Jump to content


Photo

IS SCIENCE FICTION DEAD?


  • Please log in to reply
38 replies to this topic

#1 WORF22

WORF22

    It's not a disease it's a hobby.

  • Members
  • 1,894 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:N.J.

Posted 22 December 2010 - 01:55 PM


IS SCIENCE FICTION DEAD? sad.gif

Now I am not one to do much iching about action figure lines & TV shows that get cut but I just cant take it WTF is going on with "SCIENCE FICTION"? why is it that original programming that is good gets cut off? I love SCIENCE FICTION cus its not regurgitated crap like you find on TV now a days how about giving show a chance WTF and then to top it all off the action figures get cut as well come on man!!!!
I just got my notice that the wave 5 Stargate figs have bin cancelled and that just set me off.

1. Space Above and Beyond.

2. Dark Angel

3. Firefly

4. Enterprise

5. Stargate Atlantis - Cut to do new show SGU

6. Caprica - cut for Blood and Crome

7. Stargate Universe

ya so syfy cut SGU and CAP. so I guess we will be seeing more man skeeto
super volcano & more crap like that yayaya. mfahcs!!!!!!!!! i am so P.O..

#2 Destructor!!!

Destructor!!!

    It's not a disease it's a hobby.

  • Members
  • 1,883 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ireland

Posted 23 December 2010 - 08:30 AM

Frak. SGU got the chop? Those frakkin' MOTHERFRAKKERS! What the hell am I gonna watch now!? The Clone Wars does NOT cut it (despite being surprisingly good).

#3 Gothneo

Gothneo

    Knows Paul Bunyan

  • Members
  • 5,753 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Land of sky Blue Oxen

Posted 25 December 2010 - 05:19 AM

I don't think its dead. I think think the problem is that right now, there is so much choice out there and reality shows are soooooo cheap to produce that their is very little risk taking. Shows like TNG were designed to be sold into syndication right off the bat, so they got out there and people could watch it, and it really caught on, but I don't get SyFy channel, and, so I have to wait until they put new stuff out on DVD before I see it.

SyFy and the cable networks need to re-do their pricing strategy. They need to offer ala-carte channels, other wise why should I pay $50 a month for the same content I can get from a service like netflix for $10 a month? All I have to be is a little patient and wait a year for it to come out on DVD.

Now if SyFy offered streaming via some service, like netflix, for a couple bucks a month, I'd pay that.

#4 VulcanFanatic

VulcanFanatic

    Leonard Nimoy fan

  • Members
  • 3,165 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Southeastern North Carolina

Posted 25 December 2010 - 09:12 AM

I dont think its dead either,i think that SciFi shows only appeal to a certain fraction of the viewing audience and with so many channels available on cable and sattelite its hard to attract enough fans to any particular show to please the producers of the shows in the profit margin. Back in the days of the beginning of TNG there wasnt nearly the choice we have now and i wonder how well TNG would do starting out with the market we have now. Another factor is that going in a different direction with a successful tv show can lead to the death of the show. I have seen this happen many, many times. SGU, while some liked it,and thats fine, was a lot different in style and tone and alienated a lot of SG1 and SGA fans. Similar circumstances with Enterprise,BSG,and other series. One i remember from the 80's was "War of the Worlds". The first season was good IMO and i enjoyed it each week. The second season started with a new producer and a new direction and darker tone, and they killed off many of the first season characters. I was so ticked that i sat down and wrote a letter to the production company about what a piece of crap the show had turned into. I couldnt even watch it anymore and it was canceled shortly after that i believe. I never sent in the letter, figured it would go in the trash so i saved my stamp.

Another factor that some believe is that the majority of the population of the Earth are too stupid to enjoy something as cerebral as science fiction on tv. Sometimes i wonder.....

#5 TheHSBR

TheHSBR

    Mirror Universe Moderator

  • Global Moderators
  • 3,621 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Chicago, IL
  • Interests:This will be quite the list...Star Trek, Star Wars, wrestling, He-Man, comic books, GI Joe, video games, and most of all collecting action figures!

Posted 25 December 2010 - 08:13 PM

I think scifi is stronger than ever with a huge presence on network tv....shows like lost, dollhouse, v the series, and others come to mind. Syfy struggles because they can't afford too many bombs with their cable network. I guess DDT and syfy are in the same boat!

#6 Gothneo

Gothneo

    Knows Paul Bunyan

  • Members
  • 5,753 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Land of sky Blue Oxen

Posted 26 December 2010 - 06:26 AM

QUOTE (VulcanFanatic @ Dec 25 2010, 08:12 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Another factor that some believe is that the majority of the population of the Earth are too stupid to enjoy something as cerebral as science fiction on tv. Sometimes i wonder.....


He he! I wonder too sometimes! Not all sci-fi is cerebral, at least I don't find it all cerebral...

There are quite a few programs out there that are classified as sci-fi, you can find a list HERE If you search on "Present" you'll find most of the current shows in production. The thing I find interesting is that the bulk are animated shows aimed at children! Many of which aren't very cerebral at all!

Fringe seems to be the only real US show in production right now... but I have to say... the Brits seem to like their Sci-Fi!

Fringe is another one of those shows, I've heard great things, but I just never watch it... I'll have to see if seasons are available on netflix!


#7 Guest_1701_*

Guest_1701_*
  • Guests

Posted 26 December 2010 - 09:09 PM

I don't think Sci-Fi is dead, I just don't think there's enough original story telling in the US at the moment. Here in the UK Sci-Fi has seen a significant boost in part due to the successful revival of Doctor Who (although personally I really dislike it) and before that Life on Mars did very well indeed.

What I think is more important to the success of UK Sci-Fi is that it is a very different take on the genra, it's not as formulaic and dare I say, sterile as many US Sci-Fi shows, BSG being one of the many shows that broke that mould. Many of the shows are original, now ok, there are only so many stories to be told but the UK writers are telling them in new and exciting ways... There's a variety of different Sci-Fi shows being made in the UK that appeal to a variety of different people and ages rather than just the geeks. Torchwood and Misfits especially is geared to the teen and young adult generation, Ashes to Ashes and Life on Mars were shows that appealed to perhaps an older generation who grew up in the era's presented in those shows and then Doctor Who and Primeval appeals to the families and kids. Here there's something for everyone, In the US there seems to be a lack of original story telling and a lack of different programming appealing to a broader audience than just the geeks. Rather than focusing on originality, the US studio's seem to have this constant need to re-tell, rehash and rebrand established brands - Star Trek has already fallen victim to this with Enterprise, the Stargate franchise seems to have suffered the same fate, Battlestar Galactica seems to be the next franchise to have it's dignity taken from it. When something is a success, in the US it is undoubtably made into a franchise and milked for all it's worth.

We still have the likes of Star Trek sure which after all of these years is still doing well in reruns on freeview, cable and satelite and then you have Fringe of which is doing well too and when the likes of JJ Abrams revives Star Trek in the way he did, people are going to talk about it positively but it's the british Sci-Fi shows that are getting the attention. You have the likes of Lost but as a UK citizen, I don't think there's been a US Sci-Fi show since Star Trek: The Next Generation that has done so well as Star Trek!

#8 Gothneo

Gothneo

    Knows Paul Bunyan

  • Members
  • 5,753 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Land of sky Blue Oxen

Posted 27 December 2010 - 07:20 AM

I'm pretty sure the re-imagined BSG is considered a US show...

#9 JMW326

JMW326

    If I don't have it, they never made one.

  • Members
  • 4,836 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Charlotte, NC

Posted 27 December 2010 - 08:32 AM

QUOTE (Gothneo @ Dec 27 2010, 07:20 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I'm pretty sure the re-imagined BSG is considered a US show...



Yes, it is a US show.

#10 Guest_1701_*

Guest_1701_*
  • Guests

Posted 27 December 2010 - 11:42 AM

QUOTE (Gothneo @ Dec 27 2010, 08:20 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I'm pretty sure the re-imagined BSG is considered a US show...


Yeah? :S I didn't say it wasn't?? It is the exception to the rule, the rule that US writers follow - a generic, slightly sterile formula that isn't as raw as the UK's way of writing Sci-Fi.

#11 Gothneo

Gothneo

    Knows Paul Bunyan

  • Members
  • 5,753 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Land of sky Blue Oxen

Posted 27 December 2010 - 12:01 PM

I think I miss-read /miss-understood 1701's comment...

R U saying corp execs in the UK don't milk something for every cent they can? Because, last time I checked, Adam Smith, was a Scott, and basically wrote the bible on how to milk something for everything its worth...

I don't think it matters if its there, here, or somewhere else... how often does something really original come along? I think that's the pertinent point. Its probably why the masses reject certain incarnations of some franchises. SG-1 & SGA ran for (collectively) 12 years. Then they basically try something new and its rejected by the viewers. Maybe its run its course?

I actually liked Caprica, and thought it was fleshing out nicely, but it was moving waaaay to slow, and it was a bit preachy, which may have turned some people off.

the 1st season of SGU (like many 1st seasons) is all about character development. So it was a bit slow. The great thing about something like SGA, is they were able to segway the SGA from SG-1 into the new show, so character development went faster.

SGU, they went about it a bit differently, almost rebuilding from the ground up. I didn't mind the character development, but I thought the "shore leaves" by switching bodies got a bit creepy at times.

Also... 1701... you'll have to educate me a bit... I' don't really get what you mean by "Generic and Sterile" writing style? You'll also have to educate me on what "Edgy & RAW" styles your referring to? Can you give some examples maybe?

#12 Guest_1701_*

Guest_1701_*
  • Guests

Posted 28 December 2010 - 01:53 PM

QUOTE (Gothneo @ Dec 27 2010, 01:01 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I think I miss-read /miss-understood 1701's comment...

R U saying corp execs in the UK don't milk something for every cent they can? Because, last time I checked, Adam Smith, was a Scott, and basically wrote the bible on how to milk something for everything its worth...


I'm not sure what your talking about here but I'll say this; when a story runs it's course in the UK, it's over with. Weather it be Sci-Fi or a Drama, if it's only written to be 2 seasons long, it will only go on for 2 seasons. The US would go on and on until it didn't make them any money. As with the Stargate franchise, rather than leaving it at SG1, they went onto doing Atlantis and when that declined in ratings, they launched another series - you'd never get that in the UK with exception... Doctor Who...

Now Doctor Who is an exception to the rule.

QUOTE
I don't think it matters if its there, here, or somewhere else... how often does something really original come along? I think that's the pertinent point. Its probably why the masses reject certain incarnations of some franchises. SG-1 & SGA ran for (collectively) 12 years. Then they basically try something new and its rejected by the viewers. Maybe its run its course?


I think the problem lies with the intent on creating franchises - in the UK there isn't that intent. Creativity is still an important part in the UK where as in the US the almighty dollar dictates the creative aspect - if it's making money it'll go on forever, if it's not making money it's axed before it's really had a chance to find it's feet.

QUOTE
Also... 1701... you'll have to educate me a bit... I' don't really get what you mean by "Generic and Sterile" writing style? You'll also have to educate me on what "Edgy & RAW" styles your referring to? Can you give some examples maybe?


US Sci-Fi has in the past tended to stick to a particular formula. Generic - it's all the same, SGU or BSG? it doesn't matter, the differences between them aren't really all that obvious, Fringe or the X-files? Doesn't really matter because there kind of the same thing although Fringe is more current, Enterprise or TNG - doesn't matter, the same stories are being told all be it in a more updated way? As for the UK... Misfits, Life on Mars, Doctor Who are all very VERY different shows that can't be compared easily with one another - thus not generic.

Sterile - this isn't Sci-Fi but the same rules apply - there's a show in the UK called Skins, it's quite a risky show dealing with the lives of teenage girls and boys going through college - it shows graphic scenes of a sexual nature, deals with drug use and abuse, rape and the like. Because of it's success in the UK, it's now been exported over and re-made for US audiences, all of the things that made Skins "SKINS" has been stripped away, the sex, drugs and the very graphic stories. its not nearly as... raw or edgy! biggrin.gif

raw, means a fresh story, something that isn't like something you've seen on some other show. edgy means something quite surprising, risky, quite graphic and quite real in an all be it over the top way.

Don't get me wrong, many US Sci-Fi shows are great, Of course I love Star Trek - fantastic show, BSG was very good too and Fringe is getting really good but with the others, (and I feel this way about Doctor Who too so it's not all US Sci-Fi), I just feel like I've seen it all before, as with the case of Enterprise, I loved it because it was Star Trek but I felt I had seen most of the stories before but done better on TNG...

#13 Gothneo

Gothneo

    Knows Paul Bunyan

  • Members
  • 5,753 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Land of sky Blue Oxen

Posted 28 December 2010 - 05:49 PM

I can't really comment on UK shows, since we don't see many of them here.

I also don't know how the TV programming works in the UK, so I can't comment on that.

If you think all U.S. Sci-fi shows are the same, generic, sterile, then apparently they only export the same type of shows to the U.K.

There a plenty of Sci-fi shows that are very different. Some I like, some I don't.

I don't see allot in common between shows like Heroes, Lost, Star Trek, or X-Files...

What else is out there like Mystery Science Theater 3000??!! thats some funny stuff!

Quantum Leap, Fire Fly, The Twilight Zone... I think I can keep coming up with original sci-fi shows.

Plus there's a plethora of animated sci-fi shows that are pretty unique... like Futurama.

Sure when something is successful, it has its copy cats, but I'm pretty sure they have that in the UK too...

My point is simply this. There is plenty of programming that is unique. I don't believe it has boundaries. I don't believe that writers and producers in the UK work for anything less then money... same as here. If theres money to be made, then they will make it. Good writing can be found anywhere, neither the US or the UK have a corner on that market.

Right now, in the US, there doesn't seem to be allot of new live action Sci-Fi shows in production, but that will change. BSG showed that good writing can succeed (although I still contend that S3 was a train wreck!)

Thanks for sharing your terminology. I can't say I agree with it, but that's ok. Its your opinion. Edgy doesn't necessarily mean that you need to have shock value...

I'm aware of the remade "Skins" show..., in the US, there are laws pertaining to how graphic something can be on TV... both visually and verbally. Shows like BSG are able to skirt those laws by providing their content on Pay Channels... which means it will probably never be aired in syndication to the masses. And really... some of the graphic or "edgy" (as you call it) aspects of BSG, were really unnecessary as the language of sexual scenes did very little to forward the plot. The writing was there. Those added scenes were superfluous IMO. And thats too bad, as I think the writing of the new BSG was superb and they only do themselves a disservice by limiting themselves in such a way.



#14 Destructor!!!

Destructor!!!

    It's not a disease it's a hobby.

  • Members
  • 1,883 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ireland

Posted 28 December 2010 - 06:21 PM

I'd just like to chip in that I can't think of any superfluous sex scenes in Galactica aside from perhaps the pilot miniseries. And The Plan.

The rest had a firm place in the plot as character motivation and natural growth of relationships. Minor point, but I felt it should be made.

I think what 1701's getting at is simply a feel in the writing. Or maybe even in the shooting of the show. Perhaps it's just because we are western Europeans watching western Europeans on the TV, but the people in UK Sci-Fi do tend to feel a little more real, down to earth, one-of-us than the American heroes favoured by a lot of US TV shows. There are many exceptions to both rules, of course.

I'm Irish, and watching Colm Meaney play Chief O'Brien was such a pleasure. IT'S AN [GENUINE!!!!] IRISH GUY IN SPACE! Ok, so he's the lowest rank in the senior staff, but what the hell, at least he's useful!

#15 Gothneo

Gothneo

    Knows Paul Bunyan

  • Members
  • 5,753 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Land of sky Blue Oxen

Posted 28 December 2010 - 06:28 PM

BTW... I wanted to add that some of the worst TV we have right now is because of silly copycat reality shows exported from the UK...

Idol, & X-Factor are just two really really bad shows exported from the UK... They aren't good here, they aren't good there... not with a beer... just not anywhere!

Edit: and yes, I agree Destructor, there were only a few scenes that I felt were like that... which all-in all is why I thought it was a great show.

#16 Destructor!!!

Destructor!!!

    It's not a disease it's a hobby.

  • Members
  • 1,883 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ireland

Posted 28 December 2010 - 06:57 PM

Yeah, those shows really boil my blood. I was compelled against my will to sit down and watch X-Factor recently, the semi final and the final. I've never had a stronger impulse to mass murder an entire audience... "Contestant name!" *RABID BRAINLESS CHEER!* "X-FACTOR LOGO" *RABID, BRAINLESS CHEER* "Simon Cowell" *RABID, BRAINLESS BOO*.

Frakking pantomime.

My mum watches Strictly Come Dancing. I watch it with her to keep her company. I gotta say, it's really enjoyable. It's naff, and camp, silly and old fashioned, but it's fun, and there's enjoyment to be had from watching people's talents improve.

Anyway, yep, that's off-topic, reality shows are the devil because they represent fantastic return on investment for the programme makers. Sci-Fi shows do not. It's a wonder that ANY are still being made, really.

#17 WORF22

WORF22

    It's not a disease it's a hobby.

  • Members
  • 1,894 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:N.J.

Posted 30 December 2010 - 03:13 PM

I am so sick of reality TV, we live reality why would I want to see it on TV. I think the networks need to change the way they rate a show now cus with the DVR's and internet people do not have to watch the show they like on TV or at least not right away if it was rec. on a DVR. cancelling shows that are good make me not want to try out new ones I'll be honest I don't think I will be getting in to the new BSG B&C why so it can get cut after 1 se. FRACK THAT!!!!!

#18 Commodore Kor'Tar

Commodore Kor'Tar

    The Great Tribble Hunter

  • Members
  • 2,415 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:U.S.S. Kahless NCC-76108 AKA Fort Worth TX
  • Interests:Playmates figures and ships (90s era), Art Asylum and DST figures and ships , Galoob figures and micro machines .

Posted 30 December 2010 - 04:29 PM

You mak a good point Worf about ajusting the scale on the ratings system. Most of us now have cable or sattalite now and with that 300 channels or more to choose from. Meaning the ratings for everything are gonna be lower unlike the days when there were only 3 channels. With so many choices out there and america's short attention span, it should be acceptable if only 500,000 or more watch a show. Just becuase a show has low ratings by a the current scale doesn't mean a show should be put on the chopping block. The people who do watch the shows are pretty loyal and passionate about them.

#19 Guest_1701_*

Guest_1701_*
  • Guests

Posted 31 December 2010 - 08:29 AM

Just to add,

Studio's in the US spend more money on shows than we do in the UK. The pressure of making the millions back on the creative teams involved in writing shows such as Stargate and Star Trek must have an effect on creativity. Where as in the UK the money just isn't there to spend millions on TV shows so writers HAVE to be more creative. The pressure is probably not as high as it is in the US which in turn probably gives writers more freedom to write what they like without the fear of being canceled or losing money for the Studio. It does happen in the UK, things do get canceled but shows are given more freedom to develop.

As for the likes of X-Factor, America's Got Talent and American Idol - they are hugely successful in the UK and the US and whilst popularity has diminished, you guys and people in the UK still watch that tripe.

Shows like Being Human, Life on Mars, Skins are quintessentially British and have done well in the US however when you remake them, they loose what made them popular in the first place. I think Doctor Who is the only thing that hasn't been remade but I think thats more to do with it being a show that is made for all audiences in much the same way Star Trek was made.

I don't think Sci-Fi is dead, I think because of different cultures and laws, in both the UK and US, Sci-Fi is very different and the line between Sci-Fi and fantasy has all but merged, I think anything that provides escapism is hugely successful and whilst BSG was critically acclaimed, I think it was a one off show that never should have been given spin-offs. The shows such as SG1, Star Trek and Stargate Atlantis are all popular because whilst they do contain action and adventure, dangers and drama, they are in the end all presenting positive outlooks on life - same goes for Glee and X-Factor, they provide hours of enjoyment that take audiences away from reality.

#20 WORF22

WORF22

    It's not a disease it's a hobby.

  • Members
  • 1,894 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:N.J.

Posted 31 December 2010 - 09:50 AM

QUOTE (1701 @ Dec 31 2010, 02:29 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
that take audiences away from reality.


isn't that the point of good TV to take you/me the viewer away from reality, make us think? I just think the entertainment industry need to rethink and reevaluate what makes a good show & how it's rated.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users