Re: Doctor Who [11]

by Pettytyrant101 Mon Aug 24, 2015 8:58 pm

Well Id be devastated- I am not against them resting it a few years when Moffat steps down- I actually think long term that's probably healthier for the show - but its now such a massive global show that its hard to see the BBC slaughtering the sacred cow.

by Pettytyrant101 Mon Aug 24, 2015 9:14 pm

I shall blame everything Victorian on him then- Amarie

Gatiss loves in art basically boil down to the horror grotesque and the Victorian (and the two meet in Victorian obsessions with Freak Shows, gory crime and fairies and the like).

He came to attention first in the UK for starring in and co-writing the League of Gentlemen- a smash hit here at the time which was a homage to the grotesque and the surreal (I highly recommend it)-

He has also written documentaries on horror-

And of course there is love of and writing of Sherlock Holmes.

And if you look at his Who episodes you can clearly see his taste for period piece horror-

The Unquiet Dead

The Crimson Horror

Which is why I am not entirely sold on the idea of him taking over as show-runner on Who- I kind of suspect I already know what it would be like. And at least with Moffat whatever you think of the results, that's not something you can say- every one his series so far has been entirely different in style, format, tone and theme.
That's not to say there are not reoccurring tropes, there are, of course there are, some deliberately some probably subconscious, he is only 1 writer, so however was Shakespeare and his work is full of reoccurring tropes too.

edit add- damn it and fuck it to buggery!!! Extremely Crabbit

Why? Why? Why would the BBC do that?!! I just tried watching episode 1 of League of Gentlemen, posted above, and they've added a fucking LAUGHTER TRACK to it!!! Banghead

You stupid bastards its totally intrusive and ruins the entire tone and mood of it. Extremely Crabbit

by malickfan Mon Aug 24, 2015 9:46 pm

I'm rather neutral on the idea of Gatiss taking over, I've enjoyed more or less all his episodes, because they tend to be simple, family friendly romps-I enjoyed Robot of Sherwood because it was pure silly fun (reminded me of The Time Warrior actually), but I've not loved any of them, I can't quite put my finger on it, but his eps tend to feel either rushed or disposable, and I don't think Gatiss has quite the level of imagination RTD or Moffat did, say what you want about Moffat but at least he plays around with the format, as Petty said I think I can guess what a Gatiss run series would be like...

Personally I'm hoping the next showrunner isn't a die hard fan like RTD, Moff or Gatiss-ideally someone with a solid background in Televsion Drama or Genre fiction with the confidence to move the show forward into new areas- you only have to look at the Phillip Hinchcliffe years to see why-simple, straight forward storylines, set mostly off earth with little to no recurring monsters or characters, but a darker tone that explored the morals of the Doctor.

In any case if the leaks reported by private eye about there being no full series in 2016 are true, Moffat may be leaving soonish anyway.

(I'm certain the leaks will be to an extent, Private Eye has been pretty accurate with all its other Doctor Who stuff, and in articles they rarely take the risk of reporting information without some solid basis in fact, Moffat confirmed series 9 would be a full 12/13 episode run all the way back in January 2014, yet it's too early to confirm Series 10's schedule less than 6 months from when it would it start filiming if a full fun? Suspect

...honestly, I think a gap year or two would be good for the show...)

by Pettytyrant101 Mon Aug 24, 2015 9:57 pm

Personally I'm hoping the next showrunner isn't a die hard fan like RTD, Moff or Gatiss- Malick

I think Moffat is very aware of the situation- he said in recent interview that whilst talking with one of the new female writers o this series he referenced a classic episode, she had never seen any of classic Who- her sense of what Who is was entirely from NuWho- Moffat found he was on the one hand appalled that she hadn't seen any classic Who and wanted to immediately recommend a bunch, and on the other hand seeing her work that she was brought a fresh way of approaching it and that this was the future of the show.

by Mrs Figg Mon Aug 24, 2015 10:09 pm

Pettytyrant101 wrote:its funny how Petty is allowed to post other peoples videos to illustrate his point- Fuigg

except thats not what I am doing- I was giving scenes from the episodes as examples- something I have never objected to and in fact encourage all the time- base your thoughts on the evidence, cite the evidence from the episodes- I say this all the time- putting up a video showing what happens in the episode is exactly the same as quoting Lord of the Rings when discussing it- but its not the same as quoting someone elses opinion on Lotr's however as your own.

er yes you are. using other peoples videos is tantamount to a blog in some cases. and its incredibly disingenuous of you to ignore that fact. you know yourself that editing is not neutral and some people even have a style or fingerprint, you can tell by the out of context editing the opinion someone holds, without them having to say it in words. so when you put up a vid, it tells the tale YOU want to tell. its not neutral, and you know this.

Rose, is pretty much his equal- Figg

How can she be? According to RTD the Doctor can see the turn of Time, he is all but a God, he even has godlike titles- Rose on the other hand is annoying, petty, jealous and bitchy- yes she is also brave and loyal but so what-

so what? you just summed up why she is his equal. bravery and loyalty should count more than elitist godlike titles. well they do in my book, but you seem to be a bit of a Timelord snob. she may be ginormously limited but that doesn't stop her from teaching him important lessons and SAVING THE WORLD.

all companions are that. She is not even vaguely in his league never mind an equal- she is a kid with limited experience and knowledge by human standards and ginormously limited understand by Time Lord standards.

not vaguely in his league, snobbery again, or is it you just cant stomach a shop girl SAVING THE WORLD. again.

f'or a start Rose isn't lied to and manipulated, Amy isn't told she is pregnant, she is almost like a human experiment he wants to solve rather than a human being with rights'- Figg

I sometimes wonder if you actually watch episodes-

yep I do, and he DID know she was pregnant, he just didn't want to tell her for selfish reasons or whatevs. if he didn't know what it meant, well theres a handy time machine in the area.

the Doctor did not lie to her about her pregnancy he didnt know what was going on- the TARDIS kept giving dual readings- it was not until he investigated further then went to see the early version of the FLESH he worked out was going on- and its the end of that story he reveals she is pregnant- the first time he knows this for sure, and vows to come and find her- and the very next episode he does just that.

'Who blogs in general, always agree that Moffat is rubbish at writing females.'

There is no such thing as agreement n the internet- as this thread proves.

'its all in the editing.'

Its all in the original writing in my view- but I was just trying to find the final scene and I actually in this case I dont know whats in that video as I was already nearly 5 minutes late for leaving for work being crabbit at you, so just posted the first one that looked most likely to have the relevant scene- the final one between 111 and River.

actually its is relevant- Figg

yes it is hugely so- you cant just ignore or wave away the fact he is more than 900 years older (and possibly thousands of years older) than her just because he doesnt look it. Its the same person as 12- and Im pretty sure youd object to 12 getting romantic with Clara or Rose for that matter.

And what its it you have against mature women?- is a mature women not allowed to be romantic, to be sexy? I dont see a problem here. Its just seems ageist to me. Especially when the man she is dating is several hundred years old.

er hypocracy much. if you have a problem with Rose and Tennant which is ageist against him btw, why cant I have a problem with the glaring mis-match that is River the Cougar?

'they don't actually have sex you know'

What has sex got to do with taking advantage of a lack of experience- control, manipulation and just superior knowledge and understanding dont require you having sex with the person for it to be an unfair advantage over them.

You cant give me ONE example when Eccy or Tennant ever takes advantage of Rose. because its all in your mind. Rose is fully in control, she knows what she wants and has every opportunity to back out if she wanted too, but she doesn't. the relationship between Rose and her Doctors is respectful and a deep friendship. The control and manipulation creeps in with Moffat and Amy. poor poor Amy used and abused from day one.

'so that makes the implicit creepery ok does it?'

What the hell is creepy about a husband being momentarily distracted by finding his wife sexually attractive? Seems perfectly normal to me and healthy.

On a kids tv show
.

by Pettytyrant101 Mon Aug 24, 2015 10:14 pm

Mm, was musing on the notion of tropes and writers.
Moffat gets quite a bit of stick for some for his reoccuring tropes. When I watch his Who I see some that go all the way back to my teenage years, and the first Moffat drama hit the kids tv Press Gang. This episode is both worth a watch on its own and a great example of a whole load of Moffat tropes and use of time manipulation to tell a story -

But this is also true of RTD, much of the basic elements of his Who- Rose's personality (I'll come back to this), the domestic elements, the portrayal of Mickey, an the general style of the writing, the writing tricks he uses to create the emotion ect can also be seen in his first breakthrough work Queer as Folk (which I cant find episodes of on Youtube it seems Mad

)
And thinking about this ad reflecting back on Queer as Folk something suddenly struck be about an issue I have always had with Rose which I couldn't put my finger on- she is written like a gay man from Queer as Folk. Rose should have been Roy.
Queer as Folk is set in the promiscuous drug fuelled word of the gay bar dating scene that the young RTD experienced- it has the romance of course, a lot of explicit for tv of the time gay sex, and a lot of bitchy guys who treat their boyfriends incredibly badly whilst at the same time being in some fashion emotionally dependent upon them.
JUst a thought to ponder at the end of a long days work drunken

ps I actually think Id have liked Roy better than Rose, it would have felt more honest to the character and RTD's previous work - I wonder if originally RTD planned for a gay companion and love story, and the BBC scuppered it early on as too big a risk when launching the show. Maybe he got Captain Jack as the concession. I'd love to the know the answer to that.

by Pettytyrant101 Mon Aug 24, 2015 10:37 pm

you know yourself that editing is not neutral and some people even have a style or fingerprint- Figg

Yes I do know that- which is why I clarified below that I didnt actually watch the video (I still haven't actually) as I had to dash out for work - and what I was hoping to post was just the final scene between 11 and River from Name of Doctor- which if that's what it had been would have been simply quoting the original work.
But I note you just ignored the clarification and didn't respond to that bit.

bravery and loyalty should count more than elitist godlike titles- Figg

It does which is why every companion in the shows history, event he tin dog, displays these traits eventually, Amy and Rory among them.

'she may be ginormously limited but that doesn't stop her from teaching him important lessons and SAVING THE WORLD.'

Again all companions do this- this in a nut shell (along with ask questions so the audience get answers) is to do these things.
Amy and Rory saved the world- Amy brought the Doctor back into existence.

' you just cant stomach a shop girl SAVING THE WORLD. again.'

What is this pore nonsense about? Amy is a kissogram I like her plenty and she saved the world too. But its lower in the job order than working in a London department store. I work for just above minimum wage wiping strangers arses for a living and you think I judge people on their job, social class or salary? Thats a fucking offensive cheek.

'he DID know she was pregnant, he just didn't want to tell her for selfish reasons or whatevs'

Tell me where in the storyline the Doctor knows she is pregnant? When exactly, in which episode does he make that discovery? You cant even think of a motivation for why he do this imaginary thing of knowing much earlier and not telling her- plus it wouldn't make sense in the narrative we see- him waiting to go see the Flesh to confirm once for all which of the TARDIS readings is the true one- he has already by this point, and in secret been investigating what's going on, but you'd expect that out of concern for Amy and Rory- he knows something is up but not what or which is true- he finds out what's going on in the FLESH two parter- he saves her in A Good Man Goes to War the very next episode- where is this earlier point that he knows?

'if you have a problem with Rose and Tennant which is ageist against him btw'

It snot ageism because I thought it was clear my objection is to the amount of knowledge and life experience he has over her, or any human being ever in fact- this is why he is as dangerous as he is wondrous to his companions. Even without any ill intent on his part if he falls in love with any young human by the very dint of his nature, he holds unfair advantage over her. And he shows no responsibility for his actions except to go emo and mopey- which in fairness 11 did too after Amy and Rory went but less emo and more Victorian, but just as mopey- but at least it didn't last a whole series and ruin an otherwise very promising companion in Martha Jones by never allowing her out of mopey emo Doctors Rose love shadow).

'she knows what she wants and has every opportunity to back out if she wanted too, but she doesn't.'

Rose dotes on her Doctor- so much so she cannot be happy without a human clone of him (and in RTD's original but cut for transmission the Doctor gives them a piece of TARDIS crystal- implying they grow their own TARDIS in their universe and go off into the stars together- she gets her Doctor in the end in either cut however).

'On a kids tv show'

No, on comic relief. And its a family show not a kids show. Its never been a kids show, it was conceived for ratings purposes, to fit a gap between the Saturday afternoon kids show and the football results- so it had to keep the kids watching, but also draw in the adults in time for the football.

by **Amarië** Mon Aug 24, 2015 10:44 pm

Re: tropes and writers post.

Now that I can understand. You've seen it before, recognise a pattern and get suspicious of Rose. Maybe suspicious isn't the right word but it'll have to do. Same as Figgy with River and me with Amy. We see things differently. Maybe reading more or too little into the character we see based on what we know, believe and feel.

by Pettytyrant101 Mon Aug 24, 2015 10:50 pm

Bi Jingo never doubt the power of buckie to spark a late night thought that can perhaps clarify some things on both sides.
I hadn't considered by previous knowledge of RTD work would play into my thoughts towards Rose- the question then becomes are they delibrate choices of tropes by the writer, subconscious by the writer, or added to my reading of Rose by association. And same re yourself and Figg with Amy and River.
Mmmm, more buckie required to unravel that one I feel! Nod

In the meantime we break this transmission with some light music-

by Mrs Figg Mon Aug 24, 2015 11:27 pm

here we go here we go here we go! Handbag

I will tie you in so many knots you will squeak when you walk. Suspect

by Pettytyrant101 Mon Aug 24, 2015 11:42 pm

I will tie you in so many knots you will squeak when you walk. - Figg

scratch

I don't understand, I always squeak when I walk!- winters coming on and I keep two live haggis strapped to the inside of my thighs for chilly breeze protection Nod

by bungobaggins Tue Aug 25, 2015 12:48 am

Mrs Figg wrote:here we go here we go here we go!

I will tie you in so many knots you will squeak when you walk.

I'd pay good money to see that. Nod

by Eldorion Tue Aug 25, 2015 1:09 am

Get a room you two! Mad

Or a barrel, as the case may be. scratch

by Mrs Figg Tue Aug 25, 2015 1:27 pm

lets get this show on the road...

Pettytyrant101 wrote:you know yourself that editing is not neutral and some people even have a style or fingerprint- Figg

Yes I do know that- which is why I clarified below that I didnt actually watch the video (I still haven't actually) as I had to dash out for work - and what I was hoping to post was just the final scene between 11 and River from Name of Doctor- which if that's what it had been would have been simply quoting the original work.
But I note you just ignored the clarification and didn't respond to that bit.

talking about vids in general, not just that one.

bravery and loyalty should count more than elitist godlike titles- Figg

It does which is why every companion in the shows history, event he tin dog, displays these traits eventually, Amy and Rory among them.

'she may be ginormously limited but that doesn't stop her from teaching him important lessons and SAVING THE WORLD.'

Again all companions do this- this in a nut shell (along with ask questions so the audience get answers) is to do these things.
Amy and Rory saved the world- Amy brought the Doctor back into existence.

the difference is obvious. Rose goes on a journey of discovery physical and mental, from her ordinary life to extraordinary world saver. its important, that she starts off like any run of the mill girl, on any street, in any town. You have the need for (whatever reason) to paint her as a bitch, but the reality is she is ordinary, she reacts like ordinary girls do to hopeless boyfriends who are a bit wet, with impatience, but affection, bit like an irritating pet more than a life partner. its important that Rose has ties she must break to become the amazing person she became, its important she grows and shows empathy. if she was little miss perfect it wouldn't be half much fun watching her. idem Donna and Martha. On the other hand Amy is set up from day one as special and the sad thing is that she doesn't grow or take anything positive from her journey, she ends up the same person, only she has been tortured beyond bearing along the way. and this is what I object to, that she is tortured mentally and physically just as plot device, not to teach her anything about life or the Universe. what possible use could she make from having a child ripped from her arms? a normal woman would have been scarred for life and this superficial attitude towards pain is what I hate the most. it cheapens Amy's experience, it makes her a rag doll. Being a companion should mean growth and life and strength, it shouldn't mean having ones agency taken away, in a flippant manner. Amy is a victim Rose is most certainly NOT. and that's why I love Rose as a role model for youngsters.

' you just cant stomach a shop girl SAVING THE WORLD. again.'

What is this pore nonsense about? Amy is a kissogram I like her plenty and she saved the world too. But its lower in the job order than working in a London department store. I work for just above minimum wage wiping strangers arses for a living and you think I judge people on their job, social class or salary? Thats a fucking offensive cheek.

You have misunderstood my comment. Amy is a kissogram, its not sexually threatening, its passive, frilly and silly, as is being a model. working in a shop has its own dignity, it means you are taking control of your life and not being demeaned. my comment was not about class. Being a shop assistant isn't a negative thing in itself, but it was to Rose as she was coasting along in life, just complaicantly going along with it until something better came along.

'he DID know she was pregnant, he just didn't want to tell her for selfish reasons or whatevs'

Tell me where in the storyline the Doctor knows she is pregnant? When exactly, in which episode does he make that discovery? You cant even think of a motivation for why he do this imaginary thing of knowing much earlier and not telling her- plus it wouldn't make sense in the narrative we see- him waiting to go see the Flesh to confirm once for all which of the TARDIS readings is the true one- he has already by this point, and in secret been investigating what's going on, but you'd expect that out of concern for Amy and Rory- he knows something is up but not what or which is true- he finds out what's going on in the FLESH two parter- he saves her in A Good Man Goes to War the very next episode- where is this earlier point that he knows?

er when he looks into the fucking timey wimey machine and it says PREGNANT.

'if you have a problem with Rose and Tennant which is ageist against him btw'

It snot ageism because I thought it was clear my objection is to the amount of knowledge and life experience he has over her, or any human being ever in fact- this is why he is as dangerous as he is wondrous to his companions. Even without any ill intent on his part if he falls in love with any young human by the very dint of his nature, he holds unfair advantage over her. And he shows no responsibility for his actions except to go emo and mopey- which in fairness 11 did too after Amy and Rory went but less emo and more Victorian, but just as mopey- but at least it didn't last a whole series and ruin an otherwise very promising companion in Martha Jones by never allowing her out of mopey emo Doctors Rose love shadow).

you didn't object to the Doctor going 'mopey' over Madame Pompypoo. he may hold an advantage in Timelord terms, but as he is the last one and needs to have relationships with humans, its a bit rich not to expect him now and again to fall for one who seems his equal on many levels. if he was to be really responsible he wouldn't have anyone in the TARDIS, having humans with him is a supremely selfish act to start with, so you could argue he has always shown no responsibility. he puts All of them in dire danger, All the time. that's the deal.

'she knows what she wants and has every opportunity to back out if she wanted too, but she doesn't.'

Rose dotes on her Doctor- so much so she cannot be happy without a human clone of him (and in RTD's original but cut for transmission the Doctor gives them a piece of TARDIS crystal- implying they grow their own TARDIS in their universe and go off into the stars together- she gets her Doctor in the end in either cut however).

and?..whats your point.

'On a kids tv show'

No, on comic relief. And its a family show not a kids show. Its never been a kids show, it was conceived for ratings purposes, to fit a gap between the Saturday afternoon kids show and the football results- so it had to keep the kids watching, but also draw in the adults in time for the football.

so sexual innuendo is ok on a family show? using kids tv charactes to further sexually demean women is never ok.

by Pettytyrant101 Tue Aug 25, 2015 3:20 pm

lets get this show on the road... - Figg

Gladly.

talking about vids in general, not just that one.- Figg

I don't see what objection there can be showing actual scenes- its just quoting from the source given the source is a tv show, but i it bothers you I will simply give a transcript of the source- I agree with you about edited videos but not about putting scenes as illustrative of an argument as its not using anyone else's words or images but the original material as direct evidence- which is exactly the same as quoting from a book in a discussing which is fine- whilst quoting commentary on a book would not be as again its someone else's point of view.

'Rose goes on a journey of discovery physical and mental, from her ordinary life to extraordinary world saver.'

I would say Roses home life is represented as bland, boring, tedious and not good enough- RTD presents normal everyday life as a negative, he doesn't celebrate it he berates it.
In Moffat era Amy and Rory's story is about the opposite- in the end what is important to them is their love of each other and real life, with all its ups and downs and tedium too.
The same can be said to be true of Clara to a lesser degree- she doesn't fly off with the Doctor, her real life and career are important to her- she lays down the ground rules right at the start- he can come for her and she will decide if she wants to go or not. She keeps at her training as a teacher and when she becomes one she keeps her job. Her work and her relationships are not shown as negatives or somehow lesser to life with the Doctor, quite the opposite they are presented as important.

12th Doctor- I prefer it down there. Everything is huge. Everything is so important. Every detail, every moment, every life clung to.

That to me sums up the Doctor and the shows views on life- what Rose represents it the opposite of that- her life on earth is a negative in comparison to her life with the Doctor.

Nor do I see this journey she goes on- when she leaves the TARDIS she needs a human Doctor to accompany her or she would not be content or happy- even having her father back from the dead and successful, her mother with her, a Mickey in that universe who is not a stupid git- none of it is enough for Rose even at the very end without her Doctor. All I see is emotional dependency and a belittling of the joys of normal everyday life.

'On the other hand Amy is set up from day one as special'

No she isn't really. She is just a little girl when we meet her- the crack in her wall is special, the consequences f it are sp[special, and most importantly and crucially the actions of the Doctor and his abandoning of her are absolutely crucial to their future relationship and how it develops.

And that story line follows through of that developing relationship until their very last episode- there are countless beats of it along the way - Amy' Choice, Time of Angles, Vincent and the Doctor, the Big Bang, the Almost People, A Good Man goes to War, the Girl Who Waited, the Wedding of rover Song, the Power of Three, Angels Take Manhattan- all these episodes have themes in them directly portraying the development of the relationship between Amy and the Doctor, then Amy and Rory and the Doctor, then Amy the Doctor, Rory and the Doctor, and Amy and Rory and the Doctor.
All of this is character development which takes the scarred childhood of Amelia Pond and all the problems it created and slowly but surely brigs Amy to greater understanding, acceptance, taking control of her own life and choices and ultimately making her own choice free of the problems which had haunted her life since the Doctors childhood intervention.
And just as importantly all of this has a huge effect on the Doctor as the development is as much his as theirs.

AMY: Doctor, it's happening. It's changing me. It's changing my thoughts.
DOCTOR: I can't save you from this. There's nothing I can do to stop this.
AMY: What?
DOCTOR: I stole your childhood and now I've led you by the hand to your death. But the worst thing is, I knew. I knew this would happen. This is what always happens. Forget your faith in me. I took you with me because I was vain. Because I wanted to be adored. Look at you. Glorious Pond, the girl who waited for me. I'm not a hero. I really am just a mad man in a box. And it's time we saw each other as we really are.

There is no such comparable development of the doctor as a result of his relationship with Rose- all he does is mope like a teenager after she is gone and ruin any chance Martha had of benig accepted as a companion or properly developed.

MARTHA: Well, how am I supposed to know? I've only just started believing in time travel. Give me a break.
DOCTOR: Looks like witchcraft, but it isn't. Can't be. Are you going to stand there all night?
MARTHA: Budge up a bit, then. Sorry, there's not much room. Us two here, same bed. Tongues will wag.
DOCTOR: There's such a thing as psychic energy, but a human couldn't channel it like that. Not without a generator the size of Taunton and I think we'd have spotted that. No, there's something I'm missing, Martha. Something really close, staring me right in the face and I can't see it. Rose'd know. A friend of mine, Rose. Right now, she'd say exactly the right thing. Still, can't be helped. You're a novice, never mind. I'll take you back home tomorrow.
MARTHA: Great.

And this goes on for the whole series- whiny emo Doctor moping about Rose like a little kid. Thats not developing the Doctor its reducing him and doing so at the expense of a promising companion.

'a normal woman would have been scarred for life and this superficial attitude towards pain is what I hate the most. it cheapens Amy's experience, it makes her a rag doll.'

Amy is effected by it- she commits murder on the perpetrator as a result of it then suffers guilt over those actions afterwards- but she also has several version of her life that all existed in different timelines in her head and she understands why she cannot go back and get River as a baby, and that to do so would be to alter the River she knows and has come to love and accept as her daughter and make her a new person- killing the River she knows in the process- this whole point is underlined in the Girl Who Waited- where the Doctor has to make just such a decision over old Amy- her right to existence and life is no less than young Amy, but the Doctor chooses to correct his mistake by snubbing that life out.
Its the same decision in front of Amy- going back and getting her baby kills the River she knows who would cease to exist. Amy makes a more human and altruistic choice than the Doctor does- she sacrifices her own emotional well being for the good of her daughters life.
There are several episodes which deal with these issues from A Good Man Goes to War onwards.
But its her final words to Madame Kovarian which both display Amy's understanding of the fixed nature of events and that whilst she is strong enough to make the cards she has been dealt work and to live with her decision regards River, she knows now who the dealer was and who to blame, and she lets that pain come out and takes revenge-

AMY: You took my baby from me and hurt her. And now she's all grown up and she's fine, but I'll never see my baby again.

......

RIVER: How are you doing?
AMY: How do you think?
RIVER: Well, I don't know unless you tell me.
AMY: I killed someone. Madame Kovarian, in cold blood.
RIVER: In an aborted time line, in a world that never was.
AMY: Yeah, but I can remember it, so it happened, so I did it. What does that make me now?

Amy does bear scars but she cant change events, and she is smart enough and experienced enough in Time travel and personal experience of living multiple lives in one that she knows that- but she still shoulders those wounds and she makes more than the best of the situation she is dealt, she takes possession of it. She controls the destiny of her own life. She chooses to have a full relationship with her adult daughter and not to try to go back for her own emotional reasons and in so doing destroy the grown daughter she has come to know, love and respect and be friends with.

'it means you are taking control of your life and not being demeaned'

I don't see the job of kissogram as demeaning and I suspect women who work as kissograms would not be to be pleased to be demeaned by you for doing so- that's snobbery in my view from you.
But the point of Amy's inability to keep a job for any length of time is down to her restlessness of waiting for the Raggedy Doctor to swoop back into her life, she is never settled- its a them which continues right through to the final episode, but a good example of it comes up in Dinosaurs on a Spaceship-

DOCTOR: How's the job?
AMY: We're about to be hit by missiles and you're asking me that?
DOCTOR: I work best when I'm multitasking. Keep talking. How's the job?
AMY: I gave it up.
DOCTOR: You gave the last one up.
AMY: Yeah, well, I can't settle. Every minute I'm listening out for that stupid Tardis sound.
DOCTOR: Right, so it's my fault now, is it?
AMY: I can't not wait for you, even now.

This theme is one of the last to be resolved, and continues until their final episode- and even technically into Clara's first as companion and the discovery that after Amy and Rory settled down in 40's New York Amy had a long and successful career writing children's fiction- that final part of her arc, first brought up in 11th Hour with the kissogram thing is resolved only when Amy takes full control of her life back out from the shadow of the Doctor- its an outward sign of the settling and resolving of her inner turmoil caused by the Doctor. And its another great example of one of the development themes of Amy's character that you claim don't exist!
Another theme that runs form first to last series of the Ponds is the consequences on Amy's ability to express her feelings. She had a childhood in which she was told by everyone around her that what she knew had happened never happened and was not real. A direct result of this is she clamped up, she doesn't talk about her feelings directly.
When we first meet Rory in 11th Hour he introduces himself as her boyfriend,. but she cant even express that much at this point. And the whole thing culminates in the divorce story-line in Asylum.
The entire reason for the divorce is beuase Amy threw Rory out, without telling him why, after she discovered that she could no longer have a baby, thanks to the events at Demons Run. And she knows how much Rory ants to be a father (and we can assume they have been trying for some time)- this is basically the same choice Amy made about River- she didnt go back to her baby, she choose to suffer herself for the sake of an another. In this case its Rory, she choose to let him go in the belief in the long term it would be better for him. Its only when she finally blurts out the reason she threw him out and fully lets her emotions out to Rory that the situation is able to be resolved, and the final part of that ark comes when we discover they adopted a war orphan in post war New York. It also ties into how Amy acts towards Kovarian (cleverly linked by Moffat by linking her infertility to Demons Run) when she kills her- we say that same problem, she has been bottling those feeling up inside, not letting anyone even Rory know just how she really feels, and when it comes out it leads first to her killing someone in vengeance, and then to ending her marriage with someone she loves extremely. Its another thing Amy's arc covers and which is resolved by Amy before their departure, and another point at which she lets a part of her dependency on the Doctor and the effect that has had on her life go and moves on having grown form the experience and matured as a person (this moving from the damaged Amelia to the final Amy of Angels is another theme that run throughout and is why we keep seeing reminders of Amelia in episodes, such as God Complex and why their final episode ends on Amelia and adult Amy narrating over it, to highlight the contrast and the journey).
Roses entire existence post her leaving on the other hand is all about the Doctor still, she never escapes him.

'Being a shop assistant isn't a negative thing in itself, but it was to Rose'

Yes because Rose is selfish and self centred as a gyroscope. she couldn't see the value in her life, her workmates, her mother, her boyfriend, she feels like life owes her better. I think its a terrible message in a companion as most of those watching are destined to life just such a life- to present it all so negatively and with so little value or merit is just not Who.

er when he looks into the fucking timey wimey machine and it says PREGNANT.- Figgs

No it doesn't- it says 'positive' then immediately flips to 'negative' then back to positive, then negative and so on- the TARDIS cant decide- which is why the Doctor starts investigating what the buggery might be going on, his leads culminate ina theory involving the Flesh- he goes to see the FLESH in its early form to better understand it, realises what is happening- tells Amy, promises that no matter what, no matter how far, they are coming for her- and then goes and rescues her.

'you didn't object to the Doctor going 'mopey' over Madame Pompypoo'

Actually I don't like that much either, its probably my least favourite aspect of it, I like it from her side of the story, not so much from his -its more emo 10 to me. Its one of the reasons that whilst I enjoy the episode it wouldn't make a top ten best Moffat episodes list for me.

'its a bit rich not to expect him now and again to fall for one who seems his equal on many levels'

Its tough but that's the deal- personally Id rather he didn't show any interest romantically at all- as in classic where the whole notion is not on his radar.
But in fairness 11 never did romantically involved with his companions had a more classic Doctor view of sex- in that he was aware it existed but beyond that it wasn't in his field of interests-

Vastra- When was this baby, begun?

DOCTOR- Amy? Rory? I don't know! That's human, private stuff. They don't put up a balloon or anything.

'and?..whats your point.'

That Rose stars out a someone who needs the Doctor to make her shitty ever day life worth living- and ends up as someone crying on a beach until she gets the Doctor to live with to make her shitty life worth living.

'so sexual innuendo is ok on a family show?'

Yup absolutely- its in classic Who and in fact in British family entertainment going back to at least Shakespeare's day.
Hell Round the Horn is full of wonderful smutty innuendo and it was broadcast in the 1950's at lunchtime on a Sunday to mass family audiences.
And lets not forget the oral sex innuendo in Love and Monsters from RTD's run- or almost everything Captain Jack ever say to anyone.

by Mrs Figg Tue Aug 25, 2015 5:16 pm

Pettytyrant101 wrote:lets get this show on the road... - Figg

Gladly.

talking about vids in general, not just that one.- Figg

I don't see what objection there can be showing actual scenes- its just quoting from the source given the source is a tv show, but i it bothers you I will simply give a transcript of the source- I agree with you about edited videos but not about putting scenes as illustrative of an argument as its not using anyone else's words or images but the original material as direct evidence- which is exactly the same as quoting from a book in a discussing which is fine- whilst quoting commentary on a book would not be as again its someone else's point of view.

wriggle out of it all you like...

'so sexual innuendo is ok on a family show?'

Yup absolutely-

yeah in the 70s

its in classic Who and in fact in British family entertainment going back to at least Shakespeare's day.
Hell Round the Horn is full of wonderful smutty innuendo and it was broadcast in the 1950's at lunchtime on a Sunday to mass family audiences.
And lets not forget the oral sex innuendo in Love and Monsters from RTD's run- or almost everything Captain Jack ever say to anyone.

so according to you sexism is just jolly fun. spoken like a true Moffat fan
[/color]

by Mrs Figg Tue Aug 25, 2015 5:24 pm

on reflection I think RTD as a gay man probably writes female characters with more neutrality, he is more objective and sympathetic. Moffat just lets his inner Benny Hill run riot. Irene Adler is a prime example of destroying a strong female character. RTD has far too much respect to have turned her into a walking cliché.

by Pettytyrant101 Tue Aug 25, 2015 5:26 pm

wriggle out of it all you like...- Figg

I don't really have to when you don't present any counter arguments or address any of the points of substance raised do I?

'yeah in the 70s...o according to you sexism is just jolly fun. spoken like a true Moffat fan'

Or like a true RTD fan if you include all his innuendo.

"Oh, look, its the walking innuendo" - Mickey upon meeting Captain jack again.

And innuendo is not sexism, nor for that matter is a husband being distracted to comedy effect by finding his wife sexually attractive- if it were the 70's and sexist the wife would be either a shrew or fat or a nag, and the distraction would be a nurse or some such.

by Mrs Figg Tue Aug 25, 2015 7:35 pm

Pettytyrant101 wrote:wriggle out of it all you like...- Figg

I don't really have to when you don't present any counter arguments or address any of the points of substance raised do I?

you didn't raise any points of substance though did you. you just gave one half arsed justification. that's not the same thing now is it?

'yeah in the 70s...o according to you sexism is just jolly fun. spoken like a true Moffat fan'

Or like a true RTD fan if you include all his innuendo.

Innuendo is fine, but looking up a womans skirt is not innuendo, its not subtle, its not funny, its creepy voyeurism. even 'Are you being served' in the 70s did innuendo with more charm.

"Oh, look, its the walking innuendo" - Mickey upon meeting Captain jack again.

And innuendo is not sexism,

of course it isn't, who said it was? but looking up skirts is NOT innuendo

nor for that matter is a husband being distracted to comedy effect by finding his wife sexually attractive-

Of course not if its in private between consenting adults, but this before 9pm on prime time kids tv. what messages does this send out? bad ones.

if it were the 70's and sexist the wife would be either a shrew or fat or a nag, and the distraction would be a nurse or some such

so? we don't live in the 70s any more.

.

by David H Tue Aug 25, 2015 7:42 pm

Mrs Figg wrote: looking up a womans skirt is not innuendo, its not subtle, its not funny, its creepy

I agree. The same cold be said for looking up and finding a Scotshobbit in your apple tree. affraid

by Mrs Figg Tue Aug 25, 2015 7:46 pm

not a pretty sight methinks.

by Pettytyrant101 Tue Aug 25, 2015 7:54 pm

you didn't raise any points of substance though did you. you just gave one half arsed justification. that's not the same thing now is it?- Figg

Come off it Figg- you cant wriggle out of this that easy- I pointed out many of the character development themes that run throughout the Amy storyline and cited the evidence to back up my arguments, you haven't addressed a single one of them but have instead simply fixated on a single joke in a comedy themed sketch done for charity.

You have claimed Amy has no character development, that all she is is tortured, that she is helpless and has no control ect- I have given examples where each of these is wrong. That is substantive. You have offered no evidence at all to counter those arguments are point out where they are in error, or to offer alternative readings of the scenes I have used as my evidence.

And it was you raised the comparison with the sexism of the 70's not me.

'The same cold be said for looking up and finding a Scotshobbit in your apple tree.'- Dave

What? There is no finer sight for a farmer to see Dave! You can tell which way the wind is blowing by the direction of my kilt and the direction the exiting buckie blows in, and you can instantly judge the temperature on the chart of my dangling scotsmanhood from sunburnt summer to bluest winter. Its a positive boom for a farmer keen on a quick weather check Nod

by David H Tue Aug 25, 2015 9:44 pm

Pettytyrant101 wrote:

'The same cold be said for looking up and finding a Scotshobbit in your apple tree.'- Dave

What? There is no finer sight for a farmer to see Dave! You can tell which way the wind is blowing by the direction of my kilt and the direction the exiting buckie blows in, and you can instantly judge the temperature on the chart of my dangling scotsmanhood from sunburnt summer to bluest winter. Its a positive boom for a farmer keen on a quick weather check

That all may (or may NOT Mad

) be true, but I still stand by Mrs Figg's assertion: its not subtle, its not funny, its creepy Suspect

by Pettytyrant101 Tue Aug 25, 2015 9:57 pm

its not subtle, its not funny, its creepy- Dave

Not saying it was a finest moment but its no worse than making an oral sex reference in an episode where a guys girlfriend has been reduced to a face on a concrete slab- and in an episode where the main villain was designed and invented by a prize winner in the children program Blue Peter.

by Mrs Figg Tue Aug 25, 2015 10:06 pm

Pettytyrant101 wrote:you didn't raise any points of substance though did you. you just gave one half arsed justification. that's not the same thing now is it?- Figg

Come off it Figg- you cant wriggle out of this that easy- I pointed out many of the character development themes that run throughout the Amy storyline and cited the evidence to back up my arguments, you haven't addressed a single one of them but have instead simply fixated on a single joke in a comedy themed sketch done for charity.

that's not the issue at hand, the issue is, is it cool to post vids.

You have claimed Amy has no character development, that all she is is tortured, that she is helpless and has no control ect- I have given examples where each of these is wrong. That is substantive. You have offered no evidence at all to counter those arguments are point out where they are in error, or to offer alternative readings of the scenes I have used as my evidence.

I could 'do a you' and post many vids of Amy being tortured on a regular basis. The evidence is there, its up to you to mount the case for the defence. I have evidence of guilt, there a few million witnesses, you may as well plead guilty and hope I don't string you up by your kilt hairs

And it was you raised the comparison with the sexism of the 70's not me.

ok sunshine

'The same cold be said for looking up and finding a Scotshobbit in your apple tree.'- Dave

What? There is no finer sight for a farmer to see Dave! You can tell which way the wind is blowing by the direction of my kilt and the direction the exiting buckie blows in, and you can instantly judge the temperature on the chart of my dangling scotsmanhood from sunburnt summer to bluest winter. Its a positive boom for a farmer keen on a quick weather check