• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

Sanctuary

sherbetbizarre

sherbetbizarre

Special Branch
Joined
Sep 4, 2004
Messages
5,248
Starting tomorrow night on ITV4 is new US Sci-Fi series, Sanctuary:

New sci-fi drama series using live-action actors against virtual sets. In the first of a two-part episode, a psychiatrist is introduced to the mysterious Sanctuary by the 157-year-old physician Dr Magnus, who reveals all about her quest to track, study and protect the world's strangest creatures.
Click to expand...

http://www.sanctuaryforall.com/
 
Sounds like it could be interesting enough, I hope it wont be disappointing like Eureka was. I like the look of Heyerdahls character, he looks odd without looking unhuman.
 
We watched the first episode and were not particularly impressed. A lot of the first episode was exposition and one obvious question wasn't asked. You can't really tell from the pilot, of course; it gets another couple of weeks to develop, anyway.

As one old enough to remember watching shows that were practically unwatchable just in order to encourage the networks to air fantasy and science fiction shows, I'm not going to judge too harshly. But it struck me as a bit ordinary, with no characters who sparked.
 
I just watched the pilot, and I would have to agree that it seemed nothing out of the ordinary. The computer graphics was quite bad in places, but I think they admitted that they have quite a low budget. Having Tapping from Stargate in it, I couldn´t help but compare the Zimmerman character to Daniel Jackson.
 
PeniG said:
We watched the first episode and were not particularly impressed. A lot of the first episode was exposition and one obvious question wasn't asked. You can't really tell from the pilot, of course; it gets another couple of weeks to develop, anyway.

As one old enough to remember watching shows that were practically unwatchable just in order to encourage the networks to air fantasy and science fiction shows, I'm not going to judge too harshly. But it struck me as a bit ordinary, with no characters who sparked.
Click to expand...

Was the obvious question "Who's funding this operation?"

Or was it "How do you keep an embryo in cryopreservation four years prior to the invention of the Dewar Flask?"

Or was it "Who writes this stuff?"
 
It was "So exactly how did you achieve such an unusual age while appearing so youthful?" I presume that the answers to the other questions would flow naturally from that; and, I would really, really want to know (being well-versed in vampire literature).

You can find out "who writes this stuff" for yourself, by looking at the credits; but TV screenwriting typically has so many cooks that I try to moderate my scorn of the writers by considering their working conditions. This is the sort of show that could have all kinds of interesting and logical ideas in the original script which someone other than the writer was in a position to remove with something cliched and stupid before the final production. It's not always the problem; but it happens often enough that I don't have to dis my fellow writers automatically or exclusively.
 
PeniG said:
It was "So exactly how did you achieve such an unusual age while appearing so youthful?" I presume that the answers to the other questions would flow naturally from that; and, I would really, really want to know (being well-versed in vampire literature).

You can find out "who writes this stuff" for yourself, by looking at the credits; but TV screenwriting typically has so many cooks that I try to moderate my scorn of the writers by considering their working conditions. This is the sort of show that could have all kinds of interesting and logical ideas in the original script which someone other than the writer was in a position to remove with something cliched and stupid before the final production. It's not always the problem; but it happens often enough that I don't have to dis my fellow writers automatically or exclusively.
Click to expand...

I would presume that the answer to your question is "it's in the blood" - but the actual mechanism is better left (in my opinion) vague.

And I forgot my smiley on the writer dismissal. So here it is: ;)

I find it sad really, that I'm willing to suspend my disbelief of an apparently mid-30s woman being 157; but struggle to do the same with a vast high tech complex on river frontage being operated as a sole proprietorship. Wherefore art thou, Tom Swift? :D
 
A certain amount of vagueness is called for, butan answer that gives you a general idea of what to expect from the series and leaves plenty of room to develop details as needed is easy to construct. For instance, "I'm a vampire" points in one direction, "I'm a stranded alien" in another. "I'm an incarnated spiritual being who rebelled against my initial mission." "I don't know what I am. I woke up in a cellar in Wales in 1535 looking exactly like this and keep finding odd information in my head." "I'm an android from the future." "I'm a magician." Any such answer would be fine with me, even if it turned out to be not quite accurate for plot reasons later on.

My big problem is, Zimmerman didn't ask.

The degree to which we weren't impressed is reflected in the fact that we missed the second episode, despite my husband's near obsessive tracking of TV schedules. Probably the fact that we've both been mysteriously ill contributed - I didn't realize it was October till a few days ago and missed my niece's birthday, which is much more serious. But whereas I immediately leaped into action to get my neice a present, as fas as I know we haven't decided which of the reairings we're going to tape. They're all inconvenient.
 
PeniG said:
We watched the first episode and were not particularly impressed. A lot of the first episode was exposition and one obvious question wasn't asked. You can't really tell from the pilot, of course; it gets another couple of weeks to develop, anyway.

As one old enough to remember watching shows that were practically unwatchable just in order to encourage the networks to air fantasy and science fiction shows, I'm not going to judge too harshly. But it struck me as a bit ordinary, with no characters who sparked.
Click to expand...

Me and my husband watched the first episode and we didnt think it was as good as some of the other new stuff like eli stone and fringe.
 
I watched the second episode the other day, not an improvement on anything. At least the one playing the daughter is from Denmark, that´s a bit interesting.

To me the big question was, how come a street prostitute knew the location of this facility, as well as knowing exactly which place Druitt was talking about?.
 
Xanatico said:
I watched the second episode the other day, not an improvement on anything. At least the one playing the daughter is from Denmark, that´s a bit interesting.

To me the big question was, how come a street prostitute knew the location of this facility, as well as knowing exactly which place Druitt was talking about?.
Click to expand...

This is what my husband was talking about things like that, simple mistakes :lol: :D
 
We just watched the second episode and all I can say is Oh. Dear. (Spoilers ahead but if you love research, you want to be warned.)

Character, plot, situation stuff, not promising. You take the new guy into a firefight, don't brief him properly, and don't give him a weapon. You take three comatose women out of a crypt without ever wondering why they were there. You don't give them new clothes when they wake up. You have no clearly-defined policy on which abnormals you capture and which ones you kill in the field. All of the questions raised about the place in the viewer's mind by the first episode are left unaddressed, and we don't find out what happened to the boy with the tentacle, but we do get a long and pointless conversation with the ex, which I guess counts as characterization.

But that's not why I won't be back next week. I was sitting there remembering - oh, so many shows, sucking it up and nerving myself, but they just. Kept. Hitting me. Right in the brain. "Miasma" refers to bubonic plague, which was last recorded in 800 AD (which is the Middle Ages rather than the Dark Ages) in Scotland, Arthur was defeated at Badon Hill, the Morrigan is three human woman - that's the point at which I pulled the accent pillow over my head.

I can take a lot. I really can. But we all have our breaking points. And for those of you who share mine, you deserve a head's up.
 
PeniG said:
.. "Miasma" refers to bubonic plague, which was last recorded in 800 AD...
Click to expand...
To be fair, in Britain miasma was, until Victorian times, believed to be the invisible, airborne vector for a lot of infectious diseases including cholera, TB, and a host of other ailments. It wasn't uniquely associated with plague.

But other than that, you're bang on. It was dreadful. I won't be bothering again.
 
well me and my husband watched the second episode last night and to be honest we both still like it, not as good as fringe or eli stone but still good to watch.
 
I wasn't saying "Miasma" referred specifically to plague, they were! I primarily associate the notion of miasma with a misunderstanding of why people who live near swamps get malaria, and understand it not to mean the disease, but the vector.

It's particularly annoying that Zimmerman translated the word accurately and then Magnus "corrected" him on the specific usage. So somebody does know how to look things up and they decided to get it wrong on purpose. And then the stuff with the dating of the last bubonic plague epidemic. And then, and then, and then -

Well, we all have our different breaking points and hooks to hang our disbelief on, and I won't criticize anyone who enjoys it, but I am so outta here.

My husband then immediately and sadistically directed me to a Shadow radio script in which the villain claims to be a Neanderthal, which Lamont Cranston thinks went extinct 200,000 years ago. I cried out when I reached that line of dialog and he laughed and laughed. Now I'm traumatized and afraid to read fiction; too much crappy research in one night!
 
PeniG said:
We just watched the second episode and all I can say is Oh. Dear. (Spoilers ahead but if you love research, you want to be warned.)

Character, plot, situation stuff, not promising. You take the new guy into a firefight, don't brief him properly, and don't give him a weapon. You take three comatose women out of a crypt without ever wondering why they were there. You don't give them new clothes when they wake up. You have no clearly-defined policy on which abnormals you capture and which ones you kill in the field. All of the questions raised about the place in the viewer's mind by the first episode are left unaddressed, and we don't find out what happened to the boy with the tentacle, but we do get a long and pointless conversation with the ex, which I guess counts as characterization.

But that's not why I won't be back next week. I was sitting there remembering - oh, so many shows, sucking it up and nerving myself, but they just. Kept. Hitting me. Right in the brain. "Miasma" refers to bubonic plague, which was last recorded in 800 AD (which is the Middle Ages rather than the Dark Ages) in Scotland, Arthur was defeated at Badon Hill, the Morrigan is three human woman - that's the point at which I pulled the accent pillow over my head.

I can take a lot. I really can. But we all have our breaking points. And for those of you who share mine, you deserve a head's up.
Click to expand...

I tried to warn you.
 
You said it was weak, you didn't say it spindled, folded, and mutilated history and mythology simultaneously!

The second X-Files movie was weak; I still liked it all right.
 
PeniG said:
You said it was weak, you didn't say it spindled, folded, and mutilated history and mythology simultaneously!

The second X-Files movie was weak; I still liked it all right.
Click to expand...

I didn't want to spoil it. ;)
 
PeniG said:
I wasn't saying "Miasma" referred specifically to plague, they were! I primarily associate the notion of miasma with a misunderstanding of why people who live near swamps get malaria, and understand it not to mean the disease, but the vector.
Click to expand...
Mea culpa, Peni - I didn't catch that bit of the episode in question. I did think it'd be curious if miasma was a narrower concept elsewhere.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top