As we get reflective ahead of Amy's Choice, the exact midpoint of this series of Doctor Who, I'm reminded of a remark a friend made about Steven Moffat's Doctor Who: "It's very clever, but I'm not sure I'm feeling it." Really? "It's making me realise how much a fan I was of the Russell T Davies big emotional stuff."

And these feelings have been echoed time and again in our Doctor Who series blog. The very thing that got most criticism about the RTD era was the amount of overwrought emotion – Rose's big-eyed lovesickness, Martha's emo pining, Donna's overdeveloped sense of compassion; the sheer amount of crying. Six episodes in to this new series, the only tears to have been shed were those creeping across the Doctor's face during Father Octavian's stunning death scene in Flesh and Stone. And oddly, that was probably the best scene so far this series.

Given the overwhelming excitement that heralded the new era of Who, some sort of backlash was inevitable. And certainly, some of you on this blog are unhappy. So now we're at the halfway point in the series, this might be a good time to work out what is, and maybe isn't, working about Moffat's tenure.

As the series started to air, Moffat said that the key to success was "to make good Doctor Who, which is a different thing to making the same Doctor Who". And this series has been full of the things that Moffat does best: sly comedy, intricate plotting, married-couple sniping, a healthy dose of smut and big scares. It's been generally funnier, appears to have rewritten the rule that said Doctor Who had to out-epic itself every year, and the latest run has a picture-book, fairytale quality quite at odds with RTD's instinct to ground the show in urban realism.

The Eleventh Hour was hailed as a brilliant season-opener, breathlessly introducing a whole world of regulars and a new Doctor/ companion dynamic. But only a week later the knives were out for The Beast Below, for reasons I can't quite understand: it was as broad, fun and colourful a story as the companion's first adventure should be.

In retrospect Victory Of The Daleks does seem something of a wasted opportunity, apparently serving only to introduce the controversial iDaleks. And while not everyone agreed that The Time Of Angels two-parter was good enough to stand alongside the rest of the series' history, it still had more scale, scope and style than anything else on British television. Last week the lush Vampires Of Venice proved itself a lot more than a cool alliterative device in search of a story.

To my mind, the first six episodes of Moffat's reign have been strong – and yet as the story arcs are building, and the relationships are developing, I'm pondering that criticism of "not feeling it". The big mystery with the Pandorica is no doubt ingenious, and Doctor Who under Moffat is a stylish, madcap fantasy. But I wonder whether I really know Amy Pond. Beneath the sass and the sauce and the wit and (there's no getting away from this) the skirts, I've yet to completely empathise with her, or work out what makes her tick.

Moffat, of course, is easily capable of the big emotional stuff; remember Rose telling a faithless Nancy that the Germans wouldn't win the war, or River Song's heartbreaking sacrifice at the end of Forest Of The Dead? I'm hoping that Moffat is playing a long game and there is much more to come. In this week's episode, Amy's Choice, the Doctor's companion has to start facing consequences – and maybe it will fill in some of the gaps.

But what do you think of Moffat's Who so far. Do you find yourself pining for a bit of RTD-style emotion, or are you pleased to see it gone? What's your assessment of the New Who at its halfway point?