Doctor Who: The Angels Take Manhattan spoiler-free review

Review Simon Brew 26 Sep 2012 - 06:48

Doctor Who signs off until Christmas with The Angels Take Manhattan. Here's our spoiler-free review...

7.5 The Angels Take Manhattan

Appreciating that most of you know what's going to happen in this episode, given that it's a little secret Karen Gillan and Arthur Darvill are leaving Doctor Who, we're still going to be extra-cautious not to give anything away in this review. As such, plot discussion will be minimal.

What we can say is what's given away in the title. The Angels Take Manhattan sees the return of the Weeping Angels. It also sees the aforementioned departure of Amy and Rory. And while it's not a perfect episode, it does have a real emotional wallop to it. Steven Moffat, who is on writing duties here, takes real time to give two of his characters a good send-off, and there will be little doubt come the end credits that he's managed to do just that.

Furthermore, the style, look and feel of the episode is exquisite. This week's blockbuster theme is a good, detective film noir, and director Nick Hurran - along with the production designers - are clearly having a ball with it (as is Moffat with the script). The episode at its best looks amazing, and the New York location shoot is well used as well. Credit where credit's due: each week, Doctor Who has really tried to give us a distinctive looking standalone blockbuster, and The Angels Take Manhattan - whilst not quite as noisy as some of the others - looks glorious.

Let's get the grumbles out of the way. The Angels themselves, if anything, are the weak bit here. Inevitably, given that this is their third full story in Doctor Who, their scare factor has diluted the more they're exposed. Steven Moffat once again finds ways to evolve them and deepen them, but The Angels Take Manhattan does lack the sinister edge and the get-under-your-skin fright of the Angels of past. That's a by-product of us getting more familiar with them, but also there's something to do with the Angels near the start of the episode that doesn't quite work.

Also, the episode zips around an awful lot, and it requires some attention to follow the assorted threads. We've no problem with that - television that demands something of its audience is no bad thing - yet it's the stiller moments that are the most effective here. As much fun as Steven Moffat tries to pack into the episode, it's in the final third where it's very much at its strongest.

We're not going to say much more, because you really don't want this episode spoiled. So we'll come to the crux of it: did we love The Angels Take Manhattan? No, although we'd bet that many of you will. But it's nonetheless a good episode, that's excellent when its focus more overtly shifts to what we know is coming.

The ending in particular is strong, as much for the Doctor as for anything else. And Matt Smith is brilliant once more. It'd be remiss to say he gives one of his best performances in the role, because his central work in the show, particularly over what's been a bumpy-ish five episodes, has been uniformly tremendous. Karen Gillan and Arthur Darvill are no slouches either, and The Angels Take Manhattan is a real reminder of the strength they've brought to Doctor Who over the best few years.

Our advice for Saturday night? Lower your expectations just a little, get some tissues ready, and prepare for a good, moving episode of Doctor Who. It's just a shame we won't get any more until Christmas...

Follow our Twitter feed for faster news and bad jokes right here. And be our Facebook chum here.

Disqus - noscript

You may need a proof reader mate.

reminds, me, of, that, bit, in, red, dwarf,

So 3 spoiler free reviews so far, an unprecedented 11/10, a 5* and a meh from Den of Geek... irritatingly I usually agree with Den of Geek *but* you guys called Amy's Choice the first mis-step of Series 5 so for that reason alone I'm going to hold out some hope.

Tried rewatching Amy's Choice twice now, and still not keen. Appreciate I'm in the minority there (took a lot of personal flack for not liking it, too), but still, these reviews are just one person's opinion. Also: the above review isn't a 'meh', It's a "good, moving episode". It's not a flat out rave, granted, but that's far from saying it's a middling episode :-) - Simon

"while it's not a perfect episode" + "the style, look and feel of the episode is exquisite" = style over substance

That's not actually what they said at all. You might want to read the rest of the review: "real emotional wallop", "get the tissues ready"

Not sure how to take the call to lower expectations as my hopes for Power of Three were through the roof after last weeks DofG review and found it by far the worst of the series.

Didn't mean to contribute to the flack (that said how can one not fall in love with an episode that includes lawnmower wielding grannies? ;)). It really wasn't a criticism of the review,

No worries, and wasn't aiming anything at you! Got no problem with people disagreeing/taking umbrage with reviews! Vast majority of feedback is always constructive!

Normally Den of Geek is a good indicator of whether or not I'll enjoy something, but after your spoiler free (and later full) reviews praised Power of Three to the moon I'm taking this one with a pinch of salt. I thought Po3 was a real let down, especially the final 5 or 10 minutes...

I know many people here love Moffat's DW but not me. This series has been so dumbed down in its pitch and made too comedic to be remotely credible - it really is style over substance with thin plots and plot holes. The plot is so often, so easily resolved, there's no drama in how will the doctor get out of that one. Eg last episode's wave of a magic wand (sorry the sonic)/deux ex machina resolution and general retread of RTD's earth invasion blue prints. The daleks were so scared of the Asylum yet it wasn't actually that dangerous. Anyway my expectations were higher being the Angels but I should have known better.

In fairness, DoG did criticize the previous episode for the all-powerful sonic screwdriver rushed finale. They just said they liked the rest of the episode sufficiently to offset it. Personally, I nodded off when they got to the spaceship, woke up seconds later and it'd blown up. I wasn't a fan of last week's ep.

In fact, apart from the excellent 1st episode, this season hasn't been a patch on last year.

Still great as ever with the non-spoilers reviews and not treading onto the stones- keep the good work up

As opposed to the deus ex machina ending of Bombtown? I'm not knocking the RTD era at all, but I find the more fantastical version under Moffat much, much, more enjoyable. RTD more than Moffat is responsible for "magic wand" get outs. Not that I'm having a go at RTD, but those are the facts.

Agreed RTD was worse in that respect. I'm no fan of RTD's Who either however. I'm thinking of the genuine drama and intelligent plots of say Genesis or Power of the Daleks versus Asylum and Victory. Or indeed compare any modern Who season to say seasons 12-14 which despite being 35 years old are arguably much higher quality sci fi drama. Pyramids of Mars, Terror of the Zygons, Deadly Assassin etc.

The pay off in Genesis was that a Dalek went over a piece of metal on the floor which completed the job that the Doctor felt that he couldn't morally do himself and that they became "entombed", Pyramids of Mars was resolved by the Doctor sending Sutekh into a temporal trap after attaching some macguffin from the Tardis,Deadly Assasin was resolved with a similar flimsy pretext and so was Terror of the Zygons. I'm really not having a pop, but if you look at it, classic Who's ending's were just as (if not worse in many occasions) questionable as new Who. The difference was that they had 4 weeks (6 weeks in a couple of your examples) to lay down a plot whereas today we have 45 minutes for one episode and obviously twice that for a 2 parter. They are very different beasts. Comparing old Who to New Who is like comparing An Unearthly Child to The Caves of Androzani.

As much as I admire Karen Gillan as an actress (she was extremely good in the BBC4 Jean Shrimpton biopic), I've never found myself caring about Amy that much. I always cared about characters in the RTD era. Yes, perhaps he lost his way towards the end a bit by bringing Rose back again and again, but her first exit was extremely powerful. Whereas, to me, Amy is not this wonderful, glorious, ingenious woman that the Doctor describes her as. She is fickle, selfish, bossy and, often, little more than a cardboard cut-out plot device with a cracking pair of legs. While Gillan gets the emotional stuff spot-on, I don't find myself caring about it because I find Amy so dislikeable in general. In comparison, I adore Rory. I think he is a wonderful companion and Amy really doesn't deserve him what with her disturbing obsession with the Doctor taking priority more often than not. Moffat put all his character development into Rory's journey without thinking maybe Amy should evolve a little. So, when it comes to Angels Take Manhattan, I'll be far sadder over Rory's exit than Amy's. I just can't help agreeing with Rory in Asylum when he says how obvious it is that he loves her more....

After two doses of bloody Chibnall I'll take what I'm given and be grateful.

I just don't like the format that was adopted in series 6 with this split season business.
I feel as if something is missing from the episodes when they are so blatantly being used as a vehicle to get to a mid season finale. In the case of this season it feels as if so far it has been a massively drawn out goodbye to Amy - we even saw the new companion in episode one, so I have this feeling of 'Okay we got it.. she's leaving!' and it's not going to be a surprise to any of us when she actually gets on with it and leaves... so I wish they'd have gotten rid in episode one.
I think part of the problem I have is that when you get a dud episode in this split season format (or a few duds if i'm honest about this season so far) I feel cheated because there's only a few episodes before a massive gap.. whereas previously everything was nicely tied up in a series so you felt satisfied with a full series' plot's closure and had something to mull over before the next series began afresh.

I don't get this, we were told Rose was some kind of superwoman by RTD because she guessed the prank might be students. She abandoned her boyfriend without so much as a sorry, didn't seem to care much that he'd allowed him to be accused of murder, not that fussed her mother had been worrying for months at a time, said things along the lines of "you'll be back, I know how sad you are" to the Doctor. Anyone who showed any interest in the Doctor (even when she was in front of her boyfriend!) was met with insults. It's not really the point that she got to like Sarah Jane, it's the unpleasant comments she made about her initially that helped paint a negative image. All the kind of behaviour I would never tolerate from an acquaintance, let alone a friend and certainly not the "greatest companion in the universe" and yet we were told Rose was some kind of goddess? By the end of series 2 I really disliked her character and her constant inappropriate lusting after the Doctor (which was fortunately in Amy's case, dismissed early on, rather than increasing as time went on).
Amy on the other hand has been actively shown to have a good head on her shoulders, we're first introduced to her intelligence when she thinks outside of the box to make simultaneous insights in the Doctors character and the situation in the Beast Below. The character flaws you described are portrayed as a direct result of her abandonment issues to do with the Doctor flying off as a child and her being able to remember the time line where her parents were eaten by the cracks.

I don't want to know what it is, but does the ponds leaving actually have some connection to the eleventh hour?

Oh Christ. So it's looking like 2012 could be the most disappointing year of Nu Who yet seen. I enjoyed David Tennants 'Specials' more than these episodes. If I lower my expectations any more I'll have to dig a hole. And there's still another Christmas special to endure ( I HATE the X-Mas episodes, they are like Plastic Who, on auto-pilot). -sigh-.

You're just a wrong un, if you enjoyed planet of the dead, the end of time and the next doctor more than asylum of the daleks, a town called mercy and power of three then you're living in a strange world that I wouldn't want to visit.
Is Love and Monsters playing on a loop on every TV?!

I've never felt the need to post on Den of Geek, but some of the
comments below have made me! First off, RTD was pants. There were a few
genuinely good episodes stuck in a mire of rubbish and, towards the end, self-indulgence.
RTD thought he was Doctor Who, hence David Tennant's vain and egocentric death.
The specials building up to Tennant's departure were rubbish, and Rose was an
abysmal companion! He even ruined The Master! There were some real cop-out
endings, a lot of McGuffins, and a new generation of technobabble that feels as
contrived as it always has. Whitepoint Stars and Delta Waves. It might not
sound like proton generators temporal traps, but it’s just as contrived. The
only good thing about RTD's days on Doctor Who was is knowledge and execution of
Time Lord/Doctor Who mythology. However, some of the things he made up for the
Time War are insane. "The Nightmare Child", the "Could-Have-Been
King with his army of Meanwhiles and Never-Weres", did he just rip pages
out of a thesaurus and throw them around to find names for things?!

Moffat on the other hand seems to deliver, on the whole, genuinely
brilliant episodes that I feel really delve deeper into the Doctor himself,
rather than the grandeur of the Time Lords. Moffat has really made the Doctor
the focus of attention, not the fact that he is just the last Time Lord left.
Yes he makes mistakes, I think some of his season finales have been poor, but
on the whole I love Moffat's Who, and I love Matt Smith's Doctor.

As for this season, so far I have loved
every episode. The Power of Three felt a bit of a let-down towards the end, but
I loved the majority of it, and I have loved every other episode of this years
Who. I did nearly get very angry when the Daleks kept referring to him as the Predator,
not the On-coming Storm, but they did in the end!

Yeah, "End of Time" was terrible, but I'd trade this whole season for another "Waters of Mars".

This just doesn't feel like the same crew that brought us "Impossible Astronaut". I can't shake the feeling that Who is like a wife that Moffat is sick of and Sherlock is the new girlfriend that he's trying desperately to impress. How do we get them into Couples Counseling?

Last year he wrote a sterling season long arc and everyone bitched about it, so this half season we get 5 blockbuster adventures... and everyone bitches about that.

Poor Moffat... he just can't win...

So we'll excuse Moffatt if he makes mistakes, but flay RTD alive if he does the same thing, nothing like being balanced with your inane rantings.....

Perhaps he'd do well to return to the classic Who style of story telling with all of the adventures in 2, 3, 4 or more parts.

Your response makes no sense in context.

God no, do you not remember the filler? You'd never get away with that now

OK - all two parters and a three parter finale then (worked well for the most part with Utopia and Sound of the Drums (shame about Last Of The Time Lords though). Cliffhangers were always a staple of DW when I was a kid and it's one of the things I have been missing in this new series of One-Shots.

Rose was probably a bad example, yeah. I'll agree that she was pretty dislikeable at the start. In fact I feel the same way about Mickey and Rose that I do about Rory and Amy. But I felt Rose had a journey and became a better person towards the end. Sure, she's not as good as Martha (my favourte Nu-Who companion), but she had some development. I've not really noticed much of a change in Amy over two and a half series. There's plenty of moments where I like her and she's a great character. But I'm just not feeling the vibe when I look back over the whole of her journey. To each his own, though. I can definitely see your point.

Apparently not everyone gets out alive. *cough* Rory *cough*

Yes! Someone who liked Martha! I found her the bravest of the companions (Did Rose walk across a war-zone-like Earth for the Doctor? Did Donna? No.)

I think you might be right. Has anyone noticed that the Who opening credits have gone all Sherlock?

Amy starts off unable to have a real relationship, hits on the man she should never have; but then she grows up, get's married, confronts real life issues, even seems to be on the way to choosing a real life over constantly running off with the Doctor. Amy's story definitely has a journey and her character has grown.
Rose on the other hand didn't move forward, she just went from an unpleasant character to an unpleasant character lusting after the Doctor once he regenerated into Tennant.

No! Not Rory :(

how about a "spoiler- full" review? i cannot wait until saturday !

I'm a BIG Moffat/Smith Fan and so far have loved Season 7 -- but I have to admit that I thought Planet of the Dead was great -- very enjoyable. Does that ban from this forum?

I kind of agree with both points to some degree. I think it's great that Amy is somewhat hot-headed and independent whilst at the same time loyal to those she loves and not above letting the doctor know when he's getting out of hand (something Donna was a master at).

I know the actors seem best mates off set and I think Moffat has actually tried to harness that chemistry after their first season together (where Rory always seemed doomed not to have a future and Amy had the hots for the Doctor) as that is the direction they have developed the three of them in more recent series.

Ruined the Master?????????? Are you being serious? Using John Simm as The Master was a, pardon the pun, master-stroke! Simm was hugely popular at the time due to life On Mars, and for my money, was the best portrayal of The Master ever! The scene where DT is holding JS and crying for him to regenerate is one of the most poignant scenes ever in the history of TV. it had my entire family in tears. Inc me! Say what you like about RTD but he brought back Who and made it popular with a whole new generation of audience, and made two successful spin off shows! Whilst I love Sherlock, I feel that is where the Moff is best left to of his thing, he has ruined the last three years of Who, Im still waiting for the unresolved plot resolution to who blew up the TARDIS in the first run of the new "dynamic". What has Moff added to Who? Nothing, he has trotted out the Angels, yet again. And you want to talk about bad episodes in RTD's era of Who, in my opinion, and I know this will get flamed for sure, the Moff episodes were some of the worst ever! RTD gave us characters we actually care about with genuine development, whereas I care not one iota that the Pond's are leaving. In fact I'm glad, they are awful with little to no character development at all. You all lambaste "Disrespecitve" for what he says about new Who, but he s right! And the Moff as turned this show into a travesty of its former self. At least RTD gave us Davros and some classic enemies, although the Cybermen weren't great. The rise of the Cybermen and The Age of Steel were fantastic episodes.Moff has ruined them completely, defeated by the crying of a child, oh come on!

As for cop out endings, what about the end of Moff's first season? that made no logical sense at all, and what about all the River Song guff, which all led absolutely nowhere? No doubt he will wheel out Jenny next year to add some more regenerations to the Doctor's life cycle, thus ensuring the 12 regen rule will be navigated around, so the BBC can shift yet another shed load of Doctor Who figurines to America!

And yes, I'm a long time fan. Tom Baker still the Doctor to me, and DT second. Matt Smith as the acting ability of a wooden block, I have felt nothing for him through the entirety of his run. And I assure you, I take my Who very seriosuly indeed. The best I saw from Matt was the episode last week where he finally managed to demonstrate a bit of anger. I cant wait to be rid of Smith, whoever replaces cant be any worse, come back Colin, all is forgiven.

I too have never felt the need to post on here, until iIsaw your outright misguided Moff-love and claiming he has been better for Who than Davis. When RTD did a deus Ex Machina, You hit the roof, when the Moff does it, he's a genius!

I just don't get all the Moff-love. Have you seen Jekyl?. It was good, but only because of James Nesbitt's performance. The rest of it was very poorly written. I'm a fan of Sherlock, but I'm putting that down to Gatiss, as opposed to Moff's fanboi writing. Didn't Moff say he was more interested in doing that instead of Who? I'm sure he did. Moff just can't do character development, Only on Sherlock because he co writes it with Gatiss, who in my humble opinion, should have been Who forerunner. I can't wait to get rid of the Pond's or MS for that matter. Everybody seems to think he is the best thing since sliced bread but the guy as the personality of a frozen sausage! The Beeb went with him because he was the cheap option who had floppy hair and looked the part, That doesn't mean he can play the part, as he has demonstrated time and time again, Oh way to go Matt, you managed to show a bit of anger in The Power of three. Moff's character development is not natural, it's shoe horned in, episode by episode when he needs them to do such and such. Rose was a genuinely heartfelt character, her development across the series' felt "real" not changed episode by episode to suit Moff's spaghetti junction of plot threads that lead absolutely nowhere, River Song anyone? I've waited a very long time to say this: so I'm going to get it all off my chest. Moffet has killed the show. I feel nothing for the Doctor, whereas with DT and CE i the Davies era, I hung on every word, cried when they showed pain etc. With MS and the Pond's I feel nothing. MS as not had one decent line since his tenure began, I'm sure he is an outstanding actor, though I just said otherwise, but what he has to work with is awful at best! What happened to all the great lines DT and CE had in every episode? Moff's Who has none! Say what you like about Dalek Sek, a corny character for sure, but he had some great lines that had feelings and meaning, not one villain in the Moff's era have felt real, or deep, or even emotionally attaching. There is just nothing there apart from good production values. The Who of now is empty, vague, meaningless, churned out by a fanboi for a US audience. Where is the education? The science? The depth of characters? Say what you like about RTD, but he made you believe what you were watching and feel something for it, the Moff is all flash and no substance. Like Alex Kingston, nice to look at, but shallow:)

Steven Moffet, worst show runner ever!

Matt Smith, poorest portrayal of the Doctor Ever!

Current era of my beloved Doctor, worst ever!!!!

Ps. I'm a long time fan. I found something to like in every Doctor, but not in Smith, Why is that?

Lastly, I apologise for my poor grammar, but I am British and only have poor tv shows written by Steven Moffet to learn from:)

I agree

With John

Den Of Geek should be EXTERMINATED for the misguided Moff-love

Den Of Geek should be EXTERMINATED for the misguided Moff-love

No, you just enjoy better tv

No, you just enjoy better tv

Yeah, it will suck just as much:)

But being the Whovian I am, I'll still inevitably watch

I really enjoyed End Of Time. Bernard Cribbins rocked! And what a way for the current team to bow out. Briliant.

By the end of episode two I really disliked Amelia Pond(adult)

Again? How original from the pen of moffet

If RTD had killed Micky Smith this many times, we'd have a lynching round Russels

I couldn't agree more!

That's probably because he is way more interested in Sherlock, and that's where all his effort is being expended

Yup:)

But so does Muff, I mean Moff

So you got annoyed because the daleks didn't refer to the doctor as RTD's oncoming storm, yet you claim RTD just rips up thesaurus's in order to come up with his names? At least Russel didn't go for "raggedy an" which makes the all powerful Timelord sound like a blooming scarecrow! Just saw that part of your post.

I'm sorry, I know I've posted far too much but Chris Auckland as got my hackles up. But let me sum it up for him about the entirety of the two eras of new WHO.

RTD made the Doctor what he is, "The Oncoming Storm".
Moff has made the all powerful being Doctor into a scarecrow, "The Raggedy man".

I know which one I'd rather remember the Doctor has, and that sums up the difference between RTD WHO and Moff WHO. Moff's turned the Doctor into a generic galactic guffaw.

You haven't seen the episode yet, make the snarky comments after, then you'll have some credibility.

TL;DR

Dude, at the end of the day, it's just difference of opinion. You need to get over your own.

Oh, here's a little suggestion: stop watching.

Eurgh, no no no no, That whingey, unheroic ending, with 15minutes of goodbyes was the worst ending to a Doctor the show had ever seen. How is it the same man responsible for Ecclestons final episode (no Davison beater, but still good) could get it so terribly wrong.

Do you have OCD? You've posted again and again, just because the consensus is against you. Yes I've seen Jekyll, and Coupling and Joking Apart and loved them all... but that's neither here nor there as I really enjoyed the Second Coming and Children of Earth, but RTD was not a good who writer, he could ONLY do character work. RTDs sci-fi was fluffy campy nonsense, the only quality script he wrote was Midnight, which surprise surprise, played to the one and only strength as a writer he ever demonstrated during his time on the show.

Your poor grammar is more likely linked to being a fan of the years with belching bins, farting aliens, scribble monsters, Peter Kay in a fat suit, tractor beamed planets, Dobby Doctors, magic chanting, Big Brother in space.... you know I could go on and on and on, but then I'd descend in to your level of madness.

I cant believe some of the comments on D.O.G. it makes me chuckle i was never a fan of Chris Eccleston as the doctor but on re-watching the 1st season of Nu Who he grew on me, i absolutley loved David Tennant and i was gutted when he left i have only ever watched Nu Who though i have seen a few Tom Baker and Sylvester McCoy episodes and when Matt Smith was annouced i didnt know anything about him but i gave him a chance and now i think he is brilliant, Season 6 was the best so far with the season long arc but alot of people moaned that it was too complex and hard to follow.

So now in Season 7 we have these standalone episodes which are simple and straight forward and in my opinion boring in places i have liked all 4 episodes so far but its nothing compared to Season 6, but people still moan that its now too boring and comedic yet this is what they wanted when Season 6 was airing, iam glad Amy and Rory who are great fun but are starting to grate on me are leaving now maybe having a new companion will freshen it up a bit especially if Jenna-Louise Coleman plays it like she did in Asylum of the Daleks.

But my overall opinion is people should stop over thinking things and watch Doctor Who and enjoy the ride, no other show on tv can take you to the places that Doctor Who can i mean come on Dinosaurs on a spaceship which engines are powered by the waves of an artificial sea tide with matching beach that are built into the ship. I for one cant wait for saturday to see what happens to the ponds and a welcome return of the weeping angels so stop bitching and start enjoying or dont watch

Moffat's FIRST year was an amazing season arc, but last year it felt like he gave up halfway though, wrapping up all the River stuff as quick as he could.

It all went downhill at "Demon's Run". "He'll rise so high, and fall so far!" Really? He did neither. Then this master assassin that the Silents have trained since birth to kill the Doctor not only is defeated in 15 minutes, but then gives the rest of her regenerations to him!!! A total waste of "Assassin River". Could've been a better adversary than the Master for a while.

No, the River arc was abandoned, and since then Moffat's writing hasn't been very good at all... on Who. His work on Sherlock has been beyond top notch, and then some! The last season of Sherlock was an astounding bit of television, better than both the movies combined. How the same guy could be writing both of them just doesn't make sense to me.

I just wish Moffat would write the Doctor half as well as he does his OTHER show. He used to.

"...I take my Who very seriously indeed."
Never, ever take Who too seriously, or you will end hating it. It's a family show. It's meant to be fun. Yes, it has danger and emotion, but on the whole, it has to be a bit silly or no-one would watch.
(And Steven Moffat is a brilliant show-runner.)

And Chris doesn't?

Well if more people did stop watching, and refused to kowtow to the Moff-love camp, the beeb would soon replace him wouldn't they?

Apparently if you dont love the Moff, you shouldn't be watching Dr Who!

I think the only reason people claim Moff is the second coming is because if we didnt and stopped watching, our beloved Doctor would soon be axed, therefore we have to pretend to be happy about the drivel Moff puts out, and like it or lump it.

I really wish so many of you would stop trying to justify the Moff's plot holes by trying to claim if we dont appreciate the genius of them, we just dont get the show and should stop watching. Fact is, you are trying to find something with depth and substance when there is none, because you are afraid to admit the truth, that Moff as turned the Doctor into a shallow shadow of even the Mccoy years. The more you suck up to Moff and have fan-gasms over his terrible, convoluted (for the sake of it) plots, the worse our show will get. I'd be willing to bet they could take the Doc out of it completely, still call it WHO and as long as it written by the Moff and has a pair of legs on display, you will all still say its "how WHO should be, and RTD was dreck"

The same thing happened with Torchwood, the americans ruined it, and completely changed the dynamic of the show, not one alien in it, yet every week you all came on the Den and and went hyper over how great you thought the new direction was.

I completely agree, but apparently if you dont see the genius of Moff's abandoned plots and plot holes, you shouldn't be watching and you dont get the show .

I completely agree, but apparently if you dont see the genius of Moff's abandoned plots and plot holes, you shouldn't be watching and you dont get the show

It had emotional depth, something none of the entirety of Moff's Who as had since it began. Yes, some of it was weak, the Master hurling electro plasma balls at Rassilon, but I found I actually cared abut the characters, whereas with Moff era Who, I am not feeling anything for them at all. Not even the Doctor. As I said, when DT said "I dont want to go" my whole family was weepy. Even my kid's cant get attached to the MS Doctor, and as for the companions, my kids are equally happy they are getting canned. Boring is not the word.

You are right, I havent seen it yet, but I doubt if I didnt watch it, I'd be missing much, tbh. I love Who, but since Moff took over, I just dont care what happens to any of them, tbh. The sooner he is removed as show runner, the sooner we can get back on form.

PS, the 15 minute goodbye swan song was a good way to tie up all the character threads, such as Micky and Martha. No doubt if RTD had not drawn a conclusion to these character arcs you would be moaning his era was left unfinished Funny how you aren't complaining about the "abandoned" River Song plot arc though:)

Just the Moff being far too ambitious for his writing abilities and not knowing what to do with the threads he's sown. Either that or he got sick of his own self indulgence. At least Russel brought his to a close.

I agree to disagree. It's not the fact it's silly. It's the fact it just ins't emotionally engaging. If you cant achieve that, then you have failed as a writer. I loved the four seasons of RTD Who. Sure, there were a lot of insanities, but at least I felt some emotional weight to the characters even Jackie. With Moff's Who. I feel nothing. And I'm a big softy who cried at the end of "Old Yellar" and "Bambi".

It's written by Moff, who only cars about Sherlock, need I say more:)

You are spot on, mate.

Last post until tonight, I can't wait to see "Disrespective's" take on the upcoming episode. Every week he nails what is wrong with new Who, and every week they all line up with flaming torches and rope to lynch the poor chap, they hate knowing he is right. Which is why they try to make out that if you don't dig Moff's abandoned plots and massive plotholes, you don't get the show and you shouldn't be watching.

I've just waited for such a long time to point out the flaws in your Moffet love. Now I've finally bitten the bullet and decided to post, I feel compelled to get my point across after three years of pointless "vomit inducing pre-teen Moff can do no wrong" lusting so many of you seem so keen to display. The guy is by far the worst thing that as ever happened to new Who. You just don't like it that RTD actually made the characters involving and gave them some thoughtful development as opposed to Moff's rushed shoe-horned in plot point character changes done only to suit his lax writing. And yes I do suffer from OCD but at least I don't suffer from "if the majority likes it, it must be good" school of thinking that you appear to display. A lot of you remind me of our current "democratic" voting system, sure they will listen to you, as long as you say what "they" want to hear. With this sort of attitude its no wonder Hollywood keeps churning out crappy remake after crappy remake instead of any half decent original ideas, They know you are too fickle to question them and will just accept and pretend to enjoy whatever pap they put out. I refer you to the term "Sheeple":)

If as you say, the only decent episode Russel pulled off was "midnight", then the only half decent episode in Moff's run was "The Doctor's Wife" And we have Neil Gaiman to thank for that, not Moffet.

That's not emotional depth, if you're too stupid to pick up on a bit of subtlety then stop watching, clearly this show is going over your head now. Emotional depth is the understated line of the Doctor in the Girl in the Fireplace of "I'm always alright", or the speech to Amelia at the end of the Big Bang. Droning on for 15 minutes, with music blaring on full TELLING the audience what to feel is just a complete sign of the lack of respect RTD had for the audeinces intelligence.

You ninny, I said the only good episode *written* by RTD was Midnight. His era had all of Moffats episodes, and Paul Cornells keeping the show out of the gutter.
Under Moffat we've had all of his episodes (with the exception of A Good Man Goes to War and the Beast Below), Gaimans, McRae's, Whithouse, Nye, Curtis. Moffat is a better showrunner, a better head writer and better at finding talented secondary writers (although I do wish he'd stop hiring Chibnall).

And if you really have OCD then realise it, stop yourself from posting, you only get one vote, yelling at everybody who disagrees with you isn't mature, it's just trolling. Anyway, enjoy communism, I'm sure it will suit you.

I'm a ninny? Why, because I don't follow the mass commercial appeal of New Who bleaters? Under Moff the show as been static, safe and mediocre at best. Hardly what I would consider challenging tv. Stand by for my post shortly on the review of tonight's episode and see if you disagree with what I say, I can guarantee you will.. Still Sexy Tardis, I will treat you with the respect you deserve, as a fellow Whovian:) PS, I'm not a commie, I'd call myself a right wing liberal.

moffat confirmed there will be a scene in the eleventh hour that will play a big part in their exit

Yes, because Moff's writing as all the subtlety of a brick. Just because I dislike something the rest of the crowd thinks is awesome doesn't mean I'm too thick to pick up on it's complexities, It usually means the complexities are non existent I agree about some of RTD telling us week in week out what was coming at the finale, but Moffat is no better. How much was the River plot hyped up? And where exactly did it lead? oh yeah, how could I forget, the hastily humdrum underwhelming revelation that Amy was River's mother.Sheer brilliance. Hey how's this for plot logic? If TimeLord's are so easily created, by courting honeymoon couples copulating on the TARDIS, why doesn't the Doctor just bob down to a local council estate, pick up a load of chav parents take em for a spin around the galaxy and bingo, A whole new race of TmeLord's will just fall into existence, skilfully avoiding the time war lock-down, like a get out of (plot) jail free card in the Moff's writing:) It's not my fault Sir Steven is a lazy, under-accomplishing writer who has bitten off far more than he can chew. The fairy tale nonsense plots and resolutions have no credibility or weight whatsoever. At least with RTD, you had some emotional strands to engage you. This era of Who, you know for certain no matter what happens, there is no danger, or threat. Even if a main character is killed off, next week, or next year, you know MS will perform some timey wimey doo dah and guess what, they will be right back on screen again. Where is the feeling of peril? The underlying uncertainty of something just around the corner? How many times have we been told the Doctor can die, regenerations suspended etc, and then when it does happen, it all gets quickly resolved in the last episode when an earlier version of the Doctor, who didn't exist until that moment any where else in the plot arc, turns up to save the day?

Rory Wlliams, dies yet again! Big deal, that's only happened at least thirty times already. where is the drama? The suspense? Did it fall down the crack in the cushions when the Master was searching for his Lazer screwdriver?

In all fairness, he dies three times in the episode. The power of three indeed.

Go away you pyscho obsessive troll! Are you disrespective? Your poor grammar has a LOT in common with his.

You're totally right, Moffat has made a travesty of RTD's era. Fortunately, RTD had already made a travesty of the whole show. So much of Moffat's episodes and arcs have been cleaning up the mess made in series 1-4.
The daleks had become a joke, defeated by pushing some buttons and then being pushed over, this years opener finally gave genuine terror to the daleks, which I hadn't felt since Dalek.

The Doctor had basically become a god, which was a massive mistake, the whole arc of having everyone think he was dead was a fantastic way to restore him to what he should be. Sure, he may seem like a god to us, but in the universal scale he was far from it, giving him actual god like powers in Last of the Time Lords was ridiculous, and I agree that the first time round, The Master was used well (for an episode, LotTL was horrendously bad) but then his return gave him needless powers and a stupid penchant for feasting on the homeless. I can't even imagine how Moffat will be able to recover any shred of the Master after what RTD done.

One last thing, you say Matt Smith has the acting ability of a wooden block, and that you have never felt any emotion from him. You are quite plainly wrong. He has shown the most range of emotions out of any of the new incarnations, and by no means are Eccleston or DT bad actors, but Matt has outshone them time and time again during his run. Under RTD's era, DW had become a soap opera set in space. Actually, not even set in space, not once did we actually go to a planet that wasn't Earth (New Earth does not count.) or primarily colonised by humans. RTD thought that humanity and earth were the crux of the universe, which is such an idiotic idea, Donna was a good character, but making her the most important woman in the universe and then the "DoctorDonna" ruined it completely. Moffat has given us more of a fairytale quality, which some may not like, but it is a far better suit than Eastenders in the TARDIS. Also, he has toned down the scale of the show, no longer is the universe at stake at the end of every series (I know it was in series 5, but this arc was actually clever, didn't revolve around the current companion completely and was resolved far better than RTD had done).

UPDATE- Okay, this last episode is up to snuff. Fingers crossed for the next batch, whenever they show up. :)

Phillip Hinchcliffe is my favourite producer.....

The episode itself wasn't bad, but I am sorry to say the deprarture of Rory and Amy was terrible ( and utterly predictable). The trouble is it was more of the same. Consider the evidence. Rose gets trapped in a parrelel universe in a great tradegy and the Doctor can never ever see her again, Donna gets her brain wiped in a tradegy and the Doctor can never ever see her again, and now Rory and Amy get trapped in time in a tradegy and the Doctor can never ever see them again. Is anyone begining to see a pattern here? Even River Song in a roundabout kind of way suffers a similar fate.
Although these seemingly endless stream of tragic departures are dramatic, I can't help feeling that they are damaging to the Doctors character. Surely the Doctor is supposed to be an apsirational character, someone who should make the people he travels with better, instead he is in danger of becoming a kind of toxic character who ruins peoples lives. Is there any point in investing in the new companion when she will almost inevitably come to a sticky end. And what of the Doctor? Will Matt Smith now go down the same tedious path of gloomy introspection and self regarding pity that bogged down so much of David Tennants last few years. I'm the last of the time lords, im lonely, whine whine, etc.
People may think that Martha's depature was boring, but she was the only one who really benefited from her assocation with the Doctor and was therefore the best companion of the new series by default. I don't think anyone will agree with me, but I think in the long run this is untenable.

Just watched it. Very lame, forced emotions kind of episode. Was hoping for more, didn't get it. Didn't get close to it. Oh well, such is life. The Doctor moves on.

Doesn't always guarantee success, just look at Torchwood. Children of Earth had 5 parts and still felt rushed at the end. Miracle Day felt a bit like a jelly bean on a rack. They stretched it but it felt so thin in the middle.

It's all very well criticizing abandoned plots and plot holes, and it's a valid criticism to make.

That said, the vast majority of "plot holes" that people seem to identify in Moffat's work are either

1. not "plot holes" because they're not necessary to the plot, people just want a bit more extrapolation; or
2. are actually explained at some point in the episode, just not at the point people want them to be ala RTD.

For example I've lost count of the number of posts (not here, mercifully) who claim Rory aging in the "Angels Take Manhattan" is a plot hole because he's an Auton and Autons don't age.

I'm not saying there's no valid plot holes in Moffat's scripts (Oswin's voice is certainly a plot hole, though it didn't spoil it for me) but a lot of what people claim are plot holes are usually either that they didn't understand or missed something.

Sponsored Links