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)