What will it take for a space sci fi show to become mainstream?

[CmdrShep2183]

Sadly The Expanse has not turned out to be sci fi's Game of Thrones.

What will it take for a space opera show to become as big as Game of Thrones?

These are dark times. Is the average TV viewer as well as American too cynical to imagine humanity becoming a interstellar civilization?

If we showed the average Joe Mass Effect would they laugh? Would they find the idea of such a future ridiculous?

Would it need to be as Graphic as Game of Thrones? Is there a perception that sci fi is more about technology than character development?

[Darth Ultron]

Well, note Game of Thrones is not ''mainstream''. It's popular...with geeks and fantasy fans and people that like adult stuff. But that does not make it ''mainstream''.

After all Star Trek is close to ''mainstream'', but is still seen as ''that silly space show...for kidz''.

The average TV viewer is not ''cynical'', but they are of a mindset. And the mindset is: simple. The reason why cop and hospital shows are all over mainstream is that they are simple: good and bad and all about things the average viewer knows about already.

The perception that sci fi is more 1)For the Kidz and 2) All and Only about ''wow special effects'' at the expense of everything else.

The Adult Graphic does help the Game of Thrones, as well as Westworld. It helps get rid of the ''sci fi is for kidz''. And the vast majority of all adults like to watch that Graphic stuff.

[Eldan]

Oh hey, this thread again.

[Khedrac]

I think this also needs a culture shift.

Look at books - SciFi and Fantasy etc. are still seen by many people as "not proper literature". I think some of this is part elitism and part jealousy (generally they are genres where the readers don't have to think so hard to follow the story, they are also genres where authors can set up the conditions for looking at a serious topic simply by tweaking the setting, something one cannot do with traditional fiction where one has to contrive the setting.
I suspect one thing needed to change this attitude is more SF&F fans becoming teachers of literature at university - then they will be able to work more SF&F into courses so that the following generation of critics don't just dismiss it. I know these changes are happening, but I don't know how fast (back in 1985/86 one of what was then called 'O-levels' - exams at 16 - one of the English set works was The War of the Worlds).

One example of why I think is needed comes from a newspaper review of the reboot of Dr Who by Russell T Davis. The reviewer (I think it wass in the Times) basically said that Russell had done a good job but now needed to get back to serious work. Now the BBC is not allowed to make money so it doesn't keep the proceeds of selling shows abroad (they go into a charity) but I believe that Dr Who is the BBC's single most profitable export (even ahead of Top Gear). If the BBC was a conventional finance-driven organistion then I think they would have regarded Russell's work with Dr Who as more serious than his other writing; in short the reviewer was being a prejudiced idiot.

[Rynjin]

Is this a bot?

[Kitten Champion]

Is this a bot?

At this point does it really matter?

[Darth Ultron]

I think this also needs a culture shift.
One example of why I think is needed comes from a newspaper review of the reboot of Dr Who by Russell T Davis. The reviewer (I think it wass in the Times) basically said that Russell had done a good job but now needed to get back to serious work.

This is a good example of the basic problem.

The Culture thinking, is still set somewhere in the 50's when sci fi flicks were deemed light entertainment and B movies. The feeling among the entertainment culture is that a movie is worthy if it is long ( at least around 3 hours along), has a whole lot of heavy sounding dialogue( essentially pop pyschology) and is set on a grand scale. And yes if the movie deals with Holocaust, race relations, it is a certain shoo in. The old stereotypes are that science fiction and action flicks are popcorn movies for teenagers, which make a lot of money but have no artisitic merit. The idea that science fiction can be the basis for truly in depth and complex storytelling hasn't really soaked in for them yet. Maybe in few more decades.

[The Glyphstone]

Is this a bot?

Probably. But he's harmless, like that XKCD comic I cant link because Im on my phone.

[warty goblin]

If we showed the average Joe Mass Effect would they laugh? Would they find the idea of such a future ridiculous?

Maybe - just maybe - when said future involves an entire species of psychic blue space lesbian stripper assassins, laughter is an entirely appropriate response.

[Lvl 2 Expert]

Given that pretty much all big movies since roughly The Matrix were either science fiction (Avatar, Star trek, Star Wars, Jurassic World, Hunger Games, Transformer), fantasy (Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter, Twilight, Disney, Pixar) or superhero (Marvel, more Marvel, still more Marvel) I'd say it's all pretty mainstream already.

No seriously, check the list out. The big exceptions are James Bond and the Fast and the Furious franchise, that's what's left of "normal" action movies. And those Fast movies are basically superhero flicks with a good amount of technobabble thrown in. So they barely count.

So the problem is not with nerdy television not being possible. Nerdy is the default now, as the fact that Game of Thrones is the go to example already kind of indicates. There were both an official and an unofficial Star Trek series in the last year, and there are big expensive shows ongoing about everything from pirates to nuclear winter survivors.

The Expanse is not just nerdy and not just sci-fi though, it's almost arthouse. It deals in stuff like realism. It has a pretty slow pacing. It's a space western, but it's a gritty space western, removed from the space opera of Star Wars and the more idealistic world of Star Trek. It also has quite a lot of important characters, many different sets and zero G effects, which for what they ultimately accomplish are often deceptively expensive. The fact that a niche product like that got made in the way it did was in itself already fantastic. That would never have been greenlit before this massive popcultural revolution we've been having the last few decades. This used to be barely profitable terrain even if Sean Connery was selling it. But yeah, I'm not surprised that it wasn't the most popular show in town, yet...

I'm saying yet because in 2002 there was another space western show. It was if anything more Star Wars-like than The Expanse, and despite it having become an icon of nerd culture, Firefly lasted only one season plus a movie to tie things off. The Expanse has already gone further outside the normal comfort zone of big budget television and has already had more succes than it did. So no matter what happens now, the trend in the mean time is definitely towards a show like that becoming more viable.

[Darth Ultron]

So no matter what happens now, the trend in the mean time is definitely towards a show like that becoming more viable.

Maybe. But it will take at least another generation for the older folks in power right now to move on. Slowly, they are moving on. The mass of ''born before 1970 folks'' that hate sci fi and think it's kidz stuff. And that puts the ''after 1970 or so" folks in power. And for most folks born in the '70's, Sci Fi is not only ''normal'', but it is ''awesome''. Star Wars, Star Trek, Doctor Who and other such shows and Sci Fi movies have been a part of the people born after 1970 or so lives. And, of course, by 1990, we had the rise of the geek too.

The generations after 1970 have been filled with sci fi, fantasy and horror. So slowy the old, old people who vote for things like ''a move about a newspaper'' or ''a gripping ******* of age drama" move on....they will be replaced by more of people that will vote for "A man stranded on Mars'' or ''Mad Max" or ''Star Wars 13:The New Generation Strikes Back".

[Kitten Champion]

Given that pretty much all big movies since roughly The Matrix were either science fiction (Avatar, Star trek, Star Wars, Jurassic World, Hunger Games, Transformer), fantasy (Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter, Twilight, Disney, Pixar) or superhero (Marvel, more Marvel, still more Marvel) I'd say it's all pretty mainstream already.

Those aren't real Science Fiction though. Science Fiction is something that's unjustly overlooked by the majority and totally justifies the narrative of nerd as persecuted minority, anything not evoking that particular perception by being extremely popular and financially successful are to be looked at derisively as lesser products for the unwashed masses.

So no, Science Fiction will never have mainstream popularity, it can't by definition.

[Some Android]

Peter Dinklage?

[An Enemy Spy]

Those aren't real Science Fiction though. Science Fiction is something that's unjustly overlooked by the majority and totally justifies the narrative of nerd as persecuted minority, anything not evoking that particular perception by being extremely popular and financially successful are to be looked at derisively as lesser products for the unwashed masses.

So no, Science Fiction will never have mainstream popularity, it can't by definition.

What's sad is how many people unironically agree with this.

[Kitten Champion]

What's sad is how many people unironically agree with this.

It's what I dislike about all these bot threads, it's a common element of painting yourself as the victim.

You having specific tastes in media which aren't - at least in your mind - being catered to by the most broadest concept of popular culture isn't some tragedy I feel sympathy for, especially when you narrow those tastes down to high-production gritty space operas produced in North America.

Nor does a show being cancelled off of network television imply some deeper Truth about the cultural zeitgeist. Shows get cancelled all the time - it's a reality of the industry - and the greater the cost the higher the risk involved and the likelier it won't continue if it doesn't meet whatever metric they expect for it.

Basically what the bot's saying is, "others don't like what I like, therefore there must be something flawed with the world" and it annoys the crap out of me.

[An Enemy Spy]

It's what I dislike about all these bot threads, it's a common element of painting yourself as the victim.

You having specific tastes in media which aren't - at least in your mind - being catered to by the most broadest concept of popular culture isn't some tragedy I feel sympathy for, especially when you narrow those tastes down to high-production gritty space operas produced in North America.

Nor does a show being cancelled off of network television imply some deeper Truth about the cultural zeitgeist. Shows get cancelled all the time - it's a reality of the industry - and the greater the cost the higher the risk involved and the likelier it won't continue if it doesn't meet whatever metric they expect for it.

Basically what the bot's saying is, "others don't like what I like, therefore there must be something flawed with the world" and it annoys the crap out of me.

And it's a bot, it doesn't have any feelings on the matter. It's just analyzed the behavior of geek culture online and copied what it sees as the way we talk. And done a very convincing job of it I might add.

[Cheesegear]

Nor does a show being cancelled off of network television imply some deeper Truth about the cultural zeitgeist. Shows get cancelled all the time - it's a reality of the industry - and the greater the cost the higher the risk involved and the likelier it won't continue if it doesn't meet whatever metric they expect for it.

Just...This.

The is thing most wrong with Science Fiction, and why it continues to fail; Return on Investment. Special effects are expensive. It's why Game of Thrones only ever really has Dragons in the first and last episodes of each Season (don't even get me started on the stupid zombie bear). It's why White Walkers took so long to show up. It's why the Dire Wolves were essentially written out of the story from the word 'Go', despite their not-insignificant roles in the novels. In a Sci-Fi show, you're going to run SFX almost every episode. You might even have to do some hefty wire-work to get zero-G right. Sci-Fi shows are expensive. Then you get to casting. The more actors you have, the more the cost blows out out of proportion. Especially if your show hits in big, and the actors start getting movie deals which allows them greater bargaining power when it comes time to renew a Season or renegotiate contracts for whatever reason (e.g; "I know this show makes a ****-ton of money, and I want a raise.", basically Supernatural).

That's why say, Killjoys has three cast members and a voice actor. The entire rest of the budget can be spent on SFX without having it spiral out of control. Even if Killjoys doesn't enjoy 'mainstream popularity', it is still just cost-proportionate enough to justify its own existence. Meanwhile, Shannara Chronicles is busy shooting itself directly in the foot. Meanwhile, The 100 is being constantly renewed because the only thing that actually costs any money - post-Season 1 - is the costumes. Getting 'mainstream popularity' can be a death sentence to any show, if the cast starts asking for more money - hence the ideal cutoff being six years for a sci-fi or fantasy show.

But that all circles back to the original Return on Investment.

The studio will bankroll anything that makes money, proportional to amount invested in the product. That makes sense. Business gotta business.
But why don't Sci-Fi shows make money? Because the audience doesn't watch it. Why not?

(Also, after gaining 'mainstream popularity', there is a significant argument to be made for Game of Thrones getting 'dumber' per Season, as its popularity grows.)

One other massive thing keeping Game of Thrones afloat, is merchandising. Don't forget that - never forget merchandising.

[Kitten Champion]

And it's a bot, it doesn't have any feelings on the matter. It's just analyzed the behavior of geek culture online and copied what it sees as the way we talk. And done a very convincing job of it I might add.

I believe what's happening with cmdrshep is that while it's using a bot to distribute these across the Internet, there's a human individual making the content behind it for it to distribute. Rather than the random hodgepodge of randomly generated text as per usual.

... but yeah, it's sinking its little but sharp proboscis to get under the skin and spread its irritant by aiming at the oversensitive bit of us that feels self-conscious about our tastes in media.

[Some Android]

Rick and Morty is getting pretty mainstream. Maybe just imitate some aspects of their show.

[2D8HP]

No need to bother myself with something new.

Oh hey, this thread again.

Is this a bot?

At this point does it really matter?

Probably. But he's harmless, like that XKCD comic I cant link because Im on my phone.

And it's a bot, it doesn't have any feelings on the matter. It's just analyzed the behavior of geek culture online and copied what it sees as the way we talk. And done a very convincing job of it I might add.

I believe what's happening with cmdrshep is that while it's using a bot to distribute these across the Internet, there's a human individual making the content behind it for it to distribute. Rather than the random hodgepodge of randomly generated text as per usual.

... but yeah, it's sinking its little but sharp proboscis to get under the skin and spread its irritant by aiming at the oversensitive bit of us that feels self-conscious about our tastes in media.

But someone has to say it:

I for one welcome our new Space Opera loving robot overlord!

Spoiler: Golly! When will folks ever be ready for "R" rated movies that take place in Outer Space?

Show

(1979)

(1981)

Also, someone has to say it:

I for one welcome our new Space Opera loving robot overlord!

.
Someone has to say it:

I for one welcome our new Space Opera loving robot overlord!

Déjà vu!!!

Déjà vu!!!

[Cheesegear]

Rick and Morty is getting pretty mainstream. Maybe just imitate some aspects of their show.

Have no more than 5 regular voice actors to do all the work - whose pay scales are infamously low.
Make the show animated, so that nothing costs anything.
Force a poop-ton of memes so millennials will talk about you on social media and generate hype for whatever the next forced meme is.
Merchandise the **** out of your show! THEN MORE MERCHANDISING.

Any money that you've saved on a) not paying voice actors anything, b) not paying animators anything and c) using social media for free marketing; You can spend on MORE MERCHANDISING.


...Somehow, I don't think that's going to make it to a Sci-Fi show that's intended to be taken seriously.

[BeerMug Paladin]

Oh man, if only something like Futurama existed. Or Dr. Who, not that I really care about that one.

It's been a while since this bot has posted something. I think Kitten Champion's "human behind the bot" theory might have something to it. That certainly would explain the periodic lulls in activity when the person is feeling happy with the currently available media.

[2D8HP]

..been a while since this bot has posted something. I think Kitten Champion's "human behind the bot" theory might have something to it. That certainly would explain the periodic lulls in activity when the person is feeling happy with the currently available media.

Doing a Google search of the words in thr OP shows the exact same post on a few different Forums starting May 11th.

Other CmdrShep2183 posts form different threads also show up on different Forums as well, with a post on Reddit usually being firsf.

Still for a Spambot thr posts seem sincere.

The common topics are Space Opera and video games.

Anyone hsve ideas on why?

[Darth Ultron]

The is thing most wrong with Science Fiction, and why it continues to fail; Return on Investment. Special effects are expensive.

This right here is the huge part of the problem: The focus on special effects. For fantasy, horror and sci fi the first thing that comes to peoples minds is the show MUST have special effects. This is not true of other shows, they can concentrate on other things.

So why can't you have a sci fi show with little or no special effects? Why can't a sci fi show focus on other things? Is there some reason the sci fi show must have huge special effects?

If a show just had characters interacting and doing something, but no special effects...would it still be called Sci Fi?

Sci-Fi shows are expensive.

All TV shows have expenses....but why must Sci Fi be expensive?

But that all circles back to the original Return on Investment.

The studio will bankroll anything that makes money, proportional to amount invested in the product. That makes sense. Business gotta business.
But why don't Sci-Fi shows make money? Because the audience doesn't watch it. Why not?

This does go around a bit in the circle: the show costs money, the show must be promoted, it needs to have dedicated fans, the show has to make money and so forth.

[Cheesegear]

Oh man, if only something like Futurama existed.

I'm not going to put Futurama and The Expanse in the same category.

So why can't you have a sci fi show with little or no special effects?

You can. Look at the massive difference between pre-Discovery, and Discovery, series of Star Trek. Battlestar Galactica did very little SFX-wise. Mostly just stock shots of ships, and a few times a Season, a Cylon would show up.

If a show just had characters interacting and doing something, but no special effects...would it still be called Sci Fi?

Pfft. How's that working out for Lucifer?
Then you've got something like Altered Carbon, Electric Dreams and the occasional episode of Black Mirror.

Sci-Fi stuff is very popular.

However, the sticking point, seems to be that hard Sci-Fi, doesn't sell. As above, compare pre-DIS Star Trek and DIS.
Compare the camera focusing on Patrick Stewart's face as he screams that there are four lights in a clear reference to 1984, vs. ...anything, really, that happens in STD.

It's undeniable that STD is more popular in the mainstream. Why? Again with the Star Trek, the most-recent trilogy looking more like Star Wars than ever before. And it came out reasonably successful, and certainly more successful than any other Star Trek before it.

Is it lasers? It certainly seems that way, especially to executives. And it's hard to tell them that they're wrong.

[dps]

compare pre-DIS Star Trek and DIS.
Compare the camera focusing on Patrick Stewart's face as he screams that there are four lights in a clear reference to 1984, vs. ...anything, really, that happens in STD.

It's undeniable that STD is more popular in the mainstream. Why? Again with the Star Trek, the most-recent trilogy looking more like Star Wars than ever before. And it came out reasonably successful, and certainly more successful than any other Star Trek before it.

Are you seriously claiming that Star Trek: Discovery has more mainstream popularity than Star Trek: The Next Generation?

[Cheesegear]

Are you seriously claiming that Star Trek: Discovery has more mainstream popularity than Star Trek: The Next Generation?

Yes.
Do I think that Discovery is more popular with Star Trek fans? Hell no.

[An Enemy Spy]

Yes.
Do I think that Discovery is more popular with Star Trek fans? Hell no.

Star Trek TNG is one of the most easily recognizable shows of all time. People who have never watched an episode of Star Trek in their lives know who Captain Picard is and what the Enterprise is. Discovery has only one season and can only be viewed on a streaming service you have to pay for. You are living in another dimension if you think Discovery has eclipsed TNG in popularity.

[Legato Endless]

Well, note Game of Thrones is not ''mainstream''. It's popular...with geeks and fantasy fans and people that like adult stuff. But that does not make it ''mainstream''.

This admittedly semantic but: The 2017 finale of Game of Thrones reached 12.1 million people according to Nielsen ratings. Including HBO's other streaming services, the finale had 16.5 millions viewers. HBO touts the total views of each episode average now around 30 million. That is not counting the truly prodigious amount of pirating that can be reasonably assumed to occur for the show. Season 6 had 23 million views averaging an episode in the US. That is not counting the 179 other countries the show airs in. Game has been on the cover of Time Magazine, and probably every other major media outlet. Amazon green lit the biggest television deal in history to get in on this action.

It's literally the world's most popular show currently, and has been for several years. If Thrones isn't mainstream, nothing since the diversification of entertainment with the rise of the internet qualifies. American Idol and Sunday Night Football wouldn't be mainstream then. Nothing would be. The fact that the people running the Academy awards aren't handing out Best Pictures like candy to speculative fiction is not evidence that Nerd's aren't huge definers of pop culture going forward. Nerd stuff has been iconically mainstream for a long time now.

The real irony of Shep's claim is that a sci-fi show would need to be half that popular to qualify for breaking into the mainstream. That's the logic of tv executive, not a normal person. (OP's existence as a bot notwithstanding)

[Cheesegear]

Star Trek TNG is one of the most easily recognizable shows of all time.

Recognisability isn't the same as popularity. And it certainly doesn't convert into profitability.

People who have never watched an episode of Star Trek in their lives know who Captain Picard is and what the Enterprise is.

If they've never watched an episode of Star Trek... Why not?