![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
jackOK, the plot wasn't entirely coherent. I liked rjk's description that "there were some cause/effect problems." However:
* They brought Suzy and the glove back, and may do so again. The first ep felt like it was setting things up from the start of an arc, it's satisfying to feel the ominousness of the glove going somewhere -- the fact that it was all shut down so neatly was something that made me unsatisfied with it.
* I liked Suzy's plan! The idea of having this long-ranging Machiavellian contingency dead-man-switch plan that saves her if she dies. (Ignore for now that it seemed retrofitted out-of-character to knowledge she only had later.)
* "There's nothing there," felt a nihilistic approach to afterlife very appropriate to the show. And pleasantly atheistic too, despite it turning out to imply some life-after-death after all. "But something's coming," felt pleasingly vague and ominous -- being attacked from the afterlife backward is always a promising sort of evil for a series, though I don't suppose it'll turn out any less to be represented by vague angst and cheap demon special effects than any other time.
* They brought Suzy and the glove back, and may do so again. The first ep felt like it was setting things up from the start of an arc, it's satisfying to feel the ominousness of the glove going somewhere -- the fact that it was all shut down so neatly was something that made me unsatisfied with it.
* I liked Suzy's plan! The idea of having this long-ranging Machiavellian contingency dead-man-switch plan that saves her if she dies. (Ignore for now that it seemed retrofitted out-of-character to knowledge she only had later.)
* "There's nothing there," felt a nihilistic approach to afterlife very appropriate to the show. And pleasantly atheistic too, despite it turning out to imply some life-after-death after all. "But something's coming," felt pleasingly vague and ominous -- being attacked from the afterlife backward is always a promising sort of evil for a series, though I don't suppose it'll turn out any less to be represented by vague angst and cheap demon special effects than any other time.
Re: Don't make me have to watch it *again*!
Date: 2006-12-07 02:39 pm (UTC)* It was an in-joke I didn't get.
* It was a sexual reference I was too innocent to get. Maybe something to do with how long things take, or insertion??
* It was unconsummated flirting for the sake of it, that didn't have to make sense.
* It was consummated flirting for the sake of it, that didn't have to make sense.
Re: Don't make me have to watch it *again*!
Date: 2006-12-07 04:20 pm (UTC)OK, I think picking up plot holes in Torchwood is likely to be a long and thankless task!
Re: Don't make me have to watch it *again*!
Date: 2006-12-07 04:26 pm (UTC)LOL.
I thought it seemed flirty,
I didn't think there was any doubt it was flirty, though :) I don't know if it was "we are going to have sex now flirty" or "everything Jack does is flirty because that's what it's like, it doesn't mean anything flirty"
I don't know how much time has gone by; the whole Lisa thing isn't having much attention, but then in an episodic show I'm amazed it has any.