Doctor Who Review by John Keegan

Doctor Who 9.05: The Girl Who Died

Doctor Who 9.05: The Girl Who Died

Written By:
Jamie Mathieson and Steven Moffat
Directed By:
Ed Bazalgette



In terms of foreshadowing, this is probably the most blatant episode yet when it comes to the impending death of Clara Oswald.  The Doctor’s comments about immortality and enduring the loss of loved ones is practically beating the audience over the head with it.  And it seems that Ashildr is going to be taking on a certain metaphorical space for the ninth series when it comes to exploring such a loss. 





If the cost of immortality (or the human tendency to assume what that cost would be) is one of the central themes of the ninth series, then it is accompanied by further exploration of the moral underpinning of The Doctor’s activities.  Just what is the cost of interfering with history?  In this specific case, what is it going to mean in terms of The Doctor deciding, on his own, to bring Ashildr back to life.  The Doctor is not good at consequence management, after all.


While ostensibly yet another opening portion of a two-part tale, this particular episode does feel a lot more self-contained.  The connective tissue is less narrative-driven and more thematically linked, with Ashildr being the pivot.  The two-parter seems to be the standard at the moment, which may be an attempt to mitigate some of the unevenness of the eighth series.  That said, it’s a delicate balance.  





The Mire represented an interesting exploration of mythos vs. reality, in terms of the perception of their warrior prowess vs. their actual deeds.  There’s some of that happening with Doctor Who, especially in the Moffat era.  Whether it’s the long-form narrative elements or the depth and strength of the episodic content, there seems to be a disconnect between the reputation of the Modern Era Who and the quality that has been hitting the screen.


One of the little oddities of the episode was the callback to “The Fires of Pompeii”.  I’m not sure why the writers felt the compelling need to link the earlier appearance of Peter Capaldi on the series to his portrayal of The Doctor, but after making a point of the fact that it would have meaning, this felt a little small.  The parallel to the Pompeii scenario was a bit forced, given that the price of saving that earlier character from death was never explored in depth.  Ashildr’s resurrection is going to be, hopefully, getting a lot more airtime.






Once again The Doctor is putting his own sense of “the greater good” and “right vs. wrong” above all other considerations (or any consideration at all, really), and what will be the price this time?  Ashildr was given the ability to grant a loved one equal immortality, and yet she apparently didn’t use it.  Is that a lack of desire to inflict the burdens of immortality on another, or a fundamental inability to connect with someone else on that level?  And once again, one must ask: is Clara’s more bold side giving The Doctor a false sense of freedom to act recklessly?  Is she not reining him in enough?  It may turn out that The Doctor comes to realize that Clara may be the companion he wants to keep alive, but not necessarily the companion he needs.

Our Grade:
B
The Good:
  • The ninth series’ themes continue to play out
  • Ashildr is a guest character with a lot of potential
The Bad:
  • The writers who used to explain too little are now explaining way too much

John Keegan aka "criticalmyth", is one of the hosts of the "Critical Myth" podcast heard here on VOG Network's radio feed Monday, Wednesday & Friday. You can follow him on twitter at @criticalmyth

Doctor Who by - 10/19/2015 8:24 AM209 views

Your Responses

Registered Participants can leave their own Concurring/Dissenting Opinion and receive Points and Loot! Why not sign in and add your voice?

Comments

Log in to add your own voice and receive points by leaving good comments other users like!