Lost in Space : Why was it cancelled ?

[RJDiogenes]

^^ Eh, I find it easy enough to believe, given the general intelligence of TV programming execs.

I never said otherwise. But saying that nuBSG, nuTrek, nuStargate, nuMarvel and a zillion other things aren't part of the current cultural Zeitgeist is like saying that Star Trek, Laugh-In and Room 222 didn't arise from the same cultural Zeitgeist.

I never said they weren't part of the same cultural Zeitgeist. I said you can't treat them all as equal in quality or approach. A Zeitgeist is a general thing, and as I said, you can't judge a specific thing by a general trend or pattern. Because any general trend is going to have a lot of variety among its specific parts.

Which I never did. The D&G fad effects other shows and movies that are of generally high quality-- such as Firefly and Lost-- but the examples I gave earlier, including the LIS reboot pilot, are more typical examples of how ridiculously bad the trend is.

 

[Christopher]

^More shoddy reasoning. A storytelling approach is not intrinsically good or bad; only the execution is. The fiction that the quality of a story can be determined by its category rather than its individual execution is the reason why networks keep creating so many bad knockoffs in the first place, since they think duplicating the format or approach of a successful show is more important than duplicating the creative freedom and freshness that led to the success.

 

[Forbin]

^More shoddy reasoning. A storytelling approach is not intrinsically good or bad; only the execution is. The fiction that the quality of a story can be determined by its category rather than its individual execution is the reason why networks keep creating so many bad knockoffs in the first place, since they think duplicating the format or approach of a successful show is more important than duplicating the creative freedom and freshness that led to the success.

You just reminded me of - I think it was called Hollywood Heat, someone's attempt to duplicate the Miami Vice formula and compete with that show. Salt & pepper buddy cops, sharp clothes, pop music, fast cars... I think it may have lasted 6 episodes before the collective wretching of the public killed it.

 

[stj]

A well made soap opera is still a soap opera. Any kind of reasoning saying that a well made soap opera is as good as a drama, despite the ridiculous plots and plastic characters, is defective reasoning.

The dark and gritty trend is absurdly untrue to life, and motivated by cheap cynicism, not artistic vision. The notion that if you burnish the cliches a bit it suddenly becomes good is yet more defective reasoning.

The claim that one cannot usefully make generalizations is irrational.

 

[stonester1]

Yes, because we know that to be true to life, you need constant smiles...a laugh track...bright colors and a freeze at the end with everyone grinning after the punch line and the "laugh" music is cued.

"Dark and Gritty" is no more "untrue" than any other trend. Art imitates life. There is good and bad art. But as Christopher says, a storytelling style is just a storytelling style, it's all in the execution.

The recoil at "DnG" in general says more about the one doing the recoiling rather than DnG itself.

 

[Nerys Myk]

A well made soap opera is still a soap opera. Any kind of reasoning saying that a well made soap opera is as good as a drama, despite the ridiculous plots and plastic characters, is defective reasoning.

The dark and gritty trend is absurdly untrue to life, and motivated by cheap cynicism, not artistic vision. The notion that if you burnish the cliches a bit it suddenly becomes good is yet more defective reasoning.

The claim that one cannot usefully make generalizations is irrational.

My wife watches Soap Opera (And I guess I do to ) and their plots and characters are as varied as you would find on their nighttime "drama" counterparts. Many of the "good dramas" of the past 30 years were/are nothing but one night a week Soap Operas. Including such stalwarts as "Hill Street Blues", "ER" and "The West Wing".

 

[Christopher]

^Yep. Labels do not define things, they only categorize them, and the categorizations are often oversimplified. There's no real, unambiguous difference between a "soap opera" and a "drama." "Soap opera" is just a nickname that was coined in the early 20th century for serialized radio dramas that were sponsored by soap and detergent makers like P&G or Lever Brothers. So using the term to refer to serialized dramas in general is more a slangish analogy than a formal, technical classification. So there's no logic in trying to draw an absolute distinction between "soap opera" and "drama" in terms of content, let alone in terms of quality.

 

[RJDiogenes]

^More shoddy reasoning. A storytelling approach is not intrinsically good or bad

Well, yeah, it would have been shoddy reasoning had I said anything like that. Rather, I gave a couple of examples of good shows that fall into the category. I'm still not sure what you're after here.

 

[stj]

People who managed to ignore the ludicrous misrepresentations of Star Trek are posing as guardians of careful judgment and cautious reason?

What does recoiling at the dark and gritty trend tell us? That the one recoiling has eyes to see, ears to hear and a mind that remembers how real life is different from the adolescent BS, obviously. Courtesy forbids explaining what not recoiling shows us. Courtesy also forbids falsely attributing blatant nonsense to others.

Yes, many esteemed television series have hybridized with soap operas. This is one reason I found West Wing unwatchable and Hill Street Blues forgettable. Personally I had worked in hospitals so ER was particularly memorable. I agree that the soap opera elements in ER were substantial, but always to its detriment. The notorious tranmogrification of Mark Greene into a kind of murderer is classic soap opera character development. The bizarre life of John Carter, ditto. I thought Lockdown was a hoot and enjoyed it immensely but on what planet is that good drama? And the love lives of Abby Lockhart and Kovacs! I'm afraid I don't even believe you really think the soap opera parts are good. Hathaway and Ross did not make ER special.

ER was a little different from most medical shows before it, and since, in that it didn't focus solely on the Hero Doctor. It always included a junior (Carter originally, later Rasgotra,) storylines on institutional politics and patient of the week stories because ER wasn't a soap opera but a show about medicine as an institution.

The refusal to draw distinctions is the refusal to think. The insistence that only unambiguous differences are real is simplistic. I heartily recommend that anyone who resents those simplistic work off their resentments by going into their kitchens and tearing those buggers right off every can and box in the cupboards. I don't know who's been selling absolute distinctions, or buying either. I do know that the claim that artistic form and theme and content don't matter but skill in execution does, is another way of saying that a professional can deliver some nebulous, undefinable skill on demand (i.e., for money.) In practice, it's the hacks' creed.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Yes, many esteemed television series have hybridized with soap operas. This is one reason I found West Wing unwatchable and Hill Street Blues forgettable. Personally I had worked in hospitals so ER was particularly memorable. I agree that the soap opera elements in ER were substantial, but always to its detriment. The notorious tranmogrification of Mark Greene into a kind of murderer is classic soap opera character development. The bizarre life of John Carter, ditto. I thought Lockdown was a hoot and enjoyed it immensely but on what planet is that good drama? And the love lives of Abby Lockhart and Kovacs! I'm afraid I don't even believe you really think the soap opera parts are good. Hathaway and Ross did not make ER special.

I didn't say if they were "good" just that they are a part of most of the drama ( and even comedies) we see on TV. Nor are those "outlandish" elements always a bad thing or even "detrimental".

But it was a soap opera, just one focused on medicine. You could see similar stories on "General Hospital" or "The Doctors."

 

[Hober Mallow]

A well made soap opera is still a soap opera. Any kind of reasoning saying that a well made soap opera is as good as a drama, despite the ridiculous plots and plastic characters, is defective reasoning.

If it's well made, it then it wouldn't have ridiculous plots or plastic characters. You're generalizing and saying no matter how well made a soap opera is, it must have ridiculous plots and plastic characters. Absolutely nothing beyond your own fancy makes that the case.

 

[stj]

If you've watched serialized dramas, whether they're called soap operas or not, you've seen that the demand for sensational scenes to fill up the time, but no way to finish the story because the show has to continue, inevitably means that the plots become ridiculous. Big events that supposedly change a character's life bounces right off the plastic person, and they repeat the story. Or the plastic person undergoes a radical personality remolding so they can finally have another kind of big event. Or both. There ar no exceptions that I can recall. It is fanciful to think otherwise.

As to whether they are well made, soaps, excuse me, open ended serial dramas, can have the big scenes be splashy, even if their effects are temporary. The convoluted plots may be ridiculous but they can at least be cleverly contrived. Characters may re-enact the same vicariously satisfying scenario repeatedly, but it may be sincerely felt each time. The dialogue can be witty or natural as contrived occasion demands. The props can work.

Even an episode like Love's Labor's Lost couldn't be seen on The Doctors or General Hospital. An episode like The Alderman, no way. Benton blowing the whistle on the researcher, Carter publicizing a drug side effect, Corday attacking the hours imposed on residents, none of those stories would even make sense in a standard soap opera.
Even throw away lines about foreign doctors or hospital wait times couldn't be found in an open ended serial drama about the personal lives of a group of physicians and nurses.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Even an episode like Love's Labor's Lost couldn't be seen on The Doctors or General Hospital. An episode like The Alderman, no way. Benton blowing the whistle on the researcher, Carter publicizing a drug side effect, Corday attacking the hours imposed on residents, none of those stories would even make sense in a standard soap opera.
Even throw away lines about foreign doctors or hospital wait times couldn't be found in an open ended serial drama about the personal lives of a group of physicians and nurses.

Why not? Though instead of the patient of the week being involved it would be a regular. I've seen plots about shoddy research, corporate medicine and overworked residents on soaps.

 

[stonester1]

People who managed to ignore the ludicrous misrepresentations of Star Trek are posing as guardians of careful judgment and cautious reason?

What does recoiling at the dark and gritty trend tell us? That the one recoiling has eyes to see, ears to hear and a mind that remembers how real life is different from the adolescent BS, obviously.

Not to mention the rigid, dogmatic attitude that all must see it your way, or they are deficient in some way.