Doctor Who - "A Good Man Goes To War"

WHOSCALE: 4 out of 10

For those who didn't see this season as it aired, Series 6/Season 32 was divided into to halves; the first half was shown in the spring of 2011, while the second half started in the fall. This episode marked what Moffat described as a "game-changing cliffhanger" for the first half. 

Frequently throughout this season, I have had to re-watch these episodes several times in order to get a confident grasp of what was going on so that I can be assured that I gave it a fair review. With Series 5/Season 31 however, this was not the case. Oddly enough, that season scored higher than any other season so far. Coincidence? Probably not. 

This review will no doubt be extensive, because as the score indicates, there was quite a lot about this episode that just was plain silly. 

Let's start with the title. Having followed the production of the series, this episode was originally to be titled "Demons Run." That title was later changed to "A Good Man Goes To War." Now obviously, the latter is a direct reference to The Doctor, which I constantly gripe about in the resurrection - the original series seldom - if ever - made direct references to the lead characters in episode titles. Perhaps the only exception were "The Two Doctors," "The Three Doctors," and "The Five Doctors." I know I sound like I'm being nit-picky, but the original series established a kind of format for episode titles, often beginning with "The" and following with an element relative to the story's overall plot. (i.e. "The Sunmakers," "The Romans," "The Aztecs," "The Silurians,") Another format that was regularly used was the "___ of the ___" format, or something similar. (i.e. "Talons of Weng-Chiang," "Terror of the Autons," "Seeds of Death.") These titles encompassed the story as a whole, and did not reference one particular element. In the case of the new series, Moffat & Co. frequently title episodes to either deliberately mislead viewers ("The Doctor's Wife," "The Doctor's Daughter," "The Next Doctor,") or they reference something that doesn't remotely relate to the plot of the episode, but more one specific character ("Amy's Choice," "Vincent and the Doctor," "Smith and Jones," "Partners In Crime,") These titles intentionally suggest that the episode is chiefly about the characters referenced, and not about a traditional Doctor Who dilemma, although some of these episodes often do have a great story, they're just mis-titled. "Smith and Jones," for example. The hospital was transported to the Moon, where we were introduced to the Judoon. The title is a reference to The Doctor's often used alias, John Smith and of course Martha's maiden name, Jones. Ironically, there was an 80s western series called "Alias Smith & Jones," that followed the adventures of two outlaws trying to clear their records. Whether or not this was a double reference, I'm not sure. 

The bottom line is, the title of this episode was a reference to one specific element - that of the old tale about why the asteroid is called "Demons Run," and as such was a poor choice. 

The opening sequence of this episode was painful for me to watch. Sequences like that of Rory in Roman attire managing to break into a Cybermen ship, reach the bridge and demand the wherabouts of his wife (as if the Cybermen give a f*** who his wife is, or where she is) shows that the producers take "Doctor Who is intended to be a children's show" literally. Portraying The Doctor, as well as his ordinary human companions as "super bad asses" doesn't give a sense of seriousness at all - it just looks rather silly. Granted, The Doctor is the hero of the series, but not in the Superman, Batman, Chuck Norris or Bruce Willis sense. The Doctor is the hero of the series like Colonel Jack O'Neill is the hero of StarGate SG-1. He's the lead character, and obviously the hero, but not to the point that he looks tremendously superior to the other characters. 

Blowing up a Cybermen ship just to emphasize a question? That's just ridiculous. The Doctor would never do that over something so trivial. I'm not trying to downplay the issue of Amy missing, but why doesn't he just go to the Shadow Proclamation like he did in "The Stolen Earth?" Why would the Cybermen, of all species in the realm of Doctor Who, know anything about Rory's wife? Even IF they had intercepted information about that, why would they make a note of it? It is completely, totally, utterly, IRRELEVANT to the Cybermen and their objectives! Let's not forget the fact that The Doctor as of late has longed to see the ultimate end of the Cybermen, so why doesn't he just blow them all up right then? Since they're so easy to find, apparently. On a side note, the windows behind Rory on the Cybership are the same exact windows that looked out from the flight deck of the ship in "The Curse of the Black Spot."

The episode digs an even deeper hole by introducing two completely irrelevant characters - The Fat One and the Thin One. So irrelevant, that they aren't even given proper names - just a blatant reference to their sexual preferences. Why in God's name is a gay couple relevant here?! You could have just as easily omitted that detail, and the episode would still have worked seamlessly. 

Yet another character that I question is that of Lorna Bucket, the girl who apparently met The Doctor once before in her childhood in the Gamma Forests. The purpose of this character was two fold; one to provide a bit more hero worship for the viewers watching that have embraced the notion that The Doctor is Superman in a bow tie, and to help close the thread of River Song's true identity, which I'll get to in a moment. My memory is fuzzy on the Tennant years, but I think this may have been done once before. A character is introduced and claims to have met The Doctor previously, only to spend the rest of their lives seeking him. Wait...it's come back to me now. Elton from "Love And Monsters" did that. 

Why do all of the supporting characters in the new series have this overwhelming obsession with The Doctor? It's obvious that the production crew are attempting to create a link between the series and the avid fans of the show. In other words, they're blurring the lines between Doctor Who reality, and that of actual reality. I do not understand why this is necessary. If you need that to relate to the show, how the fudge did you watch "The Prisoner?" 

Moving on. Another element that I found completely distasteful was that of The Doctor raising an army. OK, let's put this in perspective: Amy Pond, a girl who has been The Doctor's companion for less than 2 years, has been abducted since the events of "Day of the Moon." To find and rescue this companion - one who has spent less time in the TARDIS than Jamie - The Doctor blows up a Cybermen ship, and travels throughout the universe recruiting those he's saved in the past so that they can repay their debt to him. First of all, when did The Doctor expect some sort of repayment for what he does? I don't think The Doctor ever felt like the universe "owed him a debt," even though he may have joked about it from time to time. Strangely enough, he only recruits characters as far back as Series 5/Season 31 - The Judoon, the Silurians, the Sontarans, Danny Boy from "Victory of the Daleks," and Captain Avery from "The Curse of the Black Spot." How convenient. The Doctor has faced more menacing odds in the original series, and wiggled his way out of the situation without having to ask a favor from the universe. First he's so bad ass that he can blow up a Cybermen ship to ask a question, then he can't even rescue his companion without raising an army. I could go on for two more days ranting about how out of character this behavior was for The Doctor, so I'll leave it at this. I think I've made my point clear: Raising an army out of previous characters was not the route to go. 

There are other moments that just made me want to face palm. For example, a scene that first shows the Headless Monks is conveniently accompanied by an overhead speaker system saying, "Reminder: It is a level 1 offense to remove the hood of a Headless Monk," or something to that effect. Immediately following this, one of the two gay couple asks aloud, "I wonder why they're called "headless monks? They can't actually be headless." REALLY?! Could you have made it more obvious? The entire audience was quietly wondering this until you wrote this first-year student shit. Now it's OBVIOUS: The Headless Monks are actually HEADLESS. 

Speaking of the Headless Monks, way to rip off Star Wars again by making them look like Sith Lords wielding lightsabers. I know people may call me lame for making that reference, but let's be honest: No matter what you're doing in a series, if you present a weapon that's a glowing sword of any kind, people are immediately going to think "Star Wars." 

By this time, I was getting sick of how River Song always has to be so cryptic with her dialogue. Never a straight answer to anything, and always riddles as answers. "He will rise higher than he's ever risen before, and then he will fall so much further." Damnit, if she feels she can't disclose any information about Demon's Run because of timelines and all that junk, why not just NOT SAY ANYTHING?! Just tell Rory that you can't say anything because it's his future and your past! This kind of crypto-clue talking was nice in "Silence In the Library," and maybe even in "The Time of Angels," but now you're just dragging it out. and it's annoying as hell. 

As usual, the music was well overdone. 

Yet another bit that makes me want to cringe is when Dorium just waltzes out to greet the pissed off Monks, thinking they will spare him because of previous dealings, even though he's just sold them out to The Doctor. This mindless sequence was done simply to emphasize that the Monks will chop your head off. Thanks Moffat, but we figured that would be the case when we saw them wielding swords. We didn't need to see someone just outright commit suicide to work it out.

Which brings up another dummy mark: Demons Run is occupied by an entire army of Silurian soldiers, but magically, a few Headless Monks (who can't inflict damage except at close quarters) manage to reduce the entire army to that of just Rory, The Doctor and Amy. Even the Sontaran Strax and Bucket are killed. 

Is this even remotely supposed to be believable?

What about how the communications array gets taken out? Seriously? Danny Boy from "Victory of the Daleks?" I thought all the Dalek tech was destroyed in that story? So how does Danny Boy still have space flight capability on his Spitfire? To say nothing about how he managed to get from 1940s WWII torn Earth, to the Demons Run asteroid in the far flung future. 

Perhaps the biggest disappointment for me was that of River Song's identity. Are you telling me that a character who possesses the ability to time travel via a vortex manipulator, has dated androids, knows The Doctor's real name, is a professor of archaeology in the future, has dealt with Weeping Angels more than once, has the ability to regenerate and is in StormCage prison for killing The Doctor is simply Amy and Rory's DAUGHTER?! At this point, I was utterly disgusted with the series. The show had officially become entirely about the supporting characters. It was then that I realized that this entire episode was in fact about Amy and Rory. If you read by blog, or if you watch my YouTube rants, you know that is a total turn off for me as a Doctor Who fan. When you devote a thread that's spanned three seasons to character development in a series that's about traveling through time and space and saving the universe from menaces like The Daleks and The Ice Warriors, you lose all respect from me as a contributing writer.

We're only half way in to Moffat's second season, and already I want him gone. 

So far, this was perhaps the lowest scoring episode of the new series, save for "Love and Monsters." A shame that it had to come from Steven Moffat, of all people.

Doctor Who - "The Almost People"

WHOSCALE: 5 out of 10

Considering that in my opinion, the bulk of the story was covered in the first half of the previous episode, it should be no surprise that the second half of this two part story scored lower on the Whoscale. 

Before I go into detail on what costs this episode so many points, I should note that the pacing for this story was a huge issue. I found it frequently difficult to understand what was going on because the dialogue from so many characters was gibberish. For some reason, Moffat seems to think that characters that talk extremely rapidly is "quirky." While this may be true, it should be a trait reserved only for the Doctor, not every character. When you get a room full of characters all conversing and their sentences are garbled because they're speaking so fast, it no longer becomes an appealing quirk, it becomes an irritating annoyance, because I cannot understand them. 

Besides the almost non stop music throughout this entire episode, that is perhaps my biggest complaint. As I stated in my previous review, the initial plot and story was not a bad idea for an episode of Doctor Who. The fact that it was a two parter of course, always yields a few points. However, in spite of the story's two part format -  and having watched this episode several times now since it aired - I still have trouble "keeping up" so to speak with the development of the story.

I think what I'm trying to say is that the episode does not have a very good structured narrative. For me, much of this episode felt like a mess, particularly when pointless elements start getting introduced into the story. For example, the doppleganger of The Doctor had no purpose whatsoever other than to confuse both Amy and the audience. Then we're forced to deal with yet another problem - as if we don't have enough of them already - Amy initially rejects the notion of "two identical Doctors," claiming that she can tell the difference between the two. This is later proven false due to The Doctor switching shoes with his ganger. What's even more ridiculous is that The Doctor claims that the reason he swapped shoes with his ganger was to determine whether or not Amy could truly tell a difference. Who the fudge cares?! 

The more I reflect on what I've just watched, the more I find it difficult to even summarize the story in my head. There was too much already going on by the time the Doctor ganger was introduced. Already we had a missing Rory, a missing Jennifer, a missing ganger Jennifer, three or four other gangers running amok and plotting a revolution against the humans. This was more than enough to resolve within the confines of this episode - and that's if you don't count the final ten minutes, which had nothing to do with this story whatsoever. 

Anytime a science fiction story deals with copies, there is always going to be that brief moment of confusion from the audience where they cannot tell which one is the original. Such an example would be the campfire scene in the snow in Star Trek: The Undiscovered Country, where a shape shifter takes on the form of Kirk, and a fight ensues. A few rolls in the snow later, we're confused on who the real Kirk is. However, the scene soon resolves this with the elimination of the shape shifter. My point is, it's confusing enough to drag out a story with two of every character over two episodes, it's practically mundane when you introduce a copy of a copy, as this episode did with Jennifer. We soon learn that Jennifer has in fact been dead for some time, at that BOTH the Jennifers that were walking around with Rory are gangers. Yet again, what purpose was served by having this element in the story? It served only to confuse the audience even further. 

Since Moffat teased the audience with the death of The Doctor in the season opener "The Impossible Astronaut," it was clear that throughout the remainder of this season, Moffat was leading us on with suggestions at how the incident at the lake could be avoided or circumvented. With "The Curse of the Black Spot," were introduced to a life support system that could sustain a dying person indefinitely. With "The Rebel Flesh/The Almost People," we're introduced to a copy of The Doctor. Naturally, my first thought when seeing this originally was that perhaps The Doctor at the lake was this ganger. However, the ganger dies of course near the end of the episode. 

The resolution of the story in my opinion was a joke. Cleaves' ganger - who for two whole episodes has sworn to wage war against the humans - suddenly decides that there is no point in the war and surrenders. Meanwhile, Jennifer, who is nothing more than a ganger, suddenly possesses the ability to morph into a horrific CGI monster similar to the one in "The Lazarus Experiment." That monster, in turn, was defeated by The Doctor's ganger simply pointing his sonic screwdriver at it, which reveals that it can break down the molecular patterns of the flesh, thus returning the ganger to a puddle of goo. So why not have just done this to the walkabout gangers from onset?!

The problem of having a double for each of the mining crew is quickly resolved by a few convenient acid-related deaths. The scene between the two Jimmys is practically scene for scene ripped from "Star Wars: The Phantom Menace," where a young Obi-Wan cradles a dying Qui-Gon. The fact that I'm actually finding similarities between a television series about time and space travel and a major motion picture franchise like Star Trek or Star Wars, shows that some, if not all of these modern Doctor Who episodes are well over done. 

Yet one other problem that the entire story touched on, was the fact that the gangers were in limbo between "real human" and "ganger" (hence the title of the episode). This issue is magically resolved after the gangers enter the TARDIS. Apparently, the TARDIS energy stabilized their molecular structure, so they were suddenly human. How convenient. 

It irritates me to my core when a writer is given the breathing room of two episodes, and yet the whole thing gets resolved in the final 10 minutes. It makes you wonder, "what the hell did we just spend the last hour doing?!"

The final sequence in the episode takes place in the TARDIS, and reveals the nature of the Eye Patch Lady that has been visiting Amy as a hallucination. Amy is revealed to be a ganger, which raises my next question. The ganger technology was unique to this time period, so assuming that Amy was copied during the time she was missing in "The Impossible Astronaut/Day of the Moon," (which was in 1969) how did the Silents become aware of this technology? It was a clever twist, but some of these little convenient resolutions feel like they were dreamed up at the last minute - to the point of just seeming ridiculous. To me, the whole "Amy is actually a ganger- a element that we just conveniently introduced" felt more like "this here, for lack of a better idea." 

I wanted to score this episode high, because it had the core of a good Doctor Who story, but like so many others in the new series, it was presented in a fashion that simply does not work for  a show like this.

Doctor Who - "The Rebel Flesh"

WHOSCALE: 7 out of 10

Following the masterpiece by Neil Gaiman, Matthew Graham was up next with a two part story. This would be the second story contributed to the series by Graham - his previous being "Fear Her."

It's not far fetched to say that "The Rebel Flesh" wasn't as brilliant as the previous episode by Gaiman, but it nevertheless was certainly more in line with what Doctor Who traditionally was than the opening two part story. The setting for the episode roughly follows what we would have seen in the original series - a isolated island, and old medieval castle, a group of scientist that aren't dressed in modern day tank tops and cargo khakis. The setting and format, as well as the storyline are really what carried this one though on the Whoscale. However, there were quite a number of things that I frequently noted while watching it.

The biggest drawback for me in this episode was the fact that the initial problem - the solar storm causing the gangers to go walkabout - was rushed through within the first fifteen minutes of the episode. It was actually so rushed that I recall having difficulty understanding what was going on the first time I watched it. Rushing the openig struck me as strange, considering that the story had the breathing room of two episodes. Normally, a two part story can unfold fluently and relatively slow, such as the case of "The Empty Child"/"The Doctor Dances." Once it was established that the gangers were now teeter-tottering between "almost people" and exact duplicates of their originals, the remainder of the episode focused solely on how the originals refuted the existence of self-aware gangers. At the same time, the gangers themselves struggled to accept their new humanity, and were met with rejection from their originals, as well as Amy. 

That brings me to yet another disappointing element in this episode: The TARDIS crew are essentially divided into three camps on the doppleganger issue; The Doctor taking on a neutral role, as well as a peaceful coalition approach, while Amy sides with the originals and Rory defends Jennifer's ganger. 

By this time, I was absolutely fed up with suggestive themes regarding the stability of Amy and Rory's marriage. This issue is completely irrelevant to the series, or any science fiction series for that matter. In Star Wars, Han Solo and Leia slowly began to fall in love with each the other, and Lucas loosely alluded to this over the course of The Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi, but it was never so much that the central narrative of Star Wars had to be pushed aside for the sake of the audience finding out whether or not "it would work out." Simply because, that wasn't the issue, and it wasn't important. Not when you've got a platoon of Stormtroopers knocking at your doorstep.

With that said, I question why this continues to be a running theme in Doctor Who, even after it has been established (and then later undermined) numerous times that Amy's love for Rory and Rory's love for Amy is indisputable. The fact that I'm even having to gripe about "relationships" in a review of a science fiction series like Doctor Who is proof that somewhere, the show has gotten side tracked. This is something that shouldn't even be in a review like this.

The original series demonstrated for twenty-six years that you can have both male and female companions in the TARDIS simultaneously without having to incorporate a romantic theme. Jamie was the Second Doctor's companion for his entire run, save for the opening story for the Second Doctor, "The Power of the Daleks." Over the course of those three seasons, numerous female companions came and went, but never was a romantic plotline introduced, and the series did just fine. Some of the greatest stories in the history of the series were during Troughton's run.

The point is, science fiction needs to stick to being just that - science fiction. Any other genre that is introduced into such a series as a recurring sub-plot can serve no other purpose than to dilute the fundamental aim of the series - to appeal to the science fiction community. 

I've ranted about that enough. Yet another minus for this episode was the overuse of incidental music. This is something that I'm very picky about, and it's often one of the revived series' shortcomings. In the world of film, music is a method of invoking an emotional response from the audience by communicating a particular mood, or it can serve to accompany action sequences to amp up the drama. However, it can also serve as a distraction, particularly during dialogue scenes. If the writing is poor, or the actors aren't great, incidental music can be used to as a smokescreen for these things. The actors all looked great, and the story was fair, but it seems that Murray Gold often uses incidental music as a means of keeping the episode from dropping into a "too slow of a pace for the iGens." Many fans who were introduced to Doctor Who in 2005 and have since watched some of the original series have complained that it was "too slow paced" or "boring" to them. Granted, they are partially correct when noting it's slower pace, but the writing was brilliant and so were the actors, so it didn't need a smokescreen. You had to pay close attention to know what was going on, and music during a critical dialogue scene would only disrupt the viewer's concentration.

To summarize, the solar storm causing otherwise lifeless gangers to become self aware was the basis for the STORY. However, rather than spread that over the two episodes, Graham rushed through that to focus on what would be the basis of DRAMA - how the two sides would cope with each other. In the midst of this drama fest would be a torn Rory looking after the safety of a female ganger, all the while making a jealous Amy furious. The basic recipe for a modern day science fiction program. 

Already this story had disappointed on so many levels, and there was still half of it to go. For me, the story was covered in the opening fifteen minutes. What could there possibly be left to tell that would take an additional episode?

Doctor Who - "The Curse of the Black Spot"

WHOSCALE: 5 out of 10

Following the season's opening two part story written by Steven Moffat, show newcomer Stephen Thompson is up to bat. 

Let me get something off my chest first: From this point on, the show will no longer be consider "Doctor Who," but instead called "The Fantasy Adventures of Amy and Rory."

It truly hurts to give this episode such a low score, because having kept up with production the year before, I was aware that much of the filming of this story would be set on a pirate ship. Although it was obvious that BBC did this to coincide with the release of the new "Pirates of the Caribbean" film, this episodes fundamental plot had tremendous potential to be a great episode of Doctor Who, in much the way the Fifth Doctor story "Enlightenment" was. However, much of that potential was flushed down the proverbial toilet in favor of senseless, mind-numbing drama amperage. When I say drama, I mean drama that isn't a natural result of the story, but is instead "forced" by scenes, music, sound effects, dialogue, etc. that in no form or fashion make their existence in the episode plausible. 

Russell T Davies was notorious for this kind of page-filling gimmick, but I think this episode has to give him a run for his money, in both meaningless drama and plot holes. I'll start with the absolutely pointless scenes that did nothing more than serve as a drama injection:

1) The Dancer (Chris Jarman), is marked by the Siren  the same time Rory does, and both are intoxicated by the Siren's song - which I'll get to in a moment. Both are marked, both intoxicated. Just to show audiences what happens when the Siren contacts a marked individual (since it was deliberately omitted in the pre-title sequence to add mystery), Jarman's character is allowed by all others standing right next to him - even his own shipmates - to just waltz up to the Siren. BAM! Jarman's character vanishes, and now everybody has a look of fright on their face. This sequence was entirely unnecessary, and is not even remotely plausible. It was written to reveal what we didn't see in the pre title sequence, as if that matters. I don't care WHAT the Siren does, what matters is that each time some is marked, they disappear without a trace!

2) The second time this happens, Toby accidentally drops the crown onto the deck. Everyone in the scene knows that the reflections are the method of entrance/exit by the Siren, and yet they all just stand and watch as the crown rolls across the deck and comes to a rest. No one panics until AFTER the Siren appears. What the fudgecake???????!!! That is so mind numbingly stupid that it makes me want to skip to the next episode. What's worse was the whole sequence was done in slow motion, to really pump up the drama factor. To quote Falco Lombardi, "Geez Loweez!"

3) The third pointless scene immediately follows number two. Toby has been marked since he was introduced. After the Siren appears, Toby is allowed to walk to her, his father watching the entire time and The Doctor. Again, no one goes in to "Oh noo!!!!" mode until AFTER Toby has been taken by the Siren. How is this scene believable???!! Captain Avery, who previously showed deep concern for his son, just lets him walk into the Siren's hands? (Literally.)

4) Why was Toby even in this story? His character had absolutely, positively, without any doubt NO PURPOSE. The only reasonable explanation I can come up with is that he was there purely for the sake of heightening drama (more). Perhaps the producers think a kid in the episode helps the younger audience relate? Listen noobs, if you need a kid in a show of adults so that you can relate, you don't need to be watching. I grew up with Captain Kirk, Captain Picard, Roj Blake, Kerr Avon and Commander Sinclair. I didn't need a kid in Star Trek to relate with Spock's preference for logic. I didn't need a kid in Blake's 7 to relate with Avon's lack of trust towards others. 

Now on to the plot holes. Oh, brother. This will take a minute. 

1) After it was established that the Siren could only enter through a stable reflection, the remaining crew decide to hole up in the ship's magazine until a storm comes and disrupts the ocean's surface, thus making a stable reflection impossible. There's violent wind and rain, and Rory get's thrown overboard. Unable to swim, apparently. The Doctor elects to release the Siren so that she will save a drowning Rory. To accomplish this, The Doctor opens a barrel of water on deck. So how did the wind, rain, and tossing of the ship not disrupt that reflection as well?

2) Probably the biggest plot hole of the entire episode was when The Doctor, Avery and Amy agree to prick their fingers to lure the Siren out. Still in the storm, the barrel is closed, yet seconds after pricking their fingers, the Siren appears without needing a stable reflection. 

3) Rory was saved by the Siren and placed on life support. While on the system, Rory is conscious, breathing normally and is talking to Amy. In order to breath normally, your lungs must be devoid of any kinds of fluids, particularly ocean water. When the life support is turned off, suddenly Rory jerks into a spasm because all of his breath is gone and he can't breathe. Let's assume the first part is plausible, and the Siren has removed the water from his lungs in order to sustain his life. Why would Rory die when taken off the life support? Now let's assume the latter is correct -  Rory is still on the verge of drowning. How is he breathing normally? How you GET your oxygen can be changed - technology can bypass your nose and mouth to get oxygen to your lungs, but once your lungs are incapacitated, the body has no way to filter the oxygen into the blood stream. Both cannot be true.

4) The same problem as three goes a step further at the close of the episode, where all of Avery's crew are shown to be off life support now, without gasping for air. Granted, most of them had minor cuts, but Toby was described as being deathly ill.

Now that I've got the most notable drawbacks out of the way, I'll touch on a few other things that really brought this episode down. 

The idea of the Siren was great, and I can see why it was necessary to cast a real-life model (Lily Cole) as the part, but her singing was a little to much like what we had just recently sat through in "A Christmas Carol." Once again, the singing is directly tied to the plot, this time as anesthesia. What really made me cringe was just after The Dance is taken, the Siren's singing changes notes to sync with the background music. 

On the subject of music, there was a little too much "Jack Sparrow" towards the end. The opening scene was scored well, but as the episode progressed to a climax, the music became more and more overpowering. 

Another thing that bothered me was how Captain Avery relatively took the place as the companion for this story. 

For those of you keeping up with how many times Rory has died, this episode makes his fourth death since his introduction as a TARDIS member in "The Vampires of Venice:"

Amy's Choice

Cold Blood

Day of the Moon (although he didn't actually get killed)

The final scene where Amy revives Rory was perhaps the hardest for me to watch. Gone With the Wind music, tear-filled eyes, hugs, kisses, lovey dovey Amy and Rory with The Doctor taking a place in the background of the scene. At this point, it was clear to me that once again we were dealing with a season that would chiefly revolve around the companions, and not The Doctor. Just to recap since 2005:

Series 1/Season 27 revolved around Rose, her connection to Bad Wolf, and her ultimately saving the universe from the Daleks.

Series 2/Season 28 further revolved chiefly around Rose and her growing feelings for the now regenerated- into-heart-throb David Tennant Tenth Doctor, as well as her making a decision to leave Mickey completely.

Series 3/Season 29 was probably the best in this department, focusing mainly on the words of The Face of Boe and the return of The Master. However, in the three part finale, the companion yet again is the one to saved the day.

Series 4/Season 30 introduced a more likeable companion for Whovians in the form of Donna Noble, but again disappoints at the close of the season by having it roughly revolve around Donna's inability to avoid The Doctor, and once more has the companion save the day from the Daleks. When was the last time The Doctor beat the Daleks? Remembrance of the Daleks?

Series 5/Season 31 introduced the Pandorica as the story arc element, but once again much of the season was aimed at exploring the personal relationship between Amy and Rory, Rory's jealousy towards The Doctor, and Amy's inability to choose between the two. In short, a rehash of Series 2/Season 28.

I apologize for this review being so lengthly, but I had a lot to cover. In closing, this episode had the potential to be something equal or greater than "Enlightenment," which is saying a lot, but was lost in the producers continuing effort to make a science fiction television program appeal to EVERYONE. I will never get through saying how foolish this approach is. You're either sci-fi or you're not. You can't be both, and if you try, you're only going to end up gaining half an audience from each genre. Doctor Who was, has, and should always be pure science fiction. If you eliminate the soapy drama, yes - fan girlies and Jersey Shore fans are going to put down the remote and walk away, but in their place will come the Harry Potter fans, the Tron fans, the Trekkies and so on. 

Doctor Who has the capacity to go anywhere, anytime. It should not be restricted by the wants and desires of an audience that get their kicks off two people being in a troubled relationship, love triangles, scandal and sexuality.

Doctor Who - "The Impossible Astronaut"

WHOSCALE: 5 out of 10

Following the Christmas special, Steven Moffat penned the opening story to Series 6/Season 32. In addition to this being the official start of the second season under the reign of Moffat, this also marked the first time since 2005 that the arrangement of episodes in a season don't follow the same pattern. Series 1-5/Seasons 27-31 all opened with the first three episodes being single-episode stories, followed by a two-part story, then one or two singles, another two parter, one or two more singles, then a finale two parter. Moffat elected to open this season with a two part story. 

As with the last episode, this one was also a bit difficult for me to score on my Whoscale. However, off the top of my head - after just watching it in a classic Doctor Who frame of mind - I can point out two or three things that I immediately noted. 

One is the pacing of the episode. This is beyond any doubt the fastest paced two part story Moffat has contributed. There was a lot to cover in this episode, such as the blue envelopes, Amy and Rory meeting The Doctor, further information regarding the true identity of River Song, as well a TARDIS full of questions. 

A question I would love answered by Moffat is why the story opens with Amy and Rory at home enjoying married life, after he made it clear at the close of "The Big Bang" that Amy and Rory wished to continue traveling with The Doctor even after they were married. He even further indicated this in "A Christmas Carol," where Amy and Rory are on their honeymoon, but still traveling with The Doctor. Even at the close of that episode, neither of them gave any indication that they wished to return to Leadworth. So why were the two of them home? And why was The Doctor off on his own without them? I understand the TECHNICAL reason for it - that if the episode opened with Amy and Rory already aboard the TARDIS, it would have been practically impossible to introduce into the mix a "future" Doctor, which is who Amy and Rory initially meet - a Doctor that is some 200 years older than the one at the close of "A Christmas Carol." Nevertheless, no reason is given in terms of storyline why Amy and Rory are back home. This isn't the behavior of a companion(s). They don't travel with the Doctor, take a vacation, then join back up with him later. When they do leave, it's normally only an episode away from The Doctor meeting a new one, so how was The Doctor able to lollygag about the cosmos for 200 years without a companion? And showing now signs of aging? Yes people, Time Lords DO age normally in each incarnation. The Doctor wasn't born an old, white haired man.

As I'll note as I review later episodes in this season, Moffat was surely working on a story arc that is spanning the entire length of the Eleventh Doctor's era, so some of my questions may be answered further down the road. It's not uncommon for Moffat to tinker with complex paradoxes with this writing, and this season is no exception.

Another thing I noted was a more regular use of shaky cam. In some scenes, it isn't Bourne Supremacy skaky, but it isn't steady. This is most noticeable throughout the entire course of the Arizona scenes, from the picnic beside the lake until Amy, Rory, and River watch Darth Vader....I mean Anakin, no wait...sorry thought I'd flipped over to Return of the Jedi there for a second.

Have I mentioned the pacing? We're only ten minutes into the first episode of a two part story, and already Amy, Rory, River, Canton and The Doctor have received blue envelopes, met in a diner, synced diaries, gone on a picnic by a Lake, seen a Silent, forgot it, an astronaut has walked out of the lake, briefly spoke to The Doctor, KILLED The Doctor before he can regenerate, found  a conveniently placed boat, placed The Doctor's body in it, doused him with gasoline, burned his body in the lake, met back at the diner, and met up with a younger version of The Doctor they just met. Still with me? 

I think it's fair to say that Moffat went just a little too far overboard with twisted plotlines and paradoxes. The first time I watched this, I had no clue whatsoever what was going on. The first ten minutes had me so confused that I couldn't even enjoy it. 

The episode finally slows things down a notch once The Doctor arrives at the Oval Office and meets President Nixon and a younger Canton. The Doctor tracks down where the mysterious phone call is coming from, and off in the TARDIS they go. Even at the warehouse, the pacing is still relatively steady, and doesn't feel rushed. Still tons of shaky cam here, though.

The emotional wreck Amy was at the lake after The Doctor's death made me cringe. WAAAAYYY too much drama there, Moffat. The Doctor is dead, yes. But the vocal soundtrack? Amy sobbing over his body, telling him to wake up? A little over the top, in my opinion.

Perhaps this episode's one saving grace is the Silents themselves. A terrific design, both in nature and appearance. Another that I felt is worth noting is the close ups of The Doctor at the lake while he's talking to the astronaut. The look of those shots - lighting, background - reminded me of classic Who quarry days, so a few points.

Don't get me wrong, it was a brilliant idea, but the audience can't keep up at this pace. If the first episode of a two part story required being rushed this much to squeeze the story into two parts, it should be more than two parts. In my opinion, this first episode could have EASILY been spread over two 45 minute episodes, leaving the second half of the story to be told over two more.

Since this is the first review of this season, I'll make it clear now: Moffat has been my favorite writer, but the criteria of a Doctor Who episode doesn't change, so from now on, I can't show Moffat any mercy.

Doctor Who - "A Christmas Carol"

WHOSCALE: 3 out of 10

With the close of Series 5/Season 31, it was time for showrunner Steven Moffat to try his writing hand at the one other element of the revived series carried over from the Davies era - a Christmas special. 

I had been keeping close tabs on the production of this episode long before it aired, and both Moffat and Smith commented on the episode prior to it's air date, describing it as "very Christmasy." 

The title of the episode is obviously taken from the Charles Dickens book, which is in a way somewhat ironic, considering that the Ninth Doctor actually met Dickens as he was reading "A Christmas Carol" onstage in "The Unquiet Dead."

Overall, it's no secret to even the most casual viewer what Moffat did with this story - it is essentially Dickens' famous story set on another planet, with certain elements altered or added to give the episode the Narnia-style fantasy tone.

Even as I write this review, I find myself having trouble deciding on a rating that would do the episode justice, but at the same time not contradict the purpose of this review. This review is, after all, a comparison this episode to the likes of the first twenty-six seasons of the series. 

Holiday specials - the Christmas variety in particular - are always a coin toss when it comes to comparing them to traditional Doctor Who. It has always been my firm belief that there is a wrong and a right approach to this type of thing. Unfortunately for Moffat, it pains me to say that this episode is as close to the wrong approach as you can get. I'm speaking in terms of being a Doctor Who episode, of course. Granted, it was a Christmas special, and as such was intended to be just that - an episode filled with Christmas overtones, happy endings, no deaths, no violence, no over the top drama - just a frolicky romp through the snow that kids and adults could watch together on Christmas Day.  

There are elements of this episode that were neat and probably could have served a full-on Doctor Who episode well, such as the fish being able to swim through the fog, but looking back at the last 60 minutes I just watched, it generally feels like I just sat through Moffat's on personal interpretation of Dickens' story, which is what this episode was. There's no room for debate here.

Just for comparison, a decent Christmas Special for this review would be something along the lines of "The Runaway Bride" or "The End of Time." Both stories were set on Christmas, and did contain subtle holiday undertones, but 90 percent of the episodes were solely focused on the issues at hand - The Racnoss and The Master,  respectively. Never did I think I would see the day when I would use RUSSELL T DAVIES AGAINST STEVEN MOFFAT in a comparison, but in the case of Moffat's first special, Davies still holds the most points, by a long shot. To be fair though, Davies' first special was no pageant winner either - "The Christmas Invasion" painfully introduced us to the Tenth Doctor. However, with two three specials under Davies' belt that did reasonably well on the Whoscale, I can only hope that Moffat steps up his game in the future. 

Now that I've bored you to tears ranting about Moffat rehashing an old Christmas tale, I want touch on some of the things in this episode that did some serious damage to it's score. 

Foremost has to be the absolute and total rip off of Abrams' Star Trek film. Shaky cam, a starship bridge, exaggerated lens flares, and a character that could pass for Geordi La Forge. Need I say more? After the special aired, I noted it's likeness to fellow fans, and several fans indicated that this rip off was more than likely done as a mockery of Abrams' film, rather than an attempt to "follow a trend." Nevertheless, this kind of ridiculous kind of film making - the lens flares and shaky cam - has no place in an episode of Doctor Who, mockery or otherwise. 

The other usual deductions were present - overpowering, emotional orchestrated music, complete with a singing of "Silent Night." 

Another was how Abigail's secret was slowly alluded to - it seemed like Moffat wanted the audience believing that she might be pregnant. Maybe that was just me.

There's really nothing else I can say about it in regards to my review. To summarize, Amy and Rory were on a ship, about to crash land into an alien planet (which has a steam-punk appearance and still celebrates Christmas), and in order to prevent this catastrophe, The Doctor takes the longest route available, exercising more time travel in this single episode then the entire previous season put together. 

A great story idea, but it relied far too much on Dickens' original text.

Doctor Who - "The Hungry Earth"

WHOSCALE: 9 out of 10

The second two parter for this season was penned by Chris Chibnall, who had previously contributed the Tenth Doctor story, "42."

Under the direction of Moffat, Chibnall is the second writer to have a kind of redemption story since the Davies era.

The idea behind this story was obviously to reintroduce the classic villains, the Silurians. To do that, Chibnall borrowed heavily from the flavor of the Third Doctor era, which was when the Silurians got the most air time.

There were tons of nods to the original series in this episodes, particularly the structure of the episode. It contained all the traditional elements you would have found in a Earth-based Third Doctor story - a mining operation, a small, rural village, and a scarce team of scientists drilling into the Earth's crust. Additionally, Chibnall successfully overcame the issue of avoiding present-day times while still setting the story relatively close to 2010 (in 2020), thus there's no reason to suspect that touch screen technology and present day clothes wouldn't still be the norm.

The plot is poured on thick in the beginning, with strange grass growing in the cemetery, a man swallowed up by the Earth, and empty graves with no visible sign of being disturbed. Although I knew well before this episode aired that it would be a Silurian story, I imagined when watching this time around what it must have been like for someone who hadn't followed production of the season before it aired, with absolutely no clue what this one was about. I expect it was even more of treat for Third Doctor fans than it was for me.

Everything seemed spot on in this episode. The pacing was a bit faster than that of "The Time Of Angels, " but not enough to feel like the producers were having to cram a six episode story into one. The music was sparingly used once again, if not a slight bit more powerful than what was used in "The Time Of Angels."

The Doctor is once again leading the way in this episode, with companions Amy and Rory tagging along as they should, and the two puzzled scientists joining in. Strange for the new series, but Amy was absent for much of this episode, having suffered the same fate as Mo near the beginning. She only appears in a couple of shots then, one of those being from a Silurian viewpoint, and a short scene near the end of the episode where a Silurian surgeon is apparently about to dissect her, having already done so on Mo.

As with most of the episodes from Moffat's debut season, I could find very little that just turned me off about it. If I just had to pick any minuses, it would be the slight over-injection of drama from The Doctor as Amy is pulled underground, the other being the CGI backdrop at the very end, and the ridiculous time discrepancy when The Doctor & company are setting up a security system - they had eight minutes to do, and it's hardly feasibly to accomplish what they did in that time. The "montage" format that is used even further indicates that far more time than eight minutes passed.

The production team took a new approach to the look of the Silurians, which has gotten mixed opinions since the episode aired. Personally, I think they looked fantastic. All mask and costume and no CGI will always win in my book. However, they did seem to fall a bit short on the facial features; the new breed of Silurian retains more human characteristics than their 1970s predecessors. No doubt this was to better smooth the transition for audiences. A sort of "safety measure" so they wouldn't look too far-fetched alien. At any rate, I think the revamp of the Silurians turned out far better than that of the Cybermen.

As with traditional Doctor Who style, the episode ends on a cliffhanger, leading up to the setting of the second part.