Snarkpit Forum Index » General Banter » Space Genre Poll
Space Genre Poll
« previous page 1
2
Post Reply
Quote
 Re: Space Genre Poll
Posted by Juim on Mon Oct 3rd at 2:15pm 2005

? quoting Crono
You do know Fox canceled the series, right? I imagine, once they did that they relinquished the rights back to Whedon. It's probably in his contracts somewhere.

Fox did cancel the series, I was there the day Joss Whedon announced it to all the crew(he was incensed and very hurt). I think basically Joss was a big money earner for fox, so they green lighted and indulged him in this very expensive show.(It was the most expensive television pilot in Fox History at around 10 million plus including re-shoots, and they never even aired it!) Buffy was winding down, and Angel was on its last legs, so Fox took a shot on this series. We took up the same amount of stage space as Speilbergs Minority report and used alot of Foxes resources. When the first episode aired it was a second pilot, which tried to establish 9 key characters within half the time allotted the original pilot. Shortly thereafter we were pre-empted by the world series (in America anyways) for almost a month. By that time the numbers just did'nt justify the cost per episode(around 3 million plus if I remember). Fox, in an attempt to appease Joss released the show to him and He shopped it everywhere until Uni said yes, although I think he may have had to promise them some other stuff exclusively to get it done.

Heres a shot of the exterior of the Serenity bridge stage 15 Fox studios.





Quote
 Re: Space Genre Poll
Posted by Agent Smith on Mon Oct 3rd at 2:15pm 2005

? quote:
But the reason I like Star Trek and StarGate more than most other Sci-Fi shows is because they make fun of themselves ... constantly. Especially stargate ... oh man.


Damned Straight. I love that episode when Jack and Sam are in the lift, there's an awkward silence, then Jack starts whistling the theme tune to SG-1. Pure Gold!

I'm looking forward to seeing Serenity, since I missed Firefly when it was on TV here. I think they showed only three episodes at 12:30am.

Battlestar was good but it took itself way too seriously, almost to the point that I could barely stand watching it. I like serious sci-fi, but it bugs me when they take it really seriously, particularly when its as full of holes and BS as BG was. Thing that bugged me was the technology, an extreme mix of old stuff and new tech stuff. They developed magnetic containment shlieds or something to hold in atmosphere on the flight deck, but couldn't develop a fricking particle shield to protect the ship. Also all there weapons were no more advanced than what we have now. You think they'd have figured out how to make better weapons, considering they've mastered space travel and spawned a super advanced race of machines. It's enough to make me nuts!



Ham and Jam Contributor
http://www.hamandjam.org

'Get your stinking paws off me, you damned dirty ape!'



Quote
 Re: Space Genre Poll
Posted by Nickelplate on Mon Oct 3rd at 4:13pm 2005

In a lot of sci-fi movies it seems that EVERYONe is in a military unit. There don't seem to be any civilians. like in star trek.

I prefer the star wars world, where there are civilians and only some are military, like IRL (in real life)




I tried sniffing coke, but the ice cubes kept getting stuck in my nose.
http://www.dimebowl.com



Quote
 Re: Space Genre Poll
Posted by Crono on Mon Oct 3rd at 4:37pm 2005

Ah, that was nice of them.

Okay, seriously, I'm not a Star Trek geek or anything like that, but ... if you think the entire show just has military figures then you've only seen a handful of episodes. Think about it, on a military vessel, now, how many civilians would there normally be? Specifically, think of the Navy, which is what Star Trek is the most like (I'm speaking about TNG and DS9, the other series' are just ... trash)

I love when Stargate makes fun of its self. Like all the ones with Murray.

But, Star Wars is one of the most unrealistic SciFi anything ever, it's all based around technology that's really infeasible (light sabers, buildings without enough support, giant ships having gravity)

In fact, everything in Star Wars is explained by "the force", past lightsabers, lightspeed, and gravity on the ships ... which they just never touch ... oh wait, that's right, lightsabers are a crystal or something like that.

Anyway, I like them both, but ... Star Trek actually deals with scientific ideas. Star Wars is just set in the ... past ...

Honestly, the one SciFi show that is the WORST about theoretical ideas is Stargate, they hand them out like candy. At least, Star Trek, in most cases, applies theoretical ideas to what it would apply to ... if anything.

But all Science Fiction writers, unless they're strongly rooted in science, will smudge it to make it plausible. Why do you think Rail Guns are in a lot of apocalyptic scifi? They're not a particularly efficient gun ... in fact, they get destroyed by the ammunition (it's like a yellow gas or grease or something like that) I don't remember the exact details, but, it's a ridiculously inefficient and expensive weapon, no matter how much damage it can cause ... an atomic or hydrogen bomb are more efficient, to be honest.

And since when did Sci-Fi mean "Bad Horror"? Is there a reason why they get mushed together? And I mean things like Friday the 13th being in the SciFi section at video stores.


Blame it on Microsoft, God does.



Quote
 Re: Space Genre Poll
Posted by Addicted to Morphine on Mon Oct 3rd at 5:33pm 2005

Yeah, some people hate when Star Wars is classified as Science Fiction.

I can only imagine how Isaac Asimov feels about that.

Anyway -- when you think of something like Starship Troopers you can see how its generic ambiguity can lead it to be classified as either science fiction or bad horror.




Quote
 Re: Space Genre Poll
Posted by wil5on on Tue Oct 4th at 9:33am 2005

I thought Star Wars was meant to be like storytelling... like "long ago in a galaxy far away" isnt actually from our perspective, its from the perspective of the narrator, who could in fact be thousands or millions of years in the future.


"If you talk at all during this lesson, you have detention. Do you understand?"
- My yr11 Economics teacher



Quote
 Re: Space Genre Poll
Posted by Crono on Wed Oct 5th at 12:57am 2005

Right, which is why the general idea of science fiction isn't a time period ... but ideas.

In fact most science fiction has no hard science in it, it's all social science, or there's a set up (like Ringworld ... no science past the setup of the story).

It's like H.G. Well's "The War in the Air" ... it was science fiction. (Not that all of it is exactly how it works now) Or even Jules Verne's "20,000 Leagues Under the Sea", that s**t is kind of scary at times. Since, they're so f**king close. And you look at when they were written though ... long before the concept was really generally known. In both cases, of course, with Nemo and the Nautilus there's a lot of stuff that's just ... BS ... but if you analyze the story and separate the thematics from the science ... you'll see it's pretty solid when explained. Of course, Verne realized to use a submarine, coal or wood wouldn't be good enough, it's too inefficient to produce steam this way (or electricity, although I don't think that's in the book) so, he hinted at a nuclear power source.

It's only when there are "gimmicks" that it becomes implausible (Star Trek gravity ... phasers ... teleporters .. replicators ... just Star Trek in general).

But of course it's all there for a reason.


Blame it on Microsoft, God does.



Quote
 Re: Space Genre Poll
Posted by FatStrings on Wed Oct 5th at 1:32am 2005

i guess i havent told my oppinion yet
id say star wars
especially the novels, particularly the x-wing series are wonderful




Quote
 Re: Space Genre Poll
Posted by parakeet on Wed Oct 5th at 1:42am 2005

A perfect tie O___O i like independant scifi



.else /me ~kill you
www.arclan.net




« previous page 1
2
Post Reply