Tag Archives: WTS

SYFY is Back?

Posted on by

This was originally published in Watch The Skies for November 2014

“If I insult you, it’s probably because you deserved it.” Harlan Ellison

Disclaimer: I don’t have cable any more. More than two and a half years ago I got fed up with another rate increase. I had just taken my second paycut in an attempt to survive a floundering economy and things looked bleak. I was forced to take a long, hard look at what cable television programming had to offer me and that programming came up wanting. Choice made, cable cut. While the seperation was difficult, I believe much like dropping a dangerous addiction, I don’t miss it.

I have stated many times that I am a fan first and foremost when it comes to all things science fiction and fantasy. One of the things I enjoyed when I had cable was the channel where those things I loved could call home. Then came a number of very poor choices from that channel, not the least of those being professional wrestling. While professional wrestling is fiction of a sort it fails to meet the criteria for science fiction on every front. I spent a great deal of time bashing and despariging the network that once gave me a weekly dose of crumudgeon (and I still miss those rants). I was not alone.

While the channel carrying the name of my beloved genre was busy trying to shed the loyal fan base the entertainment, the core, the very shows that should have lived there dashed off to other channels where they met with wild success. There are now far more popular genre television shows on other channels as there are on the network that claims them, if only in title. There were a number of failed experiments in genre programs that I would have thought should have been on a channel dedicated to science fiction. It should have all been on a channel dedicated to science fiction. Reaching out and trying to attain something is vital. Own the subject, good, bad or indifferent. The channel didn’t, it ran and hid. It was, and is frustrating. The experiments, the thought provoking stories wrapped around circumstances not of this world were popping up anyplace other than “home”.

Giving credit where credit is due, the channel I have often compared to a sexually transmitted disease now seems to be owning the error of their ways. A recent article published by EW gives some insight into how things will work going forward and gets the new head of original programming Bill McGoldrick to answer some of these criticisms. The article is full of hope and positive, forward thinking statements.

“I think now it’s about giving our audience some fresh stuff.” Mr. McGoldrick said. He gave out some thoughts on where the channel has been and where he sees things going. I’m intrigued by what he has to say. I like the idea that the channel dedicated to science fiction will be heading back to outer space. The mini series Ascension looks like it could be absolutely fascinating. The other thing it is? Most importantly it’s not like other things that are on right now. The things that do the best, the ones that get the highest ratings or score the biggest returns are the things that give a story that’s different than what’s out there. I don’t want another procedural. I want compelling story telling.

They talk a good talk, but can they walk that good walk or are they just walking dead? I look forward to finding out.

http://insidetv.ew.com/2014/10/28/syfy/ The EW article is worth the read.

Old News?

Posted on by

On the off chance that I catch a reader here that isn’t connected to me via Watch The Skies where I posted this originally – how original is Hollywood?

Hollywood is unoriginal. Shocking to hear I’m sure. Somebody’s gone and done a study to try to back that up. I linked it below, but I question how the whole thing is broken down, grouped and quantified. I’m not opposed to a movie based on a book (or comic) if it’s something that hasn’t been done 3 times before (rebooting Spiderman again anyone?). I’ve got something all written up and ready to take on SyFy for this month’s Watch The Skies Fanzine, but I saw this and thought I’d see what others had to say on the subject a little ahead of this month’s meeting…

Study

Built To Last

Posted on by

This was originally published in the Watch The Skies fanzine for the February 2014 issue:

For some reason building technology tends to get left out of the discussion when people look at science fiction. It’s always there, it’s just never the hot topic. Maybe it’s not active enough. Maybe it doesn’t have the sexy appeal of rocket ships or green alien women. There are exceptions, but even those exceptions tend to be limited in how the place where all the action happens is handled. The part that interests me is just how large a part buildings play in science fiction and fantasy stories, how completely integral they are and how those descriptions seem fade to “mere” background.

Having spent some time working in architecture I’ve struggled with what most folks know about the field. Many of my friends have heard me rant when confronted with somebody going on and on about Frank Lloyd Wright – particularly if that’s the only name in architecture they know. I tend to counter them immediately by saying, “He was a short ego-maniac that made short buildings with leaky roofs…” That rarely goes over well. It is hyperbole to make a point. While the vision and the design are undeniable, the last thing designed by Mr. Wright was in the 1950s. There are decades of design that have come on since then.

Getting to know what modern architects are designing and getting constructed should be an important part of conversations about the future. What technologies are going into the places where we live, work, eat and play every day? How will we interact with those places? Will they make us comfortable or will they be sterile and uninviting? How will those places look and feel to the people that use them every day? How will they look to the people that will see these structures 50, 100 or more years in the future? Will they last that long given the materials that are used?

Once you’ve taken a few moments to consider the technology and other aspects of architecture, consider the deeply visual nature of those designs. I’m going to stay away from the written descriptions and the worlds of fantasy and stick strictly with science fiction that has made it to the big screen.

What would Blade Runner be if you didn’t get to see Los Angeles?

Would The Fifth Element be the same if New York wasn’t so huge you needed to have flying cabs?

Where would Luke be if Bespin wasn’t a city in the clouds?

There are so many amazing structures out there and so much technology that can be added to them that architecture, the built environment, should be a topic of study for the science fiction community. Take some time, look around. Learn who some of the people are that give us the places where the future happens. Next time you’re out someplace try slowing down and looking up at the structures around you. You won’t be the only one, and you might see something that will spark your imagination.

Bonus stuff – there have been some interesting articles lately by people that think something similar. Check these articles out.

Gizmodo: World’s worst architect? http://gizmodo.com/frank-gehry-is-still-the-worlds-worst-living-architect-1523113249

The Onion: http://www.theonion.com/articles/frank-gehry-no-longer-allowed-to-make-sandwiches-f,8716/?ref=auto

iO9: Organic Brooklyn? http://io9.com/will-brooklyn-look-like-this-in-a-century-1523174170

Structures that belong in a science fiction film: http://flavorwire.com/409062/20-works-of-architecture-that-belong-in-a-sci-fi-film/