Talk:Brooke (The Lady in the Lake): Difference between revisions

From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
m (→‎Companion: fixing autocorrect error in my message (not changing message, just fixing what amounts to a typo))
Line 16: Line 16:
:::: Yes, that's true, and I think that is a very good argument in favour of her companion status, however I feel she should be considered a companion even if this weren't the case. That said, I am not familiar with the convention for such determinations.  
:::: Yes, that's true, and I think that is a very good argument in favour of her companion status, however I feel she should be considered a companion even if this weren't the case. That said, I am not familiar with the convention for such determinations.  
::::Anyway, are there any objections to this? I know it was OncomingStorm12th who originally reverted their companion status, but we haven't had any input from them on this issue yet. [[User:Danochy|Danochy]] [[User talk:Danochy|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 01:39, June 28, 2019 (UTC)
::::Anyway, are there any objections to this? I know it was OncomingStorm12th who originally reverted their companion status, but we haven't had any input from them on this issue yet. [[User:Danochy|Danochy]] [[User talk:Danochy|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 01:39, June 28, 2019 (UTC)
: So, for benefit of future readers of this discussion, I'll link to the [https://www.facebook.com/thebigfinish/posts/2598145690214597?comment_id=2598982303464269&reply_comment_id=2599619343400565&comment_tracking=%7B%22tn%22%3A%22R%22%7D Facebook post] which originated my removal of her status as a companion. Even though there isn't really a policy towards this and, in many cases there is a clear consensus on who's a companion and who's not, it seems that this isn't one. I completly agree that the narrative supports her being a companion and all, but when the producers of the stories themselves come foward and say: "River is not a companion so Brooke would not be applicable either", I think we ''could'' reconsider. After all, we consider [[Heather Threadstone]] a companion based solely on a behind the scenes comment from Colin Baker.
: And I agree there are several instances of "companion turned enemy", from BF stories in itself: [[Mathew Sharpe]] and [[Daniel Hopkins]] for example. All in all, I wouldn't be opposed to returning both Brooke and River to the companion categories, but if even Big Finish don't consider them to be companions, why would we? [[User:OncomingStorm12th|OncomingStorm12th]] [[User talk:OncomingStorm12th|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 14:17, July 28, 2019 (UTC)

Revision as of 14:17, 28 July 2019

Main Actor

I’ve listed Nina Toussaint-White as the main actress to play Brooke because she’s the latest incarnation but I don’t know what the policy is on who is considered the main voice actor. Joanna Horton plays Brooke for the majority of My Dinner with Andrew, all of A Requiem for the Doctor and a small cameo in The Lady in the Lake. Whereas Nina only appears near the end of My Dinner with Andrew and then in all of the Furies. Basically I just want to know whether the actress who appeared most in the role or the actress who currently inhabits the role is considered to be the main one. SarahJaneFan

Going by the Master's main page, it appears the first actor to portray them gets to be listed as the main actor. Snivystorm 20:40, January 25, 2018 (UTC)

Companion

Since when do we care about out-of-universe sources? She meets the criteria required to be considered a companion of the Fifth Doctor - so why is the word of Big Finish's social media team more valid than the fact she travelled with the Fifth Doctor for a period of time both before and after we first see her in The Lady in the Lake (audio story)? Danochy 11:55, June 26, 2019 (UTC)

Companion status is a tricky thing to determine because there are no criteria as defined in-universe. Shambala108 14:19, June 26, 2019 (UTC)
I would place her as a companion. In the story where she is introduced she's a companion from the start, even if she does turn out to be a plant. The whole point of her character is introducing a companion River hasn't heard of before, which ergo makes her a companion. --Revan\Talk 17:36, June 26, 2019 (UTC)
She wouldn't be the first companion to secretly have it out for the Doctor. I agree, she’s very much introduced as such, and before her plot is revealed she and River talk about the experience of being a companion to the Doctor. There’s enough been a whole subplot where each is trying to undermine the other, ostensibly out of jealousy, and Brooke is said to have been travelling with the Doctor for a while, filling a role which she claims she's afraid she'll get replaced in by River. As far as the Fifth Doctor is concerned throughout her introduction, Brooke is his companion.
× SOTO (//) 19:42, June 26, 2019 (UTC)
Yes, that's true, and I think that is a very good argument in favour of her companion status, however I feel she should be considered a companion even if this weren't the case. That said, I am not familiar with the convention for such determinations.
Anyway, are there any objections to this? I know it was OncomingStorm12th who originally reverted their companion status, but we haven't had any input from them on this issue yet. Danochy 01:39, June 28, 2019 (UTC)
So, for benefit of future readers of this discussion, I'll link to the Facebook post which originated my removal of her status as a companion. Even though there isn't really a policy towards this and, in many cases there is a clear consensus on who's a companion and who's not, it seems that this isn't one. I completly agree that the narrative supports her being a companion and all, but when the producers of the stories themselves come foward and say: "River is not a companion so Brooke would not be applicable either", I think we could reconsider. After all, we consider Heather Threadstone a companion based solely on a behind the scenes comment from Colin Baker.
And I agree there are several instances of "companion turned enemy", from BF stories in itself: Mathew Sharpe and Daniel Hopkins for example. All in all, I wouldn't be opposed to returning both Brooke and River to the companion categories, but if even Big Finish don't consider them to be companions, why would we? OncomingStorm12th 14:17, July 28, 2019 (UTC)