Torchwood Children of Earth Ending: What would you have done?
- Thread starter Snaploud
- Start date
Maybe. Possibly. Potentially.
Meanwhile, it is a certainty that if the government is not overthrown, it will commit treason and abduct and enslave millions of its own citizens, and will target certain socio-economic classes in doing so.
I'll take the dark possibilities over the evil certainties.
No, there's always another baby being born somewhere on the planet their drug supply is a never ending one.
I for one don't buy the idea that these aliens are nearly as advanced geneticists as they claim to be, for that very reason.
They were already handed dozens of children in the 1960s, yet now they need more. Why? They already have more than enough samples of Human DNA to clone as many children as they'll ever need.
That they came back and needed more to me is a strong indicator that they're bluffing when they claim they'll be able to wipe out the Human race. Yet another example of Brian Green's government just bending over and taking it up the ass from anyone who threatens them, but it the 456 or the U.S. Army.
Having Jack release the taps would indeed have taken the show in an equally dark direction. Mass uprisings/revolutions are not pretty, to understate dramatically. The point is, the producers and writers are not capable of accepting the darkness of revolutionary violence. They can accept the darkness of an absurd scenario where someone just has to be ruthless to save us all. I suppose in the end it's just accepting that "we" are an empire, and empires have to what it takes to win. And the type of entertainment appropriate to an empire has Children of Earth, whereas Captain Jack Harnkness trying to start an uprising isn't appropriate entertainment for empires.
I would have ended it with Jack releasing the tapes. Lois Habiba "commits suicide" in her jail cell. Gwen and Reece and Jack try to coordinate not just resistance to the roundup of children but organize an attack on Thames House. The governments of the word fail to get the majority of the children to the rendezvous points, but the 456 take the ones they can and leave. The governments manage to suppress the rebellions and arrest what's left of Torchwood. Bridget Spears manages to forge an order sending Torchwood to a different location and they escape. She's caught and "dies of a heart attack." The series ends with the old Torchwood hiding in an abandoned school in a poor neighborhood, watching TV news about the resumption of school, with shots of the wealthier neighborhoods looking perfectly normal.
I wouldn't have backed down when Ianto died. I can see why Jack did it, but I don't agree with him. The 456 were toying with him and he should have recognised that.
If I had been the Prime Minister I would have come clean straight away about what happened in the 60s..."It was under Harold Wilson - I am not Harold Wilson and his methods are not mine" or something akin to that. Then I would have let America take the lead ("It's time the world's only remaining Superpower lived up to its title.") which would have removed the burden of responsibility from me (a cop-out, but since America is the stronger power that would make sense, no?) but also a sign that I recognise the need for co-operation in times of crisis.
If I had been the Prime Minister I would have come clean straight away about what happened in the 60s..."It was under Harold Wilson - I am not Harold Wilson and his methods are not mine" or something akin to that. Then I would have let America take the lead ("It's time the world's only remaining Superpower lived up to its title.") which would have removed the burden of responsibility from me (a cop-out, but since America is the stronger power that would make sense, no?) but also a sign that I recognise the need for co-operation in times of crisis.
^On the whole that's not a bad way to end it, although frankly you're still cheating as much as RTD did by just having the 456 up and leave so I don't think its any more satisfying. If anything it's somewhat more depressing than the actual ending, but I think the main reason they couldn't have done something like that is simply that this is still set in the Doctor Who universe, and I don't think they'd want the Doctor coming back to a world in that much of a mess.
To be honest I don't have a clue how to end it myself that's any better, and to be honest I think the set up and drama were so damn good, the corner humanity was painted into was so damn tight, that any ending was going to dissapoint. To be honest thought I think what RTD gave us was as good as we had any right to expect so I'm still more than happy with the series overall (shrugs)
Sci, we're not going to agree on this, but I do wish you'd stop making the poiont about socio-economic warfare every time. It makes it seem like you're suggesting you don't have a problem with rounding up kids, it's just the criteria used, and I know that's not what you meant.
At the end of the day no matter what criteria they would have used it wouldn't have been right, be it rich kids, poor kids, black kids, white kids etc. And yes Green did take it up the arse from the 456, and the US, but again these are two powers sadly more powerful than the UK. As I've said time and again, we're seeing only the UK response, but judging from the way the US general and UNIT officers were acting suggests the entire world was ready to give up their children. Maybe they were using different criteria but even if they were I doubt their way was any better.
The truth is that even the noblest of governments with the noblest of intentions will do bad things if its neccesary. People go on about Churchill ensuring the British kept fighting, and that's true, but we were up again an enemy that probably wasn't intent on complete and utter annihilation of us. Face it even a nation as fanatical as the Japanese were at the end of WW2 eventaully caved in when faced with the destructive power of the atom bomb. Worth remembering as well that Churchill was happy to side with one tyrant because it was the only way to beat another.
One last point, off on a tangent. We've had the first outbreak of swineflu, and likely it will come back, and equally likely it might be more dangerous when it does. Now say a nation (The UK, the US, Mexico, Peru whoever) has enough vaccine for half it's population. Do you really think any government will distribute that randomly to its populace? Already the UK government has earmarked those with specific health conditions and health workers as amongst the first to get jabbed. not quite the same scenario but the point is that governments always have to make decisions that potentially cost the lives of those perhaps deemed less important to the survival of the nation as a whole.
To be honest I don't have a clue how to end it myself that's any better, and to be honest I think the set up and drama were so damn good, the corner humanity was painted into was so damn tight, that any ending was going to dissapoint. To be honest thought I think what RTD gave us was as good as we had any right to expect so I'm still more than happy with the series overall (shrugs)
Sci, we're not going to agree on this, but I do wish you'd stop making the poiont about socio-economic warfare every time. It makes it seem like you're suggesting you don't have a problem with rounding up kids, it's just the criteria used, and I know that's not what you meant.
At the end of the day no matter what criteria they would have used it wouldn't have been right, be it rich kids, poor kids, black kids, white kids etc. And yes Green did take it up the arse from the 456, and the US, but again these are two powers sadly more powerful than the UK. As I've said time and again, we're seeing only the UK response, but judging from the way the US general and UNIT officers were acting suggests the entire world was ready to give up their children. Maybe they were using different criteria but even if they were I doubt their way was any better.
The truth is that even the noblest of governments with the noblest of intentions will do bad things if its neccesary. People go on about Churchill ensuring the British kept fighting, and that's true, but we were up again an enemy that probably wasn't intent on complete and utter annihilation of us. Face it even a nation as fanatical as the Japanese were at the end of WW2 eventaully caved in when faced with the destructive power of the atom bomb. Worth remembering as well that Churchill was happy to side with one tyrant because it was the only way to beat another.
One last point, off on a tangent. We've had the first outbreak of swineflu, and likely it will come back, and equally likely it might be more dangerous when it does. Now say a nation (The UK, the US, Mexico, Peru whoever) has enough vaccine for half it's population. Do you really think any government will distribute that randomly to its populace? Already the UK government has earmarked those with specific health conditions and health workers as amongst the first to get jabbed. not quite the same scenario but the point is that governments always have to make decisions that potentially cost the lives of those perhaps deemed less important to the survival of the nation as a whole.
stj, I don't agree with your inferences about why RTD wrote the finale the way he did, but I have to say that I do prefer your ending to RTD's.
I don't think that would be cheating. If anything, having the 456 just up and leave sounds more realistic to me -- they're the junkies who try to scare you with an unloaded gun and run away when they realize you've figured out their ruse.
Yeah, it's not. But I do think that specifically targeting certain socio-economic classes -- turning the crisis into an act of class warfare -- makes it even worse. It's like raping a woman before you murder her, y'know? It would have been wrong to hand over 10% of all the children, but at least it wouldn't have been an obvious act of economic oppression against the poor and working class.
I've got no problem with the idea of giving first priority to health care workers and to those with special health needs. I'll even accept the idea that the key decision-makers - the PM/President, the Cabinet, leaders of the legislature -- should also be first in the queue. But I would certainly hope that past that, everyone would have an equal shot at access to the vaccine. It absolutely should not be a matter of how much money you have.
Oh come on, the 456 just run away would have been a terrible ending! And I don't consider that the 456 had an empty gun. They may or may not have had the power to wipe us out but to suggest they weren't actually armed...
Interstellar travel, (possibly limited) mind control powers over every child on the planet. Matter transporter technology. Lethal pathogens...put all those togeather and you potentially have a formidable foe. They might not have been able to wipe us out in one fell swoop, but considering we couldn't even see their ship (if they even had one) to shoot at it they could peck us to death with impunity. They might or might not have chosen to do so, but to suggest they had an empty gun is clear fallacy.
I hope you never get mugged Sci, because your approach apepars to be. "You sir are a bounder, and I absolutely will not hand over my wallet, so you'd better shoot me, if you have the nerve!"
Blam! Blam!
The horrible truth is that it wasn't so much about class warfare as about who is more useful to society. Those in the worst schools would be probably much less likely to contribute to society, because you call them working class but these days that's something of a misnomer, the kids who would likely be targeted are the children of those under the working class--one might even call them the non-working class. Although there would be cross over, and there would be some middle class or close to it schools that fell within the catchment.
You talk about it being right to safeguard the lives of health care workers and other people important to the running of society, but extending that logic what Green and co were doing was that. They were safeguarding those kids who had more chance to grow up and contribute to society at the expense of those who were less likely to.
And I do wonder about whether the government would fall. At the end of the day most people do value self interest above all else, and what we'd be talking about here is the parents of 90% of the country's children who weren't to be sacrificed. There'd be a lot of hand wringing for sure, and probably most people wouldn't admit it, but one can just imagine a whole lot of parents being both appalled at the decision Green and co made, and yet also secretly quite glad they didn't choose their kids.
Interstellar travel, (possibly limited) mind control powers over every child on the planet. Matter transporter technology. Lethal pathogens...put all those togeather and you potentially have a formidable foe. They might not have been able to wipe us out in one fell swoop, but considering we couldn't even see their ship (if they even had one) to shoot at it they could peck us to death with impunity. They might or might not have chosen to do so, but to suggest they had an empty gun is clear fallacy.
I hope you never get mugged Sci, because your approach apepars to be. "You sir are a bounder, and I absolutely will not hand over my wallet, so you'd better shoot me, if you have the nerve!"
Blam! Blam!
The horrible truth is that it wasn't so much about class warfare as about who is more useful to society. Those in the worst schools would be probably much less likely to contribute to society, because you call them working class but these days that's something of a misnomer, the kids who would likely be targeted are the children of those under the working class--one might even call them the non-working class. Although there would be cross over, and there would be some middle class or close to it schools that fell within the catchment.
You talk about it being right to safeguard the lives of health care workers and other people important to the running of society, but extending that logic what Green and co were doing was that. They were safeguarding those kids who had more chance to grow up and contribute to society at the expense of those who were less likely to.
And I do wonder about whether the government would fall. At the end of the day most people do value self interest above all else, and what we'd be talking about here is the parents of 90% of the country's children who weren't to be sacrificed. There'd be a lot of hand wringing for sure, and probably most people wouldn't admit it, but one can just imagine a whole lot of parents being both appalled at the decision Green and co made, and yet also secretly quite glad they didn't choose their kids.
