S31 (5) 10 – Vincent and the Doctor
6 January 2013 at 15:52 #543
S31 (5) 10 – Vincent and the Doctor (repeat, BBC3 7.55pm Sat 12 January 2013)
What the Dan Martin Guardian Blogs thought at the time can be accessed here.
In figures: Overnight figures were 5m, timeshift figures were 6.7m. Audience Appreciation Index (AI) was 86 (Excellent).
Of interest: This episode was written by Richard Curtis who said Stephen Moffat had demanded a script from him because he owed him a favour for the work he put into “The Curse of Fatal Death” for Comic Relief.
Guest stars include Tony Curran as Vincent van Gogh and the mighty Bill Nighy as Dr. Blacl, the art expert. It possibly remains the only episode of Who to be followed with a “If you have been affected by the issues in this episode, contact our hotline” announcements.
Thoughts on this welcome.6 January 2013 at 18:43 #561
Just to pre-empt any discussion, I’ll confess that when @juniperfish launched her “what are your favourite three episodes of each Smith series” I selected this as one from Series 5. Yes, the monster is a bit rubbish. Yes, the ending is monstrously sentimental….but I still think this is a bit special.
I find Tony Curran a constant delight in the many support roles he has done over the years. In this, I think he delivers a masterclass in sympathetic portrayal of a very tortured real person. Karen Gillan said that he went to Croatia early to watch some of the filming of Vampires of Venice (Croatia doubled as Venice and France in this series) and he, Karen and Matt became very close. I really do think this chemistry shines through into the episode itself.
Some of the imagery and set dressing is stunning. I love the “Starry Night” sequence and therefore repost this link (warning – contains weapons grade Don McLean).6 January 2013 at 18:57 #563
Just a quick post to admit that I just edited your post to change Juniperfish to @juniperfish, as she is now in the house! Hope you don’t mind.
As a fellow Scot, I loved Tony Curran in this (and almost everything else he’s in), and as much as I hate Curtis for his many abominations such as Love Actually, and almost everything else he’s done, who can’t fail to love a tale about Vincent, his unrecognised genius, and a final reel full of real appreciation. Shmaltzy, but for everyone who’s ever felt under appreciated (which is probably everyone at one time or another), a piece of beauty.6 January 2013 at 21:41 #5697 January 2013 at 03:16 #581ScaryB @scaryb
@phaseshift Thanks for posting the link. Beautiful. This is one of thse episodes I always seem to get something in my eye towards the end! And completely agree wit @craig – Tony Curran is a joy to watch.
Came across this while I was on youTube – v funny – Outtakes and Funny bits for 10, 11 (watch out for the cyberman and the dancing angels!) . This also – a couple of overlaps but there’s more cybermen in the park. (Warning: you may never take them seriously again)8 January 2013 at 01:09 #695
I think the is one of the best – and certainly most age appropriate, for the general target demographic – studies of depression ever put on TV. Sensitive, compassionate but not chickening out.
The blind and invisible monster…9 January 2013 at 00:22 #965
Hi @pedant (IAmNotAFishIAmAFreeMan). First of all, thanks for breaking the layout with your ridiculously long username. I’ve now fixed that, although you’re now a “Fr eeMan”.
But I wanted to say thanks for posting those links. I think that must have taken real courage. I’m sorry about your friend. I lost someone incredibly close too and I’m no stranger to the monster myself, and unlike you am still drinking the booze every night and smoking the cigarettes, and yet am actually reasonably content, all in all, these days. I think! And I’m in charge of this board! What idiot put me in charge? 😀
I don’t think this is the place to go in to much more detail, but if you ever want to chat (phone, text, email) please PM me. I’d be happy to exchange details. Even though we’re strangers, I feel a shared connection. That may sound stupid, but to me it seems real (but then I have had a bottle and half of wine tonight!)
I do wish you all the best. And hope to see a lot more from you on this forum.
Craig9 January 2013 at 00:56 #977
I protest! My name fitted perfectly in my Browser (with “man” on a line by itself)! You’re one of those weirdos who uses IE, aren’t you 😉
Thanks for the kind response – much appreciated.9 January 2013 at 01:01 #981
I’m a web developer (well, partly)! I take exception to the slight that I would ever use IE (except to check how much it borks my work). I’m a Firefox man myself, and proud of it 😀
And no probs.9 January 2013 at 01:07 #985
Yeah, I know – low blow (Kind lost faith in FF a while back – should try it again now – Safari has too many quirks and Chrome to much Google).
I note that blenkinsop also has a stray end letter!9 January 2013 at 01:22 #991
Does he? Damn. I already increased the width of the div by 10px. To wrap or not to wrap? That is now the question.9 January 2013 at 01:31 #995wolfweed @wolfweed
This episode means so much to me on a personal level. I’ve lost a couple of very close friends to the monster & I know plenty more still living with it.
This is on a par with (if not better than) Curtis’ last ep of Blackadder Goes Forth. Powerful, moving stuff.
The Dr is eventually wise enough to know that you often can’t defeat this enemy but you can make a small difference. You can add to the pile of good things.11 January 2013 at 20:41 #1239Bluesqueakpip @bluesqueakpip
So, anyway, I rewatched this on the repeat.
The portrayal of depression is very powerful, but for me the best thing about the episode was the explanation of Van Gogh’s work. Who he was, why he was important in art, and – especially in the Starry Night scene – what he was trying to show in his art. You can also see that the set and props people had gone to town, lovingly recreating the various pictures.
I have a bit of a problem with depth perception, so I don’t really ‘get’ paintings. It’s not that I can’t see them; it’s just that they might as well be wallpaper. Unless a picture tells a story, it’s just a pretty picture and I have absolutely no idea why people rave about, say, Sunflowers. So it was fantastic to have an explanation in child-friendly language. Oh, okay, he was trying to get the way they’re both living and dying at the same time. And he used lots of colour, because he saw the world as full of colour – it almost talked to him. And the animation of ‘Starry Night’ was excellent.
So I would rate this as the best of the ‘Doctor meets famous historical person’ episodes, in that it went back to the old Hartnell style of trying to be a bit educational.12 January 2013 at 00:22 #1265Anonymous @
It’s a bit of an odd episode this, isn’t it. It’s so atypical of the show in general in its power, its agenda and I suppose its sentimentality. And it’s all the better for it.
On paper the idea of ‘guest’ star writers is an awful one. Big shots who won’t give a stuff about the show? Who’ll only be concerned with showboating their own name? Who won’t take anything seriously? And yet, without exception since their inception, it’s the guest writers that have provided some of the best stories of the new iteration of the show. Neil Gaiman was perhaps a given that he’d produce a great episode but Richard Curtis, that can’t stand a chance of being any good, can it? Nah, just bloody excellent, that’s all.
And on paper this episode sounds like a terrible pitch too. It’s Vincent van Gogh versus a giant chicken. In my head that sounds as if it should be some terrible Colin Baker car-crash story. Certainly nothing as good as the finished article.
There’s lots of great moments in this episode, but I’ll just pick out a few of the highlights for me.
Tony Curran’s performance as Vincent. Really nuanced, really touching. A great depiction of a mind troubled with depression. The two leads take something of a backseat in this episode, and rightly so. Although one of the great scenes, of the Doctor and Vincent in the bedroom is perhaps one of the most pivotal for the Doctor’s character development. In the face of Vincent’s depression, he realises that there are some monsters that even he cannot fight.
The Doctor, Amy and Vincent lying in the field and watching as they start to see with Vincent’s eyes. A mesmerising scene and a far more lyrical use of special effects than we’re normally treated to.
Dr Black’s eulogy to Vincent in the gallery at the end. It never fails to bring tears to my eyes. And for that matter the Doctor comforting Amy after Vincent’s death. It really shows the emotional bond between those characters. Anyone who couldn’t warm to Amy after this episode loses a little of my understanding. For all her Scottish bravado, here was laid bare her love and compassion for people (OK, possibly it might just be for ginger people, but hey).
Some seem to have a problem with the soft rock soundtrack in the gallery scene but it’s an indulgence I’m willing to overlook. Yes, it’s shamelessly sentimental towards its end. But it works. I’d be interested to know if that was stipulated in Curtis’s script or the director trying to bring a Curtis-esque flourish to the proceedings.
And, of course, a nice, quirky little performance from Bill Nighy too. I enjoyed the bowtie schtick.
It’s difficult to find something to dislike in this episode. Aside from big ideas and great performances, it was a good, tightly written episode. It’s also easy to forget that it’s largely based around the Doctor’s reading of the entire situation being colossally and disastrously wrong. Far from being a pair of ‘evil’ eyes at the window, it was a pair of misunderstood and frightened ones. This was, of course, part of the point, but I’d say that it maybe adds some weight to @juniperfish‘s two-doctors theory and that this is the ‘younger’, more inexperienced one at work.
And so in future I’ll always give the celebrity writers the benefit of the doubt and always remind myself that they are ‘big’ writers because they’ve got a proven track record at being good at their job. For all his tendency towards middle-class shmaltz, Richard Curtis is quite simply someone far, far better at handling character, plot and situation than say Chris Chibnall, who as we saw last week has an unerring tendency to drop whatever ball he happens to be carrying at the time.
So, you might have noticed, I love this episode. Doctor Who has proved over the years that it can be many things — dramatic, exciting, educational,absurd and ridiculous even. I’d say that this was the first time it showed it can also be beautiful.12 January 2013 at 03:54 #1271janetteB @janetteb
I haven’t re watched this episode for some time but it was one of my favourites. One of the strengths of nu Who is that it occasionally throws something different into the mix and isn’t afraid of emotional depth.
Really enjoyed reading through comments, especially @jimthefish ‘s detailed review.
Janette12 January 2013 at 10:35 #1293ScaryB @scaryb
Can’t really add any more to that great rundown by @jimthefish They’re allowed the schmaltzy bit, in fact they need it, so they can counterpoint with the fact that even the knowledge that he is ultimately judged to be one of THE great artists, isn’t enough to counter Van Gogh’s personal monster. The poignancy of that is what makes this episode great for me, and keeps its images hanging around my head.
Looking forward to watching it again
Incidentally, re the two doctors theory – we know that’s the case – we’ve seen it (in fact there’s more than 2) – 903 yr old, 1100 yr old, current one(?) – there are gaps when we as the audience don’t travel with the doctor – we pick up with him from time to time. We don’t know that we always catch up with him in a linear order. This might never be made explicit in the text, beyond what’s been said so far, but it’s seeded throughout so the writers can pick up on it whenever. Especially useful for resolving those tricky continuity problems!
Finally, on a sidetrack – remembering the starry starry night scene reminded me of this little gem of scene from the film Gregory’s Girl (dancing lying down and not falling off the planet)
There’s an amazing no of fan tributes to the scene, with a diverse range of soundtracks – but my fav is the one with Vincent posted above, by @phaseshift12 January 2013 at 21:09 #1317
Some interesting and heartfelt posts here. I refrained from posting or reading additions until I rewatched it (I forgot BBC3 had reset after Christmas and this episode was also shown on Friday). I still find it really powerful.
I agree with @jimthefish in that a particular delight has been having non-(conventional) Who writers in the series to present to us their own vision of the Doctor. This was a revelation, as was Simon Nye’s “Amy’s Choice”.
Two writers more known for sit-coms, writing two of the best episodes with sparking dialogue. I find it interesting that they didn’t fall into the trap of writing for Tennant, which a couple of the other, more established writers initially seemed to do.
As well as the obvious delights of Starry Night and the emotional ending, I loved Matt’s little rant while Vincent is immersed in the creative process:
“I remember watching Michelangelo painting the Sistine Chapel. Wow. What a whinger. I kept saying to him, Look, if you’re scared of heights, you shouldn’t have taken the job, mate. And Picasso, what a ghastly old goat. I kept telling him, Concentrate, Pablo. It’s one eye. Eye the side of the face.”
Above all though – Amy. Blisteringly beautiful amidst the sunflowers and the plot revealing a bit of buried Amelia. Great performance to match a really impressive performance by Curran.
Can I just add that when I reviewed the blogs, this one saw the first comment by @stevethewhistle! Seems so long ago doesn’t it?22 January 2013 at 20:39 #1823Juniperfish @juniperfish
Just caught up with this, rather lovely, thread – I’m sure Richard Curtis would be moved and delighted that the episode has prompted shared moments of empathy, as above, as well as discussions about living with depression, or caring about people who do. I suspect it probably did so up and down the country after the episode first aired. The fact that Vincent and the Doctor created a space for discussions with children about the issue is particularly moving.
A moment which stays with me is Amy skipping up the stairs of the museum, singing “Oh, the long life of Vincent Van Gogh!” and the Doctor, just watching her, because he cherishes that she is young and hopeful, but he knows, he just knows, it won’t be that easy.
@phaseshift yes that slice of dialogue made me laugh too – the Doctor was being so fidgety and inappropriate and I really loved the way Smith played that 🙂
I’d agree with @jimthefish – bring on the guest writers, based on their sucess so far!
Imagine how creepy it could be – the Doctor, our Doctor, dematerialises from episode to episode in the TARDIS as usual, but in some episodes his behaviour is just… off. Eventually, to our horror, we realise two versions have been gadding about the universe, Dr Jekyll and Mr, Hyde style. Of course Hyde-Doctor has done some terrible things which poor Jekyll-Doctor gets blamed for and somehow has to try and fix….
Hmmn, this is sounding a lot like the big, actual, arc again….
I keep coming back to Demon’s Run. What has future-Doctor done which prompted that alliance; Papal Mainframe, spitting contempt of Kovarian and all? I mean, he gads about the universe saving people, planets, and occasionally the universe itself, but, apart from Time Lord genocide, what has he done that would convince a bunch of religious factions that he was a rogue “God” who needed to be defeated?
Apart from the Time Lord genocide… <cue dramatic music>23 January 2013 at 02:16 #1837janetteB @janetteb
@juniperfish Lots of good? As discussed in other threads RTD’s Dr was Godlike. Moffat has taken that and made undoing it a central theme of his arc’s.
Or, or, your last comment inspires another idea, maybe it is all the work of the Time Lords from beyond the time lock, manipulating those on the other side to destroy the Dr before they make their triumphant return. Though personally I would be sorry to see the Time Lords portrayed as evil. Snobbish, arrogant, inflexible yes but evil no. I see them more as “lawful good”, which makes them rather hard to live with. The Doctor is unlawful good hence his exile. (I think I have just done a thread jump. sorry I am easily led astray.) Maybe I will copy past this one but must go now and build a pool fence.)
Janette23 January 2013 at 18:25 #1847Juniperfish @juniperfish
@janetteb Yes I’m convinced the Time Lords are coming back. You’re right this should probably continue in the Season 7 Part 2 speculation – I’lll head there…29 January 2013 at 15:00 #2073Rob @rob
I love this episode, brings a tear to my eye and a lump in my throat every time, simply fantastic.13 March 2015 at 20:05 #38731
Depression being the invisible beast is a pretty awesome interpretation. I didn’t even realize it when I watched it. I’m a survivor of depression and suicide so this episode tugs at my heartstrings.
I mainly came to this site, though, to ask a general time travel question and this episode is what triggered it. In the beginning of the episode when the doctor saw the monster in the painting why was he in such a rush to get to Vincent Van Gogh. It obviously wasn’t an issue of time. I think maybe that’s just the nature of the doctor? Definitely not trying to nitpick at the show because I love it.13 March 2015 at 20:12 #38732
In addition, just watched the end again where he goes to the museum and it gives me chills every time.15 March 2015 at 17:36 #38818
@schmitty918 I cry like a baby every single time I watch it. Throughout the episode I was hoping they would take him to the future, to show him what he has become and when they really did, I was so happy!!15 March 2015 at 18:09 #38819
@tenthdoctorftw It’s a beautiful episode, and having Bill Nighy on hand at the museum was a stroke of genius: an actor with a gawky, fragile look (it’s the way he’s built and how he moves) talking about works of genius that outlast their human makers by generations (with a bit of circumstantial luck) because great art is so much tougher than the human individuals who create it. We who come after give it that toughness, by keeping it alive because it still “speaks” to us.
Amazing, isn’t it.15 March 2015 at 19:09 #38822
@ichabod, for sure, this show is the absolute, most wonderful example. I believe tha Bill Nighy is an acting genius and he was perfect for the part. I couldn’t help but compare Van Gogh with Lady Cassandra. Both struggling for recognition but for completely different reasons. One understanding that there is nothing else to give or take ( Van Gogh), the other one managing to give in to the truth, which is accepting things the way they are (Cassandra). Maybe my comparison isn’t valid but that’s the way I imagined it. I shed rivers of tears for both. Now that I said rivers, I remembered River. I hope we see her again!15 March 2015 at 20:34 #38830
I found this on eBay and I REALLY need someone to appreciate this.
By the way, I am new to this forum and I really appreciate the maturity and courtesy of these forums. I’ve found it’s something very hard to come by these days. Most sites, where anyone is free to speak their mind, run rampant with trolls and idiots.15 March 2015 at 20:43 #38832
@tenthdoctorftw Mmm, now I have to go refresh my memory re Lady Cassandra; thank you!
The thing about art, for me, is that it’s the strongest sort of gift we can give to each other, and also the oddest because it’s only partly a gift at all. Mozart composed for money, and made some, but wouldn’t the music have poured out of him anyway? Van Gogh also was painting for money — his brother Theo tried to sell the paintings for years — but even without payment, Vincent kept painting. The action is compulsory: it’s in the artist’s DNA, somehow, even if it doesn’t get activated until late in life, or starts off at a cracking pace and then stops (Rimbaud, I think). People do this stuff as (IMO) a way of presenting their own life’s lessons, their perceptions of the world, to the rest of us, hoping we’ll pay them back with usable gratitude. This often doesn’t happen until it’s too late, so those who profit are dealers and collectors, not the artists themselves; if it happens at all. Imagine all the artists whose work falls by the wayside, for one reason or another, never to be recognized, let alone admired, except maybe by their moms! I’ve observed this close up, in my own family, and it’s not a pretty picture — as it were.
I wish we’d see a bit more about art and artists of other species and worlds in DW, but art doesn’t often lead to external adventures (other than the adventure of survival when hardly anyone values what you do, or when everybody does). Lacking further exploration, Vincent and the Doctor will certainly do for the time being. But this is why I wish very hard that Rigsy, from “Flatline”, would show up later, maybe as a companion: an artist before he is known to be one, waking up to himself. I’d like to see that, and it’s certainly got to be familiar ground to just about everyone on the creative team of DW, doesn’t it?15 March 2015 at 21:49 #38838
Well you have a point but just imagine that it would become “mainstream” (as they call it) if it did. And of course not everyone is artsy. I suppose they need to make every episode with unique and different stories about different situations in order to cover the needs of every viewer. Make a bunch of different stories for everyone to relate to. I would love it as well if they make more episodes that have to do with art.
Now I remembered they also went back to Shakespeare. It was the second episode of the 3rd season. You said that art is something more internal. I couldn’t agree more. Every person perceives art they way he/she “needs” to. Like when it comes to poems. Everyone can make a different assuption about the meaning of each poems. This applies to all kinds of art.
I see you know a lot about Van Gogh, are you intersted in painting?15 March 2015 at 22:50 #38843
@tenthdoctorftw Yes, I agree, individual taste as well as fashions in public taste have a lot to do with which artists are honored way past their deaths (well, during their lifetimes too, in the cases of prominent artists rather than the ones who are obscure until after death). Even Shakespeare went through a period of comparative neglect and rough handling, with everybody writing new and “better” (more optimistic, to appeal to public taste) last scenes to their productions of his plays.
I had a lot of artists in my family, all types, all commercial (cartoons, animation, book illustration, advertising art, textile design) with attempts at fine arts on the side (except for my father, who took off to live in a garret on Canal Street south of the Village in NYC and paint while supporting himself as a kitchen man in a pub — no success, alas). Messing around with drawing and painting was a large part of childhood play for me and my sisters, one of whom is a painter now; the other, when her final cataract surgery gets done at the end of this month, will return to painting in hopes of landing a gallery to show her work.
I was expected to go a similar route, was sent as an art student to a secondary school in New York called “Music and Art” as an art student and took a lot of art history in college, but I loved stories too much, read myself almost blind, and ended up writing fiction instead, and teaching. So part of what I know comes out of my family background, but more comes out of having had a quarter century to wander around looking at all kinds of art and reading about it. I’m pretty healthy, so in all probability I’ll live long enough to forget all of it, so it’s nice to take chat about it now while I’ve still got most of it!
Easy come, easy go, eh?15 March 2015 at 23:42 #38852
I was chatting with puro in another thread and now you. You both have very interesting backrounds and now I feel mine is extremely boring!! Well, i take it it runs in the family. I believe eevery single person has potential in creating but many never realize what they have.
My quarter century was kind of dull until lately that I started exploring my options and my “abilities”.
I’m in theater, in a group for 4 years now but I’m not as healthy as you so I quit this year (makes me very sad). I suffer from an invisible illness as they call it, constant dizziness which means I feel as If I am on a moving boat 24 hours a day. I can’t even walk properly and I’m freakin’ 25 years old. So now that I’m part handicap (not literally but it feels like it) I’m into creating things. I make music mostly. (Sorry for the rumbling)16 March 2015 at 02:08 #38868
@tenthdoctorftw I congratulate your on your courage and persistence; my stepdaughter has been a CFS sufferer all her life as well as being badly dyslexic, and she was working toward a career in theater but decided that the energy demands of that kind of work, and the stress-load, were more than she wanted to take on, so she took another road instead. It was a struggle, though, and so was the other road in its own way, as it turned out. She’s a social worker in a major hospital now, 15 yrs or so from retirement, and very happy in her work but nevertheless ill more often than most. People are just beginning to press forward here in the states with demands that “invisible illnesses” like Crohn’s, CFS, and others be recognized as serious handicaps entitling their sufferers to legal protection under the Disabilities legislation that covers more conventional (and readily observable) conditions. Is that happening in Greece also?
People apologize for rambling in here all the time, but nobody takes offense; we all do it, I think, and often the results are interesting and enjoyable, so not to worry about that.
What kind of music?16 March 2015 at 02:39 #38874
No, health care here in Greece is a mess. I think you’ve probably heard how things are here. We are in crisis. I recently got fired because of my dizziness/vertigo, so I’m unemployed and I don’t even have insurance in order to do more check-ups. No health care and no awareness for invisible illnesses whatsoever. Vertigo has caused major anxiety problems so on top of that I have a lot of acute anxiety attacks from being scared all the time. I’ve joined a group on facebook and if it wasn’t for these people there I would be deep in depression. I got out of it because of them. So i try to have hope and believe things are going to get better.
I play a little guitar but I mostly sing and write songs. Along with my boyfriend who plays flute, bass and guitar. Mostly idie music. Simple songs. I’m really a begginer. Theater is what I love though.
I really understand what you stepdaughter is going through and choosing something more stable is wiser for people like us. Theater is way more diffcult than what it seems to be. I had no idea how hard it could be until I joined this group (which I did out of hobby but ended up loving). Good thing you have such awareness for illnesses like that!9 April 2015 at 03:16 #39488mrpastaguy @mrpastaguy
I’m new to this forum so this is my first post.
Before watching “Vincent and the Doctor” I was a slow growing whovian. I appreciated the show but besides “The Girl in the Fireplace” or “Blink” there hasn’t been that ONE episode that defines my massive obsession over Doctor Who…Then I saw “Vincent and the Doctor.”
I have never been so effected by a show besides Breaking Bad, but the beauty behind “Vincent” was so extraordinary. There were so many things I took away from this episode. Firstly, Amy (Karen Gillan) was so gorgeous in this episode, especially the sunflower scene. I also loved that segment with the doctor, amy, and Vincent lying on the grass where Vincent was explaining the significance of color with Starry Night. (Being a huge lover of Starry Night it was so nice to see.) Then that beautiful moment in the episode where the Doctor took Vincent to the Art Museum, I was in tears, tears of joy. It was such a good moment because it made you think that your work is never in vain, and that there’s always someone that’s going to appreciate what you do. (Being a songwriter myself, it touched me so much.)
So I have completely watched all modern 8 seasons of Doctor Who, and without hesitation, in my opinion: Vincent and the Doctor is not only the best episode in the series, but the best TV episode of ALL time.9 April 2015 at 06:21 #39497
@mrpastaguy — funny, a cousin of mine just sent me this link in an email — maybe you know the clip?9 April 2015 at 07:59 #39500Anonymous @
@mrpastaguy -a great tag name!!
Welcome to the forum. I too loved Vincent and the Doctor -the scene at the end where they join hands and the sky becomes his painting? Absolutely, did I get emotional! I usually put my hand over my mouth and start to sob. It still affects me as does the scene with the amazing Bill Nighy. Some are not fans of this episode but I definitely am.
Kindest, puro9 April 2015 at 14:25 #39504mrpastaguy @mrpastaguy
@ichabod Woah, nice song. I never heard of it. And yeah starry night is a beautiful piece of work from the late great vincent.
@purofilion Thanks for liking my tag name lol And yeah Vincent and the Doctor is such a wonderful episode that I literally can’t put anything before it. That and The Girl in the Fireplace and Blink.24 June 2015 at 19:38 #40805Kharis @kharis
@juniperfish, Well said, and I couldn’t agree more. This is one of my all-time favorite episodes and it is masterfully done. I’m sure it has been a tool in helping understand depression and a comfort to those with depression.5 August 2015 at 02:03 #41537Anonymous @
@mrpastaguy Here goes … Brand spankin new to the forum hello all! Hope I’m doing this right as I’m forum challenged . I agree totally with your sentiments on this. The thing I loved, of course In addition to everything you’ve mentioned already is seeing Vincent’s agonizing and very genuinely portrayed pain; crying and sobbing on his bed like so many artists just absolutely tortured. And capable of such beauty and tremendous vision. And of course crushing on Amy … Yes yes LOTS of red headed babies please! And the end when he gets to hear the museum guide talking about him like that so passionate about his art … No dry eyes ever no matter how many times I watch. And of course the for Amy on the painting and then the heaving and sobbing starts …. SO glad to be here! Thanks!5 August 2015 at 02:06 #41538Anonymous @
Oh and sorry forgot to add that song is by Don McLean the same guy who wrote American pie not the movies haha the bye bye miss American pie song. Yes I’m filled with all sorts of trivia on music and such!30 August 2015 at 00:47 #42159Anonymous @
This episode is part of The Doctor’s Finest tonight on BBC America if anyone wants to talk about it.30 March 2020 at 20:06 #7034430 March 2020 at 20:16 #7034530 March 2020 at 23:05 #70346
Well, that was just excellent. Not sure that I’ve got much to add from my original review above (although interesting to see that I’m grousing about Chibs even back then. No bandwagon jumper me.)
However, just to heap more praise on Tony Curran’s fantastic performance as Vincent as well as a very subtle one from Bill Nighy (he would have been a fantastic Doctor if things had gone that way). And it really brings home how much I miss Amy. Best TARDIS team for me, I think, with Bill, Nardole and 12 coming a close second.
There’s almost nothing to bitch about in this episode except perhaps the Doctor getting it so spectacularly wrong about the Grafayiss. But then, the Doc has got it wrong before (and since) and Matt’s performance here is so spot on that it’s easy to forgive. His moments with Vincent in his bedroom, of comforting the dying Grafayiss and of comforting Amy at the end are just pitch-perfect and really quite wonderful. (And frankly show 13’s ‘socially awkward’ callousness to Graham to be the bollocks that it is. The Doc is plenty empathetic and has, in fact, learned it the hard way throughout all her regenerations.)
The Twitter feeds were a bit lacklustre this time. I think these things probably work best with a showrunner involved as they’re perhaps more deeply involved in the lore and production of the show as a whole. So, it’s good that Moff is back for The Eleventh Hour on Friday. But I have to say that I’ve probably enjoyed these rewatches far more than I have the entirety of s12.
But, all in all, that left me feeling quite teary and frankly all ready for a full rewatch of s5, which remains easily the best single run of the show since Hinchcliffe and Holmes walked the earth….30 March 2020 at 23:35 #70347
@jimthefish I dunno, most of the comments tonight were a bit lacklustre, but I actually quite liked the Richard Curtis feed.
I mean, Richard Curtis’ work is not something I usually like, in fact almost dislike, but he did a great job with this episode (who knows how much Moffat reined him in?) and everything seemed to gel almost perfectly.
It was nice to find out his daughter came up with the idea of the monster in the painting, and that the whole thing is basically a love letter to his sister who loved van Gogh, and who suffered from depression before taking her own life. And that the line “No, they are tears of joy” comes from the film “Elle S’Appelle Sabine” which, again, is about someone who suffered terrible depression. One I’ll I have to search out.31 March 2020 at 05:04 #70351blenkinsopthebrave @blenkinsopthebrave
Well, that was…perfect. We (Mrs Blenkinsop and I) have watched that countless times, and every single time it is as wonderful an experience as the last time. I tend to think it might rank as my favourite episode of PG Who. And yes, I am comparing it to “Blink”. Why this one? Partly, it is the warmth and the humanity. Partly, it is because there is not one single second in the episode that doesn’t feel just right. Sometimes, there are shows, or movies (Casablanca is a perfect example) where for some reason everything just…works.31 March 2020 at 13:11 #70352
Yes, you’re quite right, I was being a bit literal and focused on the Who-i-ness of it. But those tweets from RC were very interesting and I too will be seeking out Sabine. I definitely would have liked to have known more on how the writing process had worked. What the interaction with Moff had been, what his brief had been etc.
It’s odd about Curtis’s other work. I have to say I find Blackadder terribly overrated and too sixth-form smartarse for my liking but I have to say that any time I’ve sat down to watch one of his movies, I’ve always done so grudgingly but always come away happy and in a better place than where I went in…31 March 2020 at 17:30 #70354
@jimthefish Yeah, wasn’t a huge fan of Blackadder until Ben Elton joined in, then it got a lot better.
I did quite like “Four Weddings and a Funeral”, maybe because the Hugh Grant character was supposed to have been based on my boss at the time – or, at least the way Grant was told to play the character was based on my boss.
But “Notting Hill” and, especially, “Love Actually” make we want to throw things at the screen. “Love Actually” is, possibly, the most reprehensible movie I have ever seen, with its allusions to 9/11 and its treatment of women. And, yet, some people love it. I really don’t understand why at all. It enrages me. Maybe it’s just me.
I haven’t watched his other movies because of that.31 March 2020 at 18:34 #70355
Yes, I must admit that I can see your points about Love Actually and while I’m not sure I’d say it actually enrages me, it’s not one that I’d ever really want to watch again. But I do kind of like Four Weddings and I thought About Time was OK when I watched it recently — clearly Who had had an effect on him for that one.31 March 2020 at 18:40 #70356blenkinsopthebrave @blenkinsopthebrave
Been giving more thought to why I felt this story was so perfect, particularly in light of your comments about Richard Curtis. I had no real interest in the light froth of his movies and I also had reservations about “Blackadder” and skipped much of it, although the final episode of “Blackadder Goes Forth” was quite wonderful. In fact, I can see a connection between that episode and “Vincent”, in that they both end with death in a surprisingly moving way.
The other factor in explaining the brilliance of “Vincent” has to be the performance by Tony Curran. When you think of other portrayals of real historical figures in Who, they do not lend themselves to fully rounded portrayals. Rather, they tend to be either mildly amusing or mildly interesting, but sort of forgettable. But Tony Curran’s portrayal is astonishing and the portrayal is written by Curtis in a way that brings out both the passion and the pain of the character. Which in its own way is quite remarkable for a show like Who.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.