Listening to Bonnie Langford as Mel in the Big Finish stories, I feel she comes across as much more likeable than most of her TV Stories. I think this is due in part to the way the part is written for her and the much better stories she has been part off, rather than some of the dross of Season 24. (and at times Season 23 imo)

Not only that, seeing her on EastEnders at the moment and acting her socks off, it just shows what a great actress she is.

I never had a problem with Bonnie Langford as such but Mel on TV for me was written and portrayed far too theatrically and also as has been described, as being too lightweight.

I often wonder if she had played Mel during an earlier(or indeed the modern) era, we may have got a completely different character who ended up on the screen.

This is all my opinion off course, but do you think Mel would have worked better(or indeed worse if you like her!)had Bonnie Langford has been given the right material to work with? IMO, the Big Finish stories show that she would.

Billie Piper and Catherine Tate were certainly given a chance to shine in recent years. They played actual characters, rather than "ex-popstar in Doctor Who" or "catchphrase comedienne in Doctor Who". With Bonnie, however, the attitude appears to have been "Let's put light entertainer Bonnie Langford in Doctor Who!"

Mel wasn't really given any character beyond a set of one-dimensional characteristics. (Memory like an elephant, computer programmer, likes to keep fit.) It was as if Bonnie was directed to play her showbiz persona which, to put it mildly, wasn't to everyone's taste.

Going by a fairly recent DWM interview, I think Bonnie herself would agree with all of that.

I actually found her a breath of fresh air in '...Vervoids' as a gungho, non whiny/reluctant companion, and she always had a nice rapport with Colin and Sylvester, but she really had no backstory at all, she was just suddenly there, and then she just as suddenly left!

There was an appealing quality about Bonnie, I thought, and I find Mel particularly endearing in said debut story and 'Delta....' but the lack of background and the writing for her in general did her no favours at all.

Can't comment on Big Finish or Eastenders, but if she's getting meatier writing in either or both, I'm pleased, as I do think she's got talent and comes across as a nice person.

In Big Finish, Bonnie has had plenty of chances to shine. In the series, not so much though.

One of writers at the time (I cannot remember which) was interviewed years later and complained about this very point. Beyond the sketchy character notes - pretty much what you've described here - and an understanding that Mel was 'nice', they had nowhere to take her. I think the fact she was introduced without the usual introduction story didn't help either. All the writers seem very defensive of Bonnie herself, however, and keen to say she did a great job with what she was given.

I do wonder if her work on Eastenders - showing her more serious acting ability - could pave the way for a reunion on the show? She is a companion who's exit was very much left in the air.

That's precisely the problem with Mel - she is purely a generic Doctor Who Companion. And Bonnie actually does a pretty good job of portraying the Companion - she's perky, asks all the right questions, is inquisitive, gets herself into danger, and she screams - and even screams the right notes to blend into the title music! Brilliant!

So far so good. But Melanie knownasMel fails rather as a believable character mainly because she had so little character. Bonnie had nothing to work with beyond being perky and inquisitive but very also one dimensional. It didn't help that the irritating Violet Elizabeth character which Bonnie had become so associated with was basically what Bonnie was thought to be like, by the Great British Public.

Her casting was not, on paper, a bad idea. In reality, and faced with scripts that simply didn't know what to do with her, Bonnie didn't have much of a chance.

Mel feels like a throwback. She's the archetypal DW assistant: pretty, inquisitive, friendly, screaming, etc, and she does each of those things perfectly, but that just makes her seem like an artificial construct rather than a person.

Despite that, I love that she is given a bit more "big" stuff to do than some companions. I watched Time and the Rani recently and was struck that it is Mel, not the Doctor, who defuses the booby-trapped leg-bombs that the Rani attaches to various Lakertyans. She is very brave and quick-thinking, lying to Gavrok that Delta has died in the bus explosion. She knows what a megabyte modem is. The Vervoid story is one of my favourites, and she's fantastically investigative and adventurous in that.

I have a lot of time for the character, but she does feel a bit "made up as they went along".

What? You mean, deliberately? You actually chose to watch it?

On first hearing the news on John Craven's Newsround my heart sank, especially with that Peter Pan still that they were using to publicise it. She was at the time, considered a bit 'cringey'.
Come Terror of the Vervoids, I was pleasantly surprised by her and I though she did a fine job with, as mentioned, some gusto.
Unfortunately, it kind'a went down hill from there, almost as though she was a different character in subsequent stories.
The Big Finish character has been a huge redemption.

I quite liked her in Veroids, but thought she was a bit annoying in Time of the Rani (the only two Classic episodes I've seen her in.)

Yes, she is much better in Big Finish; a more subdued performance, while still retaining the light-hearted pantomime routes.

Apparently that's how she auditioned for the role in Trial, but gave the more OTT performance on the day, for whatever reason; perhaps nerves.

And I agree that she was a breath of fresh air, because she was just so damn chipper and optimistic.

I think there's not much doubt that the actors from 6 and 7s eras have been much better served by audio

LOL. I tried to watch it again for a laugh. I literally couldn't sit through it. When Sly starts tripping over his feet I had to turn it off. I wanted to see Kate's completely evil send-up of poor Bonnie's character.


Pipnjane wrote most of her lines, and she was hired for her light entertainment qualities, so kinda Doomed from the get-go. Wasn't she supposed to be a computer programmer or something? REALLY? Asked what was the defining aspect of Mel's character, I think I would respond that she liked carrot juice. Sigh. Poor woman.

I agree with a lot of the above comments. I think she worked well in the Vervoid story and to a certain degree to in The Ultimate Foe as well, bar a few cringey moments.

I think the fact she was cast to support the Sixth Doctor for a series or two then ended up with the Seventh didn't help and the big change in style for Season 24 wasn't her fault either.

In some ways she was just a victim of circumstances, much in the way the both Baker and McCoy themselves were imo.

Remembering a quote ( I think from SFX magazine)
Bonnie didn't kill Doctor Who..
She was the fire that cremated it.
You have to remember just how badly doctor who was regarded back then.
Putting Mel in as a companion was the final nail that sealed the series in peoples minds as the epitome of naff, even over the sixths amazing technicolor dreamcoat.... Nothing to do with her character or her performance... just sheer audience tiredness... oh great they put that one from just william in dr who now... can we have the other baker back please.

She was part of the JNT era of DW, which wasn't 100% great. It had it's moments. Most of Peter Davison's era was good, especially Earthshock, The Five Doctors, Ressurection and Caves. But after that, the scripts seemed to be mediocre at best. There were only a handful of episodes that I thought were great, and they were The Two Doctors, Revelation of the Daleks, Remembrance of the Daleks, Battlefield and The Curse of Fenric.

If Mel had been part of the Graham Williams era when Mary Tamm was there, then we would surely have seen a different Mel to the one we saw. For the better IMO.

Well I always think it was more Michael Grade who provided the petrol as to why the show went down hill after the hiatus but that's another story...

I do agree though it wasn't a popular choice at the time, especially as JNT had made a habit of casting comedy or big name stars in the show. Bonnie Langford was seen as just one long line of those.


Somehow I can't see her with the Fourth Doctor....not unless they changed absolutely everything about her!

As I recall, Doctor Who Monthly printed a number of letters from people who were unhappy about Sylvester McCoy being cast in the role of the Doctor. It was quite something for DWM to print negative letters at that time!

Rose & Donna would have worked better if they had just screamed at the monsters.

I think the reason she worked in BF was because you couldn't see her.

Bonnie was a verbose entertainer, her mannerisms were loud and exaggerated because she was trained first and foremost to be a child stage actor. You only have to see how she acted her departure scene (exaggerated nose wipe and sniff), or, how she paces up and down on leaving the Tardis when landing in a new location, looking for...something, with only a few paces to and fro. Her style is brilliant in panto, and that, unfortunately is how she acted on DW, like she was in a panto.

I felt the same with Sophie Aldred, but not so much. Sophie cut her teeth as a children's tv entertainer/actor, and, Imo, it showed.

Imo, of course.

A few seasoned thespians played Doctor Who as a pantomime too. Just look at Richard Briers' cringey performance in Paradise Towers. A lot of the blame can be placed on the directors of certain stories. They are, after all, supposed to give the actors directions on the type of performance required.

I did like Mel in Colins series but didnt feel the same with Syl.

It is quite a nice surprise in Eastenders that Bonnie is showing a much more intricate restrained performance as yes I was dreading her 'performance' coming into Eastenders.
.
It makes me think that the timing for her joining Doctor Who as others have mentioned wasn't right. With the confused image of the show at the time, Her 'light entertainment' persona didn't really place the show back into the drama slot it needed.

Saying that I do like her in Terror of the Vervoids and bits of Delta. Perhaps if they had incorporated more of a back story in TOTV perhaps as a companion from a future Earth. Mel from Pease Pottage is all I really got to know. The writing for her was mostly non-existent ( did we find out how her and 6 met ? ) and she was poorly directed. She is a perfectly nice companion but there isn't anything remarkable to remember.

They must have been scrapping the barrel. A light entertainment companion in Bonnie to a comediene in bloody Catherine Tate.

Comedian/Shakespearen actress. RSC, I think.

Then again, I blurdy loved Donna. Favourite C21 companion.

Ken Dodd too. Richard Briers considered Doctor Who exclusively a children's programme and acted accordingly. Bonnie Langford just did the same thing all the time, verbose, exaggerated stage entertainment.