearly missed.

PS: I can't help including Neil Gaiman's Lou Reed tribute; excellently written and with just the right amount of heartbreak. So hop over to The Guardian. I promise, you won't regret reading.

Why Sherlock Is Better Than the Original

Yes, I know what people say about books. And usually, I'm on their side. Green's The Fault in Our Stars is better than the film will ever manage to be. Not to mention Tolkien's LotR triology. I was about 11 when I read the books. That's why the films are NOTHING like the moving pictures I saw in my head. 

However. There is one exception. Sherlock. I hope people are wrong and that there are actual people who are familiar with the originals, such as 'A Study in Scarlett' or 'The Hound of Baskevilles'. And even though I have to admit that his stories would make every screenwriter of NCIS jealous, there is still one thing which Doyle gets wrong.  It's the way he writes Watson. His Watson is flat. He doesn't make much. His only purpose is to see (not to observe!) and to write. 

I accept that there weren't many 'How to Write Good' manuals around in 1895. But one of the most basic things which even Doyle should have known about writing is that you really do not want to have any flat characters in your story. They just spoil the whole thing. You want proof?

Let's take 'A Study in Scarlett' vs 'A Study in Pink'. For me, without doubt, the BBC adaptation wins. Scarlet starts with Watson describing his situation in a rather fancy (read boring) manner.  Doyle could have cut the first  paragraphs down to a few sentences. After all, no one is reading Doyle's book because of Watson. And delivering what your readers are expecting to read is one of the most crucial facts about writing which  everyone picking up a pen to put a story down should keep in mind. Additionally, a big part of the story focuses on Holmes' clever deductions to show that he is an extraordinary guy. But most of it does not add much to the actual story.

Now. Pink has those showing-Sherlock-is-nuts parts as well. Actually, they are present in the most authentic manner I've ever seen, keeping as close to the original as possible. And yet. The story feels completely different. Why? It's because of John. This John makes up his own mind. He may have less accurate (or more realistic) deduction skills, but he is not afraid to stand up against Sherlock whenever he thinks his friend is wrong. He's not afraid of an argument. He means business. At the same time, unlike Watson, he does not take himself too important.

Because of this, Doyle's Watson ends up being the guy with whom Holmes shares a flat and he becomes his mere audience, while Sherlock and John are not just flat mates but friends. Holmes does not really rely on Watson. Anyone else could fill that position just fine. On the contrary, Sherlock needs John just as much as John needs Sherlock. Sure, for different reasons. While Sherlock manages to add some content to John's life, John becomes some sort of Sherlock's moral compass keeping him 'human'. Otherwise, Sherlock's customers may hire a serial killer on him before Sherlock could actually finish the case... And even though Sherlock dose not care about what people are thinking about him, John's friendship matters to him. And, what's more, their friendship becomes one of his obvious weaknesses. It's so obvious that Moriarty uses it against him. This is why the BBC's 'Reichenbach Fall' is more touching than the original. Here, Sherlock is not fighting a villain or for his reputation. He is willing to die as a fraud if it means to save John and to ease his friend's pain. I'm not sure if Doyle had been able to say the same about his Sherlock Holmes. 

Doyle's stories are about an extraordinary clever man solving extraordinary puzzles. Sherlock is about two extraordinary people having an extraordinary friendship. And when it comes to writing a good story, friendship always wins. Always.