Re: What is so appealing about the early Dr Who episodes?
Got to remember what we were faced with back in 1963:
Back then all sets (except Donkey for some reason) wobbled,
Drama was totally studio bound (300lb TV cameras do not like rain), black and white and live!
The nearest thing to kids drama was Andy Pandy and Whirlybirds, science fiction was spearheaded by Fireball XL5 and everything else on the BBC was educational- Animal Magic, Blue Peter, Sketchbook and Newsreel et al.
Doctor Who, then, was totally new: Real drama, where the good guy was only slightly less scary than the monsters, his companions were dreadfully ordinary and not always safe even with the good guy, the stories brand new and played out at a rate you could follow, the aliens captured the imagination even better than Dan Dare in the Eagle.
Re-watching some of the Hartnell stories, umpty-tiddly years later; Many look rather corny now, but that is because of the technology available, not a weakness in the story. Even now I think something like Web Planet would push CGI animators on a Hollywood budget to the limit. But in terms of story and/or inventiveness there were a raft of episodes that still set standards
Then it was rescued by some excellent acting, not just by Hartnell, Troughton and Pertwee, but by the guests (there would be a lot of Sir's and Dame's in that cast list now, so no excuse). All three Doctors had the ability to 'REALLY' be who they were playing.
Tom Baker, also a great character actor, succeeded mostly by being Tom Baker as did Sylvester McCoy. I'm afraid the new Doctors appear to be a bit 'ordinary' in their company.