bobod
Chancellery Guard
Likes: 2,759
|
Post by bobod on Oct 31, 2018 18:02:27 GMT
There's always the possibility they didn't want to detract from the initial announcement of the all-female line-up by including a "the entire Paternoster Gang is in it" sort of thing. If you look back through the thread, mark687 linked to something that probably gives a good indication as to whether or not Strax is involved in this release (for people who don't wish to know, they can avoid his Spoiler post, but for those who do want to know conclusive proof of his inclusion/exclusion it is almost certainly contained in that Spoiler ). But!Sometime in the future!Will we actually get a "Paternoster gang" Boxset? Bobod tells us that only 2 out of the 3 can ever appear together and he is a man in the know! I guess time will tell. No I'm not, at least not in this instance. I'm only quoting what I seem to remember BF saying.
|
|
|
Post by Audio Watchdog on Oct 31, 2018 18:11:17 GMT
But!Sometime in the future!Will we actually get a "Paternoster gang" Boxset? Bobod tells us that only 2 out of the 3 can ever appear together and he is a man in the know! I guess time will tell. No I'm not, at least not in this instance. I'm only quoting what I seem to remember BF saying. I think those were Moffat's rules during his run and just after. If all three are appearing in an audio, it would seem that the TV spin-off ship has sailed and those rules have been relaxed.
|
|
|
Post by kinghumble on Oct 31, 2018 20:08:33 GMT
From a business-perspective, the timing makes this an interesting spin on the "Worlds of Doctor Who" sample-pack. A way to tie into the feminist-hype surrounding 13 in lieu of access to Whittaker herself, aiming to give feminist-fans a sample-pack of Big Finish's ranges. Hence, I think, the emphasis on NuWho characters in the marketing; this is aimed at 13's audience, and the expectation is they may be drawn by - and then stay for - River, the modern UNIT, and the Paternosters.
I would absolutely expect a Paternoster Gang range to follow to capitalize on this fan-base, unless the experiment bombs (which, given the level of excitement observed here and on Facebook for Paternoster material, I wouldn't expect)
This leaves me with three thoughts,
1) What kinds of mental-knots would the alt-right brigade need to tie themselves into, to object to feminist-capitalism at work?
2) While I enjoyed Moffat's work overall, his "feminist" characters are fully critique-worthy from feminist perspectives, on many levels. Big Finish has a history of retooling and reworking flawed characters very successfully, so I'm inclined to expect this overtly feminist product will prove artistically satisfying. But will the feminist audience this product baits really find Moffat's characters much of a draw?
3) Question 2 aside, this is absolutely a worthwhile production purely for increasing the diversity of Big Finish's behind-the-scenes talent, as other posts above have discussed! Diversity fuels creativity, and getting more female producers, directors, and authors geared up to produce more at Big Finish will be fantastic
|
|
|
Post by kinghumble on Oct 31, 2018 20:28:21 GMT
Also, I write the above with the caveat that I, personally, don't much enjoy "sample packs" and I've avoided the Worlds of Doctor Who for that reason... I'll probably be checking this project out because I'm a fan of all the characters so far announced so I expect I'll enjoy each individual story. But I'm keeping my fingers crossed that it's four stand-alone stories, rather than a tied-together wobbly series of four loosely connected chapters where the characters just pass a problem ahead to whoever's next-in-line like some fake game of "hot-potato" :/
|
|
|
Post by tuigirl on Oct 31, 2018 20:32:32 GMT
From a business-perspective, the timing makes this an interesting spin on the "Worlds of Doctor Who" sample-pack. A way to tie into the feminist-hype surrounding 13 in lieu of access to Whittaker herself, aiming to give feminist-fans a sample-pack of Big Finish's ranges. Hence, I think, the emphasis on NuWho characters in the marketing; this is aimed at 13's audience, and the expectation is they may be drawn by - and then stay for - River, the modern UNIT, and the Paternosters. I would absolutely expect a Paternoster Gang range to follow to capitalize on this fan-base, unless the experiment bombs (which, given the level of excitement observed here and on Facebook for Paternoster material, I wouldn't expect) This leaves me with three thoughts, 1) What kinds of mental-knots would the alt-right brigade need to tie themselves into, to object to feminist-capitalism at work? 2) While I enjoyed Moffat's work overall, his "feminist" characters are fully critique-worthy from feminist perspectives, on many levels. Big Finish has a history of retooling and reworking flawed characters very successfully, so I'm inclined to expect this overtly feminist product will prove artistically satisfying. But will the feminist audience this product baits really find Moffat's characters much of a draw? 3) Question 2 aside, this is absolutely a worthwhile production purely for increasing the diversity of Big Finish's behind-the-scenes talent, as other posts above have discussed! Diversity fuels creativity, and getting more female producers, directors, and authors geared up to produce more at Big Finish will be fantastic When I read the words "feminist hype" and "feminist fans" the hairs on the back of my neck stand on end. Especially in a post emphasizing that these are all Moffats "feminist" characters (and you rightly acknowledge the issues of Moffat and his FEMALE characters. Female. NOT feminist)
Sorry, I am just sick of having every tiny bit of escapism shoved into the arms of some agenda or politics. And what do you even mean with "feminist"? Is this a term like "normal" now?
Do you mean the p*ss* warriors who hate men? Or everyone having two XX chromosomes? Sorry, but we are called women. We are not automatically "feminists".
I myself do not see myself as a feminist, but you can bet your a$$ that I will stand up for myself and kick some if needed.
I am against extremism in any form, and buzzword rhetoric always raises my blood pressure.
Yes, I agree Big Finish is riding the wave with the 13 Doctor. Do I think they appeal to feminists? Taking it you mean p*ss* warriors and not "normal" females (what the hell am I, then??), nah, no way Jose.
I do not think they are much into Who or Sci Fi. I am in several geek groups in real life as well as on the WWW, and yes, I have female geek friends, and so far, I have not personally met someone I would call a real "feminist" if we talk what meaning was a few years ago before the whole thing exploded.
I also have not met any p*ss* warriors, because they are a red flag to me as are NAZIS and animal abusers.
I think this whole overblown "feminist" buzz word has just been blown out of proportion and has long since lost it`s meaning and is just thrown around like SJW. As if fighting for social justice was something bad or dirty.
Sorry. Female geek strongly opposed to being put in some box speaking her mind. I apologize for some strong wording.
|
|
|
Post by kinghumble on Oct 31, 2018 20:39:06 GMT
Ok, the point you want to make is fair - but I, a male, consider myself a feminist
I'll have more to offer in a moment but I wanted to say that before I turn to reading your post in the detail it deserves, to give a thoughtful reply
|
|
|
Post by tuigirl on Oct 31, 2018 20:46:46 GMT
Ok, the point you want to make is fair - but I, a male, consider myself a feminist I'll have more to offer in a moment but I wanted to say that before I turn to reading your post in the detail it deserves, to give a thoughtful reply And I apologize if I came across too strongly, but I have seen too many toxic posts on social media where "feminist" was used as a curse word so I am a bit sensitized.
I also assume you are a feminist in the old meaning of the word... from reading your post.
Anyways, from my geek meetings and chats about the new series 11, people around here (Vienna) just accept it and generally are very positive towards it. Nobody really made any negative comments, and also nobody went all "revolution" or "breaking glass ceilings" over it. It is just like, yeah, it is great, I like it, nice and colourful and good life like characters.
I just do not get any "feminist" vibe from people here at all. That's all. Or maybe people are just afraid of me, which, me being weird, is also always a possibility.
|
|
|
Post by kinghumble on Oct 31, 2018 21:15:14 GMT
When I read the words "feminist hype" and "feminist fans" the hairs on the back of my neck stand on end. Especially in a post emphasizing that these are all Moffats "feminist" characters (and you rightly acknowledge the issues of Moffat and his FEMALE characters. Female. NOT feminist) Yeah, the way I wrote out my thoughts above was clumsy, and should've been more specific - I don't think female characters automatically equal feminist characters, though certainly the language I used above can be interpreted that way. The point I failed to be clear on is my belief that, 1) Moffat actually wrote several good female characters, but, 2) His range of personalities proved somewhat limited, especially when, 3) He attempted to offer his ideas of feminism through the characters he had created. So I don't quite agree with you that Moffat's female characters were the problem; my personal view is Moffat's conception of feminism is fairly shallow, likely due to an insufficiency of introspection. I do think he had good intentions, but that's obviously not always good enough. So, to my view, it's Moffat's feminism depicted in his characters that needed improvement - that's what I meant by feminist characters, though I should've found better language. I know quite a few Star Trek fans, male and female, who gave Doctor Who on Netflix a try a few years ago and couldn't get past the cheeziness of Eccleston fighting mannequins in the first episode. They're telling me that they're curious about the show now and want to check it out because they want a refuge from the House that Donald built.
They see the strong feminist message 13's casting sends as a comfort. They see it as mainstream culture telling them, "Yeah, the Alt-Right have taken the White House, but your values are still respected by our production. Your values will not be buried. The Alt-Right haven't won everywhere. Come have fun with us for a few hours." Sounds like legitimate escapism to me! Well, speaking as a male, I do see myself as a feminist, so no, I don't use the word to rescribe p*ss* warriors. I was raised by two feminists, and I could offer examples from my childhood of my father taking feminism more seriously than my mother. Given that context, I do indeed consider the term feminist to be quite normal. I'm having difficulty understanding what you mean by "a term like 'normal' now?" so I can't really respond to this point any further, but I hope this helps give context for the time being? Happy to discuss further if you can clarify your own meaning? It deeply saddens me that the alt-right brigade have successfully demonized feminism to the point that it can be interpreted as extremist, or buzzword rhetoric. I'm not upset at all that you and I are crossing swords over this; I think you're angry about exactly the same factors that sadden me. I can only really repeat myself that I have many SJW friends who're also into Star Trek, Star Wars, Dungeons and Dragons, etc. And some of them have been into Doctor Who for a while, but others have, up-til-now, given it a pass. I think it is a perfectly valid business strategy for Big Finish to attempt to capitalize on their new interest via a feminist strategy. I don't honestly even know what a p*ss* warrior is. As a heterosexual, white male, I have always felt totally and completely safe and accepted by my SJW friends from all backgrounds. I suspect you and I are coming at this from pretty much the same place, with the same values, and only small differences in our perspectives? So... Yeah. Argument averted?
|
|
|
Post by tuigirl on Oct 31, 2018 21:58:34 GMT
Ah, I LOVE this forum. You know what I love most? That I meet like- minded people here that are willing to "cross swords" with me.
And I totally agree with you, we are completely on the same page. No arguement even necessary.
We just were both using unclear wording and that caused a misunderstanding.
But I still will answer to your points- I am a HUGE fan of Moffat. I love most of his characters and monsters.
I am also aware that some people have expressed their displeasure (to say it diplomatically) concerning some of the female characters he created, like Amy and River. These people call these ladies one- dimensional, overly sexual, a teenage boy's wet dream and so on.
I LOVED them from the beginning- and I actually felt a bit put off when I did read these critizisms and even felt a bit of guilt since I loved such "sexist" (another buzz word!) characters. Am I a traitor to my own gender? Maybe this was one of the reasons I reacted so strongly to your post.
Because I had previous emotional baggage. I myself do not see myself as a traitor of my gender and will proudly attend Comic Con in 2 weeks time dressed up as River, pistol and handcuffs at the ready.
I wonder if anyone will challenge me?
I was raised by very conservative parents (as in a bit backwards religious country people, not political conservatives... my dad is a socialist) and feminism never was a topic. I still learned how to stand up for myself (I mostly learned it the hard way) and sometimes I still react in ways that run contrary to what you would call feminism.
As I said, I only recognized the sexism in the Amy character after it was pointed out to me. Yeah, maybe I am just a bit slow.
Although- and this is a thought that might come important further down- my dad is a real life socialist and he took us kids to socialist rallies and we were adressed as "comrades" and were given red flags to wave about.
As for spoiling my escapism... I am very saddened and upset just like you about all the trenched being dug all over the internet and all over fandoms. I think we completely are on the same page here concerning all these issues. Just look at how easily I got triggered- it is a good thing I keep away from social media and certain other forums at the moment otherwise I would just take part in watching the internet burn and that seriously would spoil my fun.
Yes, I agree, we are angry about the same thing!!!
Haha, funny. I am a big Trekkie, and I was first introduced to Doctor Who in the early Tennant era by my flatmates. Back then I called the series "cheap looking b*llsh*t with some crazy clueless guy clowing about on the screen". I was basically forced to watch, there was no escape and there were always cookies, plus, back then I lived in NZ and the heater was in the living room, so if I wanted freshly baked cookies and warmth, I had to endure cheap looking television with some silly crazy guy.
To this day, I am not very fond of the RTD era and Eccleston and Tennant.
What made me change my mind? Nostalgia mainly. Feeling nostalgic for those cozy TV evenings with my flatmates who later became some of my best ever friends.
I had no political agenda, I was just looking for some light entertainment and escapism.
Doctor Who is an aquired taste. It really is. It grows on you. Just ask the more than 50Gb of Big Finish on my hard drive.
Now, come to think about it... concerning political agenda. Some of the things the 12th Doctor says could come right out of the mouth of my dad. So yeah, maybe it is all in my subconscious. Not that my dad would ever voluntarily watch the series, I did show a few episodes to my mum and my dad just came in and called it "Cheap looking b*llsh*t"...
I can see a pattern emerging....
Well, I have met a few toxic literally man hating females, I had those in my class at school and at university (even challenging the teachers in class). They were real extremists and as likely to attack me as a traitor as they were likely to attack anyone with a Y chromosome for just looking at them. This is what I call "P*SS* Warriors". I think these are the "feminists" the alt-right is always blabbering on about and see them as much as a danger as the ANTIFA.
But neither are these people "feminists" nor are the ANTIFA "social justice warriors".
So as with our little mis-understanding, the definition of words has become very important in these times. And the mis-use of certain terms as buzz words damages more than it helps. I a huge way.
Come to think about it, maybe I am already a feminist, without even knowing, avoiding the term, just because I am afraid that I get put into the same box as such ladies mentioned above.
See, you got me thinking there.
Maybe bring some cookies next time, and you might just win me over.
|
|
|
Post by randomcomments on Nov 1, 2018 3:48:54 GMT
But anyway, this is an interesting idea for a release. There was a post a ways up expressing some concern that this feels like a gimmicky 'the female range' approach, but I don't think I agree.
And has anyone ever accused the vast, vast majority of releases which are written, directed, produced, starring, scored and catered by men of being a gimmicky 'male range'?
No need to rehash the stats but it would takes years of nothing but releases by women to come close to any sort of parity.
This is wildly unfair. Nobody's upset that women are making these, or in them. Some people are uncomfortable with the idea of having a specifically "female range", because it might appear to make "women" a genre on the side, so there are "stories" and then there are "girl stories." This is, specifically and as advertised, a set to celebrate the female characters, rather than just a "crossover boxset" which happens to be primarily-female. To the best of my knowledge, none of the previous BF releases were made for the purpose of being, nor advertised as, a "male range" nor a celebration of the "men of Doctor Who." (To be clear, I don't want a "Nineteenth of November" followup set. I wouldn't riot if a boxset should come out which didn't have women involved, mostly because I just want to hear Eight with a new male companion at some point, but that (being all male) wouldn't be a selling point, and it is good to hear from people of all sorts of different perspectives and backgrounds. I don't feel that there's some "war on men" or underrepresentaion of men in Doctor Who, and am glad BF is hiring more women, and you know, more people in general than the like four writers they use for everything. I just think there are reasonable arguments from people who have questions or concerns about the specifics of this.) (Also, I wish these titles wouldn't act like the Classic Series didn't exist, as the other recent "Women of Who" titles mostly did. And it i a bit strange that so many of these "specific celebrations of women" titles are coming out in various franchises. It does seem like corporations discovering a bit too late, and all at once, that women sell, and wanting to be loud about their virtues. But that might not be fair to BF, particularly given how female-led, if on only one side of the microphone, basically every spinoff range is.) (Also, I'll probably get it at some point when I have funds, so I'm not actually mad or anything.)
|
|
|
Post by tuigirl on Nov 1, 2018 8:23:32 GMT
This is wildly unfair. Nobody's upset that women are making these, or in them. Some people are uncomfortable with the idea of having a specifically "female range", because it might appear to make "women" a genre on the side, so there are "stories" and then there are "girl stories." This is, specifically and as advertised, a set to celebrate the female characters, rather than just a "crossover boxset" which happens to be primarily-female. To the best of my knowledge, none of the previous BF releases were made for the purpose of being, nor advertised as, a "male range" nor a celebration of the "men of Doctor Who." (To be clear, I don't want a "Nineteenth of November" followup set. I wouldn't riot if a boxset should come out which didn't have women involved, mostly because I just want to hear Eight with a new male companion at some point, but that (being all male) wouldn't be a selling point, and it is good to hear from people of all sorts of different perspectives and backgrounds. I don't feel that there's some "war on men" or underrepresentaion of men in Doctor Who, and am glad BF is hiring more women, and you know, more people in general than the like four writers they use for everything. I just think there are reasonable arguments from people who have questions or concerns about the specifics of this.) (Also, I wish these titles wouldn't act like the Classic Series didn't exist, as the other recent "Women of Who" titles mostly did. And it i a bit strange that so many of these "specific celebrations of women" titles are coming out in various franchises. It does seem like corporations discovering a bit too late, and all at once, that women sell, and wanting to be loud about their virtues. But that might not be fair to BF, particularly given how female-led, if on only one side of the microphone, basically every spinoff range is.) (Also, I'll probably get it at some point when I have funds, so I'm not actually mad or anything.) True gender equality will only every exist when we do not need to discuss these things anymore. When it is business as usual to have as many males and females in a story or writing a story as necessary and nobody bats an eyelid either way.
Until then, one side will always feel left out.
As I said before, with the new female Doctor, of course BF will try to ride the wave, they would be stupid if they did not. Maybe they are even antoning for publishing something like "Exile", who knows ?
And what would be actually wrong with a "Men's day" or "Father's day" publication? I actually would also buy it most likely and I also would not feel attacked or suppressed by it. Why should I? It could be really cool, also. Especially if it involves the 8th Doctor.
And I agree with you, Classic Characters are getting the short end of the stick here. But that might be that there is a larger influx of NuWho fans (like me) coming in and this is what sells (but of course I am now on the journey to discover what Classic was all about). It will be a good jumping on point for discovering the other ranges in BF.
You bring up an interesting fact- many spinoffs are led by a female character. Why is that I wonder? Are there more female characters around? Are the female characters more interesting? If that is the case, would it be a problem to write and create more interesting male characters? Are females better actors than writers?
|
|
|
Post by TimPendragon on Nov 1, 2018 9:46:28 GMT
You bring up an interesting fact- many spinoffs are led by a female character. Why is that I wonder? Are there more female characters around? Are the female characters more interesting? If that is the case, would it be a problem to write and create more interesting male characters? Are females better actors than writers?
Considering that most of these spin-offs focus on former companions, and female companions outnumber male companions by what, 4 to 1, it doesn't seem that odd to me. Benny, Sarah Jane, Romana and Leela, Charley, Graceless, Vienna, Kate & Osgood, River, Jenny, Lady Christina, Missy, presumably Vastra and Jenny coming at some point, and the remote possibility of Ashildir/Me and Clara... it's sheer volume.
Other than Jack, Jago & Litefoot, I don't think any male companions or pseudo-companions have gotten their own full-fledged spin-offs. Apart from companions, you've got The War Master, but that's about it, I think. Even the Brig was just a guest star in the main range and first run of UNIT stories. But then, what other male companion would really warrant their own spin-off? Nardole, could, I think, but something like that's still a ways off. Rory would, in my book, but it'd be difficult to do, unless you're telling stories about his 2000 years guarding the Pandorica, and that would probably be a very hard sell. I wouldn't mind hearing stories about Turlough after he's left the Doctor, but I can't see that selling at all. You could possibly do it with Harry, but that would require a recast. Who's left among the male companions that anyone would care about? Jamie? Adric? Mickey?
All that being said, I'd be the first to buy a VNA-style solo series for Ace, either during her time in Spacefleet, or as Time's Vigilante. Also... who wouldn't kill for a Frobisher series?
|
|
lidar2
Castellan
You know, now that you mention it, I actually do rather like Attack of the Cybermen ...
Likes: 5,813
|
Post by lidar2 on Nov 1, 2018 9:57:08 GMT
You bring up an interesting fact- many spinoffs are led by a female character. Why is that I wonder? Are there more female characters around? Are the female characters more interesting? If that is the case, would it be a problem to write and create more interesting male characters? Are females better actors than writers? I wouldn't mind hearing stories about Turlough after he's left the Doctor,
So long as it is not an audio adaptation of Turlough and the Earthlink Dilemma - that was truly truly awful.
Anyway, back to the topic of this thread ...
|
|
|
Post by tuigirl on Nov 1, 2018 11:03:03 GMT
Considering that most of these spin-offs focus on former companions, and female companions outnumber male companions by what, 4 to 1, it doesn't seem that odd to me. Benny, Sarah Jane, Romana and Leela, Charley, Graceless, Vienna, Kate & Osgood, River, Jenny, Lady Christina, Missy, presumably Vastra and Jenny coming at some point, and the remote possibility of Ashildir/Me and Clara... it's sheer volume.
Other than Jack, Jago & Litefoot, I don't think any male companions or pseudo-companions have gotten their own full-fledged spin-offs. Apart from companions, you've got The War Master, but that's about it, I think. Even the Brig was just a guest star in the main range and first run of UNIT stories. But then, what other male companion would really warrant their own spin-off? Nardole, could, I think, but something like that's still a ways off. Rory would, in my book, but it'd be difficult to do, unless you're telling stories about his 2000 years guarding the Pandorica, and that would probably be a very hard sell. I wouldn't mind hearing stories about Turlough after he's left the Doctor, but I can't see that selling at all. You could possibly do it with Harry, but that would require a recast. Who's left among the male companions that anyone would care about? Jamie? Adric? Mickey?
All that being said, I'd be the first to buy a VNA-style solo series for Ace, either during her time in Spacefleet, or as Time's Vigilante. Also... who wouldn't kill for a Frobisher series?
So I AM right. We need more cool male companions. Come on, now is a chance with the 13th Doctor. I like Graham and Ryan, but what about a medieval knight? Or someone like King Yrcanos? A techno- sorcerer from some alien civilisation?
|
|
dorney
Big Finish Creative Team
Likes: 3,073
|
Post by dorney on Nov 1, 2018 11:12:31 GMT
You bring up an interesting fact- many spinoffs are led by a female character. Why is that I wonder? Are there more female characters around? Are the female characters more interesting? If that is the case, would it be a problem to write and create more interesting male characters? Are females better actors than writers?
Considering that most of these spin-offs focus on former companions, and female companions outnumber male companions by what, 4 to 1, it doesn't seem that odd to me. Benny, Sarah Jane, Romana and Leela, Charley, Graceless, Vienna, Kate & Osgood, River, Jenny, Lady Christina, Missy, presumably Vastra and Jenny coming at some point, and the remote possibility of Ashildir/Me and Clara... it's sheer volume.
Other than Jack, Jago & Litefoot, I don't think any male companions or pseudo-companions have gotten their own full-fledged spin-offs. Apart from companions, you've got The War Master, but that's about it, I think. Even the Brig was just a guest star in the main range and first run of UNIT stories. But then, what other male companion would really warrant their own spin-off? Nardole, could, I think, but something like that's still a ways off. Rory would, in my book, but it'd be difficult to do, unless you're telling stories about his 2000 years guarding the Pandorica, and that would probably be a very hard sell. I wouldn't mind hearing stories about Turlough after he's left the Doctor, but I can't see that selling at all. You could possibly do it with Harry, but that would require a recast. Who's left among the male companions that anyone would care about? Jamie? Adric? Mickey?
All that being said, I'd be the first to buy a VNA-style solo series for Ace, either during her time in Spacefleet, or as Time's Vigilante. Also... who wouldn't kill for a Frobisher series?
My suspicion would be that with the Doctor having been a strong male character leading the series for the majority of its run, there have probably been more strong female characters in the guest cast to balance it out (particularly in regard to the new series). And that’s probably why there’s more need for female led series too, as if you want a male led one, that’s the majority of the releases.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 1, 2018 12:46:00 GMT
You bring up an interesting fact- many spinoffs are led by a female character. Why is that I wonder? Are there more female characters around? Are the female characters more interesting? If that is the case, would it be a problem to write and create more interesting male characters? Are females better actors than writers?
Considering that most of these spin-offs focus on former companions, and female companions outnumber male companions by what, 4 to 1, it doesn't seem that odd to me. Benny, Sarah Jane, Romana and Leela, Charley, Graceless, Vienna, Kate & Osgood, River, Jenny, Lady Christina, Missy, presumably Vastra and Jenny coming at some point, and the remote possibility of Ashildir/Me and Clara... it's sheer volume.
Other than Jack, Jago & Litefoot, I don't think any male companions or pseudo-companions have gotten their own full-fledged spin-offs. Apart from companions, you've got The War Master, but that's about it, I think. Even the Brig was just a guest star in the main range and first run of UNIT stories. But then, what other male companion would really warrant their own spin-off? Nardole, could, I think, but something like that's still a ways off. Rory would, in my book, but it'd be difficult to do, unless you're telling stories about his 2000 years guarding the Pandorica, and that would probably be a very hard sell. I wouldn't mind hearing stories about Turlough after he's left the Doctor, but I can't see that selling at all. You could possibly do it with Harry, but that would require a recast. Who's left among the male companions that anyone would care about? Jamie? Adric? Mickey?
All that being said, I'd be the first to buy a VNA-style solo series for Ace, either during her time in Spacefleet, or as Time's Vigilante. Also... who wouldn't kill for a Frobisher series?
Jamie has mileage he could meet a girl who travels through some standing stones from 1945 and then tries to prevent the massacre at Culloden May have some mileage in it,but who am to say 🤪 then maybe he could head off to America...
|
|
|
Post by Ela on Nov 1, 2018 14:54:13 GMT
Also, I write the above with the caveat that I, personally, don't much enjoy "sample packs" and I've avoided the Worlds of Doctor Who for that reason... I'll probably be checking this project out because I'm a fan of all the characters so far announced so I expect I'll enjoy each individual story. But I'm keeping my fingers crossed that it's four stand-alone stories, rather than a tied-together wobbly series of four loosely connected chapters where the characters just pass a problem ahead to whoever's next-in-line like some fake game of "hot-potato" :/ The Worlds of Doctor Who was really good. Just saying.
|
|
|
Post by Ela on Nov 1, 2018 15:16:25 GMT
I am excited about this set and will definitely get it. Don't get me wrong, I'm super excited for this set, but am I the only one that's kind of miffed on the choice of name? I feel like something like "The Women of Doctor Who" or something to that effect would be better (I'm sure they could come with much better ideas than me). Seems similar to The Further Adventures of Lucie Miller, another name I don't love. I kind of agree with this. While I think it was a nice (and I'm sure well-intentioned) thought to release this in honor of International Women's Day, the framing of the news story only serves to highlight the fact that women protagonists and women writers are much less common, instead of treating it as "we have these fantastic women in Doctor Who and we'd like to build a box set around their stories." My suspicion would be that with the Doctor having been a strong male character leading the series for the majority of its run, there have probably been more strong female characters in the guest cast to balance it out (particularly in regard to the new series). And that’s probably why there’s more need for female led series too, as if you want a male led one, that’s the majority of the releases. And with this comment, you've touched on a concept that generally rubs me the wrong way: "strong female characters". Although you mention the Doctor as a "strong male character" in your post, the truth is that we don't habitually talk about male characters as strong. And we only talk about female characters as "strong" when they are not the victim, the romantic interest, or what have you side prop to the male hero. Not picking on you or trying to start a fight, just letting you (and everyone) know why I think the expression "strong female characters" should be a thing of the past. Why not just "female characters"? Or "popular female characters"? I actually had a long conversation with some forum members about the subject in this thread.I think it's a learning process and that some just need to catch up. (And to be honest, John Dorney, from what I've seen of your comments, you're more "caught up" then most.) As I said initially, looking forward to this set.
|
|
dorney
Big Finish Creative Team
Likes: 3,073
|
Post by dorney on Nov 1, 2018 16:47:55 GMT
I am excited about this set and will definitely get it. Don't get me wrong, I'm super excited for this set, but am I the only one that's kind of miffed on the choice of name? I feel like something like "The Women of Doctor Who" or something to that effect would be better (I'm sure they could come with much better ideas than me). Seems similar to The Further Adventures of Lucie Miller, another name I don't love. I kind of agree with this. While I think it was a nice (and I'm sure well-intentioned) thought to release this in honor of International Women's Day, the framing of the news story only serves to highlight the fact that women protagonists and women writers are much less common, instead of treating it as "we have these fantastic women in Doctor Who and we'd like to build a box set around their stories." My suspicion would be that with the Doctor having been a strong male character leading the series for the majority of its run, there have probably been more strong female characters in the guest cast to balance it out (particularly in regard to the new series). And that’s probably why there’s more need for female led series too, as if you want a male led one, that’s the majority of the releases. And with this comment, you've touched on a concept that generally rubs me the wrong way: "strong female characters". Although you mention the Doctor as a "strong male character" in your post, the truth is that we don't habitually talk about male characters as strong. And we only talk about female characters as "strong" when they are not the victim, the romantic interest, or what have you side prop to the male hero. Not picking on you or trying to start a fight, just letting you (and everyone) know why I think the expression "strong female characters" should be a thing of the past. Why not just "female characters"? Or "popular female characters"? I actually had a long conversation with some forum members about the subject in this thread.I think it's a learning process and that some just need to catch up. (And to be honest, John Dorney, from what I've seen of your comments, you're more "caught up" then most.) As I said initially, looking forward to this set. I’m glad to hear I’m a little caught up! Honestly, I think I only used ‘strong female characters’ as a direct contrast to ‘strong male character’. I’m not a fan of the term ‘strong female character’, personally. I think it’s often misused or misintepreted and tends to be taken as making female characters literally, physically strong (in a kind of Joss Whedon, Buffy kind of way), when it should actually mean complex, deep and well rounded. When people talk about wanting ‘strong female characters’ that’s what they want, the gap they’re identifying. They want female characters to have just as much detail and complexity as the male characters - not to leave them bland cyphers who happen to be good with quips and fists. Personally speaking, I don’t think we should replace it with ‘female characters’ or ‘popular female characters’. Because both of those don’t imply the character being written with especial depth or nuance. I’m sure we could all think of examples of thin yet popular female characters. The issue, surely, is including the word ‘male’ or the word ‘female’. We should have strong characters in general. That should be the base line for everything we write. Just as the ideal is that we don’t talk about ‘male writers’ and ‘female writers’ and just use the word ‘writers’. All your characters should be ‘strong’.
|
|
|
Post by Digi on Nov 1, 2018 16:55:45 GMT
I like you, dorney, I really do. You’ve absolutely nailed why I bristle at the phrase ‘strong female character,’ even though I’m interested in strong representation both ‘on camera’ and ‘off camera.’
|
|