Maybe you’ve had it happen to you: you’re trying your very best to do something, but try as you may, you fail nonetheless. However, you find that you have actually done very well at something else in the process, which you never intended. This happens with TV shows quite often, and these days, showrunners have learned to adapt. And this show is like that: failing in what it tried to do, but succeeding in other areas. Let’s take a look at this dual nature that I’m attributing to “The New Avengers”.
“The New Avengers” (NA for short) was created in 1976, seven years after “The Avengers” ended, as a sequel/spin-off to the show. The series ran for 26 hour-long episodes over two seasons, ending in 1977. The show once again starred John Steed, this time working with two young agents: Mike Gambit and Purdy. Together, the trio fought spy rings and the like to bring counterspies to justice.
NA attempted to be like “The Avengers”, just with much younger agents than Emma or even Tara, but still keeping Steed for the older viewers. This sounds like many a sequel series, right? And in that area, it failed, as it didn’t bring justice at all to the original show, even with Steed. However, the show succeeded as its own production.
NA was very creative and original, and the plots were much faster-moving than in the original, with more of an emphasis on action and confrontation rather than thinking and reasoning through problems like in the original “Avengers”. And while Gambit and Purdy didn’t replace Cathy, Emma, or Tara like they were supposed to, the duo worked together well, and their lack of romantic interest in one another made for a great partnership that fit right in with Steed, making NA a fantastic original series.
So, I know this article is shorter, but that’s really all there is to say about it. The show was cancelled due to lack of funds, but in the end, “The New Avengers” was a great example of a new, fresh original series, even though it by no means succeeded as an “Avengers” revival. What do you think?