I think I've put my finger on why the era of Eccleston/Tennant/RTD worked so well at hooking me in, and that's that while RTD's plots may have been all over the map as far as technical quality, still the *emotions* were real. The plots were basically a reason for the characters to feel those emotions. And that, for me, makes the difference between being mildly entertained for a little while and being completely *blown away*.
Whereas the Moffat era so far seems to be more "let's impress the audience" and less "let's make the audience care about the characters". Nothing wrong with that, I guess, but being the type of viewer I am, it feels to me like a letdown.
I found A Christmas Carol (the Who one, not Dickens) enjoyable on an eye-candy level. Matt Smith was fun to watch, and I loved Katherine Jenkins' singing (this was the first time I'd ever heard her). But that was pretty much it.
Still, hey, not a lot of Amy in it! Definitely a plus in my book. :-)
no subject
I think I've put my finger on why the era of Eccleston/Tennant/RTD worked so well at hooking me in, and that's that while RTD's plots may have been all over the map as far as technical quality, still the *emotions* were real. The plots were basically a reason for the characters to feel those emotions. And that, for me, makes the difference between being mildly entertained for a little while and being completely *blown away*.
Whereas the Moffat era so far seems to be more "let's impress the audience" and less "let's make the audience care about the characters". Nothing wrong with that, I guess, but being the type of viewer I am, it feels to me like a letdown.
I found A Christmas Carol (the Who one, not Dickens) enjoyable on an eye-candy level. Matt Smith was fun to watch, and I loved Katherine Jenkins' singing (this was the first time I'd ever heard her). But that was pretty much it.
Still, hey, not a lot of Amy in it! Definitely a plus in my book. :-)