Twice Upon A Time Review
Clint Hassell gives his verdict on the 2017 Christmas special of Doctor Who.
Note: this review contains full spoilers!
On initial viewing, “Twice Upon a Time” seems to be a low-key restatement of many of showrunner Steven Moffat’s familiar themes. This is not unexpected, as the Christmas special is the final episode for Moffat as showrunner and the last appearance of lead actors Peter Capaldi and Pearl Mackie, but the result is a storyline that feels less novel, less manifestly innovative than in previous years. The thin plot includes no real threat – – as Testimony is actually benevolent – – and very little action, save for a brief ride on a plummeting TARDIS and a bit of laser fire from a rusty Dalek.
Still, to dismiss “Twice Upon a Time” as Moffat limping to the finish line would be a mistake. In the episode’s most perfectly written moment, the dialogue references a scene from Richard Greenberg’s surreal, darkly comic play, The Violet Hour. Set in 1919, the play follows a book publisher and his assistant as they read pages from a book published over 70 years in their relative future, containing information about how their professional accomplishments and personal decisions are viewed from the other side of the 20th century. The mood turns somber when the characters realize that the recent “Great War” will be known in the future as “World War I” – – a name change only made necessary by the advent of the Second World War – – meaning that mankind’s capacity for hate and destruction would again be visited on society. “Twice Upon a Time” repeats the idea, but with added meaning, considering that, at this moment in his relative timeline, the “First” Doctor is merely “the Doctor,” and only needs to be numerated with his regeneration and the appearance of a “Second” Doctor. Though the episode’s teaser pointedly compares the First and Twelfth Doctors for refusing their respective regenerations, this subtle moment notes that it is the First Doctor and the Captain who can be best compared: both are facing their mortality, men literally out of time.
Note that an obvious plot point – – if the First Doctor refuses to regenerate, all of the good that the Doctor has accomplished across his many incarnations never happens – – is barely addressed. Rather than having Twelve persuade One, and thus himself, to regenerate, Moffat mirrors a plot device from “The Day of the Doctor,” allowing the showrunner to revisit perhaps his most significant contribution to Who canon, the War Doctor. In both episodes, a sentient machine uses the visage of a former companion to allow the Doctor to wrestle with a weighty personal decision – – there, to end the Time War via genocide; here, to end his cycle of loss via suicide. In “Twice Upon a Time,” Testimony refers to the First Doctor as the “Doctor of War,” a blatant reference to the Doctor’s forgotten incarnation. “‘The Doctor’? Yes. ‘The Doctor of War’? Never,” claims the First Doctor, before he is shown that the destructive effects of his future involvement across time and space does indeed earn him the honorific of “War Doctor.” In saving both the Captain and the opposing soldier, Twelve demonstrates what it could mean to be a “Doctor of War” to the First Doctor, convincing One to embrace his future, and further rehabilitating the name of the War Doctor.
Though the storyline focuses on Twelve’s imminent departure from the narrative, “Twice Upon a Time” also features the exit of Pearl Mackie from the series, and the episode is wise to clearly focus on such an accomplished actress. Mackie’s talent outshines even the appearance of a previous Doctor, bringing depth and confidence to a role that both honors Bill Potts and serves as a poignant counterpoint to the First Doctor’s blatant sexism. It is only in the scenes featuring Bill with Twelve that the character work in “Twice Upon a Time” really dazzles. “I hope we talk about it loads. I hope we spend years laughing about it,” Bill says, in the episode’s most quietly affecting moment, proving that Capaldi and Mackie have chemistry unseen since Eleven and Amy’s rapport mirrored Smith and Gillan’s real-life friendship.
In fact, if a complaint were to be levied against “Twice Upon a Time,” it might be that the character development is lacking. While the Captain serves many narrative roles – – not only does his rescue drive the plot and serve as the episode’s only tie to the Christmas holiday, his last name is the episode’s biggest Easter egg – – he seems more a cipher for the Doctors than a character in his own right. The Captain voices what both Doctors are thinking: the idea of a noble demise is comforting, until you are at death’s threshold, and then it’s, well, “I don’t want to go.” Despite this, the role seems fairly light, mostly because the Captain is repeatedly sidelined by a recurring joke where he understands little of what is happening and is thus able to be more than a passive participant in the admittedly thin plot.
Surprisingly, the First Doctor is also ill-served by the script. Yes, it is a nice bit of continuity to see that the First Doctor is surprised when Twelve states that Earth “is protected” – – One wasn’t particularly keen on Earth. Later, his response to Bill’s question, “I mean, ‘What were you running to?” indicates that the First Doctor saw himself as a refugee in a stolen TARDIS, that his legacy as a hero is an accident, however beautiful, of his exceptional character. However, much of One’s characterization in “Twice Upon a Time” runs contrary to the majority of his tenure from the first four seasons of Doctor Who. Certainly, the First Doctor could be bossy, abrasive, and patronizing – – particularly in the early episodes where the writers were emphasizing his mysterious and, ahem, “unearthly” nature – – but “Twice Upon a Time” occurs late in One’s narrative, after actor William Hartnell had pushed the writers towards a more grandfatherly characterization of the Doctor. This episode seems to focus primarily on the “hilarity” of the Doctor’s comments regarding a woman’s expected role as housekeeper, fragile emotional state, and “ladylike” behavior. Was the First Doctor ever sexist? Occasionally – – one could make a list of the times a classic Doctor said something that, by today’s standards, would be considered insensitive – – but not to this extent, and it’s a shame that the episode focuses on this minor character point over the chance to revisit and even expand upon the First Doctor’s persona.
But, maybe that was Moffat’s plan? Hearing the First Doctor say blatantly misogynist things throughout the episode, the audience is forced to bristle and rebuke – – “No, women are awesome! Look at how far attitudes about women have come, since the 1960s!” – – only for the Twelfth Doctor’s regeneration to reveal a now-female Time Lord. Can’t complain, now, audience! Never has Doctor Who taken such great care to ensure the acceptance of the incoming Doctor. It’s a clever move by Moffat, and evidence that the BBC is ensuring the future of the franchise.
So, what started with eyebrows, ends with eyelashes . . . and a final, blustery speech from Capaldi’s Twelfth Doctor, who repeats key points of the Doctor’s character, as a reminder to his future self. When learning to write, children are taught to summarize their previous arguments in their final paragraph, for clarity; professional writers, however, usually forgo summarization in lieu of the opportunity to leave their readers with a novel thought. Moffat had one final moment to comment on Doctor Who, and he chose to end with a summary, rather than a conclusion that might have framed the narrative of the Twelfth Doctor in a new philosophical light. A perfect example of the latter would be Moffat’s “The Husbands of River Song,” which concludes River Song’s storyline by not only filling in the last piece of her twisted timeline, but by revealing the motives to her actions in such a novel way as to redefine the River/Doctor dynamic, completely rehabilitating her character. In “Twice Upon a Time,” Moffat merely restates the familiar – – an interesting choice for the Twelfth Doctor who, three years ago, seemed as foreign and distant as imaginable. Perhaps, this choice is again a deliberate one, meant to contrast Capaldi’s now-familiar Twelfth Doctor with Jodie Whittaker’s truly revolutionary Thirteen?
