Was Ada not in danger of being held accountable for her part in the forced imprisonments and deaths? Were the Paternoster Gang going to whisk her away before the Peelers turned up to look into things?
Ada seemed to play a role in the operational aspects of Sweetville. Such as body disposal. She also seemed in harmony with the plan - well, at least when she thought she and Monster were going to survive the mass murder.
Was Ada not in danger of being held accountable for her part in the forced imprisonments and deaths? Were the Paternoster Gang going to whisk her away before the Peelers turned up to look into things?
Ada seemed to play a role in the operational aspects of Sweetville. Such as body disposal. She also seemed in harmony with the plan - well, at least when she thought she and Monster were going to survive the mass murder.
Yes, I mentioned this in another thread. Ada was far from innocent in all this. She was happy to go along with the plan as long as she was going to be one of the chosen ones. She only turned against her mother when she realised that wasn't going to happen.
Was Ada not in danger of being held accountable for her part in the forced imprisonments and deaths? Were the Paternoster Gang going to whisk her away before the Peelers turned up to look into things?
Ada seemed to play a role in the operational aspects of Sweetville. Such as body disposal. She also seemed in harmony with the plan - well, at least when she thought she and Monster were going to survive the mass murder.
I hadn't thought of that at all! I'm surprised she didn't get a talking to. Unless she didn't know the extent to which her mother was going...maybe she just thought it was going to be a little society of betters?
And a lot more people called Thomas than Navrinder.
.So to keep within product placement guidelines the joke should have been:
"What's your name?"
"Thomas, sir. Thomas Thomas. Other children who know the way are available."
But I now rather like the idea of shoehorning in the implausible Asian kid. If only to piss off UKIP. (Another lot who would do well to stay off the jelly sherbert fancies).
Yes, I mentioned this in another thread. Ada was far from innocent in all this. She was happy to go along with the plan as long as she was going to be one of the chosen ones. She only turned against her mother when she realised that wasn't going to happen.
sorry old bean. Missed that. Seven thousand odd posts and barely an original notion among them
Gatiss sacrificed moral rectitude in order to have his fabulous "monster" reveal.
I wonder if there is any significance in the singing of Jerusalem 23 years before the music was written. Either it has some meaning, or it was a disappointing historical error - the BBC should know better! Sure they could have consulted Aled Jones - who probably lives just up the road from the studios!
Because historical verisimilitude is always a high priority in Doctor Who
I won't say it wasn't true to history as i've not done the research but in the Shakespear episode there were black people walking about the streets.
So no reason to think there couldn't be an Asian family in Yorkshire in the Victorian period.
From an episode of QI
When the Pilgrim Fathers first arrived in America, the first thing that the Native Americans said to them was "Could I have some beer?" in English. Most of the Native Americans learnt their English from Squanto, a Native who travelled across the Atlantic Ocean 6 times. He was kidnapped to England, then brought back to America, he was kidnapped again and sold to slavery in Spain, before escaping to Cuper's Cove, Newfoundland, but he found it took too long to walk back, so he took a boat back to Ireland before returning to New England. The other famous Native, Samoset, learnt his English from fishermen.
Although I enjoyed the episode, I think Clara has quickly fallen into the same trap as Amy and become all story-line and no character.
When Rose, Martha and Donna joined the TARDIS I had a real sense of who they were, what their lives had been like and why they wanted to leave it all behind.
I just didn't get that sense of Amy being a real person and I'm now in the same boat with Clara. Moffat spends too much time building a story arc/mystery around his companions, and not enough time making them seem real.
The fact the Doctor keeps dropping her off after every adventure doesn't exactly help either.
A shame, because she seemed to have great promise.
FWIW, I re-watched "The Snowmen" last night and Jenny was wearing the same catsuit/corset in that as well so I guess it wasn't a tribute to Diana Rigg in The Crimson Horror.
Also, after re-watching The Snowmen, I think I've got a very good idea how this season is going to work out.
The clue, IMO, is that although we first see Clara in the future, her "original" appearance was in "The Snowmen".
FWIW, I re-watched "The Snowmen" last night and Jenny was wearing the same catsuit/corset in that as well so I guess it wasn't a tribute to Diana Rigg in The Crimson Horror.
Yea, I pointed that out here earlier in the thread, but I was overlooked.
It's ok, I wasn't having a go, just surprised that people missed it. Guess it spoils their excitement as the thought it was a tribute.
I was pretty sure she wore the same thing in Snowmen so I was a bit bemused by all this tribute stuff. However, my memory is notoriously awful so I didn't want to say anything in case I was wrong!
You asserted that she did nothing to contribute to the episodes, that she just stood around in the background and looked pretty. That was what I was arguing. I believe I have demonstrated this to be patently untrue and you even seem to have acknowledged that at least once:
None of your other comments go anywhere to countering my assertion that she played an important part in most, if not all of the episodes. Whether she showed genius, whether other people contributed, whether the mission could have succeeded without her. It's all irrelevant. Point is, you cannot deny that she did all of the things I listed which means she played an important role. She was not just background scenery.
We'll agree to disagree. I stand by everything I said. The parts she has played in each episode have been, to my mind, pretty negligible. You see them as important or big contributions, I see them as throwaway lines or the odd bit of action that could have just as easily been played by anyone.
The point is, there's no sense of who Clara is. It's like the writers can't figure out what to do with her since The Snowman. They seem to be banking on 'the mystery of Clara' to hold our attention and make us care about this character and it feels like lazy characterization to me.
When I say she just seems to be there to look pretty in the background, its because she doesn't seem to have any interests, history, ambitions, disagreeable aspects to her personality, any sense of a real life and so on.
Perhaps I'm simply getting tired of seeing the same thing in the doctor's companions: usually flirting with the doctor, snarky, always have a witty comeback, their whole life seemingly revolving around him, and I know I'm fed up with the sexist little asides that keep cropping up in the show. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy Doctor Who a lot, but I do have a problem with the way Clara has been written.
When I say she just seems to be there to look pretty in the background, its because she doesn't seem to have any interests, history, ambitions, disagreeable aspects to her personality, any sense of a real life and so on.
What does that have to do with staying in the background of an episode
Are you saying that anything she does in the episode is irrelevant unless it reveals her history and past interests? By that reasoning she could have 80% of the focus of the episode and a pivotal role and still be a background character. That makes no sense to me.
Apart from which we had half an episode dedicated to her history. From how her parents met, to her growing up as a child, the death of her mother, her desire to see the world and travel, how her friend died and how she took it on herself to look after the kids.
Just precisely how many companions have we had anywhere near that amount of history on?
That covers the history, interests and ambitions. As for disagreeable aspects, the forums are awash with people who think she has disagreeable aspects. Not that I would consider a lack of disagreeable aspects to be a problem but, each to their own, I guess
You are, of course, perfectly free to dislike Clara or how she is being portrayed and I am perfectly happy to agree to disagree with your assessment. However, i have to say, I don't understand your reasoning at all.
What does that have to do with staying in the background of an episode
Are you saying that anything she does in the episode is irrelevant unless it reveals her history and past interests? By that reasoning she could have 80% of the focus of the episode and a pivotal role and still be a background character. That makes no sense to me.
Apart from which we had half an episode dedicated to her history. From how her parents met, to her growing up as a child, the death of her mother, her desire to see the world and travel, how her friend died and how she took it on herself to look after the kids.
Just precisely how many companions have we had anywhere near that amount of history on?
That covers the history, interests and ambitions. As for disagreeable aspects, the forums are awash with people who think she has disagreeable aspects. Not that I would consider a lack of disagreeable aspects to be a problem but, each to their own, I guess
You are, of course, perfectly free to dislike Clara or how she is being portrayed and I am perfectly happy to agree to disagree with your assessment. However, i have to say, I don't understand your reasoning at all.
After reading that part of his post I was gonna reply, but saw this reply so I needed not! You said everything I wanted to say.
After reading that part of his post I was gonna reply, but saw this reply so I needed not! You said everything I wanted to say.
Thanks
I should add that Sarah Jane Smith was one of the most popular classic companions of all time. About the only thing we knew about her background was that she was a Journalist and she had an Aunt Lavinia!
What does that have to do with staying in the background of an episode
Are you saying that anything she does in the episode is irrelevant unless it reveals her history and past interests? By that reasoning she could have 80% of the focus of the episode and a pivotal role and still be a background character. That makes no sense to me.
Apart from which we had half an episode dedicated to her history. From how her parents met, to her growing up as a child, the death of her mother, her desire to see the world and travel, how her friend died and how she took it on herself to look after the kids.
Just precisely how many companions have we had anywhere near that amount of history on?
That covers the history, interests and ambitions. As for disagreeable aspects, the forums are awash with people who think she has disagreeable aspects. Not that I would consider a lack of disagreeable aspects to be a problem but, each to their own, I guess
You are, of course, perfectly free to dislike Clara or how she is being portrayed and I am perfectly happy to agree to disagree with your assessment. However, i have to say, I don't understand your reasoning at all.
Comments
Ada seemed to play a role in the operational aspects of Sweetville. Such as body disposal. She also seemed in harmony with the plan - well, at least when she thought she and Monster were going to survive the mass murder.
Yes, I mentioned this in another thread. Ada was far from innocent in all this. She was happy to go along with the plan as long as she was going to be one of the chosen ones. She only turned against her mother when she realised that wasn't going to happen.
I hadn't thought of that at all! I'm surprised she didn't get a talking to. Unless she didn't know the extent to which her mother was going...maybe she just thought it was going to be a little society of betters?
And a lot more people called Thomas than Navrinder.
.So to keep within product placement guidelines the joke should have been:
"What's your name?"
"Thomas, sir. Thomas Thomas. Other children who know the way are available."
But I now rather like the idea of shoehorning in the implausible Asian kid. If only to piss off UKIP. (Another lot who would do well to stay off the jelly sherbert fancies).
sorry old bean. Missed that. Seven thousand odd posts and barely an original notion among them
Gatiss sacrificed moral rectitude in order to have his fabulous "monster" reveal.
So no reason to think there couldn't be an Asian family in Yorkshire in the Victorian period.
From an episode of QI People do seem to get around
Wasn't he one one of the scientists in Genesis of the Daleks?
Gary
This.
Nice try. It was Gharman.
Don't be sorry. I’m just glad I'm not the only one who noticed!
Also, after re-watching The Snowmen, I think I've got a very good idea how this season is going to work out.
The clue, IMO, is that although we first see Clara in the future, her "original" appearance was in "The Snowmen".
Yea, I pointed that out here earlier in the thread, but I was overlooked.
It was just to show people go missing after going to sweetville, that was all.
Sorry.
I thought somebody else might have noticed but I last posted here on Saturday so there's a bunch of new pages to read though.
It's ok, I wasn't having a go, just surprised that people missed it. Guess it spoils their excitement as the thought it was a tribute.
I was pretty sure she wore the same thing in Snowmen so I was a bit bemused by all this tribute stuff. However, my memory is notoriously awful so I didn't want to say anything in case I was wrong!
We'll agree to disagree. I stand by everything I said. The parts she has played in each episode have been, to my mind, pretty negligible. You see them as important or big contributions, I see them as throwaway lines or the odd bit of action that could have just as easily been played by anyone.
The point is, there's no sense of who Clara is. It's like the writers can't figure out what to do with her since The Snowman. They seem to be banking on 'the mystery of Clara' to hold our attention and make us care about this character and it feels like lazy characterization to me.
When I say she just seems to be there to look pretty in the background, its because she doesn't seem to have any interests, history, ambitions, disagreeable aspects to her personality, any sense of a real life and so on.
Perhaps I'm simply getting tired of seeing the same thing in the doctor's companions: usually flirting with the doctor, snarky, always have a witty comeback, their whole life seemingly revolving around him, and I know I'm fed up with the sexist little asides that keep cropping up in the show. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy Doctor Who a lot, but I do have a problem with the way Clara has been written.
What does that have to do with staying in the background of an episode
Are you saying that anything she does in the episode is irrelevant unless it reveals her history and past interests? By that reasoning she could have 80% of the focus of the episode and a pivotal role and still be a background character. That makes no sense to me.
Apart from which we had half an episode dedicated to her history. From how her parents met, to her growing up as a child, the death of her mother, her desire to see the world and travel, how her friend died and how she took it on herself to look after the kids.
Just precisely how many companions have we had anywhere near that amount of history on?
That covers the history, interests and ambitions. As for disagreeable aspects, the forums are awash with people who think she has disagreeable aspects. Not that I would consider a lack of disagreeable aspects to be a problem but, each to their own, I guess
You are, of course, perfectly free to dislike Clara or how she is being portrayed and I am perfectly happy to agree to disagree with your assessment. However, i have to say, I don't understand your reasoning at all.
After reading that part of his post I was gonna reply, but saw this reply so I needed not! You said everything I wanted to say.
Thanks
I should add that Sarah Jane Smith was one of the most popular classic companions of all time. About the only thing we knew about her background was that she was a Journalist and she had an Aunt Lavinia!
*Like*