hawkwing_lb: (No dumping dead bodies!)
hawkwing_lb ([personal profile] hawkwing_lb) wrote2009-03-11 07:55 pm

Books 2009: after this, filing. Oh, also thoughts on "Doctor Who."

Books 2009: 16-18

16. T.A. Pratt, Spell Games.

Another Marla Mason book, this time with mushroom gods and fungi sorcerers. Also, Marla's brother turns up, up to no good.

The ending is not exactly a cliffhanger. Not exactly. But it's very hook-y. A good, fast, marvellously entertaining book.


17. Brandon Sanderson, The Well of Ascension.

Mistborn had a caper plot going for it. Well is very close to being bog-standard epic brick fantasy. With angst. I am tired of mysterious dark forces and evil warlords in my fantasy, kthnx? Caper plots = interesting. Evil warlords with armies = boring.

It was entertaining enough, and I still like the characters, even if I did want to strangle Vin over her angst. But it did drag on a bit.


18. Holly Scott and Jaimie Duncan, Stargate SG-1: Hydra.

I read tie-ins. Well known fact. This one? Not exactly the best ever.




So, Doctor Who.

Somewhere, in the furthest recesses of a childhood that started in the middle of the eighties, I remember a man with big hair and a little blue police box. Or possibly I have imagined remembering it. But, anyway, point is, I don't actually remember watching the pre-reboot Doctor Who. I just knew it existed.

So far, I've watched Season Two, Three, and half of Season Four of the new Doctor Who. And I like it. It's funny. If it wasn't for the incredible manic energy of David Tennant as the Doctor, and the whole travelling in time and space bit, this would look awful similar to a monster of the week show. It does, actually, look awfully similar to a monster of the week show, but the energy - lots of running - the writing - good dialogue! funny jokes! - and the different sets make it seriously entertaining.

You know what I like, though? I like that the main female characters have families and strong relationships apart from the Doctor. I like that their families look like real people, and are written as real people, with individual screwed-up bits and weirdnesses.

It makes next to no sense. It's utterly riduculous. And Rose did not make half as strong an impression on me as a character as Martha or Donna: Martha is made of win, but Donna is made of funny. I have met women like Donna. (And like Rose's mum, who also made an impression.)

And it's played for laughs, and I'm not sure I always like the gender politics, and the universe of humanity could stand a bit more diversity, but seriously, the standard of acting? Is really high.

Thing is, though, it's showing me something that American-made television almost never does. The characters in Doctor Who look and act like real people - oh, exaggerated, and your one who played Rose and Freema Agyeman and Catherine Tate are certainly more beautiful than most people, but their families? Other incidental characters? They look like people or types of people I could recognise.

Also, all the running. That's a hero I can get behind. One who knows when to run. And which direction.

Donna Noble: "A giant wasp. And we're chasing it?"

The Doctor: "That's right. Come on!"




Right. Filing.