EPISODE REVIEW: Torchwood: “Children of Earth, Day 5” (Season 3, Episode 5)

Too much of Captain Jack's character in Torchwood felt like his sexuality was his main raison d'etre. He didn't feel like the Captain Jack we met in Doctor Who--- he felt like a version of the same character, with an agenda tacked on.

And Torchwood is a great concept and would fit in to the Doctor Who universe really well... but it didn't quite make it in Series One. Two was much improved and Children of Earth rocked....

But for my money, Sarah Jane Adventures was a better spin off.

I can't speak for R2, of course, but I actually *like* the character (Despite the odd fact that he can't run properly. Have you noticed that?), and I like the actor. In fact, when Jack is acting as a companion for the Doctor, I think he's great. There's a solid dynamic between them, and they share what is probably the only unspoken bond in Jack's life that isn't sexual.

My reservations stem primarily from the fact that Jack is essentially a different character in Torchwood than he is in Dr. Who. In Who, he's rakish, funny, dishonest, brave, cocky, slightly piratical, and almost entirely unapologetic. In Torchwood, he's whiney, mopey, dark, angrier than he is brave, honest, arogant, and entirely too introspective. Jack works better as an amiable rogue than as a caring boss, and that's got nothing to do with his sexuality.

My other most-frequently-stated reservation is that I've just never really enjoyed Torchwood. I like the *concept* all to hell, it's great, I like Gwen, one of the better forceful female characters in SF, I like the occasional episode here and there, I even like the way they've repeatedly used Jack's immortality to tie the previous iterations of Torchwood together. But if I'm honest, I don't like the show. I mean, come on: Cyberwoman? Whether the cast is all straight or all gay or happy dancing eunichs, it doesn't change the fact that "Cyberwoman" was just silly. The character interactions frequently felt like they were getting in the way of the show - Tosh and Owen, for instance - and it felt to me like...well, like I've said elsewhere: I think there's a great concept for a show *in* Torchwood, but they didn't seem to be able to find it in the first year. Second season was better, and "Children of Earth" was freakin' awsome, and pretty much erased all the qualms I had with the show.

If it comes back, and if it continues the quality "CoE" had, I'll doubtless sign on as a big fan.

That's a good question about Captain Kirk, and whether or not what's good for the goose is good for the...uhm...other goose, I guess, in this case. As a little kid, watching Trek, like all little boys I found the smoochy stuff to be embarasing, and as a slightly older boy I found it boring. "Enough kissing already! Punch someone!" When I was an adolescent, I was all like, "Hey, that's Yvonne Craig from Batman, and damn is she Hawt!" but as I got older, I began to find it kind of sad. Of course Trek has always been a horribly, horribly sexist show, but I think it fell kind of prey to the "Magnum Problem" - as a recently-divorced 30-ish private detective living in a friends' house and nailing every woman in sight, Thomas Magnum is kinda' cool. As a 40ish guy dating every woman in sight and *Still* living in a friend's house, he's kinda' sad. Again, I can't speak for R2, but that's my impression.

Getting back to Jack, he's always struck me as a kind of tragic character, but on the other hand, he's also been played as the post-homophobic ideal, the epitome of an amoral, consequenceless life where sex is completely free from emotion and morality. When they play up the tragic angle, he works better, when they play up the other angle, he works not so well. Even if Jack comes from a completely post-genderized society, he's living on freakin' earth, and there's still plenty of homophobia in Wales. Even if a 24/7 all-gay-and-barnyard-animal orgy is standard for where he comes from, it's still going to raise eyebrows on earth, and likely lit torches and pitchforks. No one ever complains - until CoE - and so that aspect of Jack's life plays out as propagandistic and false. Does that make sense?

You wrote: >>So why not review Torchwood as literature rather than treat it as the writer's personal political views?

Is that what you intend with your writing?<<

I admit I don't understand what you mean by that, could you explain it differently?

Having the benefit of reading all the Republibot 2.0/3.0 contributions at once since I'm late to the game, I had some thoughts. Full disclosure -- I'm one of those Republicans you probly consider morally ambiguous as I'm a fiscal conservative and moderately liberal on social issues) and no heath care is not a social issue to me). And I'm not gay not that . . . .

2.0/3.0 detest the omnisexual Jack who is portrayed to be a happy, confident guy who has casual sex but I assume it was cool for Kirk and his progeny of heteros

2.0/3.0 admire the homosexual Jack who is committed to Iago since love is what makes us vulnerable and makes the world go round

Much early commentary was about how Torchwood was all about the big gay club.

What I see is a common literary tool of painting a Hercules that you later find out has a giant Achilles heel and all the happy, overconfident, bravado is compensating for the issues the hero has inside or because of what he did in the past.

There were many indications early on that the Jack we first meet is a tragic figure that has been trying to drown his sorrows in shallow relationships with whoever he is with and since he spent a lot of times with aliens, it included all races and genders.

The point is, none of it worked!

So, in the end, what was initially criticized by 2.0/3.0 as a big gay club attraction taught a pretty Republican lesson.

Rhys was a device to show the personal side of Gwen, but I don't know any women who really want a puppy dog as a husband. It is truly rare that writers can produce a really cool chick character (Gwen is an excellent effort in my view) AND an equally cool spouse.

I don't agree that the writers hate the British government. Cautionary tales are intended to be exaggerations, and I don't think Dr. Seuss hated the Sneetches. But if you really think about it, most of those cautionary tales are recreations of actual happenings of genocide, discrimination, slavery, and other less desirable human activities that actually happen(ed) in this universe.

So why not review Torchwood as literature rather than treat it as the writer's personal political views?

Is that what you intend with your writing?

You're right - Celts were looked down upon just like Blacks and Hispanics often are here in the 'States. I missed that, presumably because the traditionally 'ethnicly undesirable' people in the UK are every bit as caucasian as everyone else. That's a good point.

I felt like - and I could be wrong, since they didn't actualy explain it - as the deadline grew nearer they were just panicking and grabbing any kids that happened to be around. I mean, Frobisher's kids clearly weren't low on the food chain, though of course that was a deliberate political sacrifice. But running through the projects of Cardiff and grabbing any kids they seemed to find seemed pretty random and desparate to me.

But, yes, this was undoubtedly the best Torchwood has ever been, and if they fumbled the ball a bit in the final play, that doesn't change the fact that this was unquestionably a 'win' for the show. A big win.

"I enjoyed it," which is not something I thought I'd ever say about Torchwood.

As Americans I am sure we are missing some subtle point since the kids in 65 where Scottish and they make a point of showing the army going into a Walsh neighborhood. Historically in the UK the Welsh and Scottish have been treated as an under class. It would be like showing the army going into a poor neighborhood in Mississippi to grab kids here in the US.

The biggest plot hole that bothered me is that when they ran short on the "unwanted" kids because of parents hiding them or whatever, their solution was to do a house to house search for individual kids down to the last one they needed. It seemed to me that a MUCH easier solution to make up the remainder of missing kids was to just cull some of the "secondary" type schools that weren't originally proposed for grabbing but could be used a LOT easier to get bunches of the numbers up instead of trying so hard to find all the individual ones that didn't come in on the first list. Yeah, so they couldn't find all the ones destined to be "phone sanitiser, third degree" (aka Doug Adams) but what stopped them from grabbing ones a bit up the food chain instead, with so much less effort? God knows they had no scruples at that point.

I do agree a bit with the ending being somewhat of a "Reverse The Polarity" type of a deus ex machina thingy, but it did have some established basis in the old guy who was left behind, and not quite entirely out of the blue. And yeah it did pay some price by using a heavy character cost, which worked instead. All in all though, excellent job, much more so than expected and I was quite impressed and satisfied. Bravo.

I agree, it was kind of a Star Trek solution to a Babylon 5 problem, as R2 likes to say. Definitely too abrupt and not set up well enough in advance.

I thought they were doing the 'spread the blame around to the Americans' thing too, but in fact they weren't - the PM had engineered that from the start so that he could blame us for his own actions. That was interesting.

So, yes, it could have been better, but this is Torchwood after all: if they're good at all, or merely not embarasing it's an accomplishment.

well they kept the creepy end of the world vibe going in this one but they did take the easy route to. the American general taking over after they showed what a bunch of gutless NAZI weenies their gov was seemed that they thought they needed to spread the blame around and played into the UK's oh well we are just American lackeys cop out.
the why they killed the 456 seemed like they just pulled it out of there ass, it did not seem their was any build up to it. Jack leaving was a logical ending after all he went through.