sf/f TV development news - 2013

[RJDiogenes]

Re: sf/f TV development news - 2012

^^ Or maybe I just made a funny remark that bounced off of Temis's comment. If mine was insulting, then I guess hers was worse, right?

Do you bashers really not understand how obnoxious and mean-spirited it is to say things like that? You're not just insulting the movie, you're insulting the taste, judgment, and intelligence of those of us who did like the movie.

Wow. You mean that every time somebody points out that something really popular is really bad they're doing all those terrible things? I guess I'll like everything I see without question from now on so I don't hurt anyone's feelings.

What I'm talking about is the differences in interpretation among the storytellers themselves. Even with the pretense of continuity, different Trek series and films represent different points of view, different interpretations of what that continuity is, how it fits together, what belongs to it and what doesn't (e.g. whether the animated series or certain movies should count), what the ground rules of the universe are (e.g. whether it's based in plausible science or wild technobabble), etc. Ultimately it's all filtered through the interpretations of different creative minds, even when they are pretending it all forms a coherent whole.

Of course. So what? In terms of Trek, all these different creators managed to be mostly consistent throughout the entire run. That's what creators should do when working with an established concept: Remain true to the concept while bringing something new to the table. I'm not sure what we're arguing about here.

I know a lot of people hate Voyager, but First Contact? Really? For me FC is only behind the Abrams movie and Wrath of Kahn in my Trek movie rankings.

The Voyager finale was awful because of the timeline-changing plot-- something incredibly unethical that was treated as heroic. First Contact was decent for the last fifteen minutes or so, but prior to that was just a stupid, mindless zombie movie.

 

[Sindatur]

Re: sf/f TV development news - 2012

^^ Or maybe I just made a funny remark that bounced off of Temis's comment. If mine was insulting, then I guess hers was worse, right?

That's not the way reads, especially since Temis points out, it's those of us, like on the board who are the exception (IE: We're the ones driving up the numbers by seeing it multiple times) IMHO. The General Audience might see it again, with another group of folks, but, they're not likely to watch it 3 or 4 or 5 times, like many of us

Not liking someone is fine, posting about that is fine, it's when that post comes off as personally offensive it's not fine

 

[stj]

Re: sf/f TV development news - 2012

Admiral Janeway's selfish history-changing plot in Endgame was exchanged for a heroic history-changing attack on the Borg. Genocide of the bad guys is the kind of history changing everyone can get behind. (The Admiral dies for her sins, what more do you want, gang-rape? Captain Janeway, like all of us, has the right to change her future.)

Yes, Fist Contact was a dumb space vampire (not mindless zombie, get the facts right!) movie. It was still the only re-watchable TNG movie.

As to the new Star Trek movie and concerns with continuity, as I recall there some tedious persiflage in the new movie that rationalizes that. Doesn't help the movie a bit. In Star Trek, Spock was the cool character and Kirk/Spock was such a famous friendship it inspired slash. In the new Star Trek movie, Kirk is the cool character and Kirk viciously attacks Spock, which we are supposed to believe is the foundation for a new famous friendship. Plus, Star Trek improved the believability of the setting and premises, while the new movie invents new offenses against plausibility.

Driveling about how narrow continuity has never been part of the Trek phenomenon misses the direct opposition between the two Star Treks. No doubt the completely white, completely non-geeky guy being the cool one is more popular. And no doubt adolescents of all ages feel like friendship is like being accomplices in defying the 'rents and the teachers, so that getting all drippy about each other has nothing to do with it. But as much as you might like the takeaway from the new Star Trek, the only thing it's got to do with the old Star Trek is Leonard Nimoy.

 

[AviTrek]

Re: sf/f TV development news - 2012

Is The Last Ship going to debut in the fall? If it appears later, Last Resort might be cancelled by then. It's got a terrible times lot with too much competition for the male demographic. TNT is a better place for that concept, since they don't demand as high ratings and they could sell the show to the Falling Skies audience. ABC has no compatible series to use to bootstrap a new guy show, since they program heavily for women.

If it's just going to pilot now, I doubt it will debut in the fall. My guess is if it gets picked up, it will either air with Falling Skies next summer or air in Falling Skies timeslot after Falling Skies finishes its run next summer.

 

[Christopher]

Re: sf/f TV development news - 2012

Wow. You mean that every time somebody points out that something really popular is really bad they're doing all those terrible things? I guess I'll like everything I see without question from now on so I don't hurt anyone's feelings.

Come on. It's not about whether you dislike a movie, it's about how you express that dislike and whether it's fair or hurtful.

I don't like The Wrath of Khan much. But I don't constantly hijack every Trek movie thread with mean-spirited, abusive rants about what a horrible movie it was and how only idiots and fools could possibly like it. I strongly dislike the choices Nicholas Meyer made. But I don't impugn his competence, intelligence, or motives just because he happened to make creative choices that don't conform to my personal taste. Criticism does not require hatred, hostility, or abuse. Disagreeing with the choices made by a creator does not require vilifying the creator on a personal level or damning the intelligence or judgment of anyone who liked that creator's choices. Those are the tactics of a bully, not a reasonable critic.

Of course. So what? In terms of Trek, all these different creators managed to be mostly consistent throughout the entire run.

Superficially, yes, but there were still differences in interpretation and nuance. And then there were the massive continuity glitches or retcons that the fans simply choose to ignore in the name of pretending it all fits together, like Khan's followers changing race and getting younger, or Deanna in Insurrection saying she's never kissed a bearded Riker despite doing so multiple times in TNG, or Jonathan Archer commanding a ship named Enterprise despite statements in earlier shows that Kirk's Enterprise was the first. As I keep saying, the pretense of continuity is just part of the fiction. Everything that happens in the franchise is made up, just something we're pretending happened, and sometimes that means pretending that something actually happened differently than we pretended earlier. Which is why you can't dwell too much on "continuity" as some kind of overriding truth.

That's what creators should do when working with an established concept: Remain true to the concept while bringing something new to the table. I'm not sure what we're arguing about here.

If you haven't figured it out yet, you never will. You're just not listening to anything except your own biases and preconceptions, so of course you're not able to understand it even though I've been explaining in detail for what feels like weeks now. So I'm done trying.

 

[Out Of My Vulcan Mind]

Re: sf/f TV development news - 2012

Christopher Judge has a new sci-fi show in the works, which he teased at Comic-Con without giving a title or any details of the premise:

"It's a sci-fi show. We are going to announce soon. We've already signed a deal with a certain company, and I think fans will get a kick out of who it is. And we are in negotiations with a second company that also fans will get a kick out of, because they are doing some of the best stuff in film right now. And it will be only their second foray into television. I can't wait to let it out of the bag. The announcements will probably be relatively soon, probably in the next month or so."

 

[Kegg]

Re: sf/f TV development news - 2012

^
That's an interesting ambiguous statement, implying that two of the companies involved in his show are, well, nerd-popular, one for films in particular. If I was gonna wildly guess I'd throw a dart at Marvel because they seem to be hugely popular with their superhero line and I can't read a pop culture website without an announcement of another Marvel film on the front page.

And even if HBO or Showtime decided to do a space opera, is Star Trek the first thing they'd think of? Or would they take a page from Game of Thrones or The Walking Dead, and adapt a well-regarded title from novels or graphic novels, that would have more snob appeal than a franchise associated with bland broadcast?

The latter. I can easily see Showtime or HBO or AMC or whatever hypothetically making a space opera series, and doing so in a way that keeps with their brand. I don't see any of them using the Star Trek license to pursue this. It'd be an original title or as you say an adaption of novels or the like.

On the other hand, something like TNT's Falling Skies - more family-friendly and surprisingly optimistic than AMC's zombie-filled apocalyptic drama - is definitely a future I could imagine for Star Trek.

I still wouldn't discount the networks though, honestly. If there's ever to be space opera on network TV again, Star Trek is exactly the kind of broadly successful franchise that'd do it (and of course J.J. Abrams, who did what I consider to be a bang-up job on the new movie, has apparently a good track record with network TV - I say 'apparently' as I've never actually watched his TV shows).

Sure, even if you feel that cable TV right now is considerably more interesting than what network TV is putting out, the fact remains at one point you really liked a network TV franchise called Star Trek... so I don't think it's a terrible prospect.

 

[Christopher]

Re: sf/f TV development news - 2012

I still wouldn't discount the networks though, honestly. If there's ever to be space opera on network TV again, Star Trek is exactly the kind of broadly successful franchise that'd do it (and of course J.J. Abrams, who did what I consider to be a bang-up job on the new movie, has apparently a good track record with network TV - I say 'apparently' as I've never actually watched his TV shows).

Well, Abrams is so busy these days that it's been a long time since he personally ran a show produced by Bad Robot; I think Felicity and Alias were pretty much the only ones. Mostly he executive-produces shows created and run by other people, like Damon Lindelof and Carlton Cuse for Lost and Jeff Pinkner and J. H. Wyman for Fringe (although Kurtzman & Orci created that one). So the track record for Bad Robot shows has been uneven. For every Alias or Lost there's been a Six Degrees or Undercovers.

I daresay that if there were a Trek TV series from the current movie brain trust, it would more likely be created, produced, and run by Kurtzman/Orci, with Bad Robot and K/O as production partners along with CBS. (In fact, Orci's apparently looking into the possibility of a new animated Trek series, something K/O has some experience with, since they're the showrunners for Transformers Prime.)

 

[Kegg]

Re: sf/f TV development news - 2012

Well, Abrams is so busy these days

I'm aware of that. I didn't imply that he would be involved in any hypothetical new Star Trek, but that Abrams - who I felt did well by Star Trek - has a past in network TV. So by the same logic I could imagine a Star Trek that is fresh, fun, exciting, et cetera, all without being on American cable.

CBS does seem like the by far the most likely channel to air it, at that ('cause rights and such).

 

[Christopher]

Re: sf/f TV development news - 2012

CBS does seem like the by far the most likely channel to air it, at that ('cause rights and such).

Theoretically, except that of all the broadcast networks, CBS has historically been the one least interested in airing science fiction programming. And their upcoming fall schedule has absolutely no SF in it unless you count Person of Interest, which is borderline at best. So I don't see CBS being eager to air a space show, even one owned by their corporate partners, because it doesn't fit their network identity.

And while production companies and TV networks tend to share common corporate owners and umbrella names these days, they're still separate entities, and networks do air shows produced by other conglomerates' production houses; for instance, Fringe is produced by Warner Bros. but airs on FOX rather than The CW. So while it's nice and cozy if a show's production company and its network are owned by the same conglomerate, it's not a requirement.

Of the major broadcast networks that still exist, the two that have historically bought and aired the largest number of SF/fantasy shows (or rather, whose genre shows have been the largest percentage of their total lineup) are FOX and NBC. Based on that, I'd consider them the most likely candidates to want to pick up a new Star Trek series -- perhaps NBC in particular because they have a history with it.

 

[Sindatur]

Re: sf/f TV development news - 2012

CBS does seem like the by far the most likely channel to air it, at that ('cause rights and such).

Theoretically, except that of all the broadcast networks, CBS has historically been the one least interested in airing science fiction programming. And their upcoming fall schedule has absolutely no SF in it unless you count Person of Interest, which is borderline at best. So I don't see CBS being eager to air a space show, even one owned by their corporate partners, because it doesn't fit their network identity.

And while production companies and TV networks tend to share common corporate owners and umbrella names these days, they're still separate entities, and networks do air shows produced by other conglomerates' production houses; for instance, Fringe is produced by Warner Bros. but airs on FOX rather than The CW. So while it's nice and cozy if a show's production company and its network are owned by the same conglomerate, it's not a requirement.

Of the major broadcast networks that still exist, the two that have historically bought and aired the largest number of SF/fantasy shows (or rather, whose genre shows have been the largest percentage of their total lineup) are FOX and NBC. Based on that, I'd consider them the most likely candidates to want to pick up a new Star Trek series -- perhaps NBC in particular because they have a history with it.

Yea, it's funny, we all like to hate on FOX for "always cancelling so many SciFi shows", but, the reason they cancel so many, is because they give so many a chance

 

[Bob The Skutter]

Re: sf/f TV development news - 2012

Well, Abrams is so busy these days

I'm aware of that. I didn't imply that he would be involved in any hypothetical new Star Trek, but that Abrams - who I felt did well by Star Trek - has a past in network TV. So by the same logic I could imagine a Star Trek that is fresh, fun, exciting, et cetera, all without being on American cable.

CBS does seem like the by far the most likely channel to air it, at that ('cause rights and such).

Well Showtime are owned by CBS so there's always that. But this conversation seems to be about broadcast TV.

 

[Out Of My Vulcan Mind]

Re: sf/f TV development news - 2012

Ron Moore is developing a cable TV adaptation of Diana Gabaldon's Outlander series. You can read Deadline's report here.

 

[Christopher]

Re: sf/f TV development news - 2012

Yea, it's funny, we all like to hate on FOX for "always cancelling so many SciFi shows", but, the reason they cancel so many, is because they give so many a chance

Exactly. Also, people tend to forget that show success or failure is not simply about the whims of executives but primarily about whether ratings and ad revenues are enough to offset the cost of producing a show. SF/fantasy shows generally cost more to make and have smaller niche audiences than mainstream shows, so they're intrinsically less likely to succeed. So they have a high failure rate on every network, even with the best efforts of the network execs to promote and nurture them.

Not to mention that it's been a decade since Firefly ended and the executives who made the bad decisions about it no longer work for FOX, so it's really past time the fans got over it.

 

[Sindatur]

Re: sf/f TV development news - 2012

Yea, it's funny, we all like to hate on FOX for "always cancelling so many SciFi shows", but, the reason they cancel so many, is because they give so many a chance

Exactly. Also, people tend to forget that show success or failure is not simply about the whims of executives but primarily about whether ratings and ad revenues are enough to offset the cost of producing a show. SF/fantasy shows generally cost more to make and have smaller niche audiences than mainstream shows, so they're intrinsically less likely to succeed. So they have a high failure rate on every network, even with the best efforts of the network execs to promote and nurture them.

Not to mention that it's been a decade since Firefly ended and the executives who made the bad decisions about it no longer work for FOX, so it's really past time the fans got over it.

Eh... I'm bitter over more than just Firefly Matter of fact, I wasn't even aware of Firefly until it was already gone. Dollhouse, Tru Calling and Sapce:Above and Beyond were shows I watched in first run.

But, yea, agreed, as painful as some of the FOX (And SyFy) cancellations are, no reason to hate on them for the business decision they were forced to make (Though TNT deliberately sabotaged the B5 spinoff Crusade, so they could weasel out of it, so, it's OK to be bitter there )

 

[Temis the Vorta]

Re: sf/f TV development news - 2012

The conversation shouldn't be about broadcast; I'd be surprised to ever see Star Trek on broadcast again.

Ron Moore has a new time travel show, at least in the premise: Outlander. WWII nurse time travels to 18th C Scotland.

Edit, I see I've been beaten to the scoop. Again.

Looking forward to Christopher Judge's announcement...

 

[Temis the Vorta]

Re: sf/f TV development news - 2012

^^ Or maybe I just made a funny remark that bounced off of Temis's comment. If mine was insulting, then I guess hers was worse, right?

That's not the way reads, especially since Temis points out, it's those of us, like on the board who are the exception (IE: We're the ones driving up the numbers by seeing it multiple times) IMHO. The General Audience might see it again, with another group of folks, but, they're not likely to watch it 3 or 4 or 5 times, like many of us

Not liking someone is fine, posting about that is fine, it's when that post comes off as personally offensive it's not fine

Also, what I said is unquestionably true. Most people don't think about the movies they watch or shows they see, beyond the immediate experience. Nor should they. The last movie I saw was The Avengers and before that, The Hunger Games. I'm sure that there are True Believers for both that are incensed at those movies, but I can't waste my time worrying about that. I'd never be able to watch movies at all if I were inclined to let them take over my life. it's absurd enough that I'm even thinking about one movie three years after it debuted.

 

[DWF]

Re: sf/f TV development news - 2012

Christopher Judge has a new sci-fi show in the works, which he teased at Comic-Con without giving a title or any details of the premise:

"It's a sci-fi show. We are going to announce soon. We've already signed a deal with a certain company, and I think fans will get a kick out of who it is. And we are in negotiations with a second company that also fans will get a kick out of, because they are doing some of the best stuff in film right now. And it will be only their second foray into television. I can't wait to let it out of the bag. The announcements will probably be relatively soon, probably in the next month or so."

It's probably his Rage Of Angels series.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

Re: sf/f TV development news - 2012

CBS does seem like the by far the most likely channel to air it, at that ('cause rights and such).

Unless something truly monumental happens to change what CBS is and the audience they are chasing, and I'm sure there will be plenty of advance notice of something like that, there is no possibility at all that CBS will show Star Trek. I doubt they'd ever show sci if of any kind, unless it's the barely sci if type of show like Person of Interest.

CBS Studios may produce Star Trek, but it will be shown elsewhere, where it makes more sense.

The way network ratings are going, I wonder how long broadcast of any kind will exist.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

Re: sf/f TV development news - 2012

Electric City debuts on Yahoo today.

The animation put me off but if anyone checks it out, tell us what ya think.