Skip to main content

Doctor Who: The Woman Who Fell to Earth Review


I approached this new series of Doctor Who with trepidation. For the most part, I was very excited. I was especially looking forward to Jodie Whittaker's Doctor. She'd proven herself to be a highly capable dramatic actor on screen and appeared to have exactly the right energy off screen to bring the iconic Time Lord to life. What concerned me, however, was the new showrunner. Despite receiving much acclaim for his crime drama Broadchurch, Chris Chibnall's contributions to Doctor Who have been mixed. The series seven episodes Dinosaurs on a Spaceship and The Power of Three were particular low points that Chibnall was responsible for. Still, I had hope. Maybe Chibnall would be far more adept in the position of showrunner. Plus, all the trailers and promotional material looked great. So, now the first episode has landed (or fallen, I guess) was I right to be cautious?

With a new showrunner in charge, things are inevitably going to feel different. However, I think this change is a more jarring one than when Steven Moffat took over from Russell T. Davies. There a number of reasons I think this is the case. Moffat, for one, was a more frequent contributor to Davies' era than Chibnall has been to either. Consequently, we were far more familiar with what Moffat's vision for the show would be than Chibnall's. Additionally, Moffat had been at the helm for seven years - three more than Davies - so his style had become more entrenched into the identity of Doctor Who. The main reason, however, is because Chibnall is simply a very different showrunner. Moffat's era was defined by his trademark complex, wibbly wobbly, timey wimey plots. Whilst initially popular, this became increasingly divisive as Moffat indulged in it more. I always quite enjoyed these storylines, but it's understandable why some would feel exhausted by them.

Chibnall has been very clear that he's going for the complete opposite. With ten standalone episodes in this series, avoiding any grand story arcs and attempting to be an entry point for new fans, his approach to story is deliberately more straightforward. This is very apparent in The Woman Who Fell to Earth. Chibnall maintains a level of mystery to keep the viewer intrigued by the plot, but he doesn't play with its structure in any way or attempt any bonkers time travel ideas. Quite simply, there's an alien on earth and the Doctor needs to find out what it wants and how to stop it. However, in the place of an elaborate plot is a very welcome focus on character. The first ten minutes could have convincingly been its own standalone drama, as Chibnall takes the time to introduce and flesh out the new TARDIS team before dropping the Doctor into the mix.

As fond as I am of Moffat's era, his characters didn't always click instantly. His focus was a very intellectual one that channelled most of its energy into coming up with intricate twists and ambitious concepts. Out of this, strong emotional moments were often born, but not always. Clara and her 'impossible girl’ arc in series seven is a perfect example of how Moffat could write a fascinating concept but neglect creating a relatable, well-rounded human being for audiences to connect to. Clara did improve with time, but it would've made Matt Smith's final series a lot less hit or miss if she'd been great from the start. Chibnall is clearly aware of this because I already feel like I empathise with these new characters as if we've spent way more than an hour with them.

By keeping the plot simple, Chibnall leaves space to explore who these new characters are. What motivates them, what frustrates them, who and what they care about and why we should care about them. There are numerous lovely scenes in which nothing's happening except characters talking to each other, expressing genuine emotion and carving out authentic identities. In later episodes, I would like to see the plots develop further. For the mysteries to become deeper and the aliens to become less straightforward, but for a first episode, this works. We need to care about these characters or else we'll be fundamentally disengaged from the series. The characters are further enhanced by the cast. Mandip Gill, Tosin Cole and Bradley Walsh define their characters diversely and convincingly. All three of them are also left with a lot of room to grow and I can't wait to witness that as the series unfolds.

However, the crucial question is: how good is Jodie Whittaker? Well, right now it's hard to say because it always is with a new Doctor. The first post-regeneration episode inevitably sees the character finding their feet, so we tend to only glimpse their true potential in the third act. That said, Whittaker handles this process spectacularly. She delivers every line with such spark and enthusiasm, echoing the wit and madness of past regenerations through her own unique energy. Whittaker's Doctor looks at the world with a delightful wonder and curiosity that was present ever since she reacted to her regeneration with a gleeful “brilliant!” Chibnall writes the Doctor in a state of rediscovery. We see her searching for her values in an effort to define herself, defiantly declaring (in the most Doctor-y of ways) “when people need help, I never refuse”. It's also undeniably exciting to refer to the Doctor as ‘she’.

The most welcome change for me, however, is how much the filmmaking has improved. Jamie Childs, the director of this and three other episodes this series, has said he drew inspiration from '80s Steven Spielberg films. As well as being a savvy commercial move (given the success of '80s nostalgia-fest Stranger Things) this is perfect for Whittaker's Doctor. The magic and whimsy of Spielberg's style compliments and emphasises those same qualities in Whittaker's performance. This is most apparent in the sonic screwdriver constructing montage, with its swirling camera work, vibrant lighting and rousing music. That music is also significant because, for the first time since the reboot, it’s not composed by Murray Gold. Segun Akinola has taken over and he’s already doing some fantastic work. This episode’s score ranges from the soaring orchestra uplifting the aforementioned montage to the ‘60s evoking electronic eeriness underpinning the creepier scenes.

So, everything’s new and nothing is certain. Things could get much better from here, things could get much worse, or they could stay just about the same. All I can say is I can’t wait for the next episode, which makes The Woman Who Fell to Earth successful in my book.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

A Horrible Christmas Rant

Horrible, Horrible Christmas, In Every Single Sense of the Word Horrible Christmas - A Quick Rant by Nathan Brooks The Good When you expect one thing, and get something else, you can get very angry. You can get so angry that you refuse to acknowledge the positives of what you have got, and just focus on what you haven't got. For example, Agents of SHIELD. I think Agents of SHIELD is great, but unfortunately I don't appear to share that opinion with a lot of other people. Why? Because they're too busy whining about the lack of all the superhero-y stuff they expected and fair enough, considering you are watching a Marvel TV show. However, I've managed to let that initial disappointment go, and I've found I really enjoy this show.  The Bad Horrible Christmas, a Horrible Histories stage production, is the complete opposite of this. As the theme of this post suggests, I expected something great. Horrible Histories is the only children's educatio...

Is Nativity 3: Dude, Where's My Donkey?! Any Good?

Dude, Where's My Funny?! Nativity 3: Dude, Where's My Donkey?! - Film Review by Nathan Brooks Nativity's lack of critical success completely baffles me. I thought Nativity was a great movie. It was funny, it had more depth to it than most comedies and was overall just a fun movie. Nativity 2: Danger in the Manger's lack of critical success, I understand a lot better. I still remember it being fairly entertaining, but I was about 11 then, and I didn't have a brilliant judgement of what makes a good movie. Of what I can remember, however, it was nowhere near as good as Nativity in terms of story and character and basically everything important needed to make a good film. I also remember that they spent most of the movie in a bus. Nativity 3: Dude, Where's My Donkey is proof that the film makers have given up on trying to please the critics. This is an awful film. Nativity 2 was not a brilliant movie, but it at least kept me entertained for however long it...

Is Avengers: Age of Ultron Any Good?

Avengers Assemble! Again! Avengers: Age of Ultron - Film Review by Nathan Brooks And they say English Weather's bad. Back in the summer of 2012, a little film came out called Avengers Assemble. It wasn't much. It's only the biggest superhero film of all time and it only made $1.518 billion. Everybody loved it, I loved it and clearly moviegoers did as well.  Due to its massive success, obviously a sequel was going to be made. In this case, that sequel is Avengers: Age of Ultron, but with all the hype it's received, is it actually any good? Story The story in this film is definitely not for first time Marvel viewers, you really need to see most, if not all, of the previous Marvel Cinematic Universe films. It is packed full of references to earlier films and understanding a lot of elements of the story will require you to have seen the others. But is the story any good? I thinks so. The main story centres around the fact that Tony Stark, or Iron Man, has ...