Good and bad aspects of scifi, in relation to The Expanse

 

(photo credit)

I just watched The Expanse series on Amazon.  I've been way behind in catching lots of streaming platform content, because we were many years late in subscribing to any of it.  We first subscribed to Netflix a couple of years ago, although we did catch some shows and movies using an account from an aunt who visited some years back.  

It just seemed like the kids didn't need to keep up with a large volume of entertainment content.  We had subscribed to Disney + for a couple of years earlier, related to a local promotion being inexpensive, but in general they spent so much time on Youtube, shorts, and Tik Tok that it seemed like more than enough.  They also probably watched cable tv a little longer than most American kids.

It was interesting thinking through the pros and cons of different scifi content in relation to The Expanse, which was generally pretty good.  I had tried to watch a couple of Netflix scifi series but it never worked out; the writing was just too bad to tolerate it, never mind enjoying it.  I'm not sure why my opinion would matter to anyone, but I also write to collect thoughts, so I'll do that.  I'll start with what worked well, why it was appealing, and there's a longer list of potential mistakes they might've made, and did.

Positive aspects

Without generally good writing shows of any type are hard to watch.  The story needs to be good, some main premise themes unique and interesting, and character depth and arc needs to be there.  They accomplished all of this.  Acting was great in The Expanse; I tried considering which characters represent thin spots, but to me there were none.  Some parts of some character themes didn't work, but in general every character had depth, was acted well, and contributed to the stories.

The show was based on a series of books, which helps.  In such circumstances an online show can adapt a strong story--or they wouldn't be using that source, and limit what doesn't work in that format.  If there are huge plot holes or inconsistencies those will probably carry over to the show, and I'll describe some examples of that.

The sets and effects worked; the general look was good.  They seemed to use a lot of very detailed models, for the space ships shots, and that can work really well.  Shows or movies can adjust motion and lighting, to make panning shots look very realistic.  They need to add back in some CGI for explosions or lasers and such, and all of that was ok.  In one unconventional scene they actually never got around to creating a critical part of a space-based battle, someone destroying a missile, which seemed to be late in the season when they were rushing to finish production, during Covid.  But in general not much looked unfinished or not quite there.  Quality of effects varied, but for a tv series it was good.

There were other parts people might like, like depth of the worldbuilding being reinforced by accent or language development, or ship systems being developed in a more complex form.  There weren't so many "hard scifi" / realism gaps, beyond the alien technology parts being a bit absurd at times.  So let's switch over to that, as a main gap, followed by the rest.

It's hard to emphasize just how well some parts worked, for example how an unlikely villain role really came together, how a terrorist could be framed as having a partially valid motivation and approach.  Good acting is required to pull that off, and good dialog writing to get the ideas across.  Some characters keep switching motivations, and "sides," and it generally all worked.  That's rare; it took careful development to make that happen.

Thinner spots; what didn't work as well

The alien proto-molecule and technology:   this part was whatever the series needed it to be in any given context.  It looked like a micro-organism or infection at one part, then made up a hive-like community structure, and later the same thing was used to create alien hybrids and vast new technological systems.  Those alien hybrids were invulnerable, like terminators, and people affected by the "virus-like" input were capable of long distance ESP sort of communication.  

It made no sense.  It was never supposed to make sense; it was a vehicle for supporting every plot point the story needed.

Character arcs:  this takes careful planning for different media form development, and it may have come across better in the source writing.  One character goes from being an ex-military transport pilot, based on a full career of experience, to a fighter jock in a few episodes.  Some characters are developed extensively and then just drop out, before that develops to real plot input (like the "Andersen Dawes" rebel minority leader; his part never came to much, even though it seemed headed to main character status).

Killing off a character for off-screen reasons:  part of why Dawes just disappeared related to his actor not being available, and one of the main 4 or 5 characters was deleted quickly due to "me too" themed accusations.  The actor probably deserved it, but that negatively impacted the show.  It would've provided limited closure if there could've been a real life resolution to all of that, some summary of what really happened, but that didn't occur.  30 or more women came forward to say that he had acted inappropriately, and apparently there was message or image based confirmation of that, so he was gone.

Over-use of music:  a music input can really add depth and emotional tone to a scene, but they overused it for this series, at times for extended scenes, so it would just keep going and going.  Less can be more; if it's not spanning 10 or 15% of the content time it can work better.

Parts that mostly worked that could have been better:

Time jumps:  for a long term saga sort of story this can be tricky, signaling when time has passed.  They did a good job of explaining when a gap had occurred, but with more careful writing they could've did more than just have one character tell another about an event.  Using flashbacks would be too much to demand to add more filming, CGI, and storytelling, but character interactions could flesh out critical themes without it just being short exposition ("this happened").  

One character formed a personal relationship with a villain character from the last season, turned into a sympathetic figure, and they crammed all of that transition into a short video call, mostly as context based, so the viewer could figure out what had changed.

Use of language differences:  for the most part this belongs in the "what worked section," to me, but that's a judgment call.  The story used a New Zealand accent to represent a minority group (asteroid belt residents), because a main character was from New Zealand, and it worked better to draw on an established accent than to make one up.  It seemed to me others were using more of a Singaporean accent, and one guy sounded a bit Irish.  For me that really worked, mixing different accent inputs, even for people from the same places, but someone else could see it differently.  

The same could be true of making up racial or origin area designations, or slang.  I was fine with all of it, but someone else might see it as overdone, as a bit beaten to death with repetition.

Complex story line gaps:  again this is part of what worked well and potentially huge gaps, depending on how one took it.  The alien technology themes were never really developed, as to what it all meant, and the show stopped before a conclusion phase that would resolve that.  There was a second alien input group that was introduced, and played a critical role in two plot points, and there was nothing at all developed about them.  

One character was transmitted mentally, in the form of a dead earlier character, and it was never really filled in what that meant, or how it worked, even though he was later split into two characters, as a fictional projection and as the real earlier guy coming back.  For some it would've worked well, and leaving parts vague could've been a big part of that.  For others it would seem like they just never told parts of the story, or those never even existed.

A story line about a new set of alien themes at the end went nowhere, there really only to develop a starting point for later possible exploration (and a time-gap later book series event sequence).  Maybe some found that interesting, and a positive addition, but in general wasting a couple of hours on developing a sequence that goes nowhere and doesn't interrelate is a negative.

Overuse of misunderstanding to move the plot along:  it's a little more trivial but the writing relied on explanatory gaps or misunderstanding between characters a bit too much, in spots.  Characters wouldn't say what they really meant, or explain themselves, allowing plot tension and conflict to develop and to be easily resolved later, when other characters understood what they hadn't initially.  It's a good work-around for a problematic point in a story, but if a writer uses it over and over it seems lazy, and takes you out of the story.

Dark tone:  this kind of thing is especially subject.  A dark, tense, somber tone can be a very positive context in a movie or series, if it matches the rest, and that's what the theme is.  It's a big part of what worked well in the first groundbreaking Blade Runner movie.  I think the main negative part relates to me being tired of seeing it, and not wanting to experience tension or dread over many hours of viewing.  They did break up the experience some with positive personal interactions, or it would've seemed relentless, but the dark imagery (literally, even; it was all dark), tension over ongoing conflict themes, somber music, and dark character themes were all a bit much.

On the whole

Most of it worked, really well.  They developed perspectives and themes related to Earth resident activities and themes, and those tied to Mars and asteroid belt culture and communities.  It was a lot to tell connected stories around, and it worked.  Some of the characters were really compelling (I guess especially the Amos character, a dark sort of antihero type).  It didn't draw on any of the minority representation or female empowerment themes that can be problematic; characters varied by race and gender in a seamless and sensible way.

Because it all worked so well the thinner spots, or what didn't work, stood out all the more to me.  I suppose the same comes up with Star Trek series, and the like.  If a series is weak, the acting is patchy, story lines make no sense, then only a limited audience can appreciate any of it.  But if it's strong then limited flaws can stand out all the more, story inconsistency, less realistic aspects, or one character that doesn't work as well.  

It's hard for me to say which character didn't work well in The Expanse, as a written character or related to the acting.  The series started slowly, and there were some jumps in character arcs, but in general all of that range was really solid.  These other gaps are the same; they stand out more because the rest is so well done.