Categorised | TV reviews

Review: The Sarah Jane Adventures 2x1

Posted on September 30, 2008 | Post a comment | Bookmark and Share

The Sarah Jane Adventure 2x1

In the UK: Mondays, 4.35pm, BBC1
In the US: The SciFi Channel again, probably

Last series of The Sarah Jane Adventures posed something of a dilemma. Obviously, being a spin-off of Doctor Who featuring a former Doctor Who companion, comparisons with the mother ship were inevitable. Thing was, the comparison invariably became "Don't you think The Sarah Jane Adventures is more entertaining, more adult and more consistently higher quality than Doctor Who?" – even though ostensibly it was aimed at six year olds.

Now it's back, packed with action, continuity references and Sarah Jane fun. So again we have to ask, which one's better? We also have to ask, can we bear the shame of watching CBBC at our ages?

Just like last year, episode one features the return of a popular Doctor Who villain, handily mixing kanny marketing that should draw in old and new viewer alike, as well as kanny budgeting since there's a whole world of effects and costume re-use that cuts costs.

This time, it's the Sontarans who are making a return visit, thus sending a tingle up the spine of the old guard, who remember that Sarah Jane's first ever Doctor Who encounter was with a Sontaran. The Whoers in charge of Sarah Jane don't let us down, inserting a good few references to those old stories into the script to keep the adults fans happy, even if the six-year-olds are struggling.

The Sontarans, surely the leaders in "most mistreated monster" in the eternal Doctor Who awards ceremony, fare averagely here, doing the usual stupid thing of waiting rather than shooting everyone stone dead instantly and then telling everyone within earshot its plan. We could do without "Sontar, ha" again, too.

However, since there's only one of him/her/it and it's in full on Predator mode, it also proves to be a scarier monster than in nu-Who, stalking people through the woods, and hatching cunning plans, all by itself.

Meanwhile, back to things domestic, as one of the main cast reveals he or she is leaving. It's a measure of the quality of the writing and the depth of the acting from said character and the other cast members that we do give a monkey's about this; and that Sarah Jane's reaction isn't exactly what you'd expect.

Despite all these pluses, it is very much a kids' show, unsurprisingly, so it's pretty unchallenging and feels like we're intruding on someone else's viewing. The latest series of Who probably had the edge over the show in terms of quality, simply because of the darker eps and David Tennant. But it's a close run contest and it's almost compulsory to watch it all the same, just for the overlap with the other shows, the eternally marvellous Lis Sladen, further insights into Sarah Jane due down the line, and the return of at least one much loved old-Who character later in the series. Plus later episodes might be even better.

You've made it this far so a big question: do you want episode by episode reviews of this, as with Doctor Who and Torchwood, or should I leave y'all in peace? Answers below or on a postcard, please. And the best way to watch it, by the way, is on an iPod when no one's looking.

Related entries

  • October 7, 2008: Review: The Sarah Jane Adventures 2x2
    A review of the second episode of the second series of The Sarah Janes Adventures

Read other posts about:

Allowable comments

You can leave just about any kind of comment you like. You can argue, suggest I am (or anyone else is) wrong, leaving general messages of love – anything. However, you absolutely can't leave messages that attack other commenters (or me), are simple variations of "your review sucks" or that are misogynistic, racist, homophobic, etc: your comment will either be edited or deleted and you'll be barred from leaving any further comments. We want to keep it civil here.

Spoilers

You can hide a spoiler by putting <spoiler> before it and </spoiler> after it. Hover over a spoiler to reveal it!

Featured Articles

The Bold Type

Journalism for people who can't read more than a Tweet