Doctor Who: ‘A Good Man Goes to War’ Review & Discussion

Published 4 years ago by

doctor who season 6 a good man goes to war Doctor Who: A Good Man Goes to War Review & Discussion

In a feat of masterful storytelling, with a plot so beautifully immense in its conception, Steven Moffat has once again elevated Doctor Who above all conceivable expectations and elegantly crafted this mid-season finale into what may be the Doctor’s greatest adventure ever presented – and that’s taking into account the highly disappointing, and completely anticipated, revelation of River Song’s true identity.

Continuing from the previous week’s two-part episode and cliffhanger, “A Good Man Goes To War” opens with Rory (Arthur Darvill), in full Centurion garb, aboard a Cybermen battleship. With dialogue and visuals reminiscent of Russell T. Davies’ tendency to overreach, one does not truly recognize the monumental importance of what is occurring until the phrase “the Doctor is calling in his debts” is uttered.

What may first appear to be a simple reclamation of past good deeds quickly turns all those watching into children with over-active imaginations. The simple notion of the Doctor (Matt Smith) – the proverbial savior of the Universe – calling upon those he saved in his 900 years of existence to help in a single event may very well be the most prodigious plot line presented in the decades of Doctor Who storytelling.

Akin to the often talked about (but never shown – on purpose) Time War, the act of the Doctor calling in his debts presents a nearly infinite array of grandiose visuals and immense possibilities. While the opening scenes present a fleet of Cybermen ships being destroyed in an instant, what is eventually presented as the Doctor “calling in debts” is nothing more than a few familiar faces from Steven Moffat’s tenure as executive producer – with a reluctant Sontaran thrown in for good measure.

doctor who amy pond1 Doctor Who: A Good Man Goes to War Review & Discussion

Even though the collected figures hardly meet the lofty imagination of anyone watching (although presenting a good argument of why the Time War should never be visually represented), the pure and unexpected notion of the Doctor “calling in his debts” serves to provide an environment of accidental repercussions that maintains the audience’s excitement throughout. With a story and execution that is both brilliant and disappointing (at times), it’s hard not to want to fault this episode, while at the same time continuously proclaiming its inclusion in the franchise’s top episodes.

With a story that serves to transition the Doctor from the Universe’s only hope, to a man that everyone should fear, the elements involving Amy (Karen Gillan) and her baby, and the revelation of River Song (Alex Kingston), often feel inferior in their presentation, even though they’re the two main and reoccurring plots. While still wonderful in its execution, there are times when convolution – even to the level that one expects with Doctor Who – begins to conflict with what appears to be important.

Continuing that sentiment comes the long-awaited revelation of River Song’s true identity. One of Russell T. Davies many wondrous creations, River Song has always stood out in both elegance and mystery. A figure important in the Doctor’s life, but one that is existing in a contrarian timeline. Since the moment that audiences were introduced to her, in her final living moments, the theory of who she is, and who she comes to be, were always present.

doctor who rory good man goes to war Doctor Who: A Good Man Goes to War Review & Discussion

Unfortunately, as Doctor Who season 6 began, those theories quickly lessened, and a more assured situation took over. As seasonal imagery and on-the-nose insinuations highlighted River Song’s only possible identity, the once great mystery quickly turned into anything but.

With a long, drawn-out, revelation that even the most inexperienced Doctor Who fan could have spotted without the given back-story, the presented situation may leave some unhappy. But for those with enough foresight to see the possibilities awaiting fans this fall, it’s hard to conclude this episode with anything but a smile.

For all its elegance, brilliance, disappointments and anticipated outcomes, the sheer scope of the episode, mixed with the numerous storytelling possibilities that await audiences when the series returns, serves to elevate this episode past all of its few downfalls.


Doctor Who airs on Saturdays @9pm on BBC America

TAGS: Doctor who
Get our free email alerts on the topics and author of this article:


Post a Comment

GravatarWant to change your avatar?
Go to and upload your own (we'll wait)!

 Rules: No profanity or personal attacks.
 Use a valid email address or risk being banned from commenting.

If your comment doesn't show up immediately, it may have been flagged for moderation. Please try refreshing the page first, then drop us a note and we'll retrieve it. Keep in mind that we do not allow external links in the comments.

  1. I thought this episode was absolutely brilliant. Matt Smith really shined in this one as an angry, vengeful Doctor, and Rory stole the best line in the episode with “Would you like me to repeat the question?”. Epic. Can’t wait to see how this story arch plays out.

  2. River Song is NOT the creation of Russell T Davies, she is the creation of Steven Moffat.
    The same can be said for Captain Jack, although Russell T Davies actually wrote for Captain Jack, unlike River Song, who is the plot arc Moffat has been setting up since Silence in the Library/Forest of the Dead

    • Bang on Aaron. I was just about to correct them too.

      • I was about to say the same about River! Captain Jack first appeared in an episode written by Steven Moffat, but he is a Russell T Davies character. Moffat recently confirmed this on Twitter.

    • In regards to River Song: I wasn’t simply referring to the person who put pen to paper and wrote the name first. There’s more to the development of a character than that. Mise-en-scène, for example. As the executive producer, head writer and overall Doctor Who revisionist, I feel that Russell T. Davies can appropriately be credited for many of the reasons why River Song is/was so beloved.

      • Given that RTD openly said that he never interfered with Moffat’s scripts, I’d say you need to provide more justification than that.

        • And who is to say Moffat didn’t originally intend for River to be a throw away character? Yeah, I mean yes, it’s clear from her first appearance that River was meant to be a big part of the Doctor’s life down the road, but as far as RTD was concerned at the time, or anybody for that matter, River never necessarily needed to come back in the show. Much like Neil Gaiman’s episode which had been rewritten and revised for a few years now to incorporate new characters and seasonal arcs, Silence/Forest were episodes that could have taken place at any point in that series. Hell, outside of rewriting Donna, it could have been with any of the companions. Sorry, the point: Considering her introductory plotline had nothing to do with the seasonal arc, which is really what RTD’s main job was (overseeing the series progression on the grand scale, and moving storylines around while pumping out a few scripts of his own), I’d be willing to bet he didn’t have any hand in River’s creation.

        • Exactly. So far Moffat hasn’t carried over anything new from RTD’s tenure that he didn’t create himself – River, the Angels etc. He wanted to start fresh with his new Doctor.

      • I thought I’d quote this email from The Writer’s Tale. It’s Russell replying to Ben Cook’s request for more information about Moffat’s scripts. It’s already been established that the first time RTD finds out what’s in Moffat’s scripts is when the latter sends them through, so that even at that stage Russell can still somewhat have the joy of experiencing new Doctor like any fan. It’s also been established that Russell does not rewrite any of Moffat’s stuff, something he grants to few people.

        There’s an earlier discussion in which the two scriptwriters discuss the different parallel worlds in that two parter and Turn Left and they’re consciously not trying to tell each other much but still trying to sort something out. Both scripts featured Donna gaining a husband and kids and it’s decided that Moffat should do it instead and RTD removes that threat from his story. That’s the level of demarcation between the writers at this stage.

        Anyway, here’s the key email:



        It’s funny isn’t it? I ask him not to spoiler me. He’s written 4.9 already, so I’ve read that. It’s called Silence in the Library, and it has a character in it who I’m just sure is the Doctor’s wife (!!!), but I don’t like to ask. I want to find out in the second episode, like a viewer. It’s the closest that I get to experiencing brand new Doctor Who. Not for long though …

        River Song is Moffat’s creation, basically, which is why he feels comfortable in continuing to use her. If your argument is that she works because Alex Kingston was cast and Moffat had nothing to do with that decision, we’re getting into auteur theory territory which is foggy at the best of times in relation to franchise television and especially with Doctor Who, because casting person Andy Pryor had much to do with that too. Besides, they originally wanted Kate Winslet.

  3. One question I had from the finale though – if Rory is so adept at using a sword and gun, like he did against the Headless Monks and survived unlike the battle-hardened Sontaran, why is he such a wimp over the rest of the season?

    • Just because Rory is adept with sword and gun doesn’t mean it’s in his nature to battle. He has always struck me as a most reluctant fighter. He only battles when his back is to the wall.

      That doesn’t mean he’s a coward, anything but. However, my impression is that Rory is first and always a care-giver, a nurse (nicely echoed by Commander Strax, btw), and will do whatever he can to avoid battle.

      • This is purely unfounded speculation, but earlier in the series, the Doctor asked Rory how much he remembered about his life as a Roman soldier, to which Rory replied (paraphrasing) that it was kind of sketchy, bits here and there, but it’s never all there at any one time. I kind of thought that the Doctor had Rory dress up in his Centurion persona as a means of bringing his soldier knowledge to the forefront. Like if he was dressed as a soldier, it might inspire that part of him to come out.

        • Ah. Good call. Yeah, I’ll buy that. Don’t get me wrong, I love Rory, just at the time it seemed out of character. Cool, but out of character.

        • Plus the fact that he is defend his wife and child. That’ll bring out the tiger in anyone, no?

  4. Not sure why all are so happy about it,
    I for once feel the show is getting worse and worse.
    And I am watching Doctor who for over 25 years now.

    Not sure what exactly it is but this season has some of the most un interesting ep I have seen so far !
    Somehow expected a bit more from Moffat !

    Anyway…still its the Doctor,so lets see what the future or past holds !

    • While I did enjoy the episode, I have to whole heartedly agree with you io.
      Above all else I think they committed a great sin by adding that monologue by Amy to the intro/opening credits. I actually think Amy is one of the worst companions. I don’t know what it is about her but she just annoys me. LOL. Nothing will replace the brilliance that was Donna Noble. However, I LOVE Rory. And yes, we did see guess River’s identity quite some time ago. I guess I will admit to being a Dr. Who fanboy. I love the show regardless of the changes.

      • I think Amy is great, but I do agree about Donna Noble, she is my favourite assistant. It is a shame they ruined her part in the final David Tennant episodes.

  5. Moffat is not doing a great job. He is playing with too many “Doctor” conventions.

  6. I think you are being overly gushy about the episode though it was great to see the Doctor call in favors (didn’t realize he’s been collecting markers ) and step up to the plate.

  7. 1. River Song isn’t Russell T. Davies creation. 2. the episode was probably one of the worst dr who episodes i’ve ever seen. From start to finish nothing happened. It took 45 minuet for someone to finally come out and say what most were probably thinking, River is Amy and Rory’s baby, no big shock there. I am a fan of Moffat but he really let me down on this on. The next half of the series needs to seriously step up. Series 5 was probably one of the most memorable series, but this one has been a bit of a let down. They’ve shot themselves in the foot by having the first two episodes of series 6 be so good, the other episodes have not be able to live up to their scale and sense of adventure.

  8. Dr. Who is off the rails. Just like good men, story telling has rules. There are no rules in the Moffat era. The Dr. said as much in the ep. Too bad. Matt Smith gets better and better while the story arc gets shakier and shakier.

  9. I thought this episode ran last weekend? If not, what did I watch last Sunday?

    • It did air last week in the UK. apparently it was aired a week later in the states. don’t know why.

      • A holiday a couple of weeks back delayed the “Almost People” a week. The thinking was that people wouldn’t watch a new episode on Memorial Day (which is dumb seeing as it’s not a widely celebrated holiday. Besides, they ended up airing a Doctor Who marathon in it’s place anyway…), but yeah, it put us back a week.

  10. With the identity of where River Song came from, we still dont really know who she is, and why she becomes so important to the doctor, we still have that to look forward to. all we did is find out where she came from. cant wait for the second half of series 6.

    • Well we know exactly where she came from (Amy’s womb) – what we don’t know is how show got timelord DNA – was it simply exposure to the time vortex or TARDIS energy soon after conception? Did the TARDIS insert it on purpose? Or something else entirely? There’s a lot we don’t know yet nor do we know why she’s in jail.

      I found it a little annoying that the Doctor states that he’s never had children. He may have been lying…but is Moffet making it so Susan is not really his granddaughter even though the Doctor himself has stated he is was father and grandfather? Bad for continuity I think.

      Am I the only one that finds this s little creepy with Amy’s daughter romantically involved with the Doctor?

      • I was thinking that too. I think its weird that amy and rry are cool and have no opinion about melody and the doctor. I think I was expecting rory to be a little more overprotecttive.

  11. We are a week behind in the US because of a holiday (Memorial Day).

  12. Am I the only one who is totally lost with this episode? Who took Amy, When was she taken, Why was she taken, who was the woman with the patch, what happened to the baby when it “dissolved”? What debts were being paid from all of the former characters? This should have been a 2-hour episode because it felt totally out of “space and time”, completely disconnected from all the other ones…anyone have answers?

    • I too might have missed an episode along the way without realizing it because I don’t remember her getting abducted or who that woman was prior to the last episode. Some of those other characters are from past episodes, but I don’t remember that eye patch woman (Funny how she from some advanced tech society and the best they can do for her is a big gaudy eye patch) either…..

      • The Doctor mentions that Amy was abducted before America, so we don’t actually see the abduction.

    • My 2p FWIW:

      I don’t think the identity of the people who took Amy and the baby has been fully revealed… yet. The eyepatch lady’s name is Madame Kovarian but is a new character to the Dr Who ‘universe’. They used a mercenary army and were associated with the headless monks so no clues there either.

      The only timeline for her abduction was the Dr’s comment that she hasn’t been Amy for ‘quite a while’, probably during the America trip but at least before ‘the flesh’ episodes. The whole reason for the trip to the flesh was for the Dr to find out how to disconnect the link to the fake Amy (made of the flesh).

      She was taken because of the fear/terror many races feel for the Dr and they wanted a weapon to try and match him, a Timelord or a way to find a weakness in Timelords. The baby was conceived when the TARDIS was in the time vortex and so apparently has Timelord characteristics/abilities.

      The baby Rory recovered was just another fake ‘the flesh’ baby and Madame Kovarian severed the link (just to prove to the Dr he’d been fooled apparently) so it dissolved, just like the fake Amy did when the Dr blocked her link.

      The debts repaid were characters the Dr had previously helped coming and helping him, it was implied that there were more helping than were shown but the expense of including characters from 50+ years of Dr Who would’ve been too great.


      • Right we are not shown Amy’s abduction. This occurred sometime before ‘Impossible Astronaut’.

        This episode is confusing in that it introduces several new characters that the Doctor has met before but we haven’t. Dorium has appeared in the show before as has Danny Boy and his wingman, the Church, as well as the ex-Pirates from ‘Curse of the Black Spot’. The appearance of the Silurians is a bit puzzling as they have not always been friendly towards the Doctor – after all he has killed quite a lot of them in the past. I rather liked Vastra though.

  13. Does anyone else Hat River? she has got to be the worst thing about the entire show. I cringe everytime she speaks and can barely watch her arrogant annoying ways. Love Moffat Love Smtih, but please no more river

    Fantastic episode with so many questions to answer in the second half of the series

  14. I have been a long time Dr fan – prior to the new series back on Sci Fi – and I have to say that I am not in the majority on the show or the new Dr. I feel that the writing is elementary and stretched and each episode seems to be only as good as the villain it has for that time. When the new series started what did they do – go back to the weeping angles, and the storylines are just not clicking. Besides the oblivious end plot of River Song the episode itself was cluttered and actually made zero sense to the relevance of the Dr Who universe. Only to this Doctor and as stated the facts were not followed. Here it comes – geek time – When asked by Amy if the Dr had any children he replied no – but in fact he did in an earlier season, I think 3rd or 4th, a girl was created and considered him father and or daughter. I am not a Marc Smith fan for the Dr. He is too wordy and has to explain everything only to kind of insult the viewer and fill the time with dialogue form the writers. The villains if they have not been recycled are weak at best, Come on last season they even made the Darlek color coded and that in itself is against all Darlek thinking – there is no difference. Well just my opinion but I do not think this Dr is very good and the stories are lame to fill time and now he is traveling on his own and late summer we go back to Earth in WWII – Wow original again, hell Winston again? Come on???

    • Dalek*

      Perhaps someone with an obvious IQ toward the lower end of the spectrum cant follow the plot of the best show on TV right now, I am truly sorry for that.

      Come back when you learn to spell, graduate and can appreciate the brilliance of the Moffat/Smith age

      • My bad for the spell check, Dalek. Insulting me doesnt change a thing and if that is all you have to gripe about – grow up. I see more comments and reviews saying the same thing I am saying. Want to see great stories, characters and a great Dr? Check out any Tom Baker Dr episode – you will then know what I am talking about.

        • Geek times two: when Amy asked the doctor if he ever had any children, he didn’t reply. When she asked if the crib belonged to a child of his is when he said no. This episode wasn’t the best in the series, but it wasn’t as bad as you made it out to be. And I’m already a Tom Baker fan and have been since the eighties.

    • I wondered about that cloned child too. I thought she was who River actually was, but it seemed like they dragged her along far too long if she was. On the other hand if they thought they actually had something with the Time Traveler DNA in that child then wouldn’t the clone be much more of a prize since she clearly has far more DNA in her? I don’t know why they didn’t make her the companion once she was discovered. She had more physical abilities than his other companions….

    • I share all of your frustrations. Whatever budget they got was squandered on gratuitous CGI xf instead of story. The only decent ep this season was from Neal Gaiman and apparently that was written years ago. I think Matt Smith is doing a decent job with the material he has, but the material is subpar– exactly what I wasn’t expecting from Moffat. These episodes are as flaky as the parody Rowan Atkinson did some years ago. Whoever at BBC thought this would be the right direction to take their biggest cash cow to the next level should think again. Personally, I’d dump Amy in a heartbeat and River Song ran dry years ago.

      • All points agreed.

    • When Amy asked if The Doctor has children, he said no; he thinks Jenny is dead. When she asks if he’s ever had children, he changed the subject. Which suggests he has had children, but they are dead to him.

    • Quote – “I am not a Marc Smith fan for the Dr. He is too wordy and has to explain everything only to kind of insult the viewer and fill the time with dialogue form the writers.”

      You realise BBC produce this as a kids show right? Ask a 10 year old if Matt Smith’s exposition is insulting their intelligence. Ask them if they care the original canon is not being followed.

      They are going to change things that were introduced in the original (pre 2005) series because they want to tell a good story and if they decide the Daleks need to evolve in order to do that then they can.

      If you really don’t enjoy watching it then why bother? Get the old series on DVD/Blu-Ray and watch that instead ;)

      • If you think this is made for kids and half of the adults commenting do not understand what is going on your kidding yourself – Dr. Who was never meant for children at any time of its existence. And making changes to source characters does not constitute good writing – it is the exact opposite. I watch because I am still a fan, I may not like what I see but I still take it in hoping for a turn around and since Matt Smith has signed for another season I will have to continue waiting. But I find it funny that this Dr has been created to be the “Villain” of the universe, he was last season as well, as opposed to the helper he has always been written to be? Is that the direction we are going – an evil Dr. Who? I can buy that for a few seasons, interesting. But get some continuum in the storyline and keep the flow – that is all I am asking. This episode was out of the blue and could have been a 2 hour stand alone.

        • If you think that Dr Who was never meant for kids – you know nothing of the show’s history!

          Villian? You have a strange definition of evil…how is saving an abducted baby evil?

    • The Doctor’s “daughter” IIRC “Jenny” is a clone so technically she is not a natural daughter. So the Doctor is technically correct in that regard. But that contradicts older episodes where he unequivocally states he was a father and grandfather.

  15. @Raven West – I am with you

  16. Hey, Who Fans! I think “A Good Man Goes to War” was brilliant because it actually didn’t show us everything that was going on, just as the very first and second episodes of the season didn’t. I just hope Moffat ties up everything nicely when the season returns just as he did in “The Big Bang.” For instance, many of us Dr. Who fans are pretty sure that the Doctor that was killed in “The Impossible Astronaut” has to be a “Flesh” replica. So at some point, we’re going to get that story detail. Also, Rory (in Centurian costume) asks River Song in “A Good Man Goes to War” if they have met yet? Since they met in America when the Doctor was killed, obviously this is an earlier Rory (Perhaps, the Rory from the time of the The Pandorica Opens and The Big Bang). In fact, River looks rather stunned and slightly teary-eyed when she sees him, which might mean Rory is dead in her time. Also, the big question about River in “A Good Man Goes to War” was when was she conceived? Dr. Who mentions the night of Rory and Amy’s wedding. The night of the wedding they were on their way to investigate an escaped Egyptian goddess on the Orient Express in space. So, perhaps, we get to see that episode. Plus, Moffat did a lot of jumping around in “The Day of the Moon”, which didn’t show us how they got from A to Z so-to-speak. So, I think we’re looking at another Big Bang-like ending for this season.

  17. I loved the episode.. And I’m not sure if River being Amy/Rorys kid is the huge secret about her past.. She is someone much more important to the Doctor..

  18. I am a huge fan of Doctor Who and this has been an amazing series so far since Moffet took over. There are a couple things people aren’t remembering or looking at when it comes to the arcs of the last 2 seasons. 1) season 5 was never completely finished off, there is a reason why the saying “The Silence will fall” was so important. I really believe that we have only watched part of that story. 2) River keeps saying that she has a darker day coming, obviously that hasn’t happened yet. The Doctor has risen so high, but has yet to fall, who ever is the “Villain” calling the shots I’m sure we will find out very soon. I also would not be surprised if it is a time lord from the Doctor’s past, example would be when the Doctor questioned her about how she learned to fly the Tardis. River Song is about to be the main focus in the Fall and its going to be quite a ride.

  19. I am sorry but in the “Day of the Moon” episode was River the little girl everyone was looking for???

    • I think she will be. Plus she’s in prison for killing someone, which I reckon is the Doctor from The Impossible Astronaut. She said to Rory she was a little girl when she met the Doctor.

  20. River’s reveal was a bit of an anti-climax, but remember we still don’t know who she is, to the Doctor.

    She knows his real name, she can control the Tardis, she knows he can open the Tardis doors by a click of the finger!

    My theory, is that Amy and Rory die at some point, and the Doctor is left to bring up this child; hence she grew up in the Tardis (perhaps increasing her Time-Lordiness, a la Regeneration etc).

    However, why she keeps implying she’s been intimate with the Doctor is very strange, and creepy, indeed.

    • You mean like meeting Amy when she was around 12 and coming back when she was around 18 to take her with? That struck me as a bit odd and would have been on the perv side if the good Dr. ever seemed even a bit interested in sex.

      • I didn’t think that was creepy – the current plot however is quite creepy. Of course he is a time traveler and so age and generations don’t mean as much; its hard to apply current mores. But even if River does not become involved romantically with he Doctor until she is fully an adult – it is still a bit creepy – especially since her mother Amy has had at least some romantic attraction to him.

  21. Love karen and matt, i don’t care for the season long story arc. I like the show when they are just off on some adventure!

  22. I think you are a bit harsh on the episode even while “elevating” it to the top ten. I was surprised by the revelation. I’ve been watching Doctor Who since the 80′s, have watched many of the earlier episodes, have read some of the books. I think I qualify as a fan and I think I’m of reasonable intelligence. I do think I should have seen this coming– but I didn’t, and I don’t feel like a fool for missing it.

    • Although I did guess that the girl in the spacesuit was Amy & Rory’s daughter, I did not guess the she and River were one and the same. I was surprised but I wanted to be – what’s the point of watching a TV show or reading a book if you already know the ending?

  23. Loved it! I cant wait till the end of summer episodes begin.

  24. The last three episodes of the first half of the 2011 season of Dr. Who were exceedingly mediocre, evidencing a dearth of any fresh, intelligent ideas on the part of the producers and writers. They even have more than a whiff of the dreaded Jump the Shark quality to them.

    A Good Man Goes to War was, frankly stated, stupid. There was no credible basis for the Doctor’s over the top maniac behavior. Moreover this episode violated the cardinal principle regarding the Doctor, that is that he is not stupid. Yet the Doctor was a complete idiot, witlessly and childishly out maneuvered. Moreover his gloating at his supposed military victory was wholly out of character.

    As for the River Song revelation that was the sole redeeming, albeit badly under utilized, movement of this episode.

    After a brilliant beginning this season has gone completely off the rails. hopefully the second half of 2011 Dr. Who will witness a badly needed climb out of the creative abyss this program has sadly fallen into of late.

  25. I Think that this episode/story arch could have been everything that the fans would have hoped for if they ahd made it into to episodes. The amount of ideas, information and emotional elements taht were needed could have been much more powerful if they had been given an extra hour.

  26. I watched all the episodes with River Song in them. One point came to mind. If she is a “Timelord” does that mean that the moment the Doctor first met her was not the last. And thus, does this give an opening for a new face of River Song, through Timelord regeneration. Much like the Doctor…

    Kudos to Russel T Davies for creating her and claps to Steven Moffat for trying to develop on the character.

    It can’t be an easy task given the amount of material that Doctor Who has since the 1960s

    But am glad Doctor Who exist, it fills up the void since there are no more new Star Trek Series… sob sob

    • I’m not quite sure what you mean – but we do know that River can regenerate. In fact we saw part of her first regeneration at the end of “Day of the Moon” (second episode of the season).

    • I really enjoyed everything up to this point. People should stop complaining about it and enjoy it we never had it for so long. Plus the mistake is that people are saying that River is the creation of RTD sorry but she was created by Steven Moffet just like Jack was

      • Steven Moffat did not create Jack Harkness, RTD did. Wikipedia it people its right there.

    • River Song can’t regenerate after her sacrifice in the library. The energy required was so great it would burn out BOTH of the Doctor’s hearts, killing him and making regeneration impossible for him. That’s why River took his place, so that he could live on and meet her in his future and her past (she died to preserve her past). If that would burn out both the Doctor’s hearts and make his regeneration impossible, then it would also be impossible for River Song to regenerate under those circumstances.

  27. Uhm, River Song was created by Steven Moffat-he wrote the two parter in which she was introduced in S5.

    I just can’t wait to watch the second part-its hard to judge as a whole since it isn’t yet, I am sure the next half of the series will be even better than the first.

    • series 4 I meant!! D’oh. :)

  28. Correction: Steven Moffat wrote “The library” episodes in which Dr. River Song was introduced. Really, she is HIS baby, not Russell T. Davis, who is a great producer in his own right and to whom we owe the return of the Doctor. Salve Moffat and Davis!

  29. I loved the season finale. I thought everyone played their parts well, and I loved the story line too. I will always carry a torch for David Tennant, but the new Doctor who has made this character all his own, and I really respect that. The show continues to feel fresh and new, just like a really good book you can’t put down. Good job Matt Smith, Karen Gillan, Arthur Darvill, and Alex Kingston aka river song.