In the first episode of “The X-Files” in 1993, an exasperated Scully dismisses Mulder’s latest ideas as “crap” and demands, “I want the truth.”

In the 20-plus years since audiences first saw that moment, the truth may have been out there but whatever constituted that truth was elastic and elusive and subject to considerable change.

Even when inspiration (and cast members) looked exhausted, there were still questions to be asked, answers to be sought. Still are, apparently.

Close to 14 years after the telecast of what appeared to be its last regular episode, and nearly eight years after a poorly received big-screen reunion, “The X-Files” has brought back series creator Chris Carter, Scully (Gillian Anderson) and Mulder (David Duchovny) for six episodes variously referred to as a special event and a new (albeit short) season of the show.

The first new episode on Fox was Jan. 24.

A second new one aired Jan. 25. Monday, 7 p.m. CST is the regular time slot for the remaining new shows.

The revival of “The X-Files” is part of a larger effort by TV programmers to mine their past for renewable material. That’s not new in television, even years after a show’s demise.

With shows such as “Community,” “The Mindy Project,” “Unforgettable” and “Longmire” finding new TV homes almost immediately after being canceled, viewers now ask reflexively if the end of their favorite in one place means it will pop up somewhere else.

Most programs don’t. And those that do can find themselves seeking audiences in competition with much older programs that have been retooled or revived decades after their debut.

For example, on Feb. 26, Netflix will debut “Fuller House,” a comedy sequel to 1987-95’s “Full House” with characters and actors back from the old show (though the biggest stars will just be special guests).

“Twin Peaks,” an inspiration for “The X-Files,” according to X-Files FAQ author John Kenneth Muir is making a comeback on Showtime in 2017, more than a quarter-century after the original series and a prequel movie. NBC announced and then abandoned a continuation of “Coach,” the Craig T. Nelson comedy that concluded in 1997.

Some might see this as a sign that TV has lost all sense of creativity, an odd declaration considering how rich and varied the offerings are across broadcast, cable/satellite and streaming services. But when looking at ways to get audiences, programmers still recognize the importance of brand names and stars.

Check out the American movie hits of 2015 as listed by Box Office Mojo. Four of the top five – “Star Wars: The Force Awakens,” “Jurassic World,” “Avengers: Age of Ultron” and “Furious 7” – are continuations of older stories, often with older characters. (The exception was “Inside Out,” in fourth place.)

Scroll down the list and you find the likes of “Minions,” “Spectre” (the latest James Bond film), another “Mission: Impossible,” “Pitch Perfect 2,” the return of Mad Max and an addition to the Rocky saga, “Creed.” But the real test of a show is twofold: Will the revival attract those old fans, and will they like what they see enough to stay for more than one episode?

I have seen the first three new “X-Files,” and they are certainly aware of the devoted fan base for the series.

Veteran writers are back at work. What appears at first to be a serialized plot gives way to some stand-alone stories, which frankly are more what I preferred. The elaborate mythology of “The X-Files” was often its most aggravating element, especially when it sprang a new secret because it had painted itself into a corner in the pursuit of earlier deceptions.

There are still vast conspiracies, grisly horror and comedy, especially in the third episode. (Again, I liked the old show’s funny turns, notably the Lone Gunmen, who had their own short-lived series. And while they were killed off in the TV series, they will be back on the new series, reportedly in a fantasy sequence.)

The question of what to believe  indeed, whether to believe at all, remains on characters’ minds.

And Scully and Mulder are haunted, especially by what has become of the son, William, they gave up for adoption long ago. The show’s creative history is also part of the onscreen text. You may notice allusions to Kim Manners, a directing mainstay on “X-Files,” who died in 2009. And one supporting character has a wardrobe straight out of “The Night Stalker,” another inspiration for “The X-Files.”

But even loyalists may find their patience tested by the first new episode, which in its attempt to be a stately return feels sluggish, the dialogue and storytelling dragged out. It so surprised me in its slowness that I went back to the very first “X-Files” (the series is on Netflix as well as disc) to see if memory had inflated its quality.

While the premiere had its ludicrous elements (if evidence could be destroyed and hidden so easily, how would Scully and Mulder ever find anything?), it had energy.

Duchovny was snappier, Anderson more irascible. (Others may look admiringly at Duchovny’s great head of ‘90s hair, or the camera’s adoration of Anderson’s big blue eyes.)

Yes, the new show comes long, long years after the original; Scully and Mulder have been damaged by time and circumstance, just as Duchovny and Anderson are more weathered.

But “The X-Files” is trying too hard in that premiere; the second and third episodes are better – but it may be that, when it comes to new telecasts, six is enough.