Which Sci-Fi shows have aged the best?

[Christopher]

jayceee wrote:

---

Is this the one from the 10-episode 1980 Galactica season

It was the final episode of Galactica 1980, which wasn't a season of BSG (despite how it was sometimes syndicated), but in fact a sequel series that was commissioned by the network after BSG's cancellation, in an attempt to amortize the cost of the show's sets, costumes, FX footage, etc. by recycling them in what they hoped would be a much cheaper show. None of the creative staff actually wanted to make it, and there was no inspiration behind it, so it was utterly horrible; so at the end, Larson just abandoned it altogether and went back to writing about Starbuck, and the result was possibly the best episode of the entire original franchise.

[MacLeod]

Well "The Return of Starbuck" was definantly the best of episode of BSG 1980.

[T.Geiger]

The Cage looks remarkably good (if slightly retro). I can only imagine how different the world would be right now if that was the path Star Trek had gone down.

Some aspects of TOS have aged poorly, but we are starting to get distant enough from the era now that its coming back around the other side as a sort of esoteric aesthetic. Until the space hippies episode.

TNG's first few seasons look awful and scream 80s.

The main problem with DS9 is the quality of some of the early episodes and Sisko's lack of facial hair. Odo's liquidity doesn't look great early on though. Really, it just needs a high def transfer. They don't need to redo the effects. Except to maybe add some facial hair to Brooks. If he wouldn't, you know, go completely nuts over them doing that.

I love to shout "Oh no! Janeway's being attacked by a special effect!" whenever I get a chance to see early, TV series budget, digital effects on VOY.

I am rewatching Sliders and, for at least the first two seasons, I am surprised how well it holds up, everything considered. Still, perms everywhere (highly noticeable early on) are a bit disconcerting. I had to check the production years because I had previously remembered those as long dead by '96.

Buffy and Angel are finally starting to age a bit.

Haven't watched any other older genre shows recently to comment further.

[jayceee]

T.Geiger wrote:

---

TNG's first few seasons look awful and scream 80s.

As in Troi's "big hair" look?

[degra]

tng
tos
ds9
voy
ent
b5
x files

I knew trek was pretty solid tv but I've come to appreciate its writing, stories, originality and rewatchability after sat through so much overly convoluted, pointless sff shows in the last decade,,,v 2.0, flash forward, caprica, lost, surface, invasion, fringe, sga, sgu, post s2 heroes, Alcatraz, terra nova, the event, bionic woman 2.0, haven, lost gir, being human, Andromeda, Dr who, torchwood, falling skies, true blood, walking dead etc etc. And I never thought I'd say this but I have a newfound respect for voy and even enterprise after watching all these crap shows with bland characters, recycled convoluted stories and poor casting.

[DarthTom]

Christopher wrote:

---

It was the final episode of Galactica 1980, which wasn't a season of BSG (despite how it was sometimes syndicated), but in fact a sequel series that was commissioned by the network after BSG's cancellation, in an attempt to amortize the cost of the show's sets, costumes, FX footage, etc. by recycling them in what they hoped would be a much cheaper show. None of the creative staff actually wanted to make it, and there was no inspiration behind it, so it was utterly horrible; so at the end, Larson just abandoned it altogether and went back to writing about Starbuck, and the result was possibly the best episode of the entire original franchise.

I never new the back story on that. It's amazing they could crank out such bad stories but have this gem hidden in the rubble. Yes, the Starbuck episode with the Cylon re-named 'Cy,' by Starbuck was the original BSG's best episode.

Anyone who hasn't seen it should.

BTW, Wiki has this interesting tidbit about a sequel to that episode that was never made:

Starbuck's fate remained unknown as the series was cancelled after the episode's production. A follow-on episode "The Wheel of Fire" was scripted but never produced. The script for "The Wheel of Fire" reveals that Starbuck is eventually rescued from the planet by the Seraphs, the inhabitants of the Ship of Lights, of which Angela was one. The entire affair had been set up by the Seraphs as a test of Starbuck's worthiness to join them.

[CorporalCaptain]

^ I didn't know about "The Wheel of Fire". I'm immediately made to wonder how much that storyline influenced nuBSG's handling of Starbuck, because there seem to be obvious parallels.

[TREK_GOD_1]

Funny that some cite Space:1999's bell-bottoms as aging the series, but in reality, the bell-bottom look made a temporary comeback in the real 1990's--the early 90s as the 70's was in vogue again. This was seen in the new appreciation/marketing of Blaxploitation movies, Dazed and Confused, Tarantino's early films feeding off of 70's references, a golden age for 70s music reissues and compilations released, and later that decade, That 70s Show's debut on TV. So with that said, one could argue that Space 1999's bellbottoms were just predicting the retro 70's movement that would happen of the 90's.

On the other hand, Battlestar Galactica--set in the far future--was awful the first time out, with forced "sci-fi" terms not even used in the worst of 1950's kiddie sci-fi (Rocky Jones, Space Patrol, etc.). Then, there's the disco/prostitute imagery obsession that looked like the kind of cheap trappings found at Hugh Hefner parties of the same period. You can aim this criticism at Buck Rogers in the 25th Century, too.

Lost in Space ages better than some would think, only because so many of its episodes were set on barren planet sets, so what little technical design appeared, it was limited to the Jupiter 2, which is more hit and miss than total miss as a design.

Star Trek: The Next Generation - one of the biggest, design mistakes which were dated right out of the gates:the early Phasers, which looked like the kind of endlessly cloned "futuristic" designs seen at schools like Art Center, and as much as TNG tried to separate/advance the design from TOS-TV/TOS movies, the Phasers were nothing more than a glorified appliance. It s no wonder its unofficial nickname was the Dust Buster.

[TREK_GOD_1]

T.Geiger wrote:

---

Some aspects of TOS have aged poorly, but we are starting to get distant enough from the era now that its coming back around the other side as a sort of esoteric aesthetic. Until the space hippies episode.

I think the strongest argument for how well TOS' look aged was the 1701 and Defiant's appearances on DS9 and Enterprise, respecitvely. Using then-modern cameras/lighting, the TOS set designs were honestly beautiful, and did not seem out of place or dated on series with 1990s/2000s production design.

I'm not sure if the DS9 or ENT interiors will hold up that well some 30-40 years from now.

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Star Trek TOS.

It's really remarkable that Paramount is going to release a mega-expensive movie this summer in which most of the visual design is identifiably based on costumes, sets and overall art design originated for a television series in 1964-68.

Trekkies who obsess over the ways in which the thing has been changed tend to overlook how amazingly similar everything actually is, given that the original is half a century old and the movie designers clearly aren't embracing that look for its "retro" appeal. The essential design concepts are that strong.

[RAMA]

CorporalCaptain wrote:

---

The CRT's and computer keyboards on original BSG haven't aged well. Neither have the feathered hairstyles.

Those are fairly minor in the realm of world building, in terms of that, I think the original show did a better job of making a believable space culture compared to nubsg.

RAMA

[CorporalCaptain]

TREK_GOD_1 wrote:

---

Funny that some cite Space:1999's bell-bottoms as aging the series, but in reality, the bell-bottom look made a temporary comeback in the real 1990's--the early 90s as the 70's was in vogue again. This was seen in the new appreciation/marketing of Blaxploitation movies, Dazed and Confused, Tarantino's early films feeding off of 70's references, a golden age for 70s music reissues and compilations released, and later that decade, That 70s Show's debut on TV. So with that said, one could argue that Space 1999's bellbottoms were just predicting the retro 70's movement that would happen of the 90's.

That's an interesting point, although in that case bell-bottoms were probably one of the few things that Space: 1999 got right about the 90's.

[Donald Draper]

Fixating on fashion as a reason something is dated is redundant. Fashion by definition is dated.

Paul McCartney's song "Vintage Clothes" is spot on

Don't live in the past
Don't hold on to something that's changing fast
What we are, is what we are and what we wear
Is vintage clothes, vintage clothes:

We jump up for joy
Who cares if we look like a girl or boy
What we are, is what we are and what we wear
Is vintage clothes, vintage clothes:

A little more, a little tall
Check the rack
What went out, is coming back

Don't live in the past
Don't hold on to something that's changing fast
What we are, is what we are and what we wear
Is vintage clothes, vintage clothes:

A little more, a little tall
Check the rack
What went out, is coming back

Meaning what is the current fashion will soon be dated. Than come back into fashion. Its cyclical.

I think it depends on when we are born. But also the stage of our lives we are in. I was born in 1978. Growing up in the 80s and early 90s I thought everything from the 70s looked ancient and odd. The hair styles in Star Wars and BSG etc. But now as I am older I see difference in time from the 70s and 80s is no different than 2000s to the 2010s. More importantly I see teens with hair almost exactly like Luke's in ANH every single day.

Another factor is picture quality. Seeing stuff from the 70s as a kid, the picture quality of tv shows and movies from that era was usually awful. Seeing them on cable the colors were washed out and no details, and pan and scanned. I use to assume this is how everything originally looked in the 70s. It was not until DVD and proper restorations that I realized I had been seeing badly made transfers. Plus copies that had worn out after multiple reairings.

[Galileo7]

Andrew_Kearley wrote:

---

I don't really understand what you mean by not ageing well.

I think Space: 1999 still looks believably futuristic for example. (Aside from the fact that it's now set in past! - but the design look is fantastic.)

Agree. Space:1999 story and production design are still brilliant, even though it was produced in the '70s.

[Galileo7]

RAMA wrote:

---

... BSG 1979: They actually didn't use too much that was time period specific, and by comparison, the other big budget SF series of the time was Buck Rogers, which is incredibly dated.

Agree.

TREK_GOD_1 wrote:

---

... Then, there's the disco/prostitute imagery obsession that looked like the kind of cheap trappings found at Hugh Hefner parties of the same period. You can aim this criticism at Buck Rogers in the 25th Century, too.

Agree.

TREK_GOD_1 wrote:

---

Lost in Space ages better than some would think, only because so many of its episodes were set on barren planet sets, so what little technical design appeared, it was limited to the Jupiter 2, which is more hit and miss than total miss as a design.

Agree. The Jupiter 2 sets[both upper and lower decks] are still an impressive setting for a series.