"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.

Image courtesy BBC

Comments

[Ray Fleming Jackson, MS]

Who ever wrote this article is pretty much an idiot. OK, I'll give you the moody Jack isn't as loveable. Some of the shows aren't as well written as others. However, completely trashing this show is out of the question. First of all it is BBC America's highest rated show ever so apparently people are watching and like it. Second of all, the most useless thing on the planet is a film, book, or TV critic. No one ever listens to you people anyway so I can't figure out why anyone pays you to be less useful than a pile of cow crap. At least it can be used as fertilizer. Why don't you do something better if you don't like it. Third the episode you mentioned was the best one to date. I'd rather see melodrama than read what a drama queen with a 2000 words or less limit has to say.

[Robert M O'Bara]

I agree with Mr. Fleming. I'm a big Dr. Who / SciFi fan and have followed the Dr, Who series since the late 60's. I found the first season of Torchwood to be amazing. A cross between Dr. Who & X-Files the show involves very human characters (including gay/bi!) that are thrown into extraordinary circumstances. That is not say it didn't have some weaknesses. I think Captain Jack's immortality needs to be addressed because there is too much of a risk of it being an over-used "solution" resolution as it was used in the finale "End of Days" (but still needs to properly fit into the comments made in the finale of "Last of the Timelords in Dr. Who). But compared to other first seasons (such as Star Trek, Babylon 5, etc..) it was extremely entertaining!

Overall I think all of the actors in the series have done an excellent job and I all I can say it keep up the great work! (Even Suzie :)

[T Wallace]

We love it. We started watching it on BBC America without ever seeing any Dr Who or even really being Sci Fi fans. It doesnt give us all the answers and we find ourselves really wanting to know more about each of the characters. I have to say I clicked on the article as a fan of the show. It was a bit dissapointing hearing negative words.(I though it would be a "we love this show" article) We just thought it was a good show that didnt make a gay character stand out. They were just there. I guess thats what real equality is. When your all just there...

[paswede]

The "Captain Jack Harkness" episode is the hottest, sexiest and romantic episode of any show that I have ever seen on TV (includes hetero and homo scenes). The critic is so far off base or he completely misses it. The whole episode builds throughout the ep culminating in a very passionate and truthful (and long) open mouth kiss between the two Captains. I was glad it was not a typical , walk up to each other, grab the other guys nuts and off to bed. THAT is typical gay love scenes. This was romantic and there is not one thing wrong with that.

Am I in love with every episode, no, but for once, being gay is not an issue. Isn't that what we want? Our 'gay agenda'?

But that is just my humble (but accurate) opinion.

[Bald Jason]

The reviewer's views are moronic.

Our Jack kissing the real Jack didn't get him killed. The people in the hall didn't even see them kiss. They were frozen in time by the rift; go back and watch it again. What they did see (the Jacks dancing together) would most likely be overshadowed by our Jack's disappearance from their time frame as they stood frozen in time.

And Jack's character is different on Torchwood because he's lived for decades wondering how became immortal, and why The Doctor left him stranded in the future, besides the fact that Jack's role on Torchwood is that of a leader - people change. Now he has made peace with himself and The Doctor he's back on track to find a kind of balance between the two versions we've seen.

Torchwood / Doctor Who / The Sarah Jane Adventures are awesome! :-0)

[Joshua]

Never watched Torchwood, it looked boring... I've watched Hotel Babylon a couple of times instead... I wish they had a gay scene there...

[RobDe]

As an English veiwer of the show with a second series being eagerly anticipated over in the UK I must add that the "training mission gone wrong" was not due to homophobia as the writer suggests. If you pay attention you discover that actually he is killed by a German plane attack DURING a training mission. His kissing of another man was in no way connected.

[Zengkun Feng]

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:

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.

[BBC America fan]

I will agree that Torchwood is finding its bearings as a series. That is the nature of Dr-Who-like series. Characters develop over the series (time and space travel are nasty bugger to keep consistent). However, the critical view of the portrayal Capatin Jack's sexuality is off point. That one gay kiss was more realistic and explicit that anything we have seen on American network TV. This isn't Queer as Folk...but thank goodness its more revealing than Ugly Betty or Will and Grace I love them both but they always have/had straight couples in their sexual beds, but gay couple apprently only hold hands and watch TV.

[cleverstud]

Well, I agree with the reviewer 100%. So there. :-)

[studly]

Zengkun Feng explains the comments the reviewer made about Captain Jack II being a possible cause for the death of Jack I-- but if you like this show despite the huge problems with character and logic, you are probably not intelligent enough to get it. I sat through episode after episode and watched potential develop only to see it squashed. Russell T Davies wrote brilliantly for QAF (the original series) but is very hit and miss with Torchwood. The last episode of the 1st season makes so little sense and has problems EVERYWHERE too numerous to mention. And talk about total Buffy (and StarTrek Borg) rip-offs-- and like in Buffy-- why is this horrible monster so damn easy to kill?

Dont get me started on the old creepy guy-- what a loss that turned out to be? I get that he kills the BF to get her to open the rift, but why does anyone think that opening the rift will set it all right? and then why does it? and why does feeding on Jacks life force kill the monster-- that makes no sense?? Simply retarded. And not worth it for some BISEXUAL action.

By the way -- the episode with the 2 jacks was interesting and really sexually charged UNTIL they kissed. It would have been better to have that lust be unrequited.

[Casey]

I think the scriptwriters were trying to make a beautiful point: How tragic it would have been if the original Captain Jack had died without ever realizing one of the greatest and most fulfilling of human emotions -- true, honest love. He had that chance before he died. Our Captain Jack showed that he wasn't intimidated by people like George. Our Captain Jack can say that he has "lived". The message is that life is finite -- that if you allow bigots, bullies, and homophobes to frighten you, they ultimately win and steal your chance at true love -- not just loving another, but loving oneself enough to live authentically and according to one's own needs. Living your life in fear may mean a life not lived: There may not be a second chance at life. Unlike our Captain Jack, the original Captain Jack apparently had only one trip through this world, and it could have ended without ever knowing true love. The message was very powerful: One may die before allowing oneself to ever accept oneself, wholly, internally and externally, without the ambivalence of remaining discreet and closeted.

We have to realize that this is a UK series, with a UK sensibility. It also has fewer writers and fewer resources than most American television series. I think if one approaches it with the history of the BBC's Doctor Who in mind, it makes a lot of sense. What would absolutely have killed Torchwood is if FOX had produced it, just as they did the disastrous Doctor Who movie that celebrated the millennium.

As for leaving the love unrequited: That was used to powerful effect in Doctor Who, when the doctor bid Rose farewell and was entirely appropriate there. There is so much heterosexual kissing on television that it was refreshing to see an example of love unrequited. But the converse is true of homosexual love: We never see it, except as a "joke" or a "mistake", and it was refreshing to see it here for a change.

[Star Trek 1701]

Is it possible that gay men can talk about more than just being gay? "Torchwood" is a sci-fi series whose main character just happens to be gay; sorry, "omnisexual". It's a gimmick. It is NOT a gay series with a sci-fi theme. If it was, and it was as cheesy as some of the gay-themed series/movies I have seen, I probably would not have bothered to watch it. Unfortunately, I did not see all of the episodes (I've ordered the DVD set to correct that problem). Also, as a gay man, I don't require the shows I watch to have gay characters; wonderful they may be or not.

Another thing to keep in mind that this is a British produced series. The Brits have a different notion of sci-fi than we Americans. They suffer from what I call the Dunkirk mind-set. Even when the main characters succeed, the victory is always bitter sweet. Watch any Doctor Who show; new or old. It is as if any true victory is beyond all hope. In most movies and made-for-TV mini-series, the lead character is even killed-off; victoriously but dead nonetheless.

As to the show's "aimlessness", again, this is not American television. The British like to develop things over time and they seem to do a better job at character development then most American productions. So, let's give them a chance before condemning it with faint praise.

Let's wait to see what they do for Season 2. They should have their "sealegs" by then.

[Ron]

não consigo acessar