Does anyone else here agree that there is a dearth of GOOD, long running, well maintained science fiction TV in general out there to satisfy those of us who grew up on Trek, Dr. Who, Red Dwarf and the Hitchhiker�s Guide as well as the excellent scifi novels that are out there? When will the TV industry realize that you don't just throw together an interesting ensemble, a bit of tech and it automatically flows? From this season�s future offerings, how many shows will fail? The Scifi Channel has bought up many series that were very promising but lost steam because, I guess, the investors who created the show wanted a quick, easy way to print money, no doubt with an eye to Trek�s success without having a Gene Roddenberry on board to insure continuity, good storylines and a generally realistic framework.

For a time, I was a Happy Camper in front of the TV because I had found the first season of the well received EFC, Earth: Final Conflict, on the SCIFI Channel. EFC is a rather different, gritty, dark Roddenberry concept based show (though a lot of it was created by the concept team including Majel Barrett Roddenberry and DC Fontana). The original EFC's premise of a kind of silent invasion in post-modern times is one that could have been particularly good to follow at this particularly nasty moment in our history, especially since the 'Dark Knight', Synod Leader Zo�or�s powerful Implant -- Ronald Sandoval, was originally an FBI agent who worked as an anti-terrorist during a 'Sino-Indian War' which was raging when the aliens arrived and helped us to somehow make peace (which of course, being OUR planet, didn't last that long).

I started watching the series in the middle of Season 3 about 2 years ago, intrigued by the tall blue bald aliens who could 'mind meld' by using their hands and yet could not understand what makes US tick because they themselves lost their ability to use violence to protect themselves on a planet where violence is a method that many of us use to force our visions upon others who refuse to understand how right WE are. I liked the Mystery/Scifi format, especially as the people on it were recognizably like US, warts and all.

It�s amazing how FAR off base the current creators of the show are going in an attempt to capture new fans by totally neglecting the old, and it is discouraging because, you have to admit, this happens all too often. Now I fear I�m losing one hour of fairly good quality entertainment each week because the show is morphing substantially once more because of a major failure of the show�s producers to anticipate fan requests for the direction WE wanted to see. They removed Wiliam Boone, the popular protagonist, Protector to the alien Da�an between Season One and Two and lost a large slice of their fans, including the firemen and cops who liked the show.

Evidently the Young Male Viewer is the Target, the only Target in their sights these days if you make science fiction TV. And this means often the shows get formulaic and begin to base their episodes on visual appeal. You get a Producer with a good idea who thinks HE is a visionary and you get, to repeat Voyager�s ever popular format, Seven of Nine, Seven of Nine, Seven of Nine thrusting into just about every major scene forgetting that there were other reasons some of us watched the show.

Besides the Borg.

Speaking of Trek, first episode of Enterprise is proof that they still do the � place 4 male characters, 2 voluptuous females, 2 aliens into a high tech vessel and lose them in space � routine. Fortunately, Trek usually learns how to accommodate their very vocal audiences, so I�m HOPING they�ll explain the �gell scene,� as Spock would have said, �logically.� And the Beagle? Too cute. I HATE being told in such manner that I�m supposed to have instant warm fuzzy feelings with the crew. I liked how in FarScape you were thrown into a situation with Creighton who floundered for a while, trying to stay alive and sane, while � TOGETHER � you and he figured out what the Hell was going on. EFC was rather like this, encouraging you to use what Hercule Poirot called, �the little grey cells� which was a nice compliment to us, the fans, that we are generally clever sorts. Often the villians turned out to be not heroes, but more like us than we might feel comfortable, especially Ronald Sandoval.

But not now�.

As to Tribune/Alliance Atlantis who have been pushing into the science fiction market the last few years, here�s hopes that some day they will LEARN that they need to set up forums for dialogue between Those who Watch and Those who Think that they are Entertaining in order to give the scifi genre a shot in the arm. Other Producers have done this, setting up forums, but from what I can see, don�t pay anyone with sense to monitor them AND then use what they�ve gathered in a scientific manner (preferring to let the Neilson ratings drive the Industry) to get the show�s writers and producers to trim their sails to go where WE want them to go. There are signs that some Producers DO understand how to use the net. I know that Babylon 5 improved and altered storylines, going more military, because of heated fan inputs and on-line dialogues with the Man at the Top of it all. I understand that Buffy�s creative staff also kept a close and responsive eyes to the fans that like THAT genre (not me). I think that the Boards, the Forums do identify flaws accurately because usually, if you check several boards and are on a few fan club lists, they all scream the same things over and over and over.

On EFC it was "More Human Taelon interaction/Cooperation." I call for the show, if it continues, to GIVE us Humans and aliens learning from each other with both altering their attitudes, their minds as they perhaps strive together to solve a complex problem or avert a future disaster waiting, complexly, in the wings. I want lashings of OUR past, the aliens who were uplifted, then let down by the Kimera (a precursor species). I want the show to be Earth and near Earth based and would like to see the colonization of Mars. And more of the existing Taelon Moon Colony. I still see EFC as a First Contact Mission gone rather wrong and crave to see it put to rights instead of being shot in the head.

People recognize quality and they recognize when folks have given up. Right now, it�s clear that EFC has been tossed into the dustbin, Taelons first, and perhaps eked out a trifle to give Tribune legal justification that Mutant X is not just a Marvel Comics clone.

As I�ve said, most fans want a well constructed show, like a typical Roddenberry show that ACKNOWLEGES that some viewers are female and some are male and base their show design and characters to appeal to our INTELLECT as well as our eyeballs. Some of us are beginning to wonder just when a wise producer will learn how to acknowlege and exploit this fact and I tuned into Enterprise with, as the Taelon Da�an said in episode one of that series, �High Hopes.�

I, for one, am disappointed that for MY interest on Enterprise I get � Scott Bacula (Oh Boy), two rather tame 20 something males, one with a vaguely British accent who seem generally clueless rather than quietly competant (Scotty, where ARE you?) We did get an interesting doctor who resembles the Joker crossed with Neelix who was accidentally merged in a transporter accident with Voyager�s Doctor. But none of them set my heart beating like Spock or the Cardassian Gul Dukat whom everyone just LOVED to hate. Rather like EFC�s Ronald Sandoval.

I DO like the Klingon, but I suspect he�s just passing through. Too bad.

So they didn�t score really well at making this potential viewer THAT happy.

On the other hand, though Enterprise�s MALE viewers get a very acceptable Alien Babe in the very unVulcan-like female, To�pal and�.a Keiko clone, a wimpy little thing who wants to stay home teaching Vulcan 101 at first rather than go to brave new worlds. To me, it seemed she was co-opted in from a different show, one of a different genre. My husband was Most Unimpressed with her professional abilities and her �attributes' so I suspect her 'character design' needs overhaul.

And it's Trek so she can always be red shirted.

So in a manner, we�ve all been short changed because the Producers have gone with the invalid assumption that VISUAL appearance is paramount because Male Viewers of Trek are young and are driven by VISUAL appeal (that's why all the big...ships).

I THINK that to please viewers, male and female, we need to communicate to the SUITS, to quickly set up a dialogue that we wish to see characters whose attractiveness is based on their Attitude, Physical Bearing and IQ level, as well as the actor�s ability to deliver witty dialogue lacked with subtle innuendos. Which means that the show needs good Dialogue Writers. Just like shows in other genres. Folks LIKE it when a scifi show acknowledges that we viewers are, or like to think ourselves, of superior intelligence. FarScape does this. And EFC had this quality at its beginnings and from time to time when they didn't just hire free lance writers (which explained Season 2's wild fluctuations).

Looking towards the future -- though EFC�s fans are calling for SCIFI to produce a 6th season or a Taelon based spin-off, it looks like Enterprise is going to be on the weekly menu, it looks very Trek. So, I call for Enterprise to give us females good ROLE MODELS -- women who aren�t merely portrayed as "emotionally repressed" � as To�pal was told to her face several times, but as well fleshed out, well rounded as Spock certainly was. I just don't want an embarassing Laxanna Troi character. Subtle, intelligent and sensitive would be good attributes. And for contrast add stubborn, proud and perhaps callous of alien sensibilities.

I also call for them to perhaps give us an older more dynamic male on board who is clearly competent and who DOES not look like Neelix.

I want a more realistic crew structure on board with the Enterprise perhaps carrying Diplomats and Administrators from Point A to Point B and thereby, vicariously enjoying the sort of exploration of alien philosophies that the original Star Trek excelled in. I want a longer running, deeper theme to flow as an undercurrent to the show, but I don�t want it a �Time Lords� scenario with the future mucking about with the past. I found the Evil Alien Shapeshifters causing problems to be rather predictable. I would prefer something more Roddenberry, the slow alteration of mankind from what we are now, to what we really WANT to be. I LOVED the look of panic on the Captain's face when he was transported up because the Tech was new and dangerous. I want that raw, "whoa, we ARE in space and those aliens are really alien" feel. Not long tongued mammalian females lapping up butterflies.

And I want more Klingons speaking with subtitles.

[ October 02, 2001: Message edited by: Aestrae ]

I agree with some of this, but ill have to comment later, im getting sleepy.

Enterprise notes.
Possibly apocryphal, but was someone serious when they said Berman has a 'Screw You Fanboy' deskplate.

And Braga has said that he hates continuity in an interview.

[ October 02, 2001: Message edited by: CaptainMike ]

quote:

---

but was someone serious when they said Berman has a 'Screw You Fanboy' deskplate.

---

quote:

---

And Braga has said that he hates continuity in an interview.

---

Don't let people here frighten you. We're all just a little crazy. More, in some cases.

Trek's been, well bland. I think it's the Californization of the media. You know, you get the LOOK that takes precedence over the ability to act. The fact that they hired Patrick Steward, an RSC fellow, as Jean Luc- Picard MADE the Next Generation for me. Of course, Wesley Crusher, his mother, the loss of Tasha Yarr (sigh, what a great role model) and (gag) the all purpose Plot Truncation Device -- the ineptly acted Deanna Troi eventually caused me to stop watching.

I liked Deep Space 9 until they got overwhelmed with the Bajoran New Age babbly stuff, and that HORRIBLE lady, the Kai whatever, who reminded me of a Sunday School Teacher from Hell (though the actress was GREAT in the movie Purdy in a very different role). I liked the Cardassians, the fact that circumstances forced them to become soldiers rather than farmers. At first I liked Sisco, but after a while he seemed tame. And...as you can guess, I HATED Keiko. O'Brian was a favorite character (no Scotty, but a real guy) and he did NOT belong with that woman.

Voyager got too Q ish from the beginning. It was OK at first, but after a while, it got annoying. I liked Kes, didn't like her leaving rather abruptly as she 'felt' at times more alien than those characters with the funny noses. I got disinterested as everyone slowly ramped down, got less dynamic. I liked Tuvoc. Didn't like Belanna Torres who never seemed to give the show what hybrids often do-- a real insight. She just seemed like a pissed off supervisor most of the time and not THAT alien. The hotshot pilot character -- forget his name right now -- surprised me. I HATED him at first and gradually, as he matured and the writers did a better job, I got to enjoy his scenes. Seven of 9 was delightfully Borgian. And I LOVED the Doctor, especially the episode that was rather 'Groundhog Day' like with him re-enacting Grendal (I remember a dying Valkeryie like woman who was acted very well).

I've yet to see the second episode of Enterprise.

I wonder if the problem is that a lot of scifi producers do NOT read science fiction books which have probably changed since they read Tarzan of the Apes as a kid. Some of them also confuse (as EFC seems to be doing) FANTASY with SCIFI which can be the kiss of death, alienating TWO audiences simultaneously if not done just right. I also think that the Trek audience, like EFC's will put up with a lot of crappy episodes to get the good ones which eventually DO come along.

I also figured out, finally when I was reading Douglas Adam's obituary, that HE was the one who wrote the Tom Baker Dr. Who dialogue that was witty, obtuse, a mile a minute and that hooked me on the series in my 20's (which I was able to watch it on PBS from midnight to 2am Saturday nights fairly regularly). I think that the key to any series is GOOD DIALOGUE, CHARACTERIZATION and CONSISTENCY. I also think that folks like long term story arcs (EFC certainly kept us going with its unrealized potentiality), especially revealing how favorite characters change and grow as they interact with others in challenging times.

[ October 05, 2001: Message edited by: Aestrae ]

As far as I can work out, this is up there with "humans only use 10% of their brains" in the "complete bullshit that everyone seems to believe for some reason".

The comment actually was more like

"I'd ignore continuity if it got in the way of the story." Meaning that (for a Trek example, if one not to do with Braga), even though it was implied in early DS9 that Sisko's father was dead, the writers gave Ben a dad because it helped several story points.

Aestrae: Douglas Adams actually did a lot less work on Dr Who that I thought he did. He was only script supervisor for one season, and, including "Sharda", he only did two (or possibly three) stories.

You did seem to give up on the recent Trek shows really quickly. If you stopped watching TNG around Tasha's death, well, you watched pretty much the worst portion of the show, and missed all the good stuff. That's like eating only the crust on a really nice sandwhich. Same with DS9. Sisko (while never on the level of Kirk or Picard), started to pick up with season 3, when they got rid of that silly "I hate everyone cause my wife died" chip on his shoulder. And by season 6, he had become a complete psycho, which is always fun.