Classic Companions = Fully Rounded Characters

If we set out from the starting premise that Ian and Barbara were not only the original companions, but also believable, fully rounded characters in their own right; then which of the many companions that were to follow would you class as also being as well developed - and why?

Peri, for a couple of reasons.

The Co=Ordinator wrote:Peri, for a couple of reasons.

*sigh*

And there goes the tone of the entire discussion.

At your service.

*Siggggggggggggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhh*

*looks around imploringly*

Any body out there fancy making, you know, an on-topic post actually related to the question posed in the OP?

*scans the horizon hopfully*

I have answer you original question in an open and honest manner. Your subsequent responses have caused me considerable hurt and grief. I might well have to flounce off for 17 seconds.

Baysan Tulu...is that you...?

Awesome. 10/10.

Ah, that takes me back...

Most Uncool!

I think the answer on some of this is going to depend on a subjective assessment of "believability."

Having said that, I think the team of the Second Doctor, Jaime and Victoria worked for much the same reason Ian and Barbara did: they had a personal history we were privy to, even (in Victoria's case) met some of their family. I'd offer these two in answer to your question, Sid.

Yeah, but what about Peri?

Granted re the relative subjectiveness of of "believability", Patrick. Perhaps I could/should have worded it better.

Having said that, I can see the merits of Jamie and Zoe for the reasons stated. Although for me personally they lack that extra layer of depth displayed by Ian and Barbara. (Although there again, the differences in age/outlook and life experience of the characters might well play into perception of additional depth for I&B).

Thanks for the input - you're given me something to ponder.

The Co=Ordinator wrote:Yeah, but what about Peri?

Peri is perfectly believeable when she's in a swim suit.

Patrick wrote:

The Co=Ordinator wrote:Yeah, but what about Peri?

Peri is perfectly believeable when she's in a swim suit.

*sigh*

There goes the neighbourhood again.

All praise the lowest common denominator!

Is he going to be a series 6 villain?

Alongside the top secret return of the Quarks.

Blimey!!

Sid Seadevil wrote:Granted re the relative subjectiveness of of "believability", Patrick. Perhaps I could/should have worded it better.

Having said that, I can see the merits of Jamie and Zoe for the reasons stated. Although for me personally they lack that extra layer of depth displayed by Ian and Barbara. (Although there again, the differences in age/outlook and life experience of the characters might well play into perception of additional depth for I&B).

Thanks for the input - you're given me something to ponder.

I was actually going more for the Jaime and Victoria pairing.

Zoe is certainly believeable in a Peri sense- she's totally credible when she's wearing a form fitting silver jump suit and leaning over the TARDIS console.

Patrick wrote:I was actually going more for the Jaime and Victoria pairing.

Zoe is certainly believeable in a Peri sense- she's totally credible when she's wearing a form fitting silver jump suit and leaning over the TARDIS console.

And the tones dips even deeper than the neighbourhood did.

I'd say that Wendy Padbury was pretty unbelievable. Still is today actually. The cow. I'll be lucky to look as good as Tony by the time I'm 60.

I'd go for Lalla Ward's Romana as a character you can believe in.

Okay, I think we need a clarification from the thread starter at this point.

Sid, when you say "If we set out from the starting premise that Ian and Barbara were not only the original companions, but also believable, fully rounded characters in their own right..." I need to know which aspect of believeability you're drawing our attention toward.

Was it in how the characters were written? Was it in the apparently back-story and lives they had led before meeting the Doctor (their own personal history)? Was it in how they were portrayed/acted? Was it the character development over their time travelling with the Doctor?

Some answers to these might focus our opinions a little.

Sorry Patrick, the confusion is entirely my fault.

My thinking was almost certainly a tad woolly when the idea for this thread first struck and I simply dashed it off post haste.

To answer your question - I suppose it's a combination of all the qualities you mention that, when taken together together, coalesce into something much more the sum of its parts when it comes to giving the successfully, convincing illusion of bringing more realism to the characters of Ian and Barbara.

Hope that helps.

stanmore wrote:I'd say that Wendy Padbury was pretty unbelievable. Still is today actually. The cow. I'll be lucky to look as good as Tony by the time I'm 60.

Is that almost a compliment?

Crumbs! She does look good, doesn't she?