Sunday 2 September 2012

Insane In The Membrane! Asylum of the Daleks Review


The B-Movie style poster for last night's Doctor Who
So, Doctor Who returned last night by doing what it does best - not exactly what anyone expected it to. 

The gist.  The Doctor, Amy and Rory are kidnapped by human-shaped Dalek 'puppets' and sent to go and destroy a kind of Dalek Borstal - the Daleks themselves are too scared to go down there.  This must be a pretty harsh place then, we think.  We had been told (or at least it had been bandied around on Twitter) that we would see all the old Daleks over the years in action which turned out not to be sort of but not really true - quite rightly.  Although it would have given me and a lot of other fanboys a short-term thrill to see the Specials Weapon Dalek in action again, it would probably have happened at the expense of the plot and characters and other things that keep non-obsessive normal people watching.  When Davros was brought back a few years ago it didn't really work because there was no reason for him to be there other than for people to go "Ooh, look, Davros!" before going back to trying to figure out what the hell was going on.

Instead, Steven Moffat's script did the exact opposite - it relaunched the Daleks, and did it by not so much rewriting the Daleks' history as just treating it as something less important than the Daleks' present.  It introduced new things like a Parliament of Daleks, complete with a blobby Prime Minister and the idea of the eponymous Asylum - a place for all the imperfections to go hang out.  It also ended the idea of the Daleks seeing The Doctor as an arch-enemy by having them forget who he is, which is such a brilliantly simple way of rebooting some established villains it reminds you there's life in the old format yet.  It also did all this efficiently and without too much fuss so it could get down to the really interesting task of dealing with The Doctor's current companions divorcing and his new companion being a Dalek (and now an exploded Dalek at that).

After the body/psycho-horror of seeing someone being converted into a Dalek again (as in Revelation of the Daleks), the Cybermen in Doctor Who are redundant again.  The idea of someone willingly being trapped in their own mind to avoid accepting the fact they're now a Dalek was done in a genuinely dramatic and shocking way.  It also upset some continuity nuts online (we'll get to them in a bit).  In fact, the whole episode had its feet firmly planted in the Horror genre instead of the Action/Sci-Fi tales one normally expects from a Dalek story.  Rory tip-toeing through a crypt with cobwebby, dormant, lunatic Daleks was much more exciting than CGI-fleets of them going 'Bang!'  And the worry that Amy might be going to turning into a Dalek felt like a genuine worry, even though everyone knows that the chances are pretty good for The Doctor and friends surviving.  There were a few things that in retrospect didn't exactly add up (like, for instance, The Doctor not realising that the Woman From Emmerdale was going to be a Dalek even though he's been chatting to her all episode), but on the whole it felt true to its own agenda.

The aforementioned continuity-nuts online weren't keen on a few aspects of the story, one of the most frequently voiced criticisms online being that the Daleks don't turn humans into Daleks.  Which is the kind of Doctor Who criticism that is great if you fancy a laugh.  When will people realise that it's so much easier to accept the fact that Doctor Who frequently contradicts its own past (and sometimes its own present) and celebrate that?  Because it's that willingness to disregard its own past that is the reason it's lasted for 50-odd years.  It's nothing new for fans to dislike rewriting supposedly established concepts and one wearily reaches for the infamous 70s review of 'A Deadly Assassin' to see why these fans end up looking a bit po-faced and silly.  In fact, a lot of the 'classic' Doctor Who stories make no sense compared to what went before them (Spearhead From Space, Genesis Of The Daleks and so on).  This is why I like the show; it's willing to keep the most important things about the show and chuck out the past if it gets in the way of a good story in the present.  There are very few 'rules' in Doctor Who story telling.  Terrence Dicks said that the rule of thumb of what was important about the past of the show was just what you could remember, and Paul Cornell said that it is the job of the fan, not the writers, to worry about continuity, if they're that way inclined.

Why can't the Daleks turn people into Daleks?  Aside from the fact it's something which has been done before anyway, they are fictional, you know?  They didn't used to be able to fly or have a creator called Davros, and they might one day be able to grow legs and go for a run, or sing Abba songs, or give birth to little baby Daleks or whatever.  It's part of the fun.  I like being a fan of a show that instead of surreptitiously changing its lead actor James Bond-style and hoping no-one notices makes it into a massive plot-device (and one that isn't really explained for over 5 years), and carries on with the more important task of making ambitious and interesting stories for anyone who fancies watching.  Because its always succeeded as a show primarily concerned with stories, not as a show aimed at a fanbase.  So when I read people writing thjings like 'Daleks turning people into Daleks makes no sense' I think 'Yeah, I was forgetting that a man travelling in a box that's bigger on the inside is exactly the premise that requires a gritty attention to detail in order to work' and move on (or write a blog about it depending on how pompous I'm feeling).  There's been more expert analysis on fans and continuity on Phillip Sandifer's TARDIS Eruditorium blog comment sections if that's the kind of thing that floats yer boat.

So that little rant over with, what next?  We've been told that this series isn't going to worry too much about complex story arcs and is going to do more individual stories which I think is a good thing, not because I'm against them per se but because I think Doctor Who is at its best when changing direction and we've had quite a lot of story arcs over the last few years.  Amy and Rory are going, which will make me sad; Woman From Emmerdale who turned out to be a Dalek and was blown up is going to be a new companion in Christmas, which should be interesting; and there are some dinosaurs on a spaceship next week which will be fun, though might contradict a Jon Pertwee story from the 1970s or something.  It's good to see a show approach its 50th year and  being relevant event telly again.



6 comments:

  1. Great write-up! I agree with every word. So refreshing to see the Daleks being used in a normal rather than bombastic-the-universe-will-implode way for once. I hope this series will see in the Big Anniversary in a fitting way. I trust the Moff to do so!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Cheers! I too trust the Moff - I'm positive he's going to make the big 5-0 something special!

      Delete
  2. Its a shame really because I rather like the cybermen, although I dislike the new origins of the cybermen... maybe we could see a reboot story for them, but pay it a bit more Fan service & set it on Mondas or Telos.
    Personally I would have liked to have seen a few more of the old school Darleks even if it was just them doing the terrorizing in the Asylum rather than just paint jobs of the more recent style Darleks. I think you could happily have used the Special Weapons Darlek in that respect.
    I'm still unsure if I liked or disliked the non use & the rather sad dismissal of Davros. Not just in this episode but in all the "New Who" Eccleston’s Doctor gave him a nod, & I don't know about other fans but even before it was announced I got the feeling that Tennant's Doctors was leading up to a Davros episode.(Shame it was such a big let down when he was brought back) It’s not that I mind him not being there, but I mind him being forgotten altogether. An example (all be it a rather OTT one but never the less the best way I can think to get my point across is like this)
    My issue with the Recent Christopher Nolan film The Dark Knight Rises was the complete lack of any mention in the film of the Joker. In the Dark Knight the Joker pretty much wipes out the mob, kidnaps a load of the people & blows up a hospital & causes chaos, yet in The Dark Knight Rises everyone seem to have forgotten he ever existed & piles all the blame of the events from the Dark Knight on Batman &/or Harvey Dent.
    & that's my problem with excluding Davros from the Big Darlek stories. I'm not saying he need to be there all the time or even some of the time or even appear at all. All Eccleston did was use one line of dialog but it was enough to al least acknowledge the poor fella.

    So in Summery, Yes I liked the episode, yes I agree mostly with Pete’s review (I’m just saying it was in the foreground why not use the special weapons Darlek to blow up a few doors????)
    & Yes I’ll agree that my mad Davros ramblings are a little Fanboy’esk, but its once thing to just play fast & loose with continuity it’s another to just ignore a massive bit of Darlek back story.
    I’ll shut up now.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I do get the whole link with The Joker/Davros treatment. I didn't know whether them not having The Joker mentioned in The Dark Knight Rises was to do with Heath Ledger dying or not? Or maybe it was to stop him over-shadowing Bane? It's certainly true that with Davros, whenever he's around the Daleks become a little bit more like cannon fodder and he gets all the good lines.

      But yeah, it does seem like Davros is gone for now. I really do think Asylum is an attempt to wipe the Dalek History slate clean and do something new with them at a later date!

      Delete
    2. Nolan has said that no mention was made as a mark of respect for Heath Ledger.
      Personally I'd have thought mentioning that his most enduring creation is still out there despite the actor's death would have been a better way of showing respect but Nolan probably knows best!

      Delete
  3. Great review Pete. I've sat and watched Asylum twice now and still haven't quite made up my mind about it. I'm a huge fan of Moffat's writing in the RTD years and while I think he's made a lot of missteps since becoming showrunner (The Beast Below and The Wedding of River Song being the first that jump to mind) I'm generally first in line to extol his time on the show. This just felt... off.

    A lot of it might stem from my disappointment with last season's finale. The idea of people believing the Doctor had died just didn't sit well with a time traveller who has been to the beginning and the end of the universe. How would it help? How would it affect the way people dealt with him? Would they assume he was from a point in his timeline before his death? Would they think he'd pulled a Jesus? Turns out it would have no effect at all. People don't even believe he's dead! Similarily, the Dalek's forgetting who the Doctor is intrigues me, yet as the Dalek's can clearly travel in time surely any trip back in time would cause them to re-download the information? Maybe I'm just overthinking it.

    And then the new 'blockbuster of the week' theme didn't really work for me, it's not something I find suits a show about a man who is at his best outthinking problems rather than blowing them up. A 'The Empty Child/The Doctor Dances' style two-parter (the high point of 2 parters since 2005) would have suited the concept much better as it desperately needed room to breathe, not least for the B-story of Amy and Rory's marriage. Breaking them up only to reconcile them 45 minutes later just felt unnecessarily lumped in.

    This isn't to say the episode didn't have highlights. This was, without a doubt, the best use of the Daleks in the new series. SM managed to get more tension out of a dimly lit corridor than has been found in any world ending threat they've come up with previously. I would have liked to have more of the new paradigm daleks but considering the fan backlash against them I can understand the decision. Oswin was incredible, Matt Smith's Doctor continues to be better than anyone deserves, and I'm eagerly awaiting next week's episode. Maybe I'll watch it again, lights out this time, after Michael's gone to bed and with popcorn. Clearly this was how it was meant to be seen.

    ReplyDelete