From Newsgroup: rec.arts.drwho.moderated
From Address: jphalt@aol.com
Subject: Re: jphalt's Doctor Who reviews

On Mar 12, 12:20 pm, John Hall  wrote:
> In article
> <073d50e3-05d2-48af-9973-a93982ecf...@g16g2000yqe.googlegroups.com>,
"jph...@aol.com"  writes:
>
> 
>
> >Regardless, the failure of the finale or any other point in the season
> >to address what I still believe were deliberate holes in the premiere
> >is the one failing of this episode, and the one reason why I'm not
> >ultimately awarding it full marks.
>
> Knowing Moffat, I wouldn't be surprised if he has plans for filling in
> those holes during the next series. There's nothing that says that a
> plot arc can't stretch over more than one series.


I'd love to have that end up being the case.  It still wouldn't quite
raise this episode to a "10" for me, but it would at least answer the
niggling feeling I have that the season arc may have gotten just a
little bit away from him.

Either way, I do think Series Six was a good season overall.  A bit
uneven, but that's par for the course for "Who" - great stories have
always sat side-by-side with weak ones.  It was certainly an ambitious
year.  All told, I liked Series Five better.  But I appreciate the
ambition of Series Six, and I think it succeeded a lot more than not.

--- Synchronet 3.15a-Linux NewsLink 1.92-mlp
 * Origin: http://groups.google.com (1:2320/105.97)
--- SBBSecho 2.12-Linux
 * Origin: telnet & http://cco.ath.cx - Dial-Up: 502-875-8938 (1:2320/105.1)