Shame a quite valid topic has been blighted by a poor opening post. Cutting out the bizarre reasoning, 'would Doctor Who be better as an hour rather than 45-50 mins?' is, I think, a good question.
Some episodes would, yes. Rose for instance felt a bit rushed , excusable given what it had to cram in, but it still managed to hook a whole new generation so what would the extra 10 mins have done to improve it?
My all time favourite episode is Girl in the Fireplace (and I include classic Who there), absolutely perfect in every way to me (we loves shaggy dog stories!)and as good an argument as any for DW in its present format.
The current crop of episodes are just the same as every series has been since 2005, some feel a bit clipped, some are just right and some even feel a bit padded!
Asylum maybe could have had a bit more of a coherent set up but was still a joy.
Dinosaurs felt like it was padding out a bit before getting to idea that was driving the story, Solomon's greed and the dilemma the Doctor faced over Nefertiti (only watched it once as my TiVo box went duff and lost it so memory might be hazy on that one)
Bells was just right and had everything. Introduced a new companion, some delightful Matt moments , a top set piece in the plane, good threat and a great resolution with a twist.Even the potentially awful anti grav bike was handled well and didn't feel like a 'burping bin' moment and was much better than watching The Doctor waiting for a lift in the Shard!