True the passage of time can change how things are viewed. But lets look at how the Doctor (or at least The Sixth Doctor) viewed Time Lord Society In all my travelling throughout the universe, I have battled against evil, against power-mad conspirators. I should have stayed here. The oldest civilisation: decadent, degenerate, and rotten to the core. Power-mad conspirators, Daleks, Sontarans, Cybermen - they're still in the nursery compared to us. Ten million years of absolute power. That's what it takes to be really corrupt.
Well, that certainly helps me understand where you are coming from. All I can suggest is that you read posts and try to gain an understanding of a different way to enjoy the episodes than the one that comes naturally to you. I can certainly agree with some of your critiques of the episodes, yet I was able to enjoy most of them. A few I weren't, but overall an enjoyable season. Mr Awe
What we use to say in high school is, "There is no such thing as 'normal'. It is a ideal or construct. No one is 'normal' because no one can be exactly those standards."
I taught an essay by Henry James a couple weeks ago, and I was really struck by what he said about character vs. plot: "What is character but the determination of incident? What is incident but the illustration of character?"
Well entertainment is subjective, given the premise of the thread is that some critics seem to enjoy the show more than some fans, subjectivity is of course a valid answer. My rule with "plot holes" a horrifically abused term on the internet, is if I dont notice it on first viewing it doesnt count. I have to admit I didnt notice any in DIH, though I have to date only watched it once, I've been busy!
Speaking of Danny Pink, * the number of years to reach a rank are from the British Army website, and are an average * Between 1953 & 2014, there were no field promotions in the British Army. Here is an article on, what is considered a historic field promotion from the UK government - https://www.gov.uk/government/news/soldier-receives-first-field-promotion-since-1953 In the same time period, the USMC gave field promotions to 62 enlisted personnel in Vietnam and an unspecified number of Explosive Ordnance Disposal personnel in Afghanistan. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battlefield_promotion For the uniform worn by British soldiers in Afghanistan, here is an article on that subject. http://www.army.mod.uk/news/20421.aspx There is some controversy over whether or not the ISAF committed an atrocity in Afghtanistan, in which women and children were killed in a night raid. Narang Night Raid - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narang_night_raid Here is the US Army Field Manual on urban operations. I am pretty sure that the British have a similar field manual. http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/army/fm/7-8/ch6.htm Here is another article on infantry squad tactics. http://www.military.com/forums/0,15240,79595,00.html In Afghanistan and Iraq, the coalition forces do night raids as they provide advantages to the forces. http://www.isaf.nato.int/article/is...s-guidance-on-night-raids-in-afghanistan.html Using the information from Series 8 and real life, this is a believable scenario. Danny Pink joined the British Army at the age of 17. He rises to the rank of sergeant by age 29. During his career, he is first stationed in the United Kingdom, then sent to Afghanistan, where he is a member of NATO's ISAF. In Helmand, Afghanistan, where the British contigent is stationed, a British military unit received orders for a night raid on a village where insurgents are suspected to be hiding. On this night, Pink is second-in-command of a troop or platoon of 35 soldiers. During the raid, women and children are killed. Pink blames his commanding officer for the raid. He leaves the military soon afterwards, still bitter at what happened, enters a Troops to Teachers program, and becomes a teacher at Coal Hill School.
For me, and I am guilty of this, one of the laziest things a person can do is not doing their research when writing a story or making an opinion. I didn't do enough research on storytelling, and I was rightly dinged for that. I think some persons had some satisfaction in pointing that out. Again, I could be reading the words wrong - autism really screws up the "emotional sensor". My family served in the military. I had an ancestor who was a major colonel in the Revolutionary Army, a grandfather who was a recon pilot in a P-38 in World War II, and a father who was a medic during the Cold War. I even attempted to join the military during the First Gulf War; however, I was deemed psychologically unfit for the military. So, yes, for me, depicting the military correctly is important. I have read of people complaining of lazy writing this year; for me, this is an example of lazy research. Fix a few things, and, voila, Danny Pink becomes a more believable character, one someone could met in the real world. I believe that characters need to have some resemblance of truth in their characterization and background for them to be relatable to the audience. When it was revealed that Danny Pink had become a sergeant in five years, that resemblance of truth was shattered for me.
With respect to my remarks, I think it was highly instructive to focus on a straightforward observation of Ithekro's that put the matter to rest in short order. Any satisfaction that I felt came because that observation was both educational and decisive. I felt no satisfaction from the act of contradicting a fellow user though, and certainly I feel none now when I know that no error was intended.