SF and TV don't mix, we need to find another way...

[Lord Refa]

SF and TV don\'t mix, we need to find another way...

With Farscape, they cancelled one SF show too many. By now it's clear to me that Science Fiction and TV don't mix. (The market for feature films is even worse).
Good SF shows should build on long-term success. Good SF is made for a few people, when TV is made for the masses. To me it's like: the better the show, the lower the ratings.

We, the fans, need to find another way to bring good SF to the screen.

There should be a few ways to do that. I believe we should do it our self. One way could be fans financing the production of a new B5 movie. Somebody could start a thrust-fund or something. Or make stock-holders of everyone who invests.
In any event, the success of a show should not depend on the first time it's being shown on a US TV station.

It seems like this: once a show IS made, selling it doesn't seem a hard thing. There is a better chance of TV stations buying a movie, then making it.

So think about it, and come with some ideas. We all know how TV works. So if we don't do it ourselves, it won't be done. (Let alone 'be done right' /forums/images/icons/smile.gif )


PS
One thing's for sure. If I would suddenly get a million $ or 2, I would notify JMS immediately...

 

[**DONOTDELETE**]

Re: SF and TV don\'t mix, we need to find another way...

Actually its more like Sci-Fi channel and Sci-Fi dont mix.

 

[Lord Refa]

Re: SF and TV don\'t mix, we need to find another way...

have you forgotten about TNT?

besides, Sci-Fi Channel was our last hope for good SF on TV. It's gone now. (It's time they change the name of that f***** channel)

 

[ElScorcho]

Re: SF and TV don\'t mix, we need to find another way...

It's like MTV. Remember when they had music?

 

[Joseph DeMartino]

Re: SF and TV don\'t mix, we need to find another way...

I believe the "other way" you're looking for is called "books". /forums/images/icons/smile.gif

Regards,

Joe

 

[hypatia]

Re: SF and TV don\'t mix, we need to find another way...

Or theatre (theater?) /forums/images/icons/wink.gif

The damned stage. /forums/images/icons/grin.gif

 

[Lord Refa]

Re: SF and TV don\'t mix, we need to find another way...

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr />
I believe the "other way" you're looking for is called "books".

Regards,

Joe

[/quote]

Well, I really HATE reading. It's a miracle I read all those 'important' B5 books. So untill books have screens in them, with moving pictures and audio sound, it's not a real option. /forums/images/icons/smile.gif

 

[Lord Refa]

Re: SF and TV don\'t mix, we need to find another way...

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr />
It's like MTV. Remember when they had music?


[/quote]

Yeah, it's a long time ago. But it makes me think.
I listed to hiphop music. A lot of independent hiphop artists get big bucks without making commercial pop music. They don't even sell that many records. Maybe we can learn from their situation.
Although I believe filming Science Fiction is a bit more expensive then making music. /forums/images/icons/frown.gif

 

[A_M_Swallow]

Re: SF and TV don\'t mix, we need to find another way...

Radio plays on CD-Roms or VHS?

 

[kin_of_zathras]

Re: SF and TV don\'t mix, we need to find another way...

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr />
Well, I really HATE reading. It's a miracle I read all those 'important' B5 books. So untill books have screens in them, with moving pictures and audio sound, it's not a real option.

[/quote]
Boy, U really are missing out. Go pick up Asimov's foundation series for a saga as interesting, wonderful and epic as B5. Stay away from Dune, Frank Herbert could envision a great story but he wasn't so good at the actual craft of writing.

 

[Rid]

Re: SF and TV don\'t mix, we need to find another way...

Asimov....now that is boring /forums/images/icons/grin.gif

 

[channe]

Re: SF and TV don\'t mix, we need to find another way...

People who do not read cannot learn.

Because books are still the foundation to learning, no matter what those idiots in TV tell ya or how much your school is buying technology.

No books, no education.

 

[Shaal Mayan]

Re: SF and TV don\'t mix, we need to find another way...

Del Rey is reprinting all the original novels and I guess sales will determine if there is new material and most impotant if JMS has the time.To give an outline but Oh it takes so long for a new book to come out but if that's the only way to get Babylon 5, Rangers or Crusade I'll take it .Since tv isn't the way Rangers was canceled but it was given a chance and Crusade I won't even go there.

 

[Lord Refa]

Re: SF and TV don\'t mix, we need to find another way...

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr />
People who do not read cannot learn.


[/quote]

Funny, I allways thought people learn through real life experience. "Those of us who spend their lives in books don't know anything about living." /forums/images/icons/smile.gif

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr />
Because books are still the foundation to learning, no matter what those idiots in TV tell ya or how much your school is buying technology.

[/quote]
? What's that all about?

 

[channe]

Re: SF and TV don\'t mix, we need to find another way...

Real-life experience and booklearning are two different things entirely.

Literacy - not just knowing HOW to read, but LIKING to do it -- is essential for a technological society. And that's the bottom line.

 

[**DONOTDELETE**]

Re: SF and TV don\'t mix, we need to find another w

I would put it this way...

...a quality digital book is very desirable. It could store thousandfold more data. It could fluently search among data. Nevertheless, it would remain a book, meaning something you mainly read. Some applications make it favourable for a digital book (essentially a convenient special-purpose computer) to have added capabilities, ones currently possessed by multipurpose computers, sound records and television.

For example, you might read a biology book meant for better recognition (and explaining the classification) of species. It may have convenient links to comparison material, illustrations as figures, photos and drawings, even sounds when sounds are relevant (let us assume you are dealing with birds, in which case sounds are relevant).

However, in essence, it remains a book. If you wish to find out what the business is about, you cannot get around text. Text can convey more meaning with less information than sound. With sound records, you are describing sound waves. With pictures, you are describing pixels. With text, you are describing characters and words...

... which are much more meaning-intensive than pixels or sound waves. You need some characters to form a meaningful word, but thousands of sound waves or pixels to present a meaningful sound or picture. Moreover, pictures are specific but words general. They cannot fulfill each other's task. Text is meaning-intensive but also subjective. Text and formulas carry abstract information, information which can only be processed with imagination.

Television will not replace books. Television seeks to make its story more vivid, more immersive -- and achieves this by presenting not only text, not only script and lines said by actors, but also picture, sound and special effects. Television cannot replace books. Books may gain capabilities now only possessed by television, but they will never become television.

Why? Because books serve the opposite purpose. They rely on abstraction and imagination. If you cannot imagine the particular thing they describe, they will be less vivid and immersive than the same presented via television (where someone has already done part of the imagination and presentation).

However, when you can understand and imagine the topic described, the higher level of abstraction characteristic of books allows telling stories and presenting explanations which are many times more densely woven than the same presented as sound or video.

Simply because the author did not have to bother with transfering the product of his/her imagination, instead writing down something much closer to "source code" (pardon for using an unsuitable term, the source code of thoughts can come in all different formats). You compile this "source code", run it in your own mind, see what imagination provides.

 

[hypatia]

Re: SF and TV don\'t mix, we need to find another way...

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr />
Funny, I allways thought people learn through real life experience. "Those of us who spend their lives in books don't know anything about living."

[/quote]

I just have to repeat what others have said. Being illiterate is NOT the only choice if you want to avoid spending your life in books.

/forums/images/icons/rolleyes.gif

Give me a break. If you cannot read you cannot instruct yourself. You can't hold most jobs.

Even though I teach math, I think reading is actually far more important to having a fighting chance in life than even mathematics is.

 

[Joseph DeMartino]

Re: SF and TV don\'t mix, we need to find another way...

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr />
Real-life experience and booklearning are two different things entirely.

[/quote]

And you need both to be a complete human being. Not to mention the sheer pleasure the books can bring, and the way knowing books can make it easier to find common ground with others (who know the same books.)

Regards,

Joe

 

[Mike G]

Re: SF and TV don\'t mix, we need to find another way...

Every school in the world has some kind of book. Therfore books are important for learning.

 

[ElScorcho]

Re: SF and TV don\'t mix, we need to find another way...

I'm pretty sure all of us can read.