Sunday 2 September 2012

Asylum of the Daleks




For about two minutes, I wondered if this might actually turn out to be a good story. It turned out to be typical sleep-inducing New Series waffle. Asylum of the Daleks has some pretty impressive visuals- lots of Daleks, flying saucers, impressive sets. Unfortunately it has no substance at all.

Despite the title, this story is not about the Daleks. These Daleks are not doing anything interesting like conquering the universe or enslaving humans. The paper thin premise of the Daleks enlisting Dr Who's aid is simply a cheap device to launch a big mawkish story about the power of LOVE. Once again, the companion's personal emotional drama is the biggest, most important thing in the universe. We get told lots of stuff about how the Daleks call Dr. Who 'the Pretador' and how he is the biggest enemy of the Daleks ever. However, there is no evidence of this onscreen. This is just verbiage. We can only believe that Dr Who is the enemy of the Daleks if we actually see him foiling their invasion plots, blowing up Dalek spaceships and the like. It's a shame we didn't see much of the yellow 'Eternal' Daleks either. I was looking forward to seeing them. Moffat evidently chickened out of using too many of the fun and cool New Paradigm Daleks.

It turns out that Skaro still exists, so presumably the premise of War of the Daleks, with the Daleks fooling Dr. Who into believing he had destroyed Skaro was all true.

Rory and Amy have very much outstayed their welcome. It's clear that the writers have run out of ideas for them because they have them getting divorced (what else do you do with a married couple?). Watching them argue and make up just fills one with a sense of crushing deja vu. Incidently, Amy was making some remarkably sexual poses for such an everyday style outfit. One would expect her to be wearing a slinkier sort of outfit for the poses she was striking. It's incredible how Amy seems to wear that leather jacket ensemble in nearly every story (even when she is supposed to be dressed for Brazil). It's like we are back in the days of JNT, when Tegan had to always wear her stewardess uniform and Nyssa always had to wear that hideous puffy sleeved velvet thing.

The big surprise of this story is the early revelation of new companion Oswin, played by Jenna-Louise Coleman. Only she's died. So it looks like we are going to get another stupid timey-wimey story about Dr. Who meeting a character backwards. What we see of Oswin is not encouraging. She is just another overconfident character who flirts and makes wisecracks all the time.

Not only is Oswin dead, but she has been turned into a Dalek (did anybody fail to see that coming?). I know Revelation of the Daleks had people being converted into Daleks, but that was Davros' idea. Turning people into Daleks is a denial of what Daleks are about. They are obsessed with their own racial superiority and purity. They would not want to turn people into Daleks.

The story ends with a chorus of Doctor Who? How many times have we heard that joke? Dr. Who really is just his name. He really is called that. Get over it.

Dr. Who has clearly never seen an episode of Star Trek Next Generation. Surely it must be obvious she got the milk from a replicator.

15 comments:

  1. This site appears to be about Doctor Who but really seems to dislike it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Do you think I would have bothered writing so many reviews if I didn't like Doctor Who?

      Delete
  2. She is just another overconfident character who flirts and makes wisecracks all the time.

    Which is bad because ...?

    Turning people into Daleks is a denial of what Daleks are about

    But it's not just Davros in "Revelation." Various human/Dalek experiments have been part of Dalek strategy from 1967's "Evil of the Daleks" through 2007's "Evolution of the Daleks."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's bad because that seems to be the default female characterization in the New Series.

      Evil of the Daleks involved making up a perceived weakness in the Daleks not turning people into Daleks. It's an odd story.

      I don't really care about Evolution of the Daleks.

      Delete
    2. Isn't it obvious? They've obviously managed to turn them into pure Dalek DNA, see The Empty Child/The Doctor Dances. And as bad as Evolution of the Daleks is, it's still part of the continuity.

      Delete
  3. Doctor Who is not his name. We don't know his real name -- he goes by the name "The Doctor." "Doctor who?" is a question that frequently gets asked since no one knows his real name, but it is not his name -- no one calls him that.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nobody calls him that except Wotan in The War Machines and everybody in the TV Comic strip.

      But that does not settle the question of whether Dr. Who is his name or not. Luke Skywalker addressed Obi-Wan as 'Ben' but Obi-Wan is still his name.

      Until JNT, the Doctor was credited as Dr. Who at the end of every episode. This is just one of a number of reasons for Dr. Who being his name.

      Delete
  4. Hi Matthew, I'd be fascinated to know what your other reasons are, because the majority of evidence stacks up against "Dr. Who" being his actual name.

    Since the genesis of the show, the character frequently referred to as "Dr. Who" appearing in the television show titled "Doctor Who" was deliberately created to be mysterious, in particular with regard to his origins, race and identity. In fact, the only thing we can be sure of about his name is that it is neither "Dr. Foreman" nor "Dr. John Smith". (We can be sure that Susan's name isn't actually "Susan Foreman" similarly, and it certainly isn't "Susan Who.")

    Apart from the odd nickname "Theta Sigma" which he later uses as a calling card, and the mysterious gallifreyan writing on his crib which doesn't help at all, we really don't know anything about his real name except that he has one, and for some reason could only tell River Song what it was under one specific circumstance. I suspect (hope?) we'll never actually hear it said or see it written in english.

    Steven Moffatt is right when he declares that "Doctor Who" has always been a question, even if both the show and the character are frequently referred to as "Doctor Who". Really, if they'd just appended a question mark in 1963 it would have been a lot clearer. But perhaps less mysterious. Even the 7th Doctor, of whose tenure you and I are both very fond (although I'm afraid Delta and the Bannermen and Paradise Towers were not just his worst stories, but very poor television) frequently (over)used the question mark motif, on his umbrella, vest, etc, and he was hardly the only Doctor to do so.

    JNT by correcting the credits, RTD by explicitly stating in "Rose" that he was "The Doctor. Just: the Doctor", and now SM by emphasising that "Doctor Who" is a question have made it pretty clear by now that "Dr. Who" isn't his name.

    But I'm still interested to know why you think otherwise.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I had believed I was the only person who thought this story was basically cobblers. Apparently I am not, this is something of a relief (though for me the main problem was that the plot Did Not Make Sense). Much as I dislike using the Time War as a quick fix for continuity glips I would much rather say that Skaro got put back because of it than admit that anything written by John Peel actually happened in-universe.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for reading.

      I do have a bit of a soft spot for War of the Daleks. I certainly prefer it to this awful mess of a story.

      Delete
  6. First of all, the nanogenes alter DNA, as shown in The Empty Child/The Doctor Dances, also written by Steven Moffat. This story is the climax of the Doctor/Dalek conflict. Honestly, how could ANYONE have seen Oswin being a Dalek? And have you seen how many so called "fans" complained about the new Daleks??? It even is established in the episode that the nanogenes turn people into the Time War Daleks. And does it matter if Amy is wearing a bikini or not?? Also, the Amy and Rory thing is hardly the main focus of the episode.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for reading and offering your thoughts.

      Delete
    2. Actually, thank you for giving an intelligent and plite response. Sorry if I sounded a little rude, but I dislike it when an episode I enjoyed is hated on.

      Delete
    3. Two fans, two different opinions.

      Delete