# Are We Living in A Golden Of Television In terms of Science fiction  Fantasy and Horror Show?



## BAYLOR (Jul 25, 2016)

Is this the golden age for  fans of these genres of shows ?  When do you think this current golden age began and how long do you think it will continue?Are these types of shows here to stay?  What factors made this golden age possible ? 

Thoughts?


----------



## Foxbat (Jul 25, 2016)

There are many critics who claim that TV has surpassed the movie in artistic importance. The reason they give is that there is much more scope  to deal with an epic tale in a mini-series than in a movie (or a trilogy that might take years before being finally completed). When you think of the many fine series available, I find it difficult to argue against that point of view.

Golden Age of Television (2000s–present) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Dave (Jul 25, 2016)

I'd agree that it is a "golden age of television" on the basis that when you compare a newly made series with one from 20 years ago, the production standards, quality of acting, locations used, editing and costumes are all far superior. They are of movie quality and the money spent is comparable. However, the question asked was "in terms of Science fiction Fantasy and Horror Show." I think what has happened is that science fiction, fantasy and horror have become more mainstream. While it is true that shows such as _Game of Thrones_ would not have been made before, I think the main difference is that within mainstream dramas it is now much more common to see elements of science fiction, fantasy and horror used. This does, however, mean that we have lost those science fiction, fantasy and horror drama shows like _Outer Limits_ and _The Twilight Show_ that were pure science fiction, fantasy and horror, and some might see those as "golden age."


----------



## Cli-Fi (Aug 20, 2016)

Dave said:


> I'd agree that it is a "golden age of television" on the basis that when you compare a newly made series with one from 20 years ago, the production standards, quality of acting, locations used, editing and costumes are all far superior. They are of movie quality and the money spent is comparable. However, the question asked was "in terms of Science fiction Fantasy and Horror Show." I think what has happened is that science fiction, fantasy and horror have become more mainstream. While it is true that shows such as _Game of Thrones_ would not have been made before, I think the main difference is that within mainstream dramas it is now much more common to see elements of science fiction, fantasy and horror used. This does, however, mean that we have lost those science fiction, fantasy and horror drama shows like _Outer Limits_ and _The Twilight Show_ that were pure science fiction, fantasy and horror, and some might see those as "golden age."



I agree with this for the most part. Dramas have taken over the formula for how sci-fi TV used to turn a fan turn into rabid fanboys. That whole experience only used to belong to us (namely trekkies, browncoats, jedis, whovians etc...). Now, Comic Con no longer belongs to just comics and sci-fi. Other shows try to break that glass ceiling.

The last true sci-fi Show that had this type of fanboy following was LOST. I don't think you can call LOST anything but Sci-fi. I think with shows like The Expanse, 12 Monkeys, and even the whimsical paranormal stuff like The Leftovers, the hunger for the next great thing is there. Will sci-fi TV get a breaking Bad like thing that everybody and their mothers will watch? Possibly, but sci-fi tends to go the other direction. They get popular over time and the grandmother ends up being the one to re-introduce it to the masses.

So yes, while we are waning off the golden age of TV in general, as I think it's slowly diminishing about now. Sci-fi didn't really have that moment this time. It didn't have a Downton Abbey, a Mad Men, a Breaking Bad. No sci-fi show won major emmys. It didn't have that breakout moment except for LOST. Remember how many people watched the finale??? Some shows like Battlestar came close, but you only watched that if you liked sci-fi and spaceships in the first place and sought it out. I'm talking about genuine word of mouth popularity. When you can walk down the street and ask, what do you think the smoke monster is and everybody next to you will completely understand what you are talking about. sci-fi hasn't had that since LOST. 

BTW: Game of Thrones I consider, fantasy.
Walking Dead belongs in the comics section. Which frankly I give Comics their own section even though they all could be considered sci-fi in a sense.


----------



## Wawona Girl (Aug 20, 2016)

Yes, we do watch more science fiction on the television and at the movies these days. And yes, science fiction effects have improved tremendously since the eighties and nineties. But get real! Where did most of the ideas in sci-if plots come from? I grew up on Star Trek, marvel and DC comics, the six million dollar man, the Gemini man, space 1999, battlestar galatica, the terminator, Star Wars........need I go on? Before that, there was the twilight zone and the time machine. Writers have consciously or subconsciously taken those ideas and either improved on them or messed with them badly. Why do the movie makers continue to try to capture the past by rebooting old series like Star Trek. This is not the golden age. More like let's try to fool everyone that it is.


----------



## Stuart Suffel (Aug 20, 2016)

Not to mention Logan's Run, The Man From Atlantis and Dr Who...  But production value wise, today's stuff is pretty awesome. Writing wise...hit n miss.


----------



## Wawona Girl (Aug 21, 2016)

StuartSuffers said:


> Not to mention Logan's Run, The Man From Atlantis and Dr Who...  But production value wise, today's stuff is pretty awesome. Writing wise...hit n miss.



You're right. Today's stuff is pretty awesome and the special effects outclass the effects of the eighties tremendously. And the length of some tv series are impressive, seeing as how many still don't get past the first series. Look how far Game of Thrones has gone. The creative ideas that go into a series like that are mind-boggling. Personally, I love the dark elements of Gotham myself. The writing content takes the viewer into a corrupt world that twists and turns, with villains that stop at nothing to get what they want. Continuum was also good, but seem to lose its way. Science fiction is all around us now, but still, there is an insatiable hunger for new ideas. Gotham is a terrific series, but then so too was Smallville back in its day. New clothes can fool many into believing they are looking at a new man. But it is only that he is made up to look differently to us.


----------



## Overread (Aug 21, 2016)

I think we are between golden ages honestly and I could argue that fantasy has never really had one yet.

Sci-fi was very popular and big - Star Trek; Sliders; Quantum Leap; Knight Rider; Battlestar Galactica; Buck Rogers etc... To name a tiny few of the legion of classics. Indeed much of our current age is born of that history with continuing Startrek and even reboots of old series; and I would argue that scifi has never really slipped; its maintained a constant presence. 

However at present I feel that scifi and fantasy are in a dip. We are getting more series more akin to the recent Merlin which is a way of saying its light in story even though its got high production values in nearly all other areas. I put this down to a lot of TV following the formula of "how to write a series". Thus resulting in a lot of episodes that are drop-in in style and writing where any effect on the actual characters and story is held in limbo until the very last episodes and very first of a season.

I think that we are still waiting for a golden age when we see grand story lines and strong interlinking of episodes. Game of Thrones is a near first there and even in long running traditional series we get very few like Babalon 5 which are written with long term story arcs in mind. 



Fantasy I think on the TV is abit like Steam Punk. It gets a handful of really top rate productions but never seems to spawn much of a following to spawn a lot of series of quality. Indeed I'm hard pressed to think of any major fantasy series beyond Game of Thrones and Merlin and a lot of the traditional fantasy were very hack and slash (Conan/Xena) style. If we put Buffy into the Fantasy line then its at least had that, which is probably the biggest outside of Game of Thrones. Oddly this pattern seems to extend into films as well; sci-fi tends to make a bigger hit at least in advertising whilst al ot of fantasy films are often quite niche or fringe. 
I think part of the problem is the Harry Potter effect - Hollywood and the cinema/TV industry thinks of fantasy as for kids and thus they get a bulk of productions and many are geared more toward them. Meanwhile sci-fi straddles neatly and has adult and teen and child focused franchises all of its own. 

Indeed we can see this even with a huge Epic like Lord of the Rings - where once something like Star-Wars prompted a huge number of copy-cats; we've not really had a slew of copy-cat films after Lord of the Rings. Although part of that I think is because Comic films took off big time after that which I think has soaked up a LOT of resources in the film world. Thus leaving scant pickings for other films to get into the serious market. 





So I think we are in the middle; we've a few big series and films but nothing like a true Golden age for both. Fantasy is still really waiting to have one whilst Sci-fi is kind of in a long term mainstream binge and might build into a fresh golden age although most likely will be one long series of big wins every so often amidst a sea of standard productions.


----------



## Rodders (Aug 21, 2016)

TV is generally excellent these days, both in quality and quantity but for me the Golden Age would've been the nineties.

Babylon Five, The X-Files, Star Trek: TNG was just finishing and DS9 was just starting up. We had Zena Warrior Princess, Hercules and Lexx. An right at the very end, just to push us into the noughties, we had Farscape.


----------



## Overread (Aug 21, 2016)

Farscape and Stargate. Might be one or two others but mostly just those two. Stargate itself got alittle long in the tooth but they also took the right choice in closing it off rather than letting it go Simpsons style and getting stuck in an endless rut.


----------



## Cli-Fi (Aug 21, 2016)

Overread said:


> 1. Fantasy I think on the TV is abit like Steam Punk. It gets a handful of really top rate productions but never seems to spawn much of a following to spawn a lot of series of quality. Indeed I'm hard pressed to think of any major fantasy series beyond Game of Thrones and Merlin and a lot of the traditional fantasy were very hack and slash (Conan/Xena) style. If we put Buffy into the Fantasy line then its at least had that, which is probably the biggest outside of Game of Thrones. Oddly this pattern seems to extend into films as well; sci-fi tends to make a bigger hit at least in advertising whilst al ot of fantasy films are often quite niche or fringe.
> 
> 
> 2. I think part of the problem is the Harry Potter effect - Hollywood and the cinema/TV industry thinks of fantasy as for kids and thus they get a bulk of productions and many are geared more toward them. Meanwhile sci-fi straddles neatly and has adult and teen and child focused franchises all of its own.
> ...



I totally agree with you on this.

1. I have never really been able to get into a fantasy TV Show. Even Game of Thrones bothers me. I don't watch it. I never liked it. I feel like I'm the only nerd who thinks this way. I do think Game of Thrones is the best of the best where Fantasy is concerned. Which I think is very hard to do. It would be interesting to compare the budgets of Game of Thrones VS The Walking Dead. Two of the most popular TV shows in America. I think Game of Thrones has a much higher budget, since half of the Walking Dead is indeed the Walking part!!!! I haven't seen the series, but it seems Game of Thrones has a lot more on site locations and sets that have to be made.

2. Totally agree. YA has a lot going for it, but as of now, it can't be taken seriously as a TV Show. It will alienate a certain group of people who don't want to watch "a kids show". I remember they once thought that Harry Potter would make a good TV Show. Rowlings wants to stay away from TV. I also don't think it would have been a good idea. The TV World is not kind to fantasy. That's why every single Harry Potter/Hunger Games type book has been made into movies (most were not that successful either).

TV is a different medium. You have to have a big enough following where you make a splash right away. Even so, it might not be successful. I'm not so sure how something like The Shannara Chronicles is doing plus, it's on MTV, which I think was a HUGE mistake. If you and your Uncle are a fan of that world, you might check it out because you have no bias towards MTV, but your Uncle is NOT. Going. To. Watch. MTV.

A new fantasy show would almost have to debut on Netflix if they want to attract the right kinds of viewers. Millennials who typically, read Fantasy are not that interested in cable TV shows. That's why the relatively simple plot of Stranger Things is doing so well on Netflix. I've heard rumblings that it is now it's top show. I would consider Stranger Things fantasy.

3. They will likely remake LOTR before something bigger takes it's place. I honestly don't see how one would oneup LOTR. A lot of Adult Fantasy focuses on the one of the races that LOTR mixes together so well. Why would viewers care about an elf world after LOTR already had the most beautiful elves in cinema?

What series of books can possibly compare?
Game of Thrones has a great big following and they are massive in size. That's comparable to LOTR, but it's already almost over. I think it's ending after only eight seasons. That's another problem with Fantasy on TV. You are ultimately tied to ratings and/or how fast you follow the timeline of the books, at least in today's marketplace. We are heading into a future where that will actually change. I don't think HBO cares about Ratings. AMC actually loves ratings. But if you are a fantasy show, unless you are on Netflix. It's hopeless. I'm left wondering if Fantasy will ever have it's time to shine on the silver screen? I know my WIP which I would consider part fantasy would make a lousy TV show, and a better blockbuster trilogy. TV is too risky.


----------



## Overread (Aug 21, 2016)

Lord of the Rings can totally be one-upped. Especially when one reads the books and realises that for all its strengths the final script is quite original in telling the story and not totally faithful. As a result if one director and script writing team can do it so too can another. Indeed Peter Jackson has teased many with hsi comment that he'd like to make Temeraire into a film. 

Lets not also forget we've had a few greats in the past like Dragonheart which really wowed (at the time) audiences. 


I think the problem is that fantasy just isn't taken seriously and its treated poorly. Furthermore its kind of stuck in the Dungeons and Dragons era in film and they've not really got a desire to make 80-90s films like that any more but similarly don't quite know what to do with fantasy otherwise. Coupled to the fact that a lot of fantasy authors go for young adult (or correctly lots of publishers do) and you've a market that can't mature because the gatekeepers won't let it. 


In truth when one looks at films anything of quality tends to do well. Consider all those who thought comicbook heroes wouldn't make for big budget films - yet done well (or even terribly - Transformers has several films despite appalling writing) and marketed well they can be big money.


Sci-fi had a bonus in directors like Steven Spielburg who really pushed that genre every chance they got. As a result of directors pushing sci-fi (which lets be honest is just fantasy with lasers and spaceships ) its got a mature market and mature series of productions. I think put that same energy; that same fire and same budget behind fantasy and it would work - heck Lord of the Rings showed it would work. 




The same is true for the TV market as well. There's just no one to champion and push for a strong fantasy series at present barring Game of Thrones.


----------



## Cli-Fi (Aug 21, 2016)

Overread said:


> Lord of the Rings can totally be one-upped. Especially when one reads the books and realises that for all its strengths the final script is quite original in telling the story and not totally faithful. As a result if one director and script writing team can do it so too can another. Indeed Peter Jackson has teased many with hsi comment that he'd like to make Temeraire into a film.



I think another problem with fantasy is that it just doesn't appeal to the broader audience. I myself am not a huge fan of the dungeon and dragon stories. Once in awhile something really original grabs me and makes me take notice. Shrek was the one that did that for me where fantasy was concerned. Yes, Shrek is not serious in any way but it was broad enough where everybody knew all the characters involved (besides Shrek himself). That type of formula may work in future fantasy films or perhaps better in a TV-verse.

LOTR was another and that was the serious one.  Albeit it has a similar model as Shrek did. The Hobbits were really Tolkien's original creation. All the other races had already been used countless times in the literature. As with Shrek. The hobbit characters were new and we got to see the fantasy world through their eyes. The audience could relate easier. 

This is also why something like Avatar was successful. It was partly fantasy and partly that new type of character that we didn't know about and the world that we didn't know about. Something that James Cameron is obsessing over as I write this. He is writing four more stories about those characters and that world.


----------



## Overread (Aug 21, 2016)

Thing is fantasy tends to have less need for info-dumping than scifi - elves dwarves goblins orks etc... are all things that fantasy can make use of without any quibble from fans or casual people alike and both know what an elf or an ork is. Thus you can use them easily. Sci-fi has to put background to nearly every unique critter they want to show; or is expected to. 

You don't have to introduce a dragon to people - they know what it is. All you need is show where yours is different to others. Much if not nearly all of the background a fantasy story needs is political/social and magical and the first two are universal for anything that isn't set in the modern world (and even then you tend to have to put it in anyway). 

Indeed if you go for the classic Dungeons and Dragons formula its just specialist people on an adventure - something that seems to be a bad word these days. We don't really get adventure stories any more; indeed I'd say we are in a dark age for them which is a shame as they translate fantastically well to a TV series structure. Done well they can even up-scale to a full blown movie (look at something like Cowboy Bebop* where the film is basically a very high production value episode built over a longer time-frame that a film allows for). 

And that's what most think of when they think of fantasy - Dungeons and Dragons or Lord of the Rings. Thus there's ample material there to build upon for new works; but at the same time there's huge potential for new films as well.


We do get them but they are rather like Seventh Son - films that kind of make a little ripple but sneak into DVD and vanish into obscurity very quickly. 



* Cowboy Bebop and films like Serenity are also a good display of how a movie-tie-in to a series can be done well. It also shows that one major weakness of many stand alone films is that they have to present a story and character introduction which is honestly quite a major talent that not every director has. Having a series established that leads into a film is a great thing; the series handles the setup of the characters; it introduces them and has time to look into their histories and to build up mysteries as well. Then a film can focus on the action, the adventure and the story without being bogged down.


----------



## Cli-Fi (Aug 21, 2016)

Overread said:


> * Cowboy Bebop and films like Serenity are also a good display of how a movie-tie-in to a series can be done well. It also shows that one major weakness of many stand alone films is that they have to present a story and character introduction which is honestly quite a major talent that not every director has. Having a series established that leads into a film is a great thing; the series handles the setup of the characters; it introduces them and has time to look into their histories and to build up mysteries as well. Then a film can focus on the action, the adventure and the story without being bogged down.



One that did this really well but in reverse is The Librarian movies that were first a trilogy of movies which are now The Librarians TV series. That's a modern day fantasy world, that's a bit quirky and silly. It's not serious at all tho. Which is a shame because it very well could be and I think at some points tries to be. But it's hardly a household name.

Another serious fantasy TV Show might be Early Edition. Kyle Chandler's first hit about a guy who gets tomorrow's newspaper today and he chooses to use it to prevent bad things from happening in Chicago.


----------



## Cli-Fi (Aug 21, 2016)

Also if Fantastic Beasts does well, which I hope it does and I'm very much looking forward to that. That can pave a way for a whole new method of fantasy cinema formulas. You can stay in the extended universes but toss out your main characters and start with others. Marvel will be looking at that formula soon.


----------



## BAYLOR (Aug 25, 2016)

I can remember a time when there few if any since fiction and fantasy show on tv . Through much of the 1970's and 1980's  there is not much pod anything.


----------



## logan_run (Aug 29, 2016)

the  syfi channel plays  stuff that's not  so hot I wish they played   classics like the original the day the earth stood still and remade shows like logans run. bionic man and  woman. starlost for a new  generation.


----------



## BAYLOR (Aug 29, 2016)

logan_run said:


> the  syfi channel plays  stuff that's not  so hot I wish they played   classics like the original the day the earth stood still and remade shows like logans run. bionic man and  woman. starlost for a new  generation.



And what's wrong with the Sharknado  film saga ?


----------



## Overread (Aug 29, 2016)

Logan I would rather Syfi wouldn't touch classics - or anything. It's a bit like Micheal Bay films only without the budget to at least make a good action flick. Heck that channel has never ever been anything but an attempt to spin money as cheaply as possible [heck the UK versin of the channel never did late night runs of Alien or such but instead showed cringe worthy light nudity films)


----------



## BAYLOR (Aug 30, 2016)

Overread said:


> Logan I would rather Syfi wouldn't touch classics - or anything. It's a bit like Micheal Bay films only without the budget to at least make a good action flick. Heck that channel has never ever been anything but an attempt to spin money as cheaply as possible [heck the UK versin of the channel never did late night runs of Alien or such but instead showed cringe worthy light nudity films)



The Syfy Channel  over all is doing better program, they making the effort to do good shows.


----------



## logan_run (Aug 31, 2016)

I never seen it  overread


----------



## WaylanderToo (Aug 31, 2016)

BAYLOR said:


> The Syfy Channel  over all is doing better program, they making the effort to do good shows.




Well I'm enjoying Dark Matter and Killjoys which are currently being shown on said channel - though TBF I have no idea if they are actually SyFy _productions_


----------



## BAYLOR (Nov 6, 2016)

*Westworld* , another excellent tv show.


----------



## BAYLOR (Jan 9, 2017)

Then there is *The Expanse *, great show.


----------



## BAYLOR (Jun 20, 2021)

Multiple Star Trek series in the production pipeline.


----------



## DrStrangelove (Jun 20, 2021)

I must say it is a mixed bag for me, especially in terms of SF.

On one hand, there are excelent shows airing right now that really nail what it means to engage in science fiction outside of the "pew-pew-lasers-in-space". Expanse is a great example - while I do not dig the series and know it mostly either from my girlfriend's summaries or wiki, what I've seen seemed like a great balance between solid research and fun, more outlandish ideas.

On the other hand, there are shows like Discovery. While I did enjoy the first season, with it's absurd mix of ideas from all over the place (Klingon Tombship straight out of W40k, Dune navigators, fungus warp and the Dark Galaxy of Space Fascists), the writing, especially when dealing with "science", was as horrible as I would expect from Alex Kurtzman, the man who pats himself on the back with technobable and then procedes with three script pages of stuff exploding loudly. It is the ultimate jocks science-fiction show - whenever anything bordering on science shows up, the absurd dialogue containing random words like "black holes" and "tachyons" literary ends with someone exclaiming "That's the power of math!" or "Yeah, science!".

Among my friends I often joke that the problem lies with a) changing demographics and b) making everything Star Wars. Apparently what we crave is just the aesthetics of SF, without any sociological or technological aspects that would hamper the pace of everything being blasted in the cosmic darkness. Imagine a non-satirical Starship Troopers TV series that actually, as in the original book, happens mostly during lectures and classes. Or a TV adaptation of "Accelerando" by Stross, or "Blindsight" by Watts.

SF rant aside, there still is the fantasy part. While fantasy has always been a minor part of my intrests, with honourable exceptions like Conan, Wheel of Time or the Witcher series (which I am obligated to know by heart as I live in the same city as the series author), I do find the situation more promising. Compared to the 90's, when fantasy shows and movies were good only in a campy sense (at best), we do have some high-budget, high quality series out there, and one thing that is great for sure is that there is no longer any stigma on the genre, now as marketable and profitable as it could ever be.


----------

