Two weeks ago, Fox aired what was probably the final episode of Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles, a pretty solid sci-fi show which nevertheless suffered Read the full post.
Apr 29
2009
04:28 PM ET
The Great Sci-Fi Divide: Why don't we want science fiction on TV?
- Comments 207
- Add comment
X-Files, Buffy and Trek had strong production teams who succesfully battled the networks. But some of those same writers failed when they launched new shows, so previous success doesn’t guarantee a good show. The track record for comedies and dramas isn’t any better (Viva Las Vegas) But with sci fi the lack of a strong writer with a clear vision can lead to shaky content like Dollhouse. Nothing turns a sci fi fan off faster than sloppy casting, cheap sets and bad dialogue. Battlestar, X-Files and Trek have set the bar high.
Terminator and Bionic Woman featured teen-friendly leads at the expense of the show. When you put a rough and ready Christian Bale next to the boy-band hero of the Sarah Chronicles there is no comparison; girls don’t watch the show and boys hate the lead so the casting backfired. Networks thing they can trot out anything and that sci fi fans will eat it up, but with sci fi lack of legitimacy will doom a project before it even airs.
Movies and Television are two very different viewer experiences. SF works as a movie experience because it fits the blockbuster model: big ideas, big special effects, larger than life characters, stories that range across a wide canvas of space and time. FOR THOSE VERY REASONS it does not work so well on television. TV is a more intimate medium. Smaller scale stories work well there, which is why you see so many doctor, law, police, etc stories on TV. Battlestar: Galactica was successful (to a point) on TV because of the human side of the story, not the special effects. Same with Lost. Heroes works when is focuses on the characters, not convoluted plot. Terminator went for the special effects/blockbuster angle and sometimes (especially in the pilot) did this very well, but therefore had limited appeal.
So I think SF can succeed on TV, but only by understanding that it needs to focus on the opposite qualities (character, intimate stories) of what works in SF in the movies.
I think that a huge reason is the episodic vs. serialized nature of series. A lot of shows that are popular are shows that you can miss a week or two and still get caught up quickly when you tune back in. Compare this to something like Farscape (one of my all-time fave shows) where you could miss 2 weeks and discover that the world had completely changed when you came back. But, I still prefer serialized shows to episodic.
The problem with Sci Fi shows is that you need to watch them from the beginning, missing one episode can confuse anyone. Look at Farscape, one of my favorite shows but if you don’t watch them in order you won’t understand what is happening and what has happened. Some sci-fi show can be successful as for the end of TSCC, I never thought that show would do so well since they messed up with the continuity of the movies as well as the weird teenage Cyborg which to me never made any sense. I don’t think TSCC was really a sci fi show, more like a sci fi soap opera.
FANS still watch Sci Fi…networks don’t give the shows a chance. Networks change the time slots and days, not FANS. The SCC was a really good show and should be kept on the air. Also worth watching, “Torchwood” on the BBC on Saturday.
Life is quite different than it was 20, 30 or 40 years ago. Years ago we had less than 10 TV channels and most everyone of a certain age group watched the same shows. There are now so many different entertainment options, that it is almost impossible to build significant group interest in anything.
FANS still watch Sci Fi…networks don’t give the shows a chance. Networks change the time slots and days, not FANS. The SCC was a really good show and should be kept on the air. Also worth watching, “Torchwood” on the BBC on Saturday.
people dont want to see shows that they have to watch every episode and have to work to decipher anything hence why Lost continues to decline… shows like CSI, NCIS, Law & order are shows that do all the work for you and you dont have to think or have to watch every episode in order to understand, and you can still enjoy their cheap thrills… its lazy tv viewership if you ask me but i’m also in the minority here…
I love Scifi, but we really need a good, strong show that has strong stories the way that Hero’s was in the first season. But then they really went off track. Remember if it ain’t broke don’t try to fix it!!! If they would have followed that it would still be great!!!
Great topic with some interesting comments. I noticed one (maybe small) point missing. TV series on DVDs. Some people that may not have the time to watch TV on a weekly basis or maybe aren’t tech savy, buy DVDs. They wait til the end of the season or series to purchase these sets. DVD sales for each recent season don’t start immediately after the finale though. This means that a sci-fi show could be selling like crazy a few months later, but it won’t help. Each show’s fate has already been decided. My sister does this. She waits til I buy Supernatural on DVD each year. I don’t think she’s ever watched an episode live.
well, Smallville has always done pretty well for a wb/cw show. but then, it also has the added bonus of being based on the most famous comic book hero ever, so…
If ten million people go see a movie one time, it’s a raging success. All ten million of them have to watch at the same time every week for twenty-two weeks of the year for a TV show to have the same level of success. While there are certainly more than ten million sci-fi fans in the country, there simply aren’t enough to end up with ten million who love a particular show enough to watch every week.
I agree that viewers are less capable of sitting down and dedicating themselves to shows over the span of a season. Especially shows like bsg are great watching back to back, therefore people wait for the dvd’s to come out and watch them in that format. DVR also hurts, I don’t think they count all views on Nielson ratings, this effects viewership. josesmom I love how people clump “Dr. Who” and “torchwood” as the greatest sci-fi of all time, and it’s not that it’s intelligent it’s just that people who watch bbc feel they are better then americans and therefore the shows on bbc must be intelligent, they are also boring as s**t.
Because sci fi is synonymous with cheese. Lost figured out a way to do it without being on a spaceship and no mention of the word ‘galactic’ in the title. It is a bit staid, and the genre needs a fresh approach.
Two reasons: 1) There’s still a geek stigma attached to liking “Sci-Fi”, and lots of people don’t want to be associated with it. 2) Big budget sci-fi is awesome, and people see those as blockbuster movies, not science fiction, again to avoid the geeky stigma.
Sci-Fi just sounds too nerdy and people avoid the lower budget TV sci-fi shows for huge blockbuster movies.