we know about as much about Amy Pond’s life before the Doctor as we do about Bella Swan’s before Edward and if you don’t see a problem with that kind of storytelling then idek what you’re about

actually we at least get to meet Bella’s parents so… good job there, Moff & co.


 when Stephanie Meyer shows you up on character development · you got problems (via jaxin88)

Not only that, but Stephanie Meyer readily admits she’s not the greatest or most skilled writer. Her fans treat her like she is, but she herself will tell you she’s not. Moffat on the other hand…

Not trying to start something, if you dont like Moffat then whatever its your opinion, but are we all forgetting that the crack in time “deleted” her parents and then after the Big Bang 2 we do see them at the wedding or before the wedding… Like yeah its not much but.. I havent done a rewatch in a little but thats what I remember..

No, we’re not forgetting that. It’s true that S5 did not leave a lot of room for her parents. They could have had some material at the wedding. Less Doctor dancing for the lulz and more character development, you feel me? But beyond that, we had plenty of time to meet Rory’s dad in S7. There’s no reason there couldn’t have been more from Amy’s parents. I can tell you much more about Renee and Charlie Swan than I ever could Amy’s parents. I don’t even know their first names! (Wiki’s telling me they’re Augustus and Tabetha. They were name dropped at the wedding once and never mentioned again).

As I said in my tags, however, it’s not so much that we needed to meet her parents specifically (i.e. that is not THE thing we needed to know her better). Her character development leaves a lot to be desired. She deserved better. I could love Amy Pond if I’d only had the chance to know her. All I know about Amy Pond, I know relatively. That is, I know how she relates to the Doctor and how she relates to Rory and how she relates to River (to a lesser extent than to her relationships with the men). I don’t know a lot about her.

Yeah I totally get what youre saying. I like Amy and have honestly just kinda created my own headcacon for her to get by hah. Moffat is not the best at character development, by far. I still love the show and dont agree with some of the things said about Moffat, but I get that theyre just opinions and I have my own about Moffat. But yeah. I get you. I mean I honestly skimmed through the Twilight books and dont remember shit about Bellas parents but then again I dont remember half the books..  But Amys character development could be far better. I think if RTD and Moffat worked together thatd be cool cause I do like Moffats story lines, but thats just me.

Reblogging as link to spare people’s dashes.

It doesn’t matter if you weren’t invested in Bella’s parents. The point is that the material is there. It doesn’t matter that you only skimmed the books either. In fact, that’s kind of the point. Twilight’s not exactly a masterpiece itself, but it was full of more character development than anything the Ponds got.

Even some minor characters are more developed than the Ponds. See: The Emily/Sam/Leah debacle. It was only there to reinforce the unrequited love/Imprinting theme, yet they got full backgrounds! In the movies, it’s far less significantly prominent, but even so, you get the feeling that the author (screenwriter, what have you) knows everything about these characters.

And yes, y’know, Moffat’s Who comes so close to being something great sometimes, and then completely drops the ball. And then smashes it with a hammer. Then does a time reboot so the ball never existed. It’s endlessly frustrating.

Just one example of what I’m talking about? Victory of the Daleks. It’s kind of bullshit how this actually deactivated the bomb in Dr. Bracewell, but it’s still a pretty good message: that love is greater than loss (even when that loss was of love) and that humanity/emotions > Daleks/hatred

But then it’s actually about unrequited love.

And implied to parallel Amy’s (completely squicky tbh) crush on the Doctor her completely romanticized version of the Doctor.

You see? So close. So. Close.

I don’t deny the man has some talent. (I don’t think anyone does? Criticisms on his writing stem much more from intersectional discussions. i.e. gender, race, class, sexuality etc.) I have no beef with his story lines at face value. But that’s just the thing. It’s all flash and no substance. It’s like the pictures of the value meals at McDonald’s vs. what you actually get.  They promise great things, then deliver something sub-par. Now, if you’ve never had a meal at a 5-star restaurant, McDonald’s might be good eating to you (and sure, even the finest palate will go for a Big Mac once in a while), but I’ve just been far too spoiled by the likes of RTD and JK Rowling, the Gordon Ramseys of writing.