TiVo Community Forums Archives - The Future of Sci-Fi

TiVoCommunity.com
(c)opyright 1995-2005 All rights reserved
indexcheckTC
This area is a static history of posts in the TiVo Community Forum Archive.
This archive history was made for the simple indexing of search sites like Google.

Pages:1

The Future of Sci-Fi
(Click here to view the original thread with full colors/images)

Posted by: chris1

All good sci-fi shows (e.g. Farscape, Firefly, Stargate after season 7) will disappear. Mindless crap (e.g. Enterprise, Andromeda) will stay on the air, even when no one is still watching it. On the bright side, DS9 reruns are coming to TNN in the fall and a Stargate spinoff called "Atlantis" will appear in 2004.

Posted by: rexdart

Chris, I think it vacillates. I don't recall much sci-fi merriment from the 80's (theatrical movies of course notwithstanding) and then the 90's were pretty great. Perhaps its just time for the pendulum to swing back to the stinky side for a bit.

quote:
Originally posted by chris1
On the bright side, DS9 reruns are coming to TNN in the fall.

now this is great news, I did not know that!

of course, I will have already bought whatever DVDs have been released by that time so it may actually not do me any good! B)

Posted by: JimSpence

DS9 reruns on TNN.

That's too bad, unless they get rid of that &^%$ banner.
I don't watch TNN because of it.:(

Posted by: Graymalkin

Just remember --between Star Wars and Star Trek: The Next Generation, we had to put up with Battlestar Galactica, Buck Rogers, and Tron.

The pendulum swings to and fro, but I don't think it'll ever swing as far back as Buck and Twikky. Gawd, I hope not.

Posted by: rexdart

ahh but remember, the 80's TNG wasn't much to get excited about either, didn't really get good until 90 (maybe some in 89 I'll concede, hehe).

bee-duh-bee-duh-bee Buck!

gosh, all this nostalgia, you know what I really miss? the action pack stuff! the hercules movies, tekwar (was that action pack?) everyone may think it was cheesy, but I sure enjoyed watching it!

Posted by: gregpr

I'm waiting to see "Tripping the Rift" and I sure hope Sci-Fi doesn't goof it up as the videos online have been hilarious :D

Posted by: Fleegle

VideoS? There's more than one? I've only seen the original!

They got Stephen Root to come back as Chode, right? Please say yes, please say yes!

Posted by: unoriginal

quote:
Originally posted by gregpr
I'm waiting to see "Tripping the Rift" and I sure hope Sci-Fi doesn't goof it up as the videos online have been hilarious :D

Those gosh darn silly heads will find buy pepsi some way to mess it up. I really dislike those censored censored censored.

Posted by: ellinj

Whats up with The Dream Team? Is that really scifi?

http://www.scifi.com/dreamteam/

Posted by: DaveLessnau

That "Dream Team" garbage looks like the kind of stuff we can expect on SciFi since they've sworn off real science fiction. I don't know why they just don't change their name to the "Miss Cleo Psychic Hotline Channel."

Posted by: jimborst

quote:
All good sci-fi shows (e.g. Farscape, Firefly, Stargate after season 7) will disappear. Mindless crap (e.g. Enterprise, Andromeda) will stay on the air, even when no one is still watching it. On the bright side, DS9 reruns are coming to TNN

Do we ever disagree. I enjoy Enterprise, even like Andromeda to a point (although this season has been bad so far). I have always thought that DS9 was one of the worst Sci-Fi series there was. I always look forward to Enterprise, however I quit taping DS9 after awhile.

And Firefly...A freind gave me the mud episode, I'm sure you know which one that is, I have to say I fell asleep during it.

I will now put on my flame suit.

Posted by: smark

Tron rules man.

Posted by: Hunter Green

I can see why "the mud episode" taken on its own wouldn't be much of an inspiration. Even with the context of who the characters are, it wasn't the show's best.

Posted by: ClutchBrake

Jaynestown was OK. I wouldn't say it really compares to Serenity, Out of Gas, or Objects in Space.

Posted by: sacherjj

I have never sat through Farscape until I decided to TiVo the run of 8 or 9 episodes before Christmas. After the first hour, I wasn't too annoyed with the whole muppets thing. After the third hour, I wasn't totally lost. After the fifth hour, I was enjoying myself. Now I'm wondering why he is hoving over Earth, like the rest of the Farscape fans. Hopefully after the last season is over, Sci-Fi will run Farscape from the beginning. It would be interesting to see how much I've missed. Each time I had tried to watch it before, I would turn it on and think, "What in the world?" just before switching channels. Due to the positive feedback in this forum, I stuck it out through the initial gag reflex and turned out to like it.

I guess if Firefly doesn't come back on another network, and we are actually in to a lack of good science fiction, it is nice to not have seen Farscape and have some series to catch up on.

Posted by: Dale Sorel

quote:
Originally posted by Graymalkin
The pendulum swings to and fro, but I don't think it'll ever swing as far back as Buck and Twikky. Gawd, I hope not.

Hey, don't forget about Erin Gray:

http://www.milleniumgroup.de/br9.JPG

I spent many a Saturday afternoon in my youth keeping up with "Buck and Twikky" ;)

Posted by: allan

I KNEW there was a reason I watched that show! BDBDBD!

Posted by: brahamt

I had the same experience with Farscape over the summer. I usually watched Stargate, but it moved from Showtime to SciFi. After the premiere of Stargate, I decided to give Farscape a try, and I hated it (completely lost). But it was summer time, so I watched the next one and it was better.

Anyway, I got sick that next week, and rented the first few episodes on DVD and was unimpressed, but for some reason I kept watching. It kept getting better and better and before I knew it, I was all the way through Season One and the first four episodes of season two. By this time, I had realized that it was the best Sci-Fi show ever (alongside Babylon 5). But at the time, only the first four eps of season 2 had been released and I was hopelessly addicted to the show.

So my point to all of this is that I was able to download all of seasons 2, 3, and 4 from the internet so I could catch up. I can tell you without question or hyperbole, seasons 2 and 3 of Farscape is THE BEST arc of television I have ever seen. There are things in S2 and S3 especially that have tremendous emotional impact on the entire story.

I hate SciFi for cancelling the show just when I fell in love with it, but I guess that's life. At least we have what promises to be the most interesting last 11 episodes of the series.

quote:
Originally posted by sacherjj
I have never sat through Farscape until I decided to TiVo the run of 8 or 9 episodes before Christmas. After the first hour, I wasn't too annoyed with the whole muppets thing. After the third hour, I wasn't totally lost. After the fifth hour, I was enjoying myself. Now I'm wondering why he is hoving over Earth, like the rest of the Farscape fans. Hopefully after the last season is over, Sci-Fi will run Farscape from the beginning. It would be interesting to see how much I've missed. Each time I had tried to watch it before, I would turn it on and think, "What in the world?" just before switching channels. Due to the positive feedback in this forum, I stuck it out through the initial gag reflex and turned out to like it.

I guess if Firefly doesn't come back on another network, and we are actually in to a lack of good science fiction, it is nice to not have seen Farscape and have some series to catch up on.

Posted by: stormsweeper

quote:
Originally posted by sacherjj
Hopefully after the last season is over, Sci-Fi will run Farscape from the beginning. It would be interesting to see how much I've missed.

For some reason, Sci Fi almost *never* airs reruns of Farscape. They've been known to air Galactica 1980 reruns, but not Farscape. :rolleyes:

Posted by: rexdart

Farscape canceled.....Firefly not given a fair chance....Crusade with a wacky show order....

all piffles, truly the greatest travesty in television scifi was the skirt they put Wilma Deering in! :D

Can't quite decide between the white skin tight outfit or the colored jump suits.....

Posted by: Big_Daddy

I've moaned enough about Farscape's departure. Now, you may potentially add Odyssey 5 to the list. I don't watch it - don't subscribe to Showtime - but I can empathize with it's fans. Hope the post is incorrect.

http://www.scifi.com/scifiwire/art-...-12/26/10.00.tv

Posted by: HTH

Damn, I was fearing that about Odyssey 5 when they dropped the widescreen showings on Sundays before they completed their complete rerun of the half-season. (I feared the same for Jeremiah... it's like watching the Sci-Fi Channel for season resolutions!)

I've introduced a friend to Farscape via the DVDs (2.4 on its way in the mail) and he can't believe Sci-Fi is canceling it. Wasn't it their highest-rated show? (I'm gonna need to download the rest of season 2, plus season 3 on VCD while I wait for them to finish releasing them on DVD.)

Why doesn't the parent company, USA Networks, just spin off a Fantasy Channel for their psychic tripe? Are they still showing that Crossing Over With the Biggest Stupid Douche in the Universe show? Huh, TiVo says they are. That reminds me: I need to give it three thumbs down.

Posted by: Skittles

Farscape was Sci-Fi's highest rated show, and their cancellation of the show has become more of a blunder for them, now that their average viewership has skyrocketed as a result of the Taken miniseries.

Sci-Fi's thinking on it was that their highest rated show was also their most costly show, and that it didn't make sense to keep producing it.

The Sci-Fi channel has turned into a big joke. I remember when they used to run the Star Wars trilogy on the network. You know what I saw a few weeks ago in the TiVo Guide info for the Sci-Fi network? An Indiana Jones movie. Yes, Indy was being run on the Sci-Fi network.

You just have to wonder about the average mental capacity of a network programming executive.

Posted by: stormsweeper

They showed Braveheart a couple months ago. And Gremlins on the 25th.

Lexx and Farscape were the two highest rated shows on the network. Lexx was far cheaper (as they were only paying for broadcast/syndication rights, the ownership of the show is separate) but the creators of that one got to end it on their own terms. Farscape is expensive, but Sci Fi keeps dodging the issue that they only pay half of the cost for the series, and thus it costs them half what SG-1 does. They probably paid as much for X-Files reruns as they did for the last season of Farscape.

Posted by: sacherjj

quote:
Originally posted by stormsweeper
Farscape is expensive, but Sci Fi keeps dodging the issue that they only pay half of the cost for the series, and thus it costs them half what SG-1 does. They probably paid as much for X-Files reruns as they did for the last season of Farscape.

How does that work? I'm new to the who Sci-Fi/Farscape thing, but it seems like a stupid move on their part. All the advertising seems to point towards Farscape being a Sci-Fi original. If they have the sole rights, who pays for the other half of production?

Posted by: tanstaafl

Actually, Farscape was their highest rated show until this year. Stargate SG-1 routinely scored higher ratings and I think their repeats of The Dead Zone beat them a few times. Still, second or third isn't bad.

The excuses Sci-Fi made were that Farscape cost too much and that it didn't keep enough of the lead-in from Stargate SG-1. I have heard, however, that TPTB at the Sci-Fi channel's parent company don't like "space shows" and killed it for that reason.

Anyone trying to catch up on Farscape at the start of the fourth season may find my introduction at http://home.earthlink.net/~tanstaaf...ape-intro4.html useful.

Posted by: Rob Helmerichs

The reason they don't like "sapce shows" isn't philosophical, it's fiscal...space costs money.

Posted by: mrmike

I'm heartened by "Children of Dune", but I'm afraid that SciFi is headed downhill fast. Once new Stargates stop, I don't know of any weekly show I'd watch on it. I might tune in Tremors once or twice just to see how cringe-worthy it is, but that's about it.

-MM

Posted by: stormsweeper

quote:
Originally posted by sacherjj
How does that work? I'm new to the who Sci-Fi/Farscape thing, but it seems like a stupid move on their part. All the advertising seems to point towards Farscape being a Sci-Fi original. If they have the sole rights, who pays for the other half of production?

Henson Entertainment pays the other half, and they have all the merchandising and video rights (which they lease to ADV).

Posted by: MarkofT

quote:
Originally posted by stormsweeper
Henson Entertainment pays the other half, and they have all the merchandising and video rights (which they lease to ADV).

In the US. ADV videos are pretty much just what is aired on SciFi. Blackstar carries the Region 2 videos and I have heard that they are the full uncut episodes.

Posted by: dmdeane

quote:
Originally posted by stormsweeper
For some reason, Sci Fi almost *never* airs reruns of Farscape. They've been known to air Galactica 1980 reruns, but not Farscape. :rolleyes:

For precisely this reason I have suspected Sci Fi Channel all along of having extremely bad motives in the way they have dealt with Farscape. The way to draw in new viewers is to continually air the series, in its proper order, every week. Sci Fi refused to do this, even while it was airing completely useless fluff (that was unoriginal and unlikely to give them high ratings anyway). Sci Fi claimed to have "promoted" Farscape, but I saw absolutely no evidence of this. Farscape's fanbase was built up entirely by word of mouth; it succeeded in spite of the Sci Fi Channel.

Consider a counter example of how to do things right: shows like Buffy on FX. If it had not been for FX constantly showing the reruns in their proper order, I would never have gotten hooked on Buffy. Sci Fi didn't have to run Farscape every night; once a week, every week, would have been plenty, to draw in a larger fan base. How on earth did they expect the show to attract new fans, when it wasn't even being shown for half of the year? Methinks they weren't interested in Farscape at all; else they would have been a bit more proactive in catering to their fans.

Posted by: tanstaafl

MarkofT - The ADV DVDs do have the full uncut episodes, not the cut-down Sci-Fi channel versions. I understand the only real difference was in the first season.

dmdeane - Sci-Fi only has the rights to show each episode of Farscape a limited number of times. (Exactly how many I don't know.) That is why they are so reluctant to re-run episodes.

Posted by: stormsweeper

To confuse matters, the "Best of Season 1" DVD is made of SciFi Channel edited ones. Even still, most of the cuts are for time - the only real nudity ever seen on the show is a couple blue ass shots.

Posted by: dmdeane

quote:
Originally posted by tanstaafl
Sci-Fi only has the rights to show each episode of Farscape a limited number of times. (Exactly how many I don't know.) That is why they are so reluctant to re-run episodes.

That does not make any sense. Why would they sign a contract with Sci Fi which limited their ability to draw in new fans? That would be cutting their own throats. I can't think of any other Sci Fi show that had such a stupid limitation - I saw endless repeats of Lexx, for instance. Even if there was a limitation, I doubt it was as severely limited to the extremely few number of times Sci Fi has shown old episodes of Farscape. If Farscape really did sign such a deal, whoever negotiated it for them should be fired.

Posted by: chris1

quote:
Originally posted by stormsweeper
the only real nudity ever seen on the show is a couple blue ass shots.

Is that from the episode when Zhaan drops her robe and says "Is nudity taboo in your culture?" to the mercenary with the armband weapon?

Posted by: Rob Helmerichs

quote:
Originally posted by dmdeane
That does not make any sense. Why would they sign a contract with Sci Fi which limited their ability to draw in new fans? That would be cutting their own throats. I can't think of any other Sci Fi show that had such a stupid limitation - I saw endless repeats of Lexx, for instance. Even if there was a limitation, I doubt it was as severely limited to the extremely few number of times Sci Fi has shown old episodes of Farscape. If Farscape really did sign such a deal, whoever negotiated it for them should be fired.

That's a pretty standard network contract...usually they have the right to broadcast episodes 2 or 3 times. For cable, I suspect it is a much higher number. Perhaps Sci-Fi got a reduced price for rights to a smaller number of showings; that would certainly fit with their reputation for short-sighted cheapness.

On Henson's side, if the choice was between the show never getting made and getting made under less than optimal conditions, then I suppose we should be grateful we got the four years. But it's too bad they didn't work out a broader deal, like the one Stargate got at Showtime, that allowed for second-run syndication, which would probably have generated the revenue necessary to keep the show alive.

Posted by: HTH

quote:
Originally posted by Medieval Guy
The reason they don't like "space shows" isn't philosophical, it's fiscal...space costs money.

It's not as if they're shooting the deep space scenes on location!

Posted by: chris1

Sci-fi/fantasy got massacred this season with the cancellation of Farscape, Firefly, and Buffy. The latest Stargate episodes were lame. I am not looking forward to the next Stargate season. At least we stil have Angel and um ... Enterprise and fortunetly the DS9 DVDs are coming out.

Posted by: Jojo

quote:
Originally posted by HTH
It's not as if they're shooting the deep space scenes on location!

That was meant to be a joke comment right? :)

I was thinking about how all the sci-fi shows are getting cancelled because they are so expensive to make, and how ridiculous it is. In the 80s, when no-one could do CG, they had to make shows on a budget, and use models, greenscreens, people in latex and shoot polystyrene rocks in the desert. People's expectations on the effects were much lower.

Now that CG can make incredibly realistic ships, locations and even whole characters, every sci-fi series is expected to use CG, which can be prohibitively expensive. Much as I love seeing great CG, I'm more attached to the shows themselves than their visual effects. Given a choice between having no Firefly at all, because it uses CG, or having Firefly back but using cheap effects, like model shots for ships, I know which I would choose! :)

Cheers,
Jojo

P.S. I know models can be expensive too, but I meant "cheap and crappy" effects versus "expensive and pretty" effects. I was thinking back to Doctor Who and Blake's Seven, which were made on a really tight budget, and the effects looked bad even then, but it didn't matter. The storylines and characters made the show.

Posted by: jones07

I don't think the American public would put up with Dr Who, Blake's 7 "cheap and crappy" effects. Great shows, But both of these shows was made for BBC viewers. I would still watch them today if reruns was on the air. But I'm not the avg American scifi Fan. I love almost all BBC style scifi even with bad "cheap and crappy effects". Story is everything to me.

Posted by: Rob Helmerichs

More to the point, most people who watch TV also go to the movies from time to time, and after you've seen 5th Element, one of the new Star Wars flicks, or even something as average as Nemesis, Blake's 7 just won't hack it. And, unfortunately, Hollywood seems to lack the imagination to do science fiction that depends on ideas, not f/x.

Posted by: Jojo

OK, I guess my point is, there must be some compromise. I'm not seriously suggesting that Firefly could be a success if it really did look as bad as Blake 7s, after all that was 20? years ago. But there must be a cheaper way to do the effects that would look bearable, surely?

Medieval Guy I suppose you're right that movies have set the standard, and people expect TV effects to look just as good. I just think its rather sad, because I love sci-fi so much, and its a shame to see so much of it being cancelled for what feels like the wrong reason.

Posted by: Rob Helmerichs

But I stress again, so little of what makes good science fiction good needs special effects.

Then again, Hollywood has always been allergic to ideas, and great science fiction is ideas ideas ideas...

Posted by: murgatroyd

quote:
Originally posted by chris1
Sci-fi/fantasy got massacred this season with the cancellation of Farscape, Firefly, and Buffy.

Niggly point: Buffy was not cancelled. If the show's makers decide it is time to shut down, that's very different than the network deciding to give it the boot.

Jan

Posted by: Hunter Green

For what it's worth, Babylon 5 pioneered that use of CG, and consistently came in under budget throughout its run. That's not to say that the much higher quality of effects isn't the precipitating or triggering factor here, just that it's not necessary that those effects should break the bank.

(Admittedly, some of B5's effects look a little dated today, but that's to be expected; Moore's Law ensures better results could be done on the same budget today using the same management. And some of B5's effects still look as good as or better than anything being done today, which is quite an achievement given how much time has passed.)

Posted by: Chris Roberts

I'm hoping that with the success of the LOTR movies in theaters we'll start seeing one or two good fantasy shows (and probably ten crap ones as well). There has been a lack in campy fantasy since Herc/Xena left the air and we've never really had a successful serious fantasy show that I can think of offhand (someone will probably correct me on this).

Posted by: raitchison

This seasons SG-1 is getting better, now that they are actually going offworld again. When Dr. Jackson comes back it can only get better. Season 7 has only recently begun production, it's a bit early to say there won't be a season 8 before any of Season 7 has even aired.

I've tried watching Farscape a few times and CAN'T get into it for the life of me, sometimes it seems like the original Star Trek had better alien makeup.

Thank god the Dream Team got cancelled, now they need to ditch that douche John Edwards.

I noticed they are strarting to show some Battlestar Gallactica, that's a welcome addition.

Posted by: rich

quote:
Originally posted by raitchison
I noticed they are strarting to show some Battlestar Galactica, that's a welcome addition.

This is getting us ready for their new Battlestar Galactica miniseries coming this Fall. (See scifi.com for more details.)

Posted by: dmdeane

quote:
Originally posted by Medieval Guy
That's a pretty standard network contract...usually they have the right to broadcast episodes 2 or 3 times. For cable, I suspect it is a much higher number. Perhaps Sci-Fi got a reduced price for rights to a smaller number of showings; that would certainly fit with their reputation for short-sighted cheapness.

On Henson's side, if the choice was between the show never getting made and getting made under less than optimal conditions, then I suppose we should be grateful we got the four years. But it's too bad they didn't work out a broader deal, like the one Stargate got at Showtime, that allowed for second-run syndication, which would probably have generated the revenue necessary to keep the show alive.

Which begs the question, why didn't Sci Fi renegotiate the terms of the deal, if they were unhappy with it, especially when they agreed to fund the making of seasons four and five. That would have been the time to adjust things. Instead they sprung the surprise cancellation of the show at the end of filming of season four, when it was too late. Obviously Sci Fi was not motivated to reach a better deal; it sounds more like word came down from on high to cancel the show for reasons that have little to do with the stated reasons. Also, even if Sci Fi had only limited rebroadcast rights, I doubt that they exercised their full options. There are episodes of Farscape I am convinced Sci Fi has not reaired, although I have not researched that, it's just a hunch based on the extraordinarily paltry airing of Farscape episodes on Sci Fi.

Posted by: dmdeane

quote:
Originally posted by rich
This is getting us ready for their new Battlestar Galactica miniseries coming this Fall. (See scifi.com for more details.)

This, from the network which allegedly cancelled Farscape because they were trying to get away from "shows about space ships"!!!

Posted by: dmdeane

quote:
Originally posted by raitchison
I've tried watching Farscape a few times and CAN'T get into it for the life of me, sometimes it seems like the original Star Trek had better alien makeup.

You're kidding, right? Pulling our leg?

Sometimes it seems that all the people who "don't get" Farscape betray, contra their word, evidence of never having actually watched the show for more than a few moments.

Posted by: LooseWiring

quote:
Just remember --between Star Wars and Star Trek: The Next Generation, we had to put up with Battlestar Galactica, Buck Rogers, and Tron.

Don't forget the classic, Ice Pirates! "Space Herpes?!?"

Posted by: raitchison

quote:
Originally posted by dmdeane
You're kidding, right? Pulling our leg?

Sometimes it seems that all the people who "don't get" Farscape betray, contra their word, evidence of never having actually watched the show for more than a few moments.

I've watched no less than 5 episodes:

One where they went back to earth, in the past and John Crighton(sp) had to stop his dad from going on Challenger.

One where They were with this guru dude who was trying to condition JC by dropping this key into hot coals and the dingleberry chinned alien was dealing with having been falesly convicted of killing his wife.

One where they were getting some kind of device to disguise the energy pattern of the ship and the ugly spray painted white girl and the old broad got genetically manipulated.

One where JC was watching videos of this Expose on earth TV.

Once where JC was on this station that was quarantined and he had to trick his way to try to rescue the ugly brunette.

Nobody can claim that I didn't give this show a chance, after having watched it I don't find it remotely surprising that it got cancelled.

Posted by: jones07

raitchison
There's nothing wrong with not liking a TV show. Some Hardcore Farscape Fans find it hard to believed that most people just do not like or understand the show. And coming in after the first season makes it even harder to find new viewers. I visited two of the save farscape Sites. And they are stunned that a very low budget show like Tracker is beating FS in the ratings.

Friends is the show I just don't like an never have. And I can not understand why people love this show. I tried to watch it 5 or 6 times like you and FS. But after 5 or ten minutes My eyes daze over and I watch something else recorded on my Replay. To each his own. That's why there are over 300 channels to watch :D

btw: I'm a FS lover never missed an eps

Posted by: Chris Roberts

quote:
Originally posted by raitchison
the dingleberry chinned alien
the ugly spray painted white girl
the ugly brunette.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. :p

Posted by: Buster

quote:
Thank god the Dream Team got cancelled, now they need to ditch that douche John Edwards.

I'm assuming you saw the South Park episode where John Edwards won the award for being the The Biggest Douche in the Universe? ;)

I'm extremely bummed about the cancellation of Odyssey 5. I thought that show had incredible potential and good actors. What a shame.

Posted by: raitchison

quote:
Originally posted by Buster
I'm assuming you saw the South Park episode where John Edwards won the award for being the The Biggest Douche in the Universe? ;)

I only get to see a few South Park Episodes a year, luckily it's enough to keep me up to date on the insider speak, such as John Edwards the douche or "Tree Fiddy"

Posted by: jchan

I agree that things are going downhill. For a while there was a bumper crop of decent Sci-Fi: Farscape, Odyssey 5, Buffy, Firefly, Enterprise, ST:TNG reruns, B5 reruns, etc.

Now all those shows either have exhausted storylines, cancelled or being on the verge.

I see nothing GOOD upcoming besides mini-series style shows...no seasonal runs.

And yes, Sci-Fi showing Gremilins...well it IS kind of a "monster movie" so I could see it there...but BRAVEHEART!? That's just sad. Besdies, whatever happened to being the REAL Sci-Fi channel...re-running Dr. Who, Godzilla, Buck Rogers, etc. Even if it's old, it's still Sci-Fi enough to bring in the fans.

However, in lieu of good Sci-Fi there IS a huge crop of new good anime/toons on Cartoon Network to fill my TV gap!

Posted by: HTH

quote:
Originally posted by jchan
IAnd yes, Sci-Fi showing Gremilins...well it IS kind of a "monster movie" so I could see it there...but BRAVEHEART!? That's just sad.

You're kidding. What do they think he is, half Delvian?

Posted by: DLiquid

raitchison, the 5 Farscape eps you watched were from the second half of Farscape season 4. To be honest, I don't blame you for not liking the show. First of all, three of those episodes I don't consider to be very good, and I'm a big Farscape fan. Second, these episodes are building on 3.5 years of material. This isn't Star Trek, where you can just watch a single episode and generally understand what's going on. This is Farscape, with dozens of long running interrelated story arcs. Things that happen now begin to explain things that were hinted at several episodes, or years, earlier. Even liking the show as much as I do, I think that if the first 5 eps I watched were the same ones you did I probably wouldn't be too into it. Luckily, I've been watching since the beginning. :D

I think the long story arcs were this show's downfall. Recently, they dumbed down Alias a bit because the long story arcs there were confusing the casual viewers. If I could go back and change Farscape, I wouldn't change a thing, I'd rather have a great show that was canceled prematurely than an okay show that got better ratings.

P.S. - Do you really think Claudia Black is ugly? :confused:

Posted by: raitchison

http://www.angelfire.com/movies/pitchblack/images/pb26.jpg

Yep I'm pretty sure she's ugly.

I see what you mean, if someos only exposure to SG-1 were the current season they likely wouldn't like it.

As far as long running storylines, I'm an original B5 fan so I'm no stranger to those, but again I know that it eventually killed B5 which was one of the best SciFi series in history.

Posted by: dmdeane

quote:
Originally posted by raitchison
Once where JC was on this station that was quarantined and he had to trick his way to try to rescue the ugly brunette.

Nobody can claim that I didn't give this show a chance, after having watched it I don't find it remotely surprising that it got cancelled.

Of course there is no arguing matters of taste; you do confirm to me that we probably have nothing in common when it comes to taste, if you think that Claudia Black is an "ugly brunette".

But I also observe, that when it comes to watching shows which do not conform to our tastes, that usually we do not actually understand or "get" what we are watching, and make all sorts of gaffes, mistakes, or slips which indicate that we watched the show, but didn't actually "see" the show.

One could list endless examples of reviewers who actually watched a movie or show they hated; sure, they watched it, but any observant fan can pick out glaring mistakes in the review, because at some point the reviewer's mind switched off and his attention wondered to other things. "Giving it a fair chance" is entirely the subjective opinion of the reviewer.

If you think so poorly of the Farscape alien makeup, thinking it no better than Star Trek TOS, you are, IMO, guilty of not paying attention, no matter how many episodes you "watched" by virtue of having your open eyeballs in front of the TV screen. That's not just a matter of taste, but of an objective observation of the skill and talents of the makeup artists and other costuming and visual effects people working on the show.

Yes, everyone is entitled to their own tastes, but that does not mean they are objectively viewing and reviewing everything.

Posted by: DLiquid

http://www.perfectpeople.net/media/celebs/49/0244.jpg

Your honor, the defense rests.

:D

Posted by: Hunter Green

I think I watched the first seven or eight Farscape episodes. Then I "checked in" for a few episodes two or three times after that. It never really grabbed me either. Not much point in being critical, it's enough that it's not my flavor.

Posted by: dmdeane

quote:
Originally posted by DLiquid
Your honor, the defense rests.

:D

Thanks; you beat me to it. You really have to see this actress in action for a bit to realize how talented she is, and how attractive she is. She doesn't have your stereotypical bimbo good looks that a lot of the "eye candy" TV shows demand, but Claudia has an interesting face that focuses one's attention, and a knockout smile as well. She doesn't ruin her looks with phoney plastic surgery, so she has some "lines" in her face that our shallow culture designates as "ugly" but which in fact give her face more character and beauty than the merely conventional face would ever have. Claudia Black is the thinking man's eye candy.

As for Farscape and those who can't "get into it"; this is just more proof that the show was killed by its lack of reruns or repeat showings on Sci Fi Channel. You cannot expect casual fans to just come in at the end of the third or fourth season, and understand what is going on. You have to have repeated, sequential airings of past seasons in order to allow new fans to understand the show as it was meant to be understood.

Posted by: spelcheker

B5 wasn't "killed" by anything, it was conceived to be a five year series, and it was. It 'almost' got axed after 4, and suffered in season 5 because of it, but it got the run JMS wanted it to.

And as far as bad scifi between Star Wars and TNG, how come nobody has mentioned this load of crud featuring Clint Howard?

http://www.ee.surrey.ac.uk/Contrib/SciFi/SpaceRangers/

Posted by: jchan

I still want Chiana though...not the actress who plays her...just Chiana...complete with Black and White skin and the latex outfit.

Posted by: Crrink

I couldn't get into FS either, I just didn't like the whole look of the aliens. I'm not saying that the makeup artists aren't talented or anything, but It just bugged me too much to be interested in the show.

One thing I'm curious about - for fans of both FS and B5 - which one do you think had better writing?

I loved how on B5 we got to see the characters grow and evolve, and I really loved how intricately knit the plot was throughout the 5 year arc.

From comments I've read, I gather FS is similar, I'm just curious if it's as good as B5 was...no reason really, just wondering what your opinions are.

Posted by: Rob Helmerichs

I think B5 had a more interesting Big Picture, more "vision." Farscape, on the other hand, has tighter, better-written scripts (JMS is brilliant in many ways, but dialog is not one of them). Farscape's characters are more finely-drawn, whereas the B5 characters were simpler (almost simplistic), but better-tied to the overall themes of the show.

In short, I'd say B5 was a great Big Picture show, and Farscape is a great details show.

Posted by: Hunter Green

FWIW, it wasn't the look of the aliens that put me off of Farscape, it was the stories themselves. Some of the time it seemed to be going for a new-sensibilities sci-fi approach, and some of the time for a pulpy, corny-on-purpose feel. Either way would have been fine with me, but halfway in between gets the benefits of neither.

I also didn't find anything interesting in the characters, nothing that I hadn't seen fully explored many times before. Of course, everything is new to someone and old hat to someone else, and the stories where I first met these characters were no more original, they were just new to me at the time. Someday the folks who loved the Farscape characters will not like similar characters in some other show, and will need their new shows to have more complex layers to their characters, and will be having to explain why they didn't like some new show others loved to bits. That's the way of the world.

Posted by: Rob Helmerichs

Hunter:

Well, that's just 'cause you're wrong! :D

But seriously, this is interesting:

Viacom To Buy Sci-Fi Channel?

If this were actually to happen, it would certainly make the prospect for space shows brighter!

Posted by: brahamt

Medieval Dude, are you trying to restore my faith in happy endings :up:

One could only hope the news proves to be true.

Posted by: Chris Roberts

How is that good news? If anything I'd think it would kill non-Paramount shows on sci-fi channel for years to come. Unless I'm missing something, which is often the case it seems...

Posted by: raitchison

I agree not necessarily a good thing. When Newscorp bought SpeedVision they utterly destroyed it.

Posted by: Rob Helmerichs

quote:
Originally posted by Chris Roberts
How is that good news? If anything I'd think it would kill non-Paramount shows on sci-fi channel for years to come. Unless I'm missing something, which is often the case it seems...

Not really...if there's money to be made, they'll show anybody's shows. That's why Buffy (made by Fox) went from WB to UPN, not to Fox.

What would be nice is that Sci-Fi would then potentially get access (eventually, when the current syndication deals expire) to the entire Star Trek catalog. Now, those who have been paying attention know that I'm no Star Trek fan, but Sci-Fi has had a hell of a time trying to fill their schedule, and having another 21 years' worth of Trek (TNG, DS9, Voyager) at their disposal would go a long way.

Posted by: Chris Roberts

http://www.trektoday.com/news/281100_05.shtml

"By Christian
November 28, 2000 - 11:47 PM
Beating out competing cable networks such as TNT and the Sci-Fi Channel, TNN: The National Network announced today that it has acquired from Paramount Domestic Television the rerun rights for the latest three Star Trek series, as well as the first five Trek movies. No price was disclosed, but last month Paramount was reported to be asking at least $364 million.

Currently, all three series are still tied up due to syndication contracts, but TNN will be able to start running TNG episodes in Fall 2001. DS9 will launch on the cable network in Fall 2004, followed by Voyager in late 2006. In addition, TNN will be able to start showing the first five Trek films, from 'Star Trek: The Motion Picture' to 'Star Trek V: The Final Frontier' as early as January 2001.

TNN obtaining the Trek rerun rights could be seen as a major disappointment for the Sci-Fi Channel, which was considered to be the other major contender for the license. The Sci-Fi Channel currently already has the rerun rights for the Original Series, and has over the past year obtained the rights to many high-profile series, including 'Babylon 5'. In addition, it used to have the rerun rights for the 2nd, 3rd and 4th Trek movies, which it will now lose to TNN.

TNN, which like Paramount is owned by Viacom, recently retitled itself from 'The Nashville Network' to 'The National Network', and has since then been working to establish itself as a major cable entertainment network. It is already showing the popular 'Raw is War' WWF wrestling series, and together with the Trek license that should help the network a lot in achieving this goal."

===========

Not sure what this means since TNN is owned by Viacom as well. At least with the scifi channel they could start DS9 and VOY reruns sooner since they have the schedule space for scifi shows.

Posted by: buffan

quote:
Originally posted by raitchison
I agree not necessarily a good thing. When Newscorp bought SpeedVision they utterly destroyed it.

As far as I'm concerned, with the exception of a few miniseries, SciFi Channel is already destroyed. It can't get much worse for me.

I never got into Farscape, so the only thing that I've watched recently on SciFi is Taken, and I'll watch Children of Dune.

P.S. What's wrong with NASCARVision??;)

Posted by: chris1

It looks like TNN is turning into a better science-fiction channel than Sci-Fi. Now if only they could pick up Farscape and Firefly ...

Posted by: KLB

What stuns me is that not that long ago David Kemper and Ben Browder both talked about how Bonnie Hammer was the force at sci-fi behind FARSCAPE and how she was the one that championed the show to the upper execs. Based on her insulting comments recently in Time magazine.... she's obviously fallen in line with the rest of the execs there.

SciFi is SO DAMN FAR OUT OF TOUCH with their core audience it is unbelievable.

There are a lot of people calling for a boycott of them over the continued disrespect of the viewers..... I'm starting to think it's time for a little payback to scifi. I think that if half the people that fought and wrote to save Farscape wrote to sponsors and the network telling them that not only wouldn't they buy the products but they are going to tell all their friends not to buy them things will get ugly.

If writing to sponsors telling them you do buy their products won't do anything... I bet they'd react to someone saying the opposite.

Not that a boycott would bring FARSCAPE or any of the other shows they've cancelled back.... but sometimes Revenge is its own reward.

:mad:

Posted by: Chris Roberts

I don't need to boycott scifi channel. In a few more weeks they won't have anything I'll want to see. And thats sad because I'm a huge sci-fi fan.

Posted by: raitchison

quote:
Originally posted by buffan
As far as I'm concerned, with the exception of a few miniseries, SciFi Channel is already destroyed. It can't get much worse for me.

I guess you never got into SG-1 either then.

I actually think the worst thing about SciFi is the miniseries, I couldn't wait for SciFi to stop being the "Taken Channel" and it's already gearing up to be the "Children of Dune Chanel" for another couple weeks.

Look at just tonightm they are playing both Virus and Species as well as several different series which appeal to a wide variety of Fans. Event Horizon and Mad Max: beyond Thunderdome are on Saturday

quote:
P.S. What's wrong with NASCARVision??;)

Exactly, they took what used to be a motorsports channel and focused it on something that is to motorsports what WWE is to athletic sports.

Posted by: JimSpence

Okay, just watched the next to last episode of Farscape. They finished the Trilogy. Okay I guess.

I have a technical question regarding the SciFi channel. Is there a reason why they had to have the damnable channel bug in the corner of the letterbox and not in the black area? And, was is brighter than normal? Damn, I hate channel bugs, especially the big ugly ones.

Posted by: DLiquid

And how did you like the big ass "Children of Dune" graphics they kept flashing in the lower left corner? The nerve of these Psuedo-Fi lame brains, thinking I'm actually going to watch any of the dren on that disaster of a channel after next week's Farscape finale. I don't think so. :mad:

Posted by: Hunter Green

Maybe if they put it in the black area, folks watching on HDTVs or other 16:9 TVs wouldn't see it. And we couldn't have that!

Posted by: JimSpence

Heaven forbid, that the viewer enjoy the show.!?!?!?

Posted by: Hunter Green

"Where's the profit in that?" - Spike Jones

Posted by: esperantisto

I just wish they would show Doctor Who again!

Posted by: Grumpy Pants

quote:

Science friction

The Sci-Fi Channel's slick new shows are causing an outcry from its longtime fans

By Suzanne C. Ryan, Globe Staff, 3/16/2003

or die-hard science fiction fans like Jason Seaver, Friday will be a sad day in TV land.

It's the day the Sci Fi Channel will run the final episode of its first original series, ''Farscape,'' a show that Seaver and other passionate followers call television's best science-fiction program since the original ''Star Trek.''

Sci Fi officials, pointing to flagging ratings, say ''Farscape'' must go to make room for new and higher-profile programming such as the Steven Spielberg-produced miniseries ''Taken'' and ''Frank Herbert's Children of Dune,'' which begins tonight and stars Oscar-winner Susan Sarandon. Next, the channel introduces its first original reality series, ''Scare Tactics,''as well as a horror-comedy series that spins off the movie ''Tremors.''

But Sci Fi's fans don't want to hear about an image makeover. They want the channel to stay the same. ''I've talked to a ton of people online who have said they're through with the channel after the last episode of `Farscape' airs,'' says Seaver, a 29-year-old computer programmer in Cambridge. ''I can't say I'm too interested in much of their upcoming slate. ... `Tremors' looks like it's going to stink. And just what does `Scare Tactics' have to do with science fiction anyway?''

After operating for 11 years in relative obscurity, the sleepy channel known for airing old episodes of ''The Twilight Zone'' is finally attempting to jettison its pocket-protector image.

''Many of the top-grossing movies of all time are science fiction. We're realizing there is a huge audience to explore,'' says Bonnie Hammer, president of the 24-hour basic-cable channel, which is available in 81 million subscribing homes nationwide.

Link to the full article

Posted by: HTH

quote:
Originally posted by esperantisto
I just wish they would show Doctor Who again!

I don't. Don't you remember what Doctor Who was like on the Sci-Fi Channel? Remember the introductions by Howard DaSilva?

Posted by: esperantisto

Actually, I didn't have Sci-Fi then. Some people like the DaSilva intros. And besides... they don't have to do it that way again...

Posted by: KLB

These moronic idiots at scifi...

First they have the NERVE to run a "thanks" piece at the end of Farscape, a show they cancelled and screwed....

Then in the middle of the SG1 season finale they run an ad for next season... giving away the surprise for next season.

Why? Why? Why?

man, I'm glad that after tonight I'll never have to watch them again.

Good riddence, you bastards!

Posted by: MikeSh

Thank God for Tivo then, I skipped right over the commercial for next season.

Posted by: JimSpence

Now that Farscape is done, the only show remaining on SciFi that I will watch is SG-1. And, with the season finale of SG-1, there is no reason for that season pass anymore either. Tremors doesn't show much interest for me. Just how many ways can they fight off big ugly worms? Neither does Children on Dune.

Note: Season 3 DVD for SG-1 is now available for re-order. Delivery in June.