NationStates Jolt Archive

What is it with these people? I swear their motto must be "if it aint broke, break it."

I just tried to watch Highlander: the Source. I shouldn't have wasted my time. They took a great series and, in one fell swoop, turned it into crap.
I changed the station after 10 minutes (I only watched that long because I was hoping it would get better - it didn't, obviously) and ended up watching something about stately homes and gardens in England - which was less disjointed and better written.

I think the only reason to watch Sci Fi any more is to see what they'll screw up next.

If they bring back MST3K, then I'll start watching that channel again, only for the MST3K though.

They used to run "Beyond Belief: Fact or Fiction" but they cancelled that as well. Sci-Fi is made of fail.

Only a little while till they cancel or attempt to cancel Stargate Atlantis.

Don't even get me started on what they did to Sliders.

That would suck... Atlantis is a good show

Anyone else get the feeling the executives at the Sci Fi Channel are trying to engineer a colossal Uwe Boll/The Producers-style tax writeoff?

It's what happens when you have budgets for movies and shows less than the change in your couch. With the exception of the Painkiller Jane movie (the first one they did not the whole show follow up) and Stargate SG-1, everything they originally make pretty much sucks. The acting is awful, the special effects are painfully cheap, and the storylines are lacking.

The only decent shows on Sci Fi are Stargate and BSG, the rest are these crappy low-budget movies that make you cringe.

I actually watched that movie all the way through, but I sort of stopped paying attention when I couldn't figure out what the fuck was going on.

But seriously-Highlander was broken a really really long time ago. I mean, common, how much can you milk something that starts off with, "There can be only one" and at the end of the first movie, there is. Really, by any definition anything that follows it is going to be fucking ridiculous.

I actually liked the tv series a little bit (and they did that little bit of retro cop out in Endgame where it turns out there was a pack of immortals hiding on holy ground to prevent the gathering...), even though I thought shoehorning a beheading into every episode was a bit much. But even then it had to take in a bit of re-writing in my head.

But really, how good could it really have been? The franchise went dogshit when it became a franchise.

Don't even get me started on what they did to Sliders.
i recall watching that as kid it was good yur you know
That would suck... Atlantis is a good show

indeed

If they bring back MST3K, then I'll start watching that channel again, only for the MST3K though.

They used to run "Beyond Belief: Fact or Fiction" but they cancelled that as well. Sci-Fi is made of fail.
Beyond Belief wasn't that good when Fox was running it 8 years before Sci Fi picked it up.

Ans Sliders was not a Sci Fi show either. Fox again.

Listen, if you want to bitch about the Sci Fi Channel, try picking out the fucking Sci Fi Channel unique shows.

Painkiller Jane is decent and Flash Gordon looks like it could develop decently.

What is it with these people? I swear their motto must be "if it aint broke, break it."

I just tried to watch Highlander: the Source. I shouldn't have wasted my time. They took a great series and, in one fell swoop, turned it into crap.
I changed the station after 10 minutes (I only watched that long because I was hoping it would get better - it didn't, obviously) and ended up watching something about stately homes and gardens in England - which was less disjointed and better written.

I think the only reason to watch Sci Fi any more is to see what they'll screw up next.

The fuckers cancelled reruns of MST3k. What does that tell you?

The fuckers cancelled reruns of MST3k. What does that tell you?
It didn't have enough viewership?

It didn't have enough viewership?

Or that they're idiots?

I like Eureka...

I like Eureka...

Eureka is pretty good, especially since they were smart enough to stick it on Tuesday.

Or that they're idiots?

They would had to renew the rights to the original films and it was too expensive to do that, not to mention renegotiating for each one since most didn't come in packages, so they couldn't afford to re-run them anymore.

all i can say is, this is why cable/dish corporate media isn't worth the indenture of subscribing to it. we've got the internet, where you can find REAL (litterary) science fiction if you're willing to look for it. there are also these things called books, which require no additional tecnology to re-experience completely at one's own convenience.

=^^=
.../\...

They would had to renew the rights to the original films and it was too expensive to do that, not to mention renegotiating for each one since most didn't come in packages, so they couldn't afford to re-run them anymore.

Yeah, true. I still watch a lot of episodes anyway.

all i can say is, this is why cable/dish corporate media isn't worth the indenture of subscribing to it. we've got the internet, where you can find REAL (litterary) science fiction if you're willing to look for it. there are also these things called books, which require no additional tecnology to re-experience completely at one's own convenience.

=^^=
.../\...

What, if you like TV you can't also like books?

No one has even seen it yet because it isn't out. Besides, you would have to try pretty god damn hard to fuck up highlander. The damn storyline is practically designed for a series.
Highlander storyline: Aliens are exiled to earth and have to kill other aliens by cutting their heads off through drawn out sword fights until they are the last one so they can go home. It won't be any different than the Crow series, probably better, because these remakes of old series/shows are going well so far. Flash Gordon is building up and no one is going to disagree with me when I say the new Battlestar: Galactica has been one of the best shows on tv.

Yup....Sci-Fi pretty much totaly sucks. They've got Dr. Who now though, and I think they run Noenin on Saturdays now, which I've heard is a good anime.
I used to love Friday Morning Anime. I cant remember what the title was, but when I was five I watched some anime that gave me nightmares for a week, mostly because it involved demons eating people and little girls singing creepy songs and attacking people.
And I loved it :P

Yup....Sci-Fi pretty much totaly sucks. They've got Dr. Who now though, and I think they run Noenin on Saturdays now, which I've heard is a good anime.
I used to love Friday Morning Anime. I cant remember what the title was, but when I was five I watched some anime that gave me nightmares for a week, mostly because it involved demons eating people and little girls singing creepy songs and attacking people.
And I loved it :P
They have anime every Monday. Normally it is Noein, Tokko, something, two Street Fighters. Sometimes they have movies. So far they have had a Ghost in the Shell movie based on Stand Alone Complex and the original Ghost in the Shell.

They have anime every Monday. Normally it is Noein, Tokko, something, two Street Fighters. Sometimes they have movies. So far they have had a Ghost in the Shell movie based on Stand Alone Complex and the original Ghost in the Shell.

Isnt the movie the one with the kamikazi Tachikomas? Good stuff :P
Nice to see they brought it back. It just wont be the same now though.

No one has even seen it yet because it isn't out. Besides, you would have to try pretty god damn hard to fuck up highlander. The damn storyline is practically designed for a series.
Highlander storyline: Aliens are exiled to earth and have to kill other aliens by cutting their heads off through drawn out sword fights until they are the last one so they can go home. It won't be any different than the Crow series, probably better, because these remakes of old series/shows are going well so far. Flash Gordon is building up and no one is going to disagree with me when I say the new Battlestar: Galactica has been one of the best shows on tv.

The Highlander movie aired last Saturday when he made this post. I watched it, god help me...It will also air again tomorrow. (I watch the Twilight Zone reruns so know too much about Sci-Fi's line up).

And Highlander as a series existed quite some time ago and already wrapped itself up, and they ignored the Highlander II thing.

Sometimes, like with immortals and the Force, it's better not to explain it. It was better when all we knew was-There are immortals, the only way to kill one was to take their head off, and eventually there could be only one. I don't need to know why, I'm good with that. I didn't even need the series to fit perfectly. All that twisting to conform to some Trekkie style adherence to story bible. We all understand that this whole thing was an excuse to have modern sword fights make sense-the original had enough story to justify its goal.

The latest movie-god-fucking awful by any standard.

And Highlander as a series existed quite some time ago and already wrapped itself up,
Then they can revamp it like they have been other series.

Then they can revamp it like they have been other series.

Not that long ago, and the movie starred Adrien Paul from the series (the other McLoud was killed in the last movie, Endgame. This isn't an attempt to re-start the series, this is just another movie in a beleaguered franchise. And of course continue to over-explain the concept.

I like the Sci-Fi Channel. It's to bad Stargate ended... Doctor who isn't so bad either.

I like Eureka...

At first, I didn't make an effort to watch it. But I ended up catching a little bit of one episode, and it's started to really grow on me. I've started watching regularly for about 4-5 weeks now.

For those who are thinking that Sci-Fi cancelled Stargate: SG-1...they didn't. That was all MGM, who felt they would be better off money wise with direct to DVD movies, two of which are being made as we speak.

And Atlantis is still around...there are a few changes. Amanda Tapping is going to become a star, and Christopher Judge will make a couple of appearances as a guest. Stargate is hardly gone.

As for Sci-Fi itself though...it's a horrible channel, really...not to mention outdated in this world of the internet.

I miss Farscape. :(

For those who are thinking that Sci-Fi cancelled Stargate: SG-1...they didn't. That was all MGM, who felt they would be better off money wise with direct to DVD movies, two of which are being made as we speak.

And Atlantis is still around...there are a few changes. Amanda Tapping is going to become a star, and Christopher Judge will make a couple of appearances as a guest. Stargate is hardly gone.

As for Sci-Fi itself though...it's a horrible channel, really...not to mention outdated in this world of the internet.
Well, it was more mutual than that. (I don't even like Stargate...I just learned this last time everyone flipped out over this...)

Sci Fi wanted to lower the rates paid for the show and MGM disagreed. There was a dispute-Sci Fi moved the programing a bit in what MGM felt was an effort to artificially torpedo the ratings-they couldn't come to terms on the rates and then ultimately Sci Fi canceled the show with MGM deciding that the money would be made in direct to DVD sales.

So it was a joint effort.

I miss Farscape. :(

Isn't that coming back as a web-series or a movie or something? I thought I saw something like that.

I'm not a fan of that, either. Why do I know so much about shows I don't even watch...

Well, it was more mutual than that. (I don't even like Stargate...I just learned this last time everyone flipped out over this...)

Sci Fi wanted to lower the rates paid for the show and MGM disagreed. There was a dispute-Sci Fi moved the programing a bit in what MGM felt was an effort to artificially torpedo the ratings-they couldn't come to terms on the rates and then ultimately Sci Fi canceled the show with MGM deciding that the money would be made in direct to DVD sales.

So it was a joint effort.
True. My point is that ultimately it is MGM who is at fault for the series not continuing. Given the sheer amount of money generated by it(and why don't you watch it anyway? It's good! Certainly better than that bullshit Eureka that I can't stand) there is no reason that it would not have been picked up by another network. Atlantis probably would have moved as well, but both series would remain intact.

However, ultimately, MGM decided not to do that and instead sought after direct to DVD sales.

And yes, Farscape is coming back as a ten part web program.

Isn't that coming back as a web-series or a movie or something? I thought I saw something like that.

I'm not a fan of that, either. Why do I know so much about shows I don't even watch...

Now that you mention it I do believe I heard something about them making a series of web shorts to continue the story.

Isn't that coming back as a web-series or a movie or something? I thought I saw something like that.

I'm not a fan of that, either. Why do I know so much about shows I don't even watch...

As far as I know the Peacekeeper Wars mini-series was the finale to the show. You give me hope though.

True. My point is that ultimately it is MGM who is at fault for the series not continuing. Given the sheer amount of money generated by it(and why don't you watch it anyway? It's good! Certainly better than that bullshit Eureka that I can't stand) there is no reason that it would not have been picked up by another network. Atlantis probably would have moved as well, but both series would remain intact.

However, ultimately, MGM decided not to do that and instead sought after direct to DVD sales.

And yes, Farscape is coming back as a ten part web program.

I just don't like it. It's silly. Eureka is silly, too, but thats' in the premise. MGM couldn't make the show of of what Sci-Fi wanted to pay for it-this is a fairly common crossroads where it has to be determined if the show needs the network more than the network needs the show.

Often the show needs the network and shows are actually sold below production costs in the hopes to make up loses in syndication and these days in DVD sales. They need the network to run the show long enough to reach watermark for syndication (last time I checked it was 100, but I think they lowered it because of changes in how much programing the network itself can own made the survival rate of shows have been hard to maintain). With Stargate who needed who was in dispute. "Back in the day" it was clear that Sci Fi needed Stargate more than Stargate needed Sci Fi.

Now that isn't as clear as they have a handful of more successful shows in Battlestar Galactica, Eureka, Dr. Who, that stupid ghost show...they have ratings makers outside of Stargate and don't need to hang their hat on an aging show as much.

As for being able to take the show to other channels-It might be a rating maker (well, before re-shuffling) for Sci Fi, but there is a reason Sci Fi runs its programing when it does-nothing competes with it on Friday. It's not enough of a ratings beast to put it in anywhere but the dredges of the line up, where they end up with the same problem they accuse Sci Fi of. That really puts their hat back in their hand. It really is in their best interest to go ahead and exploit the DVD market, especially since the fan base is in place already.

Eureka isn't just silly...it's essentially a rip off of every stupid sci-fi idea ever invented, from "demons come through a portal" to "guy freezes himself and wakes up fifty years later" and so on and so forth. The premise suggested a community of scientists in a way that might've actually be interesting, but instead it was just another insult to science.

I want a hard science fiction show. Stargate is hardly that, but at least most of the thing it postulates are closer in realism than anything Eureka could even approach.

Actually, to be honest what I'd love to see is a redone Star Trek with realism and hard science...that would be amazing.

As for Stargate running on other channels...you're right, of course. I'm not complaining about the series ending, especially since the last two seasons were rather lackluster compared to previous seasons...I was simply trying to get facts entirely straight.

Isn't that coming back as a web-series or a movie or something? I thought I saw something like that.

I'm not a fan of that, either. Why do I know so much about shows I don't even watch...

Might it have something to do with your line of work? :D

You have a stronger stomach than I--I gave up on that Highlander POS about 20 minutes in when I discovered I couldn't keep up and really didn't give a shit anyway.

Eureka isn't just silly...it's essentially a rip off of every stupid sci-fi idea ever invented, from "demons come through a portal" to "guy freezes himself and wakes up fifty years later" and so on and so forth. The premise suggested a community of scientists in a way that might've actually be interesting, but instead it was just another insult to science.

I want a hard science fiction show. Stargate is hardly that, but at least most of the thing it postulates are closer in realism than anything Eureka could even approach.

Actually, to be honest what I'd love to see is a redone Star Trek with realism and hard science...that would be amazing.

As for Stargate running on other channels...you're right, of course. I'm not complaining about the series ending, especially since the last two seasons were rather lackluster compared to previous seasons...I was simply trying to get facts entirely straight.
Ah see, I'd rather the science serve the story. I don't need, as I pointed out earlier, to know the how as long as the result serves the story well. I like Lem and Capek because of that, their science is practically fairy tale and that doesn't matter to me as long as it serves the story well. If I want feasibility I read Popular Science or something (sometimes feasible science can serve the story pretty well, it's not an absolute...)

Might it have something to do with your line of work? :D
Man I wish. I'd love to work on narrative tv versus what I usually work on...though I do pay more attention than I should...

You have a stronger stomach than I--I gave up on that Highlander POS about 20 minutes in when I discovered I couldn't keep up and really didn't give a shit anyway.

I really started half assing it after the editing started to bug the hell out of me, and then the introduction of characters that I guess I was supposed to already know...too much. I stopped watching the series about two or three years before it ended (when he went to Paris, I stopped before that), so I didn't really know who or what...hell, I couldn't even remember how Endgame ended. You know, except with someone being be-headed...

Ah see, I'd rather the science serve the story. I don't need, as I pointed out earlier, to know the how as long as the result serves the story well. I like Lem and Capek because of that, their science is practically fairy tale and that doesn't matter to me as long as it serves the story well. If I want feasibility I read Popular Science or something (sometimes feasible science can serve the story pretty well, it's not an absolute...)
Science can serve the story, it's true, but that doesn't mean you need fairy tale science. Now, obviously, I'm not talking about emphasizing the science over the characters and the story itself--far from it...Voyager and Enterprise suffered from doing that far too much. Technobabble...ugh...--but I am talking about hard science and accurate science when it is part of the story, that's all.

What doesn't help is when a show tries to sell me on something for the purpose of a story and then gives me a subpar story. I can accept fairy tale science when a story is actually very good quality wise, but when it's not, it just pisses me off. That's another thing I don't like about Eureka...it can't even justify its fairy tale science with decent stories!

What, if you like TV you can't also like books?

i didn't say you can't like tv. personal taste to each their own. but i think there are real limits as to what you can expect from corporate media considering the primary focus of their agenda. which isn't serving art in any sense of the word, but only the circular illogic of symbolic value.

(and if you really understand what REAL science fiction is all about, can you honestly say you've ever seen anything quite there, even on cable. i'm not saying there haven't been nobel attempts. but there really is nothing that comes even anywhere near close)

=^^=
.../\...

i didn't say you can't like tv. personal taste to each their own. but i think there are real limits as to what you can expect from corporate media considering the primary focus of their agenda. which isn't serving art in any sense of the word, but only the circular illogic of symbolic value.

(and if you really understand what REAL science fiction is all about, can you honestly say you've ever seen anything quite there, even on cable. i'm not saying there haven't been nobel attempts. but there really is nothing that comes even anywhere near close)

=^^=
.../\...

Seems pretty limiting to me. But whatever. I'm certainly not about to get into a conversation about what 'real' science fiction is 'about' or dragged into another 'kill your television' debate.

It's not as if publishing houses aren't corporate media entities. But whatever. Bears/Cowboys, Coke/Pepsi. People are always passionate about what 'side' they're on.

Eureka isn't just silly...it's essentially a rip off of every stupid sci-fi idea ever invented, from "demons come through a portal" to "guy freezes himself and wakes up fifty years later" and so on and so forth. The premise suggested a community of scientists in a way that might've actually be interesting, but instead it was just another insult to science.

It's entertaining, you're apparently trying to take it for more than what it is.

Science can serve the story, it's true, but that doesn't mean you need fairy tale science. Now, obviously, I'm not talking about emphasizing the science over the characters and the story itself--far from it...Voyager and Enterprise suffered from doing that far too much. Technobabble...ugh...--but I am talking about hard science and accurate science when it is part of the story, that's all.
Enterprise had too much god damn deux ex machina.

What is it with these people? I swear their motto must be "if it aint broke, break it."

I just tried to watch Highlander: the Source. I shouldn't have wasted my time. They took a great series and, in one fell swoop, turned it into crap.
I changed the station after 10 minutes (I only watched that long because I was hoping it would get better - it didn't, obviously) and ended up watching something about stately homes and gardens in England - which was less disjointed and better written.

I think the only reason to watch Sci Fi any more is to see what they'll screw up next.

don't know. I didn't think Sci Fi Channel was behind it. it's rated R so I'm thinking "Straight to DVD" release.

don't know. I didn't think Sci Fi Channel was behind it. it's rated R so I'm thinking "Straight to DVD" release.

It's like that with a lot of Sci Fi "originals"...I'm not sure how they qualify it.

It's like that with a lot of Sci Fi "originals"...I'm not sure how they qualify it.

Probably though small, independant filim companies.

Probably though small, independant filim companies.

My thought is that they are part of the distribution deal they make when the film is financed. The DVD is released with the promise of x number of airings on Sci Fi, they call it a 'Sci Fi Original' and the DVD gets a legitimization.

A lot of distribution for independent films focuses on the DVD release. Distributors have found that people make the decision on whether they're going to watch it on DVD or in the theater immediately. Often now the DVD release will coincide with the theatrical release, and the only reason they bother with a theatrical release is to 'legitimize' the film-to get big paper reviews so that people will think of it as a 'real' film instead of tainted with 'straight to DVD,' which carries a bit of a shadow to it.

But for the most part, small films stand their greatest chance on DVD rather than trying to compete with Transformers at the box office. Since on opening weekend theaters often are only getting 10% of the box office of a film, they are more likely to promote and bid for movies that will attract families, dates, younger people, anyone who will spend at the concession stand. The indy crowd doesn't buy enough popcorn is what it comes down to.

Could be.

Oh I agree about the direct to DVD. some of my favorite movies are Direct to DVD releases (at least they never made it to the theaters here.)

Dungeons and Dragons II: Wrath of the Dragon God is one example. a WHOLE lot better than the first D&D movie.
Oddly enough, another movie billed as a Sci Fi 'Original'.

And saying it was better than the theatrical film-well, doesn't set the bar that high...

EDIT:HA! I answer you in the past!

My thought is that they are part of the distribution deal they make when the film is financed. The DVD is released with the promise of x number of airings on Sci Fi, they call it a 'Sci Fi Original' and the DVD gets a legitimization.

A lot of distribution for independent films focuses on the DVD release. Distributors have found that people make the decision on whether they're going to watch it on DVD or in the theater immediately. Often now the DVD release will coincide with the theatrical release, and the only reason they bother with a theatrical release is to 'legitimize' the film-to get big paper reviews so that people will think of it as a 'real' film instead of tainted with 'straight to DVD,' which carries a bit of a shadow to it.

But for the most part, small films stand their greatest chance on DVD rather than trying to compete with Transformers at the box office. Since on opening weekend theaters often are only getting 10% of the box office of a film, they are more likely to promote and bid for movies that will attract families, dates, younger people, anyone who will spend at the concession stand. The indy crowd doesn't buy enough popcorn is what it comes down to.Could be.

Oh I agree about the direct to DVD. some of my favorite movies are Direct to DVD releases (at least they never made it to the theaters here.)

Dungeons and Dragons II: Wrath of the Dragon God is one example. a WHOLE lot better than the first D&D movie.

It's entertaining, you're apparently trying to take it for more than what it is.

That's the thing: it's NOT entertaining. It's fully of crappy stories, with crappy acting and crappy science. It's not entertaining at all...it's just plain insulting.

Enterprise had too much god damn deux ex machina.
I think we can agree on that, certainly.

Oddly enough, another movie billed as a Sci Fi 'Original'.

And saying it was better than the theatrical film-well, doesn't set the bar that high...

EDIT:HA! I answer you in the past!
Sci-Fi bills ANYTHING on their network as a Sci-Fi original...they billed Stargate: SG-1 as a Sci-Fi original from the moment it stepped onto the network even though the first five seasons had been on Showtime!