<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
xmlns:podcast="https://podcastindex.org/namespace/1.0"
xmlns:rawvoice="https://blubrry.com/developer/rawvoice-rss/"

	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss"
	xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: DOCTOR WHO 7&#215;05: &quot;THE ANGELS TAKE MANHATTAN&quot;	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://unaffiliatedcritic.com/2012/09/doctor-who-s07e05-tv-review/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://unaffiliatedcritic.com/2012/09/doctor-who-s07e05-tv-review/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 17 Mar 2021 10:22:27 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Halle		</title>
		<link>https://unaffiliatedcritic.com/2012/09/doctor-who-s07e05-tv-review/#comment-20163</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Halle]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Mar 2021 10:22:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://unaffiliatedcritic.com/?p=9149#comment-20163</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[This was a beautiful way of writing a review for THIS story.

Thank you for it. It has enriched my life.

Year later, after watching the tragedy that DW has become, I hope Whovians realize just how special Davies and Moffatt and]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This was a beautiful way of writing a review for THIS story.</p>
<p>Thank you for it. It has enriched my life.</p>
<p>Year later, after watching the tragedy that DW has become, I hope Whovians realize just how special Davies and Moffatt and</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Meghan		</title>
		<link>https://unaffiliatedcritic.com/2012/09/doctor-who-s07e05-tv-review/#comment-617</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Meghan]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Dec 2012 05:40:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://unaffiliatedcritic.com/?p=9149#comment-617</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[We&#039;re all just stories in the end...and this one was well told. Well done indeed.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>We're all just stories in the end&#8230;and this one was well told. Well done indeed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Claud		</title>
		<link>https://unaffiliatedcritic.com/2012/09/doctor-who-s07e05-tv-review/#comment-566</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Claud]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Oct 2012 18:53:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://unaffiliatedcritic.com/?p=9149#comment-566</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Beautiful story. all and all, till the end.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Beautiful story. all and all, till the end.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Sybil		</title>
		<link>https://unaffiliatedcritic.com/2012/09/doctor-who-s07e05-tv-review/#comment-565</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Sybil]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Oct 2012 22:35:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://unaffiliatedcritic.com/?p=9149#comment-565</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Beautifully told.

I&#039;ve never stopped liking River Song.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Beautifully told.</p>
<p>I've never stopped liking River Song.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: The Unaffiliated Critic		</title>
		<link>https://unaffiliatedcritic.com/2012/09/doctor-who-s07e05-tv-review/#comment-564</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[The Unaffiliated Critic]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Oct 2012 14:04:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://unaffiliatedcritic.com/?p=9149#comment-564</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;https://unaffiliatedcritic.com/2012/09/doctor-who-s07e05-tv-review/#comment-563&quot;&gt;bbbbbb&lt;/a&gt;.

Ah, you&#039;re looking for the &quot;review&quot; part of my review: fair enough.

I thought it was easily the best episode of the season so far, though I fully admit that when the emotional content works (as I think it did here), I am willing—even eager—to overlook some glaring plot holes and implausibilities. (This is one reason I didn&#039;t feel like writing my standard analysis this week. Did the angel&#039;s scheme, the time-travel rules, or the surprisingly perambulatory Statue of Liberty make any sense to me? No, not at all—but in an emotionally rich and narratively exciting episode, those things don&#039;t bother me so much.)

Moffat&#039;s script was actually the weakest element—though still Moffat, and still better than most everyone else&#039;s—while the performances and direction carried the day. (Director Nick Hurran is 4 for 4 in my opinion, and should be put on permanent retainer.) 

I appreciated making River Song likable again—I enjoy the more mature River seen here, closer to her &quot;Silence in the Library&quot; persona—and I very much appreciated the effort to make the angels scary again. (Thank GOD we no longer see them move: they clearly know that was a mistake.) 

I liked that this was Amy and Rory&#039;s episode, from start to finish: the Doctor was fairly useless, which felt appropriate for the Ponds&#039; swan song. And the final grace note of returning to little Amelia Pond, as I hope I indicated above, was just beautiful: structurally clever and thematically perfect. 

So...I liked it. Does that answer your question?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="https://unaffiliatedcritic.com/2012/09/doctor-who-s07e05-tv-review/#comment-563">bbbbbb</a>.</p>
<p>Ah, you're looking for the "review" part of my review: fair enough.</p>
<p>I thought it was easily the best episode of the season so far, though I fully admit that when the emotional content works (as I think it did here), I am willing—even eager—to overlook some glaring plot holes and implausibilities. (This is one reason I didn't feel like writing my standard analysis this week. Did the angel's scheme, the time-travel rules, or the surprisingly perambulatory Statue of Liberty make any sense to me? No, not at all—but in an emotionally rich and narratively exciting episode, those things don't bother me so much.)</p>
<p>Moffat's script was actually the weakest element—though still Moffat, and still better than most everyone else's—while the performances and direction carried the day. (Director Nick Hurran is 4 for 4 in my opinion, and should be put on permanent retainer.) </p>
<p>I appreciated making River Song likable again—I enjoy the more mature River seen here, closer to her "Silence in the Library" persona—and I very much appreciated the effort to make the angels scary again. (Thank GOD we no longer see them move: they clearly know that was a mistake.) </p>
<p>I liked that this was Amy and Rory's episode, from start to finish: the Doctor was fairly useless, which felt appropriate for the Ponds' swan song. And the final grace note of returning to little Amelia Pond, as I hope I indicated above, was just beautiful: structurally clever and thematically perfect. </p>
<p>So&#8230;I liked it. Does that answer your question?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: bbbbbb		</title>
		<link>https://unaffiliatedcritic.com/2012/09/doctor-who-s07e05-tv-review/#comment-563</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[bbbbbb]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Oct 2012 13:32:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://unaffiliatedcritic.com/?p=9149#comment-563</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[yes but what did you think of it]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>yes but what did you think of it</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
