Julie Stevens

[mousemeat]

Since everyone else is dismissing her, I'm going to stand up for Venus Smith.

She was in the Avengers and she was a "girl", therefore she was an Avengers' Girl!

Julie Stevens gives a lovely performance; wonderful, quirky, warm, funny, entertaining, innocent. I think her songs are brilliant for just being so bizarre. Box of Tricks is really the only episode to feature Venus that I don't engage with but she is a ray of sunshine is all the rest.

So there

Count me in as one of her supporters...c'mon, she's a part of the shows evolution-and-history...

[Brendan Jones]

I've so far reviewed the first three Venus episodes. I find Stevens to be a very fun actress, and I'm sensing a developing character now having watched five of the six.

Cathy was definitely the better character, and I can see why Venus is sidelined in fan estimation. However, this is often done when the two women are compared- if you watch Venus without thinking "Where's Cathy?", she's very enjoyable.

Overall, Julie and Venus get a 7 from me.

[Dandy Forsdyke]

There was certainly more variety on The Avengers than most other shows - it had real 'eras' that we should embrace, and I hope we don't get too passionate in our views that we would carve up the show into the individual eras we like and dismiss the others.

One of the strengths the show has is a real sense of you're part of a journey, from Dr Keel to The New Avengers. All done because of circumstance - video to film, b/w to colour and change of actor; there was no grand plan.

[mousemeat]

There was certainly more variety on The Avengers than most other shows - it had real 'eras' that we should embrace, and I hope we don't get too passionate in our views that we would carve up the show into the individual eras we like and dismiss the others.

One of the strengths the show has is a real sense of you're part of a journey, from Dr Keel to The New Avengers. All done because of circumstance - video to film, b/w to colour and change of actor; there was no grand plan.

well stated...couldn't have said it any better...

[Frankymole]

Cathy was definitely the better character, and I can see why Venus is sidelined in fan estimation. However, this is often done when the two women are compared- if you watch Venus without thinking "Where's Cathy?", she's very enjoyable.

Great idea. Since I'll watch the Dr King stories as a group, I might as well watch all Venus's stories in one block before I get to the Cathy ones. If nothing else, I may learn to put up with the Dave Lee Trio (but I doubt it).

[Timeless A-Peel]

There was certainly more variety on The Avengers than most other shows - it had real 'eras' that we should embrace, and I hope we don't get too passionate in our views that we would carve up the show into the individual eras we like and dismiss the others.

I find that the more years I watch the show, the more my opinions on the eras I wasn't initially fond of soften. With the new Optimum set, my opinion of the Gale era (well, season 2, anyway) has improved exponentially. I don't know if it's because I have a better idea of what to expect, and thus find the tone easier to deal with, or if it's just the fact that I can actually hear/see what's going on most of the time, but I'm enjoying the stories much more on this go-around, and find myself feeling more forgiving, even of stories I found unbearably dull years ago. I've come to the conclusion that anyone who refuses to at least try all of the different eras is missing out on a lot of good stuff. There's something to be enjoyed in each and every one of them, and no other show has ever given its viewers so much choice.

[Halfhide]

I agree with your comments wholeheartedly Timeless! When I first watched the Cathy Gale eps back on Channel 4 all those years ago (?18 years ago) I found them boring. However, now I'm watching Season 2 from Optimum I'm finding things to like about every episode! Maybe I've matured enough to like them now?

[Timeless A-Peel]

I agree with your comments wholeheartedly Timeless! When I first watched the Cathy Gale eps back on Channel 4 all those years ago (?18 years ago) I found them boring. However, now I'm watching Season 2 from Optimum I'm finding things to like about every episode! Maybe I've matured enough to like them now?

I don't know what it is. Maybe it's just maturity, or maybe it's the fact that I'm coming at the episodes with an understanding of how they're going to work, both in terms of style/content, and in terms of characterisation, and therefore I don't have such high expectations of them, and can just sort of drift along and enjoy them. I think the Gale era is the hardest one to adjust to for people coming from the Emma/Tara episodes. It's such a radically different show in so many ways, I think the viewer goes into a bit of shock. But once you know what to expect, you can sort of get past the slower pace and the fractious Steed/Cathy dynamic, and really appreciate them for what they are. That's my take on it, anyway.

[Frankymole]

I had the advantage of being very familiar with videotaped studio shows from the 50s and early 60s - Quatermass, Dr Who, Likely Lads, numerous plays... so a "live"play with 3 'acts' and piped-in music wasn't too hard to adjust to. The filmed episodes are obviously faster, "bigger" in scope and more slickly edited, and with more expensive sets (though the design sometimes looked naffer, oddly) - the monochrome season is never-bettered, but that's the common fan view these days. I think the characterisation in the pre-Emma days was better - "thicker cardboard", like in TNA. Not just of the leads, but the motivations of the incidental characters - even the villains were less like things out of "Batman", and appeared to have real lives, not just one-dimensional fetishes.

[Timeless A-Peel]

I had the advantage of being very familiar with videotaped studio shows from the 50s and early 60s - Quatermass, Dr Who, Likely Lads, numerous plays... so a "live"play with 3 'acts' and piped-in music wasn't too hard to adjust to. The filmed episodes are obsiously faster, "bigger" in scope and more slickly edited, and with more expensive sets (though the design sometimes looked naffer, oddly) - the monochrome season is never-bettered, but that's the common fan view these days. I think the characterisation in the pre-Emma days was better - "thicker cardboard", like in TNA. Not just of the leads, but the motivations of the incidental characters - even the villains were less like things out of "Batman", and appeared to have real lives, not just one-dimensional fetishes.

The first time around it was the sheer difficulty in hearing/seeing what was going on that was one of the biggest deterrents. The new sets fixed this, but after I watched the Gales the first time, when I wanted something to watch in the evening that I could just relax and enjoy, I always skipped over seasons 2 and 3 because it was just too darn hard to view them with what little mental energy I had left. Production values and pacing aside, there's just a critical mass of changes that sort of overwhelm you after being weaned on the Emma and Tara stories. Steed's just so nasty, and Cathy can be pretty hard to like, and they seem to be yelling at each other all the time. And on top of that, there's something inherently grimmer about the storylines. It's enough to make you think you're watching another show entirely. It's a huge adjustment. It probably says something that, now that I'm watching them the second time around, I like Steed and Cathy much better, and they don't seem to spend as much time yelling at each other as I remember (either that, or it all went on in season 3, and I'm in for a nasty surprise when I get to the next set).

I have to agree about the characterisation, though. The more Cathy I rewatch, the more you can see the source for a lot of TNA, from the way the leads are constructed to the seriousness of the storylines, and a general focus on making things a little more real and a little less fantastic. I adore the Emmas, but there's definitely something appealing about the overall "thicker cardboard" feel.