"The Sarah Jane Adventures" (2007) TV series 2007-????

Creator:

Russell T. Davies

Seasons:

1 | 2 | 3

Release Date:

1 January 2007 (UK)

Genre:

Drama | Family | Sci-Fi

Plot:

Investigative journalist Sarah Jane Smith and her 13-year-old neighbor Maria form an alliance to combat evil alien forces.

Plot Keywords:

Doctor Who | Character Name In Title

Awards:

1 nomination

US TV Schedule:

Mon. Dec. 28	10:00 AM	SYFY
Mon. Dec. 28	10:30 AM	SYFY

Cast

Elisabeth Sladen	...	Sarah Jane Smith (35 episodes, 2007-2009)
Daniel Anthony	...	Clyde Langer / ... (34 episodes, 2007-2009)
Tommy Knight	...	Luke Smith / ... (33 episodes, 2007-2009)
Alexander Armstrong	...	Mr. Smith (32 episodes, 2007-2009)
Anjli Mohindra	...	Rani Chandra (22 episodes, 2008-2009)
Yasmin Paige	...	Maria Jackson (15 episodes, 2007-2008)
Ace Bhatti	...	Haresh Chandra / ... (15 episodes, 2008-2009)

Also Known As:

Sarah Jane Investigates (UK) (working title)

Runtime:

60 min (1 episode) | 30 min (22 episodes)

Country:

UK

Language:

English

Color:

Color

Filming Locations:

Wales, UK

Company:

BBC Wales

Trivia:

This was the second attempt - and the first successful one - at giving Elisabeth Sladen's character of investigative journalist Sarah Jane Smith a spinoff series from "Doctor Who" (1963). The first attempt resulted only in a pilot episode which was broadcast as K-9 and Company: A Girl's Best Friend (1981) (TV).

Movie Connections:

Referenced in "Doctor Who: Journey's End (#4.13)" (2008)

Tooth Fairy becomes a real woman, version 2.00

Looking at the reviews of this, at March 2009 there were 13 so practical to browse them all, those in favour and those not. I can agree with big chunks of both sides. If I shrug off the flaws this is okay. The best is really okay. But on the days when the ham acting drags me down it is way too other.

This is something that I need to watch only occasionally, but at March 2009, season one was available as a DVD set, and at what for me is an affordable price. At least it was possible for me to purchase this.

The worst aspects remind me of UK media when they try to fight the good fight, deliberately making their work into flawed creations, some with a love for kiddie level SF might even consider this to be a manufactured virus that might erase their love of BBC SF. At the same time there is another side, there are even some very positive aspects to this series. Some are, to me, from the story creation, some are fan stuff, if one is a fan of most of the key actors then one will have to be impressed by how they mostly cope with the ham, sometimes they all fall but mostly there are some who stand out as good actors.

*

When Doctor Who first appeared, with a double episode, I watched it with my toughest sister. Scary, but everyone else was out, sunny Saturday late afternoon. We both liked it a lot. I thought that it was way better than anything else that was in the 5 to 6 pm time slot, but I was around the age of Maria and Luke, a lot of the other progs no longer made sense.

Doctor Who as apparent perfection. When I noticed any flawed acting or flawed continuity or flawed anything I could not remember it for long. If I found a copy of that first season I think that it would likely now appear to be weak, but that would be from a now perspective.

I do not consider Sarah Jane to be perfect. As far as perfection goes, season one is way below such as Pete and Pete 1993 and Skippy 1992. Scaling factor: Typically 90% of the detail feels right, so typically 10% needs to be shrugged off, but what would the percentage be in that earliest Doctor Who? I rate the Gorgon episode as 100% for political reasons, I rate Whatever Happened and The Lost Boy as way less than 90%, Sarah being like gritty ham to me.

A big political plus. Many of the monsters in season one are unlikely to be frightening to any of age 5, some yes, most not. The first scary, Gorgon, was predictably scary, but covered until just the right time, the unveiling slow. The ugly scary related to the Gorgon host being rather old, well past her sell by date. I should shudder. With Kudlak there was an acclimatisation time, a cute look until rough stuff got rough. Whatever Happened to … is maybe in the borderline territory, but if any feel a need to skip that they also miss some really ham science fiction. This monster aspect shows sophistication, though. Several of the older audience are said to have a love for the scary and this does try to include some, but while also scaring some who just have a love for science fiction.

I have to rate this series, despite the flawed SF, for that monster aspect. If the early Dr Who achieved that it would likely be because special effects were not so advanced. This is kids television, and not geared just for the older kids. The bad guys tending to be ham might link with this, but that only occasionally works, for me. When it does work it is a big plus, folksy ham.

Fan stuff: A series that is not perfect, oh woe, just that Yasmin Paige is there so I have to take it seriously, this series covers her transition from tooth fairy to beginner level woman, it is one of the definitive Paige's. Essential viewing for those with that sort of good sense. And her acting stands out alongside the best in these stories. Except in some stories the principle actors go weak ham too, and that includes Yasmin, as if the directors sometimes had off days. Fans of any of the main actors will often be pleased, but occasionally wonder if their world has gone askew. The flaws can be difficult to shrug off.