Beasts_a_Snarling - THE KANDYMAN'S APPRENTICE
"Who can make sunrise! Sprinkle it with dew! The Kandyman - the Kandyman can!"
Well.... That was more Series 5 for me personally....
1 day, 7 hours ago on Top 12 Best Written Russell T Davies Characters
Nope. I disagree. They'd most likely ask the Master, as the Doctor wouldn't be the daredevil he was...
1 day, 13 hours ago on Who and What Would the Doctor be without the TARDIS?
It's actually a personal favourite of mine. I highly recommend it. I'm not kidding.
2 days, 3 hours ago on Could Gallifrey Be in Omega’s Dimension?
Actually he wouldn't because that particular face was chosen for him by the Time Lords when the Second Doctor was put on trial. He'd probably look very different.
2 days, 3 hours ago on Who and What Would the Doctor be without the TARDIS?
My master is planning many delicious treats for the Doctor..... Muhahahaha!
3 days, 5 hours ago on Could Gallifrey Be in Omega’s Dimension?
Oh..... Please be true. I would kneel down to Moffat if this happened.....
3 days, 7 hours ago on Could Gallifrey Be in Omega’s Dimension?
3 days, 8 hours ago on Could Gallifrey Be in Omega’s Dimension?
They are us - what we are destined to become and that's what makes them terrifying.
3 days, 12 hours ago on Best of 2014 Awards: The Winners (Part 2)
Well.... I suppose that's a good point, but even so, they still suck. It's a shame to see this happen to my favourite monster.....
4 days, 3 hours ago on Little Boxes Will Make You Angry: Doctor Who and Transphobia
But with Moffat, there are characters to support this. For Whitehouse there isn't. Look at Clara, River, and Amy. That makes it concrete then a few lines of dialogue yielding multiple interpretations.
Calling someone a transphobe can be taken as offensive.
4 days, 4 hours ago on Little Boxes Will Make You Angry: Doctor Who and Transphobia
". In light of Greeks Bearing Gifts it is clear that Mr. Whithouse was not previously a man of good character, and indeed was actually a bit of an arse."
Don't you think that's a bit extreme? To judge a man one dimensionally like that? In black and white? It's just like saying I respectfully think your a f**ker. Does that not offend you?
I doubt that anyone here meant disrespect. Everyone has complemented the skilled writing and clarified their comments. If they meant to be rude, they'd respond with rudeness instead of trying to say otherwise.
Really? Blatantly calling Whitehouse a transphobe is very insensitive in my opinion. Imagine how he'd feel if he read it to discover that he was singled out to be judged and arugebly, mocked. Why wasn't RTD or Moffat given the short end of the stick? Why did it have to Whitehouse? Not only that, the writer here deliberately chose to write that Whitehouse's script was boring. This had nothing to do with the topic. Why would she bring it up?
Why wouldn't it be? We're not always right. We need others to help us truly decide.
But to be fair basing ideas on vague bits of dialogue and calling someone a transphobe based on it is an assumption and an insult on Toby Whitehouse's person.
She's biased. We're all biased. And that's ok. Why can't we point that out?
4 days, 5 hours ago on Little Boxes Will Make You Angry: Doctor Who and Transphobia
Erm... But she did bring up how boring she found ATCM as well as brought up the idea that she found Whitehouse a transphobe. The fact that she singles him out and brings up something unrelated to the article makes it look like she has an agenda. It's unfair and uncivil as well as immaterial.
People are only reacting this way because it's as if the article blatantly attacked writers in searching for a transphobic agenda. This makes the writer seem like she WANTS to find an agenda. But, I suppose we do have different interpretations of an event. And the best writing always creates controversy - one of the reasons why I loved Dark Water.
Dude, we're all biased it's not a crime or anything....
But that does not make it ok. What are you trying to say?
But blatantly calling Whitehouse a transphobe based on vague bits of dialogue is an accusation and an insult not criticism. In fact, the author assums the role of a judge as if mocking the writers. Again, just how I felt while reading it.
I think it's pretty clear that she's having a go at Whitehouse when she brings up how bored she was with ATCM when it has NOTHING to do with the article.
But does that condone doing the same to others? Or is Moffat exempt because he's holier than thou?
"Nice article, well written, but seeing things that aren't there. Cassandra was vain because she was vain. I never took the "when I was a boy" as an accurate description of her gender any more than I took the ipod as an accurate description of the juke box or Tainted Love as "an old world classic'"
"I never took..." Lara never said explicitly that the authors was wrong.
I don't see that. We're all biased sometimes - it's how we are - and people are just pointing that out. I highly doubt that people mean any offense.
And for Martha it wasn't?
But she did have a go at Toby Whitehouse by bringing up things not even related to the article.
She didn't even tear up like Amy or Rose or Clara when she lost 11. That is being needy.
Rose was, but Martha was willing to let go.
There's a difference between character and background. And this is where all there characters are formed making them the same. Look at a particular scene from each character showcasing different emotions and sides to them. They are all vaguely the same. Character is how people react to certain events. It is not necceasarily where they are coming from. You build a character from a simple scene. And all the scenes of Clara, River, and Amy follow the same pattern.
How are they not being civil?
But the writer herself is incredibly harsh on Whitehouse. People here are just questioning that. Is there anything wrong with that?
4 days, 6 hours ago on Little Boxes Will Make You Angry: Doctor Who and Transphobia
Arguing against it.
It's definitely not sexism. But I see why many people think so. If he wants to stop people thinking this, then he needs to learn to write different characters instead of disguising the emptiness with cheap banter.
His woman characters are too needy. Look at River, Amy, and Clara. They all follow the patterns of being flirtatious, feisty, and needy on the inside.
And vulnerable when you peel off the layers? Look at Wedding. It's the stereotypical female. All his characters are like this and it's very worrying that he can't write them any differently.
That's very generic. And the fact that her whole character is a contradiction tears up any genuiness she has. Yes, we're full of contradictions, but it doesn't dominate is in a yes, no, yes, no manner like Clara. The duality is overpowering to the point that it's jarring. Not only that, she looks out of place in both locations. Even at home, she just stands at the back of shots making soufflés. She has nothing to do that expands her character. And in addition, didn't we see this struggle albeit done better before? With Amy? Making a choice between home life (Rory) and Doctor life?
Yes, Jenna Coleman is a very talented actress, but it's very hard to turn in a good performance when you get a script that can't match your skill.
But, what I found odd is that there's this and then there's her falling in love with the Doctor and being willing to save him and complement him every 5 seconds when traveling. This tells me that Moffat isn't really sure who Clara is. And the fact that he resolves this in Series 8, tells me that it took him at least 3 years to figure it out.
But it also establishes her as someone not really interested in traveling.
All we got was background in Rings of Akhaten, nothing comprehensive. And it appears to me, that Moffat was too lazy to come up with a background in Bells, so he just put Cross on the job.
But isn't Oodkind entitled to have his opinion on the article and the attitude of the writer? This is a discussion after all....
Yes. Like every companion does, It's practically a benchmark. I don't know what makes her different in the context of Seres 7. It's like she's doing things because the plot demands it, not because she is a realistic human being. I don't think her generically saving the Doctor tells us anything about her as a real person.
The way you talk about Whitehouse.... Did he break into your house and hold you at gunpoint? I know his lines may be BORDERING on transphobic, but it doesn't mean that you should go all out hating him on just a few vague lines of dialogue. I know this is a sensitive topic, I understand that, but I am seriously bewildered on why you'd talk about him as if he killed your parents.
I found Series 7 Clara quite a stereotypical female companion almost bordering on sexist. In fact, she wouldn't be out of place in Classic Who. Clara was more of a muse rather than a companion. Instead of doing anything, she'd just hang out in the back of shots waiting to inspire the Doctor or complement him. And not to mention, the fact that she had to be rescued all the time. (Bells of St. John and Journey being my prime examples.) But I think Moffat realized this and kind of rectified the issue in Series 8. But it still bothers me and definitely ruins my enjoyment of even the good episodes in Series 7.
4 days, 7 hours ago on Little Boxes Will Make You Angry: Doctor Who and Transphobia
Besides, I don't think the evidence is comprehensive enough. It's very vague. In my opinion, the Cassandra thing is way more dangerous in it's portrayal then the vague dialogue of Whitehouse.