Doctor Who (The Return of Doctor Mysterio): Movies about Writing

Here’s a short blog on a Doctor Who episode from the Capaldi years. Have I mentioned that I love Capaldi as Doctor Who? He’s so delightfully grumpy.

The Christmas Special entitled “The Return of Doctor Mysterio” is actually about a man who has a computerized gem stone in his stomach that’s been giving him super powers since he was eight years old. Oh, and it was somewhat the Doctor’s fault. The superhero, known as the “Ghost” has the mild mannered day job of being the nanny for Lucy, someone he’s been in love with since elementary school. Oh! And there are invading aliens taking human bodies in full body snatchers style. The Doctor and the Ghost fight the baddies. Yaddy yaddy.

And yes, this is still a Christmas episode. He becomes a superhero at Christmas so it totally counts.

The part I am focusing on here is Lucy’s job as a reporter. She’s an investigative journalist in the standard Lois Lane format to fit with the storyline. Still, her job as a writer adds little touches to her character. There’s the usual “do anything for the story” that comes with being a journalist in television or in films. Yet, the episode includes subtle parts of being a writer such as the taking little notes, using people watching to one’s advantage, and keeping an eye on other news sources. My favorite scene is how she interrogates the Doctor using a squeaky toy, but puts the torture on hold in order to type up some of her story from that night.

And she learns from the Doctor that when sneaking around you should always pack a snack.

The Personal History of David Copperfield: Movies about Writing

I like Charles Dickens, okay! I’m going to try very hard not to make this a comparison between movie and novel . . . but know that it’s killing me inside. I’m going to say 2 things 1) it’s difficult to make a decent version of this story in under 2 hours so at least they gave it their best shot and 2) this movie was very pretty and had a great cast (except Ben Whishaw I normally love and is not creepy enough to play Uriah Heep)!

Why am I including this in this blog and not other versions of David Copperfield? This is the first film adaption I’ve seen that really focuses on David’s desire to be a writer. David (Dev Patel/Jairaj Varsani), for those who have never read the book, is a man reciting the story of his life starting from his birth to a sweet, widowed mother (Morfydd Clark who has a duel role as David’s first love Dora). Upon his arrival, he is rejected by his Aunt Betsey Trotwood (Tilda Swinton) for not being a girl. Despite having the protection of a loving housekeeper who takes him to meet her king brother and his adoptive family which include David’s first friends in his life, Ham and Emily, she cannot stop his mother from marrying the hard Mr. Murdstone (Darren Boyd). Murdstone and his equally awful sister (Gwendoline Christie) send David away to a factory which they own. For those of you who’ve read the book - I know this is out of order. In this new miserable chapter of his life, he rooms with the Micawber family (patriarch played very humorously by Peter Capaldi) who in this version of events are more selfish than their literary counterparts. When his mother dies, David runs away to find Aunt Betsey living with her cousin by marriage Mr. Dick (Hugh Laurie).

From there, David is sent to school and his life continues as it does in most versions: his friendship with Agnes Wickfield (Rosalind Elazar) and her father (Benedict Wong), the rocky bond he forms with Steerforth (Aneurin Barnard), the suspicions toward Uriah Heep, his marriage to the child-like Dora, and the way his past shapes his adult life. It’s all still out of order and some characters are combined, but it’s meant to give the same themes. Although, there’s a part where Steerforth sings the Mermaid Song, which is a good metaphor for the amount of humor put into this movie even when it isn’t always appropriate.

As I said, this one really focuses on how David is in love with words, characters, metaphors, and writing in-general. The film opens with him walking out on a stage in front of an audience, ready to tell his tale out loud in a way identical to how the author Charles Dickens used to hold assemblies where he read out his works in a theatrical manner. When depicted as a child, David is encouraged to read and collect words he enjoys. When his mother hears him say something clever or make a good observation she records it.

As a child alone in the world, David continues the practice on scraps of paper he keeps in an old box. Most scraps continue to include phrases and descriptors he enjoys along with little illustrations. When he moves in with his aunt, it’s Mr. Dick’s own scribbles and attempts at writing that encourage David.

At school, he starts to use his own life to amuse the other students with stories he claims are made-up. In the original book, David hides his past because it’s not the way of a gentleman to talk about misfortune, yet in the movie he goes to extremes to cover up any tragedies with a complete sense of humiliation. He thrives off making his childhood of abuse and colorful characters into fiction instead of simply telling the story of his life.

When destitute, Aunt Trotwood and Mr. Dick make David a small private space to write. Just like in the book, Dora wants to help him and holds his pens as he writes. That’s not an innuendo. She literally holds onto the pens and hands them to him when he needs a fresh one. He begins with character sketches just as Dickens did. He tells the remainder of his life using these character references and reveals how all will end as he writes it.

Now that I’ve said that, I can’t keep my pretentious rants inside any longer! THIS WAS SO DIFFERENT FROM THE BOOK PLOT WISE THAT I HAD TROUBLE ENJOYING IT!

SPOILER ALERT -

DORA DOESN’T EVEN DIE! SHE JUST KINDA DISAPPEARS!