Ask Slashdot: Is Crowd Funding the Future of Sci-Fi? 116
First time accepted submitter TBNZee writes "Mainstream TV has has for a long time under-served the sci-fi loving viewers, but with declining production costs there seem to be two potential sources of alternative production/distribution: digital content (e.g. Netflix, Hulu) and crowd funded projects. There's still not a lot of sci-fi shows that are being produced by the major streaming services, but we'll probably see more with the success of Hulu's exclusive U.S. distribution of Misfits or Netflix's success with Buffy and Doctor Who. On the other hand, you have many enthusiastic upstarts on Kickstarter that look novel and engaging, while having a surprisingly professional look to them. Which do you think will ultimately be more successful? Will either be able to replace network content?"
Re:Most main-stream sci-fi isn't science-friendly (Score:4, Informative)
Indeed. Mainstream "scifi", especially movies, seems to operate on the principle that the defining qualities are fancy high-tech window dressing, whereas most of the best SF I've read takes place in settings that are for the most part not so very unlike today, with the story being less about the technology itself than about how humanity (as embodied by the characters) is adapting to the impact of that technology, and what the long-term implications are. Also there tends to be a common theme among the best stuff that only very few or very minor changes are allowed to the laws of physics. We're dreaming possible futures here, not just looking for empty entertainment!
Hmm, and suddenly I understand why Hollywood has been so very, very bad at it...