I see nothing of Donna in her, Rose perhaps, she is like a sulking child , all pouty, just like Rose, but Donna was a real woman, and she did not fancy the Doctor, she was his mate, the Doctor/Donna will never be bettered.
Shush. Donna was a one-dimensional caricature with two settings... mouthy and blubby (the latter crowbarred in at every opportunity to remind everyone that Tate is a 'serious' actress). She had none of the 'real' feeling of Rose, Martha, Amy, even Micky, cos she was written so forced, it was all about how she was so different.. essentially cos she said things like 'oi spaceman' and didn't fancy the Doc'.
In truth, Catherine Tate is a very good actress. But that doesn't remotely alter the fact that Donna was an awful, awful, awful, awful, awful character. And we're well rid of her.
Shush. Donna was a one-dimensional caricature with two settings... mouthy and blubby (the latter crowbarred in at every opportunity to remind everyone that Tate is a 'serious' actress). She had none of the 'real' feeling of Rose, Martha, Amy, even Micky, cos she was written so forced, it was all about how she was so different.. essentially cos she said things like 'oi spaceman' and didn't fancy the Doc'.
In truth, Catherine Tate is a very good actress. But that doesn't remotely alter the fact that Donna was an awful, awful, awful, awful, awful character. And we're well rid of her.
Shush. Donna was a one-dimensional caricature with two settings... mouthy and blubby (the latter crowbarred in at every opportunity to remind everyone that Tate is a 'serious' actress). She had none of the 'real' feeling of Rose, Martha, Amy, even Micky, cos she was written so forced, it was all about how she was so different.. essentially cos she said things like 'oi spaceman' and didn't fancy the Doc'.
In truth, Catherine Tate is a very good actress. But that doesn't remotely alter the fact that Donna was an awful, awful, awful, awful, awful character. And we're well rid of her.
To use a message board phrase I've never used before: THAT^^^^
Amy, after just five episodes, is already infinitely more interesting, likeable, sexy, awkward and more importanty, REAL than Donna could ever have been.
Why do you have to continue to be so unpleasant?:(
When posters tell of their valid and understandable reasons why they aren't warming to Amy they are told in no uncertain terms that they are wrong and the character is being perfectly written and acted, yet Rose, Donna et al get dismissed with insults such as 'thick', 'chav', 'cartoon with a heart' etc etc etc....
Yet more evidence of the double standards and hypocrisy from the usual suspects....
and much more real than the "cartoon with a heart" that was Donaaaahhhh.
That's a real shame, you couldn't take to her. Well we can't all like the same things, can we. It's great that you are enjoying the new companion then:).
Why do you have to continue to be so unpleasant?:(
is criticising a fictional character "being unpleasant"?
I suggest you stay away from the literary criticism section of your library - they say some terrible things about eopnymous, tragic, Shakespearean characters!
Why do you have to continue to be so unpleasant?:(
What's so unpleasant about that comment? "cartoon with a heart" seems a fair enough description of Donna to me, she was, after all, one big caricature.
There are a good few similarities but i think these are very deliberate.
For example a writer of moffats quality does not have a "run away bride" companion so soon after Catherine Tates character by mistake.
The Similarity of the ending of Flesh and Stone, and the scene where rose almost falls into the void, followed by a very downbeat beach scene is not a coincidence.
There are probably more but i haven't noticed.
Its almost like time is going crazy and the doctors past is sporadically re occuring. Or Moffat is trying to do some kind of self referential post modern meta narrative. I hope the latter i suspect the former.
is criticising a fictional character "being unpleasant"?
I suggest you stay away from the literary criticism section of your library - they say some terrible things about eopnymous, tragic, Shakespearean characters!
Its just the way you do it.
Please learn the phrases "In my opinion" or "for me..." or "the way I see it" or any permutation of the such.
Stating your own minority opinion as if it was fact, then saying stuff, as you are want to do like "fandom agrees" "All right thinking Doctor Who fans think the same way" "MILLIONS OF PEOPLE WILL BE TURNED OFF BY CATHERINE TATE!" (:D) is what many people find unpleasant.
Comments
Oh, maybe.
Amy's crack is related and linked to Amy though. Whatever actions Amy takes effects her crack.
sounds like a hideous hybrid to me! :eek:
too true.
Donna was better, followed by Amy, then Rose, then Martha IMO ... New Who obviously.
In truth, Catherine Tate is a very good actress. But that doesn't remotely alter the fact that Donna was an awful, awful, awful, awful, awful character. And we're well rid of her.
To be honest, I think it'll take a lot to top Donna in my book. Still miss her *sniffles*
POST OF THE THREAD so far.
adds nothing to the thread
I bet a lot of people reading the thread were thinking it. I know I was
I couldn't find a better way of saying it. And it is Amy's now so....
(Also fun keeping up the innuendo
To use a message board phrase I've never used before: THAT^^^^
Amy, after just five episodes, is already infinitely more interesting, likeable, sexy, awkward and more importanty, REAL than Donna could ever have been.
Why do you have to continue to be so unpleasant?:(
When posters tell of their valid and understandable reasons why they aren't warming to Amy they are told in no uncertain terms that they are wrong and the character is being perfectly written and acted, yet Rose, Donna et al get dismissed with insults such as 'thick', 'chav', 'cartoon with a heart' etc etc etc....
Yet more evidence of the double standards and hypocrisy from the usual suspects....
That's a real shame, you couldn't take to her. Well we can't all like the same things, can we. It's great that you are enjoying the new companion then:).
is criticising a fictional character "being unpleasant"?
I suggest you stay away from the literary criticism section of your library - they say some terrible things about eopnymous, tragic, Shakespearean characters!
What's so unpleasant about that comment? "cartoon with a heart" seems a fair enough description of Donna to me, she was, after all, one big caricature.
For example a writer of moffats quality does not have a "run away bride" companion so soon after Catherine Tates character by mistake.
The Similarity of the ending of Flesh and Stone, and the scene where rose almost falls into the void, followed by a very downbeat beach scene is not a coincidence.
There are probably more but i haven't noticed.
Its almost like time is going crazy and the doctors past is sporadically re occuring. Or Moffat is trying to do some kind of self referential post modern meta narrative. I hope the latter i suspect the former.
Rose - childish
Martha - unrequited love
Donna - ginger, mouthy
Amy = RoseMarthaDonna = Romana
Coincidence?
Yeah, of course it's a coincidence.:p
Its just the way you do it.
Please learn the phrases "In my opinion" or "for me..." or "the way I see it" or any permutation of the such.
Stating your own minority opinion as if it was fact, then saying stuff, as you are want to do like "fandom agrees" "All right thinking Doctor Who fans think the same way" "MILLIONS OF PEOPLE WILL BE TURNED OFF BY CATHERINE TATE!" (:D) is what many people find unpleasant.
Jack-Horny
Donna-Wedding