Comments on: The Paucity of Good Science Fiction on TV and Film http://www.sensesfive.com/2007/08/03/the-paucity-of-good-science-fiction-on-tv-and-film/ "How do you know but every Bird that cuts the airy way is an immense world of delight, clos’d by your senses five?" - William Blake Wed, 03 Mar 2010 05:05:57 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Matthew Kressel http://www.sensesfive.com/2007/08/03/the-paucity-of-good-science-fiction-on-tv-and-film/comment-page-1/#comment-44791 Matthew Kressel Thu, 09 Aug 2007 00:02:10 +0000 http://www.sensesfive.com/blog/2007/08/03/the-paucity-of-good-science-fiction-on-tv-and-film/#comment-44791 Children of Men, 2001, Alien(s), Blade Runner (of course) all do a great job of setting up a world in 90 minutes or less. It can be done. TV sometimes, with Lost and Heroes, gives writers too much leeway to drag out plots indefinitely. Sure, the canvas is bigger, but sometimes a short, tight story is better. Jekyll was 6 episodes, self-contained, and in my mind near perfect. I would hate to see a series based on it, however, as I feel it would suck the life out of the idea (no pun intended). I can't wait to see my first straight to Web high-budget production. I've seen a few Star Trek fan films, but nothing that made me want to tune in each week. I'd pay a buck or two per ep. for a show I really liked. Children of Men, 2001, Alien(s), Blade Runner (of course) all do a great job of setting up a world in 90 minutes or less. It can be done. TV sometimes, with Lost and Heroes, gives writers too much leeway to drag out plots indefinitely. Sure, the canvas is bigger, but sometimes a short, tight story is better. Jekyll was 6 episodes, self-contained, and in my mind near perfect. I would hate to see a series based on it, however, as I feel it would suck the life out of the idea (no pun intended).

I can’t wait to see my first straight to Web high-budget production. I’ve seen a few Star Trek fan films, but nothing that made me want to tune in each week. I’d pay a buck or two per ep. for a show I really liked.

]]> By: Lauren http://www.sensesfive.com/2007/08/03/the-paucity-of-good-science-fiction-on-tv-and-film/comment-page-1/#comment-44784 Lauren Wed, 08 Aug 2007 22:38:03 +0000 http://www.sensesfive.com/blog/2007/08/03/the-paucity-of-good-science-fiction-on-tv-and-film/#comment-44784 I think TV is a better substrate for SF than film because it's longer. You get a whole season (and sometimes several seasons) to tell your story. It's very hard to establish a rich SF world in 90 minutes plus create three-dimensional characters and a non-predictable story. It's actually hard to do any ONE of those things in 90 minutes. I think one of the reasons why Hollywood lames out in its treatment of SF is because they basically have to be able to establish the world very quickly, so they take shortcuts. But also, Hollywood is just plain lame these days because they're not making money the way they used to. It used to be possible to rely on a few blockbusters a year to make up for all the money-losing pet projects that actually get executives excited. Nowadays, even blockbusters die quickly. My prediction? We're going to see actor salaries plummet, overall budgets come down, greater reliance on CGI, and eventually a return to story-telling rather than star vehicles and explosive set-pieces. Additionally, I think the big screenwriters and directors are going to migrate to TV and the Web. I think TV is a better substrate for SF than film because it’s longer. You get a whole season (and sometimes several seasons) to tell your story. It’s very hard to establish a rich SF world in 90 minutes plus create three-dimensional characters and a non-predictable story. It’s actually hard to do any ONE of those things in 90 minutes. I think one of the reasons why Hollywood lames out in its treatment of SF is because they basically have to be able to establish the world very quickly, so they take shortcuts. But also, Hollywood is just plain lame these days because they’re not making money the way they used to. It used to be possible to rely on a few blockbusters a year to make up for all the money-losing pet projects that actually get executives excited. Nowadays, even blockbusters die quickly. My prediction? We’re going to see actor salaries plummet, overall budgets come down, greater reliance on CGI, and eventually a return to story-telling rather than star vehicles and explosive set-pieces. Additionally, I think the big screenwriters and directors are going to migrate to TV and the Web.

]]> By: Matt Doyle http://www.sensesfive.com/2007/08/03/the-paucity-of-good-science-fiction-on-tv-and-film/comment-page-1/#comment-44746 Matt Doyle Wed, 08 Aug 2007 13:13:56 +0000 http://www.sensesfive.com/blog/2007/08/03/the-paucity-of-good-science-fiction-on-tv-and-film/#comment-44746 Ever try Farscape? One of my faves. I love insanity and anarchy in my SF TV, and that's why I like Dr Who too. I wasn't too keen on Eccleston, but I love David Tennant, he's bringing the character back to Tom Baker-like nutterism, but still making it his own. I disagree that this season has been meh, if you are referring to S3 that is. I'm liking it. But we in the Commonwealth are very fanatical about our Dr Who. ;) Ever try Farscape? One of my faves. I love insanity and anarchy in my SF TV, and that’s why I like Dr Who too.

I wasn’t too keen on Eccleston, but I love David Tennant, he’s bringing the character back to Tom Baker-like nutterism, but still making it his own. I disagree that this season has been meh, if you are referring to S3 that is. I’m liking it. But we in the Commonwealth are very fanatical about our Dr Who. ;)

]]> By: Matthew Kressel http://www.sensesfive.com/2007/08/03/the-paucity-of-good-science-fiction-on-tv-and-film/comment-page-1/#comment-44213 Matthew Kressel Sat, 04 Aug 2007 13:14:02 +0000 http://www.sensesfive.com/blog/2007/08/03/the-paucity-of-good-science-fiction-on-tv-and-film/#comment-44213 I haven't watched the 4400, so I can't say much of it, but you're the first person who told me it was decent (not that anyone told me it was bad, mind you.) I tried watching Lost but never got into it, and Smallville never pushed my buttons in the way I like them pushed. Pushing Daisies does look cool -- very Big Fish as someone somewhere online said recently. It looks as if the networks are taking chances with programming, experimenting to see what's beyond the sinful glut of reality TV. If it does well, expect a dozen or so cheap knockoffs. I haven’t watched the 4400, so I can’t say much of it, but you’re the first person who told me it was decent (not that anyone told me it was bad, mind you.) I tried watching Lost but never got into it, and Smallville never pushed my buttons in the way I like them pushed.

Pushing Daisies does look cool — very Big Fish as someone somewhere online said recently. It looks as if the networks are taking chances with programming, experimenting to see what’s beyond the sinful glut of reality TV. If it does well, expect a dozen or so cheap knockoffs.

]]> By: Eugene http://www.sensesfive.com/2007/08/03/the-paucity-of-good-science-fiction-on-tv-and-film/comment-page-1/#comment-44081 Eugene Fri, 03 Aug 2007 17:29:37 +0000 http://www.sensesfive.com/blog/2007/08/03/the-paucity-of-good-science-fiction-on-tv-and-film/#comment-44081 From the image accompanying this, I assume you're a fan of <a HREF="http://www.amazon.com/Heroes-Season-One-Hayden-Panettiere/dp/B000QDLSR0/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/002-0665618-8392855?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1186161814&sr=8-1" rel="nofollow"><I>Heroes</I> </A> :) I actually don't think there's a shortage of sf and fantasy on television these days. In the last couple of years, the popularity of shows like BSG and <I>Lost</I> has led to a number of knockoffs. There's more specfic programming on television than almost ever before, but most of it is either not very good, or it never finds its audience, or it just arbitrarily gets cancelled without much of a chance. I haven't even tried to keep up with all the new shows, so I can't speak to their quality. Did you like <I>The 4400</I>? I liked what I saw of it in the first season and I hear it's still pretty good. The fact is, there's plenty for us to choose from, even if not all of it is brilliant. I can still enjoy fun shows like <I>Smallville</I> and <I>Supernatural</I> and turn to literature and the occasional film for the really terrific stuff. I don't mean to put down the medium because I used to love it when I had the time for it, but television has rarely elevated itself beyond mere entertainment. Probably the only new show I'm excited about next season is <I>Pushing Daisies</I>. I don't need to add any more shows to my schedule... From the image accompanying this, I assume you’re a fan of Heroes :)

I actually don’t think there’s a shortage of sf and fantasy on television these days. In the last couple of years, the popularity of shows like BSG and Lost has led to a number of knockoffs. There’s more specfic programming on television than almost ever before, but most of it is either not very good, or it never finds its audience, or it just arbitrarily gets cancelled without much of a chance.

I haven’t even tried to keep up with all the new shows, so I can’t speak to their quality. Did you like The 4400? I liked what I saw of it in the first season and I hear it’s still pretty good. The fact is, there’s plenty for us to choose from, even if not all of it is brilliant. I can still enjoy fun shows like Smallville and Supernatural and turn to literature and the occasional film for the really terrific stuff. I don’t mean to put down the medium because I used to love it when I had the time for it, but television has rarely elevated itself beyond mere entertainment.

Probably the only new show I’m excited about next season is Pushing Daisies. I don’t need to add any more shows to my schedule…

]]> By: Matthew Kressel http://www.sensesfive.com/2007/08/03/the-paucity-of-good-science-fiction-on-tv-and-film/comment-page-1/#comment-44063 Matthew Kressel Fri, 03 Aug 2007 15:40:48 +0000 http://www.sensesfive.com/blog/2007/08/03/the-paucity-of-good-science-fiction-on-tv-and-film/#comment-44063 The show has great potential for both teaching kids real science and for exciting plots, but instead of doing that they really lay on the technobabble thick, and resort to tired old plot lines. As for Joe Morton, all I can say is that didn't he play the same role in T2? The writers can't think of a new character for him? The show has great potential for both teaching kids real science and for exciting plots, but instead of doing that they really lay on the technobabble thick, and resort to tired old plot lines.

As for Joe Morton, all I can say is that didn’t he play the same role in T2? The writers can’t think of a new character for him?

]]> By: Tempest http://www.sensesfive.com/2007/08/03/the-paucity-of-good-science-fiction-on-tv-and-film/comment-page-1/#comment-44060 Tempest Fri, 03 Aug 2007 15:31:23 +0000 http://www.sensesfive.com/blog/2007/08/03/the-paucity-of-good-science-fiction-on-tv-and-film/#comment-44060 Eureka was great in its first season. right up until they turned Joe Morton into a Magical Negro. Then, suddenly, the show went downhill. I wonder if it was a cause and effect thing. I think the main problem is that Eureka has turned from a sweet SF show to a romance with quasi-SF underpinnings. Eureka was great in its first season. right up until they turned Joe Morton into a Magical Negro. Then, suddenly, the show went downhill. I wonder if it was a cause and effect thing. I think the main problem is that Eureka has turned from a sweet SF show to a romance with quasi-SF underpinnings.

]]>