Maybe it's helpful to accenuate the rise and fall of spoken words.
For example,
Would you like a cup of tea?
For example,
Would you like a cup of tea?
Why doesn't The Doctor and Clara talk properly?
3 of 3
Originally Posted by CAMERA OBSCURA:
“I would say the most common criticism of Amy Pond was that she was a character created solely for an arc and not a character in her own right that becomes part of an arc.”
“I would say the most common criticism of Amy Pond was that she was a character created solely for an arc and not a character in her own right that becomes part of an arc.”
I haven't actually heard that one too often - but anyway, that doesn't really affect how her personality is presented, more how it's sustained.
Quote:
“To me it is as if the other writers do not know what she is about as a 'real person' because she is an arc character and nothing else, thus we get smart one liners as conversion and 'character development' because there is no real flesh to the bones.”
“To me it is as if the other writers do not know what she is about as a 'real person' because she is an arc character and nothing else, thus we get smart one liners as conversion and 'character development' because there is no real flesh to the bones.”
It's funny, I get her as a real person. I totally understand where she's coming from, and I loved the little details that the writers put in that to my eyes fit how I see the character. I would argue that Amy has had more texture, depth and consistency to her than, say, Rose - who even after 2.5 series, is better defined by her family than on her own terms.
Quote:
“There is no 'Can you smell that...fish and chips' genuine character connection in the writing for me. Sounds like a daft example but in the context of the conversation it was a wonderful human moment between two characters.”
“There is no 'Can you smell that...fish and chips' genuine character connection in the writing for me. Sounds like a daft example but in the context of the conversation it was a wonderful human moment between two characters.”
You say fish and chips, I say fish fingers and custard. Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.
Quote:
“johnnysaucepn
I haven't actually heard that one too often - but anyway, that doesn't really affect how her personality is presented, more how it's sustained.”
“johnnysaucepn
I haven't actually heard that one too often - but anyway, that doesn't really affect how her personality is presented, more how it's sustained.”
For me it did affect how her personality was presented, more so during series 6 where outside the arc of the Baby/Song/ Ganger/pregnant and so on there wasn't a lot to the character IMO.
Quote:
“It's funny, I get her as a real person. I totally understand where she's coming from, and I loved the little details that the writers put in that to my eyes fit how I see the character. I would argue that Amy has had more texture, depth and consistency to her than, say, Rose - who even after 2.5 series, is better defined by her family than on her own terms”
“It's funny, I get her as a real person. I totally understand where she's coming from, and I loved the little details that the writers put in that to my eyes fit how I see the character. I would argue that Amy has had more texture, depth and consistency to her than, say, Rose - who even after 2.5 series, is better defined by her family than on her own terms”
.
Aye, thats your take on the character, there is not a lot I can add beyond I disagree.
Quote:
“You say fish and chips, I say fish fingers and custard.”
“You say fish and chips, I say fish fingers and custard.”
Fish fingers and custard was a gag though. A gag that was then practically used as an arc catchphrase during series 6. It never worked for me because it was ultimately a gimmick utilised later on based on fan feedback. Fish fingers and custard just happened to be the one that caught the fans imagination. Why not yogurt, bread and butter, bacon or beans?
Maybe because for the following days after The Eleventh Hour social media Who fans were not talking about bread and butter, just as well really, it isn't nearly as catchy enough as fish fingers and custard.
I used Fish and chips as an example because it was just a line of dialogue, nothing more nothing less, it was just a moment that wasn't then used as a sledgehammer to invoke, imo, emotional connection between two characters because there was very little else there.
I'm sure there were oodles of Amy Pond lines that worked for you in an 'emotional' context, but not for me.
People will have different 'emotional' connections with a character if they like or dislike how the are written, or even acted, in my case towards the end of series 5 onwards I found the character to be increasingly one dimensional.
Like I said, I am enjoying JLC as Clara, and I'm really liking the whole why the Tardis doesn't like her arc and it is still early days in terms of her character. But I know how much I disliked the last 'mysterious' companion and her entire arc so there is a lot of 'once bitten twice shy' about how my expectations of how series 7b will pan out.
I do kind if pine for the 'normal' companion and then things like the Tardis not letting her in would be even more intriguing.
Quote:
“Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.”
“Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.”
Easy for you to say.
Originally Posted by solomon caesar:
“I had high hopes for Clara - the asylum and snowmen episodes showed her talents as a good actress and potential for a great character but since she's become the steady companion, she does nothing except wander around, scream and look generally quizzical.
very one dimensional - no dialogue between them or spark at all. don't get it...”
“I had high hopes for Clara - the asylum and snowmen episodes showed her talents as a good actress and potential for a great character but since she's become the steady companion, she does nothing except wander around, scream and look generally quizzical.
very one dimensional - no dialogue between them or spark at all. don't get it...”
I don't think it's her fault, it's just the interaction between the two.
It comes across as surface when they just merrily exchange quips.
I just think it's a mismatch of characters where there isn't enough contrast to each other in the way they exchange lines with each other.
Very Pantomine Peter Pan or something.
Like I say, I don't think it's anything to do with her ability as an actress, more to do with the way that's she's written and the scenes they are asked to do.
If The Doctor is frivolous and casual then perhaps Clara needs to be more different for it to work. It just feels a bit too, I don't know, lighthearted and easy?
Originally Posted by johnnysaucepn:
“Nobody, in the whole history of Doctor Who, has talked like a 'real person'. The dialogue is no more quick-fire than your average sitcom. The wordage is decided by what the person needs to say in order to get the point about the character or the plot - or the joke - delivered. Nothing much about that has changed in seven years.”
“Nobody, in the whole history of Doctor Who, has talked like a 'real person'. The dialogue is no more quick-fire than your average sitcom. The wordage is decided by what the person needs to say in order to get the point about the character or the plot - or the joke - delivered. Nothing much about that has changed in seven years.”
I don't agree with that.
It hasn't always been the case where the Doctor and his companion communicate in a setup, joke, then punchline delivery manner for as often as it appears in this series.
Maybe it was getting more like that with Amy but is more noticeable now?
Originally Posted by TimCypher:
“Yes, indeed - I've no reason to question Jenna or Karen's acting abilities - my issue is with the material that they are given. Material which, to my ears, doesn't sound like it was designed for a human being to say, well not one off the set of 'Friends'...
It's not even the presence of 'one-liners' that is the problem - it's that the dialogue and character exchanges are just an unbroken succession of them, which form conversations that don't seem natural, don't seem real, don't sound like any exchanges that human beings actually have with one another...and, as such, are off-putting, smug and totally undermine the dramatic events that are taking place around them.
I've tried and tried and tried to adjust to it, or to put it to the back of my mind, but it's really difficult...
Regards,
Cypher”
“Yes, indeed - I've no reason to question Jenna or Karen's acting abilities - my issue is with the material that they are given. Material which, to my ears, doesn't sound like it was designed for a human being to say, well not one off the set of 'Friends'...
It's not even the presence of 'one-liners' that is the problem - it's that the dialogue and character exchanges are just an unbroken succession of them, which form conversations that don't seem natural, don't seem real, don't sound like any exchanges that human beings actually have with one another...and, as such, are off-putting, smug and totally undermine the dramatic events that are taking place around them.
I've tried and tried and tried to adjust to it, or to put it to the back of my mind, but it's really difficult...
Regards,
Cypher”
I agree with all that. I think Karen Gillan was pretty good now and again in certain situations.
But now with Clara it seems to be more evident that the actors seem to be very aware when they're doing a joke routine and sort of appear to go into auto-pilot mode and go through the motions to knock those scenes out in rapid succession.
It's probably more noticeable now because Jenna is new and probably hasn't had the script opportunities yet to show what she can do. She probably will when we get through more episodes.
It might just be my own perception, but it just appears that the flippant quickfire exchanges are too frequent and not interspersed with enough depth inbetween..
Originally Posted by CAMERA OBSCURA:
“I would say the most common criticism of Amy Pond was that she was a character created solely for an arc and not a character in her own right that becomes part of an arc.
Whist I am, for the most, personally enjoying Clara as a companion, and have been liking the Tardis/Clara relationship also, there is something missing, I still get the same feeling I did with the Amy Pond character under Mr. Moffat as a show runner, inconsistency. To me it is as if the other writers do not know what she is about as a 'real person' because she is an arc character and nothing else, thus we get smart one liners as conversion and 'character development' because there is no real flesh to the bones.
There is no 'Can you smell that...fish and chips' genuine character connection in the writing for me. Sounds like a daft example but in the context of the conversation it was a wonderful human moment between two characters.
That said I do think Matt and JLC have great chemistry and look forward to how they pan out.
After 2 and a half series under Mr. Moffat I'm afraid that I have come to the conclusion that he doesn't know what the hell to do with The Doctor as a character and for the same reasons this has a knock effect on the other writers.
That said apart from some terrible pacing and structure series (this new team just can not do excitement imo) 7b for me is in terms of tone, how Moffats reign should have started, unfortunately its all a little too late as series 7b doesn't seem to be doing anything original as he has already heavily done the mysterious companion stchik and The Doctor looking on.
If series 7b had been series 5 I would have loved it but as it is now 2 and a half series into Moffats reign it is more a case of 'you done this already' and 'seen it before'
Average is the word I'm looking for.”
“I would say the most common criticism of Amy Pond was that she was a character created solely for an arc and not a character in her own right that becomes part of an arc.
Whist I am, for the most, personally enjoying Clara as a companion, and have been liking the Tardis/Clara relationship also, there is something missing, I still get the same feeling I did with the Amy Pond character under Mr. Moffat as a show runner, inconsistency. To me it is as if the other writers do not know what she is about as a 'real person' because she is an arc character and nothing else, thus we get smart one liners as conversion and 'character development' because there is no real flesh to the bones.
There is no 'Can you smell that...fish and chips' genuine character connection in the writing for me. Sounds like a daft example but in the context of the conversation it was a wonderful human moment between two characters.
That said I do think Matt and JLC have great chemistry and look forward to how they pan out.
After 2 and a half series under Mr. Moffat I'm afraid that I have come to the conclusion that he doesn't know what the hell to do with The Doctor as a character and for the same reasons this has a knock effect on the other writers.
That said apart from some terrible pacing and structure series (this new team just can not do excitement imo) 7b for me is in terms of tone, how Moffats reign should have started, unfortunately its all a little too late as series 7b doesn't seem to be doing anything original as he has already heavily done the mysterious companion stchik and The Doctor looking on.
If series 7b had been series 5 I would have loved it but as it is now 2 and a half series into Moffats reign it is more a case of 'you done this already' and 'seen it before'
Average is the word I'm looking for.”
No, I think you've given a good example.
More of that kind of thing would be great. A feeling that the actors aren't at work, so to speak.
You're bringing back memories of the Christopher Eccleston series and the exchanges he would have with Billie Piper. Something rang true with a lot of the dialogue.
I'm not saying it should be one thing or the other. Just a good balance that fits and feels believable and real.
Originally Posted by CoalHillJanitor:
“Exactly. Back in the Sally Sparrow days 'fans' would claim that Moffat couldn't write a female character who wasn't some sort of perfect ideal. Then when he wrote Amy they complained that she was odd and unpleasant. Now with Clara it's back to 'too perfect' again.”
“Exactly. Back in the Sally Sparrow days 'fans' would claim that Moffat couldn't write a female character who wasn't some sort of perfect ideal. Then when he wrote Amy they complained that she was odd and unpleasant. Now with Clara it's back to 'too perfect' again.”
So maybe Moffat should stop trying to please fans with one-dimensional cookie-cutter characters.
I don't quite understand why people are saying that she isn't remotely phased by anything, she's been phased in every episode so far, surely. I'll give an example for each episode.
Bells - Getting in the TARDIS then on to the plane.
Rings - She was terrified when fused to the cube not to mention the facial expressions when he saw Akhaten up close.
Cold War - She seemed really frightened for most of this episode and when she saw the people who had been brutally murdered she seemed very phased about that.
Hide - Seeing the life span of Earth definitely had a big emotional impact on her.
Journey - Well she was phased by lots of things in this. Reacting to everything around her, the zombies, the tube things. The way that she needed to know what the zombies were.
I also don't understand why people insist that the one and only reason he's traveling with her is for the mystery. Obviously it's a big part of it but he was willing to take her before he realised that'd there would be another Clara out there somewhere. He isn't just using her to get a kick out of solving a mystery, it's very evident that he cares about her a lot.
I don't think it's just jokes and stuff between them, I think they've had some really nice moments but we do need more of them. The only problem I have with it is the way that some of her lines are delivered, it's as if they aren't written to suit the sort of things she'd say.
Bells - Getting in the TARDIS then on to the plane.
Rings - She was terrified when fused to the cube not to mention the facial expressions when he saw Akhaten up close.
Cold War - She seemed really frightened for most of this episode and when she saw the people who had been brutally murdered she seemed very phased about that.
Hide - Seeing the life span of Earth definitely had a big emotional impact on her.
Journey - Well she was phased by lots of things in this. Reacting to everything around her, the zombies, the tube things. The way that she needed to know what the zombies were.
I also don't understand why people insist that the one and only reason he's traveling with her is for the mystery. Obviously it's a big part of it but he was willing to take her before he realised that'd there would be another Clara out there somewhere. He isn't just using her to get a kick out of solving a mystery, it's very evident that he cares about her a lot.
I don't think it's just jokes and stuff between them, I think they've had some really nice moments but we do need more of them. The only problem I have with it is the way that some of her lines are delivered, it's as if they aren't written to suit the sort of things she'd say.
Originally Posted by tomwozhere:
“I don't quite understand why people are saying that she isn't remotely phased by anything, she's been phased in every episode so far, surely.”
“I don't quite understand why people are saying that she isn't remotely phased by anything, she's been phased in every episode so far, surely.”
I agree, she's definitely been affected by the things she's seen. She doesn't let it stun her into inaction, I think, may be what people don't find believable. She gets over it quickly and gets on with what needs to be done. Personally, I love that about her but everyone likes different things I guess.
3 of 3
