crimson

‘Doctor Who’: ‘The Crimson Horror’ spoiler-free review

Mark Gatiss is a man who knows his Who and – as his past BBC documentaries attest – he’s also a scholar of horror. After the tension of ‘Cold War’ Gatiss blends his twin passions together into a frothing tankard of a script, ‘The Crimson Horror’; a bonkers draught of fun and scares. It’s ‘Whorror’. Oh, no… no, we’re never saying that again…

Posted Filed under

‘Doctor Who’: ‘Journey to the Centre of the TARDIS’ spoiler-free review

Imagine Willy Wonka’s Chocolate Factory. Imagining it? Good. Brilliant, isn’t it? Now, imagine that said chocolate factory is about to explode – BOOM, wibbly-wobbly chocolatey-wocolateyness everywhere – and that a bewildered Charlie is trapped, wandering through rooms of marvellous impossible treats, while Willy Wonka is planning to rescue him. Now, replace ‘chocolate’ with ‘time’, switch a few names, and you’ve got ‘Journey to the Centre of the TARDIS’.

Posted Filed under

‘Game of Thrones’: ‘Walk of Punishment’ review

It may be something of a surprise to learn that the two men behind Game of Thrones have never actually stepped behind the camera to direct an episode themselves. That all changes with ‘Walk of Punishment’, as David Benioff takes control and directs an instalment brimming with confidence.

Posted Filed under
phantoms

‘Doctor Who’: ‘Hide’ spoiler-free review

After the cacophony of criticisms brought upon ‘Rings of Akhaten’, Neil Cross’ name may ring a Cloister Bell in the head of many a Whovian. But you can’t judge one writer by one episode, and we’re certainly not going to compare efforts here. All we’ll say is that ‘Hide’ is as far away from ‘Rings’ as the Akhaten system is from 1970s England.

Posted Filed under
cold war

‘Doctor Who’: ‘Cold War’ review

After a run of Doctor Who episodes which have made a play of character riddles and tricksy story twists, ‘Cold War’ represents something of a thaw in proceedings.

There are no paradoxes here to send you hurrying to the internet to speculate about what you have seen and why. There’s probably less subtext than in last week’s, altogether more awkward, instalment.

Posted Filed under