Originally Posted by Marinedalek
In that case you'll be disappointed with the explanations in 95% of the Doctor Who stories out there. Have fun.
|
I don't think I have particularly high standards when it comes to plot explanations. I've watched a lot of crap in my day and I will usually swallow whatever is fed to me willingly, so long as it makes some sort of sense in the context of the story. I also feel that less is more, and that the simpler the explanation, the easier it is to swallow. I felt that most of the plot points in Journey's End were so needlessly preposterous that RTD could not feasibly come up with a satisfying explanation. David Cronenberg once said of film, "Every movie has its own rules and you can really set up any game that you want, but once you do that you really have to play that game, otherwise the audience knows that something’s wrong and something’s not working." Although he was referring to violence in film (seeing as how when he said this in the '80s he was still focused on horror films), I think that this idea can be extended to rules of any kind in any visual medium. The overall tone and conventions of the show have been established since the '60s. Now, this is not to say that these unwritten rules can never be broken (change is certainly a positive thing, and in the science fiction genre there's a lot to work with). As an example, I've been told that Midnight was uncharacteristic of Doctor Who in that there was no real explanation given in the end for the episode's events. Yet even though it differed from the norm, Midnight's ending was poignant and lent an appropriately unsettling tone to the episode as a whole. The rules of Doctor Who may have been bent for a bit, but within the context of the episode the lack of explanation was perfectly apt. The same cannot be said for Journey's End, for the entire episode was absolutely, utterly ridiculous. Perhaps it could have been halfway decent if there were explanations given, in laymen's terms, as to why these specific events occurred and why they were important to the plot. The fact of the matter is, he could've written a suspenseful finale without introducing outrageous and virtually incomprehensible plot points.
As Danny said, so far in my exposure to Doctor Who I have not been dissatisfied with any of the explanations. When you're watching low-budget science-fiction, you learn not to be overly judgmental and to try and view things conceptually. Sadly, in this day and age, with high-budgets and great special effects, we are constantly shown fantastic visuals but there's rarely a point behind them. What becomes visually stimulating no longer becomes conceptually stimulating. And to be honest, I'd take cardboard props and a fascinating story ANY day over shiny CGI and a story that feels more like an afterthought.
Originally Posted by Marinedalek
As for the "Totally necessary" stuff - if you made an episode that just tied up loose ends it would be, frankly, a bit shit.
|
Again, like Danny said, of course there should be other stuff in the episode. I just think it would be nice if the extra stuff didn't make me want to beat my head against the wall.
Originally Posted by Superkid11
It may have actually been somewhat less tragic if she just... died. Yeah, that would start parent drama, but a heroic death would have been somewhat more appealing to me than what happened instead. Not sure why.
|
Agreed. I was sad to see her portrayed in her very last moments as a loud and obnoxious idiot. Sure she's normally pretty boisterous but it would've been nice if she had a more dignified departure.