You brought tears to my eyes, really. This Doctor Who finale is really so witty, so beautiful, so magical, so sad and exciting and funny and intelligent and empty pages, hearing whispers of dead people, little elements that trigger memories, the origin of the universe (being a paradox, as the universe is based on itself) the sun an ongoing explosion (which it is!) and sacrifice and time travel and growing up, merging a world of adventure with a world of marriage, merging the child with the grownup. Steven Moffat is awesome.

correction: not merging the child with the grownup. Reconciling. Co-existing. Rory AND the Doctor. Amy's boys. I so love series 5 and I can't wait for the next.

Reminds me of the scene in Tomb of the Cybermen where the Doctor talks to Victoria about his memories of his family. Great stuff.

lovely article! Thank you

Hopefully, DW can only get better from here as next season will hopefully focus on the doctor and his mysterious nemesis as well as his relationship with River Song. I'm sure there will be plenty more themes amongst all that to satisfy the adults in the audience again.

Great article. Right on the money. Thanks.

Doctor Who has never been strictly a children's program. That's a misconception the BBC publicity department has been spewing since 1963 and frankly the UK is the only place ON THE PLANET that considers Doctor Who a kid's show. Everywhere else it is treated as a FAMILY show (there is a difference), and the majority of its fans are adults. Davies realized this, and Moffat realizes this. Not that I expect to start seeing love scenes and bad language and blood and guts added to the show, but there is nothing wrong with the addition of complex storylines and concepts, especially since most kids today are being raised on manga and anime, and if you want complex, adult plots, look at that stuff.

... profound for den of geek...

Always figured Doctor Who was more of a family-friendly show anyway. Besides, just because children like a show that doesn't automatically reduce it to the level of a kid's show. There's probably a few youngsters who love The Wire, but I'm not going to start calling that a show for kids am I?

Now I can't get Erasure out of my head. (Don't you give me no reason..)

Graham Williams used to pitch it at reasonably intelligent / literate 14 year olds, I seem to remember. Terrance Dicks also said that continuity was something that any reasonably intelligent 14 year old viewer could be expected to remember from a year ago or so. Do you think that the demographic has shifted lower than this? I was struck by the amount of children in Season 5 and the gay colours of the daleks - horrid. I still think that Doctor Who is quite literate television but that Season 5 was not as thought provoking as Season 1 (Bad Wolf / Boom Town / Dalek) or Season 3 (Family of Blood / Utopia). Actually I quite liked the one with James Corden in it and the one where they all liked ELO.

You can tell there's not much in the way of new shows to report on! Talk about deep, thesaurus deep!!

I always thought of Who being family viewing, not a "kid's" show.

I don't miss people so much as my dead cat. Dr Who isn't always for kids; take a look at "Turn Left" (which strangely never gets repeated - is it only me who's sick of Dalek vs Cyberman?) and tell me that's for children?

Beautifully written article, but you're a little bit wrong. Sure, it's for us as well and the slightly old kids and your Gran, but don't underestimate the kids. They get things because they're emotionally honest. I remember watching and understanding Ghost Light on it's first transmission, and then went to read up on evolution. What is it Douglas Adams said? "Complicated enough for the kids to be interested, simple enough for the adults to understand..."

Yes, nice article, but completely wrong. Of course Dr Who is for kids - this series, and every one of the 30 previous. All for kids. And teenagers. And grown-ups. It's for everyone, and everyone can get something out of it. 'Camp' spaceships?? Kids don't see camp spaceships, they see SPACESHIPS!!! And they love 'em!

As a fifteen year old spectator I found this article a most intriguing one. Although what you say about the emotional side is correct, I don't feel that the show has become a kids show. Many people have this misconception. You're probably thinking that a 15 year old is no more an adult that a 10 year old so should not be commenting with such a third person perspective, but in fact, children of all ages (within reason) can appreciate the emotional side and therefore I speak on behalf of all children. As for your comment on the multicoloured Daleks being for kids, how dare you suggest that we would be so easily pleased by simple bright colours, in fact the majority of my friends disapprove and we are more stimulated by the emotional side. Please, don't think that children have such simple tastes. And also, it's a famiy show, meaning there are going to be elememts which may not appeal to you. It does not mean it's target audience is a 10 year old. I appreciate your meaning nonetheless.

What's all this pretentious guff about 'The Big Bang'? It was a below-par season finale, barely watched by anyone. Not for kids? Not for intelligent people either!

I am a 12 year old girl and I watch doctor who. I understood every moment of this episode and i think most children over the age of around 10 will. The children who watch doctor who, who are under 10 just see the fact that the doctor was gone for a bit and now he's back on the screen! I really, really enjoyed this series and I can't wait for series 6.

I know this article is nearly a year old, and I know that probably no-one will read these comments again, but I am compelled to respond to this article anyways. To the article's thesis (lol thesis) that The Big Bang was not for kids, I respectfully disagree; in fact, I find the idea that it is specifically "not for kids" rather than "not *just* for kids" I find to be a complete misstep. (of course, maybe I'm being too literal; language is imprecise after all. But even if I take a more liberal interpretation, "family-friendly but designed/written primarily with adults in mind" the following argument still stands more or less unmodified. On a more practical level, the idea that a national institution of a family show would attempt to put an episode with a primary function/meaning/target demographic which is specifically NOT for children, rather than not *just* for children, seems a little misguided and naive. But lets look at the content of the thing anyway. The Big Bang in particular, I found, did not write itself for adults dealing with themes only adults can understand. Well, let me say to begin with that I often find that people give children less credit than they are due, and furthermore, overly simplify what them as a single group: after all, something a six year old will have difficulty understanding might me no problem whatsoever to a 12 year old. To that end, I find that saying the themes of the episode: death, loss, friendship, heartwarmingness, etc. are completely out of grasp of kids, is absolutely wrong. They may not *completely* understand the way adults do, in some cases, and may be completely befuddled by it in others: after all, remember, our proverbial 6 year old is different from our proverbial 12 year old - you can see how our binary system of "for kids/not for kids" doesn't work already; but anyway I digress. My point is that these themes and ideas are not beyond the perception of children, and if that is the case, then Doctor Who is the perfect platform for showing such themes and "adult" ideas in a kid-friendly way. (Let me talk about this in specific for a moment. Well, probably the most famous example of Doctor Who dealing with lofty "adult" themes is the Daleks, who illustrate racism and bigotry the evils of (nuclear) war in a science-fictiony and terrifying way (which just illustrates another way we don't give kids enough credit - the monsters in Doctor Who are damn scary at times, but they somehow keep coming back for more!). Their very first appearance was only 20 years after WW2, and it couldn't exactly be ignored for the children's benefit. In that fateful first appearance, they very consciously describe them as a race of Nazis extrapolated into a terrible apocalyptic nightmare: basically, hysterical, scared little things seeing everything that's different from them as a threat - they think the peaceful Thals are the abhorrent ones. Sure, it's a horrible image, but because it's fantastical and "out there", and in the style of the show, it's shown with a degree of brevity, sans violence, and with a triumphant ending. The six year old might only fully understand the lesson a few years later, and the 12 year old will probably pick up on it, but either way, it's their for them. Anyway, enough of this extended parenthesis, on with the main point.(hey, what do you expect, these comments don't let me do paragraphs!)) To carry on The Big Bang is a perfect example of dealing with our themes in particular: what I see is loss, death and family dealt with sensitively, and, in some cases, euphemistically and with appropriate science fiction metaphors (heck, what else is science fiction for anyway?). It was in fact the epitome of what Steven Moffat means when he describes Doctor Who as a fairy story for our age: it was profound and mature, as Doctor Who usually is and should be, but it was also wide-eyed, uplifting and with a positive message. Like the Daleks and bigotry, it is a message that should be taken away by it's audience, a message that once again, can't be completely ignored for the children's benefit (and I use the word "benefit" lightly of course). It has to be acknowledged somehow, and Doctor Who is the perfect way of imparting that. The message is always there, just like it was for The Daleks. And it would be a stretch to define THAT as wide-eyed. But it IS mature. And that brings me conveniently on to my next point. (again, paragraphs, man.) The argument "let kids enjoy all the camp spaceships, sonic screwdrivers" etc. I find remarkable. In fact, I was nearly upset by the very idea of it. Let me brush over the more general aspects of it being unashamedly a fairy tale with a central message that IS meant to be taken away by kids, as I believe I've been over that enough. What I want to discuss here relates to, I think, an idea which is almost outright condescending to children. Of course kids will appreciate it for the spaceships and 'splosions. But NOT the "camp" spaceships and 'splosions by any means as domino brilliantly pointed out - the idea of appreciating ironic or bad-taste value rather than sincere value is so insidious that only an adult could respond to it. (besides camp is an aspect of Doctor Who that is primarily applied retroactively, and only ever should, if ever, be applied retroactively: write your stories which are great in the NOW, don't reference esthetic stuff that's gone out of fashion because it used to be in style at a time when Doctor Who was being made in the past. Take your "irony" somewhere else) Tying this whole thang up, I'd like to mention this whole issue in reference to the misconception that people have; not the misconception that other people in this comments section reference, theirs is a misconception that there's a misconception, and that it's the most important misconception. MY misconception, which is so widespread and subtle that hardly anyone notices or mentions it. It's basically the idea that "children's TV is childish". Children's TV is always silly and funny, and it certainly isn't "proper" TV. It's not ever serious, it's silly and throwaway. Furthermore, if a X has certain elements of maturity or drama, then it can't POSSIBLY be a show for kids or a family show, because kids just don't get that sort of thing. This is what causes the most confusion and jarring (jarringness?) about the appropriateness of Doctor Who. The have a problem with it being described as "for kids". NOTE: "for kids", not "just for kids", so put down your pitchforks, fans. It's not my fault the English language doesn't differentiate FOR and EXCLUSIVE FOR. It's a damn nightmare for digital logic. Anyway, to the point. Doctor Who disproves this whole "kids TV is silly" fallacy that people have, and people have a hard time accepting it. Kid's TV is just as important, if not more important, than adult's TV.It has a bigger impression on them. I think Steven Moffat put it best in an interview. He said that, when your writing for children, you have to write it simpler, and you have to write it BETTER. And that's exactly what The Big Bang was. Because the stronger, bolder stories and messages work for children. They need something great, not just some fluff that you can disregard. And that is why Doctor Who is their modern fairy tale. Thanks for reading. It must have been exhausting for you.