Doctor Who: "The Unquiet Dead"
Aug. 11th, 2007 07:08 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
fajrdrako![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif){kind=small}
rosiespark and I have been discussing series 1 Doctor Who episode by episode. I started off with Rose, she followed up with The End of the World, and now it's my turn again here with The Unquiet Dead. I might as well confess at the outset that "The Unquiet Dead" is my least favourite of all the episodes of Doctor Who I have seen. I can't entirely put my finger on why, though I think there are four reasons - five, maybe - all of which can be summed up as "Mark Gatiss' writing style". The fact that he himself refers to "the morbid, ebony-black grotesqueness of the nineteenth century" is not a good sign for his approach. I'll try not to dwell on the negative, because watching this again, I still enjoyed myself - it doesn't annoy me, or bore me, or make me want to watch something else instead. I still love the Doctor and Rose in it. It's more that I find the other characters dull and the story fairly weak - not really funny, not really scary.
Breaking it down into aspects:
- Charles Dickens. I was disappointed by the way Dickens was portrayed. Yes, I know it's my own fannishness coming through here. It isn't that Simon Callow isn't a good actor - I've loved him in other things. It's the concept: Dickens as being old and jaded; or Dickens as a skeptic, despite the evidence of his own eyes; Dickens as a foil to the Doctor. I'd like to see him as smarter, snappier, wittier.
On the plus side, I did love it that the Doctor is a fan, and happy to say so. (Despite Martin Chuzzelwit.) His fannishness didn't come across with the sincerity I saw in David Tennant's performance of the Doctor facing Shakespeare in The Shakespeare Code, and he seemed a little too willing to criticize Dickens.... If I were an eight year old who didn't know anything about Dickens, I wouldn't have been left thinking highly of Dickens from this.
My favourite of his lines: "What phantasmagoria is this?" - The Story. The plot doesn't entirely make sense to me, though it's intriguing. I'm not very fond of Mark Gatiss' understated writing style; his characters seem to me a little smaller than life.
But there are some aspects of the story I do like. One is the continuity between this episode and Torchwood; the Rift goes right through Sneed's house - does that mean his house was right on the site of what later became Roald Dahl Plass, with the fountain and the Millennium Centre? I like that. But the story implies that it has been only the Gelth trying to get through the Rift for many, many years - perhaps they blocked the entryway? When the Gelth say, "Open the Rift!" I thought of Bilis - and Owen. And when the Doctor said, "The Rift is getting wider," I thought; "That line was stolen from Torchwood!" Though I suppose it's really the other way round.
As far as I know, this is the only episode of Doctor Who with a psychic character, aside from the Doctor himself.
The Gelth reminded me of the Family in "Human Nature" and "The Family of Blood", except that they inhabit the living, while the Gelth favour corpses. Because of the gas. The gas connections weren't entirely convincing to me; but that's okay, it wouldn't be the only Doctor Who villains who didn't entirely make sense to me. - Interesting to see Eve Myles play Gwyneth. She doesn't remind me of Gwen Cooper, which is a sign of Eve Myles' grasp of characterization. At the same time, I don't find Gwyneth very interesting. I do like her private conversation with Rose about the butcher boy's bum, but there remains something limited about her - it doesn't seem to me that Gwyneth has much personality.
I love it that she mentioned "bad wolf". - Again, I love it that the Gelth mentioned the Time War - a phrase calculated to trigger the Doctor's sense of concern and guilt. Did they know that? What, then, did they know of the Doctor? Were they using a psychic conduit trick, through Gwyneth, to know what phrase to use? Or were they in fact victims of the Time War, just not very nice ones?
- There are many clues here to reinforce my belief that the Doctor is already very much in love with Rose, even if he doesn't know what to do about it - except feel guilty. Is there any other point at which he says she's beautiful?
- I might add that I think Rose has a beautiful personality, but I thought she looked awful in that dress and bonnet. The boots were good. I loved the boots.
- The voices of the Gelth sounded like the fairies in "Small Worlds" and the petal-aliens in "Fear Her". Are there no other ways to do group-personality aliens?
- Interesting that Rose thinks the bodies of the dead should be respected, and the Doctor doesn't. Is it that he thinks the needs of the living outweigh the needs of the dead? This episode skirts on some life and death issues that are very interesting, but never quite comes to grips with the articulation of any of them. It isn't that this is beyond the scope of a kid's show, since other episodes do it well. It's more that this particular episodes hints at meanings and then backs off.
- The best thing about this episode was its discussion of time. There are some terrific quotes. For example:
Rose: Think about it, though. Christmas 1860 happens once, just once, and then it's finished. It's gone, it'll never happen again. Except for you. You can go back and see days that are dead and gone. A hundred thousand sunsets ago. No wonder you never stay still.
And despite my rude comments about Mark Gatiss a while back, I think that is a beautifully written passage, both for content and wording: a hundred thousand sunsets. It says a lot about Rose, and he intelligence and insight, not to mention her sense of beauty. It also conveys something about the Doctor himself; his sense of priorities, the way they dovetail with hers.
I wonder, though: "You can go back and see days that are dead and gone." I assume he can't go back to the same day over and over - no Groundhog Day here? Or can he? Captain Jack implies he has gone back to Volcano Day and the Blitz more than once - is he carefully trying to avoid himself all the time, or is the timeline more complicated than that? - Other good aspects about that scene: the Doctor says, "Give the man a medal. Earth. Naples. December 24th, 1860." But it turns out it isn't. Presumably the controls on the TARDIS aren't very accurate. Or is the TARDIS lying to him? I like the notion that the TARDIS sees and finds its own trouble spots, and might have spotted the problem with the Rift and the Gelth from afar. Or maybe the TARDIS was trying to keep them out of trouble - it was clear that the Doctor hadn't a clue what was happening in Naples on Christmas Eve, 1860, but it seems to me that around that time Garibaldi was advancing on the city with his armies of liberation. The TARDIS might have been trying to keep them out of a war zone. - Oh, I just noticed: Garibaldi and those soldiers were actually in an early draft of this story. Heh.
- And the following phrase strikes me as utterly romantic:
Rose: ...It's Christmas.
Which, in keeping with the overt tone of the show, is said lightly, but really has depths and layers: he's making a gift to her of time and space. Or, in fact, this time and this space, in all its unique specialness which she articulates so perfectly. And then the punchline, after her speech:
The Doctor: All yours.The Doctor: Not a bad life.
...And I can't help thinking, what perfect articulation of romance, or Romance with a capital R, worthy of the greatest of poets and writers, and delivered subtly and casually in a somewhat macabre horror story written so as not to bore the 8 year olds.
Rose: Better with two.
This is echoed by the heroic dialogue later on:Rose: But we'll go down fighting, yeah?
It's anyone's guess as to the levels of self-awareness there, at least on Rose's part.
The Doctor: You bet.
Rose: Together.
The Doctor: Yeah. I'm glad I met you.
Rose: Me too. - I love it that the Doctor calls Rose "Barbarella". But does he worry about what she wears in other episodes? Do fashion choices only matter in connection with the past, not the future? Personally I wish he'd dressed in some elegant fashion of 1860 because he's look terrific, but I like the way Nine dressed anyway. No complaints about that jumper from me.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
Re: series 3 and the Last of the Time Lords...
Date: 2007-08-20 01:30 am (UTC)Oh, yes. I still think New Earth holds the record for "silly" in the entire new series, despite the good stuff from BP and ZW; and "Rose" isn't great telly, but it grabbed me for two reasons: the electricity between Eccleston and Piper (I was trying to explain to an American friend how incredibly unlikely such chemistry is, and the closest analogy I could come across was Robert de Niro and Britney Spears, but even that doesn't quite capture it), and the "turning of the earth" scene, which raised the little hairs on the back of my neck. But yeah, both episodes are relatively weak. Smith and Jones was better in comparison, but then again, they'd had two "drafts" to work from, because it was definitely part of the pattern.
I like the chemistry between the Doctor and the child Reinette, too. But the adult Reinette needed to be someone of striking chemistry,
I agree - I was really struck by the opening of the episode, but once we got to the actual "romance", it fell pretty flat. (I was talking with a friend who hadn't seen it, about how flat I found SM, and she commiserated, telling me about this movie that she'd seen that had the most bland, uninteresting leading lady she'd ever seen - so we looked it up on IMDb, and it was Beowulf, starring Sophia Myles!) As for sexy, she's not a patch on Billie Piper. I'm boringly straight, but I'm not blind, either.
It isn't that I want characters to have their freedom of choice taken away from them, goodness knows; more that I like heroic extremes of loyalty.
I could go with what we had if I felt it had been handled better - if we saw Rose having her fantastic life, for instance in a montage that mirrored her introduction in "Rose", or if Martha had managed to leave without coming back. I hate to see female characters essentially reduced to their relationships to male characters. I did think they avoided that very well with POTW, and I know it fits a certain grand romantic narrative, but I do like a little spine in a character, particularly a female character who's explicitly set up to be a model for tweens and teens. I'm not one of those who normally cries, "Think of the children," but I am aware of it in this case. I do a lot of work with adolescent girls, and I know how vulnerable they are to even the most subtle messages.
Re: BadWolf!Rose, I was not happy that we got no callback on that, particularly that we got no reaction to her realization of what she'd done (and perhaps the memory of Nine's sacrifice).
I can see why Davies might want to go back to someone like Donna - a clean slate, no baggage, nothing of substance to follow up from.
The thing that frustrates me is that I thought we were going to get that with Martha. I still cannot figure out a single thing (other than squirming embarrassment) that her crush added to this series. It limited her character so much. But I really liked Donna, and the thing I'm most looking forward to in S4 is her.
I'm far from giving up on the show, still fascinated by it, but I'm well aware of its ability to push my buttons and put me into a tailspin, so that watching it is like skiing through a lava-flow. Perillous.
I'm kind of at that stage, too, I'm just perhaps a little more volatile with my buttons being pushed. I suppose it's also a little more intense for me because I don't find Ten charming or heroic. But they can still pull out a HN/FOB or Blink, and I don't want to miss those!
Re: series 3 and the Last of the Time Lords... (part 1)
Date: 2007-08-20 03:46 pm (UTC)Funny, but also oddly right.
the "turning of the earth" scene, which raised the little hairs on the back of my neck.
It certainly caught my attention. One of several moments in the show that did. It was the plot that turned me off, made me a skeptic - but the characters and the script had caught my attention and made me want to see more. I see many TV shows that I think have a dumb plot, and never want to look at them again. This was quite different.
was talking with a friend who hadn't seen it, about how flat I found SM, and she commiserated, telling me about this movie that she'd seen that had the most bland, uninteresting leading lady she'd ever seen - so we looked it up on IMDb, and it was Beowulf, starring Sophia Myles!
Eee! What a wonderful story! I've been wanting to see that movie... well, I wouldn't expect or want much of a woman in Beowulf , since the original story doesn't exactly contain a gaggle of girls... and now they're doing a version with Angelina Jolie, which should at least be interesting. And even though I'm not much of an Angelina Jolie fan, I think she's more interesting silent and immobile than Sophie Myles managed to be in a fascinating role by Doctor Who's best scriptwriter, so. Definitely not impressed with Ms Myles.
As for sexy, she's not a patch on Billie Piper. I'm boringly straight, but I'm not blind, either.
I'm not straight, but I certainly agree. I don't even like Billie Piper's looks much, but that doesn't matter. She acts so well, and puts so much personality into the role, that she's striking anyway. And seems so very real.
I thought Rose was fine for 'having a spine' and a personality too; and Reinette, at least as she was written, was (it is made clear) a woman of intelligence and talent. A better role model than, say, Marie Antionette. Too bad she didn't have oomph.
Looks vs. attraction
Date: 2007-08-21 06:59 pm (UTC)I completely agree with this - I am often drawn to people who are "unconventional". Pretty is bland. It bores me, and quite often, people who are "blessed" with conventional looks learn to behave in ways that are appropriate to that look. It's not hard and fast, it can be turned upside down, but it is a factor, particularly in acting.
It also touches on something else we were talking about, the attractiveness of Ten/Tennant. I actually do think David Tennant is cute - he fits in that Adrien Brody/Jarvis Cocker area that I do love. But I also find those two attractive because they are so talented. Tennant as Tennant seems to be a sweet guy. But something happens to him when he starts to act, and he seems to flatten out to me. There's also always a tinge of smugness that I find off-putting. So the equation works in the opposite way for me there. His charm reminds me a little of what so many people have said about Eccleston - that he's stunningly handsome (RTD always calls him "beautiful") in person, but that a camera really never does him justice.
I thought Rose was fine for 'having a spine' and a personality too;
Oh, definitely. I just thought she got a bit too clingy toward the end. I tend to love the Bogart/Bacall, Nick/Nora, Cary Grant/Rosalind Russell, Tracy/Hepburn kinds of relationships, which I thought we had with Nine and Rose. Ten and Rose were a little more Dawson's Creek to me. Martha has suffered a bit more - I thought she started off well, and ended pretty well, but there was a long stretch in the middle (Gridlock - 42) where her character development was largely "Why doesn't he notice me?" I felt pretty miffed on Freema/Martha's behalf for that.
It'll be interesting to see what they'll do with Donna. I hope they don't return to the "everyone in his orbit falls in love with him" schtick; but I'm also revolted when I see fans say, "Oh, well, at least with Catherine Tate, there's no chance of a romantic subplot." And why would that be? Because she's close to Tennant's age and not a stick and doesn't look like a model? So they've got me coming and going with that one. I do think Tennant seems to be better with older women - and by older, I really do mean within ten years of his own age, he's not nearly as young as many fans seem to imagine! So many of them made such a big deal about him being "closer" to Billie Piper's age than CE, but 12 years vs. 18 years isn't that different. The two men are more the same generation than either of them with Billie Piper (who seems to like older men anyway - some of us do!).
Re: Looks vs. attraction
Date: 2007-08-23 06:09 pm (UTC)I like beauty, but prettiness isn't the same. I like dramatic looks, striking looks - sometimes congruent with beauty and sometimes not. Sometimes striking looks will make a person appear beautiful even if they have irregular or unusual features. And it's subjective anyway.
I love Adrien Brody's looks. Don't know Jarvis Cocker. My favourite actor, with regards to looks and physical style, is Peter Wingfield. I like Eccleston's looks way more than David Tennant, who fails to fit my usual taste in any way - in fact, I'd say it's a tribute to his personality, and the way he can put it across while acting, that I find him most attractive on the screen. He's definitely not my type.
I would like to see Eccleston in person. Maybe some day, if I'm lucky, and able to go to England, and he's doing stage work - ? Well, I can dream!
I tend to love the Bogart/Bacall, Nick/Nora, Cary Grant/Rosalind Russell, Tracy/Hepburn kinds of relationships, which I thought we had with Nine and Rose.
Interesting. Not something I'd have considered. I didn't equate the Nine/Rose relationship with any of these, or anything else - I saw it as unique. Must think about this.
Since I am perfectly happy with people loving the Doctor under any and all circumstanes, I wouldn't mind in the least if Donna loved him. I'm here for the romantic subplot: it's what drew me to the show in the first place. It was the shrillness of Tate's performance that put me off; but my sense of the only publicity photo we've seen is that they'll have mellowed the character. It might be good that she's a contrast to both Martha and Rose. On the other hand, I fear that having a comedian as a female lead will tempt both Tennant and Davies to more humourous wackiness. Which is not what I'm here for.
Re: Looks vs. attraction
Date: 2007-08-25 05:31 pm (UTC)Me, too. Pretty, to me, is something that is utterly conventional, symmetrical, refined, and really not very sexy. Beauty, to me, has to have an element of strength, even angularity. I definitely like a nose on a person, even women, but expressive eyes (preferably large - but then Alan Rickman has made the most of his beady little hazel eyes) are a must. Eyes, hands, and voice are my three "ticky boxes" for physical attractiveness. But all of those are inflected by the way they're used.
Don't know Jarvis Cocker.
Me, too. Pretty, to me, is something that is utterly conventional, symmetrical, refined, and really not very sexy. Beauty, to me, has to have an element of strength, even angularity. I definitely like a nose on a person, even women, but expressive eyes (preferably large - but then Alan Rickman has made the most of his beady little hazel eyes) are a must. Eyes, hands, and voice are my three "ticky boxes" for physical attractiveness. But all of those are inflected by the way they're used.
<i>Don't know Jarvis Cocker. </i>
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jarvis_Cocker"He's the lead singer of the British rock group Pulp,</a> who are somewhere in the line of English eccentrics that include Oscar Wilde, the Kinks, David Bowie, and Morrissey. Frankly, I think he'd be in his rights to sue the BBC and Tennant for brand infringement in the Tenth Doctor's look:
<img src="http://pics.livejournal.com/nina_ds/pic/000e852w">
That infamous Dead Ringers "Christmas at the Doctors'" had Nine telling Ten he was "nothing but Jarvis Cocker in space."
<i>My favourite actor, with regards to looks and physical style, is Peter Wingfield.</i>
I've only ever seen pictures of him (I just can't bring myself to watch <i>Highlander</i>, but he's definitely in the wheelhouse.
Eccleston is involved in a new staging of <i>Macbeth</i>. I hope that it comes together; and I hope I'm in the right country when it happens!
<i>I didn't equate the Nine/Rose relationship with any of these, or anything else - I saw it as unique. </i>
Oh, I do, too. I love the sparkiness and fun of bantering, with the heated undercurrent of eroticism that all those couples have; what Nine and Rose have that is completely different and <i>more than</i> the rest of those couples is a sort of innocence and wonder and vulnerability.
I just don't want Donna to go all googly-eyed over the Doctor. I don't mind if a relationship grows - in fact, of all the women thrown at Ten over the past two years, Donna seems to me to be the one who would work the best, because she sees the wrongness in him. I still want her to tell him when he's wrong and slap him whenever it's necessary. Because I'm sure it <I>will</i> be necessary.
Re: Looks vs. attraction
Date: 2007-10-23 01:20 pm (UTC)I'd say Indira Varma rates highly on this scale - more so than Eve Myles, though I have come to love Gwen Cooper not for her looks but for her style and personality - while Suzie rates low on both counts, being a somewhat messed-up killer. Pity, that.
"Christmas at the Doctors'" had Nine telling Ten he was "nothing but Jarvis Cocker in space."
LOL - great line! Good title, too - the concept.
I want to see that Macbeth, oh, yes - ! Don't know what the odds are (I can't currently afford to travel), but oh my goodness... he'd be a powerful Macbeth. I was going to say he'd be 'scary' (thinking of his Jago) but that would depend on the treatment and the characterization. Macbeth could be very sympathetic, very unscary, depending on how he's played, and whichever approach they take, or something in between, Eccleston would be brilliant.
Re: Looks vs. attraction
Date: 2007-08-25 05:38 pm (UTC)I like beauty, but prettiness isn't the same. I like dramatic looks, striking looks
Me, too. Pretty, to me, is something that is utterly conventional, symmetrical, refined, and really not very sexy. Beauty, to me, has to have an element of strength, even angularity. I definitely like a nose on a person, even women, but expressive eyes (preferably large - but then Alan Rickman has made the most of his beady little hazel eyes) are a must. Eyes, hands, and voice are my three "ticky boxes" for physical attractiveness. But all of those are inflected by the way they're used.
Don't know Jarvis Cocker.
He's the lead singer of the British rock group Pulp, (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jarvis_Cocker) who are somewhere in the line of English eccentrics that include Oscar Wilde, the Kinks, David Bowie, and Morrissey. He has a wonderfully surreal sense of humour, and a weird kind of grace in moving. But frankly, I think he'd be within his rights to sue the BBC and Tennant for brand infringement in the Tenth Doctor's look (picture c. 1997):
That infamous Dead Ringers "Christmas at the Doctors'" had Nine telling Ten he was "nothing but Jarvis Cocker in space."
My favourite actor, with regards to looks and physical style, is Peter Wingfield.
I've only ever seen pictures of him (I just can't bring myself to watch Highlander, but he's definitely in the wheelhouse.
Eccleston is involved in a new staging of Macbeth. I hope that it comes together; and I hope I'm in the right country when it happens!
I didn't equate the Nine/Rose relationship with any of these, or anything else - I saw it as unique.
Oh, I do, too. I love the sparkiness and fun of bantering, with the heated undercurrent of eroticism that all those couples have; what Nine and Rose have that is completely different and more than the rest of those couples is a sort of innocence and wonder and vulnerability.
I just don't want Donna to go all googly-eyed over the Doctor. I don't mind if a relationship grows - in fact, of all the women thrown at Ten over the past two years, Donna seems to me to be the one who would work the best, because she sees the wrongness in him. I still want her to tell him when he's wrong and slap him whenever it's necessary. Because I'm sure it will be necessary.
Re: Looks vs. attraction
Date: 2007-08-30 04:45 am (UTC)I usually think so, but the diversity of beauty makes it difficult to pinpoint characteristics and a lot of it has to do with character. I am astounded that I like John Barrowman's looks as much as I do, since he is very much not my type, usually. But I like the way he puts himself across, and find it very easy to enjoy his kind of beauty in his case.
Eyes, hands, and voice are my three "ticky boxes" for physical attractiveness.
I'd say eyes, nose and voice.
all of those are inflected by the way they're used.
Absolutely.
Thanks for the intro to Jarvis Cocker.
Eccleston is involved in a new staging of Macbeth.
Oooh - just think how good he could be!
what Nine and Rose have that is completely different and more than the rest of those couples is a sort of innocence and wonder and vulnerability.
All of that. They were totally amazing.
I just don't want Donna to go all googly-eyed over the Doctor.
I find it hard to imagine Donna being googly-eyed over anyone. I actually find myself thinking negative thoughts when I consider the matter, and I'm not sure why, because I didn't think I disliked Donna. But she seemed... emotionally limited to me.
of all the women thrown at Ten over the past two years, Donna seems to me to be the one who would work the best, because she sees the wrongness in him.
She did. Interesting. I wonder where or whether that will develop.
Re: Looks vs. attraction
Date: 2007-09-06 12:44 am (UTC)Yeah, conventional "movie star" looks don't do much for me. Bogart fan, me - Gene Kelly is probably the closest I come to "pretty boy" among the older generation, but frankly, I never noticed how beautiful his face was until I was well-wowed by his dancing and his directing talent. It was kind of a "Miss Jones! Without your glasses, you're beatiful!" moment, and it was because a film historian on a DVD commentary pointed it out.
I find that I don't find John Barrowman attractive/sexy for *myself*, but when he's with the right person (so far, Nine and the real CJH), he can be very sexy in combination. Some people are like that. Maybe my gaydar just marks him off in some way...although every single even semi-successful relationship I've ever had has been with a bi guy whom I first thought of as a friend. I don't know why I attract them (after four, you have to figure there's a pattern). I'm not very butch!
Eccleston is involved in a new staging of Macbeth.
Oooh - just think how good he could be!
I've been waiting for this since Shallow Grave, quite honestly. David is just a baby Macbeth. "That was stressful. I found that quite stressful." (I don't know why that line always sends me into gales of laughter, but it does.)
As for Donna, I like the idea that they can influence each other. I was really expecting to hate Donna...but by the end, I kind of loved her. I'll be interested to see how they handle them. At this point, I'll settle for a simple well.
Re: Looks vs. attraction
Date: 2007-09-13 01:38 pm (UTC)So now I look at them and I feel a lot of fondness - not for themselves, because the annoyance factor is still there. The fondness is not because of the actors. Maybe because of the company they keep.
And I confess that probably my lack of enchantment with the Empress of Racnoss coloured my general lack of enjoyment of Donna. There were scenes in "The Runaway Bride" that I loved, but they were mostly because of staging (the TARDIS chase on the motorway) or Tennant (the 'no mercy' scene).
So we'll see what I think of Donna in series 4. It could go either way. I might find her endearing this time - or unbearable. Or something in between. I really hope I don't find her unbearable.
I find John Barrowman amusing as himself, and sexy as Captain Jack, especially in the coat and braces, especially when he's with someone like Nine, Ianto, Gwen, or Rose. Oddly, I didn't see much chemistry between Jack and Ten, which was disappointing, because it could or should have been there in spades. I think it was written out. It therefore remains a potential.
As for bi men: you're lucky! I'd love to find a bi man who wanted me.
Re: Looks vs. attraction
Date: 2007-09-18 01:49 am (UTC)The Rachnoss: pretty terrible design, I thought, and again, I'm not so keen on genocidal!Doctor, even if "everything has its time and everything has to die." I wasn't altogether convinced by that death scene, but compared to Sarah Par(r?)ish chewing the scenery... I much preferred non-A-story parts of that episode.
I find John Barrowman amusing as himself, and sexy as Captain Jack, especially in the coat and braces, especially when he's with someone like Nine, Ianto, Gwen, or Rose.
I do find JB amusing, but not sexy unless, as you say, he's with someone else. I'd say there are also levels - Nine, Gwen, Rose, and Ianto in that order (with Ianto, I find Jack sexy, but I'm afraid Ianto doesn't project anything to me yet - he still seems remarkably blank, even when he's in the center of a scene).
I did think that Jack and Ten worked together better than I expected, but it was friendly and warm. I agree, not really sexy at all, at best old friends. And almost entirely coming from Jack. Sigh. Again. I just don't see Tennant projecting chemistry; he can occasionally respond to it, most notably with Lis Sladen in School Reunion; but despite his campiness, he also reads sooo much straighter to me than Eccleston. It's why I really couldn't get "slashiness" off the Ten/Master interaction, despite their best efforts to write it in there. To be honest, Simm was damned sexy to me with Moen (and I've never thought he was sexy before - excellent actor yes, but heartthrob, no); but again, I didn't get anything more than dysfunctional codependence with the Doctor.
I wonder if some of it isn't at least partially a class thing. Tennant's a very middle-class PK (Southern US slang for "preacher's kid"), and he wears it as much as CE wears his working/military-classness. He always seems a little "held in." CE's sexuality has always been much more fluid and on-the-surface of his parts - even early parts like Derek Bentley where he has all sorts of undefined chemistry with his sister, obvious desire for the record store girl, and a kind of crush on the boys in the gang; the bird boy in that episode of Morse that I can't remember the name of is so highly strung and stuck somewhere between innocent child and pedophile himself; and David in Shallow Grave is one of the great examples of creepy-sexy-geeky. That's why he didn't need to do Sylar - he's already been there and done it better than Zachary Quinto. I'll put the tuning fork scene up against David mouthing Juliet's fingers anyday.
Re: Looks vs. attraction, pt. 1
Date: 2007-09-18 06:16 pm (UTC)Agreed. In the case of Owen... my feelings for him went through various permutations throughout the series. By the end I was perfectly primed for the forgiveness scene, even though it took me by surprise. As did my reaction to it. Brilliant.
and my feeling is that both of them are actually really fine actors who are given characters that don't entirely make sense.
Donna was underdeveloped, but if they were using her as a one-off, that's not surprising. It gives me hope for next season.
I know that Burn Gorman stopped the filming of the scene of Owen shooting Jack because the motivation wasn't at all clear to any of them.
And... what explanation did they get? It wasn't entirely clear to me, either. But that was only one of numerous unclear things at that point.
I'm pretty sure we've talked about this before, but I thought his "reunion" with Jack at the end of End of Days was tremendously moving.
Oh, yes. A very strong scene. A very cleverly done scene, saying and implying so much about each of them, and perfectly accomplished by both actors. Amazing too that it (story-wise, in terms of emotional impact) completely eclipsed the kiss with Ianto. And I speak as a Jack/Ianto fan.
I think Eve Myles does well with Gwen - but then, I like Gwen on various levels. I don't think the writers have entirely done well by her... Which is a pity. On a more important level, I don't know how I am supposed to be interpreting her in the show. Is she a heroine in the making? A lost soul? Are we supposed to think she's clever, or an idiot? Or neither or both? ...I think she's supposed to be endearingly flawed, but I'm not sure.
Ianto doesn't project anything to me yet - he still seems remarkably blank, even when he's in the center of a scene).
I like Ianto a lot - particulary in "Cyberwoman", "Countrycide" and "Captain Jack Harkness" - but don't yet see a lot of chemistry between him and Jack. Largely because, after "Cyberwoman", we don't get many scenes where they interact - though the restraint of Ianto's approach to Jack at the end of "End of Days" was indicative in itself. I liked htat, as implying (I think) that (a) Ianto himself is uncertain where he stands with Jack, especially since he has defied him again, and (b) the others had no clue that Jack and Ianto had been having sex. (Though obviously Owen had picked up on the attraction, at least on Ianto's side.)
Ianto's best scenes are either with Owen (as in "Captain Jack Harkness") or by himself (as in "End of Days"). I like the way Ianto is a man of extremes - sometimes over-the-top emotion, but mostly showing a kind of controlled reserve.
On the other hand, I'm not entirely sure what I think of Gareth David-Lloyd in the role. His looks are perhaps a bit too... bland?
Re: Looks vs. attraction, pt. 1
Date: 2007-11-03 06:07 pm (UTC)Re: Owen By the end I was perfectly primed for the forgiveness scene, even though it took me by surprise.
Me, too. That, and Gwen's reaction to Rhys's "death" were definitely my favourite parts of the finale. I thought the show was finding its feet in "Out of Time" and CJH, but the finale was a bit...all the bad tendencies of Chris Chibnall resonating with all the worst tendencies of RTD.
Donna was underdeveloped, but if they were using her as a one-off, that's not surprising. It gives me hope for next season.
Me, too. I was actually going to stop watching DW - I have just reached such a pitch of loathing for Ten and his characterization that I couldn't bear it anymore, at least after we'd had an end, if not a closure, to the relationship with Jack - but bringing Donna back is the one thing that's going to keep me watching. I'm hoping for a rude awakening one way or the other.
And... what explanation did they get? It wasn't entirely clear to me, either. But that was only one of numerous unclear things at that point.
You know, I don't know that I ever heard the reason! I just heard that BG stopped the filming, which at least proves that one person in the production had his head in gear! I agree with you on the problem of Gwen - it's not Eve Myles's fault. It seems to be a particular feature/problem of RTD-flavoured shows that I'm not altogether sure how we're supposed to feel about characters. At least half of my problems with Ten are that I think we're supposed to think he's wonderful, and I really, really don't.
As for Ianto, I think "underdeveloped" is a big part of it. I also do find GDL bland, both in appearance and performance. I don't dislike the character so much as feel like he doesn't hold my attention. Often when he's onscreen (even if he's the only person onscreen), I find my eyes/attention drifting away from him. It plays into the chemistry issue, too, with Jack - I think John Barrowman can generate chemistry with others, though he needs someone to play with him. Eve Myles did that, Chris Eccleston did that, Billie Piper did that, even David Tennant did that - to an extent, and Freema Agyeman gave it a shot, though they had very little time together. But I just didn't see it happening much with GDL. As you intimate, everything seemed tentative. I've seen some people argue that Ianto was just being "discreet" when he approached Jack at the end, but I can't shake the feeling that GDL, if not Ianto, looked really uncomfortable in the kiss.
I'm curious as to how Martha is going to fit in. Martha was a little like S2 Rose, in that I liked her better when she was apart from the Doctor, so it could really be an opportunity for FA to mature as an actress. I think she's beautiful, and she's not a bad actress, but there are definitely times when she seems a bit raw and unfinished. I don't know that the production team will be able to help her, but perhaps some time around BG and GM will.
Have you been watching the Sarah Jane Adventures? I'm a few weeks behind, but I have to say, I'm really enjoying it!
Re: Looks vs. attraction, pt. 1a
Date: 2007-11-08 04:15 pm (UTC)And I keep forgetting when your Thanksgiving is - every year I have to ask, and every year I get the same answer from American friends, and every year I forget again - two weeks from now? Last something in November? Thursday?
[the scene where Jack forgives Owen] and Gwen's reaction to Rhys's "death" were definitely my favourite parts of the finale.
He too, though I also liked hearing Ianto reading from the Book of Revelations, and I adored the end when Jack heard the TARDIS and smiled. Too bad that didn't pan out.
I thought the show was finding its feet in "Out of Time" and CJH, but the finale was a bit...all the bad tendencies of Chris Chibnall resonating with all the worst tendencies of RTD.
Catherine Tregana knows how to write a great episode, and I hope they have her write some episodes next season. "End of Days" was a hodge-podge of random ideas badly put together. And excessive excess, as you say.
I just heard that BG stopped the filming, which at least proves that one person in the production had his head in gear!
You'd think writers, as well as actors, should realize that characters need motives for their actions. Which brings me back to my original assessment that the problems with Torchwood are all in the writing and the conceptualization, not in the acting or direction.
And though I think there are many things about both the new Doctor Who and Torchwood that are absolutely brilliant, their flaws show more and more as time goes on: a certain recklessness with content, a willingness to sacrifice sense for sensationalism, and a focus on bold ideas over characterization.
It seems to be a particular feature/problem of RTD-flavoured shows that I'm not altogether sure how we're supposed to feel about characters.
Yes. Look at David Tennant's character in Blackpool, D.I. Peter Carlisle - were we supposed to think he was sympathetic, or despicable? I liked the story well enough and I liked his role, but I still don't know. I like ambiguity, but we need some kind of anchor of character-assessment. Amorality doesn't do it.
As far as I know, Russell T. Davies had nothing to do with it; it could be just a style in writing at the BBC these days. If so, I disapprove.
At least half of my problems with Ten are that I think we're supposed to think he's wonderful, and I really, really don't.
I was ready to take it on faith for a long time, but I was going by certain assumptions that turned out to be unwarranted. There are still moments and scenes where I love him, and that makes me try to rationalize the other scenes. Without a lot of success.
Part of it is that I had in my head a certain notion of the Jack/Doctor relationship that the story supported completely: that Jack loved the Doctor and saw him as a mentor, a moral superior who had turned his life around at a point of crisis in "The Empty Child/The Doctor Dances". That relationship paradigm stopped making sense with "The Last of the Time Lords" and even with "Utopia" - I liked the rationale that the Doctor couldn't cope with Jack's immortality, but I expected him to come to terms with it and accept Jack again. Instead we got... ambiguity, even obfuscation.
The bottom line being, however I reconstruct the relationship in my head, the Doctor no longer has the high moral ground. And that's why I feel that my fandom was 'broken' - because the core idea of it can't be reconstructed or fixed even if the story should bring resolution. The Doctor whose core motivation was compassion and caring isn't there any more. He let Earth be decimated.
And that puts Jack in the position of champion of Earth even if just in intent, which is the position of moral superiority in relation to the Doctor, and that's just... confusing. Emotionally speaking.
Re: Looks vs. attraction, pt. 1a1(!)
From:Re: Looks vs. attraction, pt. 1a1(!)+x
From:Re: Looks vs. attraction, pt. 1a1(!)+x
From:Re: Looks vs. attraction, pt. 1a1(!)+x
From:the morality question
From:Re: the morality question
From:Re: Looks vs. attraction, pt. 1a2
From:Utopia thoughts
From:Re: Looks vs. attraction, pt. 1b
From:Re: Looks vs. attraction, pt. 1b
From:Re: Looks vs. attraction, pt. 1b
From:Re: Looks vs. attraction, pt. 1c
From:Re: Looks vs. attraction, pt. 1c
From:Re: Looks vs. attraction, carrying on with another part (1)
From:Re: Looks vs. attraction, part 2 of another reply
From:Re: Looks vs. attraction, pt. 2
Date: 2007-09-18 06:16 pm (UTC)I felt I got a lot more insight into all of the characters (except Ianto) on reading the novels (though I've still only read two of them). And that says something about the writing of the shows.... Though of course the novels had more room for elucidation.
I saw "Utopia" again last night - they finally aired it on the CBC. Except with the Professor, Ten was entirely closed off - and I though Tennant did a wonderful job of projecting defensiveness. A man making himself an island - with Martha no less than with Jack.
And frankly, the character makes more sense to me if I revert to my former interpretation rather than anything articulated in the show: that Ten is afraid to get too close to anyone, and so pushes them away, whatever his feelings. He has a moment of rapport with Jack over Rose (when Jack hugs him), and a moment of rapport with the Professor when they are all caught up in mutual admiration. Otherwise Ten is in a 'don't approach me' mood, which he tries to extend to Jack as well - none of those warm flirty hellos! But he assumes responsibility for Jack (no shooting) and acts possessive. So: echoes of Nine, without the warmth, and only echoes of the teasing.
Hmm.
I agree that the slashiness of the Doctor and Master seemed mostly on the Master's side. Though Ten's reactions were emotional (and focussed), they were not visceral... Yes, Simm was sexy with Moen, and I'm not much of a John Simm fan, but I could see it! I thought he was sexiest with the Doctor when they were on the telephone in "The Sound of Drums".
But by the end of "The Last of the Time Lords" I felt the Doctor seemed... leeched of feeling, perhaps. Drained. Lost. Half-hearted. Not engaging with Martha or Jack so much as going through motions. Perhaps he was on auto-pilot since the loss of Rose, and losing the Master was the last straw. So at the end it's 'onward and upward, we all carry on to the next adventure' but without any spirit spirit to it except that of loss.
Re: series 3 and the Last of the Time Lords... part 2
Date: 2007-08-20 03:47 pm (UTC)we got no reaction to her realization of what she'd done (and perhaps the memory of Nine's sacrifice).
The theme was dropped, except to (somewhat inexplicably) turn up in the twelfth episode of Torchwood. It gave a good structure to series 1, working up to a very satisfying climax. Torchwood as a theme in series 2 was fun, but not so much part of the structure as glimpses of historical progression - out of order, of course.
The thing that frustrates me is that I thought we were going to get that with Martha.
Yes. I thought we would, and should have. I liked it that she loved the Doctor, but, unabashed romantic that I am, I either wanted to see him love her in return, using 'love' in the widest possible application, or no 'crush' at all. As it stands, it simply set up my disappointment - and added to my negative interpretation of the Doctor.
I had mixed feelings about Donna; she was both entertaining and annoying. By the end of "The Runaway Bride" I was glad to see the last of her, but I do think there is potential there, and my reaction to the only publicity photo I've seen of her for series 4 was a positive one. So... I hope for the best. But it's hard for me to accept that I have to forego clever, beautiful, brave Martha for the shrill, comical, not-so-bright Donna!
I suppose it's also a little more intense for me because I don't find Ten charming or heroic.
The fact that I find him attractive (not physically, but in terms of dialogue and general personality) adds a certain emotional tension - in any given scene will he charm me or squick me? I used to have only faith. (Like Jack - "Never doubted him, never will.") Now there's an added dimension to the suspense.
Now, this only really became a problem for me as of "The Last of the Time Lords". I hope I can recover my confidence.
they can still pull out a HN/FOB or Blink, and I don't want to miss those!
Absolutely not.
Re: series 3 and the Last of the Time Lords... part 2
Date: 2007-08-21 09:57 pm (UTC)There are two reasons why the (apparent) age gap has never bugged me one bit; first, I've always gone for older men myself. Even when I was 11, my first TV crush was on a man playing a dad. I like a guy who's mastered puberty! I may notice someone earlier if they're exceptional, although then it's kind of "I can't wait until he grows up!" It's not the physical aspect so much, all though that does have some impact, it's mostly the emotional maturity, the gravity, the sense of self that I find attractive, and you rarely see a guy under 30 whose got that. The actors that I named before are examples, and I know a couple in RL, but they're rare.
The other thing is the sheer scale of a 900-year-old being. When looked at from that perspective, it doesn't matter if the human is 19 or 90, s/he is still a child in comparison. And for Nine, particularly, so damaged by the weight of the war, I would argue that he needed the innocence and openness to wonder of someone like Rose. When he became less mature in behaviour and outlook as Ten, then it didn't click so well, and perhaps he really needs a Donna to keep him from imploding.
It's not necessarily the leaving, but the way of parting that I see as different. I can still argue that Jack and Martha love the Doctor, but they've not lost themselves in him to the point that they can't see they need to step back. Our last view of Rose is sobbing on a beach; Martha was doing well until she came back to say, "That heavy handed metaphor I just told you. Well, really, my friend was me, and I love you." It's a little pathetic, and I don't like seeing Martha do that, especially as she had just gone around the world for a year, preaching his gospel (ack! ick!) and didn't get much more than a faintly grudging "Thanks". When she pokes him and says, "I am good," the very least he could have said was, "Quite right, too." That's an echo I would have liked.
I liked it that she loved the Doctor, but, unabashed romantic that I am, I either wanted to see him love her in return, using 'love' in the widest possible application, or no 'crush' at all. As it stands, it simply set up my disappointment - and added to my negative interpretation of the Doctor.
Yes. Sigh. It's the crush part that I find so depressing. It's so juvenile. Not that 24-year-old smart people can't act that way, but I wanted her to pull out of it and realize that he really wasn't boyfriend material, at least not as she was conceiving of it, but she never really did. That's the sort of loss of identity/awareness that bothers me in female characters, because it's so regressive. It's part of why I couldn't quite connect with Martha the way I did (immediately) with Rose or (over the course of the episode) with Donna. In reality, I'm far more like Martha than either of the others, but the performance may also have had to do with it. Freema's a lovely personality, but she's still pretty inexperienced as an actress, and sometimes it shows, for instance in the storytelling sequences of LOTL. I really liked her when she was angry - the bones of the hand, and - my favourite Martha moment of all - she leaned into the Doctor's frame in the Blink Easter egg and complained that she had to do all the work. That's the Martha I wanted.
Re: series 3 and the Last of the Time Lords... part 2
Date: 2007-08-22 03:19 pm (UTC)So I didn't mean to imply that was a problem. Just that it's a difference that affects the dynamic: the Doctor will always have had more experience and knowledge than his Companions. (Except when he picks up other Time Lords as Companions.)
I agree that the youthful-innocence-and-enthusiasm of Rose worked well with Nine. (Everything worked well with Nine.)
I can still argue that Jack and Martha love the Doctor, but they've not lost themselves in him to the point that they can't see they need to step back.
I'm not sure what you mean here. They did step back. I wanted to see more resolution with the Doctor before they did that. As it happens, I'll just have to imagine it. It doesn't change the story, just the attitudes.
When she pokes him and says, "I am good," the very least he could have said was, "Quite right, too." That's an echo I would have liked.
Yes, that is exactly what I wanted. I did get it at the end of "The Lazarus Experiment" - "you were never just a passenger". But there was no follow-up to that. Which is why I call Davies a tease. He gives and he takes away.
Sigh. It's the crush part that I find so depressing.
I don't like the word 'crush'. I never use it. She doesn't have a crush on him; she loves him truly and deeply. And deals with it. It isn't juvenile. It could happen at any age. (As with Sarah Jane Smith, who loved him too, and dealt with it.) To dismiss him as 'not boyfriend' material is ridiculous, he isn't like a date who might take her to the prom. She wouldn't even want that if the circumstances were appropriate. It's a relationship-dynamic that is totally outside the box of anything we have in our society's social dynamic that there aren't even words for it. To see her as a young woman with a crush is misreading her entirely.
In my opinion.
(Remember also that I believe the Doctor does love her, but would rather relive the Time War than admit it. For, possibly, good reasons.)
age gap and relationship
Date: 2007-08-23 01:55 am (UTC)I'm sorry, I didn't mean to imply that you were implying that! That was one of those moments where I skipped immediately to thinking of all the fans whose response is that Rose could have never have been interested in some one who looked old enough to be her father (rather amusing, actually, given BP's personal history!). I actually did get into a discussion about that with someone on T&C, who was very assertive that a 19-year-old would think it was distasteful and icky, because she sure did. The fact that I didn't feel the same way when I was 19 didn't count, apparently. And according to her, Rose showed no interest in the Doctor until he was cute and foxy and Ten. It left a bit of a bad taste in my mouth, as you can probably tell!
I've always thought that relationships don't need to be equal/symmetrical in order to work, but they do need to balance - complementary in the geometric sense. That's one reason Nine and Rose work so beautifully for me, It's not strictly an "opposites attract" thing, but more complex - the jigsaw puzzle pieces need to fit each other.
I have to say, I do read Martha having a crush and not a true, deep love because the balance isn't there for me. I'm fine with that at the beginning, but her character development was so shallow/shaky during the middle part of the series - and then he was such an ass through a lot of the latter part, although there's a big potential gap in Blink - that I can't really see it as a genuinely informed love because she doesn't seem to see him as he truly is. Nor, sadly, does he seem to see her at all. I do think true love can be one-sided, but I haven't been as drawn into Martha's subjectivity as much as I'd have liked. So I think she's attracted, I think she may love him, but for me, it's not convincing me as a well-rounded love. It's not clicking for me, and that's a writing issue more than anything else.
I think the Doctor does love her, but I'm not sure it's in the way she wants. Of course, that's true of Rose, too.
Re: age gap and relationship
Date: 2007-08-23 01:11 pm (UTC)So that issue just boils down to personal taste. Personally, I love it that the show gives the impression that "age doesn't matter" in just the way Torchwood gives the impression "gender doesn't matter". I happen to believe both those things.
And yes, I prefer romances where the people involved aren't too much alike.
You think Martha doesn't see the Doctor as he is? I thought she saw him, warts and all, and loved him anyway. And yes, it's all a writing issue. I liked Martha in every way. I thought she was better and more consistently written than the Doctor.
Re: age gap and relationship
Date: 2007-08-24 04:20 pm (UTC)I know this is big in fan circles, but I don't know that I think Rose's issues are "issues" - she never knew her father, so it makes sense that she'd be curious; OTOH, I think she had also become the strong one in her relationship with her mother. So I don't think she was looking for a father substitute in the Doctor. In fact, I see her attraction to him more in the line of her running off with the dangerous, rock'n'roll Jimmy Stones, and Mickey was a step back into something "safe". But the instinct is to go with the dangerous, exciting one.
And Christopher Eccleston is incredibly sexy!
Well, yes. There's always that.
Re: age gap and relationship
Date: 2007-08-24 04:48 pm (UTC)Well, yes - what nuance are you putting on the word 'issues'? I simply mean that she never knew her father, and wishes she had known him. I certainly don't mean that she sees the Doctor as a father figure in any way, but I do think it means that real or apparent age issues don't bother her. I also think it means that she has a certain image of a masculine ideal, and measures (or tries to measure) both Pete and the Doctor by it.
In fact, I see her attraction to him more in the line of her running off with the dangerous, rock'n'roll Jimmy Stones, and Mickey was a step back into something "safe".
I'd say the Doctor was the perfect compromise for her there. He offered her excitement and adventure and danger, but also good character, honesty, and - though Jackie wouldn't have agreed, because she had different standards - stability. Mickey offered safety, familiarity, and boredom.
There's always that.
Works for me. Though perhaps in an unusual way.
Re: age gap and relationship
Date: 2007-08-25 06:27 pm (UTC)I'm just glad I finally found a solo Claude icon that I like!
what nuance are you putting on the word 'issues'?
Pretty much what you're talking about. Most of the time people trot it out, it's in the context of "Nine is too old for her." Which is not only limited thinking, but just how does it make it better if Ten only looks younger? 900 years, or 902, the Doctor is "too old" for any human. Acting like a teenager just makes him seem like one of those middle-aged guys who drive a sports car. And I do feel that a bit with Ten. He has very little dignity.
I do agree with you on the "safety" issue with Nine. There's something about him that makes you trust him in terms of physical protection - that "come with me" moment with Lynda is rightfully iconic. But Nine also offers an emotional stability that really counts for so much more. At least to me.
Works for me. Though perhaps in an unusual way.
Oh? ::raised eyebrow:: You don't have to answer if you don't want to, but what do you mean?
Re: age gap and relationship
Date: 2007-08-28 07:29 pm (UTC)I do too. I'm really into large noses, but Eccleston's ears are just totally charming. He makes them look like something everyone should want.
I never believe anyone is too old for anyone. May/December relationships - bring 'em on!
I agree that Ten hasn't much dignity most of the time, but I think that's because he doesn't feel the need for dignity. Sometimes I think he shows a lot of dignity. But only sometimes.
that "come with me" moment with Lynda is rightfully iconic.
I don't even like Lynda much, but that scene always chokes me up a little.
...but what do you mean?
I don't remember what I meant! I know I had something in mind when I wrote it.... But Eccleston is sexy, period. I'm sure I had some special aspect of his sexiness in mind when I said that.
Re: age gap and relationship
Date: 2007-09-02 04:32 pm (UTC)Me, too, on all of that. I love that he's so proud of them, really, "They remind me who I am when I shave in the morning." I think that's one of the reasons he's so sexy - he's completely comfortable with his body. There is a lot of architectural beauty there, but a lot of it is the way he carries himself and his expressivity.
I never believe anyone is too old for anyone.
I feel the same way - it seems an arbitrary obstacle, like race or gender. The only time I find it squicky is if there's a clear power differential, but then again, you can't always tell what the internal dynamics are. For instance, I think Nine and Rose balance each other beautifully. Ten and Rose bothered me, because I felt like he closed himself off more, and I can't shake the feeling that he was more interested in having her adoration than having her.
I don't even like Lynda much, but that scene always chokes me up a little.
I have a weird relationship with Lynda. I don't particularly like her as a character, but I loved her interaction with the Doctor. I liked who he was with her. And the moment where Eccleston kills me like no other is that momet when he "hears" Lynda's death in PotW. The expression on his face is just...
But Eccleston is sexy, period. I'm sure I had some special aspect of his sexiness in mind when I said that.
;-) There are so many!
Eccleston
From: