Because I firmly believe you can never spend enough money or buy enough crap, I bought an iPod tonight. Sort of an impulse purchase, although with some thought behind it: I have to go home to visit the family next week, and I've got some Big Finish CDs I haven't listened to yet. The little, tiny low-memory MP3 player I had that would plug into my Handspring just doesn't hold enough. So, I got me an iPod. How hip I am! And, instead of listening to ... well, whatever I'd be listening to at home, I get to listen to The Adventures of Luther Arkwright, or the new Doctor Who story. Although, the thrill of listening to new Doctor Who stories on CD has paled considerably, now that we have new Doctor Who stories on TV...

As if the return of Doctor Who wasn't enough, I recently learned of another childhood Brit TV fave revival: Basil Brush. As a kid, during our year in New Zealand, the year that fatefully brought me into contact with Doctor Who, Blakes 7, The Tomorrow People, and Sapphire and Steel--which was so scary I couldn't watch more than the first episode--I remember watching The Basil Brush Show faithfully with my family. It was this sketch comedy show, hosted by a small fox puppet with the personality of Terry-Thomas. It was, I suppose, no Muppet Show, but Basil's pun-riddled, borderline-ribald wit had us all in hysterics. So, upon learning that there had been a revival, naturally, I bought the DVDs to catch up. (Sadly, the original is only available as a one-hour "best of" clips collection, which doesn't really do it justice.)

I've only seen one episode of the new one so far, and I'm not sure how I feel. I enjoyed it, and Basil seems very much the same character that I remember from 25 years ago. But the format has changed from a variety/sketch comedy show to a more standard sitcom setup, with a stable setting and cast of characters. (At least, that seems to be the case.) I still enjoyed it, I still laughed at Basil's jokes, but seeing him in the context of a 23-minute extended story, as just this guy interacting with the other regular characters (except he's, you know, a fox puppet) took some getting used to.

And I wonder whether you could make a variety show/sketch comedy show for kids any more. I can't think of any contemporary examples. Nickelodeon used to have some, like All That and The Amanda Show, starring the lovely Amanda Bynes, now star of the big screen and, well, the smaller screen. Maybe for a new Basil Brush show to exist, these are the changes that had to be made? And this brings us to the latest episode of Doctor Who.

SPOILERS FOR DOCTOR WHO: ALIENS OF LONDON FOLLOW. YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED.





In a lot of ways, this week's episode, Aliens of London represents the greatest departure from the original series. I mean, there are fans bitching about how the show's 45-minute long episodes lack the depth of plot and character of the original stories. (The original stories were usually told over the course of four 25-minute episodes, and "depth of plot and character" apparently means running around, getting locked up, and escaping multiple times.) For me, who tries not to get hung up on fiddly details, the biggest difference between Old and New Who is that, for the first time ever, the Doctor and his companion are presented as characters. By that, I mean they exist to do more than for the companion to say "Explain the story to me, Doctor," and for the Doctor to save the world. There's a difference between character and personality quirks, and that's a pretty handy example of the difference in what audiences expect from their TV shows between the 1970s (probably the last time Doctor Who was universally acclaimed) and today.

So far, the show has only hinted at the greater depth it has given its characters. In the first episode, tellingly titled Rose, after the new companion, Rose Tyler, we get a picture of her life, including her mother, home life, and boyfriend. This is to be expected; the old series usually made a token attempt at giving a background to the companions, which would be instantly ignored as soon as they went away in the TARDIS. In the second episode, however, the show introduces a device--a modified cell phone--that allows Rose to contact her mother from five billion years in the future. This is the first time I can recall where the companion's lives before meeting the Doctor were actually revisited and factored into the story. It was a touching moment, unlike anything the series had done before, and I loved it.

This week, the Doctor and Rose return to her home. It's only been a few days for Rose since she left, but on Earth, a whole year has passed. And we actually see how her mother has been dealing with the fact that her daughter has been missing without a trace for the past 12 months. Her boyfriend has been a suspect in her disappearance. For the first time ever, we get a--relatively--realistic view of what it might be like for the people who get left behind when the Doctor takes someone with him. In the context of contemporary drama, where the action and adventure stories play out against a backdrop of ongoing character interaction and development, this makes perfect sense. And it's freaked some longtime Doctor Who fans out.

I've read comments that complain about the intrusive nature of the "soap opera" elements in the latest episode. And this, from a Doctor Who critic/fan whose work I enjoy. (Also a heck of a nice guy, and a publisher of some pretty cool books.) And I haven't even bothered reading any of the messages on the forums at Outpost Gallifrey, because the subject headings are off-putting enough. To be honest, I think any fan criticism needs to be taken with this grain of salt: this is easily the most character-oriented episode of Doctor Who ever (or at least to date). As a result, this is the one that may feel to some the least like the show that they remember from anywhere from 15 to 41 years ago. And that's a long time to have loved something, and to find that it's changed... sometimes it's hard. To me, it's still a Doctor Who story, because Doctor Who has never been specifically this or not included that. It's still a show about the Doctor, and he's still fighting monsters, and, for me, at the end of the day, that's what still matters.

And it's still really, really good. I accidentally came across a photo of a pig-headed alien on the official web site, and thought it looked a bit silly. Who would have known that when I actually saw the scene involving the pig-thing, I would almost cry? Again, another first for the show. It's ironic that fans who are somehow under the impression that Doctor Who was ever aimed exclusively at adults, like it was a forerunner to the new Battlestar Galactica or something, accuse the new one of being too childish, because of burping killer trash bins or farting aliens. For my money, this version is the most emotionally mature version of Doctor Who ever.

Sci Fi Wire -- The News Service of the Sci Fi Channel: "SCI FI Reveals New Series

SCI FI Channel announced a slate of new original series for the 2006-07 season, adding projects from luminaries in film, television and literature to its roster of scripted dramas, miniseries and alternative series. The new shows will incorporate the mainstream appeal of fantasy, adventure and alternative reality.

The following scripted series are currently in development:

•An untitled project executive-produced by Academy Award-winning actor/producer Michael Douglas, based on the work of the late author Shirley Jackson (The Haunting of Hill House). Storylines and themes from Jackson's catalog of supernatural short stories will be woven into her real life experiences transitioning from urban mom to small-town matriarch.

•Heroes Anonymous, a live-action series based the comic book created by Scott Gimpel and Bill Morrison which follows a group of 20-something aspiring superheroes who form a support group to help them discover their own identity while carving out their secret identity. The series will be executive-produced by Lawrence Bender (Kill Bill, Pulp Fiction), Kevin Brown (Legend of Earthsea, Roswell) and Karl Schaefer (The Dead Zone). Gimpel and Morrison will write the pilot.

•Those Who Walk in Darkness, a drama based on John Ridley's (Three Kings, Third Watch) best-selling novel of the same name about an expert team of S.W.A.T. police whose primary mission is to hunt down and capture people who genetically possess super powers. John Ridley will write and executive-produce in association with NBC Universal Television Studio."

There are more series listed, but the one that interests me the most is Those who Walk in Darkness. I read the novel, thought it was great, and wanted more. The novel seemed to be setting some things up for a sequel anyway, so it's already tailor-made to be explored as a TV series. Plus, it's incredibly dark and humorless, which makes it a perfect fit with another new SciFi hit series, Battlestar Galactica. (Don't get me wrong; I love the new Galactica, but saying it's dark is like saying my cat, Penelope, is slightly fuzzy and enigmatic.)

Of course, the gutters of Hollywood and Canada are littered with TV series in development for SciFi that never make it to air (wither the proposed TV series spin-off from Chronicles of Riddick/Pitch Black, although that was tied into a failed movie...) so I'm not holding my breath.