My
earliest memory of Doctor Who
involves the Daleks. It is from the Jon Pertwee story, “Day of the
Daleks”, the moment when the Daleks exterminate the Controller for
betraying them. His last words as the Daleks screech “Exterminate!”
are, “Who knows? Maybe I’ve just helped to exterminate you.”
That scene had a very powerful effect on me. It scared the living
daylights out of me! For quite some time, Doctor Who
and the Daleks became synonymous with horror as far as I was
concerned. I don’t remember exactly how old I was when I saw that
episode. The story was made in 1972 (a year before I was born), but
TV Ontario (which was the most likely station I saw it on while my
mom was watching it, although it might have been a PBS station) at
the time was generally a couple years behind in broadcasting the
series, and then would repeat stories yet another couple years later,
so in all likelihood, I was around three or four years old.
I
find it interesting to compare the responses people have to the
Daleks. In my experience (which I know doesn’t really count as a
conclusive survey of all viewers, but bear with me), people
introduced to Doctor Who
as children (such as myself or a few of my friends) were terrified by
the Daleks and today, although not so terrified anymore, consider the
Daleks as the iconic adversaries of the Doctor, brilliant and
awesome. People introduced to Doctor Who
as adults (such as my wife) think the Daleks are laughable, dull, and
utterly un-scary, and
are sick to death of them showing up over and over again (although
this is actually now their first appearance in two years).
In
recent years, there has been some criticism amongst even the most
hardened Dalek fans that the Daleks have lost a lot of their scare
factor. Although the Dalek stories of the Russel T Davies years were
epic in scope, with modern special effects finally allowing massive
Dalek armies to appear on screens, there is valid criticism that the
Daleks were too easily defeated. Huge armies look great, but they
have to be stopped, so they are all wiped out...only to return next
time with a bigger army and a bigger plan...then get wiped out again.
The Daleks’ last appearance in “Victory of the Daleks” was
meant to reverse that trend somewhat, by allowing the Daleks to not
get wiped out at the end. Unfortunately, fans did not respond well to
“Victory of the Daleks”. The story was poor, the characters
nothing but caricatures (especially the Santa Claus version of
Winston Churchill), and the new design of the Daleks themselves was
horrible.
In
the season’s opener, “Asylum of the Daleks”, Steven Moffat
promised to return the scare factor to the Daleks, to return their
chills and thrills, and to make viewers want to hide behind the sofa
once more. Has he succeeded? I think for children, without a doubt.
For more critical adults, perhaps not so much. There are definitely
some chilling moments in this episode, some thrills and excitement,
and an excellent performance from its surprise guest star. Overall,
I’d have to say the episode works. It’s far from perfect and
there are some significant issues with it, but I did enjoy it. It’s
without doubt a step up from many recent episodes (particularly the
dreadful Christmas special), and it makes a decent season opener.
SPOILERS
FOLLOW
“Asylum
of the Daleks” certainly looks
spectacular, particularly the opening shots showing the ruins of the
Dalek homeworld, Skaro (apparently no longer destroyed, but since the
universe was reset a couple of seasons ago, it’s hard to know what
still did or didn’t happen). The giant Dalek-shaped building is at
once both ridiculous and yet strangely fits one’s expectations of
the Daleks. The production team certainly spared no expense giving
this episode the look of a full-blown movie (Moffat has commented
that they want all the episodes of this season to have a stand-alone
movie feel to them). Even the title sequence has been tweaked to give
it a slightly new, edgier look (and I am immensely relieved that the
horrid TARDIS-shaped “DW” in the middle of the logo is finally
gone). Tighter bugets in the last couple of seasons have resulted in
a few episodes looking rather cheaper than the ones that came just a
couple years before, but “Asylum” certainly doesn’t suffer from
that problem.
However,
there is a lot more to a good story than looking good, and while
“Asylum” pulls off much of what it needs to be a good story, it
has a few stumbling blocks along the way. The premise itself is very
good. The idea that the Daleks have a whole planet set aside for
their own insane is an intriguing concept. Unfortunately, once we get
down to the planet, we never really see what sets the Daleks there
apart from the ones who put them there. These Daleks are all coming
out of hibernation and are sluggish. While this helps keep the heroes
alive, it gives us no insight into why these Daleks were considered
so terrible that even their own kind couldn’t keep them around.
This is a shame as I absolutely love the idea that the Daleks
consider hatred the purest form of beauty. Too often, Dalek stories
fall into the trap of thinking the Daleks are like Cybermen:
emotionless and bound by logic. Even their own creator, Terry Nation,
fell into this trap sometimes (see 1979’s “Destiny of the
Daleks”). But the Daleks have never been emotionless. From their
very first appearance, they have been beings driven by hate and fear.
Yes, fear. Fear of
anything different from them. So hatred being beauty is a wonderful
insight into Dalek character and culture, something the show
desperately needs in order to elevate the Daleks beyond just tin
pepper pots who shout, “Exterminate!” As such, I found it very
disappointing that we don’t actually get to see this “divine
hatred” that has resulted in the Daleks creating a whole world for
their insane because they can’t bring themselves to destroy
creatures of such beauty. The Daleks in the Asylum seem like nothing
more than regular Daleks with a few mechanical problems.
It’s
also a shame we don’t really get to see more of the old-style
Daleks. In advance of this episode, Steven Moffat proclaimed that it
would contain “every Dalek ever”, and publicity shots showed Matt
Smith, Karen Gillan, and Arthur Darvill posing with Dalek props from
the old series, even ones from the sixties. Those Daleks are in the
episode amongst the Daleks in the Asylum. Even the special weapons
Dalek from 1989’s “Remembrance of the Daleks” is there. But you
have to look carefully to notice them, as they’re never in the
forefront. All the ones in the forefront are new series Daleks.
Strangely, even the Daleks in intensive care, the ones specifically
stated to be survivors of those old stories are new series Daleks.
Shouldn’t those have been the ones they used the old props for? To
be nit-picky, most of those occasions referenced (like Exxilon) had
no Dalek survivors, so
there shouldn’t even be any Daleks there in the first place. (Oh,
and to be super nit-picky, they pronounce Spiridon wrong. To be fair,
they pronounce it the way the word actually looks, not the way it was
actually pronounced in 1973’s “Planet of the Daleks”. The same
mistake was made in “Remembrance of the Daleks”.) Of course,
these references to old stories are not things most viewers (who have
never seen those stories) are likely to get, and they don’t intrude
on the story at all. As such, they constitute a very minor complaint.
I
mentioned earlier that Dalek stories often fall into the trap of
treating Daleks like Cybermen. It’s odd that this story completely
avoids that trap in one way (acknowledging Dalek emotions and their
concept of “divine hatred”), yet completely falls into it in a
very different way. Since when have Daleks turned people into Daleks?
They sometimes capture and enslave, yes. They have been known to turn
people into near automatons (Robomen), but they don’t turn them
into Daleks. That’s a Cyberman trait. Daleks don’t want their own
kind tainted by other kinds. Daleks exterminate other Daleks that
aren’t pure enough (see “Victory of the Daleks” and
“Remembrance of the Daleks”). When Dalek Sek (in “Daleks in
Manhattan”), the supreme commander of the Cult of Skaro,
contemplated that there were valuable attributes in humans that the
Daleks could learn from and then actually made himself half human,
the rest of the cult exterminated him. Yet now we learn that the
nanobots on the Asylum will fully convert humans who are intelligent
enough into Daleks. I have to say, I don’t buy it. Maybe the
nanobots are insane too?
There’s
also the matter of the hive mind, or rather “Path Web”. The
Daleks have never had anything like this before, and the idea that
someone can simply erase information from Dalek minds like they’re
computers just doesn’t work for me. Again, this is more a Cyberman
trait, and I am forced to wonder if maybe the Cybermen would have
been a better choice of villains for this story. They would have had
to do away with the wonderful concept of divine hatred, but since
that is not really explored anyway, it wouldn’t make a large
difference. The Cybermen on the Asylum could be the ones for whom
conversion went wrong or were just plain rejected. They could be the
ones who still retain some of their previous humanity. Just a
thought. Jonathan Blum contemplates the same idea in his own review of this episode, so it seems I'm not alone.
That
said, the (not particularly surprising) revelation that Oswin is
actually a Dalek makes for a very strong, and even heart-wrenching
storyline (one that could have been just as strong if she had turned
out to be a Cyberman). Indeed, Oswin is the best part of “Asylum of
the Daleks”. Of course, I can’t talk about her without referring
to the surprise appearance of the actor playing her: Jenna-Louise
Coleman. In this day and age, it’s hard to keep a secret like this.
Yet despite numerous preview screenings of this episode around the
world, the news didn’t leak. The press and fans lucky enough to
attend the preview screenings kept quiet, allowing the rest of the
world their moment of shock when they saw her. For the few people not
in the know, Coleman will be portraying the Doctor’s new companion,
who will be replacing Amy and Rory later in the season. She will make
her début in this year’s Christmas special. Although her casting
was announced months ago, and she’s been in the British press quite
frequently ever since, no mention was ever made of her appearing in
the season opener.
There’s
been a lot of speculation as to what this appearance means. We know
very little about what her companion role will be like. Even her
character’s name was kept hidden for quite some time. We now know
that it is Clara. This is all we know for sure, but rumours have
abounded since well before “Asylum” aired that her full name is
Clara Oswin. Her character in “Asylum” is Oswin Oswald. Are they
the same character, or will Clara simply be a relation of Oswin’s?
It would be very much in keeping with Moffat’s style for him to
have performed some “timey wimey” manipulations, having us meet
Clara/Oswin out of sequence, showing us the end of her life before
the earlier parts. While this would be a new approach for a companion
(although it’s already been done with River Song), I really hope
this is not the case. Knowing that the character is destined to turn
into a Dalek will make viewing her travels with the Doctor rather
depressing.
Speculation
aside, however, what’s important now is her role in this episode,
and here she really is the life of this episode. Oswin has a
snarkiness to her that is typical of many of Moffat’s female
characters, but Coleman brings it alive in a captivating and
enjoyable way. Her banter with both the Doctor and Rory is a lot of
fun, and if her companion role is anything like Oswin, she’ll be a
joy to watch. She also makes the story of Oswin’s transformation
into a Dalek, her accepting that she is a Dalek, and then reclaiming
her humanity totally heart-wrenching. Recent Doctor Who
has suffered a dearth of believable, sympathetic characters, so it’s
very refreshing to see Oswin be a character I can fully believe in.
In this particular case, I think it is down more to the performance
than it is to the writing. I have only one problem with Oswin and her
story, but it has nothing to do with Coleman’s performance or her
character. Since Oswin turns out to be a Dalek and when we see the
real her, she speaks as a Dalek (kudos to Nicholas Briggs,
Dalek-voice extraordinaire, for creating such a sympathetic Dalek
voice for her!), how is it, through the rest of the episode, she is
able to broadcast over the communications system in her human voice?
Where is that human voice coming from since she doesn’t seem to
have human vocal chords anymore? In the fantasy world she has
constructed for herself, speaking in her human voice makes sense, as
does having her hear herself as if she is human. But how do the
Doctor and the others manage to hear her as human? Unfortunately, it
makes no sense, yet removing it would change the story completely.
I’ve
left for last the story’s subplot about Amy and Rory’s
relationship and impending divorce. This is my biggest problem with
the episode because once again, we’re treated to developments in
their relationship and characters that are just thrown in because
somebody (presumably Moffat) thought it would be cool rather than
because it’s a natural development that arises out of what’s come
before. I suppose, though, that I’ve come to expect that from Amy
and Rory, particularly Amy. She will forever be a character that just
doesn’t feel real to me, whose only real constant of personality is
a horrible selfishness that is starting to disgust me. Those who have
read my reviews of last season will know I was very dissatisfied with
the handling of Amy’s pregnancy and the way that Amy and Rory seem
totally unaffected by having their daughter kidnapped and never
getting to raise her. It’s a criticism I am not alone in. Shortly
before “Asylum” aired, Karen Gillan said in an interview (in
response to this criticism from fandom) that we will be learning some
pertinent new information about this in the new season, and heavily
implied this new information would put an end to the criticism. I
don’t know for sure if the revelation that Amy can no longer have
children is meant to be this new information, but I have a feeling it
is (although perhaps it is only one part of it). Alas, in my mind, it
only makes the situation worse, as Amy comes across as even more
selfish than ever. I don’t know, but somehow I feel that Rory
waiting around for 2000 years outside a box, protecting her from harm
is a far, far bigger sacrifice than “giving him up”. Sure, giving
up someone you love because it’s better for that person can be a
horrible emotional sacrifice, but it’s one that’s over with
relatively quickly in the grand scheme of things. And in this case,
it’s not even to his benefit. Has Amy really never considered
talking to Rory about
the situation to find out his opinion? He clearly doesn’t want her
to give him up. His desire to stay with her outweighs his desire for
kids. A short talk could have revealed that to her if she didn’t
realize it already. What about adoption? Even though she can’t get
pregnant anymore, there are still ways they can have children
together, thus making them both happy so they don’t need to break
up. Yet Amy apparently never considers any of them. Instead, she
chooses the option that just makes things worse and ruins Rory’s
life. Although honestly, I don’t know what Rory sees in her. I
certainly wouldn’t stick around with someone who slapped me so
frequently. Seriously, is anyone else starting to get just a little
creeped out by how frequently Amy slaps Rory? Just imagine if it were
the other way around, with Rory slapping Amy.
Alas,
Amy slapping Rory is symptomatic of Moffat’s portrayal of women. It
comes across as Moffat saying, “Look! She’s a strong, independent
woman because she can stand up to her man! She doesn’t take any
crap from anyone.” But she also has to have a baby, just like all
other women. And the moment she can no longer have a baby, she’s
not good enough for the man she loves. Sigh. In his review, Jonathan Blum paraphrases a comment from his
wife (author Kate Orman, who wrote many popular Doctor Who
novels in the 90’s): “Can we please have a storyline for Amy Pond
which does not involve things either going into, or coming out of,
her ladybits?” I am one hundred percent in agreement with Kate
here. I would only make one small change: Can we please have a
storyline for any
female character which does not involve things either going into, or
coming out of, her ladybits? Even Oswin, a great character in this
story, spends much of the time flirting with the Doctor and Rory.
It’s getting old and tiring.
Luckily,
the Amy/Rory subplot is a fairly small (though significant) part of
the episode, and the rest of the episode is quite enjoyable. There
are flaws in the rest of the story as well, but “Asylum of the
Daleks” does manage to rise above them and provide fifty minutes of
enjoyment. It’s a definite step up from many of last season’s
episodes, and I hope further episodes this season continue to step up
higher.
No comments:
Post a Comment