Just As I Thought

Fanboy Heaven

The revival of Doctor Who in 2005 was, all told, more immediately successful than the revival of Star Trek in 1987. Still, that Star Trek revival had an incredible longevity, resulting in 24 years worth of spinoffs.
Doctor Who has always been positioned a bit less aggressively; but in this new era the BBC is far more interested in ancillary projects and profit projections. So, when the new show was an immediate hit, it got the nod as a new industry.

The revival of Doctor Who in 2005 was, all told, more immediately successful than the revival of Star Trek in 1987. Still, that Star Trek revival had an incredible longevity, resulting in 24 years worth of spinoffs.
Doctor Who has always been positioned a bit less aggressively; but in this new era the BBC is far more interested in ancillary projects and profit projections. So, when the new show was an immediate hit, it got the nod as a new industry.
And the spinoffs that were mooted in the distant past but never materialized — save one pilot for a show starring the Doctor’s assistant Sarah Jane and the robot dog K9 — have finally come to pass.
First, there was Torchwood, which just finished its first year. With almost no mention of the parent show, Torchwood is left to fend for itself. And then on New Year’s Day, the second spinoff debuted: The Sarah Jane Adventures. A whopping 30 years after she last travelled with the Doctor, Sarah Jane Smith has her own series for kids. (It is amazing how good Elisabeth Sladen, who embodies Sarah Jane, looks after 30 years — I guess time travel agreed with her!)
So now, like Star Trek, we have multiple Doctor Who series on the air; a show for kids, a show for families, and a show for adults. Only two years into the Doctor Who revival, are the producers spreading it all a bit thin? Is this golden goose well and truly cooked? Or can they sustain three series and maintain the popularity of all three?
How much of a good thing is too much?

Browse the Archive

Tweets

Browse by Category