tv execs hate sifi
I tend to blame television audiences. TV executives will always attempt to second guess and cater for the market place, but the logic of supply and demand tends to dictate their own reasoning and choices. This is not to deny that executives will always try and play it safe and opt for the easy option. Its just that if there was a bigger market for SF on television – or alternately, greater resistance to generic crap – then people like ourselves would (presumably) be happier.
Witness the example of Firefly on the Fox network . It is currently ‘enjoying’ ratings that would be embraced on smaller networks like UPN on WB, but performing as if it were in syndication does not bode well for its future. If Firefly would have proved to be a bigger hit, executives would have attempted to capitalise on its popularity. I expect that the general lack of acceptance will resonate for years to come.
The recent cancellation of Farscape is equally instructive. Shows requiring talent and imagination cost lots of money, and are difficult to justify if the ratings flatline or go into freefall. It help explains why crap like Mutant X, Stargate and Andromeda are (apparently) cost effective decisions and remain on air. The franchice that is Star Trek speaks for itself, although its popularity turned out to be nostalgic and/or belated.
It seems that most people equate SF with spectacle and action, ensuring that anything making demands on its audiences (like good SF should) will not prove to be viable within a competive marketplace. Apparently its easier to convince people to watch ‘quality’ hospital or cop dramas than it is to watch ‘quality’ SF. Maybe the responsibility is on us to convince family and friends to be more open minded -although if my experience is any indication, we risk making such reccomendations at our own peril. [img]images/smiles/icon_eek.gif[/img]