|
||||||||
Amy Pond: A cross between Rose and Donna? |
![]() |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#26 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Sofas are deities
Posts: 16,123
|
Sorry I don't agree, she is quite different from both these characters. I can't quite make her out!
|
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#27 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 351
|
Quote:
Wasn't it just Amy's crack is the most important thing to sort out? Not Amy herself?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#28 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 117,021
|
Quote:
Wasn't it just Amy's crack is the most important thing to sort out? Not Amy herself?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#29 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 1,155
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#30 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 1,155
|
Quote:
Nope, very much her own character-and far better than either Rose or Donna.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#31 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 8,713
|
Quote:
Nope, very much her own character-and far better than either Rose or Donna.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#32 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 580
|
Quote:
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.
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. |
|
|
|
|
|
#33 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Glasgow
Posts: 4,517
|
I like Amy, but I see little of either character in her.
To be honest, I think it'll take a lot to top Donna in my book. Still miss her *sniffles*
|
|
|
|
|
|
#34 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 580
|
Quote:
Wasn't it just Amy's crack is the most important thing to sort out?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#35 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 1,155
|
Quote:
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. |
|
|
|
|
|
#36 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location: City of London
Posts: 4,573
|
Quote:
POST OF THE THREAD so far.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#37 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 16,500
|
Quote:
No, I ain't gonna say it. It's just too easy. And certainly not suitable for a family message board.
![]()
|
|
|
|
|
|
#38 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 4,179
|
Quote:
No, I ain't gonna say it. It's just too easy. And certainly not suitable for a family message board.
![]() (Also fun keeping up the innuendo ![]() )
|
|
|
|
|
|
#39 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Norwich
Posts: 4,056
|
Quote:
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. Amy, after just five episodes, is already infinitely more interesting, likeable, sexy, awkward and more importanty, REAL than Donna could ever have been. |
|
|
|
|
#40 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 582
|
I don't think she's particularly like either of them! She seems much more independent and a bit nuts.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#41 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 1,155
|
and much more real than the "cartoon with a heart" that was Donaaaahhhh.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#42 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location: City of London
Posts: 4,573
|
Quote:
and much more real than the "cartoon with a heart" that was Donaaaahhhh.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#43 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 3,342
|
Quote:
Why do you have to continue to be so unpleasant?
![]() Yet more evidence of the double standards and hypocrisy from the usual suspects.... |
|
|
|
|
|
#44 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Sofas are deities
Posts: 16,123
|
Quote:
and much more real than the "cartoon with a heart" that was Donaaaahhhh.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#45 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 1,155
|
Quote:
Why do you have to continue to be so unpleasant?
![]() I suggest you stay away from the literary criticism section of your library - they say some terrible things about eopnymous, tragic, Shakespearean characters!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#46 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Norwich
Posts: 4,056
|
Quote:
Why do you have to continue to be so unpleasant?
![]() |
|
|
|
|
#47 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 2,332
|
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. |
|
|
|
|
|
#48 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 9
|
All three?
Amy has three characteristics of the past three new who companions:
Rose - childish Martha - unrequited love Donna - ginger, mouthy Amy = RoseMarthaDonna = Romana Coincidence? Yeah, of course it's a coincidence.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#49 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Downforce Radio
Posts: 9,226
|
Quote:
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! ![]() 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!" ( ) is what many people find unpleasant.
|
|
|
|
|
#50 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Downforce Radio
Posts: 9,226
|
Quote:
Amy has three characteristics of the past three new who companions:
Rose - childish Martha - unrequited love Donna - ginger, mouthy Amy = RoseMarthaDonna = Romana Coincidence? Yeah, of course it's a coincidence. ![]() Donna-Wedding |
|
|
![]() |
|
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 23:53.




