"If it weren't for Star Trek, B5 would NEVER have been accepted into
the mainstream media."
Wrong on just about every count.
1) Neither ST nor B5 have been accepted by the *mainstream* media;
they're still SF, and thus well out of the mainstream.
2) If ST is responsible for making the environment such that B5 could
get on the air, what made the media receptive to ST? Answer: Lost in
Space, which was a ratings hit a year before ST hit the airwaves (and thus
ST was looked upon in its first year as a cheap attempt to cash in on LiS's
success, as pronounced by many reviewers at the time). And how does The
Invaders fit into all this?
Crediting ST with B5 getting on the air is simply silly, and against
the facts. In point of fact, ST has made it *SUBSTANTIALLY HARDER* for new
SF series to get on the air, especially if they're set in space, in our
future. We were told, by every network and studio, that there is no room
in the TV marketplace for more than ST; that the market won't sustain more
than one show; that ST is a "non-repeating phenomenon" (direct quote), and
that SF doesn't work on TV. (And, in fact, look at the number of SF shows
other than ST that have gone on for more than two seasons in the last, say,
ten years. Nearly zilch.)
We had to fight to overcome the ST influence on the marketplace to
get B5 on the air; so you'll understand why I blanch just a little when
I hear something like that. I'd be much happier if ST just took credit
for ST, rather than making them inappropriately responsible for B5, when
ST was only one more obstacle for us to overcome.
jms |
|
