How long to stick with Farscape? (1 Viewer)

[Rex Bachmann]

Kevin Hewell wrote (post #60):


And wouldn't it be nice if one could say something about this phenomenon, viz., communicating with a sentient living plant, beyond the superficial (that she bleeds a little sap once and tells the audience she's a plant)? But, alas, no. And that's what I've been talking about with respect to "aliens" in this and other "space shows". (By the way, doesn't Zhaan also grow stems or some such in one of these episodes or another?)

 

[Rex Bachmann]

Nicodemus wrote (post #59):


It's a fourth-season episode. Haven't seen it. It's scheduled to be broadcast next on October 1 at 3:00 a.m., so I'm not likely to be seeing it soon. From the plot description I would say that it would have to go a long way in innovativeness to overcome the almost stock-nature of "parallel reality" plots. Like time-travel stories, these tend to be beset with too many convenient turns of events.

 

[Rex Bachmann]

Kevin Hewell wrote (post #50):


Quote:



. . . what do you think of "Firefly," and do you consider it true "SF?"





Must . . . . resist . . . . urge . . . . to . . . . rant . . . . Oh, what the hell! (Remember you asked for this.)

post #24 of "Firefly"


Quote:



Hope this isn't your idea of "hardcore sci-fi". This is "sci-fi" for those who hate science fiction (and/or don't know what it is).

If Mr. Whedon and Fox want to do Westerns, why not just do them straight?





post #48 of "Firefly"


Quote:



Presumably there are [interesting stories to be told, set in space, that don't require aliens], but it is also crystal-clear that Firefly won't be telling any of them.

And, certainly, it is one thing not to have "aliens" every week on episodic television, it is quite another not have any at all---ever (as Mr. Whedon implied in the quotes attributed to him in the interview I read)! I see no reason, then, to set the stories in space (not just on another planet, but in space). If one wants merely to deal with human encounters, why go to the trouble?

Of course, one can then do what this program does (so far) and, in all probability, will do, if it is allowed to continue: be ersatz-"science-fiction" for the masses; a "train-robbery" western this week, a bank-vault heist next week, an undersea treasure hunt the week after, a bad cop ("Alliance federals")/good-hearted rebel chase after that, and on, and on, and on. That's the only place I see this program going.

As a person who wants to see good "(semi-)hard" filmed science fiction, both on the big and the small screen, I object to the misappropriation of the label "science fiction" and diversion of funding for things that are clearly not science fiction. I'd rather Hollywood be honest and say forthrightly: "Science fiction doesn't 'sell' the way we want it to, so we're going to put our resources into more 'young-adult' comedies, Westerns, romances, 'thrillers', etc.", rather than the present practice of dickin' around with the public on the matter (false p.r., false advertisement).

I might add---and this might put off some readers here---that it was one of Gene Roddenberry's dicta (and, in retrospect, probably a very good one) that there should always be an outsider character, an "alien", prominent in the cast to keep the viewers ever mindful that "Yes, this story is set in space and in the future."

Kid yourself not. Without them, nothing close to "science fiction” is going to be happening in this series, or any like it. It's made to appeal to you "young adults", who will settle for so much less (and so much other) in the (false) name of "science fiction", both in the movies and on tv. And, if the reactions reported here so far are at all representative of the viewing audience as a whole, I'd say, "It's working!"





post #77 of "Firefly"


Quote:





Quote:



But I don't understand what makes it "false science fiction".





Did you actually look at the program and pay attention? And I don't mean to the useless, anachronistic "hip-cool" one-liner dialog, either. As others who've made no "patronizing" statements here have said independently, with exception of the cargo ship zipping around planet and space, what is there of "science fiction" here? ZERO! Fantasy American Old West settings don't cut it! Well, okay, there's a space station seen briefly, but the "comfy-cozy familiarity" quotient here is so high as to make this a joke as anything approaching "science fiction", even as "sci-fi lite", as one poster around here likes to refer to it.

Note: I did not say that that alone necessarily makes it a bad program or that it's "bad" not to like science fiction. I just find "genre-mixing" hipness a poor substitute for good imaginative (filmed) fiction. And, yes, I do think that the marketeers and execs (the "suits") at the networks or movie studios, as the case may be, are marketing this and much like it as something that it is not to its intended audiences, too many of whom don't know any better. The thought of studio and network "suits" going around publicly proclaiming they have "sci-fi projects" in production and then coming out with things like this . . . . I'd like to see that stop, is all.





post #14 of "Big News: The Future of Firefly"


Quote:



. . . . programs like this represent[,] and . . . this particular show embodies[,] exactly the kind of thing Hollywood in general wants to foist on the public as "science fiction". . . . I suspect that the producers of the show actually, whether they admit it or not publicly, wanted to produce a Western. However, the dictates---yes, dictates!---of today's American capitalist marketing system, which the studios do follow, as much as many on this forum don't like to believe it, say that it must be "accessible" to the "coveted demographic" (18-to-49-year-old middle class public), with the emphasis on those under 30.

Hollywood, in general, does not like to do "period pieces" any more because "the kids won't like it". So, you have a fundamental conflict sometimes with producers who may want to do so-called "period pieces", but who have to sell their ideas to the "suits". Hence, pitching a period piece, dressed up in "hip-cool" (and decidedly anachronistic) dialog and "attitude", with an Old West veneer. Of course, using Old West props and settings a lot may save on the budget somewhat, but how much, since how many Old West shows or movies are themselves being produced nowadays (to have leftover props and sets from)? It used to be said that from about the time of the early(???) 70's to---I don't know---the mid- or late 80's---when was Silverado released???---or so, Westerns couldn't get made at all in mainstream Hollywood (for tv or the big screen). Then they started to be made again in fits and starts, but never really came back as a big mainstream genre. I think shows like this are attempts to get around that prohibition---but with lots of compromises that end up making them neither fish nor fowl. The marketeers and execs hope that viewing audiences just won't care. (And they don't, either way.)

. . . .

"Science fiction" is a "niche" literature for people who like to think, especially about unusual things. I don't think most people are like that, not even about their literature or their choice of electronic entertainment. And reliving the familiar seems to be what Hollywood lives on. Totally!





post #46 of "Big News: The Future of Firefly"


Quote:



I will admit, though, that the last episode did hold some interest as just what I predicted this show would be: a "caper-of-the-week" adventure show.






post #13 of "Firefly 12/20/02 - The 2 Hour Pilot!"


Quote:



That there would be "less civilization" [in outlying worlds] is trivial compared to the exact culture-specific form this "reduced civilization" takes in the universe of Firefly. The "old West" motif is particular to a time and place, 19th-century America (U.S.A.), and for what reason in the world---in the universe---would characters in the far future in a far-flung place be using accents, clothing, and technology (including revolvers) that are already obsolete and moribund NOW, even before mankind has settled the moon? I don't see any explanation of this in the storyline itself---maybe I missed something---and can only conclude this a conceit of the creators and producers of this show, as I've surmised all along. ("Science fiction" is supposed to be based on projections of what we know now.)





Ahhh, yes. Reliving old rants!

Although I thawed a bit about the program as it went on, my basic objections have remained. My one regret with that show is that I missed the one episode broadcast that sounded as though it would have been flat-out fun (even for me!), "Bushwhacked". ("Reavers", you know.)

 

[Nicodemus]

Rex,

The interesting point is, why do you expect show much from a science fiction show? Because if you look any other show, from any genre, there's always inconsistensies to be found. Cop shows can be critized as well for not being realistic - why don't we ever see them doing paperwork or some other trivial task? The only thing which makes it a bit believable when compared to scifi show, is that we know how cops should be acting - we know at least something about their routines and work. But we don't know anything about what's going on another side of universe - what should escaped alien prisoner's should be doing on a living ship? We don't even know how aliens should look like or how they should act.
That's the suspension of disbelief. Clearly yours doesn't strech very far. You don't happen to be a scientist or a mathematist?

The scary part is, I somewhat agree with you about Firefly. Not it all but something. For starters, I didn't like it.

But I think this discussion is starting to go in circles... Everybody's just trying to 'scape Rex. If you don't like the show or generally, as it would seem, don't like "unscientific" (is there any other kind?) science fiction, fine. I know at least one other people with "rubber mask syndrome"...

 

[Kevin Hewell]

Rex Bachmann wrote in re: to "Firefly."


At least, in this series, there's no sound in space.

 

[TheLongshot]

You know, I thought that was silly when I first saw it, but the more I read, it sounds like it could be in the realm of possibility. It sounds like the only problems with being unprotected in space is the lack of oxygen, being bombarded by a radiation source (the sun), and the usual potentialhazards of having different pressures (The Bends, busted eardrums, etc.) It actually sounds like he could have survived that leap. Considering that he needed medical attention afterwards, I can start to buy it now.

Jason

 

[Eric C D]

Doh! Spoiler alert! Methinks it's time to bow out of reading my own thread... (but I knew it was a risk when I started)

Well, as long as I've had that spoiled, from a hard science fiction attitude it sounds like tht ep is a lot better on the subject of vacuum exposure than the movie Total Recall.

enjoy! (and signing off...)

 

[MikeMcNertney]

Plenty of sci-fi doesn't have aliens. When you come right down to it, the whole idea of sci-fi is exploring human reactions in the face of different technology, aliens, societal changes, or whatever. In my experience sci-fi is ALL ABOUT "human encounters" so I guess I just don't understand your criticism of single shows when (to me) they seem to fit right in with the genre.

 

[Simon Massey]

Re : Unrealized Reality


Rex

The actual episode itself deals more with an explanation of the concept with, shall we say, several demonstrations and leaves you on a hook for the next episode. Yes there are certain convenient turns of events in the following episode which is why I said to avoid that one though you may not be able to given the story is unresolved/unrealized at the end of the episode.

Its not an innovative concept but if you are seeking out more Farscape episodes, I think it is more in the style of SF you are looking for from the posts you have made.

 

[Mike Broadman]

My answer to the original question: end of season 1. If you don't care how the cliffhanger is resolved and what happens next, Farscape is not for you.

I don't think Rex and Eric will "come around" if they just watch more episodes. A season, even if it's a weaker one, is enough to give someone an idea if they want to continue with the story.


I find that the major alien characters in B5 are the most human of all, and I'm surprised that you reserve this observation for Farscape.
Londo Mollari, for example, never exhibited anything other than human character traits.

 

[Rex Bachmann]

Nicodemus wrote (post #64):


??????????

 

[Rex Bachmann]

MikeMcNertney wrote (post #68):


Surely, we want to know the effect of the experience of strange events on human consciousness and ontology, but also surely not just that exclusively. If only that, then we're missing out on a whole lot, as far as I'm concerned.

And, by the way, if you check the record you will see that I have been similarly harsh in assessing all the sci-fi space shows, even the ones I like best, in this and related regards. So, I'm not "picking on" this one especially.

 

[Rex Bachmann]

Mike Broadman wrote (post #70):


Surprised? You've perhaps forgotten this exchangehttp://hometheaterforum.com/htforum/showthread.php?&postid=988967#post988967.

Let me sum it up. For me the "major alien characters in B5" are the Vorlons and the Shadows, not the Minbari, Centauri, Narnites, Brakiri, Drazi, Pak'ma'ra, etc., who, as I've said on occasion after occasion, are merely "masked human groups".

 

[Philip Verdieck]

B5 would have had a killer season 4 cliffhanger, if he had known he had S5. It would have been the episode where Sheridan is getting tortured.

 

[Simon Massey]

 

[TheLongshot]

Sorry, I disagree with this. I see it as Crichton dealing with things he doesn't understand in terms he does. I don't know why you think it is "inappropriate" when it is part of the character to do this. Contemporary attitude? Sure, because they started from "now", so to speak.

Jason

 

[Rex Bachmann]

Jason Birzer wrote (post #76):


No sale! Do all "contemporary" people (from the West) speak or conduct themselves in this matter, or just some? And, if only some, which ones, and why? And, if only certain ones, why does this conduct end up here (as well as in so many other of today's entertainment media)? In a word: "marketing"! (Just as with Firefly.)

 

[Lars_J]

Rex, I assume you are aware that the main character in Farscape (John) is a U.S. Astronaut from present day.

Oh, and re: "Firefly" - The Western theme was distinctly disliked by the marketing/network people, and was a big reason why the show was so poorly supported, and finally canned. (It may not have been popular with most viewers as well, it sure took some time to get used to for myself) And I really hope you don't think that those characters primarily acted contemporary - they certainly did not!

BTW, this reply might be quite fruitless. I've lurked on these boards for years, and I have observed Rex's lengthy postings on both the Firefly thread and now this. It seems like you have an awfully rigid idea of what Sci-Fi is, Rex, and you seem to like going into new shows with quite a few preconceptions that appear unbreakable. There are all too little postings about what kind of Sci-Fi you like, as opposed to the lengthy writings on what you don't like. I look forward to you starting some threads about what you DO like someday. ... Just some personal observations.

 

[PhilipG]

BTW, Rex, how old are you? I'm really curious.

WRT 40-year-olds, my parents are in their 50's, but act more like teenagers. They're enjoying what I believe is termed a second childhood. Additionally, I've met a few ex-NASA people in my time - bright people who love a good laugh, and are very much into sci-fi (the big reason they chose that career). They're not all super-serious over there by any stretch. It doesn't surprise me, because you need the levity to cope in such high-stress environments.

Crichton isn't merely repeating the same jokes - your bad stand-up analogy does not hold water - as I see it he's trying to keep himself sane, to continually remind himself of Earth, and to try to convert the Moya crew into becoming "more human" so that he feels less alone. You would see this happening if you watched some more eps. Of course, there's also the "fourth wall" conceit - most of Crichton's comments are addressed at the audience at home. I certainly get a kick out of hearing them.

As another aside, Rex, what is you opinion (following on from the discussion of "humanized" aliens) about films like "The Love Bug" or the anthropomorphism in any Disney animation (with talking tea-pots, animals etc). Are you able to enjoy these films for what they are?

 

[TheLongshot]

Have you seen "The Right Stuff"? Not exactly the most grown up bunch of people out there, so to speak.

It is pretty obvious that Farscape isn't your cup of tea, since you seem to only care about the hard SF aspects of the show, and don't care as much for character. The question is, tho, is that is there any SF TV show that you are happy with? To be honest, most TV SF suffers from the same problems you attribute to Farscape. Even Star Trek has, in all of its incarnations.

Jason