So Peter Capaldi has stepped out of the TARDIS and given his first performance as the Doctor. I quite enjoyed it. We've not yet seen how he'll really handle the role. We've merely had a few pointers as to how his Doctor will develop. It's good to be intrigued and left wanting more.

I was quite impressed with how understated the performance was. We had a lot of comedic scenes that he played completely straight, allowing the comedy to happen around him rather than making it happen. That's not to say that he didn't have some very funny lines like "Don't look in that mirror; it's furious," but that he handled them with style and didn't overplay them. I was less impressed with the whole eyebrow stuff which felt a bit forced and one was inclined to think that Capaldi wasn't overly fond of the lines but that a refusal to play them might come off as vain. It was a nice touch to note that the tramp who worked against most of the Doctor's silliest lines was played by Brian Miller, husband to the late Lis Sladen (Sarah Jane Smith). He was beautifully played.

In fact the cast as a whole performed well and it was good to have a little more time for scenes to breathe and dialogue to develop. There were some lovely visuals but this episode was mainly about the actors and that was a very good thing. The Paternoster gang of Jenny Vastra and Strax provided continuity with the Matt Smith era nicely, but it also feels like it's time for them to fly on their own for a while. They've developed more than enough to warrant their own series of Victorian murder mysteries and I'm left with the impression that they and Doctor Who should part company from here on. The likelihood of the beeb picking up such a series is low, which is a shame because I think it would make an altogether more satisfying spin off than Torchwood ever was.

That said, some of it was beginning to feel a little old within Doctor Who. There are only so many times that Strax can call Clara "boy" and it still be vaguely amusing. Also Jenny and Vastra's relationship seemed a little forced this time round. Did we really need the voice over explaining their kiss to share oxygen? How does that work anyway? I've not seen CPR work on someone who's conscious and standing before. I'm over thinking this of course, but it just felt a lot like we were having the inter species lesbian kiss highlighted to the point of distraction. Doctor Who has done sterling work in helping to normalise relationships of all kinds and I'm sure helped play a part in getting gay marriage a lot higher on the political agenda than it might otherwise have been. I suppose my concern is that by overplaying it, you risk fetishising the relationship. Just as I suppose my discussing it in depth here does. *vanishes in a puff of illogic*

Anyway I like Vastra and Jenny and hope there's more to be seen of them, preferably on their own terms. Talking of relationships, the one that gave me most difficulty was that between the Doctor and Clara. There's been much written about how the role of the companion in Doctor Who was to ask questions to enable the Doctor to explain stuff and to act as the point of identification for the audience. That doesn't comfortably cover all eras of the show because initially there were more companions to carry different strands of the action, sometimes to act as the hero (Ian, Jamie) and sometime to drive the plot. With as wide an audience as Doctor Who has identification comes at different points and the idea of one companion acting as proxy for the whole audience seems a bit silly. Having said this, it's understandable that the makers would choose to any newer members' concerns about regeneration through the companion's reactions.

But with Clara we have a glaring problem. Unlike when Rose witnessed the first regeneration of the returned series, we know that Clara has met several previous doctors. All of them, if you count her tumbling through the Doctor's time line, although we seem to have established some kind of amnesiac effect taking place, given her reactions in Day of the Doctor. However in that anniversary show we saw her interract with the Tennant doctor and show a remarkable empathy with the older portrayal by John Hurt. She could read him by looking into his eyes and had no problem with the Doctor appearing seventy plus. In Time of the Doctor she met and talked to the Matt Smith version that was a thousand years older than the one she knew. She had seen him age and helped him walk. Apart from the strange pre-regeneration scene in the TARDIS, where Smith was briefly rejuvenated again, she had got used to the idea of the Doctor being a very old man. Suddenly we are being asked to believe that this young woman who is remarkably empathetic is actually quite shallow and feels uncomfortable with the Doctor appearing middle aged.

Now I know that there was quite a bit of reaction on social media when Capaldi's casting was announced and much of it was from women who were used to the Doctor being younger and a bit dishy, but this was before the screening of both Day of the Doctor and Time of the Doctor. Surely the events of these would have served as explanation enough? I get the impression that Moffat was rather leant upon by BBC management following the casting to deal with this problem so it's had to be explicitly addressed in the action. The thing is Clara is just the wrong companion to carry this role. It would have far better gone to someone who hadn't been seen on screen to deal with previous Doctors and older versions. Vastra and Jenny have only been seen with young versions of the Smith Doctor before. Couldn't they have dealt with any objections to the Doctor's older appearance rather than being the wise ones? Better still, the series could have had the balls to not excuse or explain the change.

Despite all of this, I rather liked the Vastra and Clara scene and the whole veil metaphor. I would have left it at "When did you stop wearing your veil?" "When you stopped seeing it." rather than continue with the "I don't know who the Doctor is any more" nonsense. I liked seeing Matt Smith pop up briefly although again it smacked of a production altogether not entirely comfortable with the decisions it made. What happened to "Never explain. Never apologise"?
There wasn't a great deal of story beyond the regeneration, but it was fun to see clockwork robots again and to see some hints at a more ruthless Doctor. I'll be very interested to see how the season develops.

In the most recent Doctor Who magazine there's an interview with Capaldi that's quite illuminating and hints at some of the behind the scenes issues. He talks about ideas being discussed for the 2015 series and says that he'd like to continue but that the decision is not up to him. The impression given is that there's little doubt that Doctor Who will be recommissioned, but there is some doubt as to whether he'll be allowed to continue as the Doctor. In 1986 the higher ups decided to fire the incumbent against his wishes and the first time the Doctor was replaced in 1966 it seems the producers took a similar decision. In the sixties it was probably the best thing they could have done for the show. I think it was a damaging decision in the eighties. Today I feel it would suggest cowardice and a lack of confidence in the programme makers' decisions. Choosing an older actor to play the lead was a bold move but honestly, going with someone as strong as Capaldi is hardly terrifying. His talent is proven and he deserves more confidence.

The coming season will be different, but that's a good thing. I think it's going to be exciting and quite thrilling. And thank god we've said goodbye to split seasons and can look forward to an unbroken twelve episodes. As for Deep Breath? A new Doctor, a gorgeous dinosaur, old friends and a slightly familiar enemy. On the whole, it was pretty damn good.