bobod
Chancellery Guard
Likes: 2,759
|
Post by bobod on Apr 27, 2017 10:08:35 GMT
It seems that a lot of people do not understand the phrase "four psychologists", their parents thought that their daughter was crazy, the other children made fun of her, and Amy spent all her life trying to prove that a madman in a box was real. Her attitude is totally justified. The comic Imaginary Enemies (DWM 455) verifies that my theory is correct. I think Rory is the only one who sees her crying alone while others see her as a pathetic insane. claudiaboleyn.tumblr.com/post/102899336301/ritchandspace-bisexualamy-amy-pondI'm glad Imaginary Enemies proves you correct, but I have never seen it. I have just seen the television show. And on that show, we were told Amy had a rough, confused upbringing, but we were never shown that. We just saw the result of it - and the result was (I stress, for me as a viewer) that she was brattish and unreasonable a lot of the time, especially in her early stories. What was it she called Rory? Stupid face, or something like that? That was 'her way' of communicating her love for him? If someone communicated their love for me that way, then I wouldn't be over inclined to stay with them. Maybe you could explain the 'four psychologists' phrase to me, and how it justifies her trying to have sex with someone on the eve of her wedding to someone else (thanks for the link - very interesting)? (Must remind myself, it's only a TV show!!) I have no problem with ANY of Amy's behaviour in that first season. I think it's validated by the fiction (and reacted to by the Doctor) AND much too funny for people to take it at face value and think she's even remotely offensive.
|
|
|
Post by dalekbuster523finish on Apr 27, 2017 10:18:58 GMT
I'm glad Imaginary Enemies proves you correct, but I have never seen it. I have just seen the television show. And on that show, we were told Amy had a rough, confused upbringing, but we were never shown that. We just saw the result of it - and the result was (I stress, for me as a viewer) that she was brattish and unreasonable a lot of the time, especially in her early stories. What was it she called Rory? Stupid face, or something like that? That was 'her way' of communicating her love for him? If someone communicated their love for me that way, then I wouldn't be over inclined to stay with them. Maybe you could explain the 'four psychologists' phrase to me, and how it justifies her trying to have sex with someone on the eve of her wedding to someone else (thanks for the link - very interesting)? (Must remind myself, it's only a TV show!!) I have no problem with ANY of Amy's behaviour in that first season. I think it's validated by the fiction (and reacted to by the Doctor) AND much too funny for people to take it at face value and think she's even remotely offensive. It was also treated as a serious problem by The Doctor given that it's Amy trying to seduce him that leads him to the conclusion that he needs to invite Rory on-board the TARDIS. I thought Amy's mental health issues were treated very sensitively and maturely. We weren't made to laugh at her or think she was weird, she was shown very much as a normal girl. If they'd made a big deal of her seeing psychiatrists it would have been too forced in my view.
|
|
|
Post by pawntake on Apr 27, 2017 10:20:35 GMT
No-one’s mentioned anything to me – that would be amazing,” Gillan told us, adding that she’d also be interested to follow in David Tennant and Catherine Tate’s footsteps to bring Amy Pond back to life for audio adventures with Big Finish. SO sometime!! Maybe!!?? But not the Eleventh Doctor Chronicles methinks!!
|
|
bobod
Chancellery Guard
Likes: 2,759
|
Post by bobod on Apr 27, 2017 10:21:08 GMT
I have no problem with ANY of Amy's behaviour in that first season. I think it's validated by the fiction (and reacted to by the Doctor) AND much too funny for people to take it at face value and think she's even remotely offensive. It was also treated as a serious problem by The Doctor given that it's Amy trying to seduce him that leads him to the conclusion that he needs to invite Rory on-board the TARDIS. That's not 'also', that's what I was referring to by "and reacted to by the Doctor".
|
|
|
Post by dalekbuster523finish on Apr 27, 2017 10:23:04 GMT
It was also treated as a serious problem by The Doctor given that it's Amy trying to seduce him that leads him to the conclusion that he needs to invite Rory on-board the TARDIS. That's not 'also', that's what I was referring to by "and reacted to by the Doctor". You said it was 'too funny' but it was actually dealt with quite seriously. It was a cliffhanger that made it clear Amy wasn't right in the head - she probably spent her entire childhood doubting her own sanity and whether The Doctor had visited her that night saying baked beans were evil.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 27, 2017 10:23:32 GMT
I'm glad Imaginary Enemies proves you correct, but I have never seen it. I have just seen the television show. And on that show, we were told Amy had a rough, confused upbringing, but we were never shown that. We just saw the result of it - and the result was (I stress, for me as a viewer) that she was brattish and unreasonable a lot of the time, especially in her early stories. What was it she called Rory? Stupid face, or something like that? That was 'her way' of communicating her love for him? If someone communicated their love for me that way, then I wouldn't be over inclined to stay with them. Maybe you could explain the 'four psychologists' phrase to me, and how it justifies her trying to have sex with someone on the eve of her wedding to someone else (thanks for the link - very interesting)? (Must remind myself, it's only a TV show!!) I have no problem with ANY of Amy's behaviour in that first season. I think it's validated by the fiction (and reacted to by the Doctor) AND much too funny for people to take it at face value and think she's even remotely offensive. I don't necessarily find her offensive, just very unlikeable, at least initially. I think her problems - the problems that resulted in her behaviour - should have been given more prominence if we viewers are required to understand her and 'where she's coming from.' I'm remembering a scene, ('Amy's Choice', I think) where she demands of the Doctor 'What's the point of you??' This, after he, as always, had done everything he could to salvage the latest situation. Unreasonable and uncompromising, on top of other unreasonable and uncompromising things she's said. Perhaps this could most simply boil down to the fact that I didn't really take to the character, which is strange as the actress seems lovely. Different strokes for different folks and all that.
|
|
bobod
Chancellery Guard
Likes: 2,759
|
Post by bobod on Apr 27, 2017 10:26:22 GMT
I have no problem with ANY of Amy's behaviour in that first season. I think it's validated by the fiction (and reacted to by the Doctor) AND much too funny for people to take it at face value and think she's even remotely offensive. I don't necessarily find her offensive, just very unlikeable, at least initially. I think her problems - the problems that resulted in her behaviour - should have been given more prominence if we viewers are required to understand her and 'where she's coming from.' I'm remembering a scene, ('Amy's Choice', I think) where she demands of the Doctor 'What's the point of you??' This, after he, as always, had done everything he could to salvage the latest situation. Unreasonable and uncompromising, on top of other unreasonable and uncompromising things she's said. Things like that don't really bother me, like I wasn't bothered by Rose's spoilt selfishness or how she treated Mickey. I like to see characters who react in a way that may be real but not necessarily ideal. I've never understood people who say "I don't think Rose was good because she was selfish / treated Mickey like crap".
|
|
bobod
Chancellery Guard
Likes: 2,759
|
Post by bobod on Apr 27, 2017 10:29:06 GMT
That's not 'also', that's what I was referring to by "and reacted to by the Doctor". You said it was 'too funny' but it was actually dealt with quite seriously. It was a cliffhanger that made it clear Amy wasn't right in the head - she probably spent her entire childhood doubting her own sanity and whether The Doctor had visited her that night saying baked beans were evil. When I said "too funny" I meant the "shutups" and "stupid faces". "Awh ma poncho boys". Not the Doctor reacting to her behaviour, although that scene is supposed to be funny as well as being an indicator of sorts.
We don't say "not right in the head" anymore, BTW.
|
|
bobod
Chancellery Guard
Likes: 2,759
|
Post by bobod on Apr 27, 2017 10:29:33 GMT
I really want to watch that Angels two-parter now, it is magnificent.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 27, 2017 10:32:02 GMT
I don't necessarily find her offensive, just very unlikeable, at least initially. I think her problems - the problems that resulted in her behaviour - should have been given more prominence if we viewers are required to understand her and 'where she's coming from.' I'm remembering a scene, ('Amy's Choice', I think) where she demands of the Doctor 'What's the point of you??' This, after he, as always, had done everything he could to salvage the latest situation. Unreasonable and uncompromising, on top of other unreasonable and uncompromising things she's said. Things like that don't really bother me, like I wasn't bothered by Rose's spoilt selfishness or how she treated Mickey. I like to see characters who react in a way that may be real but not necessarily ideal. I've never understood people who say "I don't thing Rose was good because she was selfish / treated Mickey like crap". If you're saying that it's okay for fictional characters to have unpleasant characteristics then I agree with you. It's called realism. A good character is, for me, one that is well visualised and articulated, not necessarily somebody "nice" So I like Amy as a character on a programme, but I probably wouldn't in real life.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 27, 2017 10:32:09 GMT
I don't necessarily find her offensive, just very unlikeable, at least initially. I think her problems - the problems that resulted in her behaviour - should have been given more prominence if we viewers are required to understand her and 'where she's coming from.' I'm remembering a scene, ('Amy's Choice', I think) where she demands of the Doctor 'What's the point of you??' This, after he, as always, had done everything he could to salvage the latest situation. Unreasonable and uncompromising, on top of other unreasonable and uncompromising things she's said. Things like that don't really bother me, like I wasn't bothered by Rose's spoilt selfishness or how she treated Mickey. I like to see characters who react in a way that may be real but not necessarily ideal. I've never understood people who say "I don't thing Rose was good because she was selfish / treated Mickey like crap". This is very true. Strangely, I had no real problem with how Rose treated Mickey, because he was, at first, played as someone who was appealingly silly. Also, Rose was hugely appealing in a way that Amy wasn't (to me, at any rate). I like characters who are real too, but I found Amy so ... I don't know, smug? Abrasive? I found these traits heightened in such a way that she became unreal to me. She seemed to be written as a companion that lacked any of the sense of wonder, or appreciation of travelling with The Doctor that Rose did, or that Bill does now.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 27, 2017 10:33:57 GMT
I really want to watch that Angels two-parter now, it is magnificent. It is a corker, isn't it? {Spoiler} The moment we see the angels actually move ... brrr! Shivers, even now!
|
|
|
Post by dalekbuster523finish on Apr 27, 2017 10:37:41 GMT
I don't necessarily find her offensive, just very unlikeable, at least initially. I think her problems - the problems that resulted in her behaviour - should have been given more prominence if we viewers are required to understand her and 'where she's coming from.' I'm remembering a scene, ('Amy's Choice', I think) where she demands of the Doctor 'What's the point of you??' This, after he, as always, had done everything he could to salvage the latest situation. Unreasonable and uncompromising, on top of other unreasonable and uncompromising things she's said. Things like that don't really bother me, like I wasn't bothered by Rose's spoilt selfishness or how she treated Mickey. I like to see characters who react in a way that may be real but not necessarily ideal. I've never understood people who say "I don't thing Rose was good because she was selfish / treated Mickey like crap". Agreed. The best characters have flaws.
|
|
bobod
Chancellery Guard
Likes: 2,759
|
Post by bobod on Apr 27, 2017 10:38:29 GMT
Things like that don't really bother me, like I wasn't bothered by Rose's spoilt selfishness or how she treated Mickey. I like to see characters who react in a way that may be real but not necessarily ideal. I've never understood people who say "I don't thing Rose was good because she was selfish / treated Mickey like crap". If you're saying that it's okay for fictional characters to have unpleasant characteristics then I agree with you. It's called realism. A good character is, for me, one that is well visualised and articulated, not necessarily somebody "nice" So I like Amy as a character on a programme, but I probably wouldn't in real life. Yup, exactly that. Though I might like her in real life an' all.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 27, 2017 10:38:30 GMT
Things like that don't really bother me, like I wasn't bothered by Rose's spoilt selfishness or how she treated Mickey. I like to see characters who react in a way that may be real but not necessarily ideal. I've never understood people who say "I don't thing Rose was good because she was selfish / treated Mickey like crap". This is very true. Strangely, I had no real problem with how Rose treated Mickey, because he was, at first, played as someone who was appealingly silly. Also, Rose was hugely appealing in a way that Amy wasn't (to me, at any rate). I like characters who are real too, but I found Amy so ... I don't know, smug? Abrasive? I found these traits heightened in such a way that she became unreal to me. She seemed to be written as a companion that lacked any of the sense of wonder, or appreciation of travelling with The Doctor that Rose did, or that Bill does now. Smug is definitely the word for it. I'm willing to give her character a fair hearing (the line from Amy's Choice occurs right before a suicide attempt, for example), but I had the same reaction to her. It wasn't quite as bad as Clara, where I was asking almost every other episode with Twelve -- "Why are you here?", but it definitely rubbed me the wrong way after a while.
|
|
bobod
Chancellery Guard
Likes: 2,759
|
Post by bobod on Apr 27, 2017 10:40:20 GMT
Things like that don't really bother me, like I wasn't bothered by Rose's spoilt selfishness or how she treated Mickey. I like to see characters who react in a way that may be real but not necessarily ideal. I've never understood people who say "I don't thing Rose was good because she was selfish / treated Mickey like crap". This is very true. Strangely, I had no real problem with how Rose treated Mickey, because he was, at first, played as someone who was appealingly silly. Also, Rose was hugely appealing in a way that Amy wasn't (to me, at any rate). I like characters who are real too, but I found Amy so ... I don't know, smug? Abrasive? I found these traits heightened in such a way that she became unreal to me. She seemed to be written as a companion that lacked any of the sense of wonder, or appreciation of travelling with The Doctor that Rose did, or that Bill does now. I did think it was odd that some of the obvious things to do were overlooked with Amy, we never saw her react to stepping out onto another planet for example.
|
|
|
Post by sherlock on Apr 27, 2017 11:33:10 GMT
This is very true. Strangely, I had no real problem with how Rose treated Mickey, because he was, at first, played as someone who was appealingly silly. Also, Rose was hugely appealing in a way that Amy wasn't (to me, at any rate). I like characters who are real too, but I found Amy so ... I don't know, smug? Abrasive? I found these traits heightened in such a way that she became unreal to me. She seemed to be written as a companion that lacked any of the sense of wonder, or appreciation of travelling with The Doctor that Rose did, or that Bill does now. I did think it was odd that some of the obvious things to do were overlooked with Amy, we never saw her react to stepping out onto another planet for example. We kind of do in The Time of Angels, but it is very brief and overshadowed by River.
|
|
bobod
Chancellery Guard
Likes: 2,759
|
Post by bobod on Apr 27, 2017 11:38:05 GMT
I did think it was odd that some of the obvious things to do were overlooked with Amy, we never saw her react to stepping out onto another planet for example. We kind of do in The Time of Angels, but it is very brief and overshadowed by River. Does she react at all? It's been a while since I saw it, but I don't remember any reaction.
|
|
|
Post by sherlock on Apr 27, 2017 11:44:50 GMT
We kind of do in The Time of Angels, but it is very brief and overshadowed by River. Does she react at all? It's been a while since I saw it, but I don't remember any reaction. She gets a bit giddy about it in the control room before going outside and then gawks a bit outside. The focus is entirely on River Song though.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 27, 2017 12:17:48 GMT
There was a rather nice moment in 'The Beast Below', where Amy was floating outside the Tardis, with the Doctor holding onto her ankle. Again, very brief. I think that was her quota of wonderment - after that, she seemed pretty blase.
|
|