Next Gen Games (PS4)

2013 was the year I left my tired 360 behind and adopted a PS4. With a new generation of consoles on our doorstep a lot of console gamers like me couldn't wait to see the vast array of improvements a next-gen game could bring in 2014. With increased horsepower and memory we would surely be witness to a new gaming renaissance, one where developers wouldn't be shackled by how many characters they can put on screen or lower the texture resolutions just so the game wouldn't explode frying the memory chips of our outdated hardware. Unfortunately it was mostly a year of waiting, filled with delays as titles were pushed to 2015 and over-hyped AAA games that failed to deliver on their pre-release hype. Good games take time to make, apparently. Hmmph. Still we're now finally starting to unwrap the potential of the next gen consoles so I thought it would be a cool idea to summarize my thoughts on all of the big games that came out last year on the PS4.

Watch Dogs was quite fun during the time I spent with it but has since soured in my memory. While the core gameplay was indeed a lot of fun and the use of the different hacking techniques were interesting all that sticks out in my mind is the lackluster open world, cardboard cut-out protagonist, overhyped/lackluster visuals and a mediocre plot. Ultimately it's a game that shows potential for a sequel but isn't really worth playing again, I like to think it's more of a proof of concept. The one thing the game excels at is it's level design, I loved the way every situation could be tackled in a variety of different ways. Some areas don't even require you to be present, your phone hacking skills (fun if a bit impossible in real life) can do all the work for you. At a touch of a button you can literally plunge half of the city into darkness. The third person gun combat was also a delight, but again in light of more recent games Watch Dogs pales in comparison. It's a shame really, this could have been so much more. The pre-release hype over the game was also unfounded, it looks good but is nowhere near the spectacular E3 demo we got two years ago. Gone are the weather effects and lighting that made everything pop, I get the impression they bit off more than they could chew. And that's without mentioning the drab and dull depiction of Chicago, the game is steeped in gray. Give me some color Ubisoft! Watch Dogs is fun for a while but very forgettable. 6,5/10

The Last Of Us: Remastered is not a next-gen game per-say, it's an upgraded version of a game that was originally released on the PS3 one year ago. With the texture upgrades and smooth conversion to 60fps the differences between the two versions are night and day: the PS4 version is essentially the blu-ray to the PS3's DVD. Visuals aside, The Last Of Us is an amazing game that EVERYONE should play. It's 15 hour campaign is a road trip that chronicles Ellie and Joel through an apocalyptic America on their quest to find a cure for the zombie plague (or in this case, a fungii that infects the brain and turns people into zombies). Both leads are immensely awesome: Joel is an interesting protagonist because he is about as anti-hero as you can get. You sympathize with him thanks to the amazingly sad prologue but when the game skips 20 years into the future the game outright tells you he has done some f*cked up sh*t on the way to survival. Point being there's more to him than the stereotypical video game grizzled male and actor Troy Baker does a wonderful job of making Joel seem as real as possible. The real star of the show though? Ellie. She's hands down one of the best characters you'll encounter in a video-game. Think of her as the coolest, most badass 14-year-old you could ever come across and she fits the bill. Far away from a damsel in distress Ashley Johnson completely owns the role and does such a perfect job of capturing every inflection of her personality. She's every bit Joel's equal, even if he is the one doing most of the heavy lifting. Or shooting, in this case. Amazing performances and believable dialogue is not the only home-run this game has up it's sleeve however, the gameplay is tense as hell. Resources are limited and enemies can very easily one shot you if you're not careful on higher difficulties, so this isn't a game you can just casually play. Add to that some brutal death animations and the terrifying Clickers (infected that can detect you only via sound) and you've got a gaming experience that will leave you on the edge of your seat. It's not next-gen but a buttery smooth framerate and crisp visuals fool you into thinking it is: 8,5/10
 

Destiny is another game that I had fun with while playing but the moment I stopped to catch a breath it's numerous flaws become immediately apparent. It's a perfectly fine shooter that can get pretty addicting once you start seeing the level-up meter start ticking and the numerous strikes and raids are exceptionally fun so there's no denying it satisfies on a pure shoot-em-up scale. Unfortunately it has delusions of being an MMO and falls flat on its arse for failing to deliver enough content to keep us all going for longer than a couple of weeks. To stop you from reaching the level cap and getting all the cool gear too quickly it makes it incredibly tedious and grindy for you to level up, so progress is severely stunted after a while. What's the point in leveling up this gun if it's going to take me 20 hours of re-doing the same zone over and over looking for random material spawns? The effort far outweighs the reward so I put this game down and never came back to it after a month. Another baffling failure is that it DOESN'T HAVE A STORY. Outside of a few cut-scenes you have literally no idea what the hell is going on for most of the time, its quite frankly insulting as a player. Destiny is a pretty looking game though, some of the environments are flat out gorgeous, but there just isn't enough of it. Like Watch Dogs Destiny is another over-hyped game that failed to live up to the high expectations we gave it. 7/10

Call Of Duty: Advanced Warfare is, simply put, another Call Of Duty. This time you've got jet packs and future tech that adds a few interesting mechanics to the mix but ultimately it feels a bit like Black Ops 2 2.0. The six hour campaign is a mixed bag, the missions themselves are hit and miss and the story itself is pretty cliche the further you get into it even with Kevin Spacey playing the bad guy. Like most COD's the strength of Advanced Warfare lies in it's multiplayer and I'm happy to report that if you're fan of COD then this game will fit you like a glove. It's faster, snappier and all your favorite game modes return. As far as next-gen improvements go there isn't much here except for the graphical upgrade, it all looks REALLY pretty. Overall I'm satisfied with the game even if it hardly reinvents the wheel. If you like COD though you knew that already. 7,5/10

The strength of the Assassin's Creed series has for me always relied on the setting, everything else is secondary to the stunning recreations of historical cities that they manage to pull out of a hat year after year. Assassins Creed: Unity doesn't disappoint in that regard: revolutionary Paris is quite frankly MIND BLOWING in it's scope and beauty. Feel like taking a tour of Notre Dame or strolling through Versailles? Be my guest, 17th century Paris has been rendered in stunning detail and feels like a living, breathing city thanks to the enormous amount of NPC's walking around and going about their daily lives. The world building here is so good it almost completely negates the less polished aspects of the game like the buggy AI or sub par framerate. Everything about Unity feels next-gen, it's just a shame they haven't ironed out the kinks yet. Overall this is a step forward for the series, it's just disappointing the once again so-so story can't live up to the breathtaking vistas and productions values. Paris is so gorgeous though, I can't wait to see Victorian London next year: 8/10

You could argue that out of all the AAA games released over the holiday season (AC: Unity, COD: Modern Warfare, Far Cry 4...) Dragon Age stands tall for not only aiming high with its ambitions but also for how it offers an uncompromising RPG experience with Skyrim-esque open worlds and quality storytelling. Bioware has clearly put all of its cards on the table for this one, essentially saying 'That's all I got!' and dropping the mic. The sheer enormity of content in this game is staggering, my semi-completionist playthrough finished at around 117 hours to give you an idea of how much time you can pore into the world of Thedas. A lot of it is optional of course, you can cruise through the main story in around 30 hours without even glimpsing the vast open world areas but you'll be missing out on a good 70% of what makes this game a triumph: lush rainforests, deserts, cities, snowcapped mountains, bogs, hills of lush countryside...just endless amounts of things to do and explore that in true Skyrim fashion have NOTHING to do with the main plot at all but are there if you want to explore. The sheer scale of these areas is daunting but it does an excellent job of immersing you in the world and the lore. 

Past Dragon Age games have only hinted at what lies beyond your field of view and were largely story focused affairs, Inquisition tears away the background curtain and lets you see everything for yourself. It's very much the whole 'See that mountain in the distance? You can go there!' idea and succeeds in making Thedas a living, breathing world. It's also incredibly pretty, the visual upgrade has left my mouth wide open on quite a few occasions admiring the lush landscape on display. The world is teeming with detail and personality, enough credit cannot be given to the level designers and artists who have brought the world to life. The campaign is also first rate stuff: while it may suffer a lame villain and an anticlimatic ending Bioware is still great at doing what it does best: writing amazing characters. The cast of nine companions in this game are nothing short of superb, quickly subverting their deceiving first impressions. Cassandra is the classic bad-ass warrior female who is a real romantic at heart, Sera is a dumb wisecracking elf hiding her fear of pretty much everything and the stoic Blackwall is hiding his dark past ect...all of them are fleshed out and voiced incredibly well, which is as to be expected from a Bioware game. I guess what elevates Dragon Age above the other games that have come out is that it combines the quality storytelling that Bioware is known for with an excellent open world game, so whichever way it cut it you'll be getting the best of both worlds. I'm going to be a tad hyperbolic here but Inquisition is pretty much the ultimate role playing experience, it ticks every possible box I can think of. It's an epic, in every sense of the word. That's a pretty impressive achievement, god knows what their next Mass Effect is going to be like *HYPERVENTILATES*! In terms of sheer value for money and it's next-gen feel, this is another game that can't be missed: 9/10

Far Cry 4 is basically Far Cry 3,5 with slight increases in visual fidelity and a refinement to Far Cry 3's already great gameplay. Everything that made Far Cry 3 so good is back, it's the age old saying of 'If it ain't broke, don't fix it'. Kyrat is an interesting locale for a game and the story, while not winning many awards, was still fun and full of memorable characters. My only real complaint is that the main bad guy is once again sidelined and barely shows up during the campaign. Pagan Min is a great villain so why is he so underutilized? There's also nothing really next gen here aside from more detailed character models and a smooth framerate, so very minor graphical and performance leaps. I'm fine with this but if they make zero graphical or mechanical improvements for Far Cry 5 then I'm going to be a bit pissed. Use that extra horsepower game developers! Anyway, it's polished open world mechanics and above average story definitely makes Far Cry 4 worth playing: 8/10

It feels appropriate to finish this list with the recently released PS4 exclusive 'The Order 1886'. Unlike the other games on this list I haven't played this one and with good reason. From what I can see the developer of 'The Order' Ready At Dawn were so obsessed with the technical side of things that they basically forgot to build a game. By all accounts this is the best looking game on the PS4 at the moment, every ounce of the console's horsepower has been optimized to give you the most detailed, cinematic experience possible. The gameplay itself however is a competent but bland 3rd person shooter that quite frankly looks lazy. A game like The Order is undeniably gorgeous but how many times are we going to play the same 3rd person based cover shooter before they start adding new mechanics? Another game I've yet to play is Shadow Of Mordor, and from what I've seen it's a true next gen experience because the nemesis system (aka the ability to randomly generate new enemies) is too taxing on old-gen systems to work and is something that can only be made possible due to current gen. However 'Mordor' is a fine looking game but it's nowhere near 'The Order' in terms of visual fidelity. Graphics are evolving at a breakneck pace but so far it seems gameplay remains rooted very much in the last generation. It's a question we have to ask ourselves: do we want better visuals or innovation/improved performance in next gen games? Is it possible to have both? We'll see what the future holds, but upcoming releases like The Witcher 3 and Batman Arkham Knight make me very excited.    

13 things I've learnt as a student

Being a student is hard, you're often between a rock and a hard place with only a stick to defend yourself against an onslaught of trials in front of you. It's difficult to even the playing field but there are precautions you can take to ensure the maximum amount of success. Here are a few of my handy tips gained after years of trial and error. A lot of blood was spilt in order to give you this information, I hope you appreciate it:   

Pace yourself in tests:

In my school lesson's last 55 minutes each (7 x 55 minute lessons per day) so if we've got a test in X then we have to be finished by the time those 55 minutes are up. Every one of those minutes count because most of the time I find I'm down to the wire with barely enough time to complete the test before the bell rings. You rarely get a chance to review what you've wrote so any spelling mistakes or dumb errors will have to stand. It's not a case of 'stop and think', it's more like 'start writing now or you're never going to finish this'. Point being: time management is essential, tests need to be completed so you've got to be a well oiled machine. Spending too long on a tricky question that requires a lot of thought just isn't worth it, MOVE ON. If you've got a watch with you (god help you if you don't) I advise to look at the time you have left and just cut your losses when you exceed a certain time limit on a question. 

Beware deceptively easy questions:

Some questions require a lot more out of you despite their deceptively short nature. For example a question like this: 'present the consequences of X on X' could be answered in a few sentences or with a few paragraphs, the key thing here being consequence(s), plural. That doesn't really define an exact amount though, does it? How many consequences do we have to present, then? 2? 5? 8? Try looking at the score to determine it's value: if the question is worth four points that might mean 4 consequences right? Unfortunately most of my teachers leave their test sheets frustratingly blank when it comes to notation, so a question could be really easy or require a lot of redaction and thought, I've no way of knowing. And seen as time is money....look I know it's difficult for teachers to gauge how long a test takes to complete (a Maths teacher can probably do an entire test in 20 minutes for example) but I'd appreciate a little indicator like (15 minutes) next to every question to give us a rough idea of how much time we should spend on it. This would be a helpful indicator of how easy the question should be to complete.

Sometimes you can't win:

Due to unfortunate scheduling you have five tests in one week, aka one per day. What do you do then? A wise answer would be to anticipate the coming onslaught of tests and start revising for everything a week in advance but this doesn't really work with me. Unless you're capable of herculean feats of memory recall it's difficult to revise and learn for all five lessons at the same time. Hard drive space in your brain is limited, there's only so much you can retain and consume before it crashes. A few weeks ago I had to  learn the entire history of the fifth french republic, grasp the inner workings of our economy, study issues in business management, get a handle on different law procedures, revise different marketing tactics employed by companies (my curriculum is very business orientated) AND speak for five minutes in German. It was insanity, the moment I finished a test of that day I had to immediately dive into revising the one for the following day, there was no time to recuperate just GO GO GO! By the end of the week my head resembled this:

Pictured: my head

And you know what? Despite working my ass off I failed dramatically in three out of those five tests, ultimately due to stretching myself a bit too thin. I've gotten over it, if anything it's spurred me to try harder next time but It's a well known fact that life is unfair and sometimes despite your best efforts you're not rewarded for doing your best. My conscience is clean, I did do my utmost and there's nothing I could have down about it. In a no-win situation you can only cut your losses and move on.

You're not going to be good at everything:

I used to think that hard work was all that was required to get a good score. The higher up in education I get though the more I realize that that isn't exactly true. For example after years of fighting, I've finally decided to give up all hope being good at Maths. I know what you're probably thinking: 'No way Tim! Maths is easy, you just need to get your head round it!' You could be right, but there comes a point when you just have to accept the fact that some lessons you're just never going to succeed in no matter how hard you try (see also: Philosophy, Sport). Which brings me to my next point... 

You're not as good as you think you are: 

Back in College I was getting some seriously good marks, I was top of the class in four out of nine subjects and either really good or just 'good' in most of the rest. That's quite a feat, it's something I proud myself with considering I'm English and still to this day can't speak French 100% fluently. Suffice to say all these great results went to my head a little bit, thinking that I was obviously more intelligent than everyone else. Then Lycee hit and I realized that I'm not top of the class at all, that my tried and true method of 'working hard' doesn't automatically guarantee good results and if anything, there are a lot of people better than me at pretty much everything...well everything except English of course. What I'm trying to say is that no matter how good you think you are there's always someone better than you out there and it's unwise to look down on other people just because at first glance they appear uninteresting and simple. It's good to be humble and not underestimate other people based on their appearances. That doesn't mean you can't get better however...    

Learn from your mistakes:

Here's what you can do to get better, and unfortunately this is all related to trial and error. That week of test driven craziness that I endured? I've got another one of those just after the October holidays (NOTE: this blog was written a while back) and I plan on coming back with a vengeance. It helps that I have two weeks of holiday to prepare but now I know the modus operandi of my new Teachers I can anticipate the next phase of tests: in Management you don't have to know everything off by heart, you can mostly get by thanks to the various documents presented in the test and extrapolate a logical solution from that. Marketing however? More than half the points are down to reciting pure definitions and precisely worded protocol we've viewed in class. Explaining the same thing but with your own words aren't going to cut it (we only knew this AFTER we got the test results back of course, hence the low scores for everyone in the class). Next time around I'll prioritize Marketing over Management then, lesson learnt. Other mistakes such as not understanding the meaning of a question or misinterpreting one of the documents are specific to every test, you can only vow to read them a little more thoroughly next time to make sure you haven't missed everything. But be careful you're not to busy focusing on improving what you got wrong last time to think about what you got right, that's another mistake that I've encountered. Eventually you'll cover some ground but until then it's trial by fire, good luck.

I wish we had tests like these. Americans get it easy...

Treat every test like it's the most important thing in the world:

Don't look up at the colossal mountain in front of you, focus on the rock in front of you, because without it you're going to fall. The french education system isn't based on letters like A or B+, it's all to do with numbers and averages. The average of all your tests in a lesson will be compiled into a score out of 20. My goal is to get the highest numerical value possible in every lesson in order to maximize my overall score, which will greatly help my chances of passing the Baccalaureate at the end of the year. At the end of the day that score is what matters, regardless of everything that might influence it like easier teachers, spaced out tests etc...I'd like to think of it as a video game, every level is a mini-boss in itself, allowing you to proceed to the next stage of the game. Every test is important, you can get 20/20 in the first two tests but fail in the third one? Your average is going to plummet down. I recommend you prioritize lessons that are 'valued' more. Maths has a x4 multiplier for example, so my score in Maths is worth 2x more than my score in Sport, which has a multiplier of x2. It's in my interest then to be better at Maths than Sport. 

Revision isn't everything:

Now don't get me wrong revision is a useful tool when it comes to grabbing those crucial extra points in tests, but there is only so much you can gain from that. You can recite every single definition off by heart and still fall on your arse, tests require a lot more out of you than just regurgitating parrot fashion everything you've seen in class. It's more about taking what you've learnt and applying it to a certain context, then analysing the crap out of it which takes a lot of thought. Philosophy tests terrify me for example as there's little you can do in terms of preparation, you either understand the meaning behind the text you're given or you don't. If you don't...well then you're simply screwed so have fun with that. It's helpful if you redo a few of the applications you've done in class a few times to get a sense of how good you are to gauge what the lesson demands of you. Also make sure to listen in Class, if a notion is explained extremely well by a teacher then sometimes you don't need to learn it off by heart, you've already 'got it' just by doing the passive act of paying attention.

When revising, learn the important stuff first:

Self explanatory really. When revising for tests I find it's often better to read EVERYTHING at first to distinguish the major acts of each chapter. Once you've defined a rough outline of the essentials, it's best to type it all out onto the computer. Having everything on one page is much easier than scrambling for several disorganised papers so you can frantically look things over before a test. Most lessons have an insane amount of stuff to learn so it's bad luck if you happen to have two tests on the same day. It's impossible to learn everything so at you should least make sure you know the main stuff off by heart so you won't be caught out during the test. At the very least the basics should be covered. 

The bane of my life (meaning: the agent of ruin or woe).

Work harder on your worst subjects:

I'm having difficulty with quite a few subjects at the moment. I manage to maintain a decent score in all three of these however because I make sure to work extra-hard on them whenever a new test comes smashing through the wall. It's another system of prioritization, albeit one that's a necessity if I want to come out of it unscathed: if I don't understand a notion we skimmed over in Philosophy then I've always got Mr. Google to back me up. Maths requires vigorous study of everything we've done and trying to replicate that by re-doing exercises is crucial. German is quite simply pure revision, I'm only going to know a word if I learn it right?  

Write everything down:

This is vital. If you're revising for a test based on on stuff you did in class three weeks ago it's best to have EVERYTHING that the teacher has said written down, anything that might impact your understanding of the lesson or the test. Key words don't work, a few weeks later they're just going to look like assorted scribbles that aren't tangibly useful. This can be hard though, especially when it comes to teachers that talk a mile a minute and don't use the whiteboard at all. If this is the case I'd recommend writing as much as possible by abbreviating your words. Basically write in text talk: it easy 2 writ like dis nd faster. Revising for a test with missing information is not a good start so make sure you've got it all jotted down.  

Nope. Just.....nope.

Adapt to your teachers:

Here's the worst thing about being a student: your level of success in any lesson is determined by how well you get on with your teacher. I know, your level of success depends largely on something that is out of your hands, sucks right?Certain teachers are harder than others: last year I was getting 17 in German but now I'm averaging 14, the teacher is demanding more from us than the teacher I had last year so therefore an increase in difficultly equals a lower score. To get back to where you were however requires upping your game, which generally means more work outside of lessons and extra revision in my case. Teachers can f*ck you over and if you draw the short straw and get stuck in a class with a tougher teacher, you're just going to have to cope with it. I'm starting to learn this the hard way this year, let's just say the last history test was significantly easier in another class than it was in mine, so my class is averaging lower than the other one. That doesn't necessarily mean my class isn't working hard enough, it just means we've been dealt a teacher that gives harder tests. 

When looking to the future, focus on your strengths:

When you're a teenager it's hard figuring out what you want to do later on in life. If you don't have much of an idea about what job or curriculum you want to take it comes down to looking at yourself and figuring out what you're good at. With me I quickly found out that it was obvious, I'm great at languages: my highest scores for this trimester have been in German and English and they've both been significantly higher than the class average. It's a no-brainer then that I'm pursuing a career in languages. I think you'll find that your strengths are also tied to what you're most passionate about, if you're good at something it's often because you're really into that particular subject. In my case it's talking profusely about things that I love, like Doctor Who, and there are some very strong parallels with teaching. Either way I think it's rare for your passions to not be tied up with your strengths. It's also good to think about what separates you from everyone else, what can you do that no one else can? Again for me it's easy, I'm bilingual. For everyone else though? That might be tougher to pinpoint...     

Pictured: Life

Conclusion:

To sum it all up: being a student (and life in general) is like attempting to juggle several dozen balls in the air without dropping any of them. It's extremely hard to keep all of them in check and requires a finely tuned method which is unique to everyone and gained mostly by experience. Most of the time we fail, sometimes sacrifices have to be made, sometimes you can't win every battle and most of the time you're scrambling to keep up but that's all part of the game. It's simultaneously stressful and exhilarating, but the rush you get from succeeding is enough to keep me going and tempts me to try harder. Basically you'll just have learn to deal with it and try to find a method to any of this madness.

Doctor Who: Last Christmas

God, can you believe that this is the tenth Doctor Who Christmas special? We've had TEN episodes of Doctor Who dedicated to Christmas, surely they've exhausted pretty much everything the show can say or do with the subject matter outside of I dunno, actually including Santa Clause himself? Oh wait...

Yep, the rather ominous sounding 'Last Christmas' actually includes Father Christmas himself in a major supporting role so I was skeptical from the off as there's quite literally a million and one ways this could have gone wrong. Thankfully (let's get this out of the way first) they didn't make him a cringe-worthy caricature at all, I'd even say Nick Frost's performance is one of favorite things about the episode. As for 'Last Christmas' itself it's a solid outing that's mired by unoriginal ideas and poor SFX. To quote writer Steven Moffat: 'This is the weirdest thing I've written!' 

The biggest downfall to 'Last Christmas' is that a lot of it's ideas have been done to death. Here the plagiarism is so blatant even the characters point it out. Look, just because you admit it's plagiarism doesn't make it okay! I mean look at this, it reads like a mish mash of five different movie plots: The episode takes place in a isolated Antarctic base (aka 'Thing From Another World') wherein a group of scientists are being attacked by dream crabs (aka facehuggers from 'Alien') that latch onto their victims faces and induce a dream state to hide the fact that they're slowly digesting your brain matter. Oh, and Father Christmas shows up and saves the day (aka 'Miracle On 34th Street'). Suffice to say if you've seen the enormously popular Christopher Nolan movie 'Inception' then you know EXACTLY what's going on here, right down to the dreams within dreams and aged-up characters. This episode is two things that I don't normally associate Doctor Who with: unoriginal and predictable. As a seasoned sci-fi fan this really took me out of the episode, I could see every twist coming. The fact that it's all over the place tonally didn't help either, Alien facehuggers and Santa Clause cracking jokes about his sleigh being bigger on the inside felt awesomely fun at first but the episode then wants to shove a few tearjerker scenes into the mix as well that don't really fit. 'Last Christmas' is a bit weird structurally, it decides to wrap up the core storyline of Clara getting over Danny's death half way through and then relies on it's series of twists to sustain itself for the second half. It felt weird, like it was playing for time. The Doctor himself thought everything was wrapped up and then....it just decides to keep on going? Um...Ok? The dream within a dream thing was neat but then you decide to do the same twist again? I just don't think it was needed and once again: INCEPTION.

Acknowledging you're copying something doesn't excuse you, Moffat.

Just like 'Into The Dalek' the special effects towards the end were so godawful it took me out of the scene completely. In theory the sleigh scene should have been delightful but in reality the Google Maps background really took the wind out of it. Yes Doctor, suuure you're flying the sleigh. The big emotional gut punch was also devoid of any emotions as old Clara looked like a muppet and Jenna Coleman didn't even bother to change her voice. Doctor Who, if you can't do old age make-up right then why do you keep slathering it over EVERY. SINGLE. CHARACTER?! I can't even....it's embarrassing, just stop.

All of this makes it seem like I hated the episode but in hindsight the special is undeniably fun. Two characters in particular really stood out: Shona and Santa. HOLY SH*T, I loved Shona. It was kind of ridiculous how much she stood out from the supporting cast, everything from the dancing to her love of all things geeky screamed fan favorite right from the start. Actress Faye Marsay did a tremendous job of embodying that character with likability.The only downfall of Clara staying for Series 9 is that we might not get Shona as a companion, because had things gone another way (Jenna Coleman changed her mind during production so they had to rewrite a few scripts) I am 100% certain Moffat was building her up to companion material. It's a shame she didn't get any meaty scenes with Capaldi because OHMYGOD that needed to happen! Look all I'm saying is that you either bring her back right now Moffat, or we riot. As for the big man himself I don't think it could have turned out better. Nick Frost was fantastic at balancing a very delicate line between the Santa we know and the somewhat blokey joe at the local pub who did nothing but poke fun at how absurd everything in this episode was. I also must applaud Moffat for writing him in in a way that made sense in the 'canon' of the show while also bringing to light everything that character represents. The episode makes a very good point *SPOILERS*: Santa doesn't have to be real to save them, in fact you can draw a lot of parallels between Santa and the Doctor himself, which is why Doctor Who is an oddly perfect fit for Christmas Day. 'Robot In Sherwood' also echoed this theme, they're both figures/icons that can inspire people to do good regardless of them being the product of fiction (you can also apply this theme to Danny, he saved Clara in a very real way even though he was just a figment of her imagination at the time). That's kind of inspiring, and that's without the nuanced performance Frost gave and the funny banter between him and Shona that made the episode. 

Just kiss already!

Santa and Shona brought the fun but this was still Capaldi and Coleman's episode. What else can be said here? Capaldi plays the Doctor slightly warmer here, he's become more of a lovable grump than an outright bastard. Kudos to Capaldi for the delivery on 'SHUT UP SANTA!' Clara also had some important scenes, Danny coming back seemed pure cry bait but again it was somewhat offset by one moment in particular: the explanation of the title 'Last Christmas' was really depressing because of how much it hit home, and his solution for Clara to only miss him for five concentrated minutes every day was lovely. It was another sad goodbye, albeit one we didn't really need. As for old Clara it was even more depressing to find out that she never got over Danny or the Doctor, even if she traveled the world as a teacher she never apparently never found happiness with someone else. Thanks Doctor Who, why don't you keep rubbing these unhappy endings into our happiness deprived skulls? Oh wait, none of that was real? So Clara's staying for another season?!! *REJOICES* I'm so happy she's staying, the duo between Capaldi and Coleman literally improves the show's quality by exactly 20%. I'd glad she didn't go via old age, they've already done that with past almost-companions and Amy and Rory. Funny how this feels like the THIRD possible exit we've had for the Clara this year, who knows how they're going to wrap up her storyline in Series 9 but it won't be due to her 1) getting mad at the Doctor, 2) dying of old age or 3) being abandoned by the Doctor as he goes to find Gallifrey. So that leaves what, just death outright? Hmmm...we'll see. All I know is that Jenna Coleman is an incredibly talented actress and I'm happy that this isn't the last we've seen of Clara. 

Positives:

+ Shona was awesome
+ Santa was awesome
+ Danny's speech to Clara about 'Last Christmas'
+ The Doctor and Santa bickering
+ Loved the Santa message 
+ Very weird episode
+ Clara didn't leave

Negatives:

- A ton of unoriginal ideas slapped together
- Blatant Aliens knock-off
- Potentially no more Shona
- Poor CGI, makeup effects

Overall Score: 7/10

So that's it then, Series 8 has officially wrapped up. Overall I think this has been an unusually strong season for the show. Outside of 'Into The Dalek' and 'In The Forest Of The Night' the episodes have ranged from good to great, and 'Listen' is one of my favorite episodes of the show ever. Capaldi makes for a wonderful Doctor and the dynamic between him and Jenna Coleman has been dynamite. Most importantly it was clear from the outset that the show-runners actually had an idea of where the show the going this time around, they made sure not to repeat the mistakes of Series 7b by focusing on character development and making every story count (I felt like series 8 was quite frankly just written better). With all that in mind I anticipate Series 9 eagerly and can't wait to see where Capaldi's Doctor goes next. 
    

Doctor Who: Dark Water & Death In Heaven

EDIT: I'm a little bit late on this one. To sum up why: video games. LOT'S of video games. Like so many video games!  

And so concludes Series 8 of Doctor Who. It's been a fun twelve weeks: we've had everything from swashbuckling with Robin Hood to raiding an intergalactic bank, and seeing Clara and the Doctor's relationship evolve over the weeks has been fascinating. I'm happy that they decided to end the series with a two-parter, while individually the episodes this season have been pretty good the somewhat swift 'get it done in 45 minutes and go' pacing has left me salivating for a more epic and intricate tale of old that you just can't express in under an hour, and that's without taking into consideration the myriad of themes and foreshadowing that this season has built up: what's up with Danny's past? Is the Doctor a good man? Will Clara be gone for good? Is this really heaven? I'm happy to report that as a whole, the finale works. I don't think it should have been a two-parter though...  

For the first part of a finale ‘Dark Water’ left me cold, it was basically set-up for ’Death In Heaven’ that didn't need to take up 45 minutes. Funnily enough, the only two parter this season didn't actually need to be a two-parter, this story would have been served much better as an extended hour long episode. A lot of 'Dark Water' feels inconsequential when viewed back to back with 'Death In Heaven', we didn't need an entire episode devoted to explaining the 3W's modus operandi and Missy's secret identity. 

Like Clara I think we all felt a bit shell shocked as Danny bit the bullet in a very real way before the credits even rolled. We knew he wasn't really dead of course, but damn that's how you open a story all about death! Unfortunately what followed was infuriating as Clara basically went crazy and chose the most aggressive and frustrating way to make the Doctor help her, which was totally unnecessary. Sure Clara, threatening to destroy the TARDIS keys near a volcano isn't AT ALL overkill, you go ahead. Why didn't she just ask the Doctor for his help first? He would have said yes, surely, because even AFTER she went all kamikaze on him he still wanted to help her! What's worse is that her 'betrayal' was never brought up again and didn't visibly impact their relationship for the rest of the finale, so what purpose did it serve in the overall plot? None, it's one of those ....BECAUSE DRAMA! moments. I'd be lying if the scene wasn't well played out by Coleman and Capaldi though, I just wish it held more weight than simple shock value. 

You really didn't think this through did you Clara?

Once we finally got away from the whole 'ultimate betrayal' thing the Doctor and Clara decide to visit the three words organisation. There were a lot of things about 3W and it's operations that left me scratching my head. How big is this compamy and why is it's base of operations inside St Pauls Cathedral? Also, how publicly known is it? There seems to be very little in terms of staff: not counting Seb we only saw Dr Chang briefly before he was vaporised. Shouldn't there be more people wandering about if the rich are willingly giving the bodies of the dead over to Missy? And how come they like to display dead skeletons inside giant water tanks, what was the purpose of that aside from the cool visual with the Cyber-reveal? What was the whole deal with Dr Skarosa, the supposed founder of the organisation? Was he an actual person or an invention of Missy? Why is the giant floating Nethersphere ball hiding in plain sight? Was it really that necessary to create a shell organisation just to fool the Doctor for about 10 mins, Missy? My head hurts. Either way a lot of this was simply build-up to the Cybermen showing up and didn't impact the story of the finale in any way, so why devote 'Dark Water' to explaining something that makes NO sense? 

While I liked Danny's scenes with Seb in the Neverworld I still think they could have compressed a lot of things down: the revelation of Danny's 'bad day' in 'Dark Water' wasn't anything mind blowing, and the Neversphere stuff was again just a place holder for the Cyberarmy reveal. This could be pretty much summed up with Seb being vaporised, he was inconsequential when you get down to it. Chris Addison was great comic relief though, so it wasn't all bad. And the kid Danny killed returned in a pivotal way for 'Death In Heaven', it gave the finale an extra gut punch that made Danny's sacrifice even more moving. If Danny's death holds, and I think it will considering his final scene (although there's still that Orson business to think about) this might be one of the few cases in Who where a main 'companion' dies permanently, another twist of audiences expectations.

Then we have Missy, or the Master reborn in female form. A lot of her screen time in ‘Dark Water’ was devoted to explaining the convoluted mechanics of the Nethersphere and basically acting weird. It’s difficult to gauge a characters personality when they're playing a cipher (Clara had this issue in Series 7), so we only really got to know her until after she was unveiled as the Master. While I didn’t have a problem with the reveal itself so much about the climax of ‘Dark Water’ felt underwhelming, her identity included. I mean, who DIDN’T figure that out? Ultimately the reveal fell that, if Missy was a returning character there were very few options: she was either the Master or the Rani, basically. And with a name like Missy, short for Mistress…I didn’t care much for that cliffhanger. ‘Oh look, the Cybermen are invading London…again. And the Master’s back trying to take over the world…again. And Danny’s grappling with the fact that he might want to delete his emotions…*SHRUGS*' It's made worse by the fact that show runner Steven Moffat categorically denied the Master’s return earlier this year. Yeah, don’t believe anything that comes out of that man's mouth. 

'If only I can recall where I've seen that bat-sh*t crazy grin before...'

So I didn't care all that much for 'Dark Water', but ‘Death In Heaven’ though? Now this is more like it!

First of all let's address the single best thing about this finale: Michelle Gomez as the Master. Now unleashed from her reveal she was killing it in pretty every scene, fully embracing the ‘bananas’ quality to the Master and threatening to consume the entire episode with her bravado and sheer madness. Considering that we only really got to see her incarnation in action during ‘Death In Heaven’ she was extremely effective in every glimpse we got of her, particularly when she dispatched Osgood. John Simm’s Master was equal parts terrifying and funny depending on the scene, and not afraid to kill someone for some random reason. I was happy to see that Missy is no less bloodthirsty she basically murdered the nicest, most adorable character in the episode (a returning character at that!) in the most brutal way possible. While certain aspects of that scene made NO sense: why didn’t the guards behind her intervene at any point (?) the shot of Missy stepping on Osgoods glasses hurt in a way that I haven't felt on Doctor Who in a while. I mean wow, that was grade A-nasty! 

All things considered both parts of the finale were very morbid and uncompromising when it came to tackling really dark material, almost unsettling. In particular the 'Don't Cremate Me!' scene had very disturbing implications which was surprisingly never brought up again. So was that just something that happens to everyone trapped in the Neversphere or is it canon now in the Who universe that our minds remain attached to our bodies after death and can feel everything that's happening to our body? Because if that's the case, jesus that's dark! And that's before we get into the whole 'dead being brought back as cyberzombies' and the horrific make-up on Danny's cyberface...*SHUDDERS* All of this death was perfect for the Master though: a properly threatening villain that wasn't afraid at any point to kill people, something the Moffat era has been sorely lacking up until this point. This makes 'Death In Heaven' a most successful revive of the Master and a worthy successor to John Simm's portrayal. It's a shame we didn't get an explanation as to how the Master regenerated into a woman and escaped Gallifrey, but Missy has practically been confirmed to make a reappearance in the future by both the actor and the show runner (to quote Steven Moffat 'She escaped!') so maybe next time?

WARNING: THIS EPISODE WILL BE DISTRESSING TO MOST VIEWERS.

HEY DOCTOR WHO FANS! REJOICE! We finally have a Cyberman story that focuses on their grisly origins and not dumb them down into faceless robots that can be defeated by the power of love! Well okay, they still did some of that, but the important thing is that they got to the heart of what makes them an effective villain: they're hideous transformations of us. With Dalek's it's always 'WE WILL KILL EVERYONE!' whereas the Cybermen are very much 'you will become like us'. They're not robots, they're us, hideous transformations of us that have forgone all emotion by giving themselves up to technology. It's a chilling thought encapsulated perfectly in this two parter with the skeletons in the tanks, the Cybermen rising up night of the living dead style from the graves and Danny's horribly disfigured face. When you get down to it yes they were just a fighting force for the Master but I'm glad that Moffat kept what makes them so terrifying at the forefront, like when Clara had to switch Danny 'off'. I still think there's a great Cyberman story out there, I just wish someone would write it and slap it on the show. 

As for the denouement of the two-parter, I liked the twist on Missy's plan. This entire season the Doctor has been debating whether this incarnation of himself is a 'good man' because he's been unafraid to let someone die for the greater good and make morally grey decisions in a heartbeat (see: 'Into The Dalek', 'Time Heist', 'Mummy On The Orient Express', 'Kill The Moon'). The Master's idea is to basically take this to the extreme by giving him a Cyber army to conquer the galaxy and right wrongs, again toying with the notion that the Doctor is merely a general who makes people sacrifice themselves for the greater goo. And if he doesn't? Then the evil clouds will convert the entire human race into Cybermen...or something? Yeah, not clear on that. The Doctor doesn't go through with it of course, proclaiming he's an 'idiot' for not realising how awesome Danny is at demonstrating his love for Clara, to the point where he overrides his programming (Cybermen have REEEALLY got to sort their software out, that's a pretty big flaw!) and saves the world by sacrificing himself and the Cyberarmy to take out the clouds. According to Danny, this is the promise of a soldier: to keep people sleeping safely at night, which nicely resolves the Doctor's beef with soldiers. What a lovely way to encapsulate what this season has been about. This wasn't a finale with a lot of bombast or explosions but it definitely delivered when it came it putting a 'Fin' on all of the major plot threads. Considering a lot of Moffats finale's have had unresolved business or dangling arcs, this was a refreshing break.  

I have mixed feeling about the Brigadiers second post-death cameo, I certainly get the sentiment but seeing a Doctor Who icon being brought back from the dead and turned into a faceless Cyberman just feels...I dunno, wrong? It's a bit too cheap, the Doctor didn't have Missy's death on his hands because someone else, *COUGH* almost in a Deus Ex Machina kind of way *COUGH* did it for him. I'll allow it, the Doctor saluting the Brigadier was simply too good a moment to write that part off. My heart melted, job done.

We need a hug too after that scene!

Another great moment of the finale was that Cafe scene. Why are cafe scenes in Doctor Who so emotional? Watching Clara and the Doctor lie to each other thinking the other one knows better? Heartbreaking. The Doctor smashing up the TARDIS console was incredibly powerful and again really, really dark. And considering everything she's been through Clara hasn't had the best of endings has she? She lost her boyfriend and the Doctor to has distanced himself away from her, all because he didn't want to infringe on her supposed personal life with Danny. And that hug? That was made of strong stuff too. While we know that isn't the last we've seen of Clara (we'll at least see her in this years Xmas special) that was a severely depressing note to end the series on, and far from a happy ending. Or until Nick Frost of all people shows up, kitted out in full Santa gear of course. Way to ruin a moment there Moffat! To put it bluntly, I have my doubts about this year's Xmas outing, I just hope they're not jumping the shark by literally having Santa be a character, because without actually seeing the episode that sounds really dumb.  

While there are still missing holes in the story (what was up with St Pauls again? Where was Danny talking to Clara from at the end? Is the Masters TARDIS still out there?) ultimately 'Death In Heaven' was a satisfying resolution to the major themes from Series 8, a solid tale in a very solid season. It did lack that certain 'epic' quality that past finales have delivered in spades, but I kind of like that. Series 8 in particular has been all about going against the grain when it comes to what we expect, with numerous episodes like 'Flatline', 'In The Forest Of The Night', 'Listen' and 'Kill The Moon' tinkering with the established format in new ways. Bucking the trend 'Death In Heaven' had surprisingly little scope, concentrating on only a few key characters of this supposedly global event. Plane sequence aside it was also lacking action, and the universe was in no danger whatsoever, thank god. Sure I have a few hang-ups with 'Dark Water' but nothing in that was inherently bad, it just felt a bit pointless in the end. To sum up this story and Series 8 as a whole: I liked it quite a bit!  

Positives:

+ Michelle Gomez was fantastic
+ Themes and arcs of the season were satisfyingly wrapped up
+ Uncompromising view on death
+ A very morbid affair
+ The Cybermen were well handled
+ Missy was suitably villainous
+ Osgood and Kate Stewart are back!
+ That depressing scene in the Cafe
+ Seb was fun
+ Brigadier cameo

Negatives:

- Lackluster first part
- Missy's plan seemed needlessly convoluted and confusing
- Clara's 'betrayal' made no sense
- The finale wasn't all that epic compared to previous season enders
- A lot of 'Dark Water' was inconsequential in the finale
- Not enough Michelle Gomez as the Master!

Overall Score: 8/10

Interstellar

If you're wondering what all the hype is about, 'Interstellar' is an enormous movie. There's no two ways about it: you HAVE to see this film in the cinema, it's just one of those films. 

We were shown a live interview with director/producer/writer Christopher Nolan before the film and he made two things VERY clear: 1) the less you know about this film, the better and 2) he's aiming for something up there with the all time film greats, we're talking '2001: A Space Odyssey', 'Star Wars', 'Close Encounters Of The Third Kind' ect... science fiction that impacted cinema by showing us worlds that we had never seen before, a visual experience that no other form of media can create and suck us into the experience. While 'Interstellar' is not a perfect film, I believe I've seen an extraordinary film that lives up to the legacy of those classics. 

This movie is gorgeous, every frame will burn itself into your cerebral cortex and stay with you for days afterwards. The alien worlds and various spacecraft are well realised, it also has the most unique design for a robot I've seen in a film. Prepare for some stunningly beautiful (and tense as hell) space sequences, between this and 'Gravity' we've been quite frankly spoiled. Nolan's penchant for having as little greenscreen as possible has clearly paid off, everything looks real because it is real. If you have a theater showing this in Imax, you lucky bastard. Aiding the phenomenal visuals is Hans Zimmers bombastically operatic score, which while effective as f*ck when it comes to ratcheting up the tension seems determined to destroy your eardrums with every instrument in the orchestra, including an organ. Maybe it was the cinema but certain sections (like the rocket take-off scene) were so loud the seats shook. I advise you bring earmuffs with you! 

So pretty...

It's difficult to talk about the story because I'm sworn to secrecy (and the movie hasn't even come out yet), but it's so vast and intricate I doubt I could tell you anyway. This movie crams so much into it's three hour run time I felt mentally and emotionally exhausted coming out from it, everything from father/daughter relationships, various space-time concepts, gravity theories, other dimensions, ghosts, black holes, wormholes, life on other planets, survival, good vs evil, heart vs mind, sustainability of our planet's resources, paradoxes, to human instinct are touched upon.....what doesn't this movie talk about? As I said this is a monumentally massive film in both scope and scale, it's amazing it turned out as good as it did considering it's trying to cram 20 different threads into one movie. The focus of 'Interstellar' is all over the place, threads prominent in the beginning will be dropped halfway through and then become relevant again an hour later. The glue holding this behemoth of tangled concepts together is Matthew Mcconaughey's character Cooper, a space cowboy whose relationship with his daughter Murph back on earth serves as the beating heart and drive for the rest of the story. Mcconaughey gives one heck of a powerhouse performance in this film, which is saying something considering everyone in this cast is giving it their all. Anne Hathaway, Jessica Chastain, *SPOILER* and Mackenzie Foy are all fantastic and brilliant in their own right but this is Mcconaughey's film. His desire to return to his family, much like Leonardo Dicaprio's Cobb in Nolan's previous film 'Inception', grounds the film emotionally as it risks involving only your brain instead of your heart. And no, Nolan can't make a film without having Michael Caine cry at some point, you'll be blabbing as well during that scene.  

Nolan's eagerness to present audiences with challenging material should be lauded but he might have gone a step too far here. In order to keep up with the mad intricacies of the plot you MUST pay attention at all times or else you'll be lost. I did my best but I completely lost the thread by the time the ending rolled around. Without spoiling anything I just don't see how A + B = C. That ending made no sense for me at least, which may or may not be my fault as by that point my brain was dribbling out of my ears thanks to the sheer onslaught of everything that happened in the two hours and a half beforehand. Suffice to say it pulls several cards out from under its hat and left me guessing as to where everything was heading. Once you finally reach that destination though, good luck figuring out what just happened!  

Also this film is long, it feels like I was stuck in that cinema for a day, like they somehow managed to distort space and time when the film started. It starts at a fairly brisk pace but suffers a bit from prolonged second and third acts packed with several moments that feel like they're building to the climax but actually aren't. It's never boring or any less than engaging, but be prepared for things to slow down a bit before the ending comes and blows your mind. 

'Interstellar' is a visually stunning epic that will transport you to the far reaches of space and back again. It's one heck of a ride that demands a lot from you so be prepared to have your socks blown off on several occasions. Christopher Nolan remains a master of his craft and blows the doors off any other movie I've seen this year. He's an incredible visionary of modern cinema, I can't wait to see his next project. 

Positives:

+ Matthew Mcconaughey, stellar cast in general 
+ Incredibly stimulating visuals  
+ Ambitious, unique script 
+ Really tense in parts
+ Several powerhouse moments
+ Intelligent, thought provoking 
+ Powerful score

Negatives:

- I didn't really understand that ending at all
- Wait, what just happened?!
- Slow middle
- The music is so loud it gave me a headache

Overall Score: 9/10

Doctor Who: In The Forest Of The Night

'In The Forest Of The Night' starts out wonderfully as we see a little girl running through a forest in a trademark red coat. Unfazed by any of this she stumbles upon a blue telephone box and decides to knock on the door. The grumpy old man inside is surprised to find a schoolgirl alone in the middle of nowhere. He tries to take her back home but it appears they're already there: the TARDIS is not in a remote forest at all, but in the middle of Trafalgar square in London! It's a great reveal that capitalises on strong fairytale imagery, like other fairytales though you have to take things at face value, if you start questioning to yourself why the wolf in 'Red Riding Hood' can talk and walk then the only answer you're going to get is 'because fairytales, duh'. Frank Cottrell Boyce's 'Forest Of The Night' is a lot like that, if you start questioning the events of this story then it falls apart completely. 'Kill The Moon' had some extremely flimsy science going on but at least it attempted to make events appear plausible, here it's outright magic with little to no explanation given. So yes, suspension of disbelief is extremely necessary to enjoy this episode. 

The best thing about 'Forest Of The Night' is it's set-up. A forest consuming the entire earth overnight is a super intriguing idea that gives the episode a unique visual flare that the previous episode 'Flatline' didn't have. The production team did a fantastic job of conveying a lush landscape peppered with London landmarks: the image of Nelsons column surrounded by green is an iconic image (aided by Murray Golds whimsical score) that once again shows how Doctor Who can separate itself from the rest of the TV landscape by being just plain bonkers when it comes to out-there ideas. The direction from Sheree Folkson, DW's first female director in a LOOOONG time, is inventive and adds a lot of personality to proceedings. I particularly adore how massive she made the TARDIS look using wide angle lens to replicate how the TARDIS would have appeared to young Maebh. It's another gorgeous looking episode. 

Aiding the fairytale-esque theme is the drove of schoolkids featured in this episode. It's a shame we didn't see Courtney again, but Abigail Eames is endearing as Maebh, the super-powered girl who can hear the trees and looking for her lost sister. The other kids are hit and miss but they're given believable/funny dialogue and aren't as intrusive as I thought they would be. Maebh aside they're mainly used as a tool to demonstrate the differences between Clara and Danny. Samuel Anderson continues to be really likeable and surprisingly parental compared to Clara, who cares more for the excitement of adventure than doing her job. I was shocked at how he brushed her lies aside, despite building up to a confrontation of some sort he wasn't really that bothered with it. Huh, ok. I like his explanation for not wanting to travel onboard the TARDIS (he doesn't want to see more, he wants to see what's in front of him more clearly). Again Doctor Who seems obsessed with flipping the script and turning established tropes on their head. Who wouldn't want to travel in the TARDIS? Well Danny apparently. It's a shame we didn't see more of him exploring the forest with the kids, the bits we did see was rather entertaining and it would have been fun to see him adventuring on his own. Maybe we'll see more of Samuel Anderson in the finale? 

That beach chair feels out of place, it's never that sunny in London!

As for Clara, 'Forest Of The Night' feels intentionally like the opposite of 'Kill The Moon' in a lot of ways. In that story Clara is furious with the Doctor for abandoning her and putting her in an impossible situation, but here she coyly manipulates him into leaving before the earth is once again struck by a natural event that could wipe us all out. Clara opts to die with the rest of her species than escape in the TARDIS, and she lied to the Doctor about leaving specifically so he would go back to the TARDIS. The Doctor refuses to leave though, and repeats word for word what Clara said at the end of 'Kill The Moon', a nice indication of how much he's changed since then: 'This is my world, too. I walk your Earth. I breathe your air'. It's a powerful moment and a great concept: the Doctor forced into abandoning the earth by his companion because he can't save us. I love that the tables have turned now, Clara is the one manipulating the Doctor whereas before it was the reverse. She's even predicting his thought patterns which is slightly concerning. Is this the control freak Clara 'Deep Breath' was going on about? She seems to be proficient at manipulating the Doctor into doing things he doesn't want to do at any rate. 

And just like 'Kill The Moon' the earth is saved by the Doctor....doing nothing whatsoever! The problem solved itself, good thing the Doctor came to this realisation in the nick of time, we'd be doomed otherwise! Not. The lack of threat is interesting, aside from a decent chase scene involving escaped zoo animals there isn't really any sense of danger present in this story at all. I can't really say the story needed a threat, the mystery of the forest was enough to keep the viewer hooked. Until we were shown what was causing the forest to grow at an alarming rate...

So those....Fairies? Pixies? Magical firefly thingies? What was up with them?! Apparently all trees have an eternal 'lifeforce' linking them together that in times of crisis can miraculously cause forests to pop out of nowhere and save the day. Erm...okay. These magical trees are going to save us from a solar flare by acting as an oxygen blanket or something (SCIENCE!) to negate the effects of the radiation/heat. In what fantastical alternate reality am I going to buy something like that? A solar flare of that magnitude wouldn't just require an excess of vegetation to brush it off surely? It's radiation, we'd all burn to death! Then at the end Maebh's lost sister shows up out of nowhere hiding under a magical bush. Did the trees magic her back somehow or has the sister literally been hiding in that bush the entire time? Either way I didn't feel anything for that scene at all, only puzzlement. Oh and Danny getting rid of the tiger thanks to shining a flashlight in it's eyes? Sure, that'll work...

Don't you just love Capaldi's facial expressions?

Despite everything 'Forest Of The Night' has going for it I couldn't fall in love with it: there's too much BS here to simply brush it to one side. Having said that I like the visuals, I thought the supporting cast was a ton of fun and there were a lot great interactions between Clara, Danny and the Doctor. This episode is unconventional and different in a lot of ways, so it's a shame everything was resolved by magic in the end.

Positives:

+ Strong visuals
+ The leads are still consistently great
+ Fairytale vibe
+ Interesting, unconventional story      
+ Continues to build the Doctor/Clara relationship dynamic 

Negatives:

- The kids are a mixed bag
- No semblance of 'science' whatsoever, completely fantastical
- Ending scene makes little sense

Overall Score: 8/10