![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
The replies to my previous post have pointed out a few shows that have eluded my notice -- or that I simply forgot about. I'm listing this partly so I remember what timers to set!
Defying Gravity is a 13-episode British/Canadian/USian co-production, following 8 astronauts on their six-year mission around the Solar System in the year 2052.
It started 02 August 2009 on ABC, and I didn't hear word one about it until this morning. This suggests that there's some glitch in the Buzz Network. Episodes are on Hulu, but.. gaaaah. Space stuff needs big screen. I won't watch postage stamps.
(Technically, it's a summer show, so it doesn't quite count toward the "dead fall" issue. But it's SF, and, crap, we all MISSED it!)
Flash Forward is one that I had heard about, and forgot: it revolves around an event in which everyone on Earth blacks out for over two minutes, and in the aftermath, it turns out that everyone has had a vision of their future, six months down the road. (It'll be interesting to see what they do after the show's been on for six months, and the visions either have or have not come true.)
It starts 24 September 2009, once again, on ABC.
ABC seems to be the go-to place for network SF this year: on 03 November 2009, they'll be treating us to a remake of the miniseries, V. I was never a fan of the original series, so my initial reaction was "meh" -- but then I remembered how everyone reacted to the news that they were remaking the velour-jumpsuit-and-robot-dog epic of the same era. One of the minds behind this revival also gave us The 4400, so I'm definitely tuning in.
Since I'm now watching everything else on ABC, I'm also going to tune into The Forgotten on 22 September 2009. It's "science fiction" in the same way CSI and Numb3rs are: it's fiction, about science. I'm going to give it a try just because it has Christian Slater, and I still miss My Own Worst Enemy.
(Hey, Quel and I started watching Castle just because it had Nathan Fillion in it.)
This is odd. It's not so much that Geek Chic has run its course -- it's just moved to a network that hasn't had much of anything to show in the SF genre in a long while.
(Of course, that could be evidence in and of itself that a trend is on its way out -- when the lowest-rated network finally jumps on the bandwagon.)
Did I mention that Eastwick is on ABC, too?
Over on NBC, Day One is going to start in the Spring, following good ol' Chuck. I don't know if it'll find any more success than NBC's last post-apocalyptic drama, but we'll give it a shot.
On Cable, BBC America has given us the summer show, Being Human. Quel and I have been enjoying it thoroughly, even though the premise sounds like a bar joke: "a vampire and a werewolf rent an apartment with a ghost..." It's only 6 episodes long, but a marathon's coming up this weekend, and it's also available On Demand for those who have access to such things.
And coming up on AMC:
A six-episode remake of one of my all-time favorite shows, The Prisoner. What this one lacks in pennyfarthing bikes and surreal Welsh architecture, it makes up for with Ian McKellan. I've seen an extensive trailer, and since I'm not particularly vulnerable to knee-jerk aversion to radical changes, it looks like it has potential.
Can't find a specific premiere date on that one, sorry.
Defying Gravity is a 13-episode British/Canadian/USian co-production, following 8 astronauts on their six-year mission around the Solar System in the year 2052.
It started 02 August 2009 on ABC, and I didn't hear word one about it until this morning. This suggests that there's some glitch in the Buzz Network. Episodes are on Hulu, but.. gaaaah. Space stuff needs big screen. I won't watch postage stamps.
(Technically, it's a summer show, so it doesn't quite count toward the "dead fall" issue. But it's SF, and, crap, we all MISSED it!)
Flash Forward is one that I had heard about, and forgot: it revolves around an event in which everyone on Earth blacks out for over two minutes, and in the aftermath, it turns out that everyone has had a vision of their future, six months down the road. (It'll be interesting to see what they do after the show's been on for six months, and the visions either have or have not come true.)
It starts 24 September 2009, once again, on ABC.
ABC seems to be the go-to place for network SF this year: on 03 November 2009, they'll be treating us to a remake of the miniseries, V. I was never a fan of the original series, so my initial reaction was "meh" -- but then I remembered how everyone reacted to the news that they were remaking the velour-jumpsuit-and-robot-dog epic of the same era. One of the minds behind this revival also gave us The 4400, so I'm definitely tuning in.
Since I'm now watching everything else on ABC, I'm also going to tune into The Forgotten on 22 September 2009. It's "science fiction" in the same way CSI and Numb3rs are: it's fiction, about science. I'm going to give it a try just because it has Christian Slater, and I still miss My Own Worst Enemy.
(Hey, Quel and I started watching Castle just because it had Nathan Fillion in it.)
This is odd. It's not so much that Geek Chic has run its course -- it's just moved to a network that hasn't had much of anything to show in the SF genre in a long while.
(Of course, that could be evidence in and of itself that a trend is on its way out -- when the lowest-rated network finally jumps on the bandwagon.)
Did I mention that Eastwick is on ABC, too?
Over on NBC, Day One is going to start in the Spring, following good ol' Chuck. I don't know if it'll find any more success than NBC's last post-apocalyptic drama, but we'll give it a shot.
On Cable, BBC America has given us the summer show, Being Human. Quel and I have been enjoying it thoroughly, even though the premise sounds like a bar joke: "a vampire and a werewolf rent an apartment with a ghost..." It's only 6 episodes long, but a marathon's coming up this weekend, and it's also available On Demand for those who have access to such things.
And coming up on AMC:
A six-episode remake of one of my all-time favorite shows, The Prisoner. What this one lacks in pennyfarthing bikes and surreal Welsh architecture, it makes up for with Ian McKellan. I've seen an extensive trailer, and since I'm not particularly vulnerable to knee-jerk aversion to radical changes, it looks like it has potential.
Can't find a specific premiere date on that one, sorry.
no subject
Date: 2009-08-27 05:22 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-08-27 05:33 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-08-27 05:44 pm (UTC)Nah, I'm just teasing, mostly deflecting my own shame for not having sat down and watched the damn thing beyond a couple episodes of Season 1. I've heard they've largely gotten back on track, and from plot summaries I've heard (I know, I know, they were non-con -- just stuff like Dharma Initiative icons and whatnot), there's no questioning this is a brilliant work.
I mean, for fuck's sake, they still hail Twin Peaks (rightly) as a work of genius, and will you just LOOK at how aimless it was?! Lost could have devoted three seasons to the adventures of Locke as a wacky sous-chef in Manhattan, intercut with scenes of boxing kittens and yacht races, and it would still be more coherent than Twin Peaks. :D
no subject
Date: 2009-08-27 06:07 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-08-27 06:39 pm (UTC)It's a time investment to get caught up from the beginning, to be sure, but definitely worth it, in my opinion.
no subject
Date: 2009-08-27 05:41 pm (UTC)I dunno. The acting didn't quite grab me -- except for McKellan, who was excellent of course. This is a tiny point, but just as an example, the shopkeeper who sells 6 his Village map was a little too... smirky. Maybe it's just that I'm used to The Prisoner being acted in more British emotional pigments -- subtler pastels like "chipper" and "arch."
I didn't see any really sterling signs that it meets my #1 criterion for loving it: awareness that it's a social allegory and a potentially damned trenchant one, truly updated for 21st century and the things that hinder human freedom now in particular.
And I really do miss the surreal architecture. The Mod stylization of The Prisoner isn't absolutely vital to me, but it was a vital part of the original's success. There are enough other good, recent models for filming a show like this -- Lost comes to mind, obviously -- but I really think the flat abstraction of The Village '67 helped life there feel mediated. You'd think that in the post-Cronenberg, post-CG era, they could be a little bolder at making the place seem truly unreal. "Gritty" worked beautifully for Battlestar; it's not right for The Prisoner, IMHO.
On the other hand, I am really intrigued by some of the new premises, like the total amnesia about the outside world. It could go either way, but the subplot with Number 2's deluding his own son about the outside world could be pretty gripping.
I'm probably investing way too much hope in the line "He only wants to do the right thing, and that's what will give him to me." There's some fantastic potential for critique of modern Britain and America and their global roles, there. I'm concerned that the lack of Cold War context will weaken the power of the show, but I also admit it's a big challenge for any writer and could be really rewarding if they pull it off. The Guantanamo subtexts should be obvious; I won't write the show off if they don't want to touch that, but there had better be something equally sharp in its place. [Aah, just got to 8:06 on a closer viewing. Hmmm...]
I do dig the new Village logo.
And wow, is that an actual minority or two? Neat! :D
Intrigued by the reference to "God" late in the trailer. I would have mad respect for these guys if they turned in elements of spiritual/mystical allegory -- again, like Lost.
Yay, they kept Rover! If my sweet, darling murder-bubble survived the executive vultures, it's entirely plausible that so will the libertarian spirit and grand surreality of the show.
If the show turns out to be remotely good, I want to start a betting pool on the ending. Seriously, I really do. My money's gonna be on "The Village is a purely mental/virtual construct." It's the shortest path to making it agonizingly contemporary. :)
"Chipper" and "Arch"
Date: 2009-08-27 06:33 pm (UTC)Re: "Chipper" and "Arch"
Date: 2009-08-27 07:12 pm (UTC)(And as of today, courtesy of Australia post and a very kind and sweet benefactor, I am a freak with an inflatable head. But not at this very moment -- that would be silly and I'm not THAT good of a touch-typist... n.n; )
Re: "" ""
Date: 2009-08-27 09:37 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-08-27 08:48 pm (UTC)*CRIES to think about it!!!*
no subject
Date: 2009-08-27 09:03 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-08-27 09:04 pm (UTC)(Heard things have been rough. Stay shiny, darlin'. **big hug** )
no subject
Date: 2009-08-27 09:08 pm (UTC)... but, oh do I wish it did!!!
(I'm good... just still a bit off-balanced on my mental teeter-totter)
no subject
Date: 2009-08-27 09:16 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-08-27 05:43 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-08-27 06:02 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-08-27 06:14 pm (UTC)But one thing I've always admired about British series is that they're often so concise. A lot of classic series (Spaced comes right to mine) only ran for a six-episode season or two, which kept them from dragging on and engaging in shark-jumping behaviors.
Life On Mars had one of the coolest premises TV's seen in a while, but is it really one that could've gone on for, say, six or seven years? If it had been left hanging without an ending, I'd say you should be absolutely livid about it. And if you feel they rushed it, that's totally legitimate -- I mean, look at what happened to Babylon 5 when they told JMS, "Oh, yeah. You're outta here. Wrap it up." But still, a lot of my favorite series got to remain favorites because the executives (who are still twits, I'll grant you) gave them a peaceful death before they could start running out of ideas.
I just kinda wish they'd make more good, risky, weird television in general. :/
no subject
Date: 2009-08-27 06:36 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-08-27 07:13 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-08-27 08:31 pm (UTC)I like it because it's definitely fleshing out the universe established by "Life on Mars" while at the same time not stepping on its toes, and I think that's important.
no subject
Date: 2009-08-28 07:00 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-08-27 09:21 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-08-27 11:35 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-08-28 12:11 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-08-27 11:49 pm (UTC)I'm still waiting to be really pulled into it. The premise is OK, but I think what Moore had planned would have been better.
That said, ummm, they tackle some things, but for a crew that's going to be out soo long, and that would have undergone a rigorous screening process they have a lot of hangups. Seriously, the ads for the next episode appear to have the ship's doctor unable to do his bloody job because he's having some serious PTSD stuff going on. No psych tests picked that up? Other are hallucinating (quite a bit for so early in), or have serious baggage. It seems also as if 1/3rd of the show is flashbacks to training/selection. It was OK for a while, but its starting to grate on me. If so much is "5 years ago" why not just start the show THERE? Then again maybe they have.
Of course there is a sinister undercurrent going on which I suppose will be what they start using to drive plot. Obviously something is odd, and a few at the top are aware of this, and it appears to be part of the reason for the mission. None of this aspect is clear so saying it gives away nothing. I'm betting on a version of extraterrestrial contact requiring they do something.
Overall, so far it doesn't really seem like you missed much.
no subject
Date: 2009-08-28 06:01 am (UTC)And I want to snark about "2050 and fashions haven't changed" but really? The suit and tie is so amazingly long lived as it is. :)
no subject
Date: 2009-08-28 04:20 pm (UTC)I have watched just two episodes on Hulu so far, and I really like the series. I'm going to try to catch up this weekend.
Of course, since I like it, I know the series is doomed.
Everyting has to be nano these days.
Date: 2009-08-29 02:48 am (UTC)