[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Why do Americans hate...... (Page 1 of 2)
Posted: 5/8/2007 12:34:19 PM EDT
|
good prime time Sci-Fi? firefly? space above and beyond? Surface? the orignal Battlestar Gallactica farscape stargate Blade: The Series Dark Angel Tru Calling john doe Earth 2 Prey invisible man Millennium Carnivale Star Trek Enterprise why? :( |
|
It's not that Americans hate it. It's that sci-fi is a genre that has always attracted a loyal, yet limited fan base. To keep a tv show on the air, you need good numbers to entice the advertisers, and that means you need a lot of viewers. Just not enough people out there who are into sci-fi to keep shows like those afloat. That, and all the sci-fi fans are too busy dressing up like Spock and playing D&D to watch tv. |
Too campy? though Buck Rodgers did a longer run with similar special effects. As a kid I liked it. I'd also note the new version has done much better ratings wise.
What's a matter 10 seasons isn't a long enough run for you? With a spin-off series in addition?
Ghey - very libtard preachy IMHO.
If I recall there were several similar types of shows on at the same time like Gemini-Man and that series with the computer generated 'superhero and his sidekicsk the cop in the computer department and 'cursor'. Too much competion among mediocre shows that were aimed at a age group that didn't have much disposable income?
That was disappoinging. I had higher hopes for the series. Perhaps people were getting tired of the series (there were 3 successful ST series running through the late 80s into the 90s). |
|
Are you saying those are good or bad shows? Sci Fi tends to be among the most expensive of shows to produce; good special effects are expensive and no viewer likes to see the same effect shot used repeatedly in several episodes, as, for example, the original BG did. The sci fi fan base is relatively small, although once developed ( Trekers, for example), the base can be very loyal to the franchise. |
Because
These sucked.
Dunno, never saw them.
all rock
We're all OK, but not superior. You forgot Babylon V and the new BSG, BTW. Both are superior. |
Because most men wear skirts and allow the women run the remote control during primetime. That is the only way you can explain the success of ER. |
To me, Topol is beyond smokin'. Her name is Jolene Blalock, and she has a number of "artistic" photos available if you google her name.  Enterprise was a very good series. I guess folks were just burned out from all the other Star trek spinoffs. The new Battlestar Galactica is excellent, as was Firefly. pa-15 |
|
firefly? - Movie was good. Show was boring. Characters obvious the orignal Battlestar Gallactica - That's a comedy, isn't it? Blade: The Series - A Rapper? As the star? Are you shitting me? john doe - If the Producers/Directors/Writers/Actors don't know where the show is going, why should I watch? He's an ultra ultra smart guy with amnesia. So he helps as a P.I. Or he helps at a bar. Or he helps the police. Or he has a girl helper. All? None? invisible man - Good show, Good effects, but costly. Plus there was a dispute with another network. Star Trek Enterprise - Worst Star Trek Ever. I tune in to watch adventures and character relationships, not to get homilies and diatribes about how good the future is. In the future - plots will be simple, characters plain, and every episode wrapped up in 60 minutes or less. Writers really took advantage of fan loyalty and a wondrous future to make crap. |
|
Most people are not up to the task of paying enough attention to understand what is going on. New stuff is shown on the tube and it is too hard to remember the words used. Whatever is going onscreen is most likely not directly related to sex, sports, or music. Therefore it escapes most people. Not intended to insult anyone on this board who has made a choice to not like sci-fi. But the general viewing audience is only just barely smart enough to qualify to watch the 5 minute dramas on cops. |
I never got to watch many episodes of that during its first run seasons because we didn't get UPN in my area. However, in watching it now on Sci Fi channel, I really don't find it all that bad. It has a different feel than the other series, and my main problem is with the historical revisionism that seems to happen between the "known history" of the Trek world and plotlines in "ST: Enterprise". |
2 out of how many. Look at most Sitcoms, look back a few years ago when alot of these shows were on also. |
i dunno I can't think of many shows that required watching the prior week's show |
Sci-Fi always seem to get shafted as far as time slots. 
|
|
Pretty simple math. Sci-fi content producers try for the largest audience, so they make barely-veiled soap operas and cop dramas dressed up as sci-fi. Just like the movies being made today, trying too hard to please everyone ends up pleasing no one. Advertisers want to reach the largest audience too, so they only back shows with good ratings. They will, however back a show if the viewers actually buy the stuff advertised. Apparently, sci-fi watchers don't buy enough of the stuff advertised on these show. If they did, the shows would stay on the air, and the viewers could actually have some say with the producers. |
|
|
I liked Firefly and Sernity (movie). Sort of a Sci-fi western with a Han Soloish captain. The cussing in Mandarin was cute. I also thought the ships mechanic was one of the cutest women on tv. I can only vaguely remember Space above and beyond. was this the show were one of the pilots was termed "invitro"? Stargate SG1 i hated at first because of the main charchter (from Mcguiver), but it grew on me somewhat. Andromeda is not on the above list. I watched it a few times, but just could'nt get into it. Dark Angel did'nt impress me any. V from the 80's was really neat for the time. The tv series of it did'nt seem to do well, but the two mini-series had good charchters and special effects. David Icke's favorite show i bet. I've heard rumors of a Star Wars series, but guess it got canned. |
The biggest flaw in most sci-fi shows that take place in space is lack of background. The charachters are of course the most important element, but the universe they live in should be as complex and detailed as in any other. Think Tolkien. Most of the backstories in these shows seem cookie cutter. You should WANT to explore the universe, the places these charchters live. My ideal series would be a combo of Firefly/Star Wars-more so KoTOR, than Lucas/Star Trek/ |
|
A lot of adults don't like sci-fi because it requires a huge leap of faith to be believable, and it seems child-like. Kinda like cartoons. Grown people generally like to watch shows with people/plots that could actually be real. A lot of people who are now adults watched campy sci-fi as kids and watching sci-fi now, even though it's not quite as campy as it used to be, makes them feel child-like. Not knocking sci-fi or cartoons, just citing reasons for the dislike from actual people I know. YMMV. |
|
I used to work with a lady that believed that there was no other intelligent life in the universe. She belonged to some fundamentalist church where they are taught that our Earth is it as far as higher life forms are concerned.......... That said, I really enjoyed watching LEXX (1997-2002). It was so different from other sci-fi shows & Xenia Seeberg as Xev Bellringer was totally hot! 
|
|
money. You have to do it on the cheap to keep costs down because there is a limited number of people that will 'get into' a sci-fi series. If you do it too cheap it becomes a joke. Good writers are hard to find and they dont come cheaply. So if they have to hire unknowns and if they get good ones then they are hired out to do something where more money can be made (movies). Good actors are hard to find and the dont come cheaply. You either end up with has-beens, or unknowns, or bad ones. If you get a good unknown one they leave to go make money doing other things (movies). So you end up left with has-beens or bad ones. SO you either end up with a decent show that cant break even. or you end up with a crappy show that doesnt break even. Find a sci-fi show that breaks even is even more rare than finding any show that does it. |
Certainly plausible. I know I'm one such example. I like the well-written sci-fi, but the commercial breaks every 2 seconds and other such crap drive me up the wall. I always wait until a show is on DVD or the iTunes Store and get it that way. Can watch it in much better definiition, on my own time, without commercials. You can't beat that. I haven't watched TV in years (History channel and occasionally the Discovery channel excepted) and don't plan on starting up ever again. Only dramas I watch are via DVD/iTS and I get my news from the web where I can actually get real news reports instead of uninformative soundbytes and ratings pandering.
A bunch of tacticool guys with ARs that have 50 pounds of Magpul shit hanging off of them throwing pseudo-military terminology at each other while terminating terrorists, watching hot babes, and contemplating the overthrow of the government and their local police forces. And who never, EVER, use anything smaller than .45 ACP and .44 Magnum in their pistols/SMGs. Think The Unit, but with about 100 times more cheese. At least, that's the vibe I get from Arfcommers in general...
|
That show wouldn't last ten episodes. Not to mention the technical advice would probably have it all wrong and it would be dumbed down. I recall about 20 years ago there was a series attempt at "The War of the Worlds". The lead actor was prior service military , and one quote from another actor stuck out in my mind at the time : the interviewed actor was lauding the lead actors prior military service in that the prior service guy when he encountered a stoppage with his blank firing M16, was able to clear the stoppage without calling a halt to filming as most actors would do ( at least according to that interview). At the time I thought that was a rather low level of expertise to demonstrate with firearms and no real sign of military prowness, etc, so the comment stuck in my mind. Thats simply the level of firearms savvy you'll find in Hollywood, I suspect. |
