Doctor Who

[Dasla]

I meant to check at the ABC website before I signed on here but from memory it is 8th of September here. Is that after the paralympics?

[gopher]

Originally Posted by Dasla

I meant to check at the ABC website before I signed on here but from memory it is 8th of September here. Is that after the paralympics?

Closing ceremony is on the 9th, the Sunday.

[Horse Chestnut]

Originally Posted by stoolie

Hmm - I'm curious - was what the Doctor was doing by the fire when Mata Hari walked in lost on those on the western side of the Atlantic?

I didn't catch the "crumpet" double entendre, but the slow rise of the toasting fork was not lost on me. Cheeky boy.

[Hastings]

*happy sigh*

Well, that was amazing.
A very good start to Series 7.

[BringTheNoise]

Indeed. I am very intrigued by

Jenna Loise Coleman's

appearance in this episode and what it means for the rest of the series.

[Blatherskite]

She's the next companion? How can I put this politely... I hope her role as companion is in no way whatsoever like her role in this episode and that what I thought was bad acting was in fact just bad dialogue.

She just grated on me. Flirty! is not an intriguing character attribute, and it was pretty much all she was. She practically had 'Sparky Female Prototype' stamped on her forehead.

Other than that, I thought it was a decent episode. A little bit jumpy and sometimes the dialogue seemed to be a selection of 'things that will sound impressive in the trailer' strung together, but it picked up towards the end. Also, Daleks! Yay! I'm nowhere near sick of daleks yet. Whenever I begin to think I've had enough I just have to hear their adorable screeching voices and I fall in love with them again.

[Andrew of Ware]

She is the next companion. I saw an interview with her a couple of months ago and she said then that her debut was going to be in the Christmas specials, so her appearance yesterday was a surprise. I can't find the clip now, but I'll have a look for it. Here's something about her from the BBC's Dr. Who website.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/doctorwho...ctor-Who-Debut

ETA: Here it is. It was broadcast in March - so more than a couple of months ago. I remember not being terribly impressed with her then and watching the clip again has not changed my mind. She is clearly 'excited' by her role!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-17456505

[Lainie]

The perkiness/flirtiness annoyed me until the end, at which point I took it to have been deliberately OTT and intended to reflect her desperate attempt to remain human.

[Aimee Evilpixie]

I liked her fine. I can see why others might not like her much, though.

I was, however, slightly irritated with the reason for Amy and Rory's marriage troubles. Amy's motivations are just written with such a... Traditional view of women, is I guess the way to put it. In her first season it was all about Getting Married, and her second season was all about Having A Baby, and the third season starting out with I Can't Give You Children rubs me the wrong way.

[Rebochan]

Sigh. I guess we're not allowed to show women doing anything like getting married or being a mother (and that being in any way a good thing!) or we're treating them like "traditional women" regardless of what they do in the stories they're in (which is usually not being traditional women...)

Look, the mere concept of Amy being upset because she was forcibly sterilized after having her only child stolen from her isn't trying to enforce "traditional values", it's freaking terrifying. It's one thing to be able to choose not to have children, but it's quite another to be rendered incapable of it against your will before you could choose it at all. The problem wasn't merely "I can't give you children", but "I've been physically violated and I'm still reeling from it."

My main problem was, well, this is a bit late. The time for storylines relating to Amy's experience at Demon's Run were during the last series when it was all fresh. Except for almost the entirety of series 6, she was hunky-dory and got her vengeance at the closing act. She has a relationship with her daughter and the last time we saw her at Christmas, she was perfectly happy with it. It feels like the arc got dragged up for no real reason except someone remembered that it's actually quite a traumatic experience and even a person with an iron will like Amy should have some reaction to it. That also would have been the time to have her deal with being rendered incapable of having any more children and would have given her final act against Kovarian a lot more weight at the end of a character arc.

Sometimes I swear Moffat gets distracted by shiny objects and forgets to have the characters react to them.

[Aimee Evilpixie]

I can readily admit that my personal feelings about what I see as tendencies in Moffat's writing are probably biasing me toward seeing issues that may or may not be present. I'm totally fine with showing women enjoying getting married or liking being mothers or whatever. I can think of shows that have dealt with those things in ways I've liked and appreciated. I just dislike certain things about how they've happened with Amy.

Maybe it won't actually be a big focus of the season. Maybe things will go in a totally different direction. But it's coming across to me like Moffat wanted something else drama-causing in Amy's life, and he pulled from the Big Bag of Shit That's Dramatic For Women again.

Also, I have a strong feeling we're in for another season about The Power of Love and I was hoping for a different theme after being a bit beaten about the head with it last season.

ETA: Soap Opera tropes! That's what Amy's big motivations have seemed like to me. Maybe that's a better way to put it.

[Beejtronic]

I have to say, I was also pretty unimpressed by the whole Amy sidestory. The thing is, being unable to have children in itself is a perfectly legitimate storytelling device. (I cried like a baby at the opening scene in Up, for instance, starting when Carl and Ellie were sitting in the hospital room.) However, coming from Moffat it seems more like, "Woe is me, I cannot fulfill my womanly duty to you, oh husband!" both due to poor execution and previous sketchy storylines which handled women's characters poorly (e.g. the last Christmas special, which basically stated how women are so important and amazing, but only due to their capacity to bear young.)

Originally Posted by Rebochan

Sigh. I guess we're not allowed to show women doing anything like getting married or being a mother (and that being in any way a good thing!) or we're treating them like "traditional women" regardless of what they do in the stories they're in (which is usually not being traditional women...)

This is pretty snarky considering Aimee was only stating her opinion.

Look, the mere concept of Amy being upset because she was forcibly sterilized after having her only child stolen from her isn't trying to enforce "traditional values", it's freaking terrifying. It's one thing to be able to choose not to have children, but it's quite another to be rendered incapable of it against your will before you could choose it at all. The problem wasn't merely "I can't give you children", but "I've been physically violated and I'm still reeling from it."

Then Moffat should have presented it that way. If that's what he meant, then that again is perfectly legitimate, but I didn't get any of that from the dialogue. ETA: Also, it never stated that she was outright sterilized. All she said is "whatever they did to me on Demon's Run" with no explanation whatsoever. It's hard to feel for someone's situation when you don't know what the hell it was.

My main problem was, well, this is a bit late. The time for storylines relating to Amy's experience at Demon's Run were during the last series when it was all fresh.

Definitely agree with the timing aspect, which I think is a big contributor to the negative reaction the storyline is having.

And for the record, I do want to have kids, and understand how painful it must be to struggle to do so. (Though I don't think that aspect really affects how valid one's opinion is on this topic.)

[Rebochan]

Originally Posted by Aimee Evilpixie

I can readily admit that my personal feelings about what I see as tendencies in Moffat's writing are probably biasing me toward seeing issues that may or may not be present. I'm totally fine with showing women enjoying getting married or liking being mothers or whatever. I can think of shows that have dealt with those things in ways I've liked and appreciated. I just dislike certain things about how they've happened with Amy.

Eh, I think with Amy they've shown it's not idealistic, which is why I'm fine with it. Getting married was actually something she wasn't even sure she really wanted even when she got engaged, but later decided she really DID want it. Being a mother was a choice that was stolen from her, so that I thought was better than just idealizing it...but like I said before, oy, the time to talk about that was last series, not this one!

I think Amy getting married also bothers me less because for once someone wrote a couple that gets married and still acts like active participants in the plot. Amy doesn't really become subservient to Rory (then again, he's so much like a little puppy dog that I'm not sure anyone could) and she doesn't actually change how she behaves aside from not kissing the Doctor anymore. I also liked how it altered the TARDIS dynamic, especially since a really common reason for women leaving the TARDIS in the past was finding a beau and leaving to stay with a guy. In Amy's case, it doesn't actually change all that much - she just takes the guy with her.

I think too many people jump at marriage and relationships existing at all and don't pay attention to why they were negative in the past, which was actually because they tended to be portrayed as the one thing a woman *really* needs so she can stop "playing around" at independence.

Soap Opera tropes! That's what Amy's big motivations have seemed like to me. Maybe that's a better way to put it.

Ha, I actually hadn't thought of it like that before. I don't think the ideas on their own are a problem, there's a lot of things that haven't come up with companions and the reality of traveling with the Doctor. The idea of balancing a marriage or a family around it or a pregnant companion are a few of them. Though just pulling them out randomly and shoving them back in the corner again feels like their getting easily distracted.

I like Amy, but I swear nobody gets what to do with her 90% of the time.

I also didn't mention this before, but I'm with the camp hoping the character Jenna-Louise Coleman plays is toned down or very different. Right now, I think the TARDIS needs at least one person on board that isn't snarking at the Doctor over and over, not someone who's going to do it non-stop. Amy, River, and Rory already relentlessly mock the poor guy, I think we can come up with other archetypes for the next one.

[Blatherskite]

Originally Posted by Rebochan

Right now, I think the TARDIS needs at least one person on board that isn't snarking at the Doctor over and over, not someone who's going to do it non-stop. Amy, River, and Rory already relentlessly mock the poor guy, I think we can come up with other archetypes for the next one.

I thought the cattiness was bad enough, but what got me was that it was being played up as flirty. I hate the idea that flirtiness can extend to constant verbals digs and put-downs. It's pigtail-pulling territory and I find it wholly unappealing when played out by supposed grown ups.

[Rebochan]

Beejtronic, I didn't actually get to respond because of the timing of my post being written during yours, so I missed it entirely earlier in the day.

Originally Posted by Beejtronic

However, coming from Moffat it seems more like, "Woe is me, I cannot fulfill my womanly duty to you, oh husband!" both due to poor execution and previous sketchy storylines which handled women's characters poorly (e.g. the last Christmas special, which basically stated how women are so important and amazing, but only due to their capacity to bear young.)

This is actually where my snarkier comment came from, because I again hold that people are trying to read negativity into the Christmas special when it was anything but, and it always fell back to "Moffat hates women." For goodness sake, it was the story of a woman's love for her family, and the love of a parent for their family was a running theme all through S6 with both men AND women beating unbelievable odds due to their physical bonds to their children (and in one case, with an adopted child that wasn't even human). I thought it worked better in the Christmas special than here simply because I genuinely believed in Madge's storyline with her family giving her strength where Amy's tended to fall off except when convenient for drama.

Then Moffat should have presented it that way. If that's what he meant, then that again is perfectly legitimate, but I didn't get any of that from the dialogue. ETA: Also, it never stated that she was outright sterilized. All she said is "whatever they did to me on Demon's Run" with no explanation whatsoever. It's hard to feel for someone's situation when you don't know what the hell it was.

I thought it was pretty straight forward - whatever happened to her at Demon's Run left her sterile afterwards. I mean, we already know they conducted a great deal of work on her to get River from her, so explaining the specifics isn't really necessary when the result is obvious.

They may not have intended to sterilize her, but they certainly didn't care if they did. In essence, not only did she lose the chance to raise her own daughter, she lost the ability to do for the rest of her life. Physically, of course :P

...which is why that should have been in S6 because doing it NOW is pointless! *sigh*

Originally Posted by Blatherskite

I thought the cattiness was bad enough, but what got me was that it was being played up as flirty. I hate the idea that flirtiness can extend to constant verbals digs and put-downs. It's pigtail-pulling territory and I find it wholly unappealing when played out by supposed grown ups.

I've known people who did this. Harmless teasing is okay, what mainly bothered me was there was so much of it.

[Blatherskite]

The excessiveness of it was my main problem. I agree there's a difference between teasing and just being out-and-out rude to somebody for no reason (other than that it's supposed to be flirty).

But the fact that they'd just met also played a part in how abrasive and obnoxious she seemed to me. I got used to the way Amy talks to Rory quite early on because they had an established relationship, which made the teasing seem more loving. Insulting the appearances of total strangers, though? Constantly flirting with strangers despite them showing no interest? Both rude. If the companion is the same character and not just the actor recycled, then I hope all the issues I took with her personality were entirely the result of loneliness and overcompensating as a result of turning into a dalek.

I'd like a genuinely nice companion. Like Rory, but for longer. I also think excessive flirtiness has been done to death. I don't want another River Song, and I like River Song! I know I'm jumping ahead after one episode, so I'm just going to assume she's not going to be like that.

[Rebochan]

I agree. On the other hand, considering that Oswin turned out to be an insane human trapped in a Dalek's body trying to constantly convince herself that she was human, the excessive flirtiness comes off on a rewatch like the desperation of a madwoman.

[Rebochan]

Speaking of the actual character, here's an interview with Moffat about her. Actually, there's not much new info in there except for a picture of the updated 11th Doctor's clothes and Jenna-Lousie Coleman dressed completely differently from Oswin, so she may well be playing a different character type.

[Beejtronic]

If Oswin is the new companion (and I have doubts she will be, especially after reading Rebochan's article), I haven't seen enough of her to really have an opinion yet. One thing I dislike about her, though, is how we're supposed to just accept that she's a genius. C'mon, Moffat, show me all her geniusy things and let me decide whether I think she's a genius or not. Don't just have her proclaim to be a genius and then just expect me to accept it. This seems to be a common problem for Moffat's run. Show, don't tell.

Originally Posted by Rebochan

Beejtronic, I didn't actually get to respond because of the timing of my post being written during yours, so I missed it entirely earlier in the day.

No worries.

This is actually where my snarkier comment came from

But no one had mentioned the Christmas special at that point? Anyway, snark is not really warranted just because someone disagrees with your opinion. I doubt you'd appreciate it if I started this post with "Sigh."

because I again hold that people are trying to read negativity into the Christmas special when it was anything but, and it always fell back to "Moffat hates women."

I assure you, I'm not "trying to read negativity" into anything. I don't have hate-on for Moffat, and I in fact defended him before he took over the show. At that point, I hadn't seen any glaringly obvious misogynistic tendencies in the few episodes he had done and was willing to write off the questionable things he'd said in interviews as taken out of context, or at least poorly worded. Since then, though, I've seen more and more evidence with my own eyes that shows that Moffat thinks very poorly of women. Do I think he hates them? No, I'm sure he doesn't. But he seems to have some very serious underlying assumptions about women and their role in society that I have seen writ large through his writing and through interviews, to the point that I simply cannot ignore it any longer.

For goodness sake, it was the story of a woman's love for her family

If it was all about the love of the parent, then why was the little girl also an acceptable substitute for carrying the alien species? She hadn't had children, all she had was a soon-to-be-functioning womb. If the episode had been written in such a way to make me think that it was another "love cures everything!" episode, I wouldn't have a problem with it, except to say that it's a somewhat corny notion which Moffat has beaten to death.
ETA: Re-reading the transcript, the concept of men and women as "weak" and "strong" respectively based entire on their ability to carry life is pretty insulting to both genders. I imagine Moffat was trying to be flattering to women here, but it really shows his true feelings regarding just what sort of worth he thinks we hold.

I thought it was pretty straight forward - whatever happened to her at Demon's Run left her sterile afterwards. I mean, we already know they conducted a great deal of work on her to get River from her, so explaining the specifics isn't really necessary when the result is obvious.

I probably shouldn't have edited my post, because whether what actually happened was explained or not isn't really relevant.* The point is, nothing in the dialogue told me that Amy was upset because of what happened to her. She specifically says she kicked Rory about because, "I can never give you children." Even the wording is horribly problematic. A woman doesn't give a man a child, they have a child together. If Moffat wanted to convey that Amy was reeling from a traumatic experience, why couldn't he include some hint of that in the dialogue? Why can't Amy be equally upset about not being able to have children, and not just upset because she can't fulfill her duty to Rory? (Presumably if they were trying, she's decided having kids is something she wants. If not, then there's some way bigger problems in their relationship than Amy's infertility.) Why does it have to be framed as, I can't give you the children that you want?

I liked the episode overall, and I actually don't think this issue is a giant deal in the grand scheme of things. But it is just one more thing in a great big line of things that have shown the lack of respect and just general cluelessness that the show has shown towards women in the last few years. Taken apart, perhaps, each one can be dismissed and explained away and downplayed, but eventually the consistent problematic elements build up to a point where they simply can't be ignored. (Though who's to say how much of it would be helped if the character development weren't so shoddy?)


*Though I'd be interested to know how she knows she's infertile and how she knows it's because of what the Demon's Run people did to her. How long have they been trying for a baby? Did some doctor actually tell her that she couldn't have kids for sure? (If they removed her uterus or something that'd be a pretty big hint, of course.) What if Rory just has really low sperm count or a chromosome problem or something? The problem with this is that I know too much about this subject, but again, not really central to the point.

[Xia]

You'd think there would be a really good fertility doctor somewhere in time/the universe that they could go visit.