But I marathoned it just fine... :/
Hell I marathoned 4 seasons of Game of Thrones (music the first 4 episodes) in 2 days.
That was an amazing two days.
Eh. That's just you, then.
I for one can't marathon things that easily without breaks of some kind. That's why it's a heck of a lot easier for me to marathon something like, say, Adventure Time than Sherlock -- because the episodes are so much shorter.
But like, that's just me. Maybe my ADD's to blame. I dunno; never thought about it too much.
But I liked season 1... :(
Other than Rose... I don't like Rose.
Nothing wrong with you liking it. But like. It still kind of was all over the place. :/ They tried to do too much in one season if you ask me.
Uh... Kaga.
You're talking about a guy who could always fix all his issues by more time travel.
PLOT HOLES ARE EVERYWHERE!!!
Well yes but it's considerably worse in Moffat's writing than it is in Davies' because of the convoluted and complex season-long arcs.
For example, I was trying to explain the whole crack in the universe thing to Henry when she pointed out kind of a massive plothole that for some reason I never thought about;
If Amy's parents got sucked into the crack in the wall, and were therefore erased from existence, and therefore
never existed... how was Amy even born in the first place?
YEAH, THAT'S KIND OF A MASSIVE PROBLEM. And it's something you don't see as often Davies' era because even his season finales were mostly self-contained, and the only real buildup each finale had was a series of subtle foreshadowing and little Easter Eggs, like all the appearances of "Bad Wolf" in season 1, the Saxon campaign ads in the background in season 3, and all the hidden appearances of Rose in season 4 -- all of which you're a hell of a lot more likely to notice on your 2nd viewing, at least in large numbers.
There is a reason why Let's Kill Hitler was the episode that made me want to watch Doctor Who straight forward. I was just way too fucking confused because Moffat puts so much more continuity between his episodes.
I still like Matt Smith the best as the doctor and can seperately recognize that Tenants episode's were better written. D:
Matt Smith just pulls off the Doctor so well.
Well yeah, and it's good that you can compare actors and writers separately. But like... part of the reason why there's such a huge Tennant/Smith split as well as a Davies/Moffat split is because
everything changed all at once, and that just isn't as good for the show as a more
gradual transition between things is. Not only did we get a new Doctor, but also a new showrunner, new companions, and even a new bloody sonic screwdriver. It's difficult to
not compare eras when everything changes that suddenly.
Compare that, then, to regenerations done
right in New Who -- Eccleston to Tennant and Smith to Capaldi -- both of which probably went a lot better because they happened without switching showrunners in the process, and also because
they kept the companion the same, which makes transitioning
so much easier because you have something familiar to hold onto. Hell, there's really only one other proper regeneration in the series where the Doctor
didn't have a companion with him -- and that was from Two to Three, which has been noted as one of the biggest changes in the show's history as they also changed a billion things at once (I mean, hell, this was when they made the switch from black-and-white to color, among other things).
And they wonder why so many fans stopped watching once Moffat took over...
