To put it simply sometimes you don’t like someone’s writing style. Some have a seething hatred for what I’d characterize as how simple, personal, and human I try to make everything I write without the verbose and grand nature that others might show. I, on the other hand, hate the pretension of being lengthy and redundant for the sake of it; writing with no immediate purpose other than that for which asserts one’s self as greater-than. To pull back from the joke of being needlessly detailed on something simple: I find that entirely too dry and inhuman.

When it comes to TV and film, analyzing the writing can be tricky for some. Specifically because there are many other pieces to the puzzle. Do you count acting that is unsteady to the analysis? Some would and others wouldn’t. Sometimes it is less a question of quality and more one of personal preference: I don’t like Gareth Roberts’ work. I’d go as far as to say that I entirely disagree with him on more personal issues. However, I’m not here to talk about his comments on trans people and the timing of his coming out soon after. I really didn’t like his previous work in Who for the simple reason that I don’t admire Shakespeare either. Don’t get me started on “The Shakespeare Code” again.

I will say out the gate that I don’t think the quality of the episode is poor, though Roberts’ writing isn’t what is lifting it. I’d go as far as to say the realization of the characters, including Fenella Woolgar’s Agatha Christie, is what does a majority of the work. The Christie-focused episode was never going to pull me in on writing anyway. Hercule Poirot and Miss Marple just never struck my years of growing up with any sweeping force. My only understanding of Miss Marple is when she sang with John Lennon. For me and I assume those my age (which Alexx thinks is 732), Agatha Christie and her characters are for the retired that watch day-time TV.

My point is that while she’s the only historical character in the episode, she is as expendable as the rest of the cast upon the first viewing. I’ll admit my ignorance on her entire life; as far as I cared to know before doing my research, she was Schrödinger’s Christie. Both alive and dead, but could have died at any point in history. This is the problem with historical/character-focused episodes set closer to contemporaneous times: Unless you know further than what they are famous for, you don’t have the context. It would be like having a Stephen King episode. I don’t know if he’s alive or dead, but I know I don’t want to read another one of his books after 11/22/63. I know enough, I’m fine with that.

However, the episode stakes itself so much on death and the peril of life. With one of the most famous crime novelists who would write about solving a murder, you aren’t going to have a massive space adventure. It is a dime-store murder mystery at best, with one of the world’s simplest mysteries, but it didn’t need to be more as it is also about the character. She is about to disappear in what biographers have penned as everything, including a rather hysterical onset of amnesia by her husband’s newly found love for a younger woman. Others characterize it as nothing more than melodrama to frame him for her disappearance. Without this episode, I wouldn’t have known she disappeared 94-years from the day we publish this review.

Coming back to the episode, I’m surprised how much I could find enjoyable. If you put aside the simplicity of the writing and the more personal disputes on the style of writing a historical piece; it is more or less a platform for acting that brings Christie to the forefront. Talking about his decisions and the extra mystery behind BioShock 2‘s key figure Sofia Lamb, Jordan Thomas notes Fenella’s performance-inspired part of the character (and her casting as Lamb). She’s not the only notable face to larger geek culture, which is something I’ll return to in a few weeks for the specials as Felicity Jones plays the Unicorn.

It is always fun to see actors you know from either prior or soon-after to their appearance in Doctor Who. Examples include Woolgar’s casting in BioShock 2, Jones’ role as Jyn Erso in Rogue One, Goodman-Hill’s performances in the BBC’s dark-comedy on drugs Ideal, and countless others. Though that doesn’t mean you’ll love their performance, as is the case with Jones’ rather plain and nonguided performance as the Unicorn. Admittedly, it is not her fault as the role isn’t that deep in the first place. Although Christopher Benjamin does bring Hugh Curbishley to life rather well.

Other than the broad criticisms of 2007-08 CGI for the giant wasp, I think I need to moan about Donna again. It is just towards the end that she rubs me the wrong way. Particularly at the point of deducing who is the Unicorn, who is the Wasp, and why there is a giant wasp anyway. It is very much Loose Women (The View for Americans), gawking and awing over the smallest of revelations and uncoverings. At that point, she’s not a stand-in for the audience or doing anything productive other than filling time. That’s the problem with humans; We like filling in the silence when the quiet is so loud.

I honestly don’t know what the point of Roger’s gayness had to do with the episode, other than to have 1920s parents moan about not having grandkids by the time he’s 13. He’s not! Roger would be about 30, but the point stands. It was mostly to have his lover moan for him once he’s dead and make it a bit sadder? That and referencing nearly every book Christie wrote as if she wasn’t called Agatha Christie in the first place. Though either written consciously or unconsciously, I do enjoy the period-appropriate version of “I’m your biggest fan,” which reminds me of Eccleston’s line in “The Unquiet Dead.”

I don’t hate the episode, but it is nothing I think I’ll specifically return for anytime soon. It functions well as one of the historicals before we jet-set off into a space library next week. Oddly enough, it reminds me a lot of “The Genocide Machine,” a Dalek, 7th Doctor, and Ace story in the Big Finish range about a massive library featuring every book ever. I wonder how many times I’ll tease the truth about River just to confuse my editor Alexx?

Phenixx Gaming is everywhere you are. Follow us on Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and Instagram.

Also, if you’d like to join the Phenixx Gaming team, check out our recruitment article for details on working with us.

Phenixx Gaming is proud to be a Humble Partner! Purchases made through our affiliate links support our writers and charity!

Doctor Who "The Unicorn and the Wasp"

7

Score

7.0/10

Pros

• Woolgar's performance is great, bring humanity to a historical character.

Cons

• Jones in such a flat and characterless role.
• 2007-08 CGI is still a bit crap, isn't it?
• Fine writing, though not a personal preference.