All derived from the mentality that some fans “own” the shows or have some form of “rights” over them. Same attitudes prevail with many shows - is it more pronounced with cult shows?

I don’t really see what’s going on here, but I guess it simply boils down to:

“I fancy Gareth David-Lloyd and I’m pissed off!”

I think only taking comments from an as-it-airs episode reaction thread is always going to give a slightly melodramatic flavour to the comments. Yes, quite a lot of the reactions seem to be “Fuck you, RTD”, but then quite a lot of the immediate reactions to episode 4’s ending were mostly along the lines of “*sob*”, yet by the time we get around to the review posts things have got vaguely more articulate and/or reasonable. (I say vaguely, there’s still a lot of weeping. But the Torchwood fandom is mostly teenage girls, what else can one expect?)

And aside from the “Oh noes, Ianto’s dead!” comments, are the criticism of the depressing nature of the finale not valid? Children of Earth was undoubtedly superior to basically all of the rest of Torchwood that had gone before it, but by eps 4 and 5 it was substantially different in tone. If you liked series 1 and 2 as they were, then having everything from them almost systematically ripped apart isn’t going to please you, no matter your what ‘objective’ views on the direction or whatever are.

To be honest, with bits like:
“If words cause the lockdown, maybe numbers reverse it. Try the ISBN, every book’s got a different number.”
“The keyboards aren’t working!”
“But the membrane underneath might just recognize the code!”
I was rather under the impression the only reason anybody would bother sitting through series 1 is because Gareth David Lloyd is a bit of a hottie. Dramatically, stylistically, logically, it was rarely much more than mediocre by any ‘objective’ standard. As the only time Torchwood seems to have been ‘objectively’ any good is when it’s being pretty much destroyed, I can see why ‘fans’ might see that as “a great big FUCK YOU to all of us”.

Maybe “Thank god it’s over!” doesn’t “make up what we in the business refer to as “criticism””, but if you’ve riled your fans to the point where they stop noticing directing/lighting/script because they “have absolutely no desire to watch anymore”, it’s hardly a shining endorsement.

…That said, perhaps the death threats directed at James Moran were something of an overreaction.

(I’m aware I probably just sound like a batshit Janto-shipper who’s come to defend my own honour. To vaguely clarify - I loved CoE, I don’t think RTD is the anti-christ, and none of the quoted comments were originally by me. I just don’t think it’s reasonable to dismiss criticism because it isn’t rational.)

> Nobody gives a flying fuck about Gwen and frankly she is probably the one person everyone hates on this show. I mean who honestly likes Gwen?

I like Gwen and I am glad she and Rhys have been given a happy ending (for now…mwahaha). Eve Myles was even more brilliant than usual in CoE IMO.

I’m glad RTD killed Ianto tbh. He was too mopey a character and his almost obsessive love of Jack couldn’t really go anywhere else drama-wise apart from them splitting up, and that would have been crap for the show too. Ianto probably would have killed himself if Jack had left him! The important characters are Jack and Gwen and they both got the endings they needed.

> I just don’t think it’s reasonable to dismiss criticism because it isn’t rational.

Say what? How the hell are you meant to engage in a critical discussion with a shouting loonie?

> Say what? How the hell are you meant to engage in a critical discussion with a shouting loonie?

Perhaps I should have said “logical” rather than “rational”, but even an irrational negative reaction driven by an emotional response isn’t necessarily synonymous with being a shouting loonie.

I meant more that a criticism of what actually happens within a television programme is (or should be) as valid as a criticism of its technical aspects, even though the former certainly cannot be measured by an objective scale. (Although I’m not sure “dramatic quality of the script, acting, direction […]” can ever really be viewed objectively either.)

I meant more that a criticism of what actually happens within a television programme is (or should be) as valid as a criticism of its technical aspects

I think that’s a totally fair point. But if someone can come up with a reason why Ianto shouldn’t have been killed that isn’t “I fancy him” or “he was gay”, I’d be more willing to engage with them. And anyone who says his death was “pointless” is talking out of their arse. And the ones saying “Gwen should have died instead” are appalling hypocrites.

Over and over and over and over, we’ve been told by people who like telling us these things that the youff of today (well since the 90s) are far more media literate than ever and can grasp the messages they’re receiving far faster and with greater depth than ever before. Steven Johnson wrote a whole book about this. It has charts demonstrating how the average episode of 24 is basically impenetrable to anyone without a young mind capable of cumulative long term memory.

If the finale of Torchwood has proved anything, it’s that there is a (hopefully) small minority of people for whom:

(a) None of the above is true
(b) Have no idea about the language of television
(c) Can’t tell the difference between a news item and a “review”
(d) Think that sending abuse to one of the writers is a pleasant and clever way to conduct business(d) Shouldn’t be allowed anywhere near proper drama again basically.

Kirsty Walker’s article is an attempt to sum up the “fan” reaction to the death of Ianto and how it spilled out into the hate mail directed towards James Moran. It’s not a review. It’s not about the general public reaction. And yet the comments section spends its time criticising it for not being a review and not mentioning the ratings most horrendously comparing it to The Sun’s coverage of the Hillsborough Tragedy.

To stereotypically paraphrase the response in these comments, on Twitter and elsewhere: “How dare you kill Ianto. He was the reason I watch Torchwood and how very dare you make him and Jack into a couple and then kill him off you homophobes and you didn’t develop their relationship properly. I’m never watching the programme again. You just keep bringing in these characters and then killing them off after we’ve started to like them. Why would we want to watch it again. Bastards. Lusers.”

Anyone with quarter of a brain can see the flaws in that so I’m not going to bother outlining them too much. It’s just fairly shocking that the very people who profess themselves to be fans of the series can’t deconstruct it on the most basic of levels. Banging on about the rift being open in Cardiff and the SUV being stolen and then entirely the subtext that ran through the rest of the series about humanity being the real monsters. Remember that tense scene in the board room about how they’re going to organise the collection of the children? Boring and too long apparently (according to someone on Twitter).

Also, over and over throughout all three series now, one of the underlying ideas is that if you join Torchwood, it’ll kill you. It was the basis for whole episodes and what Jack was talking about in his final speech before being beamed up; so the death of Ianto shouldn’t be too much of a surprise. Well it was a surprise because of when it happened (though on-reflection it was forshadowed throughout the episode) and its sudden brutality, but from the first episode on, its been underscored that with the exception of Jack, everybody dies.

How can you and I see that but not MJ who writes:

“I don’t care to see a series four that doesn’t have any recognizable characters, or that I can now fear will merely kill off whatever characters are introduced. Why should I warm up to characters who are simply destined to be eliminated pointlessly,or allow myself as a viewer to care about what happens to them?” Well, yes, it’s a point, but you’ve clearly been watching a different programme to me. Plus, you must have a real problem with Star Wars. I mean how dare they kill off Ben Kenobi half way through, I mean what’s that about?

I don’t remember it being this bad for Wash and Book or Tara …

> And anyone who says his death was “pointless” is talking out of their arse.

Depends whether they are talking about it as an element in Jack’s destruction or the aliens’, surely? Clearly as a part of the overall aim of leaving Jack without any real support or dependants it did have a point, but within the story, why was Ianto even in the room with Jack in the first place? Did Jack have a plan beyond telling the 456 to fuck off, because he didn’t do much else, except shoot at the cage-thing, and why did that require two people? And it’s not like Stephen’s death where something was gained from it for the greater good. It achieved nothing within the story, and in that way was “pointless”.

Leaving Jack alone could have been achieved in other ways, anyway. Maybe Ianto actively abandoning him, or choosing to be retconned out of Torchwood altogether. They’re not exactly arguments for why Ianto shouldn’t have died, so much as why he needn’t have, but it isn’t as if his death was unavoidable even within the scope of leaving Jack with nothing.

> And the ones saying “Gwen should have died instead” are appalling hypocrites.

Is it hypocritical to like one character more than another? There were five main characters at the beginning of Torchwood, at the end you’ve got three dead, another dead on the inside, and Gwen generally fine with a husband and family. If you don’t like Gwen much, that’s not a good ending. I’m more in the “Gwen should have died as well” category, just because her coming out of the whole thing basically unscathed confuses me slightly as to the intended message of the programme. Is there hope or isn’t there? And if there is, as Gwen’s being fine seems to imply then…well, then I’m going to start asking why Ianto had to die.

I just don’t think it’s unreasonable that people who like a character are unhappy when said character is sacrificed simply for the sake of the plot and to spurn the hero into action.

I just don’t think it’s unreasonable that people who like a character are unhappy when said character is sacrificed simply for the sake of the plot and to spurn the hero into action.

But that’s when characters are supposed to be killed off.

“I don’t care to see a series four […] that I can now fear will merely kill off whatever characters are introduced.”

And you’re not supposed to think characters are untouchable either.

Listen. Here is MY personal opinion.You can disagree but it is as valid as yours-:

The relationship never evolved. We’re mad because they just shouldn’t have HAD a relationship if it wasn’t going to evolve. The character was not developed. The jack/ianto relationship was part of the show. You’re being hypocritical in stating that it doesn’t matter.And since when are fans of that relationship inconsequential? That’s like saying a huge chunk of the ACTUAL show shouldn’t matter. We’re mad because the story of the relationship was LEADING SOMEWHERE. The writers were leading us along a path that lead to a big empty pit. Since when is this shakespeare? It is NOT one story it is a flowing narrative-this series was like a standalone story , that was contained and not connected to the flow in any way. If you read a series of books you expect the narrative to be cohesive. This is also all we’ve had in terms of a sci-fi male relationship. LISTEN! If this was a standalone miniseries-fine! You can continue to refuse to respect the opinions of others OR you can grow up and realize you’re not RIGHT.Neither are we! It’s a matter of opinon and stating your opinions as FACT is frankly just deluded.

But aren’t the most tragic relationships those which don’t have a chance to blossom because one of the parties dies leaving the other to wonder “What if?” In that way it is like Shakespeare, that’s why Romeo and Juliet hurts because all they have is one night together.

I would be interested to know how you would have liked it to have been written, how we could have seen this relationship ‘evolve’?

>You can continue to refuse to respect the opinions of others OR you can grow up and realize you’re not RIGHT

It’s all very well saying that two groups of opinions are equally valid, but when one of those groups has formed a slightly scary lynch mob and hounded a professional writer out of his own blog, it starts to get a bit worrying. It’s hard to respect the opinions of those who appear to have no self-respect. You can debate views on the quality of a story, but implying that some sort of duty existed on the show to pursue a plotline is nonsensical.

Did I like the characters of Jack and Ianto?

Yes.

Have I enjoyed watching a throwaway line being crafted into a believable and heartfelt relationship?

Yes.

Did I feel sadness at Ianto’s death?

Yes.

Was I pleased that I character I was fond formed part of such a moving and high-quality piece of writing?

Yes.

I’m a fan of Torchwood, but I don’t OWN its characters. They belong to Russell T Davies and his team to do as they see fit with in the pursuit of drama, making their political and moral points in an emotionally moving fashion. And Children of Earth saw them succeed like never before.

RTD responds: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32128070/ns/entertainm…