Human Nature (the New Adventure) |
BBC Human Nature/The Family of Blood |
|
| Story No. | 196-197 |  |
| Production Code | Series Three Episodes Eight and Nine | |
| Dates | May 26 and June 2, 2007 |
|
With David Tennant, Freema Agyeman
Written by Paul Cornell Directed by Charles Palmer Executive Producers: Russell T Davies, Julie Gardner. |
| Synopsis: The Doctor has hidden himself from the Family, but the Family know where his weaknesses lie. |
A Review by David Smith 25/7/07
Two years ago, Paul Cornell wrote Father's Day and, as a result, when I heard he was writing a two parter for series 3 I cringed. This story involves the Doctor turning himself into a human so as to hide from the sinister Family of Blood who wish to use him to make themselves immortal. Upon turning himself into a human the Doctor becomes John Smith, a teacher at a boys school in 1913 while Martha (still aware she is a space traveller) becomes a maid. The story is notably better than Father's Day though that is hardly a challange and like that clanger it has, quite frankly, rubbish monsters. It also suffers from pacing trouble. However, it does have some effective villains. Also, many of the concepts the story uses are bold and pioneering.
The Doctor turning himself human to avoid being sniffed out and trapping the Time Lord part of him in a watch is a good. It allows for us to see him in a totally new way, gives him an excuse to fall in love and lets him be mean to his companion. Topped off with some nice flashbacks to the Doctor turning human, achieved through good direction, this is most certainly a plus. Furthermore, this renders the Doctor helpless as in human form he does not have any of the answers; this gives a bit more room for Martha to do the thinking. I also like the journal. The Doctor (or John Smith) records his dream/memories in a journal and when we look inside we see drawings of past friends, foes and Doctors. This is a good way of cementing the links between the new and old series as seen effectivly done in School Reunion with the return of Sarah Jane. However, I will point out that I did not like the way the family were alerted to the Doctors presence by that school boy opening the watch. I think it would have been better if the Family had tracked down the Doctor through their own efforts rather than the blundering of another character. Having Timothy open the watch was a bit of a lazy mechanism. Overall, though some of the ideas in the story were not brilliant, the majority were good enough to cast the two parter in a good light, in this field at least.
On the other hand, the pacing of the story is somewhat troubling. The intro involves the Doctor and Martha fleeing some unseen enemies. It is fast paced and enigmatic (due to the anonymity of the attackers), giving the story a good adrenaline-burst start. Unfortunately, the bulk of part one is consists of the Doctor (in the human form of John Smith) flirting with Nurse Redford. Sure Redford is played by Spaced-genius Jessica Stevenson but it is still annoying that so much screen time is devoted to her rather than (or being shared evenly with) the far more interesting villains. The Empty Child/Doctor Dances worked well because the explanation was kept a secret until well into part two; here it is given way too early, though the bit where Martha pedals down to the Tardis is a nice break from Smith and Redford. The cliffhanger with the Doctor having to choose between Redford and Martha ('your friend or your lover' as Baines says) is passable; the resolution (Timothy opening the watch) is not. Part two is more exciting though the attack on the school has its good bits (the murder of the irritatingly patriotic headmaster) and bad bits (the scarecrows< being foddered by the cannons). We are treated to a little more of Redford and the Doctor (reminds of how Cybermen: The Early Years became more about Zoe Heriot than the Cybermen themselves) before the Doctor becomes a Time Lord again. The Doctor goes on to outwit and defeat the Family. I liked the way he did it and they are subjected to differing punishments all of which I liked a lot. Then we have a nice cap on the end. In summary, there is far far too much of the Doctor and Redford (especially in part one). While otherwise the pacing is generally passable these scenes are enough in their own right to drag the story down.
The Jack Straws, these guys annoyed me somewhat. The idea of walking killer scarecrows is a good one that has been used effectively in the past. Indeed, in the Radio Times, Russell T. Davies said 'If you thought scarecrows, you ain't seen nothing yet.' Nice, I thought, these creatures could be an effective new monster. However, last year Russel T. Davies said that series 2 would end on a collosal cliffhanger that was indescribable, saying 'I hope they manage to get it all on film.' It turned out to be Catherine Tate in a bride's dress. Not much of a cliffhanger Russell, unless of coarse it was so big they didn't manage to get it all on film. Either way, I no longer take Russell seriously and therefore wasn't surprised when the Jack Straws did little more than stand in the background and get mowed down by machine guns. Theres a couple of good bits where they jump their victims but that's about it. What background do they themselves have? None, they are simply the Family's soldiers. Why are the Cybermen cool? Because they convert humans! Why where the Ood terribly boring? Because they were written into their story as two-dimensional lackies for the Beast! But if the Ood are two dimensional then the Jack Straws are barely one dimensional! There is a point where one of the members of the family makes a typical cocky villain joke and we see a Jack Straw laughing; it colours their soul a little but no where near enough. Therefore, with the Family being human on screen and it being down to the Jack Straws to be the story's onscreen monster presence Human Nature/Family of Blood disappoints.
Despite the episode lacking effective monsters, it does possess some effective villains: the Family. Pursuing the Doctor in order to gain immortality, the Family has a lot to its credit. Firstly as they take over human bodies and therefore are capable of expressing their feelings (unlike a lot of the people in mask monsters e.g. Clockwork droids). Son of Mine which embodies pompous school boy Jeremy Baines is a good smug villain and works in the way many James Bond villains do. Sister of Mine is kept more in the background but she has her own music when she walks and the balloon becomes almost trademark. They laugh and joke and get scared. As such, the Family work well as the story's main antagonists.
In conclusion, due to its various faults, this story is weaker than the latter season two parter of series 1 The Empty Child/The Doctor Dances. It is not as well paced and the poor quality of its monsters have undermined it. However, there are a number of saving graces such as good villains and concepts. Though good overall this was a two parter and its close proximity to the end of the series meant I was expecting more. However, Paul Cornell has improved dramatically since Father's Day and has taken some bold risks in creating the story. A bit more practice and another chance might result in him writing a true epic.
To err is human by John Nor 7/9/07
I haven't read Paul Cornell's book Human Nature, though I intend to now, after watching this two-parter. I am very glad that Russell T. Davies asked Cornell write this story for the 2007 Season of Doctor Who, as this was brilliant.
There were layered and moving performances from Freema and Tennant. The production design was amazing, with the fantastical elements echoing appropriately enough writers of the period like H.G. Wells. The guest cast were great - with Harry Lloyd as the student Jeremy Baines being particularly creepy. The script was brilliant and courageous in its portrayal of an imperfect and flawed human Doctor, condoning beatings and being - yes - a little bit racist.
Part one: the first post-credits image is of the Union Flag. This very charged image could be read in various ways. One way of reading it was that this episode was emphasising that the Doctor was British, as did the 1996 TV Movie ("He's British." "I suppose I am," says the Doctor). Another way of reading it was that it was the heralding of an episode that would tackle the nature of Britishness. Nu-Who and Torchwood have tackled Britishness before, (and Torchwood evaded the sensitive and complex Irish question by misplacing Torchwood 4 in Everything Changes!), but never as directly as this episode.
What was impressive about the opening episode was that it explored notions of Britain and Empire, and the treatment of various different people within and without the Empire, with the human Doctor reflecting the attitudes of the time (as shown by his casually racist treatment of Martha.) The Union Flag was last seen so prominently in The Idiot's Lantern, but I would say there was a more multi-layered approach here. I am not saying the Union Flag equates with racism, not at all, but certain people in Britain who cling to a certain idea of Britishness do use the flag as a symbol of their ideas.
The most extraordinary thing about part one was John Smith's journal. There was a real sense of wonder created by this, mixed in with fannish satisfaction at seeing the Eighth Doctor so prominently featured. (Phew, all those arguments are now over; the 1996 TV Movie is canon.)
As well as the nods to the Classic past, there were also references to The Empty Child/The Doctor Dances with Time Agent technology within invisible space ships. (Is all this part of longer storyline featuring Captain Jack?)
Part one was beyond excellent, with the story shaping up to be one of the all time great Doctor Who stories. And British? Yes. A very English comedy-of-manners was a prominent feature of this episode, with of course a Scottish lead actor in a Welsh production.
Part two was very moving. Three scenes I was especially moved by: John Smith's gradual horrific realisation - "I'm just a story! - and later, "Your job is to execute me!". Wow. The scene where it is revealed that the Doctor is play-acting as John Smith to sabotage the ship (and John Smith is gone). The last scene with the Doctor and Martha looking on from the background at Remembrance Day.
The choice that faced John Smith in part two recalled Scorsese's The Last Temptation of Christ. I believe that in both this episode and that film, the main character has glimpses of what could be, but that is just what they are: glimpses. In that film, the main character (who is both human and divine) has to make his choice between the human life he could lead and the sacrifice. He chooses the sacrifice. As does John Smith.
Choices. The Doctor to Martha on opening the watch, "It's your choice!". The cliffhanger, "Your friend or your lover!". Sometimes discretion is the better part of valour, as when Latimer echoes the Ninth Doctor in Bad Wolf/The Parting of the Ways, "A coward? Every time!" but also Latimer recognises later that some things must be confronted. Whatever the situation, we must choose.
Freema was very impressive in the role of Martha here, showing a steely resolve in her scene at the beginning of part two, and the scene were she has to convince the sceptical Joan of her medical knowledge was a powerful one. Jessica Hynes as Joan Redfern successfully brought a complex character to the screen. After the whirlwind romance of The Girl in the Fireplace, there was still a freshness to seeing the Doctor in love as Tennant and Hynes gave a very human depth to their scenes.
The sequence where The Family of Blood are consigned to their fates had me marvelling at the screen in awe - finally after, after a long wait, ever since March 2005, there was the otherworldly Magic Realism that I wanted on screen, last seen properly in Doctor Who in Warriors' Gate. The other awe-inspiring aspect of it was the portrayal of the chillingly cold side of the Tenth Doctor.
Latimer's earlier glimpse of this foreshadowed these events: an image from the dark heart of The Runaway Bride, the Doctor ruthlessly gazes as the flames flicker behind him.
Utterly fantastic, this two-parter is one of the greatest Doctor Who stories of all time.
Adapt to Survive by Mike Morris 18/11/07
Cards on the table. First of all, I've read Paul Cornell's original novel a few times. Also, I really, really, really like it.
That's probably important to get out of the way. This is the new series' second stab at an adaptation, the other being Rob Shearman's Dalek which was taken from his original audio drama Jubilee. While I'd heard Jubilee, I'd been less than impressed with a story that I felt lacked discipline and it didn't impinge on my enjoyment of Dalek one bit. People who really liked Jubilee seemed less enthused with Dalek than I did, feeling that it had removed a lot of the colour and humour of the original. As someone who didn't particularly like the colour - Shearman's writing is too repetitious for my tastes, and I don't find him particularly funny - then I wasn't bothered by this in the least, but I could understand (if not agree with) the objections.
Perhaps you can see where this is going. I really enjoyed this adaptation, but I wasn't quite as crazy about it as others have been. People who didn't read Cornell's novel, or perhaps didn't like it very much, seemed to have derived more from it than I did. Although it's more or less futile to do a compare/contrast exercise when it comes to adaptations, I couldn't help but start enumerating the differences between one and the other. The result is that, while I consider Dalek to be the "prime" version of the Captive-Dalek-Goes-Mad story, I consider the TV rendition of Human Nature to be a half-decent cover version; it's more along the lines of Johnny Cash covering "One" than Boyzone murdering "Father and Son". Still, it's not Jimi Hendrix doing "All Along The Watchtower" either.
[Music analogies cease herewith]
That's not to say it's not very good. It's comfortably the most ambitious story of the season and, when people call it one of the best Doctor Who stories ever, I'm not going to argue too strenuously (although, as far as Series Three goes, I think I rate it behind Gridlock and possibly Blink). I'm comparing Human Nature against stiff competition: itself. I'm going to try and keep this review accessible to people who haven't read the novel, since I think the comparison does highlight a few flaws at the story's core, but the flaws themselves are the type of big, thematic ones that really only occur when you're talking about something very good to start with.
In terms of alterations, some are no-brainers which had to happen. Human Nature the novel has one huge problem, which is that it's way too long (and it's short by NA standards anyway; really, the story wants to be the length of a Target novelisation). It's "padded" - although in the way that only Paul Cornell can, it's padded with moral issues and complex characters rather than running up and down corridors. What we get on television is tighter and sharper. Characters like Alexander and Hadleman from the novel are completely excised, as is Tim's friend Anand, and fairly significant events of the novel are removed or altered.
In some cases, this undoubtedly improves the story. Always prone to what the unkind of us would call "soapboxing", Cornell looked at institutional racism in the novel in a way that felt shoehorned in. The fact that Martha is a black companion obviously helps here, and the portrayal of racism works better here than it does in the book. Hutchison's casual joke to Martha does genuinely shock, and Martha's furiously controlled retort to Joan is a lovely moment. Also, the novel takes a long time to get going and has some events which are truly bizarre - not least the appearance of a future incarnation of the Doctor (sort of) earlier on. Here, the condensation forces the removal of these elements, automatically inducing an editing exercise that the book needs anyway. To sum all this up, Human Nature is now the length it always wanted to be.
The major addition is the scarecrows and these are wonderful, acting at first as a genuine threat and then as cannon-fodder when needed; although they derive from RTD's more commercial sensibilities, there's no denying that they work splendidly. They're also beautifully choreographed, with their shambling, boneless "walk" being an example of how much attention the production pays to script ideas in this story.
Other elements are things that do detract from the story, but I understand their removal. In the novel, the headmaster is an important and unsympathetic character, whereas here he's very much in the supporting cast, most likely for running time reasons (although possibly not; see below). And one of the most affecting scenes in Human Nature involves one of the children being hanged from a dormitory window, and while I miss it I can accept that it's not exactly appropriate for a children's programme airing at seven o'clock.
In fact, there are two alterations I want to dwell on.
First of all; Human Nature the novel is first and foremost a pacifist work. It's about finding ways to win without resorting to guns, and at the conclusion this theme is brought firmly to the fore. In the televised story, this is less emphasised and - more importantly - less successful. I would have less of a problem if they'd excised the pacifist scenes altogether, but in fact a lot of them remain; they're just not as overt, or successful, as they are in the book. The most obvious alteration is the ending, which was actually the one change that really did annoy me. I'm not particularly enamoured with poppy-wearing anyway, for personal reasons, but in the novel the war scenes are quite different and the character at the end is wearing a white poppy. What we get in the televised version is, by contrast, safe and conventional and rather obvious. Seeing that character decked out in medals feels wrong, in spite of his obvious grief, in a way I find rather... cowardly. Two years ago, when the series came back, it wasn't afraid to make serious points. The alteration to Human Nature's conclusion would seem to be because the original ending might have stirred up trouble, and seeing them duck out of it is disappointing. It also must be said that having someone look up to the heavens and say "thank you Doctor" is one of the less subtle moments of the series being needlessly messianic about its central character.
It's not that there aren't powerful moments. Seeing schoolchildren cry as they prepare to fire machine guns is a wonderful microcosm of the war to come, and the innocence of Hutchison's "You mean we haven't killed anyone?" remains affecting. You can even interpret the final scenes this way: Martha tells Tim that he doesn't have to fight and he responds "I think we do", so perhaps his tears are in themselves an admission that he was wrong. However, these moments don't quite bond into a whole, and just don't quite pack the punch I think they should; rather than being peaks in a pacifist argument, they are isolated moments in a story which is concerned with other things. One of the key supporting arguments in the novel is the contrast between the morality of the headmaster and that of the Doctor, with Smith trapped between the two; shorne of that, the really anti-war moments tend to float around in the story. It feels as though it doesn't quite have the guts to be the pacifist tale it wants to be, and that leaves a slightly sour taste.
The other element is the adversaries. That's not to say that they aren't well-played (Harry Lloyd being particularly impressive), and their cynicism at key moments is genuinely vile. However, in the final analysis they're a bunch of body-snatching aliens who aren't a million miles from all the other body-snatching aliens we've had down the years; they really are terribly generic. To be fair, the Aubertides of the novel are a species who can mimic any animal they eat, which leads to scenes of cannibalism which telly-Who really couldn't get away with (two stories of Season 22 were about cannibalism, true, but neither were as explicit as this would have to be. The Two Doctors doesn't actually feature anyone actually eating a human, they just talk about how much they'd like to try one; and Revelation of the Daleks refers to people being turned into food, but it's not explicitly seen happening). I'd like a bit more effort than we get, all the same. Again, it's not that what's on screen is offensive, it's just a bit boring. We never actually discover who the Family are, why their lifespan is running out, or... anything at all, really. One of my big complaints about the series since its return is that it hasn't really developed any good monsters aside from ones it's updated from the full-fat cheapo "classic" series, and that continues here.
Okay, enough. Let's find some good bits.
Well, it's not hard. Tennant's performance here is astonishing, getting us to really empathise with a man who is - intentionally - not particularly special. In the moments when he reverts into being the Doctor we see how beautifully his performance has been modulated, and his new-found uncertainty is a delight. The scenes in the house are obviously wonderful, and some of the more pitiful moments are truly heart-breaking. "Why can't I just be John Smith? Isn't he a good man?" he cries out at one point, a man unwittingly thrust into the centre of a horror story of which he knows nothing; at another moment he demands of Martha "So that was your job? To execute me?" and really fires home the horror of what the Doctor has unwittingly done. His frantic attempts to just remove himself from events are beautifully drawn, and the moment when he collapses in tears cap what's a real tour de force by Tennant, and the way that he makes his final decision off-screen seems so... respectful. In the end, though, it's the incidental touches which are so satisfying: the sudden resolve as he mutters "I'll not have this", or the lovely bit of slapstick when he falls down the stairs.
Speaking of incidental touches, I think my favourite bit of acting in the story is Jessica sorry-she'll-always-be-Stevenson-to-me and her delivery of "We make such good wives"; look at the uncertain glance she gives at the end, enabling us all to see through her joke. Jessica's as lovely and as convincing in this as she is in just about everything I've ever seen her in, adding delightful texture to a character who remains sympathetic in spite of her flaws. She doesn't temper the bad points, repeatedly admonishing Martha to know her place before calling her a skivvy, but retains what can only be called dignity. The moment at the conclusion where the Doctor asks her to come with him is - quite deliberately - astonishingly crass, but her refusal and her confrontation of him is as quietly brave as anything in the series.
Martha gets more to do here, and more genuine characterisation, than in any story of the season. Given that her relationship with the Doctor is one of unrequited love, she underplays this element really nicely and doesn't seem out of her depth amid all the good stuff that's going on around her. I found her own speech about the Doctor ("I love him to bits") more satisfying than the slightly showy "He's ancient and forever" stuff we get from Tim, and the increasing desperation as the story progresses shows signs of an actress who really knows what she's doing. My reservations about Martha have always been the character rather than the actress, but she's so obviously out of her depth here that I think she works beautifully.
Structurally, though, the story still isn't quite right. The relationship between Smith and Joan is beautifully developed but it does happen very quickly; although they've known each other for three months they're still quite distant as the story opens (they only agree to use each others' first names a few minutes in), which means that they're not that convincing as a couple for the "friend or lover" cliffhanger. Then, in the second episode, the action splits rather clumsily between Smith going into hiding and the Family hunting for him. The result is that what's going on in the house is far more interesting than the search outside, which drags a little. This ties in with the generic nature of the adversaries; in the novel, one of them is killed, causing them to really go on the rampage, which not only gives us more plot but provides an extra edge to their characterisation. It has to be said that the second episode is a bit light on plot progression, even if the scenes between Smith, Joan, Martha and Tim are truly wonderful.
The conclusion, though, is terrific. The twist of "He was being kind" is great, and I liked that stuff about the mirrors. The scene on the hillside is beautifully shot, and in spite of the story being a grand tragedy there's a wonderfully uplifting sense to it. In conclusion, this two-parter is obviously great television. It's a more personal and small-scale story than the novel, and this is a wise decision. I found it a nice enough adaptation, and most of the decisions that they made work. However, it doesn't do as much for me as the book does. I think it's a more efficient but less interesting piece of work, and the blanding-out of the ending genuinely got on my nerves. It's still terrific, though, and something that the kids will remember.
Which, in the end, is what's important.