Sunday, February 03, 2008

Gay.com Column: "Torchwood": Time to add more fire to the show

There are gay-friendly shows that you champion, and then there are gay-friendly shows that you defend. To me, the first season of "Torchwood" was one of the latter.

The series - which returns January 26th on BBC America - had much going for it before it aired: it was a spin-off of the invincible "Doctor Who" series, it starred the immensely popular Who-niverse character Captain Jack Harkness, and it promised to be a darker and edgier show. All things considered, comparisons to the successful "Buffy" spin-off, "Angel", were not entirely unwarranted.

The series was also likely to attract LGBT viewers in droves, thanks to the openly gay and incredibly affable John Barrowman, who plays Harkness. Teasers that played up Harkness's 'omnisexuality' probably didn't hurt as well.

But premise is only half the equation of a good show, and when "Torchwood" aired it quickly became evident that execution was a problem.

The lack of a compelling villain, episodes that varied all over the place in quality, and a general aimlessness to the season: these hurt the show bad enough. But worse than all of these was the transformation of Harkness's character - the insouciant bad boy of "Doctor Who" seemed to have been lobotomized, and reappeared as a vastly more uptight and moody version on "Torchwood". It was as if he had taken the Addison Montgomery train in reverse.

The LGBT showpiece episode 'Captain Jack Harkness' was, in this viewer's opinion, also a massive disappointment. It features Harkness traveling back to the 1940s, where he chances upon his namesake, a closeted fighter pilot with whom he falls in love and whose identity he steals. Mind-imploding time-travel problems aside, the episode not only mimics trite gay melodrama, but also mimics trite gay melodrama badly. At the end of the episode, before he steps back into the time portal, Harkness damns it all and kisses his namesake in front of all and sundry.

Romantic? Only if you don't think about how implausible it is, even by "Doctor Who" / "Torchwood" standards. Furthermore, Harkness already knows that his namesake dies in a training mission gone wrong the day after they part, and yet doesn't make the (possible) connection between that and any overt display of love. Romantic? More like deadly moronic.

And I haven't even mentioned the cheesefest that is Original Harkness's farewell to Harkness v 2.0.

This episode is essentially why the series is difficult for me to recommend, and why I defend it instead of championing it. The mere fact that the show exists is cause for celebration, and the mere fact of its starring a gay actor in a lead 'omnisexual' role is cause for celebration. But - it's not a good show. There are good episodes, but it's far too hit-and-miss, far too beset by pacing problems, logic problems, and ultimately 'unlikeable character' problems. We can do better on television. We have done better.

Given the series's return in a few days, I hope to change my opinion of this series. I want to like the second season of "Torchwood", and the signing on of James 'Spike' Marsters gives me hope. That his character and Harkness are supposedly due for a "horny and violent" encounter also gives me hope. The last time Marsters played a horny and violent person was on "Buffy", so hopefully "Torchwood" is heading in that show's direction, minus the UPN seasons.

More than this, the check-signers on the show have indicated dissatisfaction with the first season change in Harkness's character, so we can all pray this means sly maverick Harkness is on the way back.

If both of these happen, "Torchwood" can count on me to champion instead of defend it. Indeed, if it at all improves from its first season it can expect me to champion it. So here's to the first few episodes, and hopefully a better season in store.

"Torchwood" premieres on BBC America on January 26th, at 9 pm / 8 pm central.

--------

This post attracted a lot of backlash; admittedly, I was unclear in parts and didn't advance a very cogent point of view. I ended up clarifying and expanding on the post in a comment, which is reproduced below:

--------

Hi, all:

First of all, thank you for posting your comments. I'm (obviously) not the biggest fan of the show, but I think it's great that you guys feel so strongly about it.

A few points have been brought up in the above comments that make a lot of sense; however, in the spirit of discussion I'd like to point out the following:

To the comment that the others were frozen by the portal opening, and hence missed the Jacks kissing: it's not entirely clear if the people are frozen when the two Jacks kiss. When the rift first opens, you can see the hand of the band's bassist moving. That suggests to me that the rift might not cause people to freeze.

And even if the people are frozen when the kiss occurs, it's clear from their reactions to the two Jacks dancing, that they do not approve. Remember earlier in the episode when George, one of the real Jack's men, punches our Jack because our Jack invites him to dance? That's a very clear sign of George's homophobia to me - homophobia that seems mirrored in the people's reactions to the two Jacks dancing.

And that, to me, is the biggest problem of all. It is true that our Jack tells us the real Jack dies in a mission ambushed by the Germans, but we have only our Jack's word for it, and our Jack wasn't there. Are we really to believe that people like George, who would punch a guy for asking for a dance, would still willingly follow real Jack after seeing him obviously in love with another man? What happened after our Jack stepped into the portal? There's too much left unanswered between the portal closing, and real Jack dying.

I'm not disputing that there was a mission and that it was ambushed by Germans; I'm just saying that it's the writers who brought up George's homophobia, and the other people's homophobia, and we don't know exactly what went down in the ambush. It's not entirely impossible that George et al wouldn't act as hard to save their captain post-our Jack's dance with him. In fact, in my opinion, with people like George, it's downright plausible. It's just that I think the writers didn't think this through. They wanted a romantic ending with the two men defying society to dance with and kiss each other. They didn't seem to think of any aftermath.

Your mileage may vary, of course.

No comments: