The Future of Sci-Fi TV (yet another late night rant...) by Micronaut

GENERAL DISCUSSIONS

The Future of Sci-Fi TV (yet another late night rant...)

POSTED BY: MICRONAUT
UPDATED: Tuesday, July 8, 2003 20:01
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 2328
PAGE 1 of 1

Monday, July 7, 2003 7:55 PM

Been browsing over the latest threads, and noticing the vast amount of bitching over the cancellation of favourite Sci-Fi TV shows. I agree... it all sucks, the executives are all tight-ass, number crunching morons who will all burn in the "special" level of Hell, yadda, yadda, yadda... Well, I'm tired of getting hooked on decent shows only to have them yanked away because Ford can't sell enough trucks or beer sales just ain't what they used to be.

I've also been looking over my recent acquisitions of DVDs, specifically the ones from TV shows... Stargate SG-1, Deep Space Nine, Buffy, Angel, South Park, Dead Zone, Space 1999, Red Dwarf, Mr Bean, and a couple dozen or so others... and I'll tell ya what folks - I am enjoying watching the DVDs a helluva lot more than first-run TV. Better quality, no commercials, no schedules, special features, etc.

So, as far as I'm concerned, that's it... I'm just not gonna watch (at least, not with any effort) drama TV anymore. Starting right now, I'm gonna watch news and documentaries and that's about it. I'm just gonna F.U. to the big Hollywood machine and all their advertisers and all their petty little mindless TV stations, and simply get the DVDs when they come out. Yeah, it's a little pricier than "free" TV, but in the end, it's worth it. I can watch my shows without having to worry about whether or not baseball is gonna pre-empt part two of that cliffhanger; I won't have to worry about being near a TV at a certain time, or setting a VCR to tape it; I won't have to worry about the power going out or the cable dying in mid-episode; I'm not exposed to mindless ads that twist and putrify my brain more than my own natural processes; I'm not concerned about the last three episodes never being seen because the executive idiots canned the show; and best of all, after I've plunked down my hard-earned money, I've got something I can keep on a shelf, share with friends, or sell to a sucker (if it's a dud). I've got a product, a manufactured item that I can hold in my hand and proudly say that I supported my favourite show with cold, hard, very tangible, very accountable cash - I've put my money where my mouth is, in effect.

And you know what? I don't think I'm alone in this attitude.

I think that the future of TV, at least as far as Sci-Fi (i.e. smaller audience) TV shows are concerned, does not exist as we know it now. I think that TV will eventually spread itself too thin with too many specialty channels and begin to collapse under it's own intellectually bankrupt weight. Big budget drama shows that we see today will become few and far between, reality shows will somehow thrive and take over the majority of stations, and documentaries and news programs will dominate the remainder of the TV wasteland. Sci-Fi will cease to exist... or will it?

The only viable economic model I can see for future Sci-Fi shows is to use TV and the Internet to show Infomercials. Think of it... a TV channel dedicated to behind the scenes looks and episode previews of soon-to-be-available shows. Instead of gambling that a show will make it through the first year, studios will pony up the dollars to produce an entire season (often less than the cost of moderate-size Hollywood film), preview a few episodes via this TV channel, push it further with a web campaign, then market the DVDs to the fans for a reasonable price. After that, its simple economics... if enough fans buy the DVD box set, the show gets another year... if not - oh well. No more Neilsen ratings, no more prissy executives with the same number of IQ points as turnips sticking their noses in, no more hopeless mail campaigns - people can simply bring a show back by opening thier wallets. No more pre-emptions, no more "we now join our regularly scheduled broadcast, already in progress", no more repeats, and no more brainless cancellations. Finally, we the fans will have control over the destiny of a show... if good, show live, if bad, show die. Simple as that.

So there, I'm just gonna skip watching most of the Sci-Fi shows on the tube these days... oh sure, I'll still watch Angel, mebbe Enterprise, I'll download Stagate SG-1 off the 'Net, but for the rest? Forget it... I'll wait for the DVD. So long Coke ads... bye bye Nike... see ya Ford... no more commercials for me. From now on, if you want to sell me your shit, you'll have to do it the old fashioned way... by making a quality product and letting the word of mouth get around... HA! like that will ever happen...

End of rant... please resume your normal brain activity...

"Just remember... all success is illusion: what has really been accomplished is the displacement of an area of specific failure to somewhere else... or is it the other way around?"

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, July 7, 2003 9:06 PM

SERGEANTX

You're preachin' to the choir, brother. I'd up the ante a bit, as I'd given up on TV several years ago. It's really bad for society if you ask me. But you didn't, so I'll get down off that soap box. As far as serial video drama goes, I think the future is definitely going to be in the form of some kind of direct to consumer type of distribution.

In my rather active imagination, I see talented directors who have shown an interest in doing quality work in the serial/episodic form (David Lynch and Joss Whedon come to mind) leading the way in bringing back the movie serial of some sixty years past. I'm still kind of fond of the idea of regularly scheduled releases of new episodes, it gives a certain community aspect to the experience, but it doesn't have to be that way.

Popular broadcast television is no longer any place I want to be. Fortunately it doesn't have the kind of stranglehold on the national imagination that it once did. The internet is fueling a demand for a new kind of media that will sell us content rather than use that content in a bait and switch scheme designed to lure us into their consumer feeding stalls. (great imagery, eh?)

Of immediate concern is whether Firefly can find a home in time. Will these hoped for changes in popular video entertainment happen soon enough to save our beloved series and restore it to the form it was designed for?

SergeantX

"..and here's to all the dreamers, may our open hearts find rest." -- Nanci Griffith

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, July 7, 2003 10:03 PM

DRAKON

"I'd given up on TV several years ago. It's really bad for society" This comment peaked my interest.

I won't argue that there is not a lot of garbage on the air these days. Most of it I do not find appealing. But I don't think that is the whole story.

Society is essentially nothing more than a population of individuals with shared or common ideas and values. As populations grow, getting everyone "on the same page" as it were becomes more difficult. Mass media, like television, radio, etc., makes maintaining a society, and preventing the Balkanization and eventual fragmentation and destruction of that society, easier.

It is the commonalities that define a society, not the differences amongst the individual members. Television can provide a common experience for a society's members. And while some of us may deride the particulars of those common experiences, they do serve a function in maintaining a society, and hence the benefits we as individuals draw from that society.

"My kind of stupid"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, July 7, 2003 11:06 PM

RUTHIE

Complete agreement with everything you say, Micronaught.

This way of doing things would remind me much more of the way books are published and marketed - the author negotiates with a publisher to put their work 'out there', and then the public can choose to buy or not according to their taste and the quality of the work.

Quote:
It is the commonalities that define a society, not the differences amongst the individual members. Television can provide a common experience for a society's members.

I would agree with you, but I think we have already lost that commonality. I think nostalgically of my schooldays, when the UK had 3 tv channels, and EVERYONE had watched Monty Python the previous evening. But now most people have a much greater choice of TV viewing, not to mention the time competition of videos, dvd's, computer games etc. The commonality today has to be that people have seen any one program/film/game/book etc, not that they have all seem it at the same time.

I find Seargenx's idea of community showings very appealing for this reason - it would restore this aspect of commonality, at least for those who chose to attend.

This is in line with something I was wondering about for Firefly. Suppose an attempt was made to finance more Firefly from profits made on the selling of the DVD's for the current episodes.

I don't know what DVD's cost in other countries, so let's just call whatever price you would expect to pay for a DVD set of a short series x. Would you pay 2x for the Firefly videos IF X OF THIS WAS GOING STRAIGHT TO THE PRODUCTION COSTS OF MORE EPISODES?

And would you then pay 2x for those DVD's to finance the next set, and so on?

I've no idea how the economics would work out - how many DVD's would have to be sold to compensate for loosing the up-front cash of a TV company sponsor, but it would be a way of fans of any series 'taking ownership' of that series, and expressing their appreciation to the creators. Again, it would be akin to an author's work, where the profits from selling one book support an author while writing the next.

*******************
Ruthie
*******************
By the data to date, there is only one animal in the Galaxy dangerous to man - man himself. So he must supply his own indispensable competition. He has no enemy to help him. (R.A.Heinlein)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, July 8, 2003 3:49 AM

MICRONAUT

I like where this discussion is going. While I like the idea of communities connected by the media, I'm not so sanguine about the content. It seems to me that in order to reach the maximum possible audience, content must be "dumbed down" to the lowest common denominator - not everyone is into the higher concepts that sci-fi often pontificates. The diverse interests that the current population has propagated over the last few decades has lead to an even greater fracturing of focal points amongst media elements - there is no one dominant trend these days, at least not for very long. Hence, there is no single type of TV show that rules the airwaves for any length of time. Reality shows might be the king for the moment, but they are fast dying off - yet, because they are cheap to produce, they are like the cockroaches of TV... plentiful and virtually unkillable. Indeed, they will likely survive and multiply faster than any other form of TV, although in the future, they might not be seen by the same numbers that Survivor draws. Cop/law shows are also big... the CSI and Law & Order clones seem to have a hold on a significant potion of the airwaves, while sports, far from the 800-pound gorilla of the past, is still a major threat to contend with. Then there are the news shows and Michael Jackson specials... sigh... Nowhere in this top-of-the-heap landscape is anything to do with sci-fi... even Alias, a popular show with quasi-sci-fi elements, trails the big boys by a wide margin. It seems that the populace at large has lost its taste for the genre... at least, that's what the networks would have the fans believe. After all, these shows are very expensive and simply don't draw the numbers like Survivor or CSI... when was the last time a sci-fi show cracked the Top Ten? The Top Twenty even? Maybe the X-files at it's fourth or fifth season peak, but other than that, I really don't know. Face it folks... the "real" fans of "true" sci-fi are a niche group, at least as far as the TV audience population is concerned. There are not enough of us watching to have that big an impact. But, unlike a lot of "average" viewers, sci-fi fans tend to be a nostagic lot, into collecables and memorabilia and such. Unlike the masses that tend to forget a show five minutes after its over, we hold on to these stories like precious gems, polishing them through discussions and proudly displaying them so that their beauty can be admired by others. We speak with our wallets when our voices can't be heard... and therein lies our strength.

So I go back to my assertion that DVD direct is the way to go... none of this episodic, one or two episode release at a time nonsense (way too expensive for the consumer and still subject to the cancellation demon). Full seasons (18-26 episodes at a time) are the way to go - tell a whole story, not unlike a mini-series, and drop most of the advertiser-favoured stand-alone episodes that some shows are famous for. We can demand how we want our shows formatted and how many to make... there are more people buying DVD copies of Buffy than Hillstreet Blues (is that one even available?).

As for the economics of the whole thing... lets look at some numbers (my wacky estimates, not real facts and figures). Firefly cost what, $2 million per episode. Others in the industry have also mentioned the hidden factors associated with start up costs (building sets, offices, administration, etc.). So, 22 episodes x $2 million per, plus, what? 5 or 10 million for start up costs? Let's just say $50 million for the first season, and about $40 million per for every season afterwards (I figure the production can save a few bucks like Lord of the Rings did by filming as much back-to-back as possible). In order to recoup costs directly from DVD, half a million people would have to pony up $100 each per set... is that unreasonable? Are there 500,000 sci-fi fans out there with a hundred bucks to blow on a full season of Firefly? Maybe there's a million... maybe not. But, recouping costs direct from DVD isn't the only way to generate revenue. There's overseas marketing... there's syndication (just because TNG is already on DVD hasn't stopped TNN/Spike from running the episodes), there's merchandising. Suddenly, recouping $50 million isn't as tough as it first appeared. And, for the amount of material generated (22 x 45 minutes per ep = 16.5 hours) versus the cost when compared to the $75-$100 million spent on a two hour movie, producing a TV show is pretty cheap.

But hell, what do I know? I'm just a guy with a little disposable income that I choose to spend on TV shows on DVD... Hollywood isn't interested in consumers like me.......

"Just remember... all success is illusion: what has really been accomplished is the displacement of an area of specific failure to somewhere else... or is it the other way around?"

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, July 8, 2003 4:46 AM

FREMDFIRMA

I hate TV, passionately... I saw it going downhill for many, many years, and finally threw in the towel during the OJ Simpson media feeding frenzy.

Folks who knew me showed me some of the firefly promos and I was like "ok, maybe TV doesn't suck?" and had a look, and of course FF sucked me RIGHT in, although the rest of TV still made me wanna puke..

Then they murder firefly, and leave me with nothing ?!!
I am annoyed, and having unfortunately seen some of the CRAP that Fox presents (reality TV makes me murderous towards all humanity..)I am doubly annoyed that I wasted my time turning the 'idiot box' on for something other than my DVD/VCR/PS2.

Sorry folks, recycled "Trek" garbage with the same ENDLESSLY recycled plots isn't gonna draw my viewing eye, or my paying dollar.

I want firefly back, and I have all the disposable income that OTHER people spend on TV stuff, since I've boycott buying anything from 90% of the folks who advertise on Fox (yeah, suck THAT Fox!).. and me, I am waiting for those DVDs in December, and a movie, and the series BACK on TV...

You want my viewing eye, my consumers dollar, you give me firefly... or you ain't EVER gettin it again.

-Frem
"Too much snow and the roof will collapse, his brains are in terrible danger!" - River

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, July 8, 2003 6:27 AM

SERGEANTX

Some really good ideas here. Thanks to everyone participating.

Fremdfirma, my experience is so very similar to what you describe in your post. In fact I posted something here a few months back, somewhat more wordy and morose, but the same sentiment. http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=2&t=1395
if you're interested.

As far as the discussion concerning television and its value in society, something interesting has occurred to me while reading this discussion.

Drakon's points about the power of television to unite are well made and to some extent I agree. Twice, in the past few years I've seen that power shine. The sense of community and national identity it gave us (here in the U.S. that is) in the wake of 9/11 was the first incident, although it seemed this was quickly squandered.

The second was local and on a more personal level. Just this spring our town was hit with a series of tornadoes. When things got hairy I found myself in the neighbors basement riding the storm out doing what? Of course, watching TV. But this time we were watching live video of the progression of the storms provided by a rather daring news crew in a helicopter hovering above the twisters below. On that day I was tremendously grateful for television. The worst of the tornadoes to touch down came at the very tail of the storm, when sunlight was already breaking through the clouds. Looking out the window it seemed the worst was over, and if if wasn't for the video on the screen, which was showing this late tornado tearing through an apartment complex 1/4 mile away, we might have decided the threat was gone and headed back home. I'm convinced that on that day, television saved
lives. The tornado didn't hit our house, but it did hit several nearby and because of those images, people were still taking shelter when it did.

So, television can be a powerful thing, and it can unite us as a community, but as Ruthie has pointed out, much of that communal aspect is gone, at least as far as the programs themselves. Which brings me to my point. The main communal aspect that remains in television is the commercials! More and more I've noticed that the public discussion of television isn't about the programs, which are so diverse and varied that none of us are watching the same thing, but about the advertisements. SO many times I've heard people telling me how a given situation reminds them of that funny ad for 'x' product or whatever nonsense they're selling lately. Television is indeed keeping us on the same page, it just turns out to be the page with all the ads on it.

So where does that leave us? Can we save the unifying power that Drakon reminds us of, without being treated as just a soulless mass of consumers? It seems worth considering.

SergeantX

"..and here's to all the dreamers, may our open hearts find rest." -- Nanci Griffith

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, July 8, 2003 8:01 PM

MICRONAUT

Interesting point...

Quote:

So, television can be a powerful thing, and it can unite us as a community, but as Ruthie has pointed out, much of that communal aspect is gone, at least as far as the programs themselves. Which brings me to my point. The main communal aspect that remains in television is the commercials! More and more I've noticed that the public discussion of television isn't about the programs, which are so diverse and varied that none of us are watching the same thing, but about the advertisements. SO many times I've heard people telling me how a given situation reminds them of that funny ad for 'x' product or whatever nonsense they're selling lately. Television is indeed keeping us on the same page, it just turns out to be the page with all the ads on it.

So where does that leave us? Can we save the unifying power that Drakon reminds us of, without being treated as just a soulless mass of consumers? It seems worth considering.

The scary thing is that in 10 or 20 years we might end up with that hokey world postulated in Demolition Man where people sing the tunes to jingles and commericals, instead of real songs, except that people will be standing around the water cooler next talking about the commercials from the previous night instead of the shows. It's already half-way there now in some respects... and this terrifies me.

Will we be reduced to little more than walking, talking, singing ads for corporations? Will we end up in a world that is run by companies instead of governments? An odd concept and likely improbable... but is it really?

I doubt anyone here doesn't have a t-shirt or a jacket or a hat with some corporate logo on it... when we wear these items, aren't we reducing ourselves to little more than walking billboards? Are we really that loyal to a product or a company, or do we just tell ourselves that it's a nice jacket and it would be a shame for it to go to waste?

I tell ya, it looks like the future is gonna be the the kind of world I do not want to live in. Might as well be assimilated by the Borg... it's quicker and a lot less painful...But, in reality, a drone-like, 1984-ish existence awaits all of us and our descendants... unless the chain of control is broken soon

Which brings me back to the original topic... the future of TV. TV is the medium of the masses, TV teaches as many kids to read as do parents, TV entertains, informs, educates and influences us in more ways than we know. But who controls it? Is it really the faceless corporations and mindless marketing managers that make all the decisions? Or, do we as viewers have the power... a responsibility, even... to change the future of TV? A network makes a show, viewers don't watch, the show is cancelled... seems to me that the people have the power to flush millions in production costs down the toilet by simply not tuning in. The network may create, produce and market the show, and have a say in how long the show will last, but we the people have the ability to toss all their surveys and focus groups and creative talents out the window if the show isn't up to our standards. And boy, do we have standards... variable at times, but they do reach a pretty lofty heights for the most part.

So how do we exercise that power? Web sites? Mail campaigns? Talk shows? Politics? Possibly, but we can get even more immediate action by simply not watching... and getting others to not watch. Anyone know any Neilsen families who are fans of Survivor or CSI? Make sure to drag them of the house next time a show is on, and make sure that their VCR or TiVo isn't set. Enough Neilsen families stop watching the show, and the show goes away. It might be hard to get people to sit down and watch Firefly (you can lead a person to good TV, but you can't make them think...) but it shouldn't be too hard to drag them away, especially if real living beats reality for entertainment value.

That's my latest idea... pull people away from the tube and get them hooked on something else, something that isn't tracked and monitored or poked and prodded... if enough people turn off the TV, Hollywood will be deafened by the silence... and then they will listen.

"Just remember... all success is illusion: what has really been accomplished is the displacement of an area of specific failure to somewhere else... or is it the other way around?"

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER	POST DATE

USER

POST DATE