sf/f TV development news - 2013

[Sindatur]

Samaritan wrote:

---

I would like to see an animated TV series and a live action TV version of TNG in the JJverse. Doing something radically different on TV doesn't make sense...why do TOS reboot in 2009? If they could have done something original under the 'Star Trek' name??? CW is he best bet for a new TV series unless they want to sell outside CBS kingdom and the direction CW wants to go...a Trek series would be a great opportunity.

My first instinct would be to say "Ew...Star Trek 90210 isn't what I had in mind". However, I remember back to before Enterprise's Premise was announced (And possibly before Voyager's), and I remember a great of deal of fans were hoping for A Starfleet Academy Series, which actually would be right up CW's alley (Though, with an Academy Series, I think I would prefer alot of the Academy's Politics to be focused on then you'd likely get in a CW Starfleet Academy Series)

I think I'd prefer an AMC, TNT or FX take on it, but, hey, Beggars can't be choosers.

[Temis the Vorta]

Samaritan wrote:

---

Doing something radically different on TV doesn't make sense...why do TOS reboot in 2009? If they could have done something original under the 'Star Trek' name??? .

Look at The Munsters reboot underway at NBC. Fuller is talking about bringing in Universal's stable of monsters from their old time monster movies, and the characters are already being changed a great deal, for instance Hermann is not green and looks essentially human.

I'm sure Munsters fans are up in arms about these changes, but to NBC Universal, The Munsters is no more sacred text than Star Trek is to CBS. It's just fodder to be used to make a profit. I wouldn't be surprised to see Star Trek changed by CBS to the same degree, and for the same reasons, as NBC is allowing Fuller to change The Munsters.

[Christopher]

It's not about "fodder." No text should be "sacred," especially not to creators. Human creativity throughout history has been about creating new interpretations of pre-existing works. Shakespeare's plays were almost all based on prior plays, myths, historical tales, and the like, and he completely "rebooted" and reinvented all of them, usually greatly improving on them in the process. And his works were reinvented in turn by other creators, producing new classics like West Side Story and Forbidden Planet and Ran. You don't honor a work by slavishly copying it, you honor it by letting it inspire you to create something new and different. That way you keep its essence alive and growing, rather than trapping it on a pedestal as some fixed, unchanging relic gathering dust.

I mean, it's preposterous to say that Bryan Fuller of all people is some soulless network hack. He's a man of great creativity and originality, and if he's given a concept to remake, of course he's going to find a drastically fresh and original and twisted take on it, because that's what he does. And there's nothing in the world wrong with that.

Personally I'd love to see a complete reinvention of Star Trek from the ground up. The original has had a really, amazingly long run and built up a rich continuity, but it's got a lot of baggage and a lot of its core concepts are increasingly antiquated. I'd welcome seeing something that took the important stuff, the characters and attitude and theme, and put them into a completely new context and continuity rooted in ideas from current science fiction rather than 1940s pulps and 1960s New Wave. Not because I'm a soulless network profiteer, but because I enjoy creativity and novelty, and because I want the franchise to stay new and adaptable, to seize the cutting edge again as it originally did rather than forever being a relic of the past.

[RJDiogenes]

^^ Then why not make up a new idea?

[Christopher]

RJDiogenes wrote:

---

^^ Then why not make up a new idea?

Why doesn't a painter make up new people instead of painting portraits of real ones? Why didn't Shakespeare invent a totally new verse form instead of writing a whole bunch of sonnets? Why do so many works of music use the same rhythm and chord structures?

Every new idea builds on old ideas. That's how creativity works. Inspiration comes from experience. Structure comes from drawing on established elements and patterns. The structure you choose is just the substrate. Its familiarity is the anchor for the audience. Creativity is in what you build onto that framework, how you modify and augment it.

And it shouldn't even be necessary to defend this. Human beings have been retelling old stories for as long as storytelling has existed. Before there was widespread literacy, that was the only way to keep worthwhile stories alive. It's not unoriginal, it's not a "ripoff," and it's not something that any creator needs to justify (so long as they have the legal right to adapt the property in question). Originality isn't in where your ideas come from -- it's in where you take them next.

[Temis the Vorta]

It's all fodder to the corporations that churn out this stuff. Some fodder is better than other fodder, that's all. Brian Fuller is one of the least hacky people working on broadcast today, but if he was a real artiste, why is he remaking some dumb show from the 60s? And shoehorning Universal's back catalog of monsters into the show, yeah right, that wasn't done to kiss corporate ass.

I'm not saying the results won't be entertaining, but I'm not expecting art. Very little of what's on TV is even close to being art, and what little there is, is on cable. I watch TV for fun. If I want art, I'll go to a museum.

We may get a complete reinvention of Star Trek for instance, but the motive won't be art. It will be that it's been sold in someplace like AMC or Showtime, where it has to be reinvented to be a viable business proposition. And it may turn out that that new version of Star Trek is more artistic than anything previously, but it will be because of commerce, not art.

[RJDiogenes]

Exactly. It's all about commerce and fodder, not creativity. New ideas are derived from old ones, like Forbidden Planet was derived from The Tempest, and that's great; it's even understandable, although usually unnecessary and inferior, to do a remake. But to create an original idea, like Fuller has here, and populate it with recycled names from an old TV series is just weird. He's proven what he can do with Pushing Daisies, and he should be doing that here-- just jettison all the baggage and be completely original.

[Christopher]

^It's not weird at all. It's what creators have done for thousands of years. The ancients told the tale of Pyramus and Thisbe; a medieval Italian author turned it into a novella about Romeus and Juliet; Shakespeare turned that into a play called Romeo and Juliet; then Bernstein and Sondheim turned that into a musical called West Side Story. Virtually all of Shakespeare's plays were adapted from pre-existing literature, drama, history, and myth, reinvented by Shakespeare into completely new and different works, and many of his works have in turn been reinterpreted into new classics, not just WSS but Forbidden Planet, Ran, even The Lion King if you consider that a classic. This is a normal part of how creativity has always worked. The only thing that's weird is thinking it's weird.

[Harvey]

RJDiogenes wrote:

---

He's proven what he can do with Pushing Daisies, and he should be doing that here-- just jettison all the baggage and be completely original.

Pushing Daisies was cancelled after two short seasons. In other words, it failed. Bryan Fuller might want to do something totally original again, but he doesn't control the money -- the Hollywood studios, and the advertisers, do -- and they've always been risk-adverse. Better to back a pre-sold property that will have a built-in audience then to back something harder to market.

[Greg Cox]

Temis the Vorta wrote:

---

It's all fodder to the corporations that churn out this stuff. Some fodder is better than other fodder, that's all. Brian Fuller is one of the least hacky people working on broadcast today, but if he was a real artiste, why is he remaking some dumb show from the 60s? And shoehorning Universal's back catalog of monsters into the show, yeah right, that wasn't done to kiss corporate ass.

Or maybe he just has a genuine nostalgic fondness for all those old classic monsters and thinks it would be great fun to bring them back?

Why assume some crass commerical motive?

I grew on the old Universal Monster movies and would jump at the chance to do something with the Creature from the Black Lagoon or the Bride of Frankenstein . . . .

In fact, as I'm typing this, I'm looking at the framed, autographed photo of the Creature hanging on my office wall. As well as the Grandpa Munster and Phantom of the Opera action figures on my bookshelf.

Just because it's "some dumb show from the 60's" to you doesn't mean it that it has no value to others. We all have our own icons and fannish obsessions.

How do we know that Bryan Fuller isn't simply a fan having fun with characters he adores?

[Samaritan]

http://www.deadline.com/2012/07/slee...iseman-fox-tv/

EXCLUSIVE: The first big drama project of the 2012 pitch season has hit the marketplace. Sleepy Hollow hails from Transformers writers Alex Kurtzman and Roberto Orci, with Underworld helmer Len Wiseman on board to direct.

... based on the legend of Sleepy Hollow. It follows Ichabod Crane as he partners with Sleepy Hollow’s local female sheriff to solve the mysteries of a town ravaged by the battle between good and evil.

The project is being pitched to Fox, CBS, ABC and NBC.

Seems interesting to me, we shall see.

[Temis the Vorta]

Sleepy Hollow does sound fun, Lee Pace would be a good choice for the lead, but aren't those guys supposed to be working on the next Star Trek on TV instead? Same as Fuller, really. and I was hoping for a historical setting, at least that would be more unique.

[Nerys Myk]

Once Upon A Time and Grimm seemed to have opened the door for "Modern Fantasy".

[Harvey]

Sounds like another dreadful procedural dressed up with fantasy trappings to me. And with all of these police shows, why on earth can't a new version of Alien Nation (far and away the most interesting sf cop show that I've seen) get off the ground?

[Sindatur]

Harvey wrote:

---

Sounds like another dreadful procedural dressed up with fantasy trappings to me. And with all of these police shows, why on earth can't a new version of Alien Nation (far and away the most interesting sf cop show that I've seen) get off the ground?

(((((CLAP, CLAP, CLAP))))) +1