Donna in Silence in the Library...Martha moaning at the Doctor for taking her to a place he took Rose in Gridlock, or "CARDIFF?" in Utopia, and Martha in Blink being stuck with the Doctor in the 60's, Rose in the Empty Child


Donna in Fires of Pompeii, Rose in Father's Day, Martha in Shakespeare Code, when the Doctor is telling her not to deal with the witches, Sound of Drums, when she tries to save her family even though the Doctor asks her not to...and therefore nearly getting show at...


And of Rose and of Donna, and of Martha....

[
she didn't go back to bubbling...but the first bit...well do you remember Donna in Fires of Pompeii? with the Sisters who are about to sacrifice her???





Well I have no interest in her legs...I can tell you that much....and yet i love Amy...

I'm quite surprised at the hostility that negative comments made here about DW can provoke. Surely people's enjoyment of the show isn't so fragile that it can be ruined by someone else's opinion?

Indeed, one can't. Nor did I. My reference was merely to those posts above me who stated that any negative comments about Amy were "boring" - which should have been obvious to anyone who had taken the trouble to read the whole thread without sounding off. The thread is inviting comments about Amy and the OP was getting dumped on - as was anyone agreeing - for being negative. I was adding to the negative comments and pre-empting those who would, seemingly, disregard my opinion on said character unless it's a swooning rave. Sorry if it wasn't obvious - although, looking back at my original post, I fear I cannot see how it could have been more so.

Quite. I've been a fan for more than four decades. But I'm not an uncritical one. I love the show, but just occasionally it's been badly-produced rubbish and more often elements have been below par - although that's always subjective, of course. A true fan should never shy away from saying so.

I do agree to some extent, but I like her. There's plenty more time to see her develop further and learn more about her. She doesn't come across as very likeable sometimes though, and I think that's important for the companion.

But we seem to be swamped by near identical threads in recent weeks constantly repeating the same tired and largely not very well thought out criticisms of Amy just for the sake of it. and it is boring.

This could apply to most of the critiques of s5 in general. Very poorly argued and boring for the most part. Give me something I dont like and I will eloquently tear it to pieces with a jig and a flourish. Not just sit there moaning that 'its a bit lacking'.

She tries to be like David Tennant. Fail, I like the doctors companions to be stupid and shy and gradually grow a backbone not start off really cocky and thinks she knows everything.

The doctor takes Amy to the year whatever, and she goes out as if it's nothing and doesn't evn look shocked. Thats why I loved Donna, she used to look really suprised and grateful wherever she was.

She's not trying to be like David Tennant, whatever that means. So, she fails for you because you want her to be an awestruck moron? I'm rather glad she's failing for you, if that's the case. I prefer a character with a bit of spirit who isn't so easily impressed, myself.

Why is that better? Why is that more interesting? Do you feel that's the way a companion should be? Do you think that perhaps subverting that cliche might be more interesting? She doesn't know anything, she makes it painfully clear she doesn't know what to do or what's going on - the difference is that she tries to have a go.


I'm starting to wonder if people are seeing what they want to see, and not what actually happens. Watch Amy at the start of the Beast Below, or meeting Churchill, persuading the Dr to let her see the planet in Time of Angels, etc., etc.

In fact the Churchill one is a good example, the whole sequence walking down the corridor she's dancing around like she's going to burst, giddy as a schoolgirl, even when she doesn't have dialog!

And then the WW2 moment gets turned on its head when she's confronted by the reality of the situation on the roof... it's a sublime bit of acting yet gets ignored most of the time.

As for Time of Angels she actively squee's when the Doctor gives in and says they'll look around! Venice she bounces over as soon as she's got over the whole Rory traveling with them shock (and it has to be said immediately goes off with him to enjoy it). And if the TARDIS hadn't decided Silurians were more interesting she'd have been just as bouncy over Rio. Can't blame her for being a bit down about Welsh Mining Village but she dives headlong into that too (although not without taking the mick out of the Doctor... fair enough say I).

I really don't mind Amy; not a big fan of hers (I thought little Amelia as adorable though). But she's not that bad, imo, even though I find some of her reactions off, and she most certainly isn't close to being my favourite companion to the Doc.

Still, some ppl here seem to think she's the best thing since sliced bread. I don't really get why (apart from admitting freely that she's eye-candy ), but I guess it just shows that taste's differ

Saying that the repeated threads knocking Amy is boring is not hostility. Boredom isn't a sign of a hostile position. In fact, I don't think I've ever seen an individual behaving actively hostile that you could describe as appearing bored.



tingramretro said it exactly. It's not about the criticism, as much as it is about another thread popping up about it. We had a nice, long and generally pleasent thread about why some people weren't clicking with Amy. We don't need yet another one.

We certainly don't need one that makes poorly thought out points, just to criticise. I mean, let's be totally fair here; criticising Amy for stopping trying to save herself, in an attempt to help a fallen man is just pathetic. Is the OP suggesting it would have been a better character trait if she ran on by and left the poor sod to his death?

No way is that honest criticism of the character, it's just looking for reasons to attack her, no matter what she does. If she left him there, she'd be being criticised for that.

That sort of "I don't like them, so I'm gonna criticise them no matter what," is incredibly tedious. And yes, it's all opinion. But if we can hold opinions on the content of the shows, then we can hold opinions on the content of the posts.

The OP thinks Amy isn't a good character. That's their opinion. I think these threads and the ill-thought-out insults thrown at the character are getting incredibly boring. That's my opinion.

Agree wholeheartedly! Karen Gillan seems an ok actress, but the character is simply awful, WAY the worst companion of Nu Who, I'm sure we'll find out alot more about her in the weeks to come, but it's getting a bit late in the day, and I think the character is dragging the series down from what it could achieve. All a shame as matt Smith is extremely good as the Doctor (no David Tennant yet but early days still...!)

[quote=SXTony;40466933]We saw her in the first episode. Annette Crosby.



Not sure we did...

No, we didn't. That was Jeff's gran.

I don't think the OP's points are in any way a fair reflection of what has actually happened on screen. I'd suggest to OP to watch an episode but not fixate solely on the individual lines that you think are examples of being spoilt, pretend hero, blubbery or whatever.

For example, you're criticising her for the scene where she heroically saved a life? The reason they have the Doctor telling her not to try is to show the audience how dangerous it all is. You're not supposed to take it literally that Amy was in the wrong for trying. It is the writers way of notching up the tension and showing how brave she is. Then when she thinks she's going to die as a result you criticise her for turning out to be slightly upset about it and wanting some help? Plenty of companions have been in scenes like that and had similar emotions, facial expressions, lines etc. and it's really not a fair example of the point you are trying to make.

The "But I'm dressed for Rio!" stuff is a classic Doctor Who joke. She simply didn't do what you said she did. And why not ask him to sort it out? They stepped out of the tardis, wrong place. Simply stepping back in and flipping the switches could have sorted it. Perfectly reasonable request. They were just trying to show how good the Doctor is at sniffing out the unusual in boring looking places.

It's not a problem to simply not gel with a character, but if you're going to post a SHOUTY bullet point polemic, it's fair game to be pulled apart a bit. All part of the fun of forums.

Because I can't see anything of substance in your list, I can only conclude that you don't like her because she can be a bit stroppy sometimes. It's something I like but you don't. Fine. But your examples just don't hold water.

1) Didn't you see her smile and shake her head in an affectionate way at the Doctor after he had ignored her Rio speech?

b) She went back to help the mining bloke, not to deliberately disobey the doctor.

iii) Actually I didn't see much crying, given the circumstances. She just said "tell Rory..." and disappeared.


4) or d) or iv) I thought this bit was quite touching. She was trying to be tough, but couldn't quite make it in the end.

But half ofthe things that the OP points out fits in with Rose, Martha and Donna at many points of their travelling life with the Doctor....the OP has pointed out very thin layerd of what is happening on the surface...and again something that all the previous companions did too. And I know you said that you liked the previous companions, then surely you would agree that they are all gulity of doing all those things that the OP said Amy has done?

Yep, would agree all the previous characters have had similar moments. But all have remained likeable (ok I know Rose got up alot of people's noses), and felt like they had a deper rooting in reality. When Amy does these things, with little or no redeeming factors, she comes across two dimensional, unsympathetic and annoying. having said all this, she has had her good moments...the scene where she was dragged under the ground last episode was exceedingly well acted by both Karen Gillan and Matt Smith. Which brings things again round to, why doesn't she do it for me? I really want to like her and adore the series, but she's the only reason I can think that is holding (in my humble opinion as I constantly say) the series back.

Matt Smith does not need to be David Tennant. He's doing just fine as Matt Smith.

I agree. Speaking as a DT fan, Matt is just fine as he is.

Once again, wholeheartedly agree, though obviously when I say no David Tennant I'm not implying that he ISN'T david tennant yet, I'm implying that he isn't AS GOOD as David Tennant yet. Simply because he hasn't had the chance to prove it after only a handful of eps, but I'm sure there'll come his moment, and if he comes up with a performance that's anywhere near as good as DT's in Family of Blood, I'll be most pleased, yes sirree.

Oh I'm getting fed up of these troll threads ...

Ooh people are falling for Matt Smith's Dr - OK then lets diss his companion instead...

Can we start a thread optimistically please?

That fine if she doesn't work for you she doesn't...I was just commenting on the main themes that the OP brought up. Persoanlly I think she is great....but sometimes some companions don't work for everyone, and their so called not so likable features annoy the hell out of people, and that the good stuff is never enough. For example as you pointed out, Rose got on some fans nerves, and they so called chavy behaviour is all that some popel can see of her, same with Martha, some poeple don't rate her due to her unrequieted love for the Doctor, and for Donna, some feel that all she does is shout or act like her characters. So in the end none of the companions are going to win everyone around....and for this time its Amy....who knows she may grow on you or she may never.....fingers crossed she does