My video on the issue of the BBC's support of Transphobia: ruclips.net/video/aN4uc0HZrWE/видео.html Shaun's 1st video, which includes some additional confirmed information: ruclips.net/video/b4buJMMiwcg/видео.html Shaun’s 2nd video, which follows how the BBC is trying to dodge accountability for all of this: ruclips.net/video/qfjTG6SVjmQ/видео.html Shaun’s recent 3rd video: ruclips.net/video/fRn1UZ4fhdE/видео.html Laura Kate Dale's recent protest speech outside the BBC offices: ruclips.net/video/hBjGnWkwAjI/видео.html
Personally, I absolutely love the frog. It is just so Doctor Who. Universe that's also a talking frog on a chair? Sure, why not! I've seen so many people complain about it and say it should have been someone important to the Doctor instead, the Master or Rose or something, but like, the Doctor had already agreed to stay, it didn't need to entice anyone any more, it could decide what it wanted for itself. And it decided to be a frog on a chair. Good for it.
One thing I never see pointed out about this episode that I noticed around my third viewing is that whenever they're in the mirror universe, the image is flipped. For example, Jodie's earring is on her left ear but when she's in the mirror, it's on the right. I thought that was a neat subtle touch.
When I was 13, I had a Religious Studies lesson in which the teacher asked us to design a diety. I drew a hamster sitting in a big, pink armchair. So when I saw the Solutract manifest as a frog on a dining chair, my suspension of disbelief was a little strained but I could go along with it.
'It Takes You Away' is still the absolute highlight of Series 11. It felt like the only time in the series where the writers and makers involved actually attempted to be bold, weird, creative and unique, resulting in an intelligent, imaginative, thought-provoking and touching story. The Norway setting added to the atmosphere, and I felt it finally reached an emotional catharsis between Graham and Ryan by the end, resolving their character storylines.
I just love the symbolism of the frog to the Solitract. Not only did it disguise itself as an animal that Grace loved, but when we picture frogs, we think of them as ugly and not very nice looking creatures. The Solitract was so wanting to be loved it turned into something that represented what someone else loved. I guess that's why many people didn't like the frog idea, because we were expecting something else. We rejected the Solitract because it became something we didn't like (in a sort of poetic ironic way to me).
I mean the issue about Erik is not the same, he lost his love one, he was in grieving, it's not reasonable but emotional understandable. In the end it's between him and Hannah, I think Hannah being a mature child understands what that did to her dad's mental health, so she can understand and forgive what he has done. After all Hannah literally said "You're not well, you haven't been since mom died."
But that doesn't excuse what he did, he was willing to abandoned her completely. I understand why, and you can argue its justifiable. But it should not be. A parent should never be willing to abandoned their child, let alone if they require a career. It's ok for her to forgive him, but it needed to fully portray him as a 'villain'.
“Space is big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind-bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist's, but that's just peanuts to space.” ― Douglas Adams
Out of all the S11 stories, this is the one where my thoughts on it have improved the most. My viewing experience wasn't great due to external reasons, but re-watches it just gets better. It's refreshingly creative compared to how safe and standard most of the season felt. Definitely feel this is the strongest of the season.
I definitely agree on this episode, it's such a surreal enjoyable episode and has a lot going for it. I also think that whilst Eric is not criticised enough in this episode for abandoning his daughter even temporarily for his dead wife he _knew_ was dead, also setting up traps to keep her scared and isolated, I do still think the episode at least tried to address this in and criticise him (one of my favourite moments of the episode is the silence when everyone gets back in and Eric sees the writing as he hugs Hanne and 13 just looks at him with disapproval is well done
This is by far my fave of S11 and possibly my fave of Jodie's era. It's got a great dark, surreal, 'Sapphire and Steel' aspect to it that I absolutely adore. I know the story is not a lot of people's cup of tea, but for me it's one of the few Chibnall-era episodes I gladly rewatch. ❤
Incisive analysis of one of the show's most intriguing and original eps - and a good breakdown and take on the father's conduct. I enjoyed this video a lot.
I'm going to say that Orphan 55 is the Spider-Man 3 of modern Doctor Who: it's really bad, but it's also loads of fun to watch, and the abundance of memeable content just makes even more enjoyable
I'm pretty mixed on this episode as I absolutely love the premise but think it was executed quite poorly- or at least don't think it lived up to the premise. Honestly I think it should have been a two-parter, that way all the story elements would've had a chance to breathe rather than being crammed into an hour slot. That being said, the Frog Universe is one of the best things to come out of new who, and it'd be fantastic if the show did more episodes that lean into the weird and fantastical side of sci-fi.
I'm happy to see this story get some love. I enjoyed it. Heck, I liked all the stories in series/season 11. Honestly, is the 'God Frog' any sillier than the Statue Of Liberty Weeping Angel?
I feel like a lot of Chibnall Who was trying to go the surrealist route, especially in series 11, but none really fully committed like this one. This wasn't just average by Who standards and above average by Chibnall standards, this was a truly great episode. I just love how absolutely off the wall it gets
Funnily enough, I thought the stories in series 11 felt really safe and kind of formulaic, which made it all the more refreshing to have a weird surreal story like this one. I personally lean more in the favour of Demons of the Punjab, but this is definitely one of the highlights of this series, and Whittaker's era as a whole
This episode is what the Chibnal era shoulda been. Weird and goofy but fun and creative. Heartwarming too. The creators of this episode should get more episodes to make in later seasons.
Great points! One thing i like about this episode is that it starts out as a fairly bog standard 'cabin in the woods' story and eventually morphs into a discussion about lonliness, grief, and the seductive nature of memories. I even love how the title means a monster will take you away, then memories and grief will take you away from real life, to a lonely universe will take you away because it wants company.
I agree that Idiot's Lantern is worse in this aspect, but how is abandoning your blind child and setting up a sound system to scare her constantly not actively cruel abuse?
5:00 okay, gotta stop there! I put off reading Douglas Adams for _years_ cos of people making these comparisons. Power of Three's cube invasion? Bad story, but a very Douglas Adams idea! The funny robots of Dinosaurs on a Spaceship? So Douglas Adams! Space frog. Adams, of course. And I'm not saying these observations are wrong. I just think they're anything but flattering. For context: Douglas Adams is my favourite novel writer of all time. Adams didn't have good ideas. As Terry Jones once said, he had fairly terrible ideas (akin to those above). And he made those ideas _legendary._ Defining a generation of sci-fi out of rubbish. That was his genius. He wasn't an ideas box. It was the way he presented these ideas, the way he took a left-turn out of nowhere and left you laughing in whiplash. No one can replicate that magic. Short answer: if a work of fiction is cited as _"Very Douglas Adams!",_ I blacklist that fiction.
Also worth pointing out that every idea he had, while terrible, was precisely terrible. They're incredibly calculated books. Nothing he did was random. Except for 42. Which, in fairness, is the joke.
As someone from Norway I can tell you that the cabin DOES NOT look like typical Norwegian cabins. It does not feel like it's set in Norway, except for the cheese on bread in the background. We love our bread and cheese.
I didn't mind the weirdness, but it reminded me of some Big Finish stories (like the establishment of the Divergent Universe), which did it so much better and even without visuals. But yeah, the parent thing just totally ruined my ability to appreciate the episode. I was having fun with it up until that point.
After series 11 had aired, I was really suprised at how many people were either disinterested in or simply didn't like this episode. it was my absolute favourite of this series and arguably one of the best Thirteenth Doctor episodes. I found it so mystifying and refreshing to see something just weird and cool after a lot of heavy, and often slow, episodes. Not even just that, but how it had the unique quirkiness of Doctor Who that made it so memorable with all the emotional moments fitted in well. as for the father, I think the aspect of him leaving his daughter alone that long was meant to work in tandem with the other themes in the episode. that's why his actions seem less egregious to me. compared to the idiots lantern in which asking a boy to forgive his abusive father had nothing to do with the episode and felt really out of place, let alone how wrong it was. anywho, love your videos and was waiting for you to cover this episode!!
Like the first act, like the last act, not a fan of the middle stuff with ribbons. And there’s so little focus on the father’s sins that I sometimes just forget he exists.
I had forgotten about this one, will definitely give it a second look - thanks for the reminder. Idiot's Lantern - I also hated that the boy was expected to forgive the father after abuse. I may have thought at the time that they put the words in Rose's mouth because she grew up without a father. But the idea that a majorly cruel and abusive father was better than no dad at all...? No, aint havin' it! A very bad misstep.
The Chibnal era really did have some brilliant stand out episodes, and this is definitely one of them! In my opinion they should have lent more in that direction rather than getting bogged down in all the continity stuff.
I honestly think the whole issue with Eric could've easily been fixed by the Doctor giving a final speech lecturing him about his responsibility to his daughter before leaving. Making a point of calling him out one last time at the end, would've at least driven home the point that what he did was not acceptable, and that the Doctor is not ok with it, without actually punishing him or changing the narrative at all
Perhaps another mitigating factor in Erik's case is that his mental trauma at losing his wife made him vulnerable to manipulation by an outside force (the Solitract). The patently abusive father in "Lantern" has no such excuse. Great review of one of my fave episodes of the Chibnall Era. Thanks.
I absolutely adore this episode. Definitely my favourite of series 11, and one of my favourites of this whole era. I love your points about how the timeline could have been tweaked to make Eric's actions less egregious, but even with that I still can't help but be enthralled by this episode. It's so weird and interesting, and doesn't feel like a normal episode of the show. It was a surprise favourite, but a favourite nonetheless!
Still my favourite episode of Chibnall era, I love the frog 🐸, love Graham and Grace. Really love the music this episode too, I think it's one where Akinola's score *REALLY* works!
The weirdness of the frog works great for me...but the whole concept of the episode is this other universe taking the form of died loved ones its the perfect place to have a cameo
Yeah this episode is pretty good! I love the sentient universe taking the form of a talking frog. I love the weirdness of it all. But I think it should have been a two-parter. There's a lot going on and it needed some more time to flesh them all out properly and make the all the emotional beats land properly. The handling of the dad was also not good. They made his actions worse than they needed to be, and there really isn't any respect for his grief and trauma from losing his wife either.
I think this is my favorite Chibnall story alongside 42 in Season 3. There is so much to like here, specially because his wirithing tends to go to the emotional side of the storytelling ~ most episodes is a failure because the fantasy element is never greatly integrated into the emotional beats, but this one is really awesome because everything is really rounded.
Ngl I’ve been so burned by the last year of Chibnall output that I’d forgotten how much I enjoyed parts of series 11, and in particular how much I got out of episodes like this one. Still prefer Demons of the Punjab though.
I think there is also an element to Eric, that he was griefing his wife. And while, yes, selfish, its the kinda selfishness thats understandable. Not excuseable, but understandable - as you stated, the Sólitract appeals to emotions, not logic. Meanwhile, the father in Idiots Lantern wasnt *tempted* to be a cruel, toxic person, he just is. He isnt in a situation where he struggles, he is just an awfull person. Both are inexcusable, but with Eric there is at least some element of "he can turn himself around".
your point about the solitract being a frog is exactly my thoughts. like c'mon! why shouldn't it be a frog! I remember when this episode aired a lot of (anti-chibnall-era, mostly) people complained about the frog being silly. and like. this is dr who. it's meant to be silly!
Hot take it was actively cruel to Hana. Classic ableist troupe Parents lean into the Disability & limits of their kids & leave them I’ll equipped, alone when something better comes along. If the comeback it’s out of guilt & shame not love
While that's not a perspective I have, I can absolutely respect it. Because honestly the "taking advantage of her disability" aspect didn't sink in properly.
This video was completely obscured by the algorithm for me.. yay... the first I realised I missed one was courtesy of your ranking video. It looks like I'm not the only one who missed it too :(
I can't believe that any DW writer isn't a Douglas Adams fan, so that fjord bit seemed like an obvious hommage to HHGG to me. Anyway, love this episode (especially Graham the overall weirdness) and hope to see more like this!
I've only seen The Idiot's Lantern once, and barely remembered it, but having you bring that scene up made me go hmm... It actually makes sense, due to Rose's trauma, that she'd say that. Like you said, it's not a good choice, and the Doctor should have known better, but I kind of like that Rose would see the loss of a father as the worse option. However, it was, like with Erik, treated over a gloss-over moment, instead of something with the potential for some depth. Or maybe I just like to psychoanalyze characters too much.
Well, to clarify. My issue is much less with Rose for saying it and much MORE with everything about it being framed as a good suggestion. No meaningful counterpoint is offered, and the filming and music choices frame it as a hopeful moment. And THAT I will never be ok with.
'The father in Idiot's Lantern is actively cruel'... And happens to share my surname. I'm at a VERY early stage of trying to process why I've become a fuck-up, and this. just. hits.
@@CouncilofGeeks For some reason, my comment containing the twitter link with photos seems to keep disappearing, but if you go to the It Takes You Away TARDIS wiki page, and to story notes, you'll find a BTS photo of the monster there.
@@maartenvangeffen4508 interesting monster. Shot well it could have been effective. But given the moths gave us a threat in the antizone already I can see why it was trimmed.
@@CouncilofGeeks I think it looks very scary, but I agree with you that for the story's sake it could have been omitted. If this thing chases you while holding those hands forward though, god that'd be scarier than the weeping angels
When it comes to Grace, it's almost poetic that the previous time we see her is in a mirror, and then we next see her in a mirror world. It's almost as if Grace in Arachnids in the UK is reaching out from the Solitract as seen here. Also, and I think I brought this up at the time, the father in The Idiot's Lantern clearly had PTSD. It's stated he fought in the Second World War, presumably seeing death and destruction few of us can imagine. Does that excuse his behaviour? Not at all, but it does give it context. By the end, Eddie Connolly is a broken man, whose whole world has come crumbling down around his ears. It's a crumbling of his own making, but the point still stands. Tommy, on the advice of Rose (who had just seen an alternate version of her own father in the previous story) chooses to help Eddie heal. Ultimately, of course, we don't know how successful Tommy is but if his willingness to forgive Eddie in time is the first step towards a better relationship with his dad, then I for one feel that scene is absolutely justified. Mental health was still a thing in the 1950s, but was seldom diagnosed or if it was there was a huge stigma attached to it.
Before watching the video I can say that from watching this episode in the last 10 months I cannot remember one thing from it no monster no part of the plot no visuals so it’s going to be nice to learn what happened
I do like this episode, however it's always felt like three different plots/tones smashed together. It feels like a horror-tinged mystery with a twist (dissappearences/a fake monster) , a more fantasy based story (magical tunnel between worlds & kooky creature) and a surreal, cerebral and emotionally based script (lonely universe, frog on a chair, "grace"). For me they never gelled together for a cohesive narrative.
I certainly think this is the one episode with Series 11 that needed to be a two-parter. Fun fact, there was actually originally a monster in the weird cave zone beyond the moths, they even had an actor and a costume for it (I dont have the picture at hand anymore, but if I remember correctly it was some mole-ish creature) but they cut it out of the finished episode, probably due to it being to much for a 50 minutes time slot.
My take-away: Plastic frog. Toothy-man... dish clothes... p'ting...... plastic frog. I'd enjoyed the episode until then, but I was utterly distracted by thinking how this might look to casual viewers.
Feels like they came up with the idea of a universe taking the form of a frog first, and wrote the episode around it. It's trying to hard to me, I wish it was more silly without forcing it. Less 'experimental', more quirky. Less 'psychedelic', more zaney. To me, this is absolutely the same writer as Orphan 55.
It's been a long time since I watched this episode and I really like it up until the frog stuff. It makes sense for the episode but I wish it was something different. Maybe it could have been a relative that the doctor mentions once or twice in the episode. I feel it would have worked better. Good review.
It completely baffled me. I feel like it was a bait-and-switch, like it was set up as Nordic horror and then took several hard turns, most of them toward the bizarre, and just left me scratching my head.
The funny part is, Henne seems old enough to start babysitting, housesititting, and be left on her own for short stints. The fact that he has to traumatize her to keep her in the house is where it gets whacked.
Equivocal. As Inigo Montoya might say, "You keep using this word. I do not think it means what you think it means." adjective, open to more than one interpretation. I think you mean equivalent? adjective, equal in value, amount, function, meaning, etc.
Please understand this, from a survivor of many kinds of abuse. It doesn't make a difference if he wasn't intentionally cruel. Abuse is abuse. He was still a toxic parent and shouldn't have been responsible for a child. Abuse survivors of unintentional abuse shouldn't have be told that their experiences are less valid
At no point was it my intention to even imply that the experiences of survivors of passive or unintentional abuse are any less valid. If it came across as that, I can only say that I'm deeply sorry. The reality for my perspective is rooted more in the fact that (as painfully cartoonish as the performance was) I recognize the toxicity of the father in Idiot's Lantern and in doing so was probably always going to react more harshly to it. And while I fear I may have worded some of my point poorly, I stand by my assertion that as a narrative product, Idiot's Lantern is worse because it frames forgiveness of a toxic person who hasn't even had the time to start working toward improvement as a positive thing, while this episode's sin is failing to address the original abuse. Both are bad, but I still feel that this episode doesn't go "and he's forgiven and that's good" like Idiot's Lantern did.
I can't remember if I actually said it on the take two review for The Idiot's Lantern or if I started to and then changed my mind, but the only semi-plausible reason I can see for Rose immediately telling Tommy to reach out to his abusive dad is because of her own issues relating to her dad dying when she was a baby. If the fact that she grew up without a dad leads her to think "better an angry dad than no dad at all" then I can kinda buy that she'd do that. It's not ideal, nor is it handled well... and thinking about it more, I'm a little unsure how much of the dad's abusiveness Rose was actually there for. Might have to rewatch it to check, because that could be a factor.
I'm pretty sure I said that in the review of Idiot's Lantern. My issue isn't with what Rose says (well, it is a little, but I do understand what motivates her as a character to do that), my issue is that the episode frames it like it's a good thing (through no alternative viewpoint being provided, as well as filming and music choices).
@@CouncilofGeeks ah, then I pretty much agreed with you... which may be why I can't remember if I typed it out the first time. Oh well. Stay safe and stay awesome 🙂
"eric is not actively cruel" is a statement I disagree with profusely. he psychologically torutured his blind daughter with scary noises for days on end. this ans the idiots lantern are different, but they are within walking distance of each other imo.
I suppose if I'm being more introspective, I was always going to judge the father in Idiot's Lantern more harshly because, while I found the depiction cartoonish, that's a kind of paternal toxicity I've actually witnessed. And as a result it's going to stir much stronger anger in me than what Erik does.
@@CouncilofGeeks that makes sense, and to be honest its an issue that people, for the most part, just dont bring up with the idiots lantern. To me, it feels more subtle than what Erik does, which I think is caused by the show calling Erik out(for as little impact that it had) opposed to framing reconnecting with an abusive father as a good thing.
I respect the weirdness but i find this episode to be one of the weaker ones (but I'll grant at least it tries something interesting).In truth by this point in the series I just wanted something either very creepy or with a proper villain or both. Which isn't entirely the fault of this episode as if this was the only episode this series that pulled the no real villain twist I'd probably be more forgiving of it. Assuming we keep to the general plot of the episode as is, for your time tweak to the episode I think it partially helps but honestly I don't think your tweak quite works completely because it still feels problematic that he sets up a bunch of things to scare his blind daughter. For me here's what i'd do is remove things to scare her entirely. Have it be that he gets dragged into the place completely unplanned and then as far as she's concerned he just disappeared and then keep her inside with something else (like he locked the door as per usual and he by chance had the only key when he disappeared) and if she needs to be scared there's easily a lot of natural things that could sound scary if you don't know what they are and can't get close enough to check. Then you bring in your time dilation thing and its easily logical that he just lost track of time. Then at least it'd feel much more unintended.
It's not without its issues. The pacing really brings it down for me because it takes too long to reach the mirror universe, we don't spend nearly enough time on Graham's struggle and Ryan calling him grandad at the end felt unearned in this episode. But it's still definitely the highlight of series 11. I love the weirdness and I think the whole main cast give their best performances in this episode. Still, even though Jodie's best scene of the series is the frog conversation, I find the scene where she breathlessly theorises about the Solitract to have abysmal line delivery. I think that's why is still can't connect to Thirteen; even in her best written episodes there is such an uneven performance.
I wanted to like this episode but its distracting when the Doctor is still spouting so much expository dialogue, like she's been doing the whole season. I know its the Doctor's thing to talk, but Thirteen is written in a way where it feels like she's literally hand-holding the viewer with the assumption they're stupid and don't know Doctor Who, even if it's been ten years.
Erik is a broken person. His actions are illogical and broken because he is broken. And while that doesn't excuse the dad in Idiot's Lantern, it does explain why ROSE tells the kid to chase after his dad - because she can't.
No, Eric is just as bad as the 'father' in idoit's lantern. That father was physically and verbally abusive. Eric is just as bad, he neglected his daughter. He was willing to leave her on her own where she would starve. You make out that Eric's abusive isn't as bad the idoit's lantern just because he didn't physically harm her. You can love a episode dispite disgusting parts, like I love buffy the vampire slayer seeing Red, but that rape scene is unforgettable. You can love this episode but abusive father is just as bad. Abusive is black and white.
Doctor Who is so obsessed with having eastern european accents be strong signs of shiftiness and villainy. Like, when do we ever get that kinda accent and it's not doing that? It's a super tiring cliche and it's definitely not ideal considering the right wing perspective on such folks in the UK.
My video on the issue of the BBC's support of Transphobia: ruclips.net/video/aN4uc0HZrWE/видео.html
Shaun's 1st video, which includes some additional confirmed information: ruclips.net/video/b4buJMMiwcg/видео.html
Shaun’s 2nd video, which follows how the BBC is trying to dodge accountability for all of this: ruclips.net/video/qfjTG6SVjmQ/видео.html
Shaun’s recent 3rd video: ruclips.net/video/fRn1UZ4fhdE/видео.html
Laura Kate Dale's recent protest speech outside the BBC offices: ruclips.net/video/hBjGnWkwAjI/видео.html
Personally, I absolutely love the frog. It is just so Doctor Who. Universe that's also a talking frog on a chair? Sure, why not! I've seen so many people complain about it and say it should have been someone important to the Doctor instead, the Master or Rose or something, but like, the Doctor had already agreed to stay, it didn't need to entice anyone any more, it could decide what it wanted for itself. And it decided to be a frog on a chair. Good for it.
One thing I never see pointed out about this episode that I noticed around my third viewing is that whenever they're in the mirror universe, the image is flipped. For example, Jodie's earring is on her left ear but when she's in the mirror, it's on the right. I thought that was a neat subtle touch.
Never noticed that.
@@txsportsfreak02 yeah it's a subtle thing and i didn't notice it the first time around, but when I did I was like, "Ooo nice touch."
Erik's shirt is a less subtle clue.
When I was 13, I had a Religious Studies lesson in which the teacher asked us to design a diety. I drew a hamster sitting in a big, pink armchair. So when I saw the Solutract manifest as a frog on a dining chair, my suspension of disbelief was a little strained but I could go along with it.
The moment of the Doctor saying why they should be chosen over the dad genuinely felt like a doctor moment and the first time Jodie felt in character
'It Takes You Away' is still the absolute highlight of Series 11. It felt like the only time in the series where the writers and makers involved actually attempted to be bold, weird, creative and unique, resulting in an intelligent, imaginative, thought-provoking and touching story. The Norway setting added to the atmosphere, and I felt it finally reached an emotional catharsis between Graham and Ryan by the end, resolving their character storylines.
Beat me to first comment lol
I just love the symbolism of the frog to the Solitract. Not only did it disguise itself as an animal that Grace loved, but when we picture frogs, we think of them as ugly and not very nice looking creatures. The Solitract was so wanting to be loved it turned into something that represented what someone else loved. I guess that's why many people didn't like the frog idea, because we were expecting something else. We rejected the Solitract because it became something we didn't like (in a sort of poetic ironic way to me).
There's also the symbolism of the Frog Prince, where someone (or something in this case) wonderful was hidden in the guise of a frog.
I mean the issue about Erik is not the same, he lost his love one, he was in grieving, it's not reasonable but emotional understandable. In the end it's between him and Hannah, I think Hannah being a mature child understands what that did to her dad's mental health, so she can understand and forgive what he has done. After all Hannah literally said "You're not well, you haven't been since mom died."
But that doesn't excuse what he did, he was willing to abandoned her completely.
I understand why, and you can argue its justifiable.
But it should not be. A parent should never be willing to abandoned their child, let alone if they require a career.
It's ok for her to forgive him, but it needed to fully portray him as a 'villain'.
"There they are. Plotting." I know Thirteen's humor doesn't always land but something about that made me chuckle.
“Space is big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind-bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist's, but that's just peanuts to space.” ― Douglas Adams
Out of all the S11 stories, this is the one where my thoughts on it have improved the most. My viewing experience wasn't great due to external reasons, but re-watches it just gets better. It's refreshingly creative compared to how safe and standard most of the season felt. Definitely feel this is the strongest of the season.
this is probably my favorite jodie witaker story
Great episode with some really nice touches with the mirrors and great character work. Love the frog!
I definitely agree on this episode, it's such a surreal enjoyable episode and has a lot going for it. I also think that whilst Eric is not criticised enough in this episode for abandoning his daughter even temporarily for his dead wife he _knew_ was dead, also setting up traps to keep her scared and isolated, I do still think the episode at least tried to address this in and criticise him (one of my favourite moments of the episode is the silence when everyone gets back in and Eric sees the writing as he hugs Hanne and 13 just looks at him with disapproval is well done
As a victim of an abusive dad I completely agree with you.
This is by far my fave of S11 and possibly my fave of Jodie's era. It's got a great dark, surreal, 'Sapphire and Steel' aspect to it that I absolutely adore. I know the story is not a lot of people's cup of tea, but for me it's one of the few Chibnall-era episodes I gladly rewatch. ❤
Incisive analysis of one of the show's most intriguing and original eps - and a good breakdown and take on the father's conduct. I enjoyed this video a lot.
I hope having revisited this, you can re-evaluate the goofy vibe of Orphan 55. It's a super funny episode...
I'm going to say that Orphan 55 is the Spider-Man 3 of modern Doctor Who: it's really bad, but it's also loads of fun to watch, and the abundance of memeable content just makes even more enjoyable
Maybe the title "It Takes You Away" is short for "[the parental neglect] takes you away from other episode aspects".
I'm pretty mixed on this episode as I absolutely love the premise but think it was executed quite poorly- or at least don't think it lived up to the premise. Honestly I think it should have been a two-parter, that way all the story elements would've had a chance to breathe rather than being crammed into an hour slot. That being said, the Frog Universe is one of the best things to come out of new who, and it'd be fantastic if the show did more episodes that lean into the weird and fantastical side of sci-fi.
I'm happy to see this story get some love. I enjoyed it. Heck, I liked all the stories in series/season 11.
Honestly, is the 'God Frog' any sillier than the Statue Of Liberty Weeping Angel?
I feel like a lot of Chibnall Who was trying to go the surrealist route, especially in series 11, but none really fully committed like this one. This wasn't just average by Who standards and above average by Chibnall standards, this was a truly great episode. I just love how absolutely off the wall it gets
Funnily enough, I thought the stories in series 11 felt really safe and kind of formulaic, which made it all the more refreshing to have a weird surreal story like this one. I personally lean more in the favour of Demons of the Punjab, but this is definitely one of the highlights of this series, and Whittaker's era as a whole
This episode is what the Chibnal era shoulda been. Weird and goofy but fun and creative. Heartwarming too. The creators of this episode should get more episodes to make in later seasons.
Great points! One thing i like about this episode is that it starts out as a fairly bog standard 'cabin in the woods' story and eventually morphs into a discussion about lonliness, grief, and the seductive nature of memories. I even love how the title means a monster will take you away, then memories and grief will take you away from real life, to a lonely universe will take you away because it wants company.
I really wish Doctor Who went that surreal more often.
Like an Episode written by Bryan Fuller or Zal Batmanglij?
I agree that Idiot's Lantern is worse in this aspect, but how is abandoning your blind child and setting up a sound system to scare her constantly not actively cruel abuse?
5:00 okay, gotta stop there! I put off reading Douglas Adams for _years_ cos of people making these comparisons. Power of Three's cube invasion? Bad story, but a very Douglas Adams idea! The funny robots of Dinosaurs on a Spaceship? So Douglas Adams! Space frog. Adams, of course. And I'm not saying these observations are wrong. I just think they're anything but flattering.
For context: Douglas Adams is my favourite novel writer of all time.
Adams didn't have good ideas. As Terry Jones once said, he had fairly terrible ideas (akin to those above). And he made those ideas _legendary._ Defining a generation of sci-fi out of rubbish. That was his genius. He wasn't an ideas box. It was the way he presented these ideas, the way he took a left-turn out of nowhere and left you laughing in whiplash. No one can replicate that magic. Short answer: if a work of fiction is cited as _"Very Douglas Adams!",_ I blacklist that fiction.
Also worth pointing out that every idea he had, while terrible, was precisely terrible. They're incredibly calculated books. Nothing he did was random. Except for 42. Which, in fairness, is the joke.
As someone from Norway I can tell you that the cabin DOES NOT look like typical Norwegian cabins. It does not feel like it's set in Norway, except for the cheese on bread in the background. We love our bread and cheese.
I didn't mind the weirdness, but it reminded me of some Big Finish stories (like the establishment of the Divergent Universe), which did it so much better and even without visuals. But yeah, the parent thing just totally ruined my ability to appreciate the episode. I was having fun with it up until that point.
After series 11 had aired, I was really suprised at how many people were either disinterested in or simply didn't like this episode. it was my absolute favourite of this series and arguably one of the best Thirteenth Doctor episodes. I found it so mystifying and refreshing to see something just weird and cool after a lot of heavy, and often slow, episodes. Not even just that, but how it had the unique quirkiness of Doctor Who that made it so memorable with all the emotional moments fitted in well.
as for the father, I think the aspect of him leaving his daughter alone that long was meant to work in tandem with the other themes in the episode. that's why his actions seem less egregious to me. compared to the idiots lantern in which asking a boy to forgive his abusive father had nothing to do with the episode and felt really out of place, let alone how wrong it was.
anywho, love your videos and was waiting for you to cover this episode!!
This is, sadly, the *only* episode of Whittaker’s entire tenure that I actually enjoy…
Like the first act, like the last act, not a fan of the middle stuff with ribbons. And there’s so little focus on the father’s sins that I sometimes just forget he exists.
I had forgotten about this one, will definitely give it a second look - thanks for the reminder. Idiot's Lantern - I also hated that the boy was expected to forgive the father after abuse. I may have thought at the time that they put the words in Rose's mouth because she grew up without a father. But the idea that a majorly cruel and abusive father was better than no dad at all...? No, aint havin' it! A very bad misstep.
The Chibnal era really did have some brilliant stand out episodes, and this is definitely one of them! In my opinion they should have lent more in that direction rather than getting bogged down in all the continity stuff.
I honestly think the whole issue with Eric could've easily been fixed by the Doctor giving a final speech lecturing him about his responsibility to his daughter before leaving. Making a point of calling him out one last time at the end, would've at least driven home the point that what he did was not acceptable, and that the Doctor is not ok with it, without actually punishing him or changing the narrative at all
Perhaps another mitigating factor in Erik's case is that his mental trauma at losing his wife made him vulnerable to manipulation by an outside force (the Solitract). The patently abusive father in "Lantern" has no such excuse.
Great review of one of my fave episodes of the Chibnall Era. Thanks.
@@christopherbennett5858 Junkies will sometimes do anything to satisfy their need for a fix.
I absolutely adore this episode. Definitely my favourite of series 11, and one of my favourites of this whole era. I love your points about how the timeline could have been tweaked to make Eric's actions less egregious, but even with that I still can't help but be enthralled by this episode. It's so weird and interesting, and doesn't feel like a normal episode of the show. It was a surprise favourite, but a favourite nonetheless!
Still my favourite episode of Chibnall era, I love the frog 🐸, love Graham and Grace. Really love the music this episode too, I think it's one where Akinola's score *REALLY* works!
When I watched this episode the first time I hadn't read the HHGTTG books. You blew my mind with the fjords thing! That totally has to be a reference
The weirdness of the frog works great for me...but the whole concept of the episode is this other universe taking the form of died loved ones its the perfect place to have a cameo
My opening joke is "Calgon - take me back!!!" but I'm probably dating myself with the old advert reference.
Yeah this episode is pretty good! I love the sentient universe taking the form of a talking frog. I love the weirdness of it all. But I think it should have been a two-parter. There's a lot going on and it needed some more time to flesh them all out properly and make the all the emotional beats land properly. The handling of the dad was also not good. They made his actions worse than they needed to be, and there really isn't any respect for his grief and trauma from losing his wife either.
I think this is my favorite Chibnall story alongside 42 in Season 3. There is so much to like here, specially because his wirithing tends to go to the emotional side of the storytelling ~ most episodes is a failure because the fantasy element is never greatly integrated into the emotional beats, but this one is really awesome because everything is really rounded.
This one isn't written by Chibnall, it's just in his era
Ngl I’ve been so burned by the last year of Chibnall output that I’d forgotten how much I enjoyed parts of series 11, and in particular how much I got out of episodes like this one.
Still prefer Demons of the Punjab though.
When it comes to the alien names, it's like they stuck a hand into a bag of scrabble pieces and used whatever they pulled out.
I think there is also an element to Eric, that he was griefing his wife. And while, yes, selfish, its the kinda selfishness thats understandable. Not excuseable, but understandable - as you stated, the Sólitract appeals to emotions, not logic. Meanwhile, the father in Idiots Lantern wasnt *tempted* to be a cruel, toxic person, he just is. He isnt in a situation where he struggles, he is just an awfull person.
Both are inexcusable, but with Eric there is at least some element of "he can turn himself around".
your point about the solitract being a frog is exactly my thoughts. like c'mon! why shouldn't it be a frog! I remember when this episode aired a lot of (anti-chibnall-era, mostly) people complained about the frog being silly. and like. this is dr who. it's meant to be silly!
Hot take it was actively cruel to Hana. Classic ableist troupe Parents lean into the Disability & limits of their kids & leave them I’ll equipped, alone when something better comes along. If the comeback it’s out of guilt & shame not love
While that's not a perspective I have, I can absolutely respect it. Because honestly the "taking advantage of her disability" aspect didn't sink in properly.
This video was completely obscured by the algorithm for me.. yay... the first I realised I missed one was courtesy of your ranking video. It looks like I'm not the only one who missed it too :(
Big Finish should do a Crossover Audio Drama between Doctor Who and The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy.
At least "Solitract" makes sense as a name for a lonely universe. Soli, from the Latin word for alone, and tract, an expanse or area of land.
I can't believe that any DW writer isn't a Douglas Adams fan, so that fjord bit seemed like an obvious hommage to HHGG to me.
Anyway, love this episode (especially Graham the overall weirdness) and hope to see more like this!
I've only seen The Idiot's Lantern once, and barely remembered it, but having you bring that scene up made me go hmm... It actually makes sense, due to Rose's trauma, that she'd say that. Like you said, it's not a good choice, and the Doctor should have known better, but I kind of like that Rose would see the loss of a father as the worse option. However, it was, like with Erik, treated over a gloss-over moment, instead of something with the potential for some depth.
Or maybe I just like to psychoanalyze characters too much.
Well, to clarify. My issue is much less with Rose for saying it and much MORE with everything about it being framed as a good suggestion. No meaningful counterpoint is offered, and the filming and music choices frame it as a hopeful moment. And THAT I will never be ok with.
@@CouncilofGeeks Oh I agree. Mine was just a connection your point sparked in my brain.
Take a shot every time Vera says "weird"
'The father in Idiot's Lantern is actively cruel'... And happens to share my surname. I'm at a VERY early stage of trying to process why I've become a fuck-up, and this. just. hits.
Hey! Have you ever seen the BTS photo of this episode with the reeeaally creepy monster? Wish that would have been in the actual story
Link?
@@CouncilofGeeks For some reason, my comment containing the twitter link with photos seems to keep disappearing, but if you go to the It Takes You Away TARDIS wiki page, and to story notes, you'll find a BTS photo of the monster there.
@@maartenvangeffen4508 interesting monster. Shot well it could have been effective. But given the moths gave us a threat in the antizone already I can see why it was trimmed.
@@CouncilofGeeks I think it looks very scary, but I agree with you that for the story's sake it could have been omitted. If this thing chases you while holding those hands forward though, god that'd be scarier than the weeping angels
the BEST episode of series 11
For me, it's just a lot of weird stuff happening. I do love The Frog scene, though.
Can't wait for some glorious RTD alien names again
When it comes to Grace, it's almost poetic that the previous time we see her is in a mirror, and then we next see her in a mirror world. It's almost as if Grace in Arachnids in the UK is reaching out from the Solitract as seen here.
Also, and I think I brought this up at the time, the father in The Idiot's Lantern clearly had PTSD. It's stated he fought in the Second World War, presumably seeing death and destruction few of us can imagine. Does that excuse his behaviour? Not at all, but it does give it context. By the end, Eddie Connolly is a broken man, whose whole world has come crumbling down around his ears. It's a crumbling of his own making, but the point still stands. Tommy, on the advice of Rose (who had just seen an alternate version of her own father in the previous story) chooses to help Eddie heal. Ultimately, of course, we don't know how successful Tommy is but if his willingness to forgive Eddie in time is the first step towards a better relationship with his dad, then I for one feel that scene is absolutely justified. Mental health was still a thing in the 1950s, but was seldom diagnosed or if it was there was a huge stigma attached to it.
Before watching the video I can say that from watching this episode in the last 10 months I cannot remember one thing from it no monster no part of the plot no visuals so it’s going to be nice to learn what happened
I do like this episode, however it's always felt like three different plots/tones smashed together. It feels like a horror-tinged mystery with a twist (dissappearences/a fake monster) , a more fantasy based story (magical tunnel between worlds & kooky creature) and a surreal, cerebral and emotionally based script (lonely universe, frog on a chair, "grace"). For me they never gelled together for a cohesive narrative.
I certainly think this is the one episode with Series 11 that needed to be a two-parter.
Fun fact, there was actually originally a monster in the weird cave zone beyond the moths, they even had an actor and a costume for it (I dont have the picture at hand anymore, but if I remember correctly it was some mole-ish creature) but they cut it out of the finished episode, probably due to it being to much for a 50 minutes time slot.
My take-away: Plastic frog. Toothy-man... dish clothes... p'ting...... plastic frog. I'd enjoyed the episode until then, but I was utterly distracted by thinking how this might look to casual viewers.
Feels like they came up with the idea of a universe taking the form of a frog first, and wrote the episode around it. It's trying to hard to me, I wish it was more silly without forcing it. Less 'experimental', more quirky. Less 'psychedelic', more zaney.
To me, this is absolutely the same writer as Orphan 55.
It's been a long time since I watched this episode and I really like it up until the frog stuff. It makes sense for the episode but I wish it was something different. Maybe it could have been a relative that the doctor mentions once or twice in the episode. I feel it would have worked better. Good review.
It completely baffled me. I feel like it was a bait-and-switch, like it was set up as Nordic horror and then took several hard turns, most of them toward the bizarre, and just left me scratching my head.
The funny part is, Henne seems old enough to start babysitting, housesititting, and be left on her own for short stints. The fact that he has to traumatize her to keep her in the house is where it gets whacked.
I'm not sure if changing the time would really help, as it doesn't address the gaslighting
Equivocal. As Inigo Montoya might say, "You keep using this word. I do not think it means what you think it means."
adjective, open to more than one interpretation.
I think you mean equivalent? adjective, equal in value, amount, function, meaning, etc.
Please understand this, from a survivor of many kinds of abuse. It doesn't make a difference if he wasn't intentionally cruel. Abuse is abuse. He was still a toxic parent and shouldn't have been responsible for a child. Abuse survivors of unintentional abuse shouldn't have be told that their experiences are less valid
At no point was it my intention to even imply that the experiences of survivors of passive or unintentional abuse are any less valid. If it came across as that, I can only say that I'm deeply sorry. The reality for my perspective is rooted more in the fact that (as painfully cartoonish as the performance was) I recognize the toxicity of the father in Idiot's Lantern and in doing so was probably always going to react more harshly to it. And while I fear I may have worded some of my point poorly, I stand by my assertion that as a narrative product, Idiot's Lantern is worse because it frames forgiveness of a toxic person who hasn't even had the time to start working toward improvement as a positive thing, while this episode's sin is failing to address the original abuse. Both are bad, but I still feel that this episode doesn't go "and he's forgiven and that's good" like Idiot's Lantern did.
I can't remember if I actually said it on the take two review for The Idiot's Lantern or if I started to and then changed my mind, but the only semi-plausible reason I can see for Rose immediately telling Tommy to reach out to his abusive dad is because of her own issues relating to her dad dying when she was a baby. If the fact that she grew up without a dad leads her to think "better an angry dad than no dad at all" then I can kinda buy that she'd do that. It's not ideal, nor is it handled well... and thinking about it more, I'm a little unsure how much of the dad's abusiveness Rose was actually there for. Might have to rewatch it to check, because that could be a factor.
I'm pretty sure I said that in the review of Idiot's Lantern. My issue isn't with what Rose says (well, it is a little, but I do understand what motivates her as a character to do that), my issue is that the episode frames it like it's a good thing (through no alternative viewpoint being provided, as well as filming and music choices).
@@CouncilofGeeks ah, then I pretty much agreed with you... which may be why I can't remember if I typed it out the first time. Oh well. Stay safe and stay awesome 🙂
I guess I’ll have to rewatch this one - so many of the other episodes in the season inspired much napping 😬😂
Jodie's really good here, yeah.
Seeing the frog just "took me away" from the story sadly..
I really liked this episode. However, the FROG still throws me off.
Batrachian rodeo takes practice! YEEEE-HA!
Was Erik's wife also Hanne's mother? Why didn't he take her with him?
"eric is not actively cruel" is a statement I disagree with profusely. he psychologically torutured his blind daughter with scary noises for days on end. this ans the idiots lantern are different, but they are within walking distance of each other imo.
I suppose if I'm being more introspective, I was always going to judge the father in Idiot's Lantern more harshly because, while I found the depiction cartoonish, that's a kind of paternal toxicity I've actually witnessed. And as a result it's going to stir much stronger anger in me than what Erik does.
@@CouncilofGeeks that makes sense, and to be honest its an issue that people, for the most part, just dont bring up with the idiots lantern. To me, it feels more subtle than what Erik does, which I think is caused by the show calling Erik out(for as little impact that it had) opposed to framing reconnecting with an abusive father as a good thing.
I respect the weirdness but i find this episode to be one of the weaker ones (but I'll grant at least it tries something interesting).In truth by this point in the series I just wanted something either very creepy or with a proper villain or both. Which isn't entirely the fault of this episode as if this was the only episode this series that pulled the no real villain twist I'd probably be more forgiving of it.
Assuming we keep to the general plot of the episode as is, for your time tweak to the episode I think it partially helps but honestly I don't think your tweak quite works completely because it still feels problematic that he sets up a bunch of things to scare his blind daughter. For me here's what i'd do is remove things to scare her entirely. Have it be that he gets dragged into the place completely unplanned and then as far as she's concerned he just disappeared and then keep her inside with something else (like he locked the door as per usual and he by chance had the only key when he disappeared) and if she needs to be scared there's easily a lot of natural things that could sound scary if you don't know what they are and can't get close enough to check. Then you bring in your time dilation thing and its easily logical that he just lost track of time. Then at least it'd feel much more unintended.
It's not without its issues. The pacing really brings it down for me because it takes too long to reach the mirror universe, we don't spend nearly enough time on Graham's struggle and Ryan calling him grandad at the end felt unearned in this episode.
But it's still definitely the highlight of series 11. I love the weirdness and I think the whole main cast give their best performances in this episode. Still, even though Jodie's best scene of the series is the frog conversation, I find the scene where she breathlessly theorises about the Solitract to have abysmal line delivery. I think that's why is still can't connect to Thirteen; even in her best written episodes there is such an uneven performance.
I wanted to like this episode but its distracting when the Doctor is still spouting so much expository dialogue, like she's been doing the whole season. I know its the Doctor's thing to talk, but Thirteen is written in a way where it feels like she's literally hand-holding the viewer with the assumption they're stupid and don't know Doctor Who, even if it's been ten years.
Erik is a broken person. His actions are illogical and broken because he is broken. And while that doesn't excuse the dad in Idiot's Lantern, it does explain why ROSE tells the kid to chase after his dad - because she can't.
No, Eric is just as bad as the 'father' in idoit's lantern.
That father was physically and verbally abusive.
Eric is just as bad, he neglected his daughter. He was willing to leave her on her own where she would starve.
You make out that Eric's abusive isn't as bad the idoit's lantern just because he didn't physically harm her.
You can love a episode dispite disgusting parts, like I love buffy the vampire slayer seeing Red, but that rape scene is unforgettable.
You can love this episode but abusive father is just as bad. Abusive is black and white.
Doctor Who is so obsessed with having eastern european accents be strong signs of shiftiness and villainy. Like, when do we ever get that kinda accent and it's not doing that? It's a super tiring cliche and it's definitely not ideal considering the right wing perspective on such folks in the UK.