1960's Science Fiction vs. Today's

Hello all,

I don't know if anyone will agree with me on this, but I have to confess I have a good deal of misgivings about the UFO movie in the works. And not just, will they be true to the characters and to the effects. No, I'm more worried about the tone they're going to adopt.

Most science fiction these days is extremely pessimistic when you compare it to what was going around in the 1960s. Things now, are almost always set in a distopian future, with disfunctional characters who can't seem to get along, even when their lives depend on it.

Compare the recent Battlestar Galactica with the old 1970's version. Yes, both were apocalyptic visions of a civilization that had been destroyed, but with the old one, you got the feeling that somehow the characters had enough courage, wit, intelligence and backbone to stand up to the challenges thrown at them. By contrast, I couldn't stand the new show. None of the characters seemed like they even deserved to live beyond the end of the episode, nevermind the series. They turned on each other like rabid dogs.

The latest Star Trek movie had Kirk and Spock at each other's throats. Far Far from the brotherhood the original characters had.

Most new science fiction out there... Well, if it's not a dystopian nightmare or post apocalyptic wasteland, it's an end of the world story.

There's so much doom and gloom in science fiction these days, it's no wonder the genre is losing it's popularity.

In my writing, I try to keep things optimistic and fun. The sort of future that I'd want to live in, instead of dreading it will happen.

Anyway, UFO was pretty dark for it's day, but the Good Guys had the upper hand morally. I really hope we don't get an "Oh! The poor aliens! We must sympathize with them! Their planet is dying from Global Warming!" story.

Scott Kellogg
21st Century Fox: The future's so bright, you gotta wear shades
http://techfox.keenspace.com

Interesting thoughts Scott. Star Trek.. yes, Kirk and Spock were close friends, but surely friendships like that are forged from somewhere, and the new film did show the developement of their relationship.
Writing.. fun and optimistic .. Good.. I like reading fun stories, but I prefer writing really dark UFO stories (darker the better! Got a really really serious one in the pipeline right now!!) Are yours available to read?
I seriously don't think the writers will go down the 'poor aliens' line... if anything they wil be concentrating more on CGI and action rather than emotions and angst. Unfortunately. One of UFOs specialities was the 'human' side of the characters. adn I think that aspect will be lost in favour of explosions, fights, space action etc.

Lightcudder!


--- In [hidden email], Scott Kellogg <kelloggs2066@...> wrote:
>
I'm more worried about the tone they're going to adopt.

I agree - there is something wrong with SF these days. Although it's not
always just the problem you outline. Even the non dystopian and apocalyptic
stuff seems to lack real ideas, wit, or intelligence - BEM 50s pulp stuff
with bigger budgets and flashy effects. At least the 50s BEM had a sense of
fun.



TV shows with an SF or non mainstream premise also seem to be lacking
something. The Prisoner remake has lost the social commentary and replaced
it with some maudlin sentimentality about #2's past. The V remake lost the
Nazi allegory, and overplayed xtianity. Even the last series of Doctor Who
was easily the worst in its history.



Quite why all this is so is a mystery.



From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of
Scott Kellogg
Sent: Sunday, 12 September 2010 11:39 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: [SHADO] 1960's Science Fiction vs. Today's





Hello all,

I don't know if anyone will agree with me on this, but I have to confess I
have a good deal of misgivings about the UFO movie in the works. And not
just, will they be true to the characters and to the effects. No, I'm more
worried about the tone they're going to adopt.

Most science fiction these days is extremely pessimistic when you compare it
to what was going around in the 1960s. Things now, are almost always set in
a distopian future, with disfunctional characters who can't seem to get
along, even when their lives depend on it.

Compare the recent Battlestar Galactica with the old 1970's version. Yes,
both were apocalyptic visions of a civilization that had been destroyed, but
with the old one, you got the feeling that somehow the characters had enough
courage, wit, intelligence and backbone to stand up to the challenges thrown
at them. By contrast, I couldn't stand the new show. None of the characters
seemed like they even deserved to live beyond the end of the episode,
nevermind the series. They turned on each other like rabid dogs.

The latest Star Trek movie had Kirk and Spock at each other's throats. Far
Far from the brotherhood the original characters had.

Most new science fiction out there... Well, if it's not a dystopian
nightmare or post apocalyptic wasteland, it's an end of the world story.

There's so much doom and gloom in science fiction these days, it's no wonder
the genre is losing it's popularity.

In my writing, I try to keep things optimistic and fun. The sort of future
that I'd want to live in, instead of dreading it will happen.

Anyway, UFO was pretty dark for it's day, but the Good Guys had the upper
hand morally. I really hope we don't get an "Oh! The poor aliens! We must
sympathize with them! Their planet is dying from Global Warming!" story.

Scott Kellogg
21st Century Fox: The future's so bright, you gotta wear shades
http://techfox.keenspace.com





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

On Mon, 13 Sep 2010 01:02:36 +0930
"David Richards" <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> TV shows with an SF or non mainstream premise also seem to be lacking
> something. The Prisoner remake has lost the social commentary and replaced
> it with some maudlin sentimentality about #2's past. The V remake lost the
> Nazi allegory, and overplayed xtianity. Even the last series of Doctor Who
> was easily the worst in its history.

Sorry to hear you didn't like the last Doctor Who, but you certainly
aren't representing a consensus point of view there. I think that
almost no Who fan would agree with you.

I also liked how they explained bones nickname.

----- Reply message -----
From: "Lightcudder" <[hidden email]>
Date: Sun, Sep 12, 2010 11:09 am
Subject: [SHADO] Re: 1960's Science Fiction vs. Today's
To: <[hidden email]>

Interesting thoughts Scott. Star Trek.. yes, Kirk and Spock were close friends, but surely friendships like that are forged from somewhere, and the new film did show the developement of their relationship.
Writing.. fun and optimistic .. Good.. I like reading fun stories, but I prefer writing really dark UFO stories (darker the better! Got a really really serious one in the pipeline right now!!) Are yours available to read?
I seriously don't think the writers will go down the 'poor aliens' line... if anything they wil be concentrating more on CGI and action rather than emotions and angst. Unfortunately. One of UFOs specialities was the 'human' side of the characters. adn I think that aspect will be lost in favour of explosions, fights, space action etc.

Lightcudder!


--- In [hidden email], Scott Kellogg <kelloggs2066@...> wrote:
>
I'm more worried about the tone they're going to adopt.




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

--- In [hidden email], James Gibbon <jg@...> wrote:
>
> Sorry to hear you didn't like the last Doctor Who, but you certainly
> aren't representing a consensus point of view there. I think that
> almost no Who fan would agree with you.


Jumping in for a moment here.

Weighing in on the recent Doctor Who: whereas I thoroughly enjoy the character of Amy Pond, I feel most of the latest season seemed to simply go over old ground ("Vincent And The Doctor" and "The Lodger" being two exceptions). I'd like for the series to recapture some of the dynamic that produced episodes such as "Blink", "Love And Monsters" and "The Girl In The Fireplace").

Going on to "old" Star Trek vs. the "new movie" Star Trek: I clearly remember how, in the second pilot ("Where No Man Has Gone Before"), the relationship between Kirk and Spock seemed to be in early days, with the crisis involving Gary Mitchell serving as the catalyst which allowed them to firmly establish both their professional and personal association.

Something I preferred from the original series was the fact that, by the time he assumed command of the Enterprise, Shatner's Kirk already enjoyed an established professional reputation . . . something which Pine's Kirk clearly lacked.

(Going to go duck back behind the couch now.)


Michael

You mean in some other way than that in the navy a ship's surgeon is
usually called the sawbones?

On 12/09/2010 20:25, bruce sherman wrote:


______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email 
______________________________________________________________________

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Yes.  Something to the effect that his wife got everything in the divorce, and
all he has left is his bones.

Jeff




________________________________
From: Grant Wray <[hidden email]>
To: [hidden email]
Sent: Sun, September 12, 2010 4:14:03 PM
Subject: Re: [SHADO] Re: 1960's Science Fiction vs. Today's

 
You mean in some other way than that in the navy a ship's surgeon is
usually called the sawbones?

On 12/09/2010 20:25, bruce sherman wrote:
__________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email 
__________________________________________________________

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

The term sawbones is more to with the way the military surgeons use to remove the limbs from wounded men when there was no way to save the limb. They would use a saw to cut the limb off, without drugs. I really horror-able process.

--- On Sun, 9/12/10, Grant Wray <[hidden email]> wrote:

From: Grant Wray <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [SHADO] Re: 1960's Science Fiction vs. Today's
To: [hidden email]
Date: Sunday, September 12, 2010, 5:14 PM







 



 


   
     
     
You mean in some other way than that in the navy a ship's surgeon is

usually called the sawbones?



On 12/09/2010 20:25, bruce sherman wrote:

>

> I also liked how they explained bones nickname.

>

> ----- Reply message -----

> From: "Lightcudder" <[hidden email]

> <mailto:l.oatridge%40blueyonder.co.uk>>

> Date: Sun, Sep 12, 2010 11:09 am

> Subject: [SHADO] Re: 1960's Science Fiction vs. Today's

> To: <[hidden email] <mailto:SHADO%40yahoogroups.com>>

>

> Interesting thoughts Scott. Star Trek.. yes, Kirk and Spock were close

> friends, but surely friendships like that are forged from somewhere,

> and the new film did show the developement of their relationship.

> Writing.. fun and optimistic .. Good.. I like reading fun stories, but

> I prefer writing really dark UFO stories (darker the better! Got a

> really really serious one in the pipeline right now!!) Are yours

> available to read?

> I seriously don't think the writers will go down the 'poor aliens'

> line... if anything they wil be concentrating more on CGI and action

> rather than emotions and angst. Unfortunately. One of UFOs

> specialities was the 'human' side of the characters. adn I think that

> aspect will be lost in favour of explosions, fights, space action etc.

>

> Lightcudder!

>

> --- In [hidden email] <mailto:SHADO%40yahoogroups.com>, Scott

> Kellogg <kelloggs2066@...> wrote:

> >

> I'm more worried about the tone they're going to adopt.

> >

> >> The latest Star Trek movie had Kirk and Spock at each other's

> throats. Far Far from the brotherhood the original characters had.

> >

> >>

> > In my writing, I try to keep things optimistic and fun. The sort of

> future that I'd want to live in, instead of dreading it will happen.

> >

> > Anyway, UFO was pretty dark for it's day, but the Good Guys had the

> upper hand morally. I really hope we don't get an "Oh! The poor

> aliens! We must sympathize with them! Their planet is dying from

> Global Warming!" story..

> >

> > Scott Kellogg

> > 21st Century Fox: The future's so bright, you gotta wear shades

> > http://techfox.keenspace.com

> >

>

> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

>

>



__________________________________________________________

This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.

For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email 

__________________________________________________________



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





   
     

   
   


 



 






     

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Yes
Ive seen the new ST film.

My point is that they jammed a scene in sideways just to explain an anachronistic nickname for an audience presumed braindead Jim.

And although UFO is not quite as dated as some 1960s serials, there's stillenough anachronism in it to give me cause for concern about a modern remake.


______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email 
______________________________________________________________________

Lightcudder wrote:
>Writing.. fun and optimistic .. Good.. I like reading fun stories, but I
>prefer writing really dark UFO stories (darker the better! Got a really
>really serious one in the pipeline right now!!) Are yours available to
>read?

Yes, indeed.

My writings are in the plot of my online comic strip.  Hard science fiction, at least as hard science as I can make it (If you can forgive the talking animals aspect of it.)

In twelve years, I've done a lot of stuff, from extremely serious, to the highly silly.  In the last couple months, I've been doing a Gilbert and Sullivan operetta parody concerning the completion of the first Transatlantic Tunnel!

Next:  On to building Atlantropa!
http://techfox.keenspace.com

Scott Kellogg
21st Century Fox:  The future's so bright, you gotta wear shades
http://techfox.keenspace.com


     

I have to agree, for the most part Scott.

I only ever watched Star Trek (ToS) I tried the others and didn't like them.  We had conquered racial discrimination.  We saved our world and had begun a time of exploration.

Doctor Who is about hope, & perseverance+it was originally designed to be for kids and be educational.  I don't care for Matt Smith, but, it's really not the story, I don't like him.

Old sci-fi (20's 30's 40's) had a sense of adventure & hope, but typically involved some foible of man that  needed to be overcome or doom would happen.  We needed to be aware of ourselves.  Then came the 50's with man playing God & failing badly & the adventures of trying to fix that.  Modern sci-fi is really nothing more then an action film with a sci-fi setting.  

Matt
 

--- In [hidden email], Scott Kellogg <kelloggs2066@...> wrote:

I am an absolute huge fan of The Prisoner; indeed, this series and UFO are my two favourite.. period. I knew they would bugger up the new show by making it more remote than a pacific island but it was so convoluted and stuffed with pschobabble. In essence, crap! I hated it.
I have only logged onto the website for the new UFO film but I feel it will be the same way. I would like to discuss this and other issues in greater depth with you all. I am very new here and so do not know what I am doing.




     

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

--- In [hidden email], "Lightcudder" <l.oatridge@...> wrote:

> I am very new here and so do not know what I am doing.

Well, welcome Stevan!  We haven't heard anything about the new UFO film in months... I don't know what's going on with it.

Marc

Yeah, I only came across it a few months back when downloading mp3 files of Barry Gray music from the TV series; I will admit I LOVE Barry Gray's musical input from the series. I know as much about the new film as the much fabled but never put into production 1996 series. Sorry!

--- On Tue, 9/14/10, Marc Martin <[hidden email]> wrote:

From: Marc Martin <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [SHADO] Re: 1960's Science Fiction vs. Today's
To: [hidden email]
Date: Tuesday, September 14, 2010, 6:58 PM







 



 


   
     
     
      > I am very new here and so do not know what I am doing.



Well, welcome Stevan!  We haven't heard anything about the new UFO film in months... I don't know what's going on with it.



Marc



   
     

   
   


 



 






     

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I also liked the original BG, never got into watching the new version.

Bruce
  ----- Original Message -----
  From: Scott Kellogg
  To: [hidden email]
  Sent: Sunday, September 12, 2010 10:08 AM
  Subject: [SHADO] 1960's Science Fiction vs. Today's


   
  Hello all,

  I don't know if anyone will agree with me on this, but I have to confess I have a good deal of misgivings about the UFO movie in the works. And not just, will they be true to the characters and to the effects. No, I'm more worried about the tone they're going to adopt.

  Most science fiction these days is extremely pessimistic when you compare it to what was going around in the 1960s. Things now, are almost always set in a distopian future, with disfunctional characters who can't seem to get along, even when their lives depend on it.

  Compare the recent Battlestar Galactica with the old 1970's version. Yes, both were apocalyptic visions of a civilization that had been destroyed, but with the old one, you got the feeling that somehow the characters had enough courage, wit, intelligence and backbone to stand up to the challenges thrown at them. By contrast, I couldn't stand the new show. None of the characters seemed like they even deserved to live beyond the end of the episode, nevermind the series. They turned on each other like rabid dogs.

  The latest Star Trek movie had Kirk and Spock at each other's throats. Far Far from the brotherhood the original characters had.

  Most new science fiction out there... Well, if it's not a dystopian nightmare or post apocalyptic wasteland, it's an end of the world story.

  There's so much doom and gloom in science fiction these days, it's no wonder the genre is losing it's popularity.

  In my writing, I try to keep things optimistic and fun. The sort of future that I'd want to live in, instead of dreading it will happen.

  Anyway, UFO was pretty dark for it's day, but the Good Guys had the upper hand morally. I really hope we don't get an "Oh! The poor aliens! We must sympathize with them! Their planet is dying from Global Warming!" story.

  Scott Kellogg
  21st Century Fox: The future's so bright, you gotta wear shades
  http://techfox.keenspace.com



 

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

It's that phase that happens to most projects called "developement hell" where
nothing happens.

James K.




________________________________
From: Marc Martin <[hidden email]>
To: [hidden email]
Sent: Tue, September 14, 2010 1:58:45 PM
Subject: Re: [SHADO] Re: 1960's Science Fiction vs. Today's

 
> I am very new here and so do not know what I am doing.

Well, welcome Stevan! We haven't heard anything about the new UFO film in
months... I don't know what's going on with it.

Marc



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]