Date: Monday, 19 November 2018 07:52 (UTC)
djm4: (Default)
From: [personal profile] djm4
I thought Charlie's actions, and what happened to him, brought an otherwise interesting episode right down. Fundamentally, in today's political climate, I'm not sure I'm ready for the message 'big business is benign, and the left are violent and bad in the same way as the right', and we didn't know enough about the rest of the economic system that Kermblam! operates in to see it as anything other than that.

Why the 10% organic rule - is that supposed to be a good thing? It's presented as though Kermblam! *could* be fully automated if it was allowed to be, and it didn't look as though the jobs on offer were especially fulfilling, so I'd have liked to see more discussion of the background to that. It's a complex question, and it wasn't presented as such.

And then, the Doctor murders Charlie.

There was no apparent need for her to detonate the bubble wrap there and then, so why did she? It was an extra order, over and above the recall of the delivery bots, so it wasn't just an inevitable but unfortunate side effect of her actions. If Charlie had at that point been shown to be setting a manual override on the bots, that might have explained both the need for urgency and his murder, but there was no hint of that.

I saw someone on Twitter saying that this felt like The Sunmakers. No. This is The Sunmakers if The Doctor gasses all the rebels to stop them throwing Gatherer Hadd off the roof, and then leaves with assurances from The Collector and Hade that they're going to tax everyone a bit less in future.
This account has disabled anonymous posting.
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting

Profile

strange_complex: (Default)
strange_complex

January 2025

M T W T F S S
  12345
6 789101112
131415161718 19
20212223242526
2728293031  

Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Tuesday, 1 July 2025 05:25
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios