It’s
become a staple now. Every 25th of December, Doctor Who
returns to television screens for a between-series—or, in this
case, since the series is split over the fall and spring, a
mid-series—special, all of them ostensibly a Christmas special,
although some with more obvious Christmas trappings than others. As
the Christmas specials need to appeal to a wider audience base than
the standard series episodes, they tend to be fairly disconnected (no
arc plots, for example) and more light-hearted. They tend to aim more
for pure fun than for thinking. There have been a few exceptions, of
course, that are more connected to the main series and more
significant. “The Christmas Invasion” had to introduce a new
Doctor, for example, and four years later, “The End of Time” had
to write that Doctor out. This year’s special, “The Snowmen” by
Steven Moffat, is another one of these significant specials, having
to appeal to its wider audience, introduce a new companion, and fit
in with the continuity of the series it comes in the middle of. Given
my general disappointment with many recent episodes, I went into this
special with a certain amount of trepidation, but also a great deal
of hope. This was an opportunity for great changes, but also an
opportunity for things to go dreadfully wrong. At the very least,
however, I was confident that it could not possibly be any worse than
last year’s “The Doctor, the Widow and the Wardrobe”.
And
thank goodness I was right about that. It’s considerably better
than last year’s special (although my wife feels that it’s even
worse, so go figure). That’s not to say that it’s a perfect
episode. Indeed, it’s quite far from that. There are a number of
problem areas from two-dimensional characters to a groan-worthy
resolution. However, it is possible to watch the episode and feel
entertained, laugh a few times, and even experience a moment or two
of tense excitement. I would still consider it amongst the weakest
Christmas specials, but it’s not all bad.
SPOILERS
FOLLOW
The
episode actually opens quite strongly, with a bit of backstory about
the villain, Dr Simeon, showing how his isolation from the world goes
back as far as his childhood and helping to set up his motivations.
As an introduction, it works beautifully. Unfortunately, Dr Simeon
gets no other real character development at any other point in the
episode. It’s a shame as Richard E Grant is a fabulous actor (he’s
even played the Doctor twice before: first as one of the many
incarnations in the spoof, “The Curse of Fatal Death”, and then
in the animated web series, “Scream of the Shalka”), but you
wouldn’t really know it from this episode since he gets so little
to do. Dr Simeon stands around looking sinister and speaking quietly,
but rarely actually doing anything. He makes a lot of threats, but
never actually follows through on them (except when killing the
nameless workers at the beginning). When his snowmen have surrounded
the house, he tells the Doctor, “Release [the ice governess] to us.
You have five minutes.” A full ten minutes of the episode pass
before the Doctor returns to the door to find Simeon and his snowmen
still waiting there. When Clara and the ice governess fall to the
ground, they don’t even make an attempt to grab the broken bits of
ice before the Doctor materialises the TARDIS around them.
In
one sense, it’s nice to have a proper villain in the story for a
change. Steven Moffat doesn’t actually write very many villains.
Most of the time, the “threat” comes from misprogrammed robots
(such as in “Girl in the Fireplace”), misunderstood monsters
(“The Beast Below”), or races of creatures that have no
individual identities (like the weeping angels or the vashta nerada).
However, when Moffat does write villains, they tend to be quite
two-dimensional (such as Simeon here or Madame Kovarian in Series VI)
and never exhibit much actual sense of threat, so in that sense, the
appearance of a villain is kind of pointless.
That
lack of threat, I feel, is one of the major problems with “The
Snowmen”, a problem that goes beyond just Simeon. The snowmen
themselves only glower and rarely do anything to create a feeling of
menace or danger. The ice governess is the only active “villain”
in the story, the only thing that represents a credible threat, but
that threat is totally ruined when the one person she manages to kill
is brought back to life.
Indeed,
Clara’s death/non-death is one of the major contributors to the
lack of any real threat in the story. In previous reviews, I’ve
pointed out the trend Steven Moffat has of never letting anyone stay
dead, be it Rory’s multiple deaths, the Doctor resurrecting the
minds of everyone killed by the vashta nerada, or the weeping angels
transporting you back in time and letting you live out the rest of
your natural life. The fact that dead characters never stay dead
removes any sense of worry from the viewer. We know that, even if
they die, they’ll be okay. Of course, we know the good guys will
(almost) always win in the end, but what helps make a story tense and
exciting is not knowing what losses the good guys will have to suffer
in order to win. In Steven Moffat’s stories, the good guys never
suffer any losses—not lasting ones at any rate. Even the final loss
of Amy and Rory doesn’t really count as we know they lived a happy,
full life and raised a family.
That
said, there is one moment in this episode where things actually
became tense and, for the first time, I started to feel a credible
threat. The Doctor’s use of the memory worm to defeat the Great
Intelligence was particularly inspired and seemed a great way to wrap
up the problem. But then it didn’t work. The Intelligence taking
over Simeon’s body and freezing the Doctor was even more of an
inspired moment. The Doctor rarely comes under any kind of direct
threat these days. Worded threats get spoken, but nobody ever
directly opposes him. Even Daleks never actually fire at him.
However, this time, the villain actually physically attacks the
Doctor, and for a brief moment, it looks like the villain might
actually kill the Doctor. For just that brief moment, there is a true
credible threat.
There
were so many ways this could have resolved and kept the threat real.
Vastra could have regained her senses and attacked Simeon with her
sword, distracting the Intelligence long enough for the Doctor to
escape and come up with a new plan. The Doctor could have retreated
back to the house and told the others to think really hard about
rain, knowing that the Intelligence had a link to Clara and Captain
Latimer’s family.
Alas
no. Clara dies and everyone cries. And the crying defeats the
Intelligence. This resolution is problematic in more ways than just
being yet another “love defeats all” ending (an ending that is
far overused on the show these days). It fails to work in the same
way that the resolution of “The Doctor, the Widow and the Wardrobe”
fails to work. It’s passive. Nobody actually does anything to
defeat the Great Intelligence. They cry because they’re sad (which
is fair enough; their governess just died after all), and that just
happens, by pure chance, to defeat the Intelligence. They don’t
actively try to defeat
the Intelligence; they just do. Even the “love defeats all”
resolution could work if someone
were simply active
about it. If the Doctor had gone back to the house, as I suggested
above, and told everyone, “Don’t be afraid to cry. Show the
Intelligence how your really feel!” then, at least, somebody would
be actually doing something. Coincidence can set a story in motion,
but coincidence should never
end it.
The
use of the Great Intelligence, itself, is an interesting choice for
this story and a nice nod to the past (the Great Intelligence first
appeared in the second Doctor stories, “The Abominable Snowmen”
and “The Web of Fear”). That said, the Intelligence is very
different in this story than it is in the previous two. As the two
Patrick Troughton Great Intelligence stories are both set after this
one, it seems clear that Moffat is attempting an origin story. The
Doctor showing the Intelligence the map of the London Underground
nicely sets up the Intelligence using that as its invasion point in
“The Web of Fear”. However, in “The Abominable Snowmen”, it’s
made pretty clear that the Intelligence has been residing in the
Tibetan monastery for several centuries, meaning it shouldn’t be in
London being created by Dr Simeon. Still, Doctor Who
has had much worse continuity errors in its time. What is odder, is
the Doctor’s apparent forgetfulness. When he shows the Intelligence
the map of the Underground, it seems deliberate. He seems to know
exactly what he’s up against. Why else make such a big deal about
the map? However, at the end, as Vastra and Jenny are scoffing at the
threat the Intelligence could pose in the future, he looks at the
business card and remarks softy, “The Great Intelligence. Rings a
bell. The Great Intelligence.” It looks very much like he can’t
quite remember his previous encounters.
Now,
in the Doctor’s personal timeline, many centuries have passed since
the events of “The Abominable Snowmen” and “The Web of Fear”.
It makes sense that he doesn’t have a perfect memory of everything
that happened during his second incarnation. However, I find it very
unlikely that he would forget the Intelligence itself, especially
since “The Web of Fear” is the story where he first meets
Alistair Gordon Lethbridge Stewart, then only a colonel. It’s very
hard to accept that the Doctor would forget his first encounter with
a person who would go on to become one of his closest, dearest
friends, one of the few people he maintains ties with over multiple
incarnations. Perhaps this is a hint of a future mystery—something
playing with the Doctor’s memory. We shall see.
Of
course, this story attempts to present a rather different Doctor, one
who has withdrawn from the world and no longer helps people, and it
does a pretty good job of showing a grumpy Doctor and a Doctor who
finds it hard to resist the temptation to move back to his old life.
However, it never really succeeds at convincing that the Doctor
hasn’t helped people for a long time. Part of the problem is that
the tragedy of Amy and Rory’s loss is not a very successful
tragedy—something that is the fault of the previous story, “The Angels Take Manhattan”, and not this one. However, the fact that
all the Doctor’s non-involvement happens between episodes,
off-screen, doesn’t help either. It would have worked much better
if the Doctor had only recently arrived in Victorian London with the
intention to stop helping, but not quite managing it. Of course, the
eleventh Doctor has already displayed a tendency to sulk for
centuries at a time, so this is only a minor issue that I have with
this episode. Even if it’s hard to accept how the Doctor got into
the state he’s in, he is presented believably from that point on,
and his redemption is easier to swallow.
One
thing that I don’t quite get, however, is why the Doctor set the
TARDIS up on a cloud. Sure, it makes for a very pretty stair-climbing
sequence and fits the whole “fairy tale” idea that Steven Moffat
is so fond of, but there’s no in-world explanation for it. I don’t
dispute that the TARDIS is capable of it. We know it can extend its
force field and that it can turn invisible. However, why bother? Why
not just set the TARDIS down in a dark alley? It comes across as
something that is there purely to look nice and no other reason.
The
most significant part of “The Snowmen” is, of course, the
introduction of new companion, Clara Oswin Oswald—along with the
mystery of her true identity. It was pretty clear that there would be
some sort of link between Clara and Oswin from “Asylum of the Daleks”, and this episode makes that explicit, even if it doesn’t
explain exactly what that link is. I rather liked Oswin in “Asylum”,
mostly down to Jenna Louise Coleman’s performance, and I still kind
of liked her in “Snowmen”, again mostly down to her performance. Coleman brings a certain energy to the role that helps keep the viewer's attention.
Unfortunately, as we get to know her in this story (or more
precisely, don’t get
to know her), she begins to exhibit the same problems as Dr Simeon
and all the other characters in this episode: two-dimensionality. Who
is Clara? I don’t mean technical details about her history. I
understand there’s supposed to be a mystery about her identity. I’m
referring again to her wants and desires, her motivations. We learn
that she lives some sort of double life, both as a governess and a
part-time barmaid. In times of stress, she reverts to a Cockney
accent, indicating that’s her native accent. But we never get a
hint as to why or how she accomplishes these things—and seeing as
this version of Clara dies in this episode, we probably never will.
Part of the problem is, she never does anything that doesn't relate directly to the plot. But that’s not how real people work. No matter how
invested we are in something, we have moments where our concentration
slips, moments when we say something or do something incongruous to
the situation. From the moment Clara first appears, everything is
directly related to the main plot. There’s never a moment when
Clara just gets to be Clara. The closest we get is her talk with the
bar owner, but even that is just to set up her going to her other
job, which is even more directly related to the plot. I’m not
saying we need to see long segments of Clara’s home life. It only
takes a few small strokes to add a little more dimension and make her
feel like a fully rounded character.
Instead,
what we end up with in “The Snowmen” is yet another female
character who has no identity beyond the man in her life—the
Doctor. Worse, her only function in the story is as a “manic pixie dream girl”, a quirky character whose sole function is to
re-energize and motivate the male hero. This sort of thing is
becoming incredibly tiring in Steven Moffat’s writing. He even ups
the ante here by killing her off and making her a “companion in the
refrigerator”. (The “woman in the refrigerator” is a trope
named after events from Green Lantern #54,
in which the Green Lantern finds his girlfriend dead and stuffed in a
refrigerator. The trope refers to the incredibly common tactic of
killing off female characters in order to advance the male hero’s
story arc. While the reverse does sometimes happen, it is much
rarer.) I apologize for sounding so bitter, but I really would like
to see something different for
a change. (See here for more of my thoughts on this problem.)
I
actually thought Clara and the Doctor’s first encounter in the
opening of the episode was very good—up until Clara runs after the
Doctor. Until that moment, we saw a believable interaction between
two people who happened to bump into each other. As the Doctor
leaves, Clara starts to return to the bar where she works, but then
suddenly runs after him, catches up to his cab, and quite amazingly
climbs on top. But why? What reason does she have to follow after him
like that? Her encounter with him is weird, sure, but we haven’t
learnt enough about her yet to accept that she chases after weird
men. And we don’t learn enough about her later to make us
understand retroactively, either. The rest of the episode continues
in much the same way. She does things because the plot requires her
to, not because we have any clear idea of her character.
The
other characters don’t fare a whole lot better. The Paternoster
Gang of Madame Vastra, Jenny, and Strax all first appeared in the
Series VI story, “A Good Man Goes to War” (although, at the time,
Strax was not part of the gang). All three of them were much better
characters in their first story, even if there were so many
characters in that story that none of them got much individual
attention. It’s interesting, as “A Good Man Goes to War” is one
of Moffat’s better recent scripts, and actually does a much better
job with characterization than usual for him. It’s almost as if
having very little time with any individual character forced him to
work harder to make each character more identifiable. Or perhaps it’s
that so little time with each character makes me as a viewer, more
forgiving of a lack of development. Either way, the addition of more
time fails to add anything new to these characters.
Jenny,
for example, is characterless in “The Snowmen”. She says a few
lines here and there, but hardly does anything at all the entire
story. She was far more active in her limited role in “A Good Man
Goes to War”, proving a foil to Vastra’s excesses and taking part
in the final battle against the Headless Monks. We even got to see a
little bit of actual affection between her and Vastra. In “The
Snowmen”, we get told explicitly that they’re married (confirming
the lesbian relationship that is only hinted at in “A Good Man”),
but we never see any moments of actual affection between them.
Vastra
has a slightly larger role than Jenny in this episode, but it’s
mostly to provide exposition (in her initial encounter with Dr
Simeon) or to scold the Doctor. There’s no actual development of
her as a character. We’re told
that she’s the basis for the fictional Sherlock Holmes, but we
never see this. We never get to see her doing any actual sleuthing
(even the prequel “Vastra Investigates” does not involve any actual
investigating). Indeed, this is a common fault of recent Doctor
Who. We’re constantly told
things, but never shown them.
We’re told that the Doctor doesn’t help people anymore, but we
don’t really see this (since he keeps helping Clara even while
saying he’s not). We’re told that Vastra and Jenny are lovers but we never see a relationship other than mistress and
servant. We’re told that Clara is really amazing, but all she ever
does is run around after the Doctor.
Strax
has a larger role than either Vastra and Jenny in this story, and
it’s primarily as comic relief. The prequels heavily played up the
comic relief aspect of the character and made him look as if he had
no intelligence whatsoever, and this had me quite worried about how
he would be handled in the actual episode. Strax was a fascinating
character in “A Good Man Goes to War”—a Sontaran forced to be a
nurse as a form of penance for crimes, a penance he found
humiliating, but one that had obviously had a profound affect on him.
Although he still talked rough (telling a young boy patient to rest
and get well so that they could meet later on the battlefield and
fight to the death), he clearly had a streak of kindness and a heart
to him. There were hints of the aspects that “The Snowmen” would
later play for laughs (not being able to tell the difference between
men and women, for example, and calling women “boys”), but this
was all part of a surprisingly nuanced character.
Mercifully,
the comic relief aspect of Strax’s character in “The Snowmen”
is not as bad as I feared, although he is very much the butt of most
of the story’s jokes. Nonetheless, he is still not quite the
character he was in “Good Man” and that’s a bit of a shame.
There was an opportunity to develop a very interesting character, but
Moffat chose to focus on the comedy route instead. Still, I would
have to say that Strax is the most nuanced and interesting character
in “The Snowmen”, even if he is not as good as he used to be.
Despite the abuse he takes from the Doctor (and the Doctor says a lot
of really nasty things to him), he does a very good job of ribbing
the Doctor right back and even manipulating the Doctor a little. I
loved the “Mister Holmes” exchange and the line, “Sir, please
do not noogie me during combat prep.” We even get to see a bit of
his nursing skills in his attempts to keep Clara alive.
Then
we get to Captain Latimer and his two children, whose names I can’t
remember without looking them up (Digby and Francesca). There’s a
hint of the difficulties Latimer has relating to his kids (playing
with the theme of Victorian values, which I’ll get into shortly),
but otherwise these three are completely characterless. Digby is a
stock young boy, Francesca a stock young girl, and Latimer...well,
nothing really. We don’t even learn what military branch he’s a
captain of.
I’ve
focused a great deal on the negatives of this story, and while I feel
there are a lot of negatives, it still manages to hold together and
be entertaining, even occasionally gripping, so it’s not all bad.
There are a number of individual bits that I actually highly like.
There are certainly some very funny moments. Many of them involve
Strax and they are not
the ways in which the Doctor puts him down (with comments like
“psychotic potato dwarf”), but with how Strax responds to them
and gets the better of the Doctor in many cases. And the initial
encounter between Simeon and the Doctor, where the Doctor pretends
(badly) to be Sherlock Holmes, is priceless.
There
is also a fairly clever examination of Victorian values running
throughout the whole episode. Unfortunately, I do think this theme
gets a little muddled by everything else going on, but it’s there
nonetheless. Simeon wants to populate the world with living ice
because that’s essentially what he already is. In Victorian times,
men like him and Latimer were expected to be like ice, never showing
emotion, and rising above the lesser peoples of the world. In many
ways, the Snowmen of the title refer to Simeon, Latimer, and other
upper class gentlemen rather than the literal monsters made of snow.
Similarly, we see a glimpse of the classicism of Victorian England in
Clara’s posing as a higher class woman in order to be a governess
and the fact that her Cockney accent has to be her “secret voice”.
I do wish the story had taken more time to examine this theme, rather
than sacrifice it to drawn-out comedy like the memory worm scene
(which took the joke too far by having Strax repeat the same mistake
again). A more
thorough examination of the theme might have actually breathed more
life into the characters, allowing us to see the people behind the
icy masks.
To
finish up, I should briefly comment on the new title sequence: I’m
not overly fond of it. It takes aspects of every previous title
sequence the show has ever had and combines them together, but
therein lies the problem. It tries to do too much and ends up looking
a bit of a mess. The jury’s still out on the new version of the
theme music.
Overall,
“The Snowmen” is a problematic episode, one that exhibits the
same issues I’ve found in a lot of recent Doctor Who
episodes—in particular, two-dimensional characters and a lack of a
credible threat. Still, it does manage to entertain and that,
ultimately, is the primary goal of a Christmas special. I would argue
that it has a few too many continuity references to truly appeal to a
wider audience that doesn’t watch every episode, but it has managed
to get one of the highest AI scores (an 87) of any Christmas special
to date, so obviously the public like it anyway. And overall, I kind
of like it too. At least it’s better than last year’s.
If you could set the Tardis on a cloud, would you not do it? I think that was reason enough for the Doctor.
ReplyDeletePersonally, I actually probably wouldn't, and I don't quite buy the Doctor doing it, either. However, if any Doctor were likely to, it would be the eleventh, so I'll give you that. :)
DeleteGood review, I gave the ep a 10 out of 10 personally. It really clicked for me, due to lack of camp rubbish and lack of the oppressive sidekick ex machina which has plagued Moffatt Who.
ReplyDeleteThere are elements from the New Adventures and the whol fanwank surrounding them in this ep but somehow they were kept under control- I would suggest the director did the pruning job and kept it professional.
Whilst personally I loathe socialist revisionism and Frankfurt School agenda stuff like the homosexual marriage intrusion, you have to judge the unfolding text on its own merits and by its own rules, so I gave the ep a pass for the inclusion of the traditional leftwing Brussels Broadcasting Crap. Likewise the overt hostility to Victorian values- or what 1960s socialist ed defines them as. Those values gifted the country an empire second to none after all, and civilised the world. However, as a cheap shot that went wide without scoring it was fine.
The implication was probably missed that the icy reserve of Victorian England was destroyed by emotional outpouring. This of course totally ignores the structured but still deeply heartfelt grief Victorians expressed in ways we would find over the top. But then Doctor Who crashed on burned on the educational level by Series 2 of the 1963 version.
It was also fascinating to see the Great Intelligence come back, my fave villain, but to see it totally stripped of its Buddhist and gothic overtones, reduced to a psychic space plague with apparent delusions of grandeur.
This article was exhaustingly negative. Merry Christmas, yeah?
ReplyDeleteI liked the article as it put in order many of the thoughts I had about the episode when first watching it. The scene where Clara met the Doctor was very jarring, as I couldn't help but think about the meeting Rose had with him in the 1st episode of season 1 of the new show. Those two are the most similar since they are the only two where The Doctor meets his future companion and immidiatley goes away after leaving a very strong impression. For Rose, The Doctor dazzled her immidiatley by saying "run", being very focused on fighting the plastic killing machines. Rose was enurmed with him and his erratic, heroic behavior and soon after began researching about him until she finaly met him.
ReplyDeleteAnd now, with Clara, you can really see how the story has been reduced. She just sprints off after The Doctor because of a 5 second long conversation during which he has not actualy been all that exceptional. I feel a lot of the charm has vanished from the story.
About the cloud though, I have an explanation and I'm pretty sure it's the correct one. The cloud is used as character development - it is used to symbolise that The Doctor is now aloof - while he always landed in the middle of the place he was going to save before, he now created a sanctuary above a human city, spending his days in the sky, not meddling in the afairs of those below him. There is something The Doctor say near the end of the episode that enforces this idea - when he talks to Clara about his future adventures he says, "no more cloud", signifying the change he went through during the episode, and his return to living among mortals.
You make a very good point about the cloud, and the more I think about the cloud, the more forgiving I become of it. It is actually a nice use of symbolism with the Doctor being "above it all". I think it would have worked better if there had been a better lead into it, but I would have to put that again as a fault of "The Angels Take Manhattan" and less this story.
DeleteThanks for the input!