Science Fiction Aficionados discussion

I was just thinking about this earlier. I know I personally look for unique concepts or at least a concept that's executed in a more unique manner. I also think a good sci-fi should make me think. It could make me think about the plausibility of the science, about a philosophical or deep idea or maybe just even more about the world. I'd like to hear what other people think and if they have examples of what they like to watch and why.

This is a hard question, Johnathan. There are a number of things that I look for but only one of those things, done well is enough for me to consider something good, one good thing could possibly override a handful of minor distracting things that I don't like.

Like you I like unique concepts, but I also like interesting characters. I'm not so much a stickler for plausability, but your right, it's got to make some kind of sense scientifically.

I think, assuming there are any number of things that I like (from the "makes it good" list) in a production, that I want it to be polished. I get sick and tired of campi shows with plastic space ships and actors that don't seem to be following any script. I only like pharse and spoofers when I know to epect a phars or a spoofer. It doesn't have to have the cool special effects of BSG5, I can swallow a rubber rock or two as long as the show's not "slip-shod?"

as far as sci-fi tv shows go, i just need a good script, some good writing. that doesn't seem like a lot to ask for, but i've found that to be a rarity. i just can't watch a stupid show for too long (other than a couple reality shows that i'm too embarrassed to mention) without getting impatient or annoyed, and then i just find something else to do that isn't aggravating to me.

unfortunately, this is the case with the vast majority of Scifi Network programs. it seems like the writers on that network's programs are continually going for breezy, campy dialogue along the lines of Buffy, but they usually can't pull it off, they don't have the writing chops to either make me laugh or to genuinely intrigue me.

scifi films are another thing altogether. sometimes seeing special effects and a lot of action on the big screen are enough to keep my interest (not so much on dvd though). although intelligent writing and intriguing concepts are always good too, and are what will get me interested in watching the film again or buying it on dvd.

Like Mark, no matter what it is, it has to have good writing, acting and directing behind it, all the basics of a good show. Specifically for SciFi, I would love a fascinating world, that has great gadgets, theoretical physics ideas, political ideas, and unique aliens.

Intelligent and imaginative writing first. Good acting, proper sets.

I meant to say that it has to make sense in some way scientifically yes...recently I really enjoyed Inception and the Source Code for the facts that they were unique ideas that made me think. And as others have said acting does play a role...good acting can make or break a film.

- good and interesting plot
- witty/clever lines
- out of the ordinary
- suspenseful

i personally think that doctor who has got this formula perfect with a twist now and again to completely throw you off, just when you thought you knew everything there was to know about the characters, etc.

Inception and Source Code are my type of films. That's what I'd like to see more of.

Doctor Who is spectacular. It's hard for me to believe it's supposed to be a kid's show. I loved Davies run as head writer but Moffat's episodes always had that little bit more. Now that he's head writer, it's even better, deeper.

And no Bunnies should get hurt. Unless it's "Night of the Lepus."

Misfits. Yeah.

Jackie wrote: "Doctor Who is spectacular. It's hard for me to believe it's supposed to be a kid's show."

Well it's really a family show, which is a bit different. It is great, though. Almost caught up on the new season, can't stop watching!

Yes, family, you're right. Same thing to me in a way. What I meant is that kids watch it, and some of it is deep; how to they follow the storylines, do they understand it?

Writing, writing, writing, and great characters - which is part of the first three. A show could have everything else, but with crappy writing, it's never worth my time.

I'll generally give new genre shows until they make me angry with the stupid (Moonlight, Lost Girl), or until something else comes up that night and I realize I don't really care if I miss it or not. (Heroes, Torchwood's newest miniseries.)

But when I do give my heart to a show, I love it passionately and will rewatch it ad nauseam (Buffy, well, anything from the Whedonverse, Babylon 5, Fringe.)

Whedonverse, yeah!

i have yet to watch Babylon-5 and am looking forward to it. don't know why it's taken me this long

another favorite was Farscape.

Babylon 5 is fantastic, although the first season is a little rocky (and part of the fifth, because JMS had to squeeze an original planned five seasons into four, and then the network gave him the fifth season.)

But it's well worth the watch. In strange ways, it deals with the running of a station in space better than most shows. (I've never seen another SF show deal with labour disputes in a serious manner, for instance.)

Deep Space 9 is also great. I am fan of both shows - B5 and DS9. DS9 (as all of Star Trek) is a bit to idealistic, but still great. And if you watch all 7 seasons you realize that in Season 1 they already knew what they will be doing in the end. Not as thought through story arc that can be seen in B5 but still very close.

I plan on renting both DS9 and B5 as soon as I have the time. Maybe during the thanksgiving-xmas hiatus when nothing is airing.

DS9 is another one i want to start from the beginnning and watch til the end. i've watched many different non-sequential episodes over the years and have enjoyed it a lot.

To me the most important thing in a Sci-Fi show is that it is character- not technology- driven. The take-away's that stick with us for the rest of our lives are the ways the CHARACTERS respond to the conflicts they face. I won't remember the tech taht was used in an old Star Trek episode, but I'll remember the qualities that the characters had and used to resolve the issue. (Of course they save the Universe in the process)

It seems everyone's settling on the characters and the plots (all resultant from the writing)...using Star Trek as an example everyone pretty much remembers those characters...I mean even people who aren't fans know who Spock is because he's memorable...

Joe wrote: "To me the most important thing in a Sci-Fi show is that it is character- not technology- driven. The take-away's that stick with us for the rest of our lives are the ways the CHARACTERS respond to..."

I agree with you Joe. The tri-corder in Star Trek only gave enough information to "set the stage." Kirk, Spok, Bones and Mr. Scot (with the occasional support cast or red shirt) had to solve the problem and do the doing. No magic technological answers to problems. Focus on the characters.

Hugh (The other Hugh) wrote: "Joe wrote: "To me the most important thing in a Sci-Fi show is that it is character- not technology- driven. The take-away's that stick with us for the rest of our lives are the ways the CHARACTER..."

Totaly agree. That's why most of the Star Trek shows are so memorable and one of the reasons why Star Trek Enterpise didn't last. THe stories there were pretty good, but they have not had a single "brake out" character.

DS9 stands alon even among other ST shows because its much darker and even more character driven. Because they knew what they were planning todo with the show it gave them an opportunity to EVOLVE some of the characters. If anyone who hasn't seen the show but wants to start from the beggining, pay close attention to Gul Duckat. His development is the most crutial part of the story.

Good writing, compelling and evolving characters, novel story ideas.

i may be in the minority here, but i actually loved Star Trek Enterprise, from beginning to end. great writing, characters, and lots of adventure.

although i agree that there really weren't any break-out characters for the show to capitalize on.

I agree, Dr Who is very well written, but i'm sure i'm not the only father who's daughter, now 10, watched and fully grasped the concepts and plot lines at aged 5!

mark wrote: "i may be in the minority here, but i actually loved Star Trek Enterprise, from beginning to end. great writing, characters, and lots of adventure.

although i agree that there really weren't any ..."


ST Enterprise was good, but with that show they broke 1st rule of Star Trek - It’s all about the Future.
By placing this show before even the Original Series they kind of killed the anticipation of "what will happen next". Everybody knew that no matter what happens in the Enterprise, 100 years later Kirk will rule and after that Pickard will make it so.

Fans wanted to know what happened to the Federation after DS9 and Voyager. Now how it came about.
And not having a very strong characters didn't help either. Although I have to admit that the "Xindy" story ark in the 3rd season of Enterprise was very good. And how they "wrapped" a few holes in Star Trek cannon at the end of Season 4 was also very well done.

I'll second the recommendations for B5 and Farscape. B5 was great because JMS outlined everything from start to finish so he was able to foreshadow events several seasons out and write a consistent story.

Farscape I liked as well but I thought it went off the tracks several times towards the end. The cartoon episode comes to mind.

Kiens wrote: "I recently read an article that pointed to Sigourney Weaver in the Alien movies as being the best example of a strong woman character in sci-fi movies."

I th ink Replay in Alien and Sarash Connor in T2 are the only strong woman character in sci-fi movies.

Unless you're going to count alien women...

Angela Bassett in Strange Days, although she does get saved by a guy at one point. still, a really strong character overall.

the Warrior Woman in Road Warrior has always been a favorite supporting character. same with Tina Turner in Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome.

two more recent strong female leads: Ultraviolet and Aeon Flux.

not a movie of course, but BSG had a wide assortment of very strong female characters.

mark wrote: "as far as sci-fi tv shows go, i just need a good script, some good writing. that doesn't seem like a lot to ask for, but i've found that to be a rarity. i just can't watch a stupid show for too lo..."

I agree about the good script. Shows in any genre are only as good as their writing. If the dialogue seems like an afterthought and all the characters are wooden and interchangeable, I lose interest pretty quickly.

I also prefer that the female lead doesn't have to be rescued every two seconds. I have seen a number of sci-fi programs where we're told the female lead is brilliant, but then she ends up captured and being sold as a slave every other episode. You'd think she'd learn after the first 12 times. :)

It's important to give your characters enough credit, and then have them act accordingly.

I like a good script, good acting, and great special effects.

If you can see the string holding the space craft aloft in space, then I lose interest. It's like seeing the zipper in the monster suit in a creature feature. lol

I'm not real big on low budget science fiction/fantasy movies. So I usually avoid the Sy-Fy Channels movies like a plague.

Doctor Who's low budgetness didn't bother me when I was a kid. It was Doctor Who, so all was good!

When it comes to shows like Star Trek or Doctor Who, I can make exceptions!

There are two different types of good scifi, if you ask me. Or at least, two that I enjoy.

There are the ones that are good, good effects, good plot, good character development. They have very driven stories, and don't depend on saying things like "space 2 plus space 2 = space 4" just to remind you that, you know, there in the future or in space. Firefly and Serenity are GOOD scifi shows. I dont need a lot of tech to believe its in space. Battlestar Galactica, etc.

Then there is campy scifi- Dr. Who, Mystery Science Theater, Red Dwarf, Hyperdrive, some "syfy" movies. You know, they don't take themselves TOO seriously, and thats what saves them. They're good because they're a little bad, and they know it. Its when they try and take themselves seriously that it becomes painful. While maybe not known for their brilliance in breaking new ground, they're still enjoyable.

Plus, then yoiu have your classics. Star Wars, Star Trek, etc. I like looking at the "history of scifi" really, it is very eye opening because in scifi humanities greatest fears always come out. This is true for both scifi movies and books.

That's a good way to look at it, Becky. I do love the sci-fi comedy. Red Dwarf is hilarious.

I like to see at least an attempt to use real science.