Re: sf/f TV development news - 2012
SGA had the Wraith, lawl.
SGA had the Wraith, lawl.
sf/f TV development news - 2013
- Thread starter Temis the Vorta
- Start date
Re: sf/f TV development news - 2012
Vampires in space would be tough to pull off, because everywhere in interplanetary space is sunlit except for the umbrae of planets and moons. Maybe vamps could travel through space so long as they stayed in windowless compartments or in their coffins, but they'd have to spend most of their time on the dark sides of planets or moons. And even that's problematical. Any habitat on Luna would spend two whole weeks in daylight, followed by two weeks of darkness. (Though that tradeoff might be worth it. Isn't there a vampire story called 30 Days of Night that does something similar with the Arctic Circle?)
And what about werewolves? What would happen if, say, a werewolf were in orbit of the Moon and perceived it full once every 30 minutes or so? What if a werewolf were on the Lunar dayside? And would, say, the moons of Jupiter have the same effect, or is it uniquely Earth's Moon?
Vampires in space would be tough to pull off, because everywhere in interplanetary space is sunlit except for the umbrae of planets and moons. Maybe vamps could travel through space so long as they stayed in windowless compartments or in their coffins, but they'd have to spend most of their time on the dark sides of planets or moons. And even that's problematical. Any habitat on Luna would spend two whole weeks in daylight, followed by two weeks of darkness. (Though that tradeoff might be worth it. Isn't there a vampire story called 30 Days of Night that does something similar with the Arctic Circle?)
And what about werewolves? What would happen if, say, a werewolf were in orbit of the Moon and perceived it full once every 30 minutes or so? What if a werewolf were on the Lunar dayside? And would, say, the moons of Jupiter have the same effect, or is it uniquely Earth's Moon?
Re: sf/f TV development news - 2012
Vampires in space is an old idea. There's "Shambleau" by C.L. Moore, the movie Lifeforce, Bava's Planet of the Vampires, Queen of Blood, etc. Heck, even Vampirella is from the planet Drakulon!
Adding a sexy, angsty vampire (or vampire-type alien) to a space opera is not a bad idea . . ..
Vampires in space is an old idea. There's "Shambleau" by C.L. Moore, the movie Lifeforce, Bava's Planet of the Vampires, Queen of Blood, etc. Heck, even Vampirella is from the planet Drakulon!
Adding a sexy, angsty vampire (or vampire-type alien) to a space opera is not a bad idea . . ..
Re: sf/f TV development news - 2012
True... and, granted, the idea about vampires being unable to survive sunlight is not an intrinsic part of vampire lore, but an invention of the silent film Nosferatu.
But I'm just generally sick of vampires and don't want to see them taking over my beloved space opera.
True... and, granted, the idea about vampires being unable to survive sunlight is not an intrinsic part of vampire lore, but an invention of the silent film Nosferatu.
But I'm just generally sick of vampires and don't want to see them taking over my beloved space opera.
Re: sf/f TV development news - 2012
And there was the salt vampire in Star Trek's "The Man Trap".
And there was the salt vampire in Star Trek's "The Man Trap".
Re: sf/f TV development news - 2012
Borg aren't zombies, because the sexy moments are when the tubules go in. Direct visual analogue to biting. The zombie imagery with the Borg is pretty close to the real Haitian zombi mythology, shuffling resurrected slaves. Very little of the modern zombies iconology has to do with that. The coincidence in names merely occasionally confuses, as in thinking the Borg are zombies. The Borg started as "technology" run amok, manifesting a very old Trek theme of technology as metaphor for the repression imposed by society.
Modern zombies in another time would have been called "ghouls." Not so long ago, either. Stephen King in his book on horror stories cited the Big Five in horror as the Vampire, the Werewolf, the Witch, the Ghost and the Ghoul, if I remember correctly. The ghoul/zombie is more or less the embodiment of fear of the lower orders, the mindless masses who want to take everything we have (eat us.)
Mnd control horror stories and dystopias are the real equivalent of the Haitian zombi. As for vampires in space, it's been done by Neal Asher in some tiresome book I couldn't finish and forgot the name of. Some gibberish about vampires as another species. The vamp of course was the captain of the spaceship. Then they meet something even worse.
Borg aren't zombies, because the sexy moments are when the tubules go in. Direct visual analogue to biting. The zombie imagery with the Borg is pretty close to the real Haitian zombi mythology, shuffling resurrected slaves. Very little of the modern zombies iconology has to do with that. The coincidence in names merely occasionally confuses, as in thinking the Borg are zombies. The Borg started as "technology" run amok, manifesting a very old Trek theme of technology as metaphor for the repression imposed by society.
Modern zombies in another time would have been called "ghouls." Not so long ago, either. Stephen King in his book on horror stories cited the Big Five in horror as the Vampire, the Werewolf, the Witch, the Ghost and the Ghoul, if I remember correctly. The ghoul/zombie is more or less the embodiment of fear of the lower orders, the mindless masses who want to take everything we have (eat us.)
Mnd control horror stories and dystopias are the real equivalent of the Haitian zombi. As for vampires in space, it's been done by Neal Asher in some tiresome book I couldn't finish and forgot the name of. Some gibberish about vampires as another species. The vamp of course was the captain of the spaceship. Then they meet something even worse.
Re: sf/f TV development news - 2012
I believe A. E. Van Vogt did it as well, although I'm too lazy to look up the story.
And it suddenly dawns on me that I have neglected to plug my anthology, Tomorrow Sucks (now on sale at B&N), which consists of nothing but sf vampire stories . . . .
I believe A. E. Van Vogt did it as well, although I'm too lazy to look up the story.
And it suddenly dawns on me that I have neglected to plug my anthology, Tomorrow Sucks (now on sale at B&N), which consists of nothing but sf vampire stories . . . .
Re: sf/f TV development news - 2012
Yeah the time is right for some heavily disguised space vampire story. It doesn't need elements like drinking blood or worrying about sunburn, but should focus on the core stuff that makes them popular. They're sexy, they're dangerous, they're angsty, they're powerful, they're the eternally fascinating inhuman Other. Use those elements and build something from scratch. I still like the cyborg angle, but without the mindlessness of the Borg.
Yeah the time is right for some heavily disguised space vampire story. It doesn't need elements like drinking blood or worrying about sunburn, but should focus on the core stuff that makes them popular. They're sexy, they're dangerous, they're angsty, they're powerful, they're the eternally fascinating inhuman Other. Use those elements and build something from scratch. I still like the cyborg angle, but without the mindlessness of the Borg.
Re: sf/f TV development news - 2012
And intrinsic vampire lore would be... what, exactly? Because Nosferatu is as influential a vampire movie as they come (and the 'die with sunlight' idea is only the most obvious example).
Unless you're talking about mythological vampires, which aren't quite the same thing as the bloodsuckers of Sheridan Le Fanu and Bram Stoker's books.
And intrinsic vampire lore would be... what, exactly? Because Nosferatu is as influential a vampire movie as they come (and the 'die with sunlight' idea is only the most obvious example).
Unless you're talking about mythological vampires, which aren't quite the same thing as the bloodsuckers of Sheridan Le Fanu and Bram Stoker's books.
Re: sf/f TV development news - 2012
Well, every vampire series tweaks the rules to fit their own purposes. Buffy vampires aren't exactly the same as Anne Rice vampires, which play by different rules than Underworld vampires and Blade vampires and Being Human vampires and True Blood vampires, etc.
The "lore" has never been locked in stone. Even Le Fanu and Stoker aren't consistent with each other, or the various movie versions.
Heck, the Hammer films aren't even consistent with each other!
Well, every vampire series tweaks the rules to fit their own purposes. Buffy vampires aren't exactly the same as Anne Rice vampires, which play by different rules than Underworld vampires and Blade vampires and Being Human vampires and True Blood vampires, etc.
The "lore" has never been locked in stone. Even Le Fanu and Stoker aren't consistent with each other, or the various movie versions.
Heck, the Hammer films aren't even consistent with each other!
Re: sf/f TV development news - 2012
^
Kind of my point, Cox, how vampires are depicted is obviously pretty fluid and depends on the author. Still I don't get someone insisting that something from Nosferatu is somehow less intrinsic to the vampire idea, because if we restrict the idea to folklore that feels reductive when discussing vampires in fiction, and if the line is drawn past one of the most famous and influential vampire movies ever made, where the heck does one put the line?
^
Kind of my point, Cox, how vampires are depicted is obviously pretty fluid and depends on the author. Still I don't get someone insisting that something from Nosferatu is somehow less intrinsic to the vampire idea, because if we restrict the idea to folklore that feels reductive when discussing vampires in fiction, and if the line is drawn past one of the most famous and influential vampire movies ever made, where the heck does one put the line?
Re: sf/f TV development news - 2012
But vampire lore is centuries older than motion pictures. And the foundational work of all modern vampire fiction is Bram Stoker's Dracula, which predates Nosferatu by a quarter century (after all, Nosferatu was an unauthorized adaptation of the book with the names changed to avoid a lawsuit). And Stoker's Count Dracula is able to walk around in daylight without burning up or disintegrating or whatever. He just prefers the darkness.
"Intrinsic" means essential, part of the fundamental nature of a thing. If it were intrinsic, then it would be impossible to tell a vampire story without it. But Stoker told his vampire story -- the vampire story -- without it, and so have others (including, let's face it, Stephenie Meyer). Thus it is optional, not intrinsic.
But vampire lore is centuries older than motion pictures. And the foundational work of all modern vampire fiction is Bram Stoker's Dracula, which predates Nosferatu by a quarter century (after all, Nosferatu was an unauthorized adaptation of the book with the names changed to avoid a lawsuit). And Stoker's Count Dracula is able to walk around in daylight without burning up or disintegrating or whatever. He just prefers the darkness.
"Intrinsic" means essential, part of the fundamental nature of a thing. If it were intrinsic, then it would be impossible to tell a vampire story without it. But Stoker told his vampire story -- the vampire story -- without it, and so have others (including, let's face it, Stephenie Meyer). Thus it is optional, not intrinsic.
Re: sf/f TV development news - 2012
Which I explicitly stated, twice. The point being that restricting instrinic properties of vampires in fiction to folklore is pretty limiting.
Of course you don't mean vampire works that are centuries older than motion pictures. Or even a decade older than motion pictures (though a couple decades older than Nosferatu), you basically just mean Bram Stoker's Dracula, apparently. And also:
...otherwise they're just beings similar to vampires (like the 'salt vampire' in "The Man Trap") or basically vampires given a different name.
And while this is basically true - a writer can use a word of an unreal thing, like a vampire or an ogre or whatever, to mean whatever he wants it to mean in the context of his story - it's not that helpful in defining what we usually mean when we talk about vampires, and what we may expect from a vampire story.
Which I explicitly stated, twice. The point being that restricting instrinic properties of vampires in fiction to folklore is pretty limiting.
Of course you don't mean vampire works that are centuries older than motion pictures. Or even a decade older than motion pictures (though a couple decades older than Nosferatu), you basically just mean Bram Stoker's Dracula, apparently. And also:
Then the only intrinsic part of the vampire idea is that they're called vampires (if that). They don't need to suck blood, be undead, have the ability to change into wolves or climb walls (to cite Bram Stoker), they just need to be identified as vampires.
...otherwise they're just beings similar to vampires (like the 'salt vampire' in "The Man Trap") or basically vampires given a different name.
And while this is basically true - a writer can use a word of an unreal thing, like a vampire or an ogre or whatever, to mean whatever he wants it to mean in the context of his story - it's not that helpful in defining what we usually mean when we talk about vampires, and what we may expect from a vampire story.
Re: sf/f TV development news - 2012
No, I mean every work of fiction or lore that has not adopted Nosferatu's innovation of vampires being killed by sunlight. Obviously nothing before that movie would've used it, and at least some works after that movie have not used it either, including I Am Legend and, ugh, Twilight.
Well, yeah, that's basically my point. Burning up in sunlight is not an intrinsic trait of vampires because it's not used in every vampire story. I think that's a very straightforward statement. I don't understand why you object to it. It sounds as if you're reacting to the word "intrinsic" as if it were some kind of value judgment, as if it were somehow offensive to say something wasn't intrinsic. I don't understand that. I've already pointed out the definition of the word.
By analogy, holodecks are not an intrinsic element of Star Trek stories; they're something used in a lot of ST stories that came out after a certain date, but they weren't part of the original conception and they aren't used in every ST story. It's as simple as that.
So no, I'm not talking about folklore versus fiction. I'm talking about stuff before 1922 versus stuff after 1922 -- and there's a lot of vampire stuff, both folklore and fiction, from before 1922. Surely you don't deny that? Not to mention, again, the various works of fiction after 1922 that have portrayed vampires as able to survive sunlight.
That's all I'm trying to do here: to make the simple point that it is possible to tell vampire stories that don't include them dying when exposed to sunlight. I don't understand why that's objectionable to you, since it's a matter of documented fact.
No, I mean every work of fiction or lore that has not adopted Nosferatu's innovation of vampires being killed by sunlight. Obviously nothing before that movie would've used it, and at least some works after that movie have not used it either, including I Am Legend and, ugh, Twilight.
Well, yeah, that's basically my point. Burning up in sunlight is not an intrinsic trait of vampires because it's not used in every vampire story. I think that's a very straightforward statement. I don't understand why you object to it. It sounds as if you're reacting to the word "intrinsic" as if it were some kind of value judgment, as if it were somehow offensive to say something wasn't intrinsic. I don't understand that. I've already pointed out the definition of the word.
By analogy, holodecks are not an intrinsic element of Star Trek stories; they're something used in a lot of ST stories that came out after a certain date, but they weren't part of the original conception and they aren't used in every ST story. It's as simple as that.
So no, I'm not talking about folklore versus fiction. I'm talking about stuff before 1922 versus stuff after 1922 -- and there's a lot of vampire stuff, both folklore and fiction, from before 1922. Surely you don't deny that? Not to mention, again, the various works of fiction after 1922 that have portrayed vampires as able to survive sunlight.
That's all I'm trying to do here: to make the simple point that it is possible to tell vampire stories that don't include them dying when exposed to sunlight. I don't understand why that's objectionable to you, since it's a matter of documented fact.
Re: sf/f TV development news - 2012
I'm pointing out that this use of intrinsic makes it a meaningless tautology.
Working with this logic, the intrinsic property of a vampire story is:
Something that is called a vampire is in the story.
If I wrote a story about a race of people who are secretly ancient sea monsters called vampires, who mostly eat kelp? Boom. That's a vampire story. Maybe they also live in dusty old castles in Eastern Europe and opine they don't drink wine (because they'd rather eat kelp), but that's kind of a big difference there.
And that's all well and good, obviously. There have never been a canonical set of 'rules' that vampire stories have needed to follow, or that you could find to be true of all the most famous/popular/acclaimed/your personal list of best vampire stories.
But you're not left with any 'intrinsic vampire lore' to fall back on. Death by sunlight isn't being excluded from a canon, there is no such canon.
Nope, that is not what I wrote nor does it resemble what I wrote.
I'm pointing out that this use of intrinsic makes it a meaningless tautology.
Working with this logic, the intrinsic property of a vampire story is:
Something that is called a vampire is in the story.
If I wrote a story about a race of people who are secretly ancient sea monsters called vampires, who mostly eat kelp? Boom. That's a vampire story. Maybe they also live in dusty old castles in Eastern Europe and opine they don't drink wine (because they'd rather eat kelp), but that's kind of a big difference there.
And that's all well and good, obviously. There have never been a canonical set of 'rules' that vampire stories have needed to follow, or that you could find to be true of all the most famous/popular/acclaimed/your personal list of best vampire stories.
But you're not left with any 'intrinsic vampire lore' to fall back on. Death by sunlight isn't being excluded from a canon, there is no such canon.
Re: sf/f TV development news - 2012
Kegg, I just don't understand why you're making such an argument out of this. All I'm trying to say is that it's possible to tell vampire stories in which the vampires aren't killed by sunlight. If you don't like my choice of words, okay, but it's not what this is about.
Kegg, I just don't understand why you're making such an argument out of this. All I'm trying to say is that it's possible to tell vampire stories in which the vampires aren't killed by sunlight. If you don't like my choice of words, okay, but it's not what this is about.
Similar threads
