The 100

Why this teen-oriented drama from the CW network is the scifi surprise of the season.

The CW network as been dipping its toes into the (futuristic genre) pool with The Tomorrow People and Star-Crossed, both of which, in different ways, have failed to live up to their basic premises (another blog for another day). Third time's a charm, however, with The 100 proving it's got the scifi chops to last the distance.

Just to clarify, everyone reall-y wants to get off this thing.

The tagline for the show is "Survival isn't who you are. It's who you become" which nicely sums it up. The cast includes Richard Harmon (Continuum), Henry Ian Cusick (Lost), Paige Turco (Person of Interest), Australian actors Eliza Taylor and Bob Morley (because Aussies are awesome, although I might be biased), and Thomas McDonell, who played the young version of Johnny Depp's character Barnaby Collins in Dark Shadows.

Aw, let's enjoy the shiny, happy moments inbetween the violence.
You know, all three seconds of them.

To give the briefest of summaries, The 100 is set almost a hundred years after a nuclear apocalypse. Upside, humanity survived, the remnants living on a space station. Down side, air's running out unexpectedly. A hundred juvenile delinquents are jettisoned down to Earth a century or so before the planet's expected to be habitable, just to test the waters. Sounds cruel, but is actually preferable to being "floated", the favoured form of future corporal punishment on the station that sees the accused jettisoned into space.

The 100, 99, 98... would probably be a better title since characters have been dropping like flies (yes, this is a ham-fisted Lord of the Flies reference, in case you were wondering). Death's been a recurring theme on this program. It aint Disney, that's for sure. By episodes five and six I was starting to get fatality fatigue, partly because the deaths are used for maximum emotional and narrative punch. This is some nice writing, notable due to the repercussion attached to each incident (even those that occurred pre-show).

Seriously, these kids aren't messing around.

There's been a backlash against teen-focused television drama in recent times, probably as a result of a slight prime time saturation. Personally, I can see the allure of teen characters in terms of narrative. Teenagers are often volatile, impulsive, unpredictable, and these are all helpful traits when trying to create believable dramatic scenarios.

Teens are also at a point in life when they're in flux/deciding their place in the world, a set-up that offers a lot more scope for adventure than a settled married character might believably pursue. Obviously exceptions exist, but I think in general there's more avenue for immediate chaos in a teenage character's experience of the everyday world than the average adults.

You'd look tired too if you'd copped a spear through the chest.

A kind of emotional honesty is also at play since an element of innocence is still present. In summary, I don't discriminate against teen television because I feel scoffing at teen characters is perilously close to scoffing at science fiction as a genre; both practices embody tired attitudes and lame attempts at ennui that are, frankly, just embarrassing.

I'm also a fan of programs that work within a specific set of guidelines. It's one thing to celebrate and enjoy shows from cable stations (here's looking at you Game of Thrones and True Detective) that are allowed a creative freedom I'm sure is giddy for the writers, but it's another to appreciate the work of writers who are keeping to specific network requests, classification requirements, and time constraints.

A doctor and a mechanic. The female role models are pretty solid.

The 100 is suitably dark for a post-apocalyptic program, aside from some restraint due to timeslot and budget. I've very much enjoy seeing how this is handled because (to reiterate), it takes a certain skill to work within very particular boundaries. 

On a side note, I'm also not a fan of predictive science - I've seen many critiques of the conditions on Earth post-apocalypse, notably the resulting mutations in the show, and honestly, I'm fine with a guess, even a (probably) inaccurate one. Let the storytelling breath, people!

A good time in history to consider vegetarianism.

I find it kind of hilarious how many people complain about the way the teenage characters act on Earth. One thing audiences always seem to underestimate is how individuals react to high pressure, unfamiliar situations. Incredible stupid decisions seem par for the course in this scenario. I'm enjoying watching The 100 discover the downfalls of a lawless society, or the dangers of large water bodies, even the unexpected alliances and yes, romances. (Hey, if you could die any day, why not?) And let's not forget they're the product of an insular society with a very different ideology. In summary, cut the storytellers some slack.

Octavia grew up under the floorboards (the space station version of them) due to a one child policy on The Ark which her mother was executed for breaking. Unfortunately life on Earth's proving no Sound of Music experience either.

Technically, I really like the way it's edited together and some of the shots are beautiful. The forest location is stunning. The special effects are good quality, especially for a program on a smaller network. Occasionally the modern tracks of music super-imposed over scenes can be jarring, and the teens are slightly too clean, but that's more an (arguably) necessary side effect of commercialisation, especially since I'm guessing product placements proving problematic.

It's not a party without a budding sociopath, am I right?

Tension rises every episode, especially when the air on The Ark (that's the name of the space station) begins to run out a lot faster than expected. If the deaths on the ground got to you, wait for the cullings in space. The 100 isn't holding back any punches as the season unfolds. I'd originally heard episodes 5 and 6 are harsh, but apparently toward the end of the season the intensity picks up. (At this point, that sounds difficult to imagine.)

To clarify, the story splits between two narratives - the one on The Ark, and the one on the ground. Both scenarios involve power struggles that will impact a lot of lives. It also means the show splits between the teen-focused storylines on the ground and the adult storylines in space.

Abby finds it tough to trust Kane. Possibly because he's tried to execute her twice, and also maybe because he executed her husband, then imprisoned her daughter (but hey, I'm just making wild guesses here).

Mostly I'm enjoying The 100 because it's displaying narrative elements that embody the best kind of science fiction; the structure of possible future societies explored, ethical grey areas examined, the (often unexpected) repercussions of both noble decisions and selfish needs addressed. Basically humanities greatest traits, and its most deplorable ones, put under a microscope.

This scene is chilling.

You can't really ask much more of a television program. I'm definitely entertained, and in for the whole season. Fingers crossed it gets a second outing x

A Long Time Ago, You Used To Be Small Screen

Let's face it, you'd have to have been living on Mars (haha!) to have not heard about the now-defunct tv show that raised 5.7 million dollars on Kickstarter for a follow-up movie. I'm not going to bore anyone with backstory, or exposition. (By which I mean, my own backstory, involving a lot of Veronica Mars watching after Buffy TVS bit the dust.)

On March 14th I received email notification of a link allowing me to download a copy of the film script thanks to my Kickstarter donation (and here I was happy with t-shirt and stickers). 

Reading the script first actually made the movie even more interesting to view, in terms of process. I got to see what was cut (generally humorous lines, or longer bits of dialogue, often not what you'd expect to get chopped, oddly enough). Let me just say I was kind of sad to note the scene with the Asian lady and her gift of spicy chicken curry over rice noodles didn't make it to cinemas.

Before I begin - to critics who, before even really ingesting the film, have an instant and overwhelming condescension/aggression/allergic reaction to the television show/Kickstarter combo, all I can say is, you do not want to start today with me, Paco. 

Is it so wrong for people to love a fictional character to the point they'll pay to see her story continue? Would it be more acceptable if Veronica had been birthed in a comic format first? I mean, how many Spiderman movies have we all sat through in recent decades? (Spotto James Franco!).

To celebrate the less than traditional path Veronica Mars took to the big screen, I've decided to do a pros, cons, and "uncertain" list in place of a traditional review.

Yes, let's sit back, relax, and take in the strange girl's opinions.

Pros:

-The way the film honours the thematic core of Veronica Mars (albeit in an updated form), which is essentially, empowerment. 

The television series began with Veronica in the process of empowering herself. Following her best friend Lily's murder, she eschews the easy path of least resistance, instead remaining loyal to her father and Lily's memory, eventually solving the case. 

In the film, a decade later, Veronica's loyalty to her ex-boyfriend sees her once again solve a murder (well, technically kind of two? Or even three?) and slowly come to terms with her own wants and needs. 

It really does continue the original story; she escapes her past, establishes a new present that she supposedly should want, and eventually, chooses the future she truly desires. 

Basically the film marks the character's full transition into adulthood, a journey that began with the television series. Hats off to Rob Thomas for creating such subtle narrative continuity.

High school reunion, huh? That face sums it up.

-Using the dreaded high school reunion as a plot device because it would be too difficult/heavy handed to work numerous high school friends into the movie any other way. Added bonus? Even people who've never seen the show can relate to the HSR cringe factor. I too had an unavoidable previous engagement on said reunion night (hair washing).

-Kristen Bell is the queen of voiceovers. I didn't experience any of the expected flashbacks to Gossip Girl. She makes her voice so distinctly Veronica here, just through inflection and timing, that the comparison doesn't even come up. 

-Hearing (a variation) of the closing line from the first ever television episode of Veronica Mars in the opening voiceover of the movie was delightful. She really IS a marshmallow!

Poor Gia. At least she had great hair.

-Krysten Ritter in general. Always been a fan of the actress, now even more so. The character of Gia Goodman turned out to be a more tragic figure than I had dared imagined.

-The noir look of the film. I love that New York seemed cold and that Veronica looked almost displaced on the streets, reflecting her subconscious lack of true connection with the location.

-The nice bit of casual background dialogue that paints Veronica as slightly absent from Piz's life, at least in the eyes of his workmates and parents. Law school is the convenient excuse, but at the same time, it's clear some element of her emotional psyche isn't completely engaged.

New York doesn't suit you, V. Totally washes you out.

-I kind of liked all the symbolism. For example, the use of mirrors and windows, and the almost exaggerated use of entrances and exits. Lots of entering and leaving, and this whole idea of being trapped in locations and identities... 

-Naming the boat Serendipity as a nod to Firefly. Okay, probably not, but I'm going to pretend it was, and enjoy the reference.

-The actress who plays Mac (Tina Majorino) is so obviously having Extreme Amounts Of Fun being back in the VM universe that she giggles, grins, and almost bounces through every scene. It's kind of cute.

And the Longing Gaze Award goes to...

-My inner Vogan? Leronica? shipper dug the fact Veronica still has Logan's number in her phone (almost a decade later) stored with a photo from when they dated. WHAT A TELL.

- Actors who make minor parts memorable deserve a mention, so let's raise a toast to the expression of fear on the face of the hedge fund guy at the bar when Veronica asks for his business card to give to her hitman boyfriend.

Piz, I'm calling to apologise for all the times I referred to you as Riley 2.0

-For the first time ever, I actually empathised with the character of Piz. Who thought that could happen?! I must be mellowing in my old age.

-The after party dance scene and accompanying voiceover. LOVED the way it was filmed and pieced together. So sharp. Veronica's mind, always working...

Maybe he should try hanging with the Mayor.

-Adored Weevil's storyline partly paralleling Veronica's self-discovery, albeit in a darker way. Kind of a tin-y bit Buffy and Faith there, guys.

Uncertain:

-The Sherlock-like use of tech information, by which I mean onscreen graphics of phone call and text details that were occasionally superfluous. Frankly, if we're seeing Veronica ring Wallace, we don't actually need the text from Wallace's phone telling us Veronica is calling flashing onscreen before he picks up. Ah, yeah, we got that. (Audience Tip: If you need that much help following the story, you probably shouldn't be watching a procedural...)

-The stalker girl critics seem to love. She scored quite a lot of screen time, comparatively. Her scenes were funny, but I could have handled some tighter editing.

-Justin Long, who deserved slightly better cameo material.

"These are my people, V." Missed you, Cliff!

-Veronica's dad. I mean, Keith's okay, but unlike the majority of VM fans who adore the character, I always found him well-meaning, but occasionally creepy, often judgmental, and a tad controlling. Extremely kind hearted, yes, and quite gallant, but sometimes I got that 7th Heaven feeling, you know, where you could see the good intentions at the core of their actions, but their strict moral filtering creeped it up a little?

-The questionable PC-ness of referring to Veronica's preferred lifestyle as an addiction. I like to think of it more as adult self-awareness!

-Knowing the $10,000 Kickstarter supporter who scored a speaking role could be any one of many bit-parters onscreen and having a corner of my brain play that guessing game the entire film.

"You should always wear this."
That there is a keeper.

-Is Logan's car really so flash?* Veronica talks about it like it's the Bat mobile, but this is Neptune, Land of the (Mostly) Rich. His car is black, sleek and expensive, but, you know, not a hovercraft. 

*This stuck in my mind because Veronica makes a comment about his car not blending just before they drive past a parked vehicle that his car, kind of, blends with? O_O 

Cons:

-Logan's Navy uniform in his first scene looks at least a size too big. Maybe it's my history in styling coming to the fore, but that bugged me. Bigtime (couldn't resist).

-What a pity Leighton Meester didn't return to play the character of Carrie Bishop, she would have killed it (pun intended).

-The first third or so seemed oddly lacking in terms of a background soundtrack, to the point where I thought there was a channel missing from my download. I guess it was an attempt to focus on the story. Obviously not a hundred percent successful since I assumed technical error.

No need to look so sad, just because your girlfriend died.
And your mum. And your dad. And your ex-girlfriend... Christ.

-Veronica's love interest Logan seems slightly disempowered without his bad boy edge. I guess he's meant to have matured to be deserving of (this version of) Veronica's love, but in the second half of the film he comes across as oddly ineffectual. It could be argued, though, that cinemagoers are just not used to a female lead being so completely empowered.

-Left a bit cut by the death of some characters I loved who now can't be in another movie (if there is one).

No spoilers here, the photo's just random, stop freaking out.

Favourite Lines:

Wallace: So when Logan Echolls said jump, did you actually say the words, "how high?" or was there just an understanding that you would achieve max verticality?

"Words with friends?"
"Some people just call it texting."

Basically EVERYTHING Dick says. Always hilarious. 

Cliff: Celeste Kane's statement says her car broke and she was accosted by the motorcycle gang. She claims she was terrified. Then she says Mr. Navarro approached her car and rapped on the window with a Glock and said, "Time to party." That's when she fired.
Weevil: Please get this case dismissed before anyone believes the words "time to party" came out of my mouth.

And, the James Franco reference (I've been informed by South Californians that this is actually true).

Veronica: There may be six degrees between anyone on the planet and Kevin Bacon, but if you're under 30 and living in Southern California, you're never more than two degrees from James Franco.

And I'll sign off with a shot from the actual script that really sums up Veronica's journey xx

xoxo (kidding)

Time After Time

The passing of Harold Ramis made me think about the iconic film Groundhog Day, a movie he directed and co-wrote, and the fact that the Groundhog Day Loop has since became an actual television trope.

Science fiction and paranormal shows obviously lend themselves to this kind of narrative, so here are five fave groundhog day tv show tribute episodes from writers who obviously love that crazy god damn movie as much as I do.

THE BEST

The Stargate episode Window of Opportunity is one of the all-time best examples of the kind of hilarity that can ensue when characters live the same day over, and over, and over. AND OVER.

Jack O'Neill's meltdown is incredibly funny. He rides a bike through the base, takes up pottery, learns to juggle, plays golf with Teal'c (using the Stargate as a green), and even resigns so he can make out with Sam! 

LET'S PARTY. AND PARTY. AND PARTY.

This recent episode of Lost Girl's aptly titled Groundhog Fae. Bo and Tamsin are trapped in a loop that happens to take place at a party... Hola!

What I love most about GHD episodes are the way the audience really clicks with the character's emotions. At first, you enjoy the novelty of the experience and the lack of repercussions right along with him/her, then you, too, become increasingly exasperated. 

Funniest scene? When Tamsin lays one on Bo, not realising she, too, is trapped in the time loop and won't be forgetting that lip lock anytime soon.... AWKWARD.

HOT SAUCE

Because Supernatural has always fabulously melded humour and tragedy, this series is a perfect match for time loop shenanigans. The repeato elements in the episode Mystery Spot are, for the most part, entertainingly funny- the recurring death of Dean, not so much, but that storyline ties in nicely with the season's overarching narrative.

This is solid scripting, really using the Groundhog Day trope to great effect. (And the nod to the original movie, with the radio coming on as Sam wakes up? Nice touch.) 

WORKING RETAIL

A time looping slayer seems destined to kick some comedic ass, but surprisingly, the groundhog-style episode of Buffy The Vampire Slayer, titled Life Serial, is comparatively weak (considering how clever/hilarious the series is overall).

While still amusing, this episode isn't the best of the Groundhog bunch. I've included it though, because anyone whose worked retail knows that even when time's moving forward, it can still feel like forever...

TRY ONLINE BANKING

Ah, Mulder and Scully. Who can forget the sight of Mulder bleeding on the floor, and the look in Scully's eyes in the opener for the episode Monday? Also, props to Mulder for using the term "deja vu", and getting all clever-cute with the Freudian reference...

Such a damn fine show, especially when X-Files perfectionism melds with the Groundhog Day trope, taking it well beyond the comedic elements. This one's a stunner.

THE BEST

The Window of Opportunity episode of Stargate is one of the all-time best examples of the hilarity that can ensue when characters live the same day over, and over, and over. AND OVER.*

*See what I did there? YOU'VE BEEN GROUNDHOG'D! x

Vamps... The Entertainment Trend That Just Won't Die.

Ah, vampires. I was pretty much a fan from the first time I saw the Count on Sesame Street. I don't think I'm impartial enough to critique the new Dracula television series; the moment Jonathan Rhys Meyers fanged out, I was in. 



I can't really say why I'm a sucker for a blood addict. I know there's a lot of psychological studies linking sexuality and vampirism, but even from a young age, I was primarily fascinated by the concept of time, and of such an impossible incarnation of loneliness; without the degenerative effects of old age, the years would be entirely too crisp, sharp, and unforgettable.

The idea of a person who experiences infinite time is probably the greatest, most fascinating tragedy I can imagine. Remember when a day, a week, even a month seemed eternal? The idea that the body doesn't age and time itself just keeps unfolding forever, is a concept that caught, and held, my imagination. I always thought the potential for isolation, and ennui, was immeasurable for the undead.

Then there's the whole thirst for blood conundrum. To my mind, it's utterly disempowering. The concept of endless life with such a vicious Achilles heel is beyond horrifying; a hunger that overrules judgement (according to the literature) could only lead to a guilty conscience, and/or eventual, eternal, insanity.

Now that's hardcore.

I know a lot of detractors criticise the physical allure of the modern vampire, but I've always been a fan of film and fiction that presents evil characters in truly beautiful physical guises. We have such a primal response to (our own concept of) beauty; we're instinctively drawn to those who possess it. Culturally we reward people for being beautiful, even when our intellect/morals/ethics may argue against such a response.

Making evil people or creatures ugly, in a way that has us flinching from the get go, is almost pathetically obvious. On the other hand, wrapping something potentially dangerous and evil in an aesthetically pleasing parcel adds a whole other layer to the story, because it's almost a perversion of our initial subconscious reading of/response to the individual. 

Making a vampire on television beautiful, so that we're attracted to the character while watching it brutalise people, is much more interesting, especially with the added twist of unwilling empathy. In any form of entertainment, mixed emotive responses are the key to engaging readers/viewers, and vampires offer that opportunity in spades...

I've now decided to wait until the end of the first season of the new series Dracula to really comment on the old guy's latest tv outing. So far I'd consider the program only partially successful, but that's due more to pacing and narrative structure, not to mention some confusing attempts to modernise the female characters in a PC way that should, theoretically, endear them to today's audience, but which fails dismally.

Instead, here's half a dozen television vampires I've enjoyed watching in the past.

What's interesting is tracking the "style" of vampire that appeals across recent decades on television, from the reclusive romantic, to the yuppie slash gangster, to the smooth talking sensual artist, and onto the current sexually aggressive incarnations. A mirror, if you will, into what appeals to the general psyche of the audience at a particular point in time...


Angel in Buffy and Angel

 
Angel was originally restricted in the sense that Buffy The Vampire Slayer began as a teen-based series, so his dialogue and interactions were "younger".

However, burdening the vampire character of Angel with a psychotic alter-ego Angelus was a stroke of scriptwriting genius. Especially since Angelus was the soulless version of Angel, so the beloved character couldn't be held responsible for the massacres he committed, yet carried the guilt whenever his soul returned to his body.

Transferred to a spin-off program, Angel also became hilariously funny, but it was the scenes with his (relatively) unattainable love Buffy in which the character excelled. By being sexually off-limits, Angel was more of a romantic, existentially-suffering interpretation of vampiredom.


Julian in Kindred The Embraced



This critically slammed Spelling production was actually very interesting in terms of television experimentation. I consider it one of the first attempts to tie American primetime soapie drama for the masses with sexy supernatural allure. I don't think mainstream audiences were quite ready yet, and the writers seemed slightly uncertain how to neatly tie together the macabre and the romantic in a way that wasn't alienating for those with more traditional television tastes, but there were some solid performances in the mix.

The vampire character of Julian is a super-slick businessman so he's more of a buff, Armani-wearing vampire who is savvy with the ways of the modern world. He's also the head of a council of vampires, so he's got a hint of gangster/underworld control to his persona. This is a version of a vampire that tries to tie in the elements of attractiveness found in a mainstream soapie character (ie money/power/worldly success) with more common undead characteristics.


Henry in Blood Ties


Sexual tension is the keystone of many a successful tv couple odd pairing, and Henry and Vicki were no exception. The lore here is that vampires are so territorial they can't stay long in the same place, meaning if Henry turns Vicki to keep her alive forever, he unfortunately won't be able to spend eternity with her. It's a clever conundrum that basically dooms any romance from the start, which makes the show work.

This version of the vampire enters into the Byronesque; artistic, sensual, self-absorbed, clever, jaded, but still in the vein of a nineties television vampire representation, in that he isn't sold as overtly violent; there's more the suggestion of potential aggression held under ruthless control.


Eric in True Blood


On a side note, I consider Sookie Stackhouse to be the dumbest character to ever grace a vampire-themed television show. "Naive" doesn't really translate well onto the small screen. Luckily for True Blood, the vamps in the mix are all pretty fascinating, more than compensating for the troubling series' lead.

This is a colder, more violent, and overtly sexual interpretation of the genre that appeals to today's appetites, and proved a small screen jackpot for the network. Eric and co. encapsulate an uncomfortable primal communion of violence and desire, a leap from the more intellectually-oriented small screen vampire heroes/anti-heroes of the past.


Damon in The Vampire Diaries


What's fascinating about The Vampire Diaries is that it's the meeting place for two modern variations of the television vampire, almost a sociological experiment showcasing changing audience tastes.

The teen-focused program that debuted in 2009 offers two vampire brothers:

-Stefan, similar to Angel/Angelus from Buffy The Vampire Slayer, who is tortured, determined to be good, ashamed of being one of the undead, etc. 

-His brother Damon, a more up-to-date version of mainstream vampire preferences, in that he's a complex sociopath who likes to kill and have sex. A lot...

Damon is undoubtedly the fan favourite O_O And I have to admit, Damon is my favourite too.

In the first few seasons his narrative is interesting, his character multi-faceted, unpredictable... and morally bankrupt. Eventually lost in his own complex mythology and slightly hamstrung by the act of falling in love (but that's a whole other blog for another day), there's no denying that from the first episode, Damon rules the roost.

Comparatively, when you look at Angel from Buffy and Damon from The Vampire Diaries, you see a drastic change in the type of vampire written to appeal to younger audiences.


Dracula/Vlad/Alexander Grayson in Dracula



I've admitted to friends before that I'd basically watch a McDonalds commercial on repeat if Jonathan Rhys Meyers was in it. He's charismatic, yes, but there's almost something twisted about his energy. He gives off a distant yet vulnerable vibe, and is aloof onscreen in a way that somehow simultaneously implies intimacy; basically, the kind of interesting emotional dichotomies great actors excel at projecting. 

 Note to traditionalists: if you're looking for viewing options that stay close to the source material, you might want to skip this incarnation. JRM's Dracula is in cahoots with Van Helsing!

This is a tragic interpretation, and a complex one, since JRM's character actually has three personas in the series. Basically, the network tries to capture elements of previously popular vampire incarnations and present them to the audience in one character mash-up. The blood-drunk lunatic, the tortured romantic, and the powerful, savvy businessman are all in the mix here. The question is whether the approach works.*

(*Will save a further breakdown on this version of Vlad for a Dracula-focused blog.)

Looking at the list above, there's a glaring omission... female vampires. Which I guess provides fodder for the theory there's a strong sexual element to the allure of the vampire, after all. 

(Although it's interesting to note that on the small screen, female vampires are generally offered to the audience in support roles, rather than as lead characters or main love interests.)

Why Scifi Isn't The Drawcard It Used To Be

This year I watched the new series Defiance. Having heard about the millions forked out, not to mention the game crossover, my expectations were high. I really wanted a new scifi show to love. Most of all, I wanted to ignore the feeling in the pit of my stomach that told me all the money in the world wasn't going to save the genre right now...

Turns out, my intuition, market understanding, call it what you will, was right. The series was a mess. 

Which got me thinking. Why wasn't I surprised? Since when did my expectations, in regards to my favourite genre, become so low?

When I was young (yes, I know, I sound about ninety), science fiction shows had the ability to command mainstream primetime audiences. Major networks didn't view investing in science fiction as a game of Russian Roulette with more than one bullet (the current attitude). Back then, everyday masses watched science fiction programs of an evening without any hesitation.

I remember, as a little kid, memorising the blurb in the TV Guide for the next episode of V well before the week's wait was over. Everyone loved those scary, rat-eating lizard people, not to mention the brave resistance, as well as the moralistic aliens who crossed sides, like Charles and Willy.

And who didn't love Captain Picard? Star Trek: The Next Generation pushed boundaries. Those writers really tried. One episode that stuck in my brain saw Dr. Crusher fall in love with an alien guy who suffers an accident and is transplanted into a woman's body. The story portrayed Dr. Crusher as an individual incapable of overcoming her prejudices to be with the person she loved. Pretty edgy material for the times.

Remember Alien Nation? The ultimate illegal immigrant metaphor? I loved those freckle-headed types and their attempts to become American suburbanites. (Not to mention some of the best "alien" soundtracks to ever come out of a television spin-off.)

Even scifi shows that weren't commercial successes, like the underestimated Space: Above and Beyond, were still brilliant family viewing. They had a lot to say about a number of moral and psychological issues, and the writing was topnotch. But obviously, the commercial allure of the genre was starting to show some fractures...

Following the trail of attempts at a scifi hit, you start to see a pattern, kind of in a crash-and-burn shape over the years. You had Crusade, which hardly anyone remembers. Farscape seems like a point where scifi transitioned fully from crowd-pulling prime time shows into niche television with a loyal following.

By the time it got to Voyager, even the new Star Treks were starting to go down the gurgler. The quirky science premise of Now and Again finished off the era with lacklustre numbers that were beginning to seem a worrying norm for science fiction.

Crossing over into the new millennium, people's expectations had plummeted to the point where even a quality effort like Firefly couldn't garner enough initial audience interest to keep it on the air of a major network. The genre had become synonymous with dubious quality television, and the masses were no longer willing to risk it (more's the pity in this case).

Even the money and big names behind Dark Angel couldn't seduce the crowds. Fervent trekkies barely made it through an episode of Star Trek Enterprise, while the interesting Jeremiah struggled to hold viewers. 

For the next decade or so, there were valiant attempts to bring the genre back to life as a primetime big hitter. FlashForward tried to reassert scifi as a mainstream power, and failed dismally. Battlestar Galactica garnered major critical acclaim but couldn't translate that into a primetime hit. The 4400 soon vanished like it's characters, Surface sunk, and Threshold barely found viewers, let alone alien life forms (I know, too much punning in one sentence).

I feel that around this period, you start to see a notable drop in the quality of the output. Someone got the terrible idea to try remakes, like V (again), a narrative mess that died horribly in the ratings. And then the scale just kept sliding... 

Stargate Universe was one of the worse shows I've ever seen- set in space or otherwise. Don't even get me started on the mess that is Revolution, and Terra Nova was a shocker. Also, Dark Skies (I only watched a few episodes of the first season and complained about them in a blog that may have been longer than the original pilot script).

Which brings me back full circle to the terrible Defiance (there, I said it).

I personally think aside from "dumbing down" scifi to make it supposedly more palatable, over-sexualising the genre is another major part of the problem. Networks are often so busy trying to throw pleasing ingredients into the mix that they ruin the recipes. And audiences... well, after the first few bouts of food poisoning, they're not coming back to the restaurant any time soon. 

Dollhouse was a prime example of upper level meddling. Science fiction had such a bad rep by the time Dollhouse was picked up that the network couldn't bring themselves to let the show sit and simmer to perfection. 

(In my opinion, they should have given the writers free rein to really WRITE, because this premise had so much potential. Some of the later episodes are baked to perfection, most notably the unaired material.)



The sad part is, nobody expects scifi to rate amazingly anymore. If a network's going to risk cash, they'll generally go procedural over science fiction. The edgiest big money show is maybe a paranormal procedural, but that's as close to the line as most will tiptoe. (Shows that are marketed as "paranormal" these days are more likely to lock down an audience, like Under The Dome.)

What happened to the genre? When did code for cutting edge become code for soapies-in-the-future instead, and ones that aren't even written that well? Did some bright spark think making the futuristic elements a form of scenery, rather than the core of the narrative, will "trick" people into watching? That audiences will get so caught up in the sexual tension/potential romance they'll "forget" it's science fiction?

Perhaps science fiction has become lost, as a television genre, because the setting seems like enough to qualify, when in fact, it should be the material, the concepts addressed, that make it "futuristic"? 

Here's hoping the next decade sees intelligent material that also entertains become the norm again, and that it will be "normal" for mainstream audiences to switch on an hour of science fiction television at night.

My favourite recent science fiction release of recent times is Continuum, because the quality of the narrative harks back to ye days of Olde. It doesn't underestimate the audience, dragging complex ideas into the narrative with gusto. 



Unfortunately, the general public's expectations of science fiction are currently so dismal, the chances of a low budget science fiction program like this becoming an international primetime hit are slim. But Continuum brings back that feeling you get when you watch something fresh, strong, and mentally challenging, not to mention entertaining. 

Fingers crossed that major networks take at least one lesson from the show... that great science fiction requires great narrative, and addresses issues consuming the psyche of the times (metaphorically or otherwise). 

Note: Of course there's exceptions to every rule, like Dr Who, who often bucks trends, regenerating many times in the ratings (see what I did there?). Happy fiftieth to the wily Timelord xx