« Football for the Non-Sports Fan | Main | The Next War »
December 6, 2005
The Sci-Fi Equation
Steph asks: "There must be some mathematical constant that describes the relationship between the quality of a science fiction show and how quickly it gets cancelled. Mark, Jeff ... can't you work that out?"
Mark provides some datapoints in the comments:
Star Trek: 28 seasons (all incarnations)
Doctor Who: 28 seasons
Stargate: 11 seasons (SG-1+Atlantis)
Babylon 5: 6 seasons (B5+Crusade)
Farscape: 4 seasonsI dunno - I think it's a crap-shoot.
I don't think it's entirely a crapshoot. But first, we need more datapoints:
Space: Above and Beyond: 1 season
Firefly: < 1 season
V: 2 seasons
Space:1999: 2 seasons
Battlestar: Galactica (original): 2? seasons
Galactica 1980: < 1 season
Battlestar: Galactica (new):2+ seasons
Quantum Leap: 5 seasons
Probe: < 1 season
Buck Rogers: 2.5 seasons
Sliders: 5 seasons
And we need to disaggregate Star Trek and B5 as well:
TOS: 3 seasons
TNG: 7 seasons
DS9: 7 seasons
Voyager: 7 seasons
Enterprise: 4 seasons
B5: 5 seasons
Crusade: 1 season
The variables would have to include:
Writing Quality: w
Acting Quality, Directing Quality and Characterization: a
Visual Quality, including special effects: v
Plot and Believability, Universe Quality, Immersion: p
Consistency: c
Originality: o
Name Recognition: n
IQ Demanded of Audience: i
Writing quality (w) includes technical aspects, dialog and the like. The scale is 1 (Voyager) to 10 (Babylon 5).
Acting Quality, Directing and Characterization (a) includes how the show hangs together, whether the characters arouse emotional responses, whether it's obvious that you're watching acting instead of appearing to be real people and so forth. The scale is 1 (truly horrid) to 10 (Firefly).
Visual Quality (v) includes special effects; the effect of the costuming, backgrounds and sets; the appearance of the ships and tools and buildings; and the quality of the camera work. A key point here is the grungy space ship factor: the Millennium Falcon, Serenity and the original Enterprise are obviously working ships, while the Voyager somehow is fit for an admiral's inspection while fighting for its life on the other side of the galaxy. The former is more human than the latter. This scale is from 1 (Flash Gordon serial) to 10 (Blade Runner).
Plot and Believability, Universe Quality, Immersion (p) includes all of the things that help you lose yourself in the universe created. Does the plot (or plots) make sense by itself or is it a vehicle for hanging geeky ideas on? Is the Universe believable, trite, or simply pointless? Can you feel what it would be like to live there? If it's not immersive, is it obviously campy or did they just fail to get it? The scale is from 1 (Galactica 1980) to 10 (Farscape).
Consistency (c) measures whether or not the show flows or keeps jerking you around. For example, having the characteristics of a ship vary in contradictory ways, or the implicit history be wildly off, can throw an otherwise fine show (ST:TNG suffered badly from this). The scale is from 1 (Galactica 1980) to 10 (Farscape).
Originality (o) simply notes whether you've seen all this before. The scale is from 1 (ST: Voyager) to 10 (Space: Above and Beyond).
Name Recognition (n) is simply whether or not the show is famous, or can piggyback off of a famous show. Or, for that matter, whether the writer or director or lead actor is famous. The scale is from 1 (Space: Above and Beyond) to 10 (every Star Trek except TOS).
IQ (i) is simply how smart you have to be to get what the show is driving at. Any moron can watch a show that is only about childish interpersonal relationships or mindless repetition of technobabble, but a show with complex relationships, long-lasting and half-revealed story lines and many cultural allusions requires a fairly intelligent viewer. 100 is average.
Before we can develop any kind of conclusions, we have to assign ratings and look for patterns. These are my own ratings, and some of them are pretty shaky. As a result, feel free to suggest changes, and also additional data points.
| Show | Seasons | Writing | Acting,etc | Visual | Plot | Consistency | Originality | Branding | IQ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Doctor Who | 28 | 6 | 5 | 2 | 9 | 3 | 10 | 61 | 110 |
| Stargate | 11 | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? |
| ST:TNG | 7 | 4 | 6 | 8 | 6 | 7 | 42 | 10 | 90 |
| ST:DS9 | 7 | 4 | 6 | 8 | 7 | 7 | 5 | 9 | 90 |
| ST:Voyager | 7 | 2 | 3 | 8 | 3 | 6 | 1 | 8 | 80 |
| Quantum Leap | 5 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 8 | 7 | 9 | 4 | 100 |
| Sliders | 5 | 7 | 8 | 7 | 7 | 53 | 6 | 4 | 100 |
| Babylon 5 | 5 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 9 | 9 | 5 | 120 |
| Farscape | 4 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 9 | 9 | 10 | 4 | 120 |
| ST: Enterprise | 4 | 3 | 5 | 8 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 9 | 80 |
| ST: TOS | 3 | 7 | 6 | 6 | 7 | 3 | 9 | 3 | 100 |
| Buck Rogers | 2.5 | 4 | 3 | 5 | 4 | 5 | 3 | 3 | 80 |
| V | 2 | 7 | 8 | 8 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 3 | 100 |
| Battlestar: Galactica (new) | 2+ | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? |
| Space: 1999 | 2 | 6 | 7 | 7 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 5 | 100 |
| Battlestar: Galactica (original) | 2 | 6 | 6 | 8 | 8 | 6 | 7 | 7 | 100 |
| Space: Above and Beyond | 1 | 10 | 9 | 10 | 9 | 9 | 10 | 1 | 125 |
| Crusade | 1 | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | 7 | ? |
| Firefly | <1 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 9 | 10 | 7 | 125 |
| Galactica 1980 | <1 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 6 | 80 |
| Probe | <1 | 9 | 8 | 7 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 4 | 110 |
1Dr. Who branded itself after a few years. While it came in with nothing, it eventually became a fan favorite, and that drove its further popularity.
2ST:TNG started out rehashing story lines from ST:TOS, and didn't venture as far as TOS for several seasons, but did eventually develop some ideas worth thinking about, including the plot lines with Q and the Borg.
3Sliders fell apart in the last couple of seasons; the first three were excellent.
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.caerdroia.org/MT/mt-tb.cgi/672