SyFy orders major new space opera series, THE EXPANSE

SyFy has ordered a 10-episode first season for The Expanse, a new space opera TV series based on the novels of the same name by James S.A. Corey.

Set 200 years in the future, The Expanse is set in a colonised Solar system where power is divided between Earth, Mars, the asteroid belt mining settlements and massive megacorporations.

James S.A. Corey is a pen-name for the writing team of Daniel Abraham, one of the best fantasy authors of the past decade, and Ty Franck, a SF writer. Both of them are collaborators of George R.R. Martin (writer of the novels Game of Thrones is based on): Abraham has written for his Wild Cards setting and is currently penning the Game of Thrones graphic novels, whilst Franck is Martin's assistant.

The Expanse series is expected to last for six volumes. The first three (Leviathan Wakes, Caliban's War and Abaddon's Gate) are out now. The fourth, Cibola Burn, is out in June and the series is expected to be completed within two years. There are also several spin-off novellas and short stories set in the same universe.

Mark Fergus and Hawk Ostby are the producers, head writers and likely showrunners for the TV project. Their previous work includes the scripts for Children of Men and the original Iron Man.

From the press release:
"The Expanse is epic in scale and scope and promises to be Syfy's most ambitious series to date," Syfy president Dave Howe said. "Bringing this coveted book franchise to television with our partners at Alcon and the Sean Daniel Co. is a giant win for Syfy, reinforcing our overall strategy to produce bold, provocative and compelling sci-fi fantasy stories. The Expanse joins a killer lineup of high-concept, high-quality series, along with recently announced original projects Ascension, 12 Monkeys, the renewal of Helix, and the soon to premiere Dominion."

Comments

  • LMLM Posts: 63,477
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Bout time we had a new space opera show.
  • MandarkMandark Posts: 47,948
    Forum Member
    That's interesting. I'm working my way through the trilogy. It's proper near future hard scifi from the Arthur C Clarke school. If you need to travel fast at high Gs then expect your seat to fasten you in tight and pump you with drugs to get through it. Great stuff!
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 61
    Forum Member
    It's a six-book series, not a trilogy. Not sure where SyFy got that idea from.
  • petelypetely Posts: 2,994
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Sounds promising. Maybe it'll make up for some of the stinkers that SyFy has put out in the past few, sorry: several, years.
  • LMLM Posts: 63,477
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Syfy must have a lot of faith in this to give it a straight to series commitment, without a pilot even being filmed

    We need a new space opera show. To think back in the 80's, 90's and early 00's, there were tons of space shows. The only show that deals with space is Doctor who but then that is only a few times per season.
  • alternatealternate Posts: 8,110
    Forum Member
    I read the first one. Not bad. I always worry about the effects budget on syfy shows though, especially on space based tales. I disagree on it being hard scifi though. It isn't star trek but they do have a magical physics breaking near FTL drive, cure all medicine, nano machines, etc, all without scientific explanations.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 1,056
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    petely wrote: »
    Sounds promising. Maybe it'll make up for some of the stinkers that SyFy has put out in the past few, sorry: several, years.

    Few, several, aren't they the same thing? Seems like you were trying to burn SyFy there. I'd have dropped the 'few' and replaced it with 'year'. Just a tip. Otherwise the burn doesn't work. Here to help.
  • paulschapmanpaulschapman Posts: 35,536
    Forum Member
    Bout time we had a new space opera show.

    don't have much faith in Syfy - if they approach it from the same point of view of Game of Thrones - as in take care with the material then it could be really good.

    The trouble with SyFy is that they don't seem to like science fiction - and give it a poor budget, inadequate fx, and wooden acting. Whenever it has been done properly (say SGU) it gets cancelled.
  • petelypetely Posts: 2,994
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    don't have much faith in Syfy - if they approach it from the same point of view of Game of Thrones - as in take care with the material then it could be really good.

    The trouble with SyFy is that they don't seem to like science fiction - and give it a poor budget, inadequate fx, and wooden acting. Whenever it has been done properly (say SGU) it gets cancelled.

    I'd say the basic problem is that Syfy don't know how to "do" science fiction: either make it, schedule it or promote it. They seem to have the view that SF fans are avid viewers and, so long as it has a spaceship in it, they'll watch any old crap.

    The problem is, that apart from a few "corrrr .... spaceships! it must be science fiction, so I'll watch it" types, the TV companies are dead wrong. You can't make a western, set it in a spaceship and call it SF. You can't make a submarine drama: essentially a bunch of people stuck in a closed vessel, and call it SGU, sorry: science fiction. And you can't make a science fiction series: which is basically about ideas and how technology (and/or science) changes situations, without it having a conclusion that it is working towards.

    Sadly TV production these days seems to have a formula that makes proper SF almost impossible. The algorithm seems to be:
    Get a promising sounding idea, lets some creatives loose on it to make it more "accessible" by taking out the heart of the SF and make a few episodes and see what happens. If the show succeeds, keep making more until the viewership drops. If it bombs, cancel it and move on to the next promising sounding idea and completely screw that up, to.
    You can't make SF like that. It needs structure. It needs a firm vision and a well-defined end: if you like, the result of the proposition put forward by the "science" bit in the SF plot.

    Just making a soap, that can run and run until it stops, and giving the characters ray-guns or monsters, or spaceships is lazy and not SF: just soap. But for a channel that leads in to Continuum (a "proper" SF series and it doesn't even have a spaceship in it :o) with wrestling? You have to wonder who the hell they think their audience is.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 61
    Forum Member
    Thomas Jane has been cast in the lead role of Detective Joe Miller.

    Book co-author Daniel Abraham discusses work on the show in detail. The most interesting news is that Terry McDonaugh, who directed several episodes of Breaking Bad and the recent Doctor Who facto-drama An Adventure in Space and Time, will be helming the first episode.

    Also good news is that Naren Shankar has come on board as co-producer (and possible co-showrunner). Shankar has serious SF TV form, having worked on all three 1980s/90s Star Trek shows as well as Farscape and The Outer Limits.

    Oh yeah, and Weta Digital are going to be handling the CGI, which means it should be pretty good.

    More casting news is imminent, apparently.
  • LMLM Posts: 63,477
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Syfy have tons of brilliant new shows coming up for the rest of this year and next. I am hoping this is going to be a comeback because their current programming is very very poor in my opinion. What happened to the network that gave us the stargate franchise, battlestar, farscape etc.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 61
    Forum Member
    Dave Howe (head of SyFy) says that The Expanse has the best pilot script he's read since BSG.

    More casting news. Shohreh Aghdashloo will be playing Chrisjen Avasarala, an important Earth-bound politician, whilst Steven Strait will be playing Holden, the show's co-lead (alongside Thomas Jane's character, Miller).
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 61
    Forum Member
    First Trailer. Looking good.
  • MoreTearsMoreTears Posts: 7,025
    Forum Member
    Just in case anyone wants a trailer without the subtitles.:)

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yP2BoUMSK-0
  • MandarkMandark Posts: 47,948
    Forum Member
    I think the issue they won't deal with well is showing the difference in human physiques from the differing gravity environments people are brought up in. The Belters are all meant to be as tall as basketball players but a lot skinnier. Even average sized Earth dwelling humans are supposed to seem short and stocky by comparison. The physical differences are important to the future humans because they help the different communities form their sense of identity and view others with suspicion. Also some Belters can't visit Earth as they can't deal with the gravity.

    Still it shows ambition from Syfy
  • racefreakracefreak Posts: 616
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    A lot of good actors in that trailer, can't wait for this.
  • montyburns56montyburns56 Posts: 2,011
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Syfy have tons of brilliant new shows coming up for the rest of this year and next. I am hoping this is going to be a comeback because their current programming is very very poor in my opinion. What happened to the network that gave us the stargate franchise, battlestar, farscape etc.

    Stargate was initially made by another channel and so was Farscape, so BSG is their only truly original successful show.
  • paulschapmanpaulschapman Posts: 35,536
    Forum Member
    Stargate was initially made by another channel and so was Farscape, so BSG is their only truly original successful show.

    And even then it was a co-production with Sky
    petely wrote:
    You can't make a western, set it in a spaceship and call it SF

    Star Trek was originally described as Wagon Train to the stars and being a Western in Space describes Firefly.

    As I said - you need to care about the material - at least enough to do it well. SyFy does not which is why it is full of those Mockbusters - barely described rip-offs of other people's work.
  • MoreTearsMoreTears Posts: 7,025
    Forum Member
    Stargate was initially made by another channel and so was Farscape, so BSG is their only truly original successful show.

    Farscape was a Sci-Fi Channel original; it was just co-produced with an Australian channel (and Sc-Fi aired the episodes first). The Wikipedia article on Farscape will tell you different, but I know that article to be unreliable (for instance, it says Farscape aired in Canada on the YTV channel before it aired in the US, but I know that is wrong because I watched the series when it started on YTV, and episode guides on the internet at the time had the dates when episodes had already aired on Sci-Fi in the US, and the US media reported about Sci-Fi Channel broadcasts before the series came to YTV).

    As for what you say about the channel and "successful shows," how are you defining "success?" Critical acclaim? Then maybe you have a point. But I think the "success" of a TV series is usually measured in business terms, and Eureka and Warehouse 13 both lasted more seasons than Battlestar Galactica and probably made the channel more money (since they were much cheaper to produce).
  • montyburns56montyburns56 Posts: 2,011
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    MoreTears wrote: »
    Farscape was a Sci-Fi Channel original; it was just co-produced with an Australian channel (and Sc-Fi aired the episodes first). The Wikipedia article on Farscape will tell you different, but I know that article to be unreliable (for instance, it says Farscape aired in Canada on the YTV channel before it aired in the US, but I know that is wrong because I watched the series when it started on YTV, and episode guides on the internet at the time had the dates when episodes had already aired on Sci-Fi in the US, and the US media reported about Sci-Fi Channel broadcasts before the series came to YTV).

    As for what you say about the channel and "successful shows," how are you defining "success?" Critical acclaim? Then maybe you have a point. But I think the "success" of a TV series is usually measured in business terms, and Eureka and Warehouse 13 both lasted more seasons than Battlestar Galactica and probably made the channel more money (since they were much cheaper to produce).

    What? Wikipedia has lied to me? Say it's not true? :D

    And I only talked about those three shows as they were the ones that the OP mentioned.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 61
    Forum Member
    Latest trailer for The Expanse, which now has an airdate of December this year. Apparently SyFy is so confident about this that they have already started pre-production on Season 2.
    And even then it was a co-production with Sky

    Season 1 of BSG got some extra production money from Sky in return for Sky being able to air it before the Americans. The pilot mini-series and Seasons 2-4 were all produced by SyFy alone.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 61
    Forum Member
    You can watch the first episode now via SyFy's Facebook page.

    Pretty damn good. The best first episode of a space opera series since BSG ended. Solid script, great acting, a nice shooting style that goes for realism without settling for BSG-style shakey cam and some fantastic effects. I also liked the subtle ways they made it clear that Ceres has lower gravity than Earth or Mars (the bird only having to flap its wings intermittently, the guy falling into the airlock fairly slowly).

    The pacing was also good, given how much they had to establish. Overall, a great opening and I'll be watching the rest of the series.
Sign In or Register to comment.