Re: Doctor Who [10]

by Mrs Figg Mon Mar 30, 2015 11:45 pm

The only reason Poldark has rave reviews is Aiden Turner brooding about tin mines in his underwear. The show itself sucks.

by Pettytyrant101 Tue Mar 31, 2015 12:02 am

Never seen Poldark, not my sort of thing, but it seemed to me to be saying the direction was getting rave reviews.
And as its the director Moffat has hired thats all good to my ears.

Also with these latest announcements its clear your Moffat hates women agedna is going strong- two episodes which from the titles seem to be about women and one of the them written by a woman- clearly Moffat is working over time to keep all feminine input out of Who! Laughing

by Mrs Figg Tue Mar 31, 2015 2:38 pm

that is yet to be seen. having the title with the word 'girl' in it does not give it feminist cred. far from it. I will be looking at the content.

by Pettytyrant101 Tue Mar 31, 2015 3:19 pm

And if you dont like the content you will have a female writer to lay the charges of sexism at the feet of. Im actually looking forward to that- though no doubt she is another pathetic shrew of a woman working on Who, just like Gillan, Coleman, Kingston ect and will write her script according to Master Sexists Moffats evil plans, doing as she is told, being only a woman and all with no strength of her own or a voice to speak it with Laughing

by Mrs Figg Tue Mar 31, 2015 5:44 pm

'pathetic shrew' Laughing

well certainly Amy was pathetic in the pathos department. and River was aggressive and unpleasant, if that's what you mean by shrew. Although you seem to think I have criticised them as human beings as you didn't refer to their characters but their real life names, which is so ridiculous I wont bother trying to defend myself from that charge. As for Moffats sexist agenda, I will wait to see how much control the writer has in the face of it, I don't know how much interfering he does once the script is plonked down in front of him. As I said I will wait and see, but a female writer is defo good news.

by Pettytyrant101 Tue Mar 31, 2015 5:54 pm

I used the actresses names because your claim of Moffats rampant sexism requires that they are all in on it, or dont object to it, or are too silly to see it.
Especially given as all of them have both defended Moffat against the charge and say their characters are not at all sexist.

For your claims of sexim to be true all the woman who work or Moffat have to be going along with it, including his female producer.
And its no good saying they are afraid for their jobs as that just makes them out to be weak pathetic females who cant voice their concerns, and out of those who have left the show none have leveled any such charges at Moffats door. Not those in front of the cameras or behind them.

by Mrs Figg Tue Mar 31, 2015 6:18 pm

Pettytyrant101 wrote:I used the actresses names because your claim of Moffats rampant sexism requires that they are all in on it, or dont object to it, or are too silly to see it.

pure fabrication, please keep real people out of this argument, it doesn't hold water

Especially given as all of them have both defended Moffat against the charge and say their characters are not at all sexist.

the really interesting question is why have they felt the need to defend Moffat? did the actresses who played Rose, Martha or Donna have to explain away sexism, did they have to defend RTD from charges of sexism? nope and nope because there wasn't any at that stage.

For your claims of sexim to be true all the woman who work or Moffat have to be going along with it, including his female producer.

my claims of sexism are true, but the actresses involved probably want to keep their jobs, Moffat is the boss theres no point in rocking the boat, for all I know they get memos giving them soundbites for interviews

And its no good saying they are afraid for their jobs as that just makes them out to be weak pathetic females who cant voice their concerns, and out of those who have left the show none have leveled any such charges at Moffats door. Not those in front of the cameras or behind them.

no it doesn't, it makes them pragmatic, if you get a gig like Who you are going to want to keep it as long as possible, specially if its your first job, its not going to look good on the cv if you are known for stirring up shit on set. women have kept their heads down for years in the face of overwhelming pressure. As for the sexism, its not overt, and could be explained away as being part of the story, easily done if you are part of that environment. Good luck to anyone who asks Moffat if he is being sexist, they would be shown the door.

by **Amarië** Tue Mar 31, 2015 6:27 pm

I'm sure they see their character and work in a different light than us who sit and watch the result. They may have the best intent, but it doesn't cancel the fact that the show is dull.
Moffat may not pinch asses all day, but that doesn't make Amy a feminist icon.
I really enjoyed Karen as Nebula*, but it doesn't change my views on Amy.

*I had forgotten what movie she was in, but noticed the name during the intro, got quite excited to finally see what she could do outside Who. Wish she had more screen time, I really liked the little we got. That green woman was as interesting as Amy, or maybe even worse... Zzzzzzz...

by Pettytyrant101 Tue Mar 31, 2015 6:36 pm

pure fabrication- Fiogg

How? They have to speak the lines, his producer has to sign off on the scripts ect there is a whole chain of BBC execs who have to approve everything above Moffat and his producer- the women who work on the show, behind the scenes and in front of camera are involved in the process all the way. So for them to be speaking sexist lines, taking part in a exist show they must be in on it or allow it to go on without complaint- I dont know about you but Alex Kingston or Michelle Gomez dont strike me as shy wallflowers not prepared to speak out.

'the really interesting question is why have they felt the need to defend Moffat?'

Because folks like you insist its there despite the evidence and as they all do the conventions circuits, many a year, it inevitable it comes up.
During the RTD years they had to defend against accusations the show had a gay agenda - there is always a group of fans ready to throw mud at the show- always have been. You are just the latest.

'my claims of sexism are true, but the actresses involved probably want to keep their jobs'

Now we are back to actresses like Alex Kingston and Michelle Gomez- who did not need Who to make a living- are just spouting sexism and taking part in it whilst keeping their pretty little mouths shut out of fear- now who is talking down women.

Also folks like you have such a one sided view.

Take Amy and Rory for example and imagine the characters were reversed.

Imagine your outcry at Amy, only on the TARDIS so she can be with her man and no other reason, completely devoted and dedicated to him following him about like a puppy, even waiting 200 years outside a box just to see him again. Even a joke about how she must be gay as Rory has never seen her interested in a man before. And then on top of that they keep torturing her and killing her off and bringing her back to do it again- your cries of sexism and how Moffat is blatantly a woman hater would reach to the heavens Figg.
Yet oddly enough you are strangely silent on accusing Moffat of being sexist against men even though there is in my view actually a much stronger case for that.

by **Amarië** Tue Mar 31, 2015 7:11 pm

But that is totally justified by the story, and the actor never complained so its all harmless fun.

(You forgot about wearing a short skirt and inpractical footwear cause Amy finds it sexy)

by **Amarië** Tue Mar 31, 2015 7:17 pm

Oh, and you hate the actor and his entire family because you are jealous of his pretty eyes and lovely hair.

by Pettytyrant101 Tue Mar 31, 2015 7:21 pm

Amy wears sneaker or boots most of the time- I don't think there is a single scene where she isnt in practical footwear- and as has been pointed out ad nasueum Moffat had nothing to do with her clothing choices or the skirts- that was Karen and the wardrobe lady- both of course females.

And I dont think he is sexist against either- but you have to look at male and female not just one to justify the charge.

Bu Danny/Clara is another good example- imagine that reversed and with a female Doctor- male companion goes off on adventures with female Doctor who in their previous incarnation they had fallen in love with, then he keeps it secret from his girlfriend and lies to her face about it whilst she stays home working as a teacher and being domestic having no more exciting a private life than liking to stay in of a night and read a good book.
And then they kill her off by torturing her and transforming her into a cyberman.

This is why Moffat is not sexist- if you take male and female companions together the females always are presented as the better, wiser, stronger, more determined, capable than the males in Moffat scripts.
Its just those who cry sexism completely ignore the male characters in the show as a comparative.

by **Amarië** Tue Mar 31, 2015 7:33 pm

Well I am soooo sorry for trying to help with your put-a-man-in-the-womans-place idea. Rolling Eyes

by Pettytyrant101 Tue Mar 31, 2015 7:38 pm

Im not sure 'helping' is the right word!

But the point is valid- male characters if they were written just the same but were female the cries from some quarters of sexism would be through the roof.

And how anyone can say Clara in the last series in particular was in any way sexist is beyond me- she is the lead character throughout the series, she gets all the big drama scenes, and she is instrumental in every single episode. To the point some where complaining it was the Doctor Clara show now.
Which in my view also goes to show that with some folks mindset Moffat cant win no matter what he does, no matter how many female producers, directors, writers he gets in or the content- the xmas episode is another good example- no reason at all for the majority of that cast to be female, or for the only male among them to be the only one who dies, except Moffat choose to write it that way.
He has done more than any other showrunner to put into cannon piece by piece that Time Lords can change gender - and even did so to the Master. Yet he is apparently still a sexist. It beggars belief at times.

by **Amarië** Tue Mar 31, 2015 8:01 pm

I find the fact that you completely missed the part where Rory is *actually* treated as a sex object as proof that you have not tried that angle before. I don't have to sit down and think hard about how people in the show were treated, I see it when it happens.

And you are doing a good job proving that Moffat really is sexist. That you see sexist as solely anit-female is your shortcoming, not mine. I am - as I have said- not sure that Moff is deliberate sexist, I think it's more likely vague and peculiar character building that leaves sexism as a plausible reason for what happens. But he IS clearly making the men look stupid. (Which is misunderstood feminism if you ask me. )

Also, Clara's looks, clothes and face is constantly being a fun joke in the series. Would a man be treated the same? Maybe. Hasn't happened yet.

by Pettytyrant101 Tue Mar 31, 2015 8:13 pm

I dont see sexism in Who at all- in fact i think on balance female characters come out stronger than males with the exception of the Doctor of course.

As to 12's comments on Clara- again you completely ignore all the disparaging comments he makes about males- he is totally dismissive of the males in Into the Dalek, he consistently mocks Robin for everything from his personality to his appearance, he treats Danny appalingly and gives him the derisory nickname of PE. The list goes on- and then we find out part of the reason is he is a terrible judge of human appearance- he thinks schoolgril Courtney is about 35 years old and he cant see the difference in Clara between young and old as she always looks the same to him.
So not only are you completely ignoring his character, but also how he treats and speaks to males and the explanation given in the scripts for his behaviour- all to make a false point indicating sexism which doesn't exist.

by **Amarië** Tue Mar 31, 2015 9:22 pm

There you list a lot of things I dislike about 12. Especially I dislike the oh so cute and quirky idea of a timelord being unable to recognize time and age.

"I dont see sexism in Who at all- in fact i think on balance female characters come out stronger than males with the exception of the Doctor of course."

...which is sexist, silly.

by Pettytyrant101 Tue Mar 31, 2015 9:25 pm

Most of the stuff about 12- his dismissiveness, his ego, his inability to really notice humans in terms of the individual details can be traced back to aspects of his character in classic Who. I for one am glad to have the Doctor back again as he should be- alien.

by malickfan Tue Mar 31, 2015 9:36 pm

Pettytyrant101 wrote:Most of the stuff about 12- his dismissiveness, his ego, his inability to really notice humans in terms of the individual details can be traced back to aspects of his character in classic Who. I for one am glad to have the Doctor back again as he should be- alien.

Me too!

Capaldi is already my favourite of New Who.

I think it was rather obvious from the start Capaldi would be going back to 'basics' for inspiration, you wouldn't cast a man of his age known for darker roles and hope for another bloke with quirky hair. Wasn't there a how-much-more-obvious-can-you-get conversation about the veil being lifted in Deep Breath?

by malickfan Tue Mar 31, 2015 9:40 pm

by Pettytyrant101 Tue Mar 31, 2015 9:44 pm

Wasn't there a how-much-more-obvious-can-you-get conversation about the veil being lifted in Deep Breath? - Malick

There is indeed-

CLARA: I don't know. I don't know. We were crashing about everywhere. The Doctor was gone. The Tardis went haywire.
JENNY: He's not gone. He's upstairs.
CLARA: Okay, he changed.
VASTRA: He regenerated. Renewed himself.
CLARA: Renewed. Fine.
VASTRA: Such a cynical smile.
CLARA: I'm not smiling.
VASTRA: Not outwardly. But I'm accustomed to seeing through a veil. How have I amused you?
CLARA: You said renewed. He doesn't. He doesn't look renewed. He looks older.
VASTRA: You thought he was young?
CLARA: He looked young.
VASTRA: He looked like your dashing young gentleman friend. Your lover, even.
CLARA: Shut up.
VASTRA: But he is the Doctor. He has walked this universe for centuries untold, he has seen stars fall to dust. You might as well flirt with a mountain range.
CLARA: I did not flirt with him.
VASTRA: He flirted with you.
CLARA: How?
VASTRA: He looked young. Who do you think that was for?
CLARA: Me?
VASTRA: Everyone. I wear a veil as he wore a face and for the same reason.
CLARA: What reason?
VASTRA: The oldest reason there is for anything. To be accepted.

Liking the poster for 8's new BF story too Thumbs Up

by malickfan Tue Mar 31, 2015 10:03 pm

Pettytyrant101 wrote:Wasn't there a how-much-more-obvious-can-you-get conversation about the veil being lifted in Deep Breath? - Malick

There is indeed-

...

VASTRA: But he is the Doctor. He has walked this universe for centuries untold, he has seen stars fall to dust. You might as well flirt with a mountain rangeI never got the impression the Classic Doctors would even know how to flirt .

...

VASTRA: The oldest reason there is for anything. To be acceptedExactly-the Doctor spent his last three incarnations living with regret over the time war, as he has reversed the genocide he no longer has to hide from himself or go looking for acceptance the new regeneration cycle was a accident and a fresh start he has be brought full circle back to a remote alien Timelord, he just does the job and gets on with things, saving who he can, he acts colder and more remote to spare himself the pain of being too involved, his older face (previously seen in Caecilius from Pompei) reflects his true self and serves of a reminder of past mistakes. .

Liking the poster for 8's new BF story too Yes looks great! Haven't listened to Dark Eyes yet...though I've noticed his hair cut is almost the same as NOTD...

by **Amarië** Tue Mar 31, 2015 10:17 pm

Pettytyrant101 wrote:Most of the stuff about 12- his dismissiveness, his ego, his inability to really notice humans in terms of the individual details can be traced back to aspects of his character in classic Who. I for one am glad to have the Doctor back again as he should be- alien.

Ailen is fine, I think it's the over all style Moff's using I don't like. Too much fishing for laughs by ridicule. Oh well, maybe there's hope for the next episodes. He might be trying to reinvent everything again.

by Pettytyrant101 Tue Mar 31, 2015 10:20 pm

He might be trying to reinvent everything again. - Moffat

He has done that every single series so far that he has been in charge. I would expect no less and he has already indicated we saw a softening of 12 at the end of series 8 and in the xmas episode and we will see more of that.

'Exactly-the Doctor spent his last three incarnations living with regret over the time war, as he has reversed the genocide he no longer has to hide from himself or go looking for acceptance the new regeneration cycle was a accident and a fresh start he has be brought full circle back to a remote alien Timelord, he just does the job and gets on with things, saving who he can, he acts colder and more remote to spare himself the pain of being too involved, his older face (previously seen in Caecilius from Pompei) reflects his true self and serves of a reminder of past mistakes. .'- Malick

Spot on, thats exactly my reading of it too. Nod

by malickfan Tue Mar 31, 2015 10:27 pm

Well from the looks of things we may be getting 4 two parters next year, certainly a change to the format.

Spot on, thats exactly my reading of it too

Although I do understand some of Amarië's critisms, the 12th Doctor is easily the most fascinating one I've yet watched, the ideas and potential are certainly there, it is perhaps the execution(or budget...I recently read that RTD only had an average of £30,000 to spend on an episode-and this was back in 2007, explains some of the filler in the show If true...) that is lacking.