5 Reasons Scifi Does Better In Movies Than In TV

POSTED BY: cljohnston108
UPDATED: Saturday, February 23, 2008 23:09
VIEWED: 3095
PAGE 2 of 2

PREV PAGE 1 2

DARKFLY

Saturday, February 23, 2008 2:27 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by reginaroadie:
On one of the HEROES commentaries, Jack Coleman says that a regular episode of HEROES looks way better than most movies, and I wholeheartedly agree with that. That has to be one of the most visually dynamic series on the air, and not just fx. The lenses they use, the composition of the shots, the mise en scene, the color pallat, all of it comes together to look like a million bucks.

That's because Heroes does have a episode budget of a million bucks

---------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.myspace.com/darkfly7
Knightfly on Xfire, www.xfire.com/profile/knightfly/
Want pics, vids, ringtones,ect releated to Serenity and Firefly...
http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=2&t=26986

VETERAN

Saturday, February 23, 2008 7:16 PM

Quote:
hughff wrote:
Friday, February 22, 2008 19:14

Two thoughts:
1. I can't see why this is the case in sf when it isn't the case in every other genre: situational comedy, action/cop, chick flick etc ad nauseum all do fine on either big screen or small.
2. Not disparaging Joss' observation but my view is that a tv series like Firefly is a novel, playing out with lots of sub-plots to a coherent conclusion; a movie is a short story, heading without diversion to a simple climax. That's why a good tv series (Firefly, Veronica Mars, Scrubs) is BETTER than a movie. I like the complexity.

Good points. I think your right on both counts. There's no good reason that SF translates better to movies than TV. Maybe if your big on stunts and special effects, but then the same would hold true for cop/action series. Those car chases and big bangs cost money. If anything Chick-flix are more geared toward the big screen than TV.

On point No. 2. I like being able to tune in a catchup with a show once a week. On a long running series you can watch characters develop over time. Biggest problem is networks don't know how to leave well enough alone. They move shows around, prempt them, etc. almost like they feel they have to do something to prove their existence.

LORDVELOS

Saturday, February 23, 2008 11:09 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Veteran:
Quote:
hughff wrote:
Friday, February 22, 2008 19:14

Two thoughts:
1. I can't see why this is the case in sf when it isn't the case in every other genre: situational comedy, action/cop, chick flick etc ad nauseum all do fine on either big screen or small.
2. Not disparaging Joss' observation but my view is that a tv series like Firefly is a novel, playing out with lots of sub-plots to a coherent conclusion; a movie is a short story, heading without diversion to a simple climax. That's why a good tv series (Firefly, Veronica Mars, Scrubs) is BETTER than a movie. I like the complexity.

Good points. I think your right on both counts. There's no good reason that SF translates better to movies than TV. Maybe if your big on stunts and special effects, but then the same would hold true for cop/action series. Those car chases and big bangs cost money. If anything Chick-flix are more geared toward the big screen than TV.

On point No. 2. I like being able to tune in a catchup with a show once a week. On a long running series you can watch characters develop over time. Biggest problem is networks don't know how to leave well enough alone. They move shows around, prempt them, etc. almost like they feel they have to do something to prove their existence.

I too miss Space Above and Beyond.

I touched on this very topic beliefly earlier today in another post.

Sadly I think it all just boils down to this in the end... MONEY.

Most TV shows have a tight budget. If they can get away with NOT creating expensive visual effect they do. I know alot of show will do anything thing they can to avoid the expensive special effects. They wil even go so far as to re-write a story to make it fit better within a budget. Gene Rodneberry admited to doing this a number of times for Star Trek.

As for the few sci-fi shows that do well I hate to say it, but I feel those shows play more like a televison DRAMA than a sci-fi show. I used the new Battle Star Galatica as an example of this. I have asked people who do no like sci-fi to watch a few episodes of the new BSG and they are hooked on it! Shows like BSG,Heros, and Lost leave you hungering for more with plots twist and storylines that extend for the entire series. They play more like a soap opera in a sci-fi setting so to speak than true sci-fi.

PREV PAGE 1 2