Movie/TV cliches

[honeybee]

Apparently, Fox wanted Firefly dead before it ever aired and dicked around the scheduling on purpose. Later, some executives realized their mistake and tried to make it up to Whedon by really giving Dollhouse a go - but Dollhouse was no Firefly. I didn't discover Firefly until the DVD because Fox aired the second episode first because it had more "action" but the pilot set up all the scenarios and characters you needed to understand in order to enjoy the action.

And then, the studio that produced Serenity really and truly thought they had the next Star Wars on their hands with the film. They promoted the hell out of it, but Firefly fans showed up the first weekend, but the film failed to pull in a more general audience. The film made money - but it did not go blockbuster - and for whatever reason - Joss decided to kill off some beloved characters. That made a sequel difficult.

Rigil, you and I are completely and totally on the same page as BSG. Give me DS9 (which Ron Moore lifted liberally from for BSG, self-plagiarism is still plagiarism.) After a solid mini-series and some great initial episodes - BSG became a Lars Von Trier movie in space. You didn't need to watch. You simply needed to think of the most depressing, worst thing that could happen - and it would unfold like that. No happiness. No joy. No fun. No humor. Glum. I love Trek because with all its flaws - it still has a spark of hope and joy - even in the darkest moments. And BSGs ratings were never great, even for the SciFi Channel - and they were really low at the end. Caprica is not doing well. I gave it a chance - but it's not that great.

But, BSG has a pretty passionate fanbase. That's great for them. If they enjoy all that doom and gloom - and some people loooove doom and gloom - I'm not going to tell them how much the show they love sucked. What would be the point of that?

Enterprise had flaws but most shows, even very good ones, do. I've been a Star Trek fan since TOS and I really liked Enterprise, even loved certain parts of it or else I wouldn't be hanging around here and other fanfic sites reading, writing and discussing the show and characters.

Trek is a tradition in my family. I love it - flaws and all.

[WarpGirl]

Well I couldn't understand why Wash died so I looked it up, found an interview and read Whedon saying all his romances are tragedies. That's why he killed Wash.

[Rigil Kent]

Later, some executives realized their mistake and tried to make it up to Whedon by really giving Dollhouse a go - but Dollhouse was no Firefly.

As a guy, I'll freely admit that the only reason I tuned into that show was the gorgeous Eliza Dushku (I loved Faith on "Buffy", and actually wanted Buffy to stay dead after that season with Glory so they could change it up to "Faith the Vampire Slayer.") But as they've said over at the PVPOnline comic, it was "Dullhouse."

Rigil, you and I are completely and totally on the same page as BSG. Give me DS9 (which Ron Moore lifted liberally from for BSG, self-plagiarism is still plagiarism.) After a sold mini-series and some great initial episodes

I thought the mini-series was one of the best things since sliced bread and then most of season 1 totally ruled. The first actual episode - "33" - was awesome, and that first season finale? Whoa, buddy. Even season 2 didn't totally stink ... until they reached New Caprica where the whole show went off the rails. In season 3, I liked exactly two episodes - the one where they got everybody off the planet - the Adama maneuver kicked ass, and that last shot of Pegasus kicking basestar ass ruled - and the one where Kat died because it was so well written. For pretty much the rest of the season/series, I was actively rooting for the cylons to exterminate mankind based on how everyone was written.

- BSG became a Lars Von Trier movie in space. You didn't need to watch. You simply needed to think of the most depressing, worst thing that could happen - and it would unfold like that. No happiness. No joy. No fun. No humor. Glum.

Which is why, as far as I'm concerned, nuBSG ended when they found the nuked out "Earth" midway through season 4. That totally fit with the crappy mood they posited. Sure, it was a show about the end of the world, so it shouldn't be all clowns and monkeys and balloons, but without any hope, it was just fricking morbid.

Caprica is not doing well. I gave it a chance - but it's not that great.

They nuked the fridge for me with how BSG played out (the Tighs as cylons? Ugh. Starbuck as an angel? Stab me in the eye, please.), so I haven't even bothered. Honestly, I'm a little stunned that I'm even enjoying Stargate: Universe since, frankly, I don't like hardly any of the characters. (Except Eli ... and Lieutenant James, 'cause she's hot.)

[pdsldl]

Well I couldn't understand why Wash died so I looked it up, found an interview and read Whedon saying all his romances are tragedies. That's why he killed Wash.

That's depressing. Sure makes me want to invest time in any of his future shows and in characters that I know he is using to act out his own neuroses with and will never have a happy ending.

[crystalswolf]

...Pretty much all of my friends are fans of both series with one or two minor exception.

That's funny. I actually had the opposite experience. There were several friends that were Farscape fans refuse to watch the show until it was cancelled and regretted the decision (shamefully, I was among them), except one that watched both. But then again, she lost interest in the Crichton/Aeryn crap so she actually chose Firefly over Farscape.

I don't actually know Firefly's ratings during the whole season but either way it's gone. My basic point was that an early cancellation of a show can't be a valid indicator of its lack of quality.

BSG, should have allowed Joss Whedon to write an episode or several early on instead of waiting until the last minute until he couldn't. I think he could have broken the constant dreary with some humor without making it silly!

[Asso]

Enterprise had flaws but most shows, even very good ones, do. I've been a Star Trek fan since TOS and I really liked Enterprise, even loved certain parts of it or else I wouldn't be hanging around here and other fanfic sites reading, writing and discussing the show and characters.

I agree totally. I get a little bit tired (and annoyed) of people claiming the other Trek was better. Maybe it was, but for no other Trek show or any television show I spend hours and hours reading fan fic and lurking on a forum and struggled for hours to write a fic. I like Enterprise, I like especially Trip and T'Pol. It's like with the people I love: I know their flaws, but I still love them.

If an old trekker like me, who had become tired of StarTrek, became again a trekker when he was able to watch Enterprise, there must be some right reasons.
And then... ahhhh... T'Pol!

[honeybee]

One thing that always annoyed me about Firefly and BSG was both of the shows taking the "we're cool because we don't have any actors in funny alien makeup" line. Part of the fun of SW, ST and Farscape is all the crazy aliens they met. I mean - really - you've got a problem with Spock? Or Chewbacca? Or Data? (I know Data's not a alien, but still.) Really. I always thought that was so unnecessarily snooty.

ENT had fun with crazy aliens like the Andorian and the Orions. It was a good thing, not a bad thing.

[Rigil Kent]

^^ Yeah, but in both instances, I think the injection of aliens would have ruined the atmosphere they were going for.

Of course, in nuBSG, that might actually be a good thing...

[ I actually had the opposite experience. There were several friends that were Farscape fans refuse to watch the show until it was cancelled and regretted the decision (shamefully, I was among them)

Why, if you don't mind me asking? This seems like an example of sci-fi fans eating their own - yeah, at their core, Farscape and Firefly were both centered around a ragtag group, but apart from that element, I don't see any similarities. And if we didn't watch a show that used a similar character layout to another show, I don't think there'd be much on TV, eh?

But then again, she lost interest in the Crichton/Aeryn crap so she actually chose Firefly over Farscape.

Interesting. While I do agree that the Aeryn/John thing got a little silly in the third season (obviously the showrunners trying to extend the will-they-won't-they angst, IMO), they seemed to be one of the better done sci-fi ships in recent memory.

My basic point was that an early cancellation of a show can't be a valid indicator of its lack of quality.

I apologize if that's how it came out as I didn't intend for it to be perceived thus. Quality of the show in question wasn't really what I was going for, but rather the general perception of success/failure. I thought "Firefly" was one of the best written and produced sci-fi shows in a long time, but in the grand scheme of things in television, it was a failure (even if it spawned a movie and is generally seen as quite good by a certain segment of the population.) I guess a better example would have been the live-action "Tick" television show starring Patrick Warburton; as an old-school comics fan, I adored this show and found it to be one of the funniest things on ... but it was canceled mid-season 1 and is generally considered a failure.

[honeybee]

Oh, I had no problem with BSG and Firefly not having aliens - that did freshen them up and make it them different. It was a good thing. But both Joss Whedon and Ron Moore (who had big successes with shows that relied on makeup) both made comments about alien makeup being silly and whatnot. And I thought that was disrespectful.

And I also agree that Firefly and Farscape couldn't be more different in tone, aesthetics and ultimate themes. I loved Firefly - I also own the box set and the film. I do think some Whedon-heads sometimes overpraise it - some of the 13 aren't that good. What is heartbreaking is that it really could have been great - really - had it had a chance to evolve.

[pdsldl]

if they have good stories and above all good actors and characters that appeal to me then I watch. Farscape and Firefly i loved. They weren't the same beyond the ragtag bit and I miss them both. Farscape most because I loved John and Aeryn and Firefly wasn't around long enough to develop such a strong connection to. That's why I can't watch Stargate Universe. They made it dark and removed everything I liked about it's predecessors that I loved and I don't like any of the characters, except maybe Eli. But he's not enough to hold my interest. I'd watch any of them and any Star Trek ( flaws and all) today as they don't seem to be offwering us much in the way of good sci-fi. There's Fringe and the Vampire Diaries, True Blood and Eureka and that's not a lot with all the shows out there.

[Alelou]

I never saw Farscape but I just went and checked and I can stream it from Netflix. So that'll be on my list this summer. AND I saw I can order the DVDs for the last episodes of Defying Gravity that we never saw aired, which is kind of cool.

[honeybee]

Farscape is really worth a look - it pushes the envelop pretty hard - and does some really wonderful, outrageous storytelling.

But, like many a Sci Fi show - the first episodes are not the strongest - so you kind of need to push through those to get to the really great stuff.


It's funny, the show Heroes broke the standard mold. It's pilot and first season were amazing - and then it just went downhill BSG style. It's a really interesting case study because unlike BSG - everyone noticed.

[Rigil Kent]

I never saw Farscape but I just went and checked and I can stream it from Netflix. So that'll be on my list this summer.

HB is right; it can be pretty hard to get through at first. I think I very nearly checked out around 1x07 or so, but I was very glad that I stuck with it. After the midpoint of season 1 (I think), I was totally hooked.

And does "Vampire Diaries" and "True Blood" count as sci-fi? I'd classify them as urban fantasy since there aren't really any sci-fi elements in there.

And they both desperately need a Slayer to show up ... or maybe Blade. Heh.

[crystalswolf]

Why, if you don't mind me asking? This seems like an example of sci-fi fans eating their own - yeah, at their core, Farscape and Firefly were both centered around a ragtag group, but apart from that element, I don't see any similarities. And if we didn't watch a show that used a similar character layout to another show, I don't think there'd be much on TV, eh?

I don't mind at all. Embarrassed, but don't mind. When they released the basic description of Firefly, (I believe it was something like "outcasts banding together in space") and it smelled of the copycat effect (let's get our version out there), not to mention it didn't help that it was at the time where Farscape was yet again teetering on cancellation (felt like Fox kicking it when its down). When I read another description that described Firefly more like "cowboys in space" I figured perhaps I may have been mistaken and tried an episode. I can't remember which one it was but Jayne came across (to me) like their version of D'argo, and Zoe their version of Aeryn. I didn't give it another chance until much later when Sci-fi started airing reruns. I guess you can say wrong timing and info and sheer stubbornness. Truth is, though, it was my lesson to watch a show before making a decision.

Interesting. While I do agree that the Aeryn/John thing got a little silly in the third season (obviously the showrunners trying to extend the will-they-won't-they angst, IMO), they seemed to be one of the better done sci-fi ships in recent memory.

I was okay with the series and Crichton/Aeryn until season 4 with the whole "Who's the daddy?" plotline. The miniseries was the final straw.

I apologize if that's how it came out as I didn't intend for it to be perceived thus. Quality of the show in question wasn't really what I was going for, but rather the general perception of success/failure. I thought "Firefly" was one of the best written and produced sci-fi shows in a long time, but in the grand scheme of things in television, it was a failure (even if it spawned a movie and is generally seen as quite good by a certain segment of the population.) I guess a better example would have been the live-action "Tick" television show starring Patrick Warburton; as an old-school comics fan, I adored this show and found it to be one of the funniest things on ... but it was canceled mid-season 1 and is generally considered a failure.

NP, I kind'a got that from your next post. I just wanted to clarify because sometimes my posts can be a bit... confusing.

[Aquarius]

If my tweets from Variety and EW are to be believed, all three CSIs have been picked up again for next season. There was a lot of teetering between keeping and canceling Law & Order, but they finally axed it...however, the network apparently still believes in the franchise, because Law & Order L.A. is being added to the fall schedule.

Yeah, I know all these shows are forumulaic, but I like them, especially if the cases are interesting. My main gripe about the CSIs, especially the Miami and NY versions, is that the crimes are always solved in 24 hours--they never account for the passage of the time it *really* takes for things like a real investigation and lab results--the reality is that this stuff can take weeks and months. At least Law & Order got that part right.

I used to be quite active in Law & Order fandom, and they've been driving fans nuts for years because every case was "Ripped from the Headlines". Even the die-hard viewers who participated at forums like this one were getting annoyed at the lack of freshness back then. Honestly, I don't know what NBC hopes to accomplish by canceling one and starting up another, because the stories can't be *that* different. My opinion: the original Law & Order was over when Jerry Orbach died. Even though he wasn't an original cast member from the beginning, for a lot of people, he *was* Law & Order.

The Stargates...well, I confess, I must be a total mutant because I like SGU. Quite a bit. I find SG1...okay. Seriously. Back in the day I watched it a few times and liked it, but not enough to be sad if I missed it. Then, once my zine project got started, we were getting a lot of submissions from that fandom, and I wanted to watch so I could at least make competent evaluations like the author staying true to characterizations, theme of the show, etc. It wasn't bad, but honestly, it just doesn't inspire me the way Trek always has. The Sam/Jack 'ship has its moments here and there, but it just doesn't grab me. And SGA... Sorry. I started watching a couple of weeks ago because one of Connor's episodes was on. I set the DVR so I wouldn't miss any of his subsequent appearances. I have to be honest and say that if it wasn't for Connor, I wouldn't be watching this show at all. When he isn't on, I find myself alternately bored and annoyed. I just can't find anything about the characters that makes me care. At least SG1 had the thing with Daniel Jackson looking for his wife and Teal'c fighting for his people's freedom, and you can figure this stuff out after watching a couple of episodes. I've seen 5-10 episodes of SGA now, and I *still* can't figure out what the deal is with most of the people who are on it.

One other thing that I wanted to address was ratings. People have said that the ratings Enterprise got back then would be considered a success now, or at least enough of one to keep it around. That may be true...so the lesson we learn here is *things change*. The other thing to keep in mind, though, is that it's possible Enterprise was more expensive to produce than lower-rated shows that were kept around. Face it, the bean counters run everything. Yeah, a show may have a huge fan base and sponsorship draw, but when your show is expensive, it's still less profitable than something lower-rated but not generating as many bills. The suits will ax a show once they see a point of diminishing returns.

I never watched Farscape or Firefly.