Skip to main content

The Expanse (SyFy Channel): Boosting the Signal

The Expanse is the new, heavily promoted, space opera television show on the SyFy channel, part of its renewed embrace of, you know, SCIENCE FICTION. I have been talking up this show for purely selfish reasons. I like the story and I want to see it reach the end of the first book.


Characters from the SyFy Channel series, "The Expanse" from the left; Julie Mao (Florence Faivre), Det. Joe Miller (Thomas Jane), Naomi Nagata (Dominique Tipper), Jim Holden (Steven Strait), Alex Kamal (Cas Anvar), Amos Burton (Wes Chatham), and Chrisjen Avasarala (Shoreh Aghdashloo)

I saw this morning that the past few episodes have not had the audience that SyFy was looking for. That's a shame and I hope that the cold-eyes execs can hold on for a little while because a show this good is absolutely going to find an audience. 

I'm going to dispense with any arguments about how you, a SFF fan, should watch this show out of some sense of obligation. The fact is, although The Expanse is unlike any other show on television right now, we're not exactly living through a SFnal drought. There's something out there for everyone and if this gritty take on Mundane Science Fiction isn't your cup of tea then I think that's fine. Go support the shows you love. Perhaps the notion that there should be ONE channel that actually shows science fiction and fantasy is outmoded anyway.

I will say that while not perfect, The Expanse has plenty of virtues. What The Expanse does well, it does VERY well.

So let's focus on that. First off, the world building on this show is very interesting. Based on a series of novels by James S.A. Corey (a pseudonym used by a pair of writers Daniel Abraham and Ty Frank), the show has a dense, lived-in feel that obeys its own set-up and internal rules. James S.A. Corey have rejected the term 'hard SF' for their series and although both the books and show spend a great deal time making its depictions of Newtonian forces feel real, this should not be confused for "The Martian." Although not discussed in the show, the central conceit of the Expanse universe is that mankind discovered a reactionless drive permitting free travel around the solar system without the need to lug around enormous reservoirs of fuel. This is not hand-waving on the level of warp speed or transporters but it is important to make this distinction.

Unleashed from rigorous thermodynamics, The Expanse brings us a solar system filled with human settlement. Various colonies exist on the Moon, Mars, and Belt asteroids. Mars has developed along quasi-libertarian lines, while the various Belt colonies are the oppressed underclass of the solar system. Belters, as they call themselves, are squeezed by the two big powers of Earth and Mars, and by the relentless pressures of survival in low-gee, resource poor environments. The show does a great job bringing the Ceres station to life, filling it with squalid claustrophobia and simmering rebellion.

The rebellion sub-plot and the cold war between Mars and Earth is the other great strength of this show. Similar to Game of Thrones (a book Corey's work is often compared to) there are no good guys here, no absolute villains. There are many shades of grey and plenty of hard moral dilemmas but a viewer would also find genuinely interesting depictions of interplanetary politics and warfare. The two main characters of the show, Thomas Jane's Detective Joe Miller of Ceres and Steven Strait's Jim Holden of the Ice Hauler Canterbury, each provide a distinct perspective on these tensions without really overlapping much. This is clever because it provides an illusion of considerable breadth in a series only a few episodes in. I've seen this show described as Babylon 5 told from a dock-worker's perspective, which gives you both a sense of its scale and its scrappy, hard-luck attitude.

Lastly, the show handles suspense extremely well. Whether dealing with an abandoned freighter, sneak attacks by mysterious space ships, a slow leak of air in an escape pod, or simply getting into a secure vault, the show displays a mastery of the slow-build. The show hit an early high point in the fourth episode "CBQ" which I can't really describe without spoiling key plot developments. Suffice to say, The Expanse has its own unique and thrilling take on space combat.

Knowing the show will get a second season, I want the show to focus on these strengths and addresses some its flaws. The big one for me is the Earth subplot centering on Chrisjen Avasarala, the UN Assistant Undersecretary of Executive Administration's political maneuvering. I have never seen Shoreh Aghdashloo's work so I'll reserve judgement on her talent. Her presence here is underwhelming. I'm not sure if it's a script problem or a mis-match between the actress and character, but many of her scenes are wooden and exposition-laden. She is a character I don't remember appearing in Leviathan Wakes but one that might have been imported into the television series from later novels. Assuming that's the case, perhaps this character becomes more essential later on. Right now it feels like a distraction.

I consider myself a media consumer of some patience. I stuck with Agents of Shield during its plodding first season because I had faith the show would find its way. This isn't one of those situations. The Expanse is already a much better show than AoS was then and comes from a detailed and well-structured source material. It's a show that deserves a chance. I'm hoping enough other viewers give it the benefit of doubt to allow it to reach its full potential.



Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Writing Horror

I'm wary offering advice to other writers. 

First of all I've got the whole imposter syndrome thing and whatever advice I give feels like a good way of revealing how little I know about anything. Second, what I've learned mostly relates to solving problems in my own writing. What advice does a dog have to offer to a duck on how to swim? 
However, for Arisia 2018, I'll be participating on a panel of doing just that - giving advice to aspiring horror writers about writing horror.

So, what truths can I impart?

Some advice feels absolutely true, if a bit self-evident.

You must read. If you're trying to write horror then you must read horror. Not just one novel. Not just one author. You should make a sincere effort to read everything by everyone. The more recent the better. The classics are always going to be there, but if you want a sense of where your stories could fit, you need to see what is being published out there.

You must write. I do not think you have to write …

Reading Response to "A Good Man is Hard to Find."

Reader Response to “A Good Man is Hard to Find” Morgan Crooks I once heard Flannery O’Connor’s work introduced as a project to describe a world denied God’s grace. This critic of O’Connor’s work meant the Christian idea that a person’s misdeeds, mistakes, and sins could be sponged away by the power of Jesus’ sacrifice at Crucifixion. The setting of her stories often seem to be monstrous distortions of the real world. These are stories where con men steal prosthetic limbs, hired labor abandons mute brides in rest stops, and bizarre, often disastrous advice is imparted.  O’Connor herself said of this reputation for writing ‘grotesque’ stories that ‘anything that comes out of the South is going to be called grotesque by the northern reader, unless it is grotesque, in which case it is going to be called realistic.’ This is both a witty observation and a piece of advice while reading O’Connor’s work. These are stories about pain and lies and ugliness. The brutality that happens to characters …

We Have Always Lived in Haunted Houses

As my final pre-Arisia post, I'd like to tackle ghosts. Metaphorically, of course, because ghosts are intangible and also don't exist. 


I don't believe in ghosts. Not the sort of ghosts, anyway, that float around decaying old mansions or scare impressionable media personalities. Physics, at least the way I've grown up understanding it, precludes the existence of energy that cannot be detected reliably. Put another way, physicist Brian Cox stated that if ghosts existed the Large Hadron Collider would have almost certainly found one by now.

So, when I say I'm a fan of ghost stories and tales of haunted houses, am I being hypocritical? Possibly, but I also think one can appreciate ghosts and haunted houses in a different way. Even though they might not exist in a 'peer-reviewed' and 'experimentally replicable' fashion, phantoms absolutely exist as a potent symbol of the past.

When we talk about ghosts what we're really talking about is that annoying…