Torchwood: Having Mercy On My Circles

[ed_rex]

 

That's right folks, it's summer and, this year, that means another series of Torchwood. Ten episodes over ten weeks this year, as compared to five over five days in 2009.

And yes, I'm watching it, hoping that Russell T Davies can return to form and wash the disappointing memories of this year's Doctor Who from my mind.

The first two series of the show ranged from campy delight to nearly pornographic awfulness (sometimes in the same episode) and the third came within a last-minute intellectual cop-out of being a masterpiece of sociological science fiction, so it's anybody's guess how Davies' fourth kick at the Torchwood can will turn out.

One episode in, the results are still up in the air.

My review of the episode is posted here and my overview of the series to date is over here.

Comments

That harsh?

[ed_rex]

I don't think I was harsh on the Oswald character as on the manner of his release. I didn't, and don't, buy it. And I won't, unless he turns out to have had extraterrestrial help in getting himself sprung without a fight.

What he cited about his sentence being carried out so he is now a 'free man' is actually true - just the likelihood of it happening is astronomical.

It might be true in our context, but you don't need a high-priced legal team to think of a few arguments suggesting that since the rules have changed the law is no longer applicable — at least enough to keep Oswald in the slammer longer than, er, 24 hours or so.

I'm open to the character — indeed, I'm kind of presuming Davies has a good reason for having him — it's the way he's been brought into the story I don't believe.

Also as to the 'baby in ear muffs.' I saw it as a cute play on wearing ear protection in shooting ranges.

I'm starting to think you're mis-reading me rather a lot (or else I am you). What leads you to think I didn't enjoy the baby-at-the-gunfight bit? I thought it was rather well done at the time, though comm ents I've read elsewhere have made me a little less comfortable about it.

[jhumor]

Hi, I wasn't ignoring you. I was out of town for a week with questionable internet service.

You still seem to have greater faith in the US Justice System than it deserves. As I said: Everything was accurate. It wasn't Oswald's fault that he survived the death penalty. And in the US system, you can't be tried twice for the same crime, let alone sentenced twice for the same crime. He survived his sentence, you might not like it, might not buy it, but that's how the system works. He wasn't sentenced to 'life in prison' he was sentenced to the Death Penalty. He served his time, as it were.

As to your 24 hours argument. The legal system doesn't work that fast. Never has. You might not buy how he was brought into the story. But, it actually does work. And for a British writer to be working with the US legal system, I was actually pleased that they seemed to do a tad bit of research rather than just going with whatever fit the storyline.

It's not a question of faith

[ed_rex]

No worries on the delay; I understand all too well that life happens.

As I said: Everything was accurate. It wasn't Oswald's fault that he survived the death penalty. And in the US system, you can't be tried twice for the same crime, let alone sentenced twice for the same crime. He survived his sentence, you might not like it, might not buy it, but that's how the system works. He wasn't sentenced to 'life in prison' he was sentenced to the Death Penalty. He served his time, as it were.

Well, yes, but I would argue that since he didn't die, he didn't serve his time/sentence and I'm sure there would be a lot lawyers who would be happy to put that argument into legalese. I don't know enough about U.S. (or any other) jurisprudence to predict the ultimate outcome of such a case, but I do know enough to be convinced the man wouldn't be walking the streets 24 hours later.

So it's the timing, I'm objecting to, not the basic concept.