The latest in my series of Reviews of the Matt Smith Doctor Who years

Summary: what does Amy Pond really desire.

Plot: The Tardis crew finds themselves in two different realities one in which the Tardis is plunging toward a cold Star and one in which Amy & Rory and the visiting Doctor in Upper Leadworth find themselves besieged by elderly alien assassins. and who is the Dream Lord in charge of all of this?

Writing:  Simon Nye gives us two stories in one but one real plot, Who does Amy really want to be with, The Doctor or Rory? It’s that interaction and debate that drives this story and makes it one of the most interesting of the entire run.

Acting: The strength of the combination of Smith, Gillian and Darvill is very apparent here and Toby Jones as the Dream Lord really works.  This will remain constant throughout their time together.

Memorable moments: The whole Dream vs Nightmare sequence is the closest thing to a real memorable moment, but this one nothing really jumps out.

Oddities: I SWEAR the guy in that van with the doctor looks like David Tennant and I really thought it might have been him in a fun cameo when I saw it.

Pet Peeves: I was really disappointed as to who the Dream Lord was, I was hoping for the return of an old villain but this one really didn’t peeve me either.

Great Quote(s):

AMY: Er, Dream Lord. He creates dreams.
DOCTOR: Dreams, delusions, cheap tricks.
DREAM LORD: And what about the gooseberry, here. Does he get a guess?
RORY: Er, listen, mate. If anyone’s the gooseberry round here, it’s the Doctor.
DREAM LORD: Well now, there’s a delusion I’m not responsible for.

DOCTOR: Where did you pick up this cheap cabaret act?
DREAM LORD: Me? Oh, you’re on shaky ground.
DREAM LORD: If you had any more tawdry quirks you could open up a Tawdry Quirk Shop.

Final Verdict: Four Stars Given how little of this story stood out that ranking might seem odd, but this was one of the steadiest Doctor Who stories I’ve ever seen.

Ranking in Series 5 to date 3rd out of 7

1. The Eleventh Hour
2. Time of the Angels
3. The Vampires of Venice
4. Amy’s choice
5. Flesh and Stone
6. Victory of the Daleks
7. The Beast Below

Ranking in Matt Smith Era (top 5 out of 7)

1. The Eleventh Hour
2. Time of the Angels
3. The Vampires of Venice
4. Amy’s choice
5. Flesh and Stone


Sgt Schultz:I see nothing, I was not here, I did not even get up this morning!

Hogan’s Heroes Hold that Tiger, 1965

Is there any point to which you would wish to draw my attention?”

“To the curious incident of the dog in the night-time.”

“The dog did nothing in the night-time.”

“That was the curious incident,”

Sir Arthur Conan Doyle Sherlock Holmes Sliverblaze

A rather extraordinary event took place this Friday.

The first Encyclical from the Papacy of Francis I was released titled LUMEN FIDEI (the light of faith).

Under ordinary circumstances the first Encyclical of a new pope is significant, this one even more so as it an Encyclical that, while signed by one Pope is authored by two:

As Francis himself told a group of cardinals and bishops in May, the encyclical was written “with four hands” together with retired Pope Benedict XVI.

Benedict had almost finished the text when he resigned on Feb. 28. Francis took up the unfinished work, adding a “few contributions” to Benedict’s “fine work” and publishing it under his own name.Francis himself has

It was also released the same day as another joint appearance by Francis & Benedict XVI. While this is not as unique as it once was it is still an amazing sight and an excellent hook for a TV report on the subject.

And if this was not enough reason to make this story newsworthy, the section on faith and family,  given the recent rulings on Gay Marriage from the Supreme Court would surely draw media attention (all emphasis mine):

In Abraham’s journey towards the future city, the Letter to the Hebrews mentions the blessing which was passed on from fathers to sons (cf. Heb 11:20-21). The first setting in which faith enlightens the human city is the family. I think first and foremost of the stable union of man and woman in marriage. This union is born of their love, as a sign and presence of God’s own love, and of the acknowledgment and acceptance of the goodness of sexual differentiation, whereby spouses can become one flesh (cf. Gen 2:24) and are enabled to give birth to a new life, a manifestation of the Creator’s goodness, wisdom and loving plan. Grounded in this love, a man and a woman can promise each other mutual love in a gesture which engages their entire lives and mirrors many features of faith. Promising love for ever is possible when we perceive a plan bigger than our own ideas and undertakings, a plan which sustains us and enables us to surrender our future entirely to the one we love. Faith also helps us to grasp in all its depth and richness the begetting of children, as a sign of the love of the Creator who entrusts us with the mystery of a new person. So it was that Sarah, by faith, became a mother, for she trusted in God’s fidelity to his promise (cf. Heb 11:11).

The family: “A stable union of man and woman“, “a manifestation of the Creator’s goodness, wisdom and loving plan.“, “a plan bigger than our own ideas and undertakings“!

Such a statement would be considered “Fighting words” if uttered by a Bishop on TV.  There would be no shortage of journalists challenging him with hard-hitting questions or side guests raining critique on such a clergyman in the most vehement of terms.

On Memeorandum there would be link after link from Media Matters and Think Progress decrying it as “homophobic”, as contrary to “marriage equality” (a phrase that means absolutely nothing) and leftist bloggers would amplify the attack in an unending stream of paragraphs filled with vitriol.

Yet how does the media react when the Supreme Pontiff, the head of the Worldwide Roman Catholic Church the single most important religious figure in the world releases, in writing a statement that challenges the MSM most cherished belief (next to the sanctity of abortion) and does it in his very first public Encyclical?  What do we hear from the media who has never found a traditional value it wasn’t willing to attack?


All that could be mustered was one post on FiredogLake so weak that in its title it actually states the Pope has excluded adopters from the definition of family (as apparently a homo-centric argument was not strong enough).

Why? Why this conspicuous silence, why does the MSM, when this pope challenges them,  see nothing and know nothing?

Because they are still afraid of a direct confrontation.

They understand that unlike the Gabriel Gomez campaign or the Amnesty Bill an attack on the beloved first Pope from Latin America can be considered by many an attack on Latin Americans in general.  It can actually create a united “Hispanica“.  United against them.

So they will see nothing as they did on the LCWR and they did on lukewarm Catholics (Hi Mrs. Pelosi) in the hope that nobody will notice until one day his “My Chcemy Boga” moment comes and it’s too late.

All is proceeding as the Holy Spirit has planned.

Update:  Added the Sherlock Holmes quote

Update 2: Instalanches are no less welcome a day after the post. If you don’t know what I mean about the whole “Hispanica” bit I plan on posting my entire radio speech about “Hispanica” on Youtube as an audio with illustrations when (and if) time permits

Update 3: Stacy McCain notes a pronouncement of the pope that is likely going to get much more press than the one I noted.


Olimometer 2.52

Unfortunately all is not proceeding as planned for me as for the 5th straight week I failed to achieve a full paycheck.

Summer is normally a time of the doldrums for bloggers five weeks of not making the weekly mortgage payment is pretty bad.

As always it will be up to you to decide if it becomes six

Update: I have spent the last two hours sending thank you notes for all those who decided to not only end my streak of short payweek’s but kicked in enough to cover last months shortfall.

Thank you so much