Sci-Fi on the Cheap

lowbudgetfun writes "NYTimes.com is reporting on the Sci-Fi channel's huge investment (28 films for $21 million) for original B movies. Includes quotes from B Movie hero, Bruce Campbell." I especially liked this line from the article: "Shot on budgets ranging from $1 million to $2 million, Sci Fi's movies are made in money-saving locales like Bulgaria, Romania and Missouri."

Comments

Outsourcing to rural america

[jurt1235]

Was that not an old slashdot article, apparently that works for sci-fi movies

Re:MST3000

[chiph]

I nominate Snakehead Terror as the first one for Tom Servo & friends to review.

Chip H.

So much to say

[Sloppy]

Damn, this one hits so many of my buttons...

First of all, some Brucelore... In Albuquerque, "The Man With the Screaming Brain" showed this weekend, and then is showing again in a couple days, with Bruce being present but those tickets all sold out long ago, so... if you snoozed, you losed. Also, Bruce will be at Page 1 Bookstore autographing his book. Of course, I'm sure he's on a whirlwind tour and visiting other cities, so wherever you are: pay attention and you'll get to meet the man, the myth, the legend.

Second: about B movies. In the last few years I've become aware of some local low-budget filmmakers, and I even got to be a zombie extra a little while back. (Maybe calling these "B" movies is a stretch, as they would go ape at the thought of a budget anywhere near the magnitude of a million dollars.) Of these people's work, one thing I've noticed is this: you can't show this stuff on TV. People, you are not seeing the "cream of the crop" on SciFi channel, because the best cheap movies have sex in them. No, they're not porn, but they're not prude either. (Oh, and they tend to be gorier than what even American TV tolerates.) Now, don't get me wrong: these movies aren't great. But they're better than the SciFi channel stuff, and they'll get some sincere laughs out of you if nothing else. Find your local cult video store if you have one, and start talking to people. Find your local filmmakers, and check out the crazy shit they're doing. SciFi channel's movies will bore you to tears after you do that.

Third, about micro-marketing. I amazes me that TV execs are actually asking questions like, "Who's at home on Saturday night?" That is so twentieth century. I have had my Tivo for nearly five years now! Is routine time-shifting (by "routine," I mean even more effortless than VCRs which have been around for decades) still not commonplace? If not, it's making me wonder if I can make money selling fully configured MythTV boxes or something, because people who watch TV need this technology whether they know it yet, or not. ;-) Timeslots, what an obsolete concept.

Re:So much to say

[Darby]

If not, it's making me wonder if I can make money selling fully configured MythTV boxes or something,

There are people doing this already. Having just gotten my first one working, I think there is definately a market. For example, after sending a link to my MythWeb URL already my Mother, Father in law, and Sister in law put in orders which I might not have the energy to fill ;-)

Economics and politics

[marcybots]

Missouri is in the same bag as bulgaria and romania, two nations hit hardest by the collapse of communism. What is hilarious is that this is a red republican state, as are most of the states with the largest percentage of poor people and lowest incomes....they vote against the welfare and social programs that would help them the most...talk about getting what you deserve for considering abortion and gay marriage more important than harsh economic realities.

Re:Economics and politics

[marcybots]

Median Income Data Mirrors Red State-Blue State Divide

This map of the most recent census data (for 2003) shows an interesting divide: Blue States are those whose median income for a family of four exceeds the U.S. median of $65,093, while Red States are those whose median income is less than the U.S. median:

US Map Income

Note the eerie similarity with the 2004 presidential election map:

Source:
http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2005/05/me dian_income_d.html

Red States Feed at Federal Trough, Blue States Supply the Feed

Monday, September 27, 2004

The Tax Foundation has released a fascinating report showing which states benefit from federal tax and spending policies, and which states foot the bill.

US 50 States MapThe report shows that of the 32 states (and the District of Columbia) that are "winners" -- receiving more in federal spending than they pay in federal taxes -- 76% are Red States that voted for George Bush in 2000. Indeed, 17 of the 20 (85%) states receiving the most federal spending per dollar of federal taxes paid are Red States. Here are the Top 10 states that feed at the federal trough (with Red States highlighted in bold):

States Receiving Most in Federal Spending Per Dollar of Federal Taxes Paid:

1. D.C. ($6.17)
2. North Dakota ($2.03)
3. New Mexico ($1.89)
4. Mississippi ($1.84)
5. Alaska ($1.82)
6. West Virginia ($1.74)
7. Montana ($1.64)
8. Alabama ($1.61)
9. South Dakota ($1.59)
10. Arkansas ($1.53)

In contrast, of the 16 states that are "losers" -- receiving less in federal spending than they pay in federal taxes -- 69% are Blue States that voted for Al Gore in 2000. Indeed, 11 of the 14 (79%) of the states receiving the least federal spending per dollar of federal taxes paid are Blue States. Here are the Top 10 states that supply feed for the federal trough (with Blue States highlighted in bold):

States Receiving Least in Federal Spending Per Dollar of Federal Taxes Paid:

1. New Jersey ($0.62)
2. Connecticut ($0.64)
3. New Hampshire ($0.68)
4. Nevada ($0.73)
5. Illinois ($0.77)
6. Minnesota ($0.77)
7. Colorado ($0.79)
8. Massachusetts ($0.79)
9. California ($0.81)
10. New York ($0.81)

Two states -- Florida and Oregon (coincidentally, the two closest states in the 2000 Presidential election) -- received $1.00 in federal spending for each $1.00 in federal taxes paid.

Re:This is not exactly a good thing

[GuyMannDude]

The idea that SciFi can be well-written and produced with some care is hard for many people to accept these days, as all they see is schlock put together on the cheap as fast as humanly possible to give the channel in question a quick cash infusion

I posted some comments above which address some of your statements. But I'll take this moment to make another point: I don't think most people are really ready for serious science fiction right now. I understand that sounds very elitist. What I mean is not that people aren't smart enough for it; they just want to see some escapist entertainment. We are in a time where many people are very uncertain about the future. I don't what to sound like Jon Katz here but events like 9/11 have really affected people deeply. America is not on an upswing right now. Our economy seems to be stalled, Iraq is not going well, terrorists seem to be able to strike wherever they want. I think most people are very worried deep down inside. That's one reason why the horror genre has found new life. Not because there are lots of well-written, well-directed horror flicks all of the sudden. You have to give people what they want. And right now, people want mindless, escapist entertainment. They don't want something that challenges their way of viewing the world. They want to think about the world in terms of good and evil, right and wrong, black and white.

Y-Create, you and I and most of slashdot may be praying for thoughtful science fiction but the fact is that most people are not. They just don't want to be challenged in such a way -- at least not right now. Now if things turn around in five years time and people are breathing a little easier, that may be the time for the types of science fiction that you refer to to find a larger, more receptive audience. But the timing is just not right. My fear is that even if someone were to do a fantastic job of bringing a famous science fiction novel to the silver screen, it would be a flop at the box office.

GMD

$21 mil

[1eyedhive]

Put that $21 million into the 3 big shows, $7 mil tob each and watch the ratings jump!

The SciFi Channel fails it

[Orion Blastar]

They lost the rights to Star Trek to Spike TV. They cannot afford to pick up Doctor Who reruns, or any other BBC SciFi (Red Dwarf, Blake's Seven, Star Cops, etc). They canceled FarScape and Lexx, WTF? Those where good shows and they flushed them down the toliet!

They remade BattleStar Galactica into a Space Opera, more emphesis on Opera than Space. Cyclons look and act human now, they stole^H^H^H^H^H^Hborrowed that from "The Terminator". A few characters got their gender changed.

SciFi had a chance to pick up "Space: Above and Beyond" one of the best SciFi shows made on network TV, and they refused.

Stargate SG1 wasn't lame enough, so they made a Stargate Atlantis, and now they recognize the lameness and are trying to change the actors with some who were on FarScape in an effort to jumpstart the show. Yet it jumped the shark long ago.

Now SciFi is buying movies that I can rent for $1 at the local video stores because they are B-Movies that hardly anyone wants to see, so they got marked down. Some are two for $1. At least the video rentals of those movies won't be edited for TV with all the good parts taken out.

Re:This is not exactly a good thing

[strikethree]

What I mean is not that people aren't smart enough for it; they just want to see some escapist entertainment.

The original Star Wars was definitely Sci-Fi and was definitely escapist entertainment.

We are in a time where many people are very uncertain about the future. I don't what to sound like Jon Katz here but events like 9/11 have really affected people deeply. America is not on an upswing right now.

We are _always_ in a time where many people are very uncertain about the future. 11 September 2001 was dramatic, I will grant you that. I would say having a man land on the moon was far more dramatic though. The world did not change with either event.

but the fact is that most people are not. They just don't want to be challenged in such a way -- at least not right now.

People _never_ want to be challenged. The path of least resistance is the path that people will always take. Yes, there are individuals that do not follow this pattern... and many of them end up here, but we are both talking about groups of people.

strike

Re:Wow, none of that is science fiction

[ScrewMaster]

Sorry, I meant "George O. Smith" ... he was a contemporary of Arthur C. Clarke and wrote the Venus Equilateral series (one of my personal favorites from that era of science fiction) among other things.

I don't know where "Harrison" came from. I need to get out more.

Re:Wow, none of that is science fiction

[ScrewMaster]

Well, I haven't really made the effort to watch Battlestar Galactica ... just don't really have that many hours in the week. Besides, I'm a pretty diehard fan of the Stargate universe, when you get right down to it. The whole secondary story arc going on with the Ancients is remarkable for a TV series. I'm hoping to see more of the Ancient that built the timeship.

But yeah, Firefly was an exceptional, if short-lived series. I remember how confused I was when I first tuned into it ... I fell in love with it immediately but couldn't figure why the continuity was so screwed up. Then I read that they were showing them in all the wrong order, with no particular justification for it. Weird, if you ask me. All I can say is that Joss Whedon must have pissed off the wrong person, I don't know. It is impressive that the show still managed to qualify as a "hit" even when the first season was aired in apparently random order.

What I also found impressive is that the actors really seemd to be into their roles from day one. Remember the first season of Star Trek: The Next Generation? I really couldn't stand it ... it took a while for the series to mature. Deanna Troi doing this William Shatner-style overacted empath routine, and Worf shooting everything in sight and growling all the time. And Wesley Crusher ... but don't let's go down that road. But Firefly came out of the gate as topflight sci-fi and I was totally involved from the get-go.

I did loosen my wallet last year and bought the boxed DVD set of all the episodes, including a couple of unaired ones. Did my own marathon: took a couple of days off from work and watched them front to back, in the proper order. Such a cool show. Can't wait to see the movie.

Re:To the NYTimes, Missouri IS Bulgaria

[Firethorn]

And where would I live? I support choice on abortion, and am not gay but support their right to enjoy the same privaleges of married couples. love my (good)chinese food*, but also am very attached to my firearms, support the military, like hunting, and support lower government spending and a balanced budget. It's usually a difficult choice on which politician to vote for.

In other words, I'd suggest that implying that red-state conservatives want a theocracy, be free to engage in incestuous relations(forbidden by same theocracy), and wanting to ressurect the KKK against gays is rather overdone, and will only alienate other people.

And what's wrong with raising chickens? I thought that was better than beef?

*If the restraunt has a steam table, it's not good chinese.

Everyone is Missing the Point

[MachineBrainz]

When I was a kid, long ago, the only people who were watching TV on Friday or Saturday night were geeks like myself, who just loved all that science fiction and horror, with monsters and spacemen and giant insects. I loved it. And lately I've been noticing that the SciFi channel has figured out that there are people like me who like this kind of junk. I like it because it is funny. I liked it then because it was funny. Maybe both ease my tension about how insane the world is (today terrorists and mad cow, yesterday it was nuclear war and ... well, nuclear war was pretty scary in the 50's). It hit me like a ton of bricks when I saw a recent SciFi channel original called something like Hammerhead. It was about a mad scientist who had crossed his dying son with a hammerhead shark. It was just like a 50's monster movie. Right down to the all the dumb parts. And the sad part is that I was really enjoying it the way I enjoyed watching all those late-night Monster Thriller Horror Theater shows. So bring it on. If you want thoughtful science fiction, you'll have to write it yourself.

amazing

[Depris]

I really have a hard time envisioning the type of people who actually spend a Saturday night watching one of scifi's horrid B-Movies. I have never even given any of their movies a chance, it's hard enough to stomach the adverts they run during their few good shows.

"Snake Man" , "Shark Attack", "Mutant Alien Warriors", "Over Thrust: Ghosts on Board" etc. etc.

The fact that they've spent 21 million on that crap is just insane. They could have done any number of things with that money.... used it to fund great shows that had devoted followings or clumped it together to make bigger budget higher quality films once every 3 months instead of every saturday.

I would really like to see an HBO scifi based show and/or a subscription scifi channel that was forced to treat people intelligently as they would be the ones footing the bill.

Most of their stuff is just insulting to me as film lover and part time actor.