imho The Sci Fi channel has become the playground for contemporary pulp science fiction. Anyone acquainted with pulp should know/tends to agree while there were a few bright, shiny stars in the pulp era (hammett, chandler, wells and verne pretty much comprise the major force of their numbers), by-and-large pulp was trash. That's the Sci Fi Channel summed up for me. BSG is one of the best dramas on tv in some time. The rest I can easily do without.
It also might be worth mentioning that in the wrestling community it was more or less leaked that unnamed Sci Fi execs wanted to start programming for a broader audience than science fiction fans are considered to allow (thus explains ECW and other perhaps questionable decisions).
I would like to clarify that I'm not biting on ECW. I'm a fan of both wrestling and science fiction (yes, we do exist and are quite numerous in my experience LoL) tho when I heard ECW going to Sci Fi I, like it seems with a lot of people, was left scratching my head in wonder. I actually miss the old days when they showed semi-bad shows that had a cult following like Friday the 13th. I would definitely kick in more 'speculative' source material than they already do.
In any case, I just hope Sci Fi doesn't go the way of MTV who no longer shows music videos and Cartoon Network that now shows live-action movies. I understand the ratings gig, so I cannot hate on a network for trying to improve their product, but a niche market has always had a place and has garnered some amount of revenue. I'm saddened to say I can also liken a lot of the cable channels going the route of big news media: everything becoming streamlined and syndicated nationally so we have everyone and their dog's opinion on Anna Nicole's demise (may she rest in peace) yet we haven't a clue as to what's happening in our own back yard.
Am I off the mark on this?
Thursday, March 8, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
the pulp comparison is an interesting one... i've never been much of a fan of sci-fi network in practice, but it's a nice idea in theory... and while i am enjoying BSG, it's not as high on my list as everyone else's. the problem with sci-fi is that while the pulps produced maybe half a dozen gems (surprised you didn't mention howard and lovecraft), BSG is pretty much sci-fi's only hit. my memory may be wrong about that though.
if sci-fi needs to expand their programming, i'd rather see them dip into fantasy and horror before pro wrestling (and yeah, i love wrestling too!)... does sci-fi air stuff like hercules or xena?
no hercules or xena at this time that I know of. it's largely crappy movies and x-files. u also missed stargate sg-1. i think the numbers qualify it as a hit. not sure, tho. dunno how i could omit howard or lovecraft. my bad indeed.
Well, I heard that the producers for many of the made for Sci Fi Channel movies have a standard for the movie pitches they get: if they dont laugh their balls off in the pitch meeting they dont make it. So they are really trying to make Pulp SciFantasy. Wich I think is fine.. as for the idea that they will start losing the SCiFi part of their concept as they branch out is another matter that I can t really comment on.. but i haven't noticed it too much... then again I dont have cable and watch BSG at my neighbors.
haha thanx illgnosis
Post a Comment