Lost has won an Emmy, which can be seen as either a good thing or a bad thing for the science fiction community.
Lost is the first show with heavy sci-fi elements to win an Emmy, true to form none of its actors won, but the show itself was recognized. Never before has a show from this genre won a non-technical Emmy. Not the groundbreaking works of Gene Roddenberry’s Star Trek, not Rod Sterling’s powerfully written Twilight Zone, not even the critically acclaimed X-Files.
In a few weeks a host of light sci-fi shows, probably inspired by Lost, will take to the airwaves. Invasion, Threshold and Surface all deal with aliens slowly invading modern-day America and the WB has some cheep sci-fi show planned too.
Why should producers and network executives take a chance on a more hard core sci-fi show with it’s massive special effects budgets when shaking trees will win you Emmys for a whole lot less?
Battlestar Galactica is a perfect example. Hailed by many critics as one of the best dramas on television and pulling in about 3 million viewers per episode during a horrible Friday night time slot the series still isn’t taken seriously. Monk and The Shield both have smaller or similar audiences and have Emmy wins, but not Galactica.
In the end I’m happy that Lost won, but I just don’t think it’s going to open any doors.
Article comments
1 - Bob A. Booey
Critics will never take sci-fi seriously, which isn't a bad thing in my book since I don't like most sci-fi.
The X-Files probably deserved some recognition, at least for Gillian Anderson. David Duchovny's a smart, cool guy, but he's a pretty bad, monotone actor with limited range.
That is all.