![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Now I know what all the screaming on my flist was about.
Politics once again took center stage as Earth tried to negotiate its way out of handing over millions of children to the 456. The negotiations were unsuccessful. The 456 demanded 10% of Earth's children or they would wipe out the human race. The bulk of the episode dealt with the resulting ethical dilemma. Earth doesn't have the capabilities to defeat an enemy that can attack from space. Is it better to hand over millions of children so that billions of people can survive? Which children should be sacrificed? How do you choose? And how do you explain your decision to the parents of those kids? This is where the episode really shined. So many science fiction television shows lately have presented their protagonists with major moral or ethical dilemmas, only to have a third option materialize out of nowhere at the last minute so that the characters can agonize about the choice but not actually have to make it. So far, no magic solution has appeared to save these kids. In fact, Torchwood's attempt at fighting back resulted in the deaths of every person in Thames House, including Ianto. I hope the show sticks to its guns in the final episode and doesn't wave a magic wand to save the day.
Of course, the part of this episode that fans will remember most is the death of Ianto Jones, especially after having just lost Toshiko Sato and Owen Harper a few episodes ago. I understand that Russell T. Davies wanted to emphasize how dangerous it is to work for Torchwood and that almost everyone who works for Torchwood dies young, but killing off characters in climactic moments on science fiction television shows has become such a cliché at this point that I no longer feel anything except irritation when characters die. To have the show defy convention by forcing its characters to make the horrible choice to sacrifice 35 million children only to turn around moments later and dish out one of the most overused plot devices in science fiction entertainment today was very disappointing.
Meanwhile, the virus that killed everyone in Thames House failed to kill Jack (permanently anyway), but the fact he survived may mean he now has antibodies to the virus the 456 are using against Earth. Given enough time, scientists could probably develop a vaccine from his blood, but not by the next day, which is the 456's deadline. Given that the 456 broke their word and came back after being given twelve children in 1965, there's no reason to think they won't come back again someday, so developing a vaccine would still be worthwhile as a long-range plan. But in the short-term, things are not looking good for the children of Earth.
Politics once again took center stage as Earth tried to negotiate its way out of handing over millions of children to the 456. The negotiations were unsuccessful. The 456 demanded 10% of Earth's children or they would wipe out the human race. The bulk of the episode dealt with the resulting ethical dilemma. Earth doesn't have the capabilities to defeat an enemy that can attack from space. Is it better to hand over millions of children so that billions of people can survive? Which children should be sacrificed? How do you choose? And how do you explain your decision to the parents of those kids? This is where the episode really shined. So many science fiction television shows lately have presented their protagonists with major moral or ethical dilemmas, only to have a third option materialize out of nowhere at the last minute so that the characters can agonize about the choice but not actually have to make it. So far, no magic solution has appeared to save these kids. In fact, Torchwood's attempt at fighting back resulted in the deaths of every person in Thames House, including Ianto. I hope the show sticks to its guns in the final episode and doesn't wave a magic wand to save the day.
Of course, the part of this episode that fans will remember most is the death of Ianto Jones, especially after having just lost Toshiko Sato and Owen Harper a few episodes ago. I understand that Russell T. Davies wanted to emphasize how dangerous it is to work for Torchwood and that almost everyone who works for Torchwood dies young, but killing off characters in climactic moments on science fiction television shows has become such a cliché at this point that I no longer feel anything except irritation when characters die. To have the show defy convention by forcing its characters to make the horrible choice to sacrifice 35 million children only to turn around moments later and dish out one of the most overused plot devices in science fiction entertainment today was very disappointing.
Meanwhile, the virus that killed everyone in Thames House failed to kill Jack (permanently anyway), but the fact he survived may mean he now has antibodies to the virus the 456 are using against Earth. Given enough time, scientists could probably develop a vaccine from his blood, but not by the next day, which is the 456's deadline. Given that the 456 broke their word and came back after being given twelve children in 1965, there's no reason to think they won't come back again someday, so developing a vaccine would still be worthwhile as a long-range plan. But in the short-term, things are not looking good for the children of Earth.
