I'm also a massive fan of the single and arced episodes, although I have to say the River Song thing pees me right off. Mainly because why have her FLIRT with her own mother for good lord's sakes? Or her father for that matter? Just... icky.

I actually quite like individual stories, and I like them more than story arcs. I think Steven Moffat, whatever you think of him, has lost the exciting edge he used to have when writing individual episodes of Who. Here he's trying to be too clever, keep us guessing and keep us watching, when usually I want Who to give us a cracking good adventure that's resolved in an exciting way and then move on.

My favourite episodes are things like Blink, Midnight, Gridlock and some two-parters like The Sontaran Strategem / The Poison Sky and The Impossible Planet / The Satan Pit (actual sci-fi there!), which follow this sort of pattern: a threat, maybe a monster, a bit of intrigue, action, drama, scares and a resolution. What I've noticed Moffat's been doing since the beginning of Series 7: Part 2 is basically forcing us to watch the next episode, in case one of the random plot strings he keeps making up is explained!

By comparison, I really liked Series 7: Part 1. Easily digestible, individual stories, well written and following a very loose arc that didn't really matter too much. For episodes like Dinosaurs On A Spaceship, you can just watch Who without worrying too much, and that's good entertainment!

The story arcs are too overpowering, IMO. I rewatched Eccleston's series recently and it was a joy to spot the tiny Bad Wolf hints; you didn't even need to get them all to enjoy the pulling together at the end. As Timemaster says, now the arc is more 'in your face' than each story; I find it makes them more uniform; each series melds into an amorphous whole, rather than each story having it's own character.

I'm also finding the constant cranking up of the threats in each series; the end of time, the end of the universe, the end of all universes, the end of absolutely everything, a bit wearing. Sometimes Who was at it's best doing small things and letting the characters and story breathe a bit. That's true, even in new Who, when you consider how popular stories like 'Midnight' and 'Blink' are in fandom.

Unfortunately I ended up giving up on Matt Smith's Doctor. It wasn't so much him - but the fact that if I missed one episode I found it hard to follow the overall story arc. Since Russell T Davies left the stories have become a lot more complicated.

I am intrigued by the casting of Peter Capaldi though and might give the series another go. It's great to cast an older Doctor - a hark back to the classic series and a realisation that the Doctor is more than just an action hero!

A common complaint since the 'classic' series ended is that it's becoming increasingly difficult to tell one Doctor from the next - there are strong resemblances, it has been argued, between the eighth, ninth, tenth and eleventh Doctors, and several aspects in particular are that they have all been in the same age bracket, are all very tall, and all have dark hair.

I remember posting about this back in 2010 when Matt's first series was about to air, I can't believe how quickly them four years have gone. When The Doctor regenerates this time, those similarities will finally get burnt away for good and we'll witness the biggest physical transformation since Colin Baker into Sylvester McCoy. I've loved all of the Nu-Who Doctors though, in particular Christopher Eccleston who left just as he was getting REALLY good. Peter Capaldi is a brilliant choice, has anyone else noticed his resemblance to Edward Tudor-Pole (The Crystal Maze).

Also, I'm not liking the amount of Third Doctor hate comments in this thread. Jon Pertwee's Action Man style was a trend-setter for the DW episodes we get nowadays. But that's just my opinion, I'd love to see a Doctor with good fighting skills again!

What's worse is his my brothers doctor, lol he does the 10th look a like at many charity events and conventions, looks just like a younger version.

Have to say the 3rd is my least favourite, followed by the 10th.

Controversial, there

Long as it gets us away from the james bond doc who and more towards the proper one wh doesn't have his assistants hit on him and have darker stories I'm all for this, I've hated who for a while because of this.

They're all 'proper', just all a bit different (with some similarities of course....)

I agree having him want to sleep with all his assistance it irrataing but I guess that's part of the times we live in.

Peter cushing was one of my favorites and I don't care if he doesn't count. lol

But then I Cushing fan, love Hammer horror.

In any case, I think Capaldi is an excellent choice. Reflecting on this, and all the points made above (can't add anything else that hasn't been said yet), I can't think of anyone better, really.

And i'm pretty sure the Moff wants to do that himself so he can establish 'his' Doctor who vision in the future, even when his gone.

Hurt's Doc is either going to jump all the other up a place, it's be pretty much confirmed h's between 8 and 9. (or it's solved with Moff get out of jail card the 'reset' button)

we'll see.

Bring back the evil clown circus!!!

We know the Moff wants to use up this 13 lives rule

I'm not sure where we 'know' that from, and it doesn't seem to fit the facts. The first lead-actor since Moffat took over the show lasted four years, and left at his own wish rather than the producer's. Four years is about the average tour-of-duty for anyone playing the Doctor, so I can't see much evidence of Moffat trying to rush anything.

Well I thought Matt and David were completely different. (Never liked David, loved Matt)

But 55 isn't really old anymore, I mean 55 is younger today than it was when Hartnell was in it.

But I fear this wont last, and it will be a short stay. We know the Moff wants to use up this 13 lives rule so he can do whatever he wants to secure the next 50 years of the show, his already tamped with the past and he wants to make sure his vision can't be changed. Sooner we get a new show runner the better.

The 13 lives "rule" was never set in stone, and was always likely to change. Once we're at the 14th then...would they just cancel the whole thing? No.

Whether Steven Moffat is in charge at the time or not is irrelevant. Someone will have to make that decision at some stage. I don't see that as tampering with the past, I see that as securing the future.

I, personally, cannot wait to see what Capaldi will interpret the role

But 55 isn't really old anymore, I mean 55 is younger today than it was when Hartnell was in it.

But I fear this wont last, and it will be a short stay. We know the Moff wants to use up this 13 lives rule so he can do whatever he wants to secure the next 50 years of the show, his already tamped with the past and he wants to make sure his vision can't be changed. Sooner we get a new show runner the better.

And no, I'm not saying the poster-boys were necessarily bad for the role. Matt Smith was a real natural for the part, it was just a bit samey to have him take over from David Tennant.

Age is never a problem for me (young or old, it's the acting/character that counts), but I am glad they went with someone on the other side of 50 (55, to be exact, the same age as William Hartnell when he started )