Doctor Who: The Time of Angels/Flesh and Stone

I’m not sure if I’ve ever really been scared of anything in Doctor Who before. I’m not saying I wasn’t. Perhaps, as a kid, I was. I have no memory of being scared, though. I know the Ogri killing the campers in "Stones of Blood" grossed me out, but I don’t remember ever being driven to hiding away from what was on the screen.

Even though I knew there would have to be a way for Amy to get out of the room when the Angel came in through the monitor screen, I felt that desire to hide. To watch between my fingers. If there had been a sofa…

I was watching it in a busy room full of people drinking beers and wine. A pub. Even with all those distractions, for the first time either in my life (if not, for a very, very, very long time) I felt genuinely scared for a character in Doctor Who.

This is the power of the Weeping Angels.

I know there have been some inconsistencies spotted by other fans between these two episodes and their debut back in "Blink". I regard those inconsistencies in much the same way as the inconsistencies between each and every Cyberman and Dalek story, frankly – it didn’t distract me from the story telling going on here. It’s not my habit to rank stories, and truthfully never really has been. I know what I enjoy, and I have a pretty good grip on what makes a story “good”. “Good” stories don’t always result in my enjoyments, and there are quite a few stories that might technically not be terribly “good” but I still love ’em.

I think both of these episodes are “good” and I found both to be immensely enjoyable.

Not just for the Angels, who I think are brilliant in terms of a Doctor Who monster, by the way. They have that ordinary thing going for them – how many people might walk past a Christian graveyard and look twice at those extraordinary angel statues with the thought, did it just move?

I was fascinated by the soldiers in these two episodes. They reminded me of Paul Cornell’s British Summertime, a science fiction novel exploring several Christian tropes as well as the meaning of time and history. Warrior priests in modern military dress. Interesting. I feel there’s a story there.

River Song. More intriguing glimpses of her, who she is, and the relationship she has with the Doctor and the Doctor has yet to have with her. Although, the Doctor knows who she is; interesting that she can see through his regenerations. I like the dangerous edge to her story, now. Who did she kill? I don’t know the answer to that, but a shivery little feeling I have is – the Doctor?

Then we get to the end of part two. I don’t go to the message boards. My interaction with fan opinion is now with a bunch of mates at the pub afterwards (as I’ve mentioned before), and Facebook/Twitter comments. Some I’ll engage with, others I won’t. Mostly, my response is driven by wanting to have a conversation with someone rather than an “argument” aka slanging match. There have been times when I’ve had to really stop myself from touching “post” on my iPhone when I’ve been tempted to respond narkily to someone who didn’t enjoy something. I stop myself because what we like is such an individual thing I would be hypocritical in saying some of the things I’ve stopped myself from posting. But given the people with whom I’m friends – and why - that’s different to glimpsing the commentary from total strangers.

I knew as soon as we had that last scene with Amy jumping the Doctor there would be a melt down. I even envisaged some of the apoplectic comments. From what I’ve heard from people I know who do read these things, I wasn’t far wrong.

Sigh.

For me, it worked beautifully. Amy is a woman who is herself. She is someone quite capable of kissing strangers for money, even though she is engaged to be married (to Rory, as it does turn out). It would be weird for her to not be attracted to the Doctor. The quick-fire humour of the scene worked for me; as did the Doctor’s rejection. The (apparent) mistake of the telemovie was not being made again. In post-watching discussion at the pub, a friend pointed out some interesting things to do with characterisation and whether it really is Amy’s character. Afterwards, another friend and I pondered the fact that what this 2005+ series of Doctor Who has is characterisation enough of the companions to have discussions about this. Something, perhaps, to get back to.

And, it segued nicely into the next episode…