sf/f TV development news - 2013
- Thread starter Temis the Vorta
- Start date
^^ I wonder that, too.
The 2010 Wolf Man wasn't much of a remake-- it didn't have much in common with the original beyond recycled names. I wonder if the series will feature the same character or a different Werewolf.
The 2010 Wolf Man wasn't much of a remake-- it didn't have much in common with the original beyond recycled names. I wonder if the series will feature the same character or a different Werewolf.
Io9 is excited for Helix (Spoiler free review):
http://io9.com/first-impressions-he...utm_source=io9_facebook&utm_medium=socialflow
http://io9.com/first-impressions-he...utm_source=io9_facebook&utm_medium=socialflow
Could be interesting...
Sounds like Adam Link.
I get a kick out of Io9 being so damn happy that actual horror is back on Sciffy.
I get a kick out of Io9 being so damn happy that actual horror is back on Sciffy.
It's sad when something sf/f/horror being on Syfy is actually noteworthy. Luckily they do seem to be working on actually getting more scripted stuff on there the last few seasons. Helix, Bitten, and The Almighty Johnsons are some of my most anticipated new TV shows next year and they are all on Syfy.
That's hyperbole. Syfy doesn't have a lot of scripted shows, but I can't think of a time when there hasn't been anything that was legitimately SF or fantasy. Of course the Stargate franchise ran on the network for seven years. Eureka was definitely science fiction -- it was fiction about scientists solving scientific problems, albeit usually fanciful ones (though the science got a lot more solid in the last 2-3 seasons, depending on how you count them). Alphas was transhumanist-ish science fiction. Warehouse 13 is indisputably fantasy, though of the sort that would be called "urban" or maybe "magic realist" if you stretched the term. Continuum and Defiance are solidly SF, Lost Girl is solidly supernatural fantasy, and Being Human is solidly fantasy-horror.
Well, that's true of most networks today. It's an unfortunate fact of life, since "reality" shows are cheaper to make and inexplicably popular, so as long as a network is dependent on advertising revenues to stay in business, it really has no choice but to air them. The bitter truth is that the reality shows and the stupid Saturday monster movies and the wrestling are what pay for the scripted dramas. We don't have to watch the other stuff, but we wouldn't have the good stuff without it.
^^ Well, there's nothing wrong with funky B-Movies. It's okay to have some fun.
That was actually my point-- that they're cheering for Horror on what is called an SF channel. I wonder if they would cheer for an SF show on Chiller channel.
"Sci-fi" has always been a broader term than "science fiction," because it's a term that comes mainly from the mass media, and the mass media have always blurred the lines between the various speculative genres quite freely. So "sci-fi" implicitly encompasses works that shade over into horror or fantasy.
Exactly. It's a mass media term-- it represents the lowest common denominator. It's like "irregardless." It's wrong, but it's come to be accepted because of general low standards.
True, for a long time it was considered pejorative by those within the prose SF field. But it seems to have lost that stigma more recently as the genre has gained more mainstream acceptance. I'm referring more to my perception of how people in the mainstream have used it over the decades. The general public, network and studio execs, video stores and bookstores, etc. have long had a habit of assigning the label "sci-fi" to encompass all speculative fiction, including SF, fantasy, horror, superheroes, and whatnot. And as I said, there are countless mass-media works that blur the line between SF and fantasy, like Star Wars (which is a sword-and-sorcery fairy tale dressed up with outer-space trappings) or superhero comics (Superman is an alien from another planet, but he's vulnerable to magic and he hangs out with an Amazon princess molded from clay and imbued with life by the Greek gods).
I used to share the view that "sci-fi" was a derogatory label and resisted its use, but I've come to see it from more a descriptivist point of view -- acknowledging how people in general actually use the term, rather than trying to prescribe a single view of how it "should" be (or not be) used.
I used to share the view that "sci-fi" was a derogatory label and resisted its use, but I've come to see it from more a descriptivist point of view -- acknowledging how people in general actually use the term, rather than trying to prescribe a single view of how it "should" be (or not be) used.
"SF" is even quicker, though. 
I prefer I prefer Sci-Fi/SF/F/H/UF/MG. I find it just rolls off the tongue. 
Similar threads
