My video on the issue of the BBC's support of Transphobia: th-cam.com/video/aN4uc0HZrWE/w-d-xo.html Shaun's 1st video, which includes some additional confirmed information: th-cam.com/video/b4buJMMiwcg/w-d-xo.html Shaun’s 2nd video, which follows how the BBC is trying to dodge accountability for all of this: th-cam.com/video/qfjTG6SVjmQ/w-d-xo.html Shaun’s recent 3rd video: th-cam.com/video/fRn1UZ4fhdE/w-d-xo.html Laura Kate Dale's recent protest speech outside the BBC offices: th-cam.com/video/hBjGnWkwAjI/w-d-xo.html
I'm actually surprised you didn't hammer this point harder: Letting the spiders essentially starve to death is arguably the LEAST moral way to kill them! The sheer amount of suffering this would cause is far greater than shooting them would ever cause. I CANNOT believe the show put this counterpoint in the dialogue ("shooting's quicker") and then DIDN'T respond to it! I hate when the villain is right in their criticism and the show acts like they're wrong.
Were they starving to death or where they suffocating because of their mutation. Or was just the big one suffocating. I haven't seen the ep in a while and don't feel like rewatching it. There's a limit to the size of insects and arachnids, any bigger and they can't absorb oxygen. You could go as far as to say they were suffocating the moment they started mutating. That would probably explain the aggression lol
@@HotDogTimeMachine385 To tells you the truth, I don't remember specifically if they were all doomed to suffocate or if they were just going to starve. But I'm glad you brought this up, because either way...that is NOT a humane way to die. Like, they use the dignity argument, but how, 13th Doctor, is a slow painful death more dignified than a quick one? Sorry to get too dark, but...JESUS Doctor Who! Why?
Not to mention they'd be suffocating to death in a relatively tiny space for that amount of huge spiders. They'd get even more panicked and angry and probably start killing each other, too. There is literally nothing humane about the Doctor's suggestion and it BAFFLES ME that the writers didn't see that. This episode is almost single-handedly responsible for me falling off the Chibnall wagon back when it aired (even though I'd been mostly enjoying series 11 up until this) because it bothered me that much
@@noellova The problem is that this isn't the 13th Doctor's suggestion, at least it's not stated by her in the dialogue. Instead, it's the zoologist/spider specialist who actually says it. Poor writing by Chibnall leaves the matter unresolved and ambiguous.
"The Doctor shouldn't feel like a cop" she says about the character that's famous for travelling in a police box 😂 In all seriousness I do agree with the actual point, just couldn't help poking
I know it comes across badly, but this is one moment I'll give to the Dr US procedurals often need that moment, but in the UK it's a different feel The Dr comes across as wanting to help, but not wanting to cross a privacy threshold rather than a legal one it's a fine margin and many UK citizens won't agree
A main crit I have for ALL of Chib's episodes is, he wrote the Doctor to be totally non-violent. Before the Doctor was only violent when necessary and as a last resort. But as he writes the Doctor all forms of violence are out. That would work out fine, IF you knew HOW to resolve plot lines without violence. Chibs either didn't have the time in each episode or he just didn't have the imagination to write innovative solutions to problems without resorting to violence. So what does he do? He has the OTHER characters solve the problems using violence and has the Doctor scold them for it. I think that's partially what Whittaker's Doctor gets the bad rep of being "preachy". Arachnids is a good example on how North's character solved an issue with violence and the Doctor yells at him for it. Ryan blasts the Space Nazi, the British soldiers blow up the Sontarans in Flux, the Chinese pirate kills a Sea Devil and this even happened in the pilot when the Doctor yelled at Karl for letting Tim Shaw fall. OTHER characters solve the problems that the Doctor is meant to.
The one counterpoint episode is Kerblam. If I remember right the doctor sets all the bombs to explode in the room the bad guy is in and then just walks away claiming it's not her problem. And she destroyed countless packages from countless people across the galaxy for no reason which is just why? "I set all the bombs to explode but it's his fault for dying, he should have left the room if he didn't want to die" is horrible. Even for a villain. The choice to have spiders eat each other and then starve if they don't suffocate before is "non-violent" to a psychopatic degree.
@@HotDogTimeMachine385 I would say she's also very inconsistent. I mean the triple genocide in Flux shows how wide the pendulum swings. Of course this all gets wiped away in Jodie's finale apparently.
The Doctor has been non-violent for nearly 59 years. Except when they are not. To be honest, it's just the nature of the show and nothing new about that.
Honestly I think the morals in this episode lead more towards Jack. Shooting the spiders, imo, is MUCH more humane then locking these creatures in a room to slowly starve to death surrounded by one another. That's just a terrible way to die in comparison.
Arachnids are predators, putting multiple spiders in a cage together usually ends up with one alive because they kill each other if they're hungry or stressed. Also they were suffocating because they were too big to absorb oxygen. I wanted to share some science only to realize this makes the story so much worse
I don't think it's been the case that I've flat-out _agreed with_ a character who's meant to be an outright villain before, at least defo not in Doctor Who, but this episode managed it.
…interesting point. Same could be said of the Amazon-allegory episode. Wasn’t the “villain” just a stressed-out worker? But I may be misremembering, as I can never bring myself to rewatch Chibnall’s era. 🤷🏼♂️
@@michaelreindel6975 The villain's goals were noble and were in the right, but the way he went about it was to murder thousands of innocent people, which I still think should put him firmly in the wrong. The episode should have ended with the Doctor stopping his plan and toppling space Amazon, honestly.
@@kylejones8289 She might have toppled space amazon when she set ALL of the robot workers to blow up all of the packages and killed the villain. That had to be a lot of upset customers lol. Wait, why did she destroy all the packages from random people across the galaxy. She also triggered the bombs and blew up the bad guy and pretended it's not her fault. "I don't use guns, but I can trigger a bomb and then pretend it's the bad guy's fault for standing there" 13th Doctor xD
This episode made me absolutely livid because The Doctor dealt with the spiders in the most incomprehensively cruel manner possible: Trapping them and forcing them to slowly die of starvation or thirst, insisting that it's more dignified than shooting them, and thenacting like we should have preferred this outcome for them over them dying quickly. I don't even slightly understand it. From this episode onward I actively wasn't able to enjoy watching this version of The Doctor as a character. Especially since Ten wanted to re-locate the Dalek Humans and not kill them. Wanting to kill them was so out of character and wanting to kill them slowly just make me actively dislike her.
In a way, the morals in this episode are the exact opposite of Daleks in Manhattan. The Daleks have cleaned out tons of humans for Dalek upload and the Doctor is like okay, cool, how can I help you? Not only that, Sec asks him to relocate the Daleks and the Dalek hybrids in his TARDIS and he agrees!
The killing part is even funnier because in Legend of the Sea Devils the Doctor gets angry when a Sea Devil is killed and later in the story Dan proceeds to kill 5 Sea Devils at once.
this is very interesting and I am very glad you are doing these take two videos. I just appreciate this not on the spot review, and it allows for us to look back on these episodes, it with a new view unlike re-watching an at the time review.
14:00 I mean. Id say thats an issue of the writers not having understanding the situation rather than the character. And also, the humane death doctor describes is suffocating to death. Which is arguably one of the least humane ways of death.
In terms of the “writers don’t get it vs. character doesn’t get it,” I consider that a distinction without a difference. It may well be that the writers don’t understand something but when they put those words into the mouth of a character then they’ve injected their misunderstanding into the character.
Thanks for that. One thing I've been saying for a long time is that there are some small scenes in season 11 that establish Yas' interest in the doctor and her queerness from pretty early on. It's very honest and self critical of you to say that your own biases against this kind of ship, not wanting it, allowed you to gloss over and forget about some of these smaller moments of character development, but acknowledgeing them on a second viewing, knowing where the story ends up.
I hate that the Doctor thought locking up a bunch of spiders to let them eat each other and starve to death was more humane than just shooting them. I'm arachnophobic as fuck so didn't love the episode as it was, but that was such a shitty moral judgement call it's when I started losing interest.
@@audleyshaypurdyce It is indeed bad writing, because - contrary to popular belief - the Doctor doesn't actually state that this is her plan. Instead, the zoologist/spider expert is the one who actually says it.
I enjoy this one , a very basic john pertwee styled story. I can definitely see the roots of thasmin with with the mom comment , but could be also be interpret as the family jumping to conclusions given how workaholic yaz is for her to suddenly bring friends over naturally they would ask if she seeing any of them given she asks Ryan the same question.
@@nightowl8477 Yeah that was my idea for the novel, I was certain I had an idea for the episode on-screen... No wait, it was the same idea. Dr lite, with the entire episode shot from the spiders pov
this episode made me drop the show. it's so infuriating that the doctor doesn't even *try* to deal with the spiders in a way that doesn't result in their death. like, surely she'd know that starving spiders in confined spaces resort to cannibalism? what happened to never cruel nor cowardly? if you're gonna kill them then surely shooting is the quickest and least painful option. this whole story lacked all sorts of depth. there was no exploration of the moral conflict because the doctor is always right, without question so shut up kids, the teacher is talking. it's not even a story, it's a situation that is hollow and goes out of its way to dodge any kind of complexity it could've had. it's an infuriating, lackluster waste of time. absolutely hate this ep.
The message I took from this episode is that Trump is right but for all the wrong reasons, and I don't think that's what they wanted to convey. Like seriously, how is shooting the spider that is suffering due to its giant size a negative for anyone. First they are out of danger, and the spider is out of pain.
Don't you dare shoot the spiders. It's much kinder to let them starve to death. I know there's supposed to be some kind of commentary on America's gun culture (which DW really likes doing) but that was just a really weird kind of confusing take.
This one’s almost a preechy don’t build hotels on rubbish dumps and not expect giant killer spiders… I often think that there’s good ideas, just that it’s all undercooked. I forget though that RTD was doing doctor who long before he did doctor who. Re-watched dark season not long ago and still a classic now. And I recall RTD did something with a series called why don’t you which was also doctor who like. What gets me is that Star Trek the next generation or say voyager or say friends can write 20 episodes (few are duds) and have them all hit the mark. Yet this time and again just doesn’t seem to work… for 10 episodes
Oh and if you’ve time at some point watch dark season as it’s only 6 episodes and 2 stories. I know it’s children tv but it is rather dark and adult. And dam good for its time. Eldridge needs to be in doctor who
Love the hair! Great review, and I totally agree on a) so they just gonna kill the spiders, nothing else??? b) how this series has characters SPEAK the plot instead of act it
Honestly, so much of the Chibnall era on paper, bulletpointed, sounds solid as hell! It just really blows that they are pretty regularly executed poorly.
Don't want to give this story the benefit of the doubt, doesn't really deserve it, on the subject of locking the spiders up, since food is mentioned to be in the safe room, I believe that the Doctor thought, locking them up would stop the spiders growing and they'd live off the food till they died. It's poorly explained in the episode. Another example is Vanquishers, The Doctor's plan is to find a way to reverse the effects of Flux, a possible way of doing this is revealed by the Ravagers, therefore it's possible that happened off screen, the lack of verbal confirmation makes it unclear if the universe is restored or like in Logopolis, a bunch of the universe might just be gone now.
I always thought the "You're Fired!" Was meant to be a nod to "The Apprentice".... since he was supposed to be a Trump Character..... but in the UK it doesn't work because its presented over here by Alan Sugar...... so maybe it isn't an in joke - all I know is I really hate it!
You're right to hate it... but it works *_most_* in the UK, because it's a reference to the sub-par knock-offs that occurred The main antagonist here is a copy of something that was successful At the time that had already happened in entertainment and the show was predicting that it would happen politically, which it has
My opinion on this episode seems to have gone in the exact opposite direction. I remember really enjoying it on initial broadcast, largely because it was around Halloween and I was in the mood for a somewhat goofy creature feature (plus, I'm an arachnophobe, so it was bound to work in some regard). At the same time though, I could see that it wasn't a perfect episode, and as time's gone on and the weaknesses I associated with this episode - the ham-fisted shallow political commentary; the underwhelming villains; awkward pacing with abrupt endings; cack-handed attempts at representation; the Doctor's weird morality (like I mentioned last week, this is Chibnall putting more emphasis on the aesthetics of violence as opposed to the act itself) - became more and more prevalent in this era, I've definitely soured on this episode a lot
"The subtext is just the text" yeeeeep thats why any 'arc' goes as far as "characters point out arc is happening. back to plot" and theres nothing deeper to explore. This is why I've been scratching my head for 3 seasons going 'why is this SO bad?' not even just Filler Not Great but bafflingly amateur... All we can do with Swarm, Azure, Vinder, Ruth, the grand serpant, Ashard, the master, Tzim Shaw, Dan's Parents, Diane, Kate, Bel, the watch AND tecteun (im not going to list every side character but like ... if every antagonist and every side character are at equal contribution or threat, no one really does anything substantial and side characters should still Affect the plot... and appear to have lives, not like "hi, im a man who doesnt trust anyone. every time I speak, I will remind everyone that I dont trust anyone"). All they can do is have them show up, explain verbatim what their single function is, and then either die or go home with nothing more to contribute. They're all interchangable mechanical plot functions to be lifted out or dropped in as they are needed to explain something an already existing character could do (or the MC's could find out organically on their own instead of the master or tecteun monologing it to greenscreen). And if they ARE affecting the plot, they're compelled to point out how they're affecting the plot in case we missed it. "Thats what I call an inner conflict" "How's this for fire and fury" "Why would they do that????? ... unless ... of course!" Oddly Jack Robinson is such an overthetop caricature that he's the only recurring one that stands out to me as too characterful to get stuck in 'just a function'. His role is still on the nose and exposition heavy, but his presence is so absurd that he defies any chance of being wooden. Almost like the character's design is too spirited, too rebellious in concept. He's the only one that appears to have strong desires outside of the plot and is too fun to write to toss aside carelessly. He's still the same "hi Im basically trump and I like to shoot things" but he's the only one that gets any organic control over the plot and manages to win because 'thats just what he'd do'. And it seems to me why I like Tesla or Rosa but not Space Racist or Edison because they're fine lifting real peoples events (so theres inherently Some nuance by the fleshed out people they're copying) but as soon as they try to write a story around it, (even if those people are real too) the people they interact with are just hollow stooges to make the plot happen. The general is an idiot, Edison is a one-note greed machine, etc. (Jack is still a poorly written character, hes just the most lively poorly written character) And what bothers me more; this is a consistent formula. Emotional Story Moment that doesnt actually add much (if there even is one, could be Whitaker looking at gallifrey or someone telling Yaz she's great) + Random Inconsequential Setting (groundhog day and sea devils are great concepts but the emotional stuff tends to be irrelevant and stops the plot, you could edit any of the Yaz/Doc moments into any episode with no difference) + Side Character Of The Week (Side characters always get introduced and explain their backstory but then get complete Arc focus, if there is one at all, and Whitaker/Yaz/Dans become functions in their own stories. Midnight forces the doctor to interact with new people but everyone has lives outside of the plot and Tennant still gets focused on as the tension rises. Whitaker may as well not be there half the time and the other half she's there so she can sonic, explain, lecture, stop to talk about how she's awkward, pretend to sacrifice anything but not, rinse repeat. She has a few buttons that get pressed but the plots rarely explore her choices. The result is: Dumb down everything so Side Character Of The Week (or the doctor in finales) can win and every other Good character can stand by collectively cheering that they all won through the power of friendship and every other Bad character has died through the power of Ran Out Of Exposition. Everyone else feels boxed in to deliver exposition and then leave or die without much clear motivation for being involved in the first place. Sigh. Sorry about the constant long comments each video. Ive been mulling on this for three seasons and its finally hit me that it was never going to explore anything beyond what a first draft would.
The “text being just the subtext” problem with Chibnall’s lines is something I couldn’t put my finger on for the longest time, but yeah, that’s one of my BIGGEST problems with this era. SHOW DON’T TELL! Even some of the lines that I like, for example “Half an hour ago I was a white-headed Scotsman” is just too on the nose. Why couldn’t it be more subtle? “Sorry, I’m without my attack eyebrows and it’s really throwing me off” “Sorry, still processing the new shape of, all, this…” “Sorry; early days, something’s always playing catch up”
I think we, the audience, should at least know he has a panic room beforehand. If the Doctor just correctly assumes he has one and that's our first time hearing about it too, that feels very much like just pulling the solution out of thin air. A bad setup (which this was) is better than no setup at all.
I have a *real* soft spot for this episode. It's not a good episode in a story sense, but the spiders are super creepy and I do love the portrayal of Jack Robertson, it's so clear the actor is having a great time playing this Trumplike figure!
Just a thought: the Moffat era was often criticised for its over-complicated plotting. I'm wondering whether a lot of Chibnall's clumsy, on-the-nose writing is his attempt to compensate for that. If it is, then i's definitely over-compensating because his era has way too many situations where that happens to quite an extreme degree. Regardless though, this is bad writing, and one of many reasons why I don't particularly like this era.
I was thinking this while watching LOTSD. I noticed 13 has a tendency to explain exactly how things are happening down to the last detail; how and why the bad guy's ship functions, what the plan is and how it'll happen and why it's bad. It's usually with a lot of technobabble followed by explaining how said technobabble works.
I don't know if I mentioned this before, but that Jack guy seems to have an "Anything he can do, I can do better" attitude to Trump, which may or may not be how they justify having him be a Trump expy and be himself at the same time.
I was confused by the panic room, as this is meant to be a hotel! One of his businesses, not a personal residence. So why is there even a panic room there? I may have missed a comment, this is certainly an episode I'm not rewatching. The too on-the-nose, no subtext writing remains a problem for Chris throughout. But, it's the instantly defused cliff hangers that grate.
So, yeah… I am one who firmly believes the Chibnall/Jodie era is overhated… but this ep? Not so much. It def deserves the criticism. This thing… it’s not good.
For me this story is competent but uneventful. A generic concept, that doesn't really do anything new with the story or doesn't give into the gimmick, present itself in the style of a 50s B-Movie. It feels like they needed to do a present day Earth story because every other season had one at this point, it's a boring run around Sheffield with a generic monster idea. It achieves what it sets out to do, but what it does is really boring, which is a problem with Chibnall. Whether intentional or as a result of interference, alot of the time he's just redoing stuff done better else, and you can feel his lack of interest, these stories are the mandatory classes he's made to take which take time away from the more interesting lessons (story ideas) which he has more investment in.
Having recently rewatched your review of Warriors of the Deep with Stubagfu, I know how much distaste you have for it. But let’s face it, Warriors is better than Arachnids, actually, IMO, Warriors is better than most of this era.
It's fluff but I can't lie. I had fun with it overall. The morales are dubious but I don't care enough for it to bother me. Robertson is a weird trump but not trump and while annoying it largely doesn't bother me.
I watched ten minutes of this and then turned it off. For me, the end of the Jodie Whittaker era of Doctor Who. Bring on the regeneration special and a new Doctor.
This is the second most offensive ending of a dr who episode ive ever seen. Hell, they couldve tacked on the ending to Heaven Sent and it'd still be in my top 10 least favourite episodes. They didnt tack it on. Get in the bin Arachnids. I haven't bothered watching dr who since this aired. Just gimme jodie's regen in a vid so i can stop boycotting chibnall
I don't know, I wouldn't say being subtle and having subtext automatically means it is better writing than stating the subtext. It is different and more blunt and maybe in this case it doesn't work. But that doesn't mean is is always bad. Like there are a few shows or movies that would benefit at being more blunt about their messaging.
Nope, it *absolutely* is... Because you deprive the audience of natural sounding dialogue AND the opportunity to determine their own interpretation of dialogue
Possibly my least favourite episode of the revival along with The Vanquishers. I genuinely don’t have much to credit to this story. I don’t know what Chibnall was smoking when he wrote this but I don’t want any.
I’ve only seen this once and I got so bored I ended up formatting an essay with the video playing in the corner. I still feel that was a wise decision. I didn’t hate it as much Tsuranga though. That’s truly the worst episode of the show ever produced
Chibnall. 🤦🏼♂️ His entire era feels like oddly expensive, but amateurishly executed, fan videos. It’s not just his clunky, expository style… it’s also actors, directors, et al. who clearly don’t know what to do with his clunky, expository style.
Yeah, if you have to explain the subtext to the audience, then it is bad writing and not only that, its not treating the audience with the respect either.
The thing that bugged me most about this episode is how they had a two way bet with a Trump analogue in a universe where Trump himself exists. Trump is in many ways so much a cartoonish villain in real life that any Trump analogue in a work of fiction has to be handled very skillfully to ever work. That's certainly beyond Chibnall's abilities as a writer.
I feel like those things were only tolerable this time because I do not have to listen to the filth coming out of trumps mouth on a daily basis anymore. I am fine with doctor who referencing politics, but they just did it so badly in this episode so it was painful on top of the pain of living through it.
This was one of my favorite episodes of that season. I enjoyed the ridiculous political parody. Also there have been copycat rich people in RL that want to emulate Trump (Bloomberg, Schultz, etc).
The thing about the spider being killed via gunshot is that guns aren't common in the UK. Yes, we can own one, but we have to jump through various hoops to get a licence: psychological profiling; doctor's reports, personal references etc. Seeing as Doctor Who is a British show, a British attitude to guns is perfectly acceptable and indeed expected, especially as children watch it as well. As for the Doctor's moral stance on this, she wasn't objecting to the death of the spider per se, it was how it died. Jack's actions were merciless; he had no idea that the big spider was dying when he killed it. Also, and I've not seen it for a while, but I thought the intention was to lead the spider away from the hotel with the tea tree oil and then release the smaller spiders using the same method. That may just be my interpretation of events though. Also, the title is a pun on the Sex Pistols' seminal track Anarchy in the UK, and was actually suggested by Demons of the Punjab/Fugitive of the Judoon writer Vinay Patel.
Admittedly, I haven't watched the episode in a couple years, but I thought the Doctor's plan was to lead all of the spiders into the safe room and leave them to die in there.
@@hiygamer I rewatched this episode last night, and you're right in that the spiders were going to die either way. However, as the 12th Doctor says in Mummy on the Orient Express, sometimes the only choices you have are bad ones, but you still have to choose. The 13th Doctor's objection to using guns is perfectly in character (the First Doctor's collection of guns in The Gunfighters notwithstanding) and, as I've already intimated, is a very British approach to them. Unless someone has a valid reason for carrying a gun: soldier; police officer of a specific branch of the service etc., we tend to be wary of gun owners and find them intimidating. In fact, it's a matter of great frustration that, despite the many mass shootings the US has suffered, gun ownership is seen as an inalienable right. Going back to my reference to the police, and this is more about a point that was brought up at the time, Yaz certainly wouldn't have had a gun, as she was still in her probationary period and in all likelihood wouldn't need one anyway, unless she moved to a firearms squad or something. It's a cultural difference which a lot of non-Brits struggle to understand sometimes. As for the episode itself, I thoroughly enjoyed it as I did at the time. Yes, it's a bit daft in places, but that's Doctor Who for you. For me at least, Chris Chibnall did a great job with his first three solo-credited episodes. I'll be watching The Tsuranga Conundrum tonight probably, but I'll share my thoughts on that in the appropriate video.
Being English, I think the point of The Doctor being so furious about the spider being shot, is simple. In Britain guns are illegal. And it is well known over here that we made it a joke about Americans shooting....things. It is a bad thing to try to write into the script, but I believe that was what Chipnall was trying to say.
I liked it but its really forgettable, or is it fine and forgettable. Its fine. And th human villain is, while that could have been better, eem something happening to him as karma, i like him even if he is a terrible businessman villain, but they exist so, he is good. Just he needed something more happening karmic to him later like a spider trapping him and he saved in the nick of an eye or something. And no i like he is pathetic, ilike e some pathetic but really harmful and detestable villains. (and i am fine he is very orange man like, orange man is basically a pathetic supervillain)
Well in terms of writing I found this episode as bad as the previous 3, only this one introduced the _really_ clichéed cartoony elements that made it all the worse.
My video on the issue of the BBC's support of Transphobia: th-cam.com/video/aN4uc0HZrWE/w-d-xo.html
Shaun's 1st video, which includes some additional confirmed information: th-cam.com/video/b4buJMMiwcg/w-d-xo.html
Shaun’s 2nd video, which follows how the BBC is trying to dodge accountability for all of this: th-cam.com/video/qfjTG6SVjmQ/w-d-xo.html
Shaun’s recent 3rd video: th-cam.com/video/fRn1UZ4fhdE/w-d-xo.html
Laura Kate Dale's recent protest speech outside the BBC offices: th-cam.com/video/hBjGnWkwAjI/w-d-xo.html
Quick question is your name now Vera?
@@c17sam90 I believe she does go by Vera mostly, at least on this channel! That's how I would address her :)
I'm actually surprised you didn't hammer this point harder: Letting the spiders essentially starve to death is arguably the LEAST moral way to kill them! The sheer amount of suffering this would cause is far greater than shooting them would ever cause. I CANNOT believe the show put this counterpoint in the dialogue ("shooting's quicker") and then DIDN'T respond to it! I hate when the villain is right in their criticism and the show acts like they're wrong.
Were they starving to death or where they suffocating because of their mutation. Or was just the big one suffocating. I haven't seen the ep in a while and don't feel like rewatching it. There's a limit to the size of insects and arachnids, any bigger and they can't absorb oxygen.
You could go as far as to say they were suffocating the moment they started mutating. That would probably explain the aggression lol
@@HotDogTimeMachine385 To tells you the truth, I don't remember specifically if they were all doomed to suffocate or if they were just going to starve. But I'm glad you brought this up, because either way...that is NOT a humane way to die. Like, they use the dignity argument, but how, 13th Doctor, is a slow painful death more dignified than a quick one? Sorry to get too dark, but...JESUS Doctor Who! Why?
Not to mention they'd be suffocating to death in a relatively tiny space for that amount of huge spiders. They'd get even more panicked and angry and probably start killing each other, too. There is literally nothing humane about the Doctor's suggestion and it BAFFLES ME that the writers didn't see that. This episode is almost single-handedly responsible for me falling off the Chibnall wagon back when it aired (even though I'd been mostly enjoying series 11 up until this) because it bothered me that much
@@noellova The problem is that this isn't the 13th Doctor's suggestion, at least it's not stated by her in the dialogue. Instead, it's the zoologist/spider specialist who actually says it. Poor writing by Chibnall leaves the matter unresolved and ambiguous.
"The Doctor shouldn't feel like a cop" she says about the character that's famous for travelling in a police box 😂
In all seriousness I do agree with the actual point, just couldn't help poking
That remined me of Capaldi's line in The Girl Who Died: "I'm not actually the police, that's just what it says on the box."
Chibnall has a lot of experience writing cop shows, so it's likely he inadvertently dug up some old familiar tropes while writing this
I know it comes across badly, but this is one moment I'll give to the Dr
US procedurals often need that moment, but in the UK it's a different feel
The Dr comes across as wanting to help, but not wanting to cross a privacy threshold rather than a legal one
it's a fine margin and many UK citizens won't agree
"Some things are tolerable" is the most praise I can give to this story.
Addendum : "assuming you expect them to BE terrible"
A main crit I have for ALL of Chib's episodes is, he wrote the Doctor to be totally non-violent. Before the Doctor was only violent when necessary and as a last resort. But as he writes the Doctor all forms of violence are out. That would work out fine, IF you knew HOW to resolve plot lines without violence. Chibs either didn't have the time in each episode or he just didn't have the imagination to write innovative solutions to problems without resorting to violence. So what does he do? He has the OTHER characters solve the problems using violence and has the Doctor scold them for it. I think that's partially what Whittaker's Doctor gets the bad rep of being "preachy". Arachnids is a good example on how North's character solved an issue with violence and the Doctor yells at him for it. Ryan blasts the Space Nazi, the British soldiers blow up the Sontarans in Flux, the Chinese pirate kills a Sea Devil and this even happened in the pilot when the Doctor yelled at Karl for letting Tim Shaw fall. OTHER characters solve the problems that the Doctor is meant to.
The one counterpoint episode is Kerblam. If I remember right the doctor sets all the bombs to explode in the room the bad guy is in and then just walks away claiming it's not her problem. And she destroyed countless packages from countless people across the galaxy for no reason which is just why?
"I set all the bombs to explode but it's his fault for dying, he should have left the room if he didn't want to die" is horrible. Even for a villain.
The choice to have spiders eat each other and then starve if they don't suffocate before is "non-violent" to a psychopatic degree.
@@HotDogTimeMachine385 I would say she's also very inconsistent. I mean the triple genocide in Flux shows how wide the pendulum swings. Of course this all gets wiped away in Jodie's finale apparently.
The Doctor has been non-violent for nearly 59 years. Except when they are not. To be honest, it's just the nature of the show and nothing new about that.
to be fair, she had solved the Sontaran issue without violence. The guy blew them up for no reason when they were already retreating.
@@marvelsomething1952 Yeah. But on Dan’s end she had him blow up the shipyard, so not completely hands clean.
Honestly I think the morals in this episode lead more towards Jack. Shooting the spiders, imo, is MUCH more humane then locking these creatures in a room to slowly starve to death surrounded by one another. That's just a terrible way to die in comparison.
Arachnids are predators, putting multiple spiders in a cage together usually ends up with one alive because they kill each other if they're hungry or stressed.
Also they were suffocating because they were too big to absorb oxygen.
I wanted to share some science only to realize this makes the story so much worse
I don't think it's been the case that I've flat-out _agreed with_ a character who's meant to be an outright villain before, at least defo not in Doctor Who, but this episode managed it.
…interesting point. Same could be said of the Amazon-allegory episode. Wasn’t the “villain” just a stressed-out worker? But I may be misremembering, as I can never bring myself to rewatch Chibnall’s era. 🤷🏼♂️
@@michaelreindel6975 The villain's goals were noble and were in the right, but the way he went about it was to murder thousands of innocent people, which I still think should put him firmly in the wrong. The episode should have ended with the Doctor stopping his plan and toppling space Amazon, honestly.
@@kylejones8289 She might have toppled space amazon when she set ALL of the robot workers to blow up all of the packages and killed the villain. That had to be a lot of upset customers lol.
Wait, why did she destroy all the packages from random people across the galaxy. She also triggered the bombs and blew up the bad guy and pretended it's not her fault. "I don't use guns, but I can trigger a bomb and then pretend it's the bad guy's fault for standing there" 13th Doctor xD
Before this video even starts i just want to say i appreciate everything you do and i think youre a great human being 🥰
This episode made me absolutely livid because The Doctor dealt with the spiders in the most incomprehensively cruel manner possible: Trapping them and forcing them to slowly die of starvation or thirst, insisting that it's more dignified than shooting them, and thenacting like we should have preferred this outcome for them over them dying quickly. I don't even slightly understand it. From this episode onward I actively wasn't able to enjoy watching this version of The Doctor as a character. Especially since Ten wanted to re-locate the Dalek Humans and not kill them. Wanting to kill them was so out of character and wanting to kill them slowly just make me actively dislike her.
I would say putting the spiders in the room to make them dying slowly is worst than shooting them lol
In a way, the morals in this episode are the exact opposite of Daleks in Manhattan. The Daleks have cleaned out tons of humans for Dalek upload and the Doctor is like okay, cool, how can I help you? Not only that, Sec asks him to relocate the Daleks and the Dalek hybrids in his TARDIS and he agrees!
I can't believe that you rewatched it. I think the post production people are heroes for doing so. I hope they got a bonus.
The killing part is even funnier because in Legend of the Sea Devils the Doctor gets angry when a Sea Devil is killed and later in the story Dan proceeds to kill 5 Sea Devils at once.
I had no problem with this bit. The Dcotor wasn't in that scene. Not the first time the companions act with a different moral compass to the Doctor.
this is very interesting and I am very glad you are doing these take two videos.
I just appreciate this not on the spot review, and it allows for us to look back on these episodes, it with a new view unlike re-watching an at the time review.
14:00
I mean. Id say thats an issue of the writers not having understanding the situation rather than the character.
And also, the humane death doctor describes is suffocating to death. Which is arguably one of the least humane ways of death.
In terms of the “writers don’t get it vs. character doesn’t get it,” I consider that a distinction without a difference. It may well be that the writers don’t understand something but when they put those words into the mouth of a character then they’ve injected their misunderstanding into the character.
Thanks for that. One thing I've been saying for a long time is that there are some small scenes in season 11 that establish Yas' interest in the doctor and her queerness from pretty early on.
It's very honest and self critical of you to say that your own biases against this kind of ship, not wanting it, allowed you to gloss over and forget about some of these smaller moments of character development, but acknowledgeing them on a second viewing, knowing where the story ends up.
I just noticed the Luisa figure on your shelf. Love it! ❤
I hate that the Doctor thought locking up a bunch of spiders to let them eat each other and starve to death was more humane than just shooting them. I'm arachnophobic as fuck so didn't love the episode as it was, but that was such a shitty moral judgement call it's when I started losing interest.
Just bad writing, so MUCH bad writing 😢
@@audleyshaypurdyce It is indeed bad writing, because - contrary to popular belief - the Doctor doesn't actually state that this is her plan. Instead, the zoologist/spider expert is the one who actually says it.
I enjoy this one , a very basic john pertwee styled story. I can definitely see the roots of thasmin with with the mom comment , but could be also be interpret as the family jumping to conclusions given how workaholic yaz is for her to suddenly bring friends over naturally they would ask if she seeing any of them given she asks Ryan the same question.
I think I once had a suggestion for how to improve this... forgotten it now. May have been drunk at the time
Spiders'perspective.
@@nightowl8477 Yeah that was my idea for the novel, I was certain I had an idea for the episode on-screen...
No wait, it was the same idea. Dr lite, with the entire episode shot from the spiders pov
don't worry they may have been drunk when they wrote it
this episode made me drop the show. it's so infuriating that the doctor doesn't even *try* to deal with the spiders in a way that doesn't result in their death. like, surely she'd know that starving spiders in confined spaces resort to cannibalism? what happened to never cruel nor cowardly? if you're gonna kill them then surely shooting is the quickest and least painful option. this whole story lacked all sorts of depth. there was no exploration of the moral conflict because the doctor is always right, without question so shut up kids, the teacher is talking. it's not even a story, it's a situation that is hollow and goes out of its way to dodge any kind of complexity it could've had. it's an infuriating, lackluster waste of time. absolutely hate this ep.
Oh thank goodness. I was really afraid I'd missed something and the episode was better than I thought.
The message I took from this episode is that Trump is right but for all the wrong reasons, and I don't think that's what they wanted to convey.
Like seriously, how is shooting the spider that is suffering due to its giant size a negative for anyone. First they are out of danger, and the spider is out of pain.
I think if you had said Trump is occasionally right but mostly accidentally I would agree.
Don't you dare shoot the spiders. It's much kinder to let them starve to death.
I know there's supposed to be some kind of commentary on America's gun culture (which DW really likes doing) but that was just a really weird kind of confusing take.
I feel like the humane way to kill the spiders would've been to just shoot them. Slowly starving them to death is a lot more painful.
The best part of this episode is when Ryan does shadow puppets
I might have blinked and missed it but did they explain what happened to the spider that killed Yaz's neighbour?
Nope.
This one’s almost a preechy don’t build hotels on rubbish dumps and not expect giant killer spiders… I often think that there’s good ideas, just that it’s all undercooked.
I forget though that RTD was doing doctor who long before he did doctor who.
Re-watched dark season not long ago and still a classic now. And I recall RTD did something with a series called why don’t you which was also doctor who like.
What gets me is that Star Trek the next generation or say voyager or say friends can write 20 episodes (few are duds) and have them all hit the mark. Yet this time and again just doesn’t seem to work… for 10 episodes
Oh and if you’ve time at some point watch dark season as it’s only 6 episodes and 2 stories. I know it’s children tv but it is rather dark and adult. And dam good for its time. Eldridge needs to be in doctor who
Love the hair! Great review, and I totally agree on a) so they just gonna kill the spiders, nothing else??? b) how this series has characters SPEAK the plot instead of act it
That time they did a bad remake of "The Green Death".
Honestly, so much of the Chibnall era on paper, bulletpointed, sounds solid as hell! It just really blows that they are pretty regularly executed poorly.
Don't want to give this story the benefit of the doubt, doesn't really deserve it, on the subject of locking the spiders up, since food is mentioned to be in the safe room, I believe that the Doctor thought, locking them up would stop the spiders growing and they'd live off the food till they died. It's poorly explained in the episode. Another example is Vanquishers, The Doctor's plan is to find a way to reverse the effects of Flux, a possible way of doing this is revealed by the Ravagers, therefore it's possible that happened off screen, the lack of verbal confirmation makes it unclear if the universe is restored or like in Logopolis, a bunch of the universe might just be gone now.
The best thing about this episode was the title.
I always thought the "You're Fired!" Was meant to be a nod to "The Apprentice".... since he was supposed to be a Trump Character..... but in the UK it doesn't work because its presented over here by Alan Sugar...... so maybe it isn't an in joke - all I know is I really hate it!
You're right to hate it... but it works *_most_* in the UK, because it's a reference to the sub-par knock-offs that occurred
The main antagonist here is a copy of something that was successful
At the time that had already happened in entertainment
and the show was predicting that it would happen politically, which it has
My opinion on this episode seems to have gone in the exact opposite direction. I remember really enjoying it on initial broadcast, largely because it was around Halloween and I was in the mood for a somewhat goofy creature feature (plus, I'm an arachnophobe, so it was bound to work in some regard). At the same time though, I could see that it wasn't a perfect episode, and as time's gone on and the weaknesses I associated with this episode - the ham-fisted shallow political commentary; the underwhelming villains; awkward pacing with abrupt endings; cack-handed attempts at representation; the Doctor's weird morality (like I mentioned last week, this is Chibnall putting more emphasis on the aesthetics of violence as opposed to the act itself) - became more and more prevalent in this era, I've definitely soured on this episode a lot
I think it’s campy fun, but that’s not a hill I care to die on.
You're right 😇
You shouldn't 😇
Monty Python's fish-slapping scene was just as silly and about 45 *_MINUTES_* shorter 😁
"The subtext is just the text"
yeeeeep thats why any 'arc' goes as far as "characters point out arc is happening. back to plot" and theres nothing deeper to explore.
This is why I've been scratching my head for 3 seasons going 'why is this SO bad?' not even just Filler Not Great but bafflingly amateur...
All we can do with Swarm, Azure, Vinder, Ruth, the grand serpant, Ashard, the master, Tzim Shaw, Dan's Parents, Diane, Kate, Bel, the watch AND tecteun (im not going to list every side character but like ... if every antagonist and every side character are at equal contribution or threat, no one really does anything substantial and side characters should still Affect the plot... and appear to have lives, not like "hi, im a man who doesnt trust anyone. every time I speak, I will remind everyone that I dont trust anyone").
All they can do is have them show up, explain verbatim what their single function is, and then either die or go home with nothing more to contribute. They're all interchangable mechanical plot functions to be lifted out or dropped in as they are needed to explain something an already existing character could do (or the MC's could find out organically on their own instead of the master or tecteun monologing it to greenscreen). And if they ARE affecting the plot, they're compelled to point out how they're affecting the plot in case we missed it. "Thats what I call an inner conflict" "How's this for fire and fury" "Why would they do that????? ... unless ... of course!"
Oddly Jack Robinson is such an overthetop caricature that he's the only recurring one that stands out to me as too characterful to get stuck in 'just a function'. His role is still on the nose and exposition heavy, but his presence is so absurd that he defies any chance of being wooden. Almost like the character's design is too spirited, too rebellious in concept. He's the only one that appears to have strong desires outside of the plot and is too fun to write to toss aside carelessly. He's still the same "hi Im basically trump and I like to shoot things" but he's the only one that gets any organic control over the plot and manages to win because 'thats just what he'd do'. And it seems to me why I like Tesla or Rosa but not Space Racist or Edison because they're fine lifting real peoples events (so theres inherently Some nuance by the fleshed out people they're copying) but as soon as they try to write a story around it, (even if those people are real too) the people they interact with are just hollow stooges to make the plot happen. The general is an idiot, Edison is a one-note greed machine, etc. (Jack is still a poorly written character, hes just the most lively poorly written character)
And what bothers me more; this is a consistent formula.
Emotional Story Moment that doesnt actually add much (if there even is one, could be Whitaker looking at gallifrey or someone telling Yaz she's great) + Random Inconsequential Setting (groundhog day and sea devils are great concepts but the emotional stuff tends to be irrelevant and stops the plot, you could edit any of the Yaz/Doc moments into any episode with no difference) + Side Character Of The Week (Side characters always get introduced and explain their backstory but then get complete Arc focus, if there is one at all, and Whitaker/Yaz/Dans become functions in their own stories. Midnight forces the doctor to interact with new people but everyone has lives outside of the plot and Tennant still gets focused on as the tension rises. Whitaker may as well not be there half the time and the other half she's there so she can sonic, explain, lecture, stop to talk about how she's awkward, pretend to sacrifice anything but not, rinse repeat. She has a few buttons that get pressed but the plots rarely explore her choices.
The result is: Dumb down everything so Side Character Of The Week (or the doctor in finales) can win and every other Good character can stand by collectively cheering that they all won through the power of friendship and every other Bad character has died through the power of Ran Out Of Exposition. Everyone else feels boxed in to deliver exposition and then leave or die without much clear motivation for being involved in the first place. Sigh.
Sorry about the constant long comments each video. Ive been mulling on this for three seasons and its finally hit me that it was never going to explore anything beyond what a first draft would.
The “text being just the subtext” problem with Chibnall’s lines is something I couldn’t put my finger on for the longest time, but yeah, that’s one of my BIGGEST problems with this era.
SHOW DON’T TELL!
Even some of the lines that I like, for example “Half an hour ago I was a white-headed Scotsman” is just too on the nose. Why couldn’t it be more subtle?
“Sorry, I’m without my attack eyebrows and it’s really throwing me off”
“Sorry, still processing the new shape of, all, this…”
“Sorry; early days, something’s always playing catch up”
I think we, the audience, should at least know he has a panic room beforehand. If the Doctor just correctly assumes he has one and that's our first time hearing about it too, that feels very much like just pulling the solution out of thin air. A bad setup (which this was) is better than no setup at all.
I didn't even know what a "panic room" was.
I have a *real* soft spot for this episode. It's not a good episode in a story sense, but the spiders are super creepy and I do love the portrayal of Jack Robertson, it's so clear the actor is having a great time playing this Trumplike figure!
Just a thought: the Moffat era was often criticised for its over-complicated plotting. I'm wondering whether a lot of Chibnall's clumsy, on-the-nose writing is his attempt to compensate for that. If it is, then i's definitely over-compensating because his era has way too many situations where that happens to quite an extreme degree. Regardless though, this is bad writing, and one of many reasons why I don't particularly like this era.
I was thinking this while watching LOTSD. I noticed 13 has a tendency to explain exactly how things are happening down to the last detail; how and why the bad guy's ship functions, what the plan is and how it'll happen and why it's bad. It's usually with a lot of technobabble followed by explaining how said technobabble works.
One of the worst episodes , definitely the one with the most psychotic "solution" the Doctor has had for a whole species.
I don't know if I mentioned this before, but that Jack guy seems to have an "Anything he can do, I can do better" attitude to Trump, which may or may not be how they justify having him be a Trump expy and be himself at the same time.
“I know writers who use subtext, and they're all cowards” - Garth Marenghi
I was confused by the panic room, as this is meant to be a hotel! One of his businesses, not a personal residence. So why is there even a panic room there? I may have missed a comment, this is certainly an episode I'm not rewatching. The too on-the-nose, no subtext writing remains a problem for Chris throughout. But, it's the instantly defused cliff hangers that grate.
He mentions he has one in every hotel.
@@CouncilofGeeks Thank you. I thought there might be a line. But, I refuse to rewatch any of Chris' run, they're just too painfully dull.
So, yeah… I am one who firmly believes the Chibnall/Jodie era is overhated… but this ep? Not so much. It def deserves the criticism. This thing… it’s not good.
Agree. Liked most of her run, but NOT this episode.
"You're fired" was also Trump's TV catchphrase, no?
Yeah
For me this story is competent but uneventful. A generic concept, that doesn't really do anything new with the story or doesn't give into the gimmick, present itself in the style of a 50s B-Movie. It feels like they needed to do a present day Earth story because every other season had one at this point, it's a boring run around Sheffield with a generic monster idea. It achieves what it sets out to do, but what it does is really boring, which is a problem with Chibnall. Whether intentional or as a result of interference, alot of the time he's just redoing stuff done better else, and you can feel his lack of interest, these stories are the mandatory classes he's made to take which take time away from the more interesting lessons (story ideas) which he has more investment in.
It falls under, let's do what was done in the Russell era, even if it doesn't make sense anymore or it didn't work the first time.
Arachnids in the UK is easily the WORST episode of the Chibnall era.
easily ? ? ?
there's some pretty piss-poor episodes around...
Sure it's bad, but EASILY worst than the others ? ?
😁😁
@@audleyshaypurdyce Yes there are other poor episodes but this is truly dreadful and definitely the worst.
Having recently rewatched your review of Warriors of the Deep with Stubagfu, I know how much distaste you have for it. But let’s face it, Warriors is better than Arachnids, actually, IMO, Warriors is better than most of this era.
It's fluff but I can't lie. I had fun with it overall. The morales are dubious but I don't care enough for it to bother me.
Robertson is a weird trump but not trump and while annoying it largely doesn't bother me.
honestly I find this just fine, not any worse than any other average episode personally
What do I think about this episode? I do my best NOT to think about it - barf.
I watched ten minutes of this and then turned it off. For me, the end of the Jodie Whittaker era of Doctor Who. Bring on the regeneration special and a new Doctor.
100%
After this it's just a question when the train-wreck would happen
and, oh my, were we put through the wringer to get there
There’s also a comment the Doctor makes in the Series 10 finale that goes along the lines of “like Donald Trump, some things are just inevitable.”
This is the second most offensive ending of a dr who episode ive ever seen. Hell, they couldve tacked on the ending to Heaven Sent and it'd still be in my top 10 least favourite episodes. They didnt tack it on. Get in the bin Arachnids. I haven't bothered watching dr who since this aired. Just gimme jodie's regen in a vid so i can stop boycotting chibnall
I don't know, I wouldn't say being subtle and having subtext automatically means it is better writing than stating the subtext. It is different and more blunt and maybe in this case it doesn't work. But that doesn't mean is is always bad. Like there are a few shows or movies that would benefit at being more blunt about their messaging.
Nope, it *absolutely* is...
Because you deprive the audience of natural sounding dialogue AND the opportunity to determine their own interpretation of dialogue
This is probably the worst episode; fear her is the only one I can think is worse.
Oh, Orphan 55 is probably the worst, in my opinion. BENNI!!!!
You don't rate love and monsters as bad??
Possibly my least favourite episode of the revival along with The Vanquishers. I genuinely don’t have much to credit to this story. I don’t know what Chibnall was smoking when he wrote this but I don’t want any.
I’ve only seen this once and I got so bored I ended up formatting an essay with the video playing in the corner. I still feel that was a wise decision. I didn’t hate it as much Tsuranga though. That’s truly the worst episode of the show ever produced
Awkward pun title? ... ... ... Oh God. Oh God that is a rank one.
Chibnall. 🤦🏼♂️ His entire era feels like oddly expensive, but amateurishly executed, fan videos. It’s not just his clunky, expository style… it’s also actors, directors, et al. who clearly don’t know what to do with his clunky, expository style.
Yeah, if you have to explain the subtext to the audience, then it is bad writing and not only that, its not treating the audience with the respect either.
Okay here me out - I think this episode might be making fun of Trump
The episode *looked* good. Now, if only everyone would just shut up. Seriously. Watch it with no sound.
The thing that bugged me most about this episode is how they had a two way bet with a Trump analogue in a universe where Trump himself exists.
Trump is in many ways so much a cartoonish villain in real life that any Trump analogue in a work of fiction has to be handled very skillfully to ever work. That's certainly beyond Chibnall's abilities as a writer.
I feel like those things were only tolerable this time because I do not have to listen to the filth coming out of trumps mouth on a daily basis anymore. I am fine with doctor who referencing politics, but they just did it so badly in this episode so it was painful on top of the pain of living through it.
My least favorite things Arachnids. The parody of Donald Trump. I didn't like this Episode.
This was one of my favorite episodes of that season. I enjoyed the ridiculous political parody.
Also there have been copycat rich people in RL that want to emulate Trump (Bloomberg, Schultz, etc).
The thing about the spider being killed via gunshot is that guns aren't common in the UK. Yes, we can own one, but we have to jump through various hoops to get a licence: psychological profiling; doctor's reports, personal references etc. Seeing as Doctor Who is a British show, a British attitude to guns is perfectly acceptable and indeed expected, especially as children watch it as well.
As for the Doctor's moral stance on this, she wasn't objecting to the death of the spider per se, it was how it died. Jack's actions were merciless; he had no idea that the big spider was dying when he killed it. Also, and I've not seen it for a while, but I thought the intention was to lead the spider away from the hotel with the tea tree oil and then release the smaller spiders using the same method. That may just be my interpretation of events though.
Also, the title is a pun on the Sex Pistols' seminal track Anarchy in the UK, and was actually suggested by Demons of the Punjab/Fugitive of the Judoon writer Vinay Patel.
Admittedly, I haven't watched the episode in a couple years, but I thought the Doctor's plan was to lead all of the spiders into the safe room and leave them to die in there.
@@hiygamer As I say, that was my interpretation of it. I'll be watching again soon, so maybe I'll pick up on the intent behind it then.
@@hiygamer I rewatched this episode last night, and you're right in that the spiders were going to die either way. However, as the 12th Doctor says in Mummy on the Orient Express, sometimes the only choices you have are bad ones, but you still have to choose. The 13th Doctor's objection to using guns is perfectly in character (the First Doctor's collection of guns in The Gunfighters notwithstanding) and, as I've already intimated, is a very British approach to them. Unless someone has a valid reason for carrying a gun: soldier; police officer of a specific branch of the service etc., we tend to be wary of gun owners and find them intimidating. In fact, it's a matter of great frustration that, despite the many mass shootings the US has suffered, gun ownership is seen as an inalienable right.
Going back to my reference to the police, and this is more about a point that was brought up at the time, Yaz certainly wouldn't have had a gun, as she was still in her probationary period and in all likelihood wouldn't need one anyway, unless she moved to a firearms squad or something. It's a cultural difference which a lot of non-Brits struggle to understand sometimes.
As for the episode itself, I thoroughly enjoyed it as I did at the time. Yes, it's a bit daft in places, but that's Doctor Who for you. For me at least, Chris Chibnall did a great job with his first three solo-credited episodes. I'll be watching The Tsuranga Conundrum tonight probably, but I'll share my thoughts on that in the appropriate video.
Being English, I think the point of The Doctor being so furious about the spider being shot, is simple.
In Britain guns are illegal. And it is well known over here that we made it a joke about Americans shooting....things.
It is a bad thing to try to write into the script, but I believe that was what Chipnall was trying to say.
I liked it but its really forgettable, or is it fine and forgettable. Its fine.
And th human villain is, while that could have been better, eem something happening to him as karma, i like him even if he is a terrible businessman villain, but they exist so, he is good. Just he needed something more happening karmic to him later like a spider trapping him and he saved in the nick of an eye or something.
And no i like he is pathetic, ilike e some pathetic but really harmful and detestable villains. (and i am fine he is very orange man like, orange man is basically a pathetic supervillain)
Well in terms of writing I found this episode as bad as the previous 3, only this one introduced the _really_ clichéed cartoony elements that made it all the worse.
The Trump analog was extremely strong for me. Don't care to see this episode again, just for that reason.