The Avengers International Fan Forum

oneknightsteed wrote:

MRotten wrote:
All I can say about The New Avengers is I did my best trying to like it. I bought the first DVD set put out by A & E, watched all the episodes and decided I wouldn't want to sit through any of them again, and sold the set. Rewatchability is an important factor in a cult series, but I can't muster up any desire to watch a whole episode again. I didn't like the first set so I haven't bothered with the second, which, from what I've read, isn't as good as the first batch of episodes. Part of the problem was the Gambit character, lacking any charisma whatsoever. He was about as exciting as Dr. King in Series 2.

I think the series' obscurity in the US is a valid arguement against it being included in the book, which is being issued here. TNA was a flop, unlike The Avengers, which arrived in early '66 and was a sensation from the outset. Leaving TNA out of the picture makes for a more streamlined product, focusing on The Avengers' '60s heyday.

Certainly one of the strengths of the Avengers is its "rewatchability". But, to disregard TNA is to leave the story incomplete.
Some people could not embrace the Cathy Gale series as it was quite different from the Emma Peel series, the jewel in the crown. And the Tara King series certainly had its dissenters as well. TNA was the final chapter in the history of an ever evolving series. Like it or not, it is a valid part of that history and deserves recognition. It still had Brian Clemens, Albert Fennel, Pat Macnee as Steed and others who had been with it from the beginning.
While I share your opinion of Gambit, the show had some good stories and gave us Purdey/Joanna Lumley, a worthy Avengers girl! The second season had more focus on Steed so at least some episodes were more interesting.

MRotten wrote:

oneknightsteed wrote:

MRotten wrote:
All I can say about The New Avengers is I did my best trying to like it. I bought the first DVD set put out by A & E, watched all the episodes and decided I wouldn't want to sit through any of them again, and sold the set. Rewatchability is an important factor in a cult series, but I can't muster up any desire to watch a whole episode again. I didn't like the first set so I haven't bothered with the second, which, from what I've read, isn't as good as the first batch of episodes. Part of the problem was the Gambit character, lacking any charisma whatsoever. He was about as exciting as Dr. King in Series 2.

I think the series' obscurity in the US is a valid arguement against it being included in the book, which is being issued here. TNA was a flop, unlike The Avengers, which arrived in early '66 and was a sensation from the outset. Leaving TNA out of the picture makes for a more streamlined product, focusing on The Avengers' '60s heyday.

Certainly one of the strengths of the Avengers is its "rewatchability". But, to disregard TNA is to leave the story incomplete.
Some people could not embrace the Cathy Gale series as it was quite different from the Emma Peel series, the jewel in the crown. And the Tara King series certainly had its dissenters as well. TNA was the final chapter in the history of an ever evolving series. Like it or not, it is a valid part of that history and deserves recognition. It still had Brian Clemens, Albert Fennel, Pat Macnee as Steed and others who had been with it from the beginning.
While I share your opinion of Gambit, the show had some good stories and gave us Purdey/Joanna Lumley, a worthy Avengers girl! The second season had more focus on Steed so at least some episodes were more interesting.

I don't disregard The New Avengers; I simply don't care for it, despite the presence of Joanna Lumley, who is wonderful, fabulous, etc. Yes, she is definitely a worthy Avengers girl; LOVE her. I only wish the series had been sharper. I think the concept of three Avengers wasn't quite right. I fully appreciate the talents involved; I just think the end result was something less than spectacular. The Avengers was an extraordinary series that holds up to countless viewings; The New Avengers seemed like little more than just another run-of-the-mill '70s action show, with a few nods to The Avengers' past glories.

There will always be a certain percentage of fans who are strictly Diana Rigg as Emma Peel aficionados. Personally I'm partial to Honor Blackman as Cathy Gale, because she really sparred with Steed and they had an edge to their relationship that was rather startling. I really love those videotaped episodes, warts and all.

Dandy Forsdyke wrote:It must be a copyright issue as Timeless said, as omission of such an important chapter as The New Avengers is a bit like The Forget-Me-Knot without it's tag.

PaulGreaves wrote:Dandy Forsdyke, I am LOVING your Tara King image. I don't suppose you have it in 1920x1080 so it can be my Mac wallpaper do you?

MRotten wrote:This book, from what I've seen and heard, is FABULOUS the way it is! What is the point of dissing it, saying it isn't this or isn't that? It's a hardcover book devoted to the incomparable TV classic The Avengers. What's not to love? I was admiring the cover today and just stared at it for some time. I got very emotional while looking at that wonderful cover photo of our beloved stars, Patrick Macnee and Diana Rigg, which I believe had never been published before. Perfection.