|
||
The Rise of Scifi TV
Originally posted at PSFK.com
What's inspired the recent influx of fantasy-scifi TV programming? Here in the States, fantasy shows like Heroes, Lost, Battlestar Galactica, and True Blood claim a surprisingly large viewership, while creators continue churning out new pilots and series ideas around the undead and the strange. And in the UK, the trend is even more apparent, with more than a handful of scifi shows slated for the Fall season. The Guardian takes a look at the growth of scifi on UK networks, suggesting today's audiences are looking for more from their TV shows and characters - high-drama reality shows having upped the wow factor to levels standard sitcoms and dramas can't meet:
What has prompted this plethora of fantasy programming? Julian Murphy, the producer of Demons and the BBC's Merlin, views the schedules as a victory for classic British creativity rather than showing a fad for sci-fi or horror drama: "...Reality TV is a factor. X Factor and Big Brother create some amazing human drama, and you have to ask how scripted drama can compete. As a result I think it has to offer something more, something bigger."
The article also points out how the current political and social climate might be adding to the appeal of moralistic, allegorical fantasy storylines:
And yet fantasy writing often contains a core of reality. When Rod Serling created The Twilight Zone in the late 1950s, it contained subversive anti-nuclear war, anti-McCarthyite tales; at the height of the war on terror, Lost, Battlestar Galactica and even Heroes carried messages that attacked the triumph of the right. So should we expect lots of messages with the latest shows? "They're escapist but they deal with serious topics," says Ben Stephenson, controller of drama commissioning at the BBC.
Scifi's unique capacity for metaphor and spectacle is nothing new - and likely explains why the big budget film industry is still ruled by fantasy-scifi (E.T., Jurassic Park and the Alien series are still some of the longest reigning box office hits). What could be driving this shift in TV programming, then, may be more a matter of perception than of changing interests: networks are treating the once stigmatized scifi genre (and its followers) as the powerful, profitable force it has grown to be.
For more articles by Christine Huang on PSFK please click here.
Follow Christine Huang on Twitter: www.twitter.com/christinewhuang
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Back in the late 1950s and early 1960s Rod Serling's Twilight Zone was able to deal with political and social issues that were "too hot to handle" because of the show's supernatural/sci-fi themes.
I'm a big SciFi fan. I remember seeing "Logan's Run" on TV back in the early 1970s. And I was absolutely blown away went I went to the first Star Wars Trology, "Close Encounters of the Third Kind", "Alien", "Star Trek: The Wrath of Khan" and "Blade Runner" on the big screen as a boy.
Even though SciFi has certainly evolved with the help of special effects. But I believe something has gotten lost over the last 15 years or so in SFi: the art of story telling and great dialouge. This is what made episodes IV, V and VI of the Star Wars saga so appealing. It was the ebb and flow of the story and how the characters related to each other, not just the "wow factor" with special effects.
I guess this is why I really like SciFi shows like "Lost" and the original "Stargate" series. Both are different in terms of their dialouge, but I love that they both tell a story, a great story. "Lost" is hands down the best SciFi show on tv. And the best thing about the show to me is that it's compelling, and riveting, and boasts the most diverse cast in television history. There is a lot to love about that metaphorically-rich show.
Good piece Ms. Huang...
See Bruce Tenenbaum's Profile
Sure there are metaphors but, heck, just give me a good stretch of the imagination. And, don't leave out those fantastic, futuristic technological advances (you can't leave out the SCI in Sci-Fi). Dr. Who has that in spades. So does Battlestar Galactica. Both of these shows also provide solid scripts, great characters and enjoyable acting, as did Farscape.
True Blood? That's an erotic thriller. I don't have any idea what's driving people to visualize vampires as sex object but I see no sci in that fi. Heck, they have no problem with mirrors or crosses and can come back from being melted by the sun! Nonsense.
As to Lost as Sci-Fi, the show seems bent on positioning itself as something other. Heck, I am so lost watching it, that I don't have any clue what it is. But to avoid a dispute, if you insist it's Sci-Fi, I won't argue.
Science fiction is really just a setting/backdrop.
I recently added SciFi & FX to my "stop & see what's on" basic cable viewing habits.
Imagining unbelieveable gadgets is easy. Making believeable characters to use them is even more difficult than writing general fiction, in conventional environments. That challenge might also have something to do with the previous shortage of successful sci-fi that could be produced on television budgets, which are generally smaller than for movies.
[
The article also points out how the current political and social climate might be adding to the appeal of moralistic, allegorical fantasy storylines:
And yet fantasy writing often contains a core of reality. When Rod Serling created The Twilight Zone in the late 1950s, it contained subversive anti-nuclear war, anti-McCarthyite tales; at the height of the war on terror, Lost, Battlestar Galactica and even Heroes carried messages that attacked the triumph of the right.
]
Good point. If the general appeal of fiction is to live vicariously through characters who are able to solve complex problems similar enough to our own that we identify with them and enjoy their victories, it stands to reason that science fiction would be no exception.
SciFi, like one of its own creations, is a shape-shifter. It is the most versatile of all literary genres. It can adapt to any setting or time period. It can deal with any topic and can include almost all other genres within its framework. When it's good it can be truly great. When it's bad, it's like REALLY bad. In fact, it has largely shaped the technological world we now live in and is a concrete example of accurate prognostication and downright prophecy in action that puts the biblical prophets to shame.
In my relatively short lifetime of 60 years, I have seen numerous examples of yesterday's fiction becoming today's fact. This whole process that's happening right now...me composing my thoughts into words on this incredibly sophisticated electronic device...and instantly sending them out to potentially millions of readers around this planet is truly astounding but it's just a part of normal daily life for so many of us. I can be just as guilty as anyone for taking all this for granted...but all it takes is a few seconds of slightly deeper thought and all of the jaw-dropping awe returns.
I fail to understand how anyone could NOT be a fan. We need MORE! We need it to be even BETTER! We need it NOW! Get rid of that god-awful so-called "reality" TV and give us something to really think about and something to inspire us to define and manifest a better future.
Well put.
I think there are a couple of things going on. First, a lot of these shows are genuinely good by any standard. Battlestar Galactica can hold its own against anything on TV today. Second, I think there are viewers out there that hunger for story. After years of reality TV and franchise, formulaic crime shows many viewers want to see an unfolding story with interesting and engaging characters. Strangely enough, many SF series tend to offer this.
Now, if only The Sara Connor Chronicles can hold on. I need my Lena Headley and Summer Glau fix.
Battlestar started out with a great idea but got caught up in it's own convolution.
The stories started going "whack a mole" with WHO is the next 'secret' Cylon. The fleet started going in circles. Then the EX-O became another secret Cylons I quit watching. It just got weirder and weirder as though the writers had no idea of what to do. WHICH is what happened. A writer who left the show said they were making it up as the show was shooting.
The ratings showed it as well with fewer and fewer watchers every week.
With Sara Conner Chronicles I see the same thing happening. MORE and MORE terminators showing up on every corner and a kid who just whines all the time. I really had high hopes for that show. But Summer makes the show although I hope someday they bring back FIREFLY.
It's as though the show writers don't have a clue.
I think the reason behind both shows lagging is that NONE of the writers really understands the genre of science fiction. Science fiction literally has the universe at it's fingertips but the writers can't see beyond their noses and write what is standard drama fare ala TVDrama script writing 101 with some robots and space ships thrown in..
Torchwood and Dr.Who have writers who get it.
The U.S. TV studios don't and they won't until they actually hire someone who gets science fiction, to be in charge of hiring NEW writers.
We'll have to agree to disagree on BSG. I haven't found it overly convoluted or weird. There are just questions raised that have yet to be answered. That's what happens when a story has a beginning, middle and end. You have to be willing to go along for the ride. If there's no payoff, then I'll complain. As for making up some of it as they go along, that's not uncommon in TV production. The timelines are tight and all about cost containment and not the convenience of writers. There have been some weak episodes, but all in all, the writing has been very good with moments of excellence.
I actually agree with you on the Sarah Connor Chronicles, but I still enjoy the ride. Summer is doing good work--some of it actually remarkably good. And Lena is just Lena.
I don't think the writing in SF series HAS to be any worse than in any other TV series type. It's the network executives and producers who define the shows and they are the ones who don't get SF. Firefly was killed by network interference, not by anything about the show itself. Also, since SF involves creating a entire universe or internally consistent reality, it takes time for it to develop. That can't occur if a series is going to be canceled after three or four episodes.
Let's not even discuss Flash Gordan! The SciFi channel should just buy the BBC stuff and leave it at that.
Doctor Who and Torchwood are two of the best shows ever, science fiction or otherwise. I've been waiting and hoping for something as good to be made here for a while now...
Torchwood is truly bold and trail blazing. And Doctor Who--well, they succeeded in both capturing the spirit of the show through the decades, while bringing it into the 21st century. I didn't think it could be done.
Dear Christine:
My husband and I teach special topics courses in film and popular culture at Kent State University. Articles like this intrigue us; we also use them for our classes. We also use articles such as this to justify our courses with our bosses. For instance, my husband teaches four different courses on classic Hollywood movie monsters, and is introducing a new course on classic science fiction films. Popular culture always reflects the time in which it was created. The hardest thing to do is to look at contemporary pop culture and assess where it is.
We liked this article; however, it doesn't specifically identify events being reflected in pop culture. For instance, could Obama have been elected president if the TV show 24 didn't have a black president? We look at True Blood as an allegory of society's view of outsiders; for instance, the beginning credits of the show has a sign saying "God Hates Fangs;" leave out the "N" and you have an anti-gay message.
Would you be willing to write a follow-up that expands on the signs, symbols and meanings in these scif/fantasy shows and how they reflect specific issues or situations in contemporary culture? If so, we'd love to read it and use it in our classes!
Sincerely,
Robert and Traci West
Hi Traci and Robert,
Would love to continue the discussion. feel free to send me an email at christine -at- psfk -dot- com.
Well that's sort of true and sort of not.
The BBC does a MUCH better job with science fiction than American TV.
Movies have always been a good money make for the SciFi genre if done right (Big budget, tons of cool special effects)
On TV however they have a tendency to not understand the genre and keep trying to turn it into a typical drama or sitcom. Usually with disasterous results. Occasionally they get it right but then refuse to support it.
Take FIREFLY for instance. One great TV show with a truly unique look at our possible future and still have a great take on today.
There are countless others who came and went because TV and the Suits did not have a CLUE as to what makes a good scifi show work and kept trying to turn it into something THEY understood.
The recent idiocy that was called Flash Gordon on SCIFI is a PERFECT example of cheapness and poor writing.
Oh well not enough room here to get into it.
Firefly was probably 10 years before its time. I'd like to think it would do better today.
It would do much better today but for some reason you can't get ANYONE to bring it back.
That absolutely lame and EMBARRASSING Flash Gordon from Sci Fi was what they preferred to Firefly??? Or any of the other lame attempts at scifi they keep coming up with as opposed to just getting the Serenity crew back together.
IF for no other reason than maybe a six part mini series.
SciFi Channel would be good but even the BBC would do it better.
I always thought a good way to do a mini series if they won't do a full season, that would also bring back the two deceased characters would be a trip back to Earth That Was with a few episodes of retrospective on Walsh and Shepard.
OH well I can dream.
I agree.
Babylon 5 was ahead of its time, too. Back then in the ancient 90s, people in the US didn't grok arc-based television. Now it's on every channel. I like to think B5 would do better today, too.
I agree. Some of the shows seem to fall on the usual formulaic soap opera type stuff.
And the thing is there are SO many great sci fi stories that could be brought to the (TV) screen.
I'd like to see more of them. Mostly I find the current SCI FI channel rather unwatchable, it's all serialized stuff, star trek ripoffs, and strange reality type shows, cmon there's great stuff out there why isn't it coming to the screen?
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
