Science Fiction Examiner vs. Sci Fi Pen

As I am now writing for Examiner.com as a Science Fiction Examiner the Sci Fi Pen will be changing focus to be more of a personal journal of my writing and so forth. My Science Fiction Examiner column will focus of science fiction news, technology and publishing. My first article on the Science Fiction Examiner is about the state of science fiction in 2010. I'll be posting links to new articles here on the Sci Fi Pen.

V is for Vacuous

"V" in its new incarnation, landed on Tuesday. It was warmly received by critics but I found it plodding and uninspired. Perhaps, what was most lacking was any sense of suspense. The writers seemed all too ready to give up some of the essential plot twists in the first episode, possibly because viewers of the original series already knew them. Still, it was amateurish at best. In a word... predictable. Without giving too much away about the episode, one of its major flaws was to give away the clandestine operatives of the "V" in the very first episode. Why would you tell the audience that without giving them the opportunity to puzzle it out for themselves? At the very least, the audience could be made aware of some of these potential  opportunities for surprise while they remained hidden from the main characters. Nice VFX but wholly uninspired and unoriginal.

Why Syfy?

Recently, the Scifi channel changed its name to Syfy. But why? It all boils down to the debasement of sci-fi. Science fiction writers call their profession science fiction, sf, or speculative fiction. Sci-fi is universally frowned upon by professionals. Sci-fi apparently has the unfortunate connection with poorly written pulp fiction and though the public uses the term indiscriminately, in some circles it is used derisively.

Maybe Syfy was just a way to say, hey we aren't making laughable lowbrow fare here anymore but mature science fiction. With notable shows like "Battlestar Galatica, " "Santuary" and the "Stargate" series what's to worry?  Just don't watch their original movies, they are definitely sci-fi.

Too Many Blood Suckers?

Has anyone else noticed a preponderance of vampire inspired fiction versus other forms of speculative fiction? Overall, fantasy seems to capture a larger market than hard science fiction but the sheer number of vampire novels, films and television shows is alarming.

HBO and Alan Ball (creator of "Six Feet Under") produce a wildly popular show "True Blood" based on the Sookie Stackhouse series. I wasn't really taken with the original episode, guess I'll have to give it a second look. The "Twilight" series is at least as popular both as novels and films. Then there's "The Vampire Diaries" on the CW network and "The Vampire's Assistant" soon to be released in theaters.

Some alternative choices in science fiction would be ABC's "LOST," a painful addiction. "Sanctuary" on Syfy (I know, hate the name change) is a modest production shot almost entirely with green screens to great effect (no pun intended). "Fringe" which has lured me to Fox is also an excellent show with a strong cast. "FlashForward" from Robert J. Sawyer's novel of the same name shows promise and premiered at number one in its time slot.

As far as films are concerned, there were two science fiction standouts this year, "District 9" and "Moon." I have to favor the latter with Sam Rockwell giving a masterful solo performance.

Certainly, there's room for both fantasy and science fiction. I'm still waiting for a definitive werewolf show or film to compete with the vampires.