Mark Holtz
05-08-03, 12:47 AM
After watching tonight's episode of Enterprise, it's really regretable to see a good cast and a good set of characters stuck with scripts that suck and recycle old ideas complete with the "cosmic reset button" that makes everything better at the end.
Does anyone remember when the Borg showed up in Q Who? They were scary, you couldn't negotiate with them, you couldn't bargain with them. They made the Romulans and the Klingons look like childs play. Or, 13 years ago, in Best Of Both Worlds when Picard said, "I an Locutas of Borg. Resistance is futile. From this point forward, you will service... US.", leaving us in a lurch from mid-June until late-September. (Fans of Dallas had it worse. JR was shot at the end of March, and the series didn't restart until November. For several months, the question was "Who shot JR?")
Now, what do we have? The only appointment television is Buffy and Angel, and Buffy is leaving after seven years. How long can Survivor stay with their formula? The Mole had you guessing the entire way. The Amazing Race took you to exotic destinations, and while there was a little backstabbing, you have to accomplish your goal.
I need to update my listings, but we have about 658 hours of television Trek. The show has been on in various incarnations for nineteen years. Even if you watch only one hour of Trek a day, it would take you almost 22 months to see all the episodes. Doctor Who ran for twenty-six seasons.
Sure. the original Twilight Zone is a fondly remembered show. Some episodes are considered classics, others were stinkers. If you collect the entire series on DVD, the early volumes have the best episodes.
Even Mystery Science Theater 3000 mocked itself. In the theme song itself, they say, "If you're wonder what he eats and breathes and breathes and other science facts, then repeat to yourself it's just show, and you should just relax." Even on Joel's last episode, the escape pod was called Deus Ex Machina. It comes from greek mythology, and means that here is a plot device, it's flimsy, so be careful.
Of the science fiction pioneers from the "modern" Science Fiction era, we had mentioned JMS and Josh Whedon. What about Chris Carter who created The X Files. It was stuck on one of the worst possible time slots (Fridays at 9 PM) and had a limited budget. Yet, they went in with good storytelling, and The X files suceeded. The only sin was that the X Files lasted two or three seasons longer than it should have, but it created it's own niche, it's own "mythos" if you will. I will admit that I didn't watch much of X Files in either network or syndication, but only because that brand of storytelling didn't appeal to me, not because it was a bad show.
I won't say that every science fiction show was good. There were some stinkers like The Burning Zone, War Of The Worlds, and SeaQuest. But, I will admit that there were shows that had a good premise, but couldn't substain themselves. Sometimes, the failure was because of a bad time slot.
Maybe it's because success breeds imitation. If memory serves me correctly, both Star Wars and Close Encounters Of The Third Kind were both very successful in the cinema. So, we ended up with a bunch of knock-off and clones. Some were good, others were simply terrible. Paramount then resurrects Star Trek as a motion picture which was successful, and those series of pictures ended up in the creation of Star Trek: The Next Generation. The first season wasn't the greatest, but it was good enough to keep it going longer than anyone expected. Some said five years, others said six years because of the actor's contracts. We ended up with seven years.
But, then the spin-offs began. Star Trek: Deep Space Nine had a downward slide, but was kicked in the side of Babylon 5 with the superior storytelling at half the budget. But, Paramount wanted to launch it's own network, so they created another series, perhaps prematurely, called Star Trek: Voyager. Funny thing is, both UPN and WB launched at the same time, yet UPN was given a better chance at surviving. Of all the shows that were launched in UPN's first season, all but Voyager was cancelled. Now, the twist is that WB is considered the better network, while UPN is on life support and nicknamed "The Smackdown Network".
How about the SciFi Channel? I used to watch it all the time. Sure, they showed the SF cheese like Buck Rogers, Lost In Space, Space: 1999 and Battlestar Galactica. They also showed some short-lived series that had not been seen in years, and even showed Dark Shadows. But, they also took some chances, like airing Anime. The first Anime was a weekend marathon was Robot Carnival, Lensman, and Vampire Hunter D. (They also showed the Streamline version of Akira, but it was butchered due to the material.) They showed both versions of Dune on a weekend. Hell, they showed bad Japanese SF films. But, something went wrong along the way. They did acquire an exclusive contract to show the original Star Trek and Twilight Zone, but other series are out of reach. TNN has the rights to show TNG, DSN, and Voyager, then alienates the viewers with the black bar. SciFi did show Higlander and Hercules, but they've moved on to other networks. But, while I can stretch the "science fiction" to include fantasy, I fail to see how Apollo 13 or Braveheart qualify as Science Fiction. They are good movies, but they are not Science Fiction.
Maybe I'm becoming cynical. Maybe it's because television operates in cycles, and we are about to see the end of the era of SciFi. Sitcoms were out for years, then The Cosby Show revitalized the format. Survivor was the surprise hit of Summer, 2000 getting ratings than the network's combined rating for their hour of coverage of the political conventions, and that has spawned other reality shows. CSI began slowly, but is now the top-rated show, and it makes the science explanations interesting, and has influenced other shows.
Maybe it's the networks that are at fault. They order only seven episodes of a series, and if it doesn't perform well, it gets yanked. Whatever happened to standing behind the show? M*A*S*H, Cheers, and All In The Family were bad performers in their initial season. M*A*S*H ended up running longer than the Korean war, and the final episode is still one of the highest rated non-sports event.
The part I really hate is the network's attitude that the programs are just filler for the advertising. They produce only enough episodes to launch a series in October, and for the sweeps months of November, February, and May. December and March are repeatsville. And the network executives wonder why the ratings overall are dropping. What would have been considered a mediocre rating 20-25 years ago is now a top 10 rating.
Enough with this rant for now. I feel like Howard Beale from Network. It's ironic how prophetic that movie actually was.
Does anyone remember when the Borg showed up in Q Who? They were scary, you couldn't negotiate with them, you couldn't bargain with them. They made the Romulans and the Klingons look like childs play. Or, 13 years ago, in Best Of Both Worlds when Picard said, "I an Locutas of Borg. Resistance is futile. From this point forward, you will service... US.", leaving us in a lurch from mid-June until late-September. (Fans of Dallas had it worse. JR was shot at the end of March, and the series didn't restart until November. For several months, the question was "Who shot JR?")
Now, what do we have? The only appointment television is Buffy and Angel, and Buffy is leaving after seven years. How long can Survivor stay with their formula? The Mole had you guessing the entire way. The Amazing Race took you to exotic destinations, and while there was a little backstabbing, you have to accomplish your goal.
I need to update my listings, but we have about 658 hours of television Trek. The show has been on in various incarnations for nineteen years. Even if you watch only one hour of Trek a day, it would take you almost 22 months to see all the episodes. Doctor Who ran for twenty-six seasons.
Sure. the original Twilight Zone is a fondly remembered show. Some episodes are considered classics, others were stinkers. If you collect the entire series on DVD, the early volumes have the best episodes.
Even Mystery Science Theater 3000 mocked itself. In the theme song itself, they say, "If you're wonder what he eats and breathes and breathes and other science facts, then repeat to yourself it's just show, and you should just relax." Even on Joel's last episode, the escape pod was called Deus Ex Machina. It comes from greek mythology, and means that here is a plot device, it's flimsy, so be careful.
Of the science fiction pioneers from the "modern" Science Fiction era, we had mentioned JMS and Josh Whedon. What about Chris Carter who created The X Files. It was stuck on one of the worst possible time slots (Fridays at 9 PM) and had a limited budget. Yet, they went in with good storytelling, and The X files suceeded. The only sin was that the X Files lasted two or three seasons longer than it should have, but it created it's own niche, it's own "mythos" if you will. I will admit that I didn't watch much of X Files in either network or syndication, but only because that brand of storytelling didn't appeal to me, not because it was a bad show.
I won't say that every science fiction show was good. There were some stinkers like The Burning Zone, War Of The Worlds, and SeaQuest. But, I will admit that there were shows that had a good premise, but couldn't substain themselves. Sometimes, the failure was because of a bad time slot.
Maybe it's because success breeds imitation. If memory serves me correctly, both Star Wars and Close Encounters Of The Third Kind were both very successful in the cinema. So, we ended up with a bunch of knock-off and clones. Some were good, others were simply terrible. Paramount then resurrects Star Trek as a motion picture which was successful, and those series of pictures ended up in the creation of Star Trek: The Next Generation. The first season wasn't the greatest, but it was good enough to keep it going longer than anyone expected. Some said five years, others said six years because of the actor's contracts. We ended up with seven years.
But, then the spin-offs began. Star Trek: Deep Space Nine had a downward slide, but was kicked in the side of Babylon 5 with the superior storytelling at half the budget. But, Paramount wanted to launch it's own network, so they created another series, perhaps prematurely, called Star Trek: Voyager. Funny thing is, both UPN and WB launched at the same time, yet UPN was given a better chance at surviving. Of all the shows that were launched in UPN's first season, all but Voyager was cancelled. Now, the twist is that WB is considered the better network, while UPN is on life support and nicknamed "The Smackdown Network".
How about the SciFi Channel? I used to watch it all the time. Sure, they showed the SF cheese like Buck Rogers, Lost In Space, Space: 1999 and Battlestar Galactica. They also showed some short-lived series that had not been seen in years, and even showed Dark Shadows. But, they also took some chances, like airing Anime. The first Anime was a weekend marathon was Robot Carnival, Lensman, and Vampire Hunter D. (They also showed the Streamline version of Akira, but it was butchered due to the material.) They showed both versions of Dune on a weekend. Hell, they showed bad Japanese SF films. But, something went wrong along the way. They did acquire an exclusive contract to show the original Star Trek and Twilight Zone, but other series are out of reach. TNN has the rights to show TNG, DSN, and Voyager, then alienates the viewers with the black bar. SciFi did show Higlander and Hercules, but they've moved on to other networks. But, while I can stretch the "science fiction" to include fantasy, I fail to see how Apollo 13 or Braveheart qualify as Science Fiction. They are good movies, but they are not Science Fiction.
Maybe I'm becoming cynical. Maybe it's because television operates in cycles, and we are about to see the end of the era of SciFi. Sitcoms were out for years, then The Cosby Show revitalized the format. Survivor was the surprise hit of Summer, 2000 getting ratings than the network's combined rating for their hour of coverage of the political conventions, and that has spawned other reality shows. CSI began slowly, but is now the top-rated show, and it makes the science explanations interesting, and has influenced other shows.
Maybe it's the networks that are at fault. They order only seven episodes of a series, and if it doesn't perform well, it gets yanked. Whatever happened to standing behind the show? M*A*S*H, Cheers, and All In The Family were bad performers in their initial season. M*A*S*H ended up running longer than the Korean war, and the final episode is still one of the highest rated non-sports event.
The part I really hate is the network's attitude that the programs are just filler for the advertising. They produce only enough episodes to launch a series in October, and for the sweeps months of November, February, and May. December and March are repeatsville. And the network executives wonder why the ratings overall are dropping. What would have been considered a mediocre rating 20-25 years ago is now a top 10 rating.
Enough with this rant for now. I feel like Howard Beale from Network. It's ironic how prophetic that movie actually was.