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 Doctor's Wife"

WHOSCALE: 8.9 out of 10

So far, the second season under the reign of Moffat wasn't looking good in terms of staying within the parameters of the original series. Steven Moffat, who had contributed the highest scoring episodes during the Davies era, had thusfar contributed the lowest scoring, with the exception of "Day of the Moon," which still only managed to score a 6.5.

As I mention occasionally, during the off-season I always follow the production of the upcoming series as closely as I can, so that I can get an idea of which direction the new season might be going. In the case of Series 6/Season 32, I had very little to go on other than some location shooting, so I was very much in the dark about it. When the episode title was revealed, I had the same feelings about it as I did towards "The Doctor's Daughter" before it aired. Like then, I couldn't have been more wrong about this one.

In my opinion, this was perhaps the best episode of the season, contributed by none other than Neil Gaiman, who was responsible for writing the film Coraline, which shared the darker tone that Gaiman presented with this episode. 

The episode title was a total red herring - probably aimed at viewers who were already certain for themselves that River Song was indeed the Doctor's wife - because it never delivers on the literal meaning of it, having no marital reference of any kind. The episode brought back many elements from the original series that really made this one stand out while I watched it. 

Gaiman pretty much rolled into a 45 minute episode what fans of the original series had been pining for since the revival in 2005 - a look at the TARDIS interior corridors, a post-Ninth/Tenth Doctor episode that contains a previous control room, a peek into The Doctor's history,  and a story loosely involving Time Lords that weren't lead by James Bond and weren't stark raving mad.

There are so many little things that I noticed about this episode that instantly reminded me of the original series, and as a result it made the viewing experience more enjoyable - especially for someone who is watching through a pair of Phillip Hinchcliffe's spectacles. That's a figure of speech. I don't really have a pair of his glasses, but you get my meaning. If anyone has watched the original series as much as I have - in particular the Fourth Doctor era - they know very well the ambient sound of a proper barren alien world. "The Doctor's Wife" hits the nail right on the head in this regard. The ambient wind sound on the surface of The House was spot on.

The location for the surface shots were perfect, too. I'm not certain where they shot the scenes, I only know that it looks very familiar to the disused quarries that stood in for alien worlds during the original series. I know it's as overused as a Rory death, but it's the only setting that works without having viewers like me compare it to Tatooine, Abydos,  Hoth, Dagobah, or Earth. Earth settings can sometimes slide by - if it's done right. For example, in the Fourth Doctor story "The Androids of Tara," the planet Tara was very much Earth like, but the episode's narrative made to attempt to draw attention to this fact, and so audiences just ignore the likeness and accept it for what it is - Earth standing in for the planet Tara. One thing that perhaps aided in giving the illusion of alien world was that the scenes were filmed at night, under a dark sky. Similar to "Utopia," this was probably to support the fact that the planet was set under a sky with no stars.

The TARDIS corridor scenes were beautiful. The designers went with the minimalist, hexagonal and roundel look, much like the original series, as well as using the same color palette as the First Doctor's TARDIS interior. Bravo! Beautiful, and I sincerely hope this isn't the last we see of them.

The episode also utilizes another minimalist aspect in the department of characters. Apart from Auntie, Uncle, and Nephew, Idris is the only other guest appearance on screen. Michael Sheen's bellowing voice as The House was superb, and fit the character like a glove. 

Gaiman also elected to have The Doctor work with what he had around him to get himself out of an otherwise hopeless predicament - the TARDIS dematerializes in front of him, with Amy and Rory trapped on board. The Doctor is left in an abandoned junkyard full of wrecked TARDISes or TARDI, not sure which the plural is. With the help of Idris, who hold's The Doctor's TARDIS' conscience, The Doctor is able to build a make-shift TARDIS to come save the day. The make shift TARDIS room flying with the exterior exposed reminded me of the Third Doctor story "Inferno," one of my favorites from that season. Gaiman also included an Ood in this episode, which we had not seen since "The End of Time." Moffat improved the look of the Ood without a doubt, with lime green eyes and an orb.

If you're still reading, then you know by now that I have very little to bark at with this one. The only two things for me mainly were yet another Rory death, (we're up to five now!), and the somewhat heart wrenching farewell between The Doctor and Idris at the end. 

The music was much more subtle this time around, although it did get a bit orchestrated at times, for the most part it was dark and subtle. 

Much less use of skaky cam in this one, which was a plus. I failed to mention in my review of "The Curse of the Black Spot" how much shaky cam was used during that episode.

A brilliant episode, and it was certainly a breath of life after sitting through four episodes and having to spend an entire review with nothing positive to say. Hat's off to Mr. Gaiman, and I look forward to other stories he contributes, if he does.

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 - "Day of the Moon"

WHOSCALE: 6.5 out of 10

Once again, Moffat opens the second part to this two part story with a completely different setting and time frame from the last episode's cliffhanger. The first five to ten minutes - like the first half - was tremendously fast paced, mainly focused on bringing viewers up to speed on the events in the last three months (the time we are told as elapsed since the close of "The Impossible Astronaut" and the opening of "Day of the Moon.")

After taking into consideration what all Moffat indicated took place BETWEEN the two episodes, I began thinking to myself, this could have been almost a 10-part story, up there with the likes of "The Daleks' Masterplan" and "The War Games." Had we still been on serial format, that's probably what we would have got. There was so much potential there for a serial, and it's shame that Moffat had to skim over it all in a few brief clips. Even though it was shown that the four members of the TARDIS crew had been separated over the course of the past three months, a series of episodes filling this gap could have easily followed them each in much the same way we followed the TARDIS crew in "The Keys of Marinus," where The Doctor, Ian, Barbara and Susan were separated over different continents on Marinus, eventually reuniting with each other near the end of the story, and it was only a six-part serial.

However, things seem to take a slight upward turn in regards to the Whoscale when Canton and Amy arrive at the orphanage. During this sequence, Moffat turned up the creepiness level, toned down the background music to a Whoscale-friendly level, and slowed the pace down as well. This was of course, short lived. 

Perhaps the most annoying thing Moffat was doing at this point was still toying with the whole "Amy hasn't made up her mind yet" theme. Seriously? We're still on this? "Flesh And Stone," "The Vampires of Venice," "Amy's Choice," and "The Big Bang" have all tinkered with this theme, and it was my understanding that we had resolved this issue at the close of last season with the wedding of Amy and Rory. Yet, in spite of the couple saying their vows, Moffat still seems to get a giggle out of giving fan girlies something to gossip about. Speaking of Amy, one thing I failed to mention in my previous review was how Moffat suddenly dropped this sub-plot on us. A little girl is screaming for help in an old abandoned warehouse - yes, this seems an appropriate time to sit down with The Doctor (NOT RORY, MIND YOU!) and tell him you're PREGNANT. What the fudge?!! Come on, Moffat! That's one of Davies' stunts! You don't have to do it, too. 

So Amy's pregnant, then she's not. The she is, then she's not. Then we're lead to believe that it might be The Doctor's, and not Amy's. Oh no, SCANDAL IN THE TARDIS!! Why is this pathetic soap scum in a science fiction television series that's about traveling time and space? Moffat, you can't appeal to EVERYONE. There are people out there who just DON'T LIKE the fantasy sci-fi thing. They like scandal, cheating, heart breaks, heart throbs, relationships rising and falling, and all the drama that comes with it. Those people have Jersey Shore. Those people have The Bachelor and The Bachelorette. You can't make a series set in space appeal to those people, unless you make it Jersey Shore: In Space. Granted, you can do that, but that's not what Doctor Who is about, now is it? If you want to write Doctor Who, then write for the audience that watches because it's Doctor Who, not the audience that's divided on whether it's The Doctor's baby or whether it's Rory's.

Now before some fan girl goes bananas and makes a comment rant, I'm fully aware that Amy's pregnancy played a key role later in the season, but it could have fulfilled that role without needing to be smothered in soapy soap opera.

Amy is once again snatched away from Rory in much the same fashion as she was in last season's "The Hungry Earth."

The episode seemed to spend a lot of time uncovering who the mysterious little girl is, only to address the Silent occupation issue in the last twenty minutes. It was clever how the occupation was resolved, but something about this solution still didn't strike me just right. The Doctor didn't lead the way into this solution. In fact, The Doctor has consistently relied on his companions to take the upper hand, as he has been known to do often since the revival in 2005. This episode is a clear example, where we are left ASSUMING that the humans were able to take care of the Silents. In other words, The Doctor was already leaving before it was confirmed that the Silents were gone. I didn't see the Fourth Doctor doing this. He would have stayed until he was absolutely certain the threat was over. 

River is dropped off back at Stormcage (again), and we learn that the kiss The Doctor and River share in this scene is not only their first, but their last. Be sure to make a mental note of this when you read my review of this season's finale.

In another unusual move for The Doctor, the whole business about the Silents, their purpose, etc. is dropped completely in favor of some unrelated adventures.

In closing, looking back at the two part story as a whole, there was so much of the story told in either flashbacks or montages, that each part felt more like completely independent stand alone episodes. As bad as this sounds, I think it was a complex story that had to be crammed into 90 minutes of screen time, and the end result was a fuster cluck of a mess. Unless Moffat is prepared to change the series back over to serial format, whether it be 45 minute episodes or 25 minute episodes, I don't think a story this complex should be attempted again. If it is, it's going to need no less than three full episodes to itself. Imagine if Russell T Davies had tried to tell the "Last of the Time Lords" trilogy in only two episodes? There's no way he could have effectively squeezed the events of "Utopia" into the opening of "The Sound of Drums."

One final note - the last scene in this episode was probably the most intriguing . The little girl that occupied the space suit is last seen in an alley regenerating, revealing that she is either a Time Lord, or possesses characteristics similar to one.

The opening story came to close, with many questions still left unanswered. It wasn't the best start, and even though we were only two episodes in, it was already looking like Series 5/Season 31 was going to be the golden season since 2005.

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 Big Bang"

WHOSCALE: 7 out of 10

This episode marked the completion of the first season under Moffat's supervision, and served to tidy up a lot of open threads Moffat has started over the course of the season. I remember seeing the previous episode for the first time, and for a whole week pondering who on Earth The Doctor could get himself out of a sealed Pandorica, and I always came up with nothing.

In addition to showing the usual "Previously..." clips from "The Pandorica Opens," the pre-title sequence for this episode opens identically to the post-title sequence scenes in "The Eleventh Hour," only this time no TARDIS crashes in Amelia Pond's backyard, and stars have become something of a fairy tale, considering that they disappeared along with the rest of creation in Roman times. Amelia is lead to the local museum, where the Pandorica is on display - having been preserved throughout history. The Pandorica opens (again), but reveals the occupant to be Amy Pond, which is of course the aged-to-early-twenties Amelia Pond. I remember being so utterly confused at that moment, and wondered if Moffat could explain such a twist logically, if it could be explained at all.

After the title sequence, the episode picks up where we left off, with Rory mourning the death of Amy. The Doctor appears in a flash, donning a Fez and a mop, and instructs Rory to open the Pandorica (which at the time had just been sealed with The Doctor inside) using his sonic screwdriver. Rory follows his instructions, and Amy is then placed in the Pandorica to be preserved in stasis until her younger self (Amelia) makes contact with the Pandorica in 1996. You follow? It's always been my intent with my reviews to avoid explaining the plot and synopsis of a particular episode, but when dealing with some of the stories Moffat dreams up, it's almost necessary to explain his paradoxes in lament terms just so my readers can understand what I'm commenting on. The first few minutes explains how Amy ends up in the Pandorica, as well as explains how The Doctor is able to escape captivity to even materialize in front of Rory in a Fez.

From this point, the episode shifts from the Stonehenge location to the interior of the museum in 2010, where most of the story is resolved. There were some absolutely terrific Doctor moments in this episode, that I felt truly represented the mentality of the classic Doctors. One such occasion was when a near-death future Doctor appears, and moments before dying whispers something to his "younger" self. What was so reminiscent was how carefully The Doctor listened to himself, knowing that anything he had to tell himself is always important. This is further alluded to at the beginning of Series 6/Season 32, where it's indicated that The Doctor trust no one more in the universe than himself. The rooftop scenes were done well, also.

Another similar instance is when it's revealed that The Doctor's words with Amy in the forest aboard the Byzantium is actually from a future version, explaining why the "Flesh And Stone" Doctor was without his tweed jacket, but when he holds Amy's hands, he's wearing it again. The Doctor assures Amy that he isn't sure what the cracks are in her wall, but that he's "working it out," referring to himself in third person, having seen his past self several feet away analyzing sonic screwdriver readings.

As I mentioned in the last review, it was nice for once not to have an alien invasion as the blockbuster season finale plot line. Something I wanted to be sure and note was the fact that The Doctor took matters into his own hands on several occasions, and effectively took it upon himself to restore the universe to it's previous form. I say this mainly in contrast to Russell T. Davies' first two part finale, "Bad Wolf" and "The Parting Of The Ways," where the companion saved the day.

Moffat took care to not overlook any obvious plot holes, and even chose to incorporate some of the questions viewers might be asking into the episode. The Doctor verbally ponders how a petrified Dalek could be restored - or even exist at all for that matter - considering the Daleks' home planet, Skaro, would have been wiped out along with the rest of the universe; therefore preventing their creation altogether.

The resolution of the story seemed to be wrapped up rather quickly - within the first half of the episode. It wasn't because it was rushed - on the contrary, the pacing of this episode seem to relatively match that of the previous, and it didn't feel like key plot points were having to be crammed into 30 minutes. The story was wrapped up evidently in order to reserve the last half of the episode to closing open threads regarding Amy and Rory's personal life. The couple are married, and in what is perhaps the least explicable thing Moffat has ever wrote, an otherwise erased from history Doctor is restored to present time by the almighty powers of Amy's memory. Once again, we're on this mental thing. It was clear this was a recurring theme throughout the season - that of major events changing according to a character's willpower. I let the resurrection of Rory slide because it was reasonably explained - whomever looted Amy's home for tidbits to build a scenario on included a picture of Amy and Rory in centurion dress. This doesn't however excuse the fact that Rory was nothing more than an Auton, and yet again by sheer power of will, he's turned into a human - that still retains Auton characteristics, such as immortality (maybe this means he won't die anymore?) and a still fully functional flip-down hand gun. I don't mean a sidearm, either. I mean an actual HAND gun. But the business of The Doctor being restored simply because Amy remembered him - how does that work? It was never explained how Amy's thoughts alone could resurrect someone who was otherwise non-existent.

The soundtrack was a bit better this time, being much more subtle during the museum scenes, but it later seemed to escalate into full orchestrated mix again for The Doctor's reappearance.

After the reception, The Doctor scurries off back to his TARDIS, exchanging a few final words with River Song, and moments later is joined by newly weds Amy and Rory.

On that note, the season closes. The change in production staff was showing considerable promise, as fans of the original series had been treated a full course meal with Series 5/Season 31. The show still had a long way to go, but seemed to be slipping back into the imaginative science fiction it was during it's first 26 seasons.

Doctor Who - "The Lodger"

WHOSCALE: 6.5 out of 10

Tackling the "character-lite" episode for this season was Gareth Roberts, who had previously penned "The Unicorn And The Wasp" for the Tenth Doctor. It should be noted that this episode is based on a short comic strip that was published during the Tenth Doctor's run, and as such was written for Tennant's Doctor. However, Roberts seemed to see the problem with having the episode soley focus on The Doctor living as a flatmate, and so a mystery element was introduced.

This was yet again another episode that I have mixed feelings about. So many things were done well, and so many weren't. As an episode of Doctor Who, I thoroughly enjoyed it, but when I look at it through my Whoscale goggles, I'm not so sure what to think.

Roberts loosely followed the same format that Moffat did with "Blink" by having the character with minimal screen time (in this case, Amy) still be actively involved in the story. Amy's absence from the episode is explained in a logical manner. Instead of just having her out of the episode altogether like Davies did with "Love And Monsters," Amy continues to offer information, clues and advice from the confines of the dematerialized TARDIS. It's always a good thing when the writer intertwines the two lead characters' roles in a way that we as viewers don't suspect it's a "character-lite" episode.

There were several nods to the original series in this episode, and some less obsessive fans might not have caught them. Some were obvious - The Doctor giving Craig a brief biography of himself, with flashes of the first three Doctors, and others weren't so obvious - If anyone's seen "Spearhead From Space" with the Third Doctor, then you couldn't help but be reminded of it during Smith's shower scene. Another that was tremendously vague was when Craig recruits The Doctor for his local football match, and The Doctor asks, "Football...is that the one with the sticks?" - harking back to the Fifth Doctor's skilled cricket abilities. It would seem that he also possesses top notch football skills, as well. In addition to sprinkles of classic Doctor Who, there were numerous other quirks about this episode that fit the bill for what you'd expect from The Doctor, such as his football jersey number being "11." Another was The Doctor's reactions to indications of romance. Craig explains the "understanding" in case The Doctor needs some alone time with wink, and The Doctor winks back in acknowledgement, immediately following the response by questioning why he would want alone time.

The episode did well to keep us on the edge of our seats with the volume a little higher so we wouldn't miss a beat after the clocks starting going awry at Craig's and The Doctor's flat. Since I'm in the States, I had to watch new episodes online, and when the time loop at the end of the football match started, I remember thinking that my video played had froze up.

I think what may have me so undecided on this episode's score is because it kept weaving back and forth between two separate stories - one of The Doctor experiencing domestic life with Craig, the other of the mystery upstairs. Now, don't get me wrong - the "weaving" this episode was doing was not so abrupt that it felt like two plot lines running parallel to each other (i.e. "Boom Town"). Roberts did well in mixing the mystery of what was upstairs in with the premise of the comic strip, also titled "The Lodger."

As with a lot of new episodes since the revival in 2005, this one took the biggest hit on the Whoscale in the last ten minutes. Something about the resolutions of plots just isn't sorted with the writers. Like so many before - to the point of almost becoming a revived series tradition - the "companions" for this episode save the day, and not by some clever thinking or application of logic - no, by using the same incredible mental powers that Bracewell used in "Victory Of The Daleks." Basically, by "wishing" the baddies away, Craig saves The Doctor and Sophie. If you're a diehard reader of this blog, this be sure to remember that resolution when reading my review of "Closing Time" in Series 6/Season 32. The phrase "kiss the girl!" just seems like it was plucked out of a Disney film, so it just didn't feel very Doctor Who-ish.

There were some VERY intriguing aspects about this episode. I remember my reaction the first time seeing the interior of the upstairs flat, and immediately thinking, "OH, S***! IT'S A TARDIS!!!" The fact that we never actually find out who owns that TARDIS makes it even better, with the mysterious visitor getting away scott free. I recall speculation floating around after it aired - fans were guessing The Master, Omega, River Song, Susan Foreman and everything between.

It wasn't has close to original Who has Chibnall's Silurian story, but it seemed to have roughly enough ingredients to make it fair well on the Whoscale.

Doctor Who - "Vincent And The Doctor"

WHOSCALE: 6 out of 10

Following the Silurian two part story, Richard Curtis penned the next episode. This story was intended to be the season's historical installment, as was "Tooth And Claw" for Series 2/Season 28, "The Shakespeare Code" for the Series 3/Season 29, and "The Unicorn And The Wasp" for Series 4/Season 30. While all of these previous installments have featured a historic figure as one of the main characters, in each case the stories were generally set around the Doctor Who style mystery/monster format, with the historic character being "along for the ride" so to speak in much the same way The Doctor's companions were meant to be.

However, in the case of "Vincent And The Doctor," it's clear that Curtis abandoned this format to focus more on teaching viewers about Vincent Van Gogh, and less about making it an episode of Doctor Who that features a historic character.

First off, I'll point out a technical oversight that I noticed before the title sequence. The episode opens with The Doctor and Amy visiting an art museum that contains all of Van Gogh's paintings. The Doctor is intrigued by one painting in particular of a church, where a mysterious creature was depicted in one of the church windows. This odd depiction convinces The Doctor to travel to the past to talk to Van Gogh personally about the painting, which serves as The Doctor's reason for visiting Van Gogh to begin with. Clearly, the creature would have wreaked havoc on the Earth by the time 2010 had rolled around, but oddly enough, the creature seemed to keep quiet all those years. Now, one might could explain this by saying that the painting was the same one done when The Doctor and Amy were with him at the church, but at the close of the episode, the church painting is shown to NOT have a creature in the window, which would seem to indicate THAT painting is the one Van Gogh did with The Doctor.

Throughout the course of the episode, I had mixed feelings about it. Sometimes it felt like Doctor Who, sometimes it didn't - but more often than not, it didn't. The problem I think was that Curtis was so wound up in trying to educate viewers instead of telling a gem of Doctor Who. Granted, the purpose of a "historical episode" is to be a rough history lesson, and the original series did several of these during Hartnell's first two seasons, but having not been told they were historic episodes, I never would have known because the plot was so tastefully done. "The Aztecs" comes to mind - one of my favorites from the Hartnell era - where a history lesson about the ancient Aztecs spanned four episodes without requiring a single monster. My point is, educational episodes are great, as long as you don't make it OBVIOUS that being educational is what you're trying to be. Besides, most children are more inclined to absorb such facts if they aren't aware that's they're being fed educational data.

Curtis minimized the use of CGI in this story by having the Krafayis be invisible to everyone in the episode except Van Gogh. This turns out to be the reason behind some of the accusations Van Gogh had got by the townspeople about being mad. Kudos for that, but it was one of those CGI-dodging gimmicks that's a bit obvious to the trained viewer. OF COURSE it's invisible. I'm not encouraging the use of CGI by no means, but there are other ways to get around it besides simply having the appearance of the monster absent for the most part of the episode, and writing it being invisible (and blind, apparently). Animatronics comes to mind. Yeah, it's a lot more time consuming to build a puppet and shoot some forced-perspective shots with it, but the pay off is worth it. If you look on YouTube, you've got five-year olds posting tutorial videos about using Adobe AfterEffects. Most kids know the difference between CGI and real, tangible puppets, so they're more likely to be scared behind the sofa by a physical puppet than a CGI monster. There's some body language that CGI just can't mimic, and it's a dead giveaway. The kids may know it's a mechanically operated puppet, but to them, its a REAL puppet nonetheless, and they can't help but wonder if it's going to be hiding under their bed later that night. The worst a CGI monster can do is crash your PC or Mac.

The episode also had atleast 30% t0 40% of it's shots done in shaky-cam, so do I really need to rant again about why I subtract points for this?

What really killed this episode's score was the final ten minutes, where it effectively drops into a modern day primetime drama format for Van Gogh's visit to the 2010 museum. Having an emotional, heart wrenching Lifehouse-ish song over the epilogue of an episode has been the norm for television dramas like "Grey's Anatomy,""E.R.," and "One Tree Hill" for years. I'm not sure if this was Moffat's experimental attempt to "see how the fans like this format," but it's been my understanding that hard core Whovians were outraged by it, myself included. If there's one thing that has no place in an episode of Doctor Who, it's modern day music with lyrics! Thankfully, so far this episode has been the only one to do so, having already seen Series 6/Season32.

It was an OK episode, but as the title implies, it was mainly about a particular character, to the point that the inclusion of a monster made little to no sense at all.