Doctor Who: The Bells of Saint John

Not at all bad. The idea that the wifi could be eating our brains doesn’t initially look good, given the older generation internet hate vibe that it gives off. But, once the reveal comes in at the end, it makes enough sense.

The real strength of this episode comes from the proper introduction of the new companion. As Martha Jones was a welcome relief from the soppiness that Rose Tyler had started bringing to the Tennant years, Clara Oswald is a welcome relief from the outright annoyingness that (while not dominating Amy Pond’s character) had got out of hand.

I particularly like how Clara’s confidence comes across without her having to get into a fight or argument and how she clearly likes the Doctor without worshipping him. These have been massive problems in previous series helmed by Moffat and Davis respectively.

The villain is a returning one, from the Christmas episode, which is welcome and anyone who’s seen the curse of fatal death may be thinking the same thing about what he actually is as I am.

Another strength of this episode is how it really keeps the mystery of who Clara Oswald is alive; at no point do we lose sight of the question and at no point does Moffat attempt to misdirect us from it. Though, knowing Moffat, this probably means that the question isn't overly important and he’s just using it to distract us from the actual issue.

The villainous robot things are very close in nature to the Teselecta, with the directional choice of having their voices and delivery very wooden. This makes them very easy to identify, but the choice to make the Doctor version more lifelike is one I can get behind, as it makes a nice contrast between him and the primary antagonists.

To be honest, there’s not that much to say; the villain follows on directly from the previous episode which is bit rare, but works all the same, the new companion is very refreshing and the new series looks very exciting

Mini-Reviews

Doctor Who The Bells of St John Prequel.

Enough of the Doctor meeting the companions as children! I get that the Smith-Doctor is supposed to exist in fairytale environment (rather than the sci-fi/drama/realism environment of Tennant and Eccleston), but change up the opening. He always accidentally runs into the new companion as a child, so she has a reason to be fascinated by him for a good couple of decades before she meets him again; the formula is getting old, so old that I knew who that little girl on the swing was as soon as she sat down!! The Easter return of the show had better be good; and there’d better be no dinosaurs!

Les Miserables.

This is without a doubt one of the worst films I’ve ever seen. Sure the songs are good, but aside from Hugh Jackman’s character, no one gets developed beyond “in this movie.”

Epic tale of love and rebellion my arse. This is story about a man skipping parole and an overzealous Police officer, with a rebellion and love story happening in the background, but acting as though they’ve been happening the whole time. On that point, the love story is the laziest kind of love story there is; they are two characters that find each other similarly physically attractive and barely speak to one another.

Russell Crowe is horribly miscast and the only good thing about his appearance in he film is the sound effect his body makes when he commits suicide, as a result a result of being an absolute moron.

To summerise, this is a film (not unlike James Cameron’s Titanic) that is all about spectacle, rather than substance. It has been continually marketed as an epic about love and rebellion, when really all it is, is a story about Hugh Jackman skipping parole and being pursued by what appears to be the only police officer in France.