Community Forums => General Chat => Topic started by: MaryJane on April 01, 2011, 03:30:37 PM
Title: The State of TV: Sci-Fi Edition
Post by: MaryJane on April 01, 2011, 03:30:37 PM
I was inspired to start this thread today by watching The Jetsons on Boomerang. At first I was thinking about how it's a little scary how badly we underestimate the future, then I started about other shows that also underestimated the future, and of course that led me into thinking about Sci-Fi.
Now, for TVs sake, the overall Star Trek universe (besides Enterprise) is my favorite Sci-Fi series ever, with X-Files and Fringe coming in close behind. I've seen the Stargate movie twice now, but I still can't get into the series. I don't know what it is, but I just got bored of the second season VERY quickly. I've also never seen Battlestar Galactica, but it's one of those series that I meant to give a try and somehow never get around to it. I've also never seen Firefly, but I've seen Serenity and loved it (though I don't agree with the interwebs that is was the best Sci-Fi movie ever).
Sci-Fi is one of my favorite genres because of how imaginative it is, and I love to read books about it, and watch TV and movies on it. The problem is these series often do not have a mass market appeal. Even Fringe, which thank the gods was picked up for another season, has a very low fanbase but hopefully it's enough to satiate Fox's Friday quota, along with all the deliberate product placement.
So what is it? Are there not enough nerds in the country? Are nerds too picky? Or are they so tech savvy that they simply download Fringe on torrents and others? OR is it that the series they come out with simply aren't compelling enough? I loved every series of Star Trek when I was a kid; the original, TNG, DS9, and Voyager. Then of course there was X-Files which was great and long running, then there were other things like Outer Limits which did a lot of Sci-Fi and even Twilight Zone had a lot of Sci-Fi(ish) stories.
Nowadays, we've gotten shows like Surface which I thought was great but failed after only one, very intriguing season. It was rough, but it had promise. Journeyman was also pretty decent, and got cancelled. I've already mentioned Firefly, and while I haven't seen the series, it's hard to imagine that the series that spawned such a good movie only deserved one season. DarkAngel was weak, as was Dollhouse (even though I did watch the entire first season, but the season finale was terrible and I was almost horrified that they brought it back for a second season) Flashforward could have been better but was okay, and I also like Eureka and Andromeda. So within that kind of broad scope of Sci-Fi, all have failed, and I wonder what is the secret to success?
What is missing from recent Sci-Fi that isn't drawing people in? Is it just the state of our society as a whole, that science is no longer popular? Do people no longer dream of what's happening beyond the stars because their blinded by their own self-importance and need for fame even on the level of their peers? Is the expense of creating the special effects needed for Sci-Fi too much to support a middling viewerbase? Can a new Star Trek series, based off the newest movie work? I really don't want to see the Sci-Fi genre die from TV shows, but that seems to be steadily happening, nothing ever seems good enough to steadily hold its viewers.
Beyond my questions, discuss favorites, sleepers, and trainwrecks, that others might have missed.
Edit: I also wanted to ask if HBO or another movie channel doing a new Sci-Fi show like they did originally did with Stargate could reinvigorate the genre.
Title: Re: The State of T.V: Sci-Fi Edition
Post by: NWR_insanolord on April 01, 2011, 03:57:28 PM
You've got to remember that all the Star Trek series (except the original) were either syndicated (TNG, DS9) or on a network with a lot lower expectations (Voyager and Enterprise were on UPN), which let them be more successful than they would have been as traditional major network shows.
Sci-Fi shows just aren't in a good position right now. The networks see them as not being capable of bringing in good numbers, and they don't usually fit in with the style cable networks go for.
Title: Re: The State of T.V: Sci-Fi Edition
Post by: Morari on April 01, 2011, 04:25:43 PM
Sci-fi shows are unfortunately rather expensive to make, due to make-up, specialized sets, and obligatory special effects. Top that off with the requirement of a good writing team, and the genre doesn't look very appealing to most producers. Sci-fi appeals to so few people, that it's never been a very profitable business to be in. It requires a fanbase that is not only imaginative enough to appreciate the lofty settings, but also intelligent enough to grasp the more serious plots and real world allusions. Not a lot of people like that make up your general television audience. :(
As you point out, a premium channel would have a good chance. I've never watched the Stargate series, personally. It seems that given the niche appeal and budget constraints however, that'd be the place for good sci-fi nowadays.
Actually, I've recently taken to gathering up older sci-fi shows that I missed out on during their original runs. They may not equal up to the Star Trek and X-files episodes that I was busying myself with at the time, but most of them have been good enough to watch through now that the genre is being largely ignored.
Can a new Star Trek series, based off the newest movie work?
Would. Not. Watch.
I'm a huge Trekkie, but absolutely hated that last film. It was everything Star Trek shouldn't be. It was all flash and action, with no real exploration or intelligence. It was Star Trek trying to be Star Wars in an attempt to trade one aging fanbase in for a newer, younger, easier to please one.
Title: Re: The State of T.V: Sci-Fi Edition
Post by: apdude on April 01, 2011, 04:25:58 PM
The problem is that the general public can't get behind suspending belief enough to just accept the show and follow the story. If they see someone in alien make up they instantly just turn off. That's why I think Firefly was a Sci-Fi show that would probably be better recieved now than when it originally aired because while it is set in a Sci-Fi world it doesn't really focus on aliens or special effects, or tech jargon.
Farscape was one of my favorite Sci-Fi shows. Who doesn't love Muppets in Space?!
Title: Re: The State of T.V: Sci-Fi Edition
Post by: Stogi on April 01, 2011, 04:33:45 PM
I'd be interested in a Sci-Fi show if HBO or Showtime made one.
Title: Re: The State of T.V: Sci-Fi Edition
Post by: BlackNMild2k1 on April 01, 2011, 04:48:04 PM
I wish either HBO or Showtime had picked up Firefly
Title: Re: The State of T.V: Sci-Fi Edition
Post by: NWR_insanolord on April 01, 2011, 05:40:29 PM
If I were really rich, instead of wasting my money feeding the hungry and curing diseases, I'd use it to pick up great TV shows that got canceled and continue making them for release on Netflix/Hulu/etc.
Title: Re: The State of T.V: Sci-Fi Edition
Post by: Morari on April 01, 2011, 05:44:40 PM
I'd go in halves with you on Twin Peaks...
Title: Re: The State of T.V: Sci-Fi Edition
Post by: NWR_insanolord on April 01, 2011, 05:47:15 PM
I've never seen that one. I think it's coming to Netflix Instant soon, like maybe today, so I'll throw it on my queue.
Title: Re: The State of T.V: Sci-Fi Edition
Post by: apdude on April 01, 2011, 05:48:55 PM
I don't have showtime or HBO, but I watch it sometimes when I'm traveling for work. I don't know if they would really do Sci Fi any better.
I saw all of one episode of True Blood and that show is a trainwreck. I'm not really into the whole vampire thing anyway and maybe you had to see it from the begining but it really made no sense to me and it was so slow and plodding that it was pretty much unwatchable. The only reason people would even want to watch it would be for all the blood and what not if that's their thing.
I'm pretty sure this was just a cash grab into the whole vampire thing but it's basicly a shock version of any crap that could be on the neworks.
Title: Re: The State of T.V: Sci-Fi Edition
Post by: NWR_insanolord on April 01, 2011, 05:53:07 PM
If HBO or AMC were to do a Sci-Fi show I'd be hugely interested, given the quality of the stuff they've done. The idea of a sci-fi show as well-done as The Wire or Breaking Bad is very, very intriguing (though, if it had stayed as good as it was in the first two seasons and come together better at the end, that would be how I'd describe Battlestar Galactica).
Title: Re: The State of T.V: Sci-Fi Edition
Post by: Stogi on April 01, 2011, 05:58:05 PM
LOL True Blood has been a train wreck since the second season, but even the first season was pretty incoherent. It's a guilty pleasure show. There's lots of nudity, blood, and vampires. Do not base HBO off of that alone.
Next time watch Boardwalk Empire.
Title: Re: The State of T.V: Sci-Fi Edition
Post by: apdude on April 01, 2011, 05:59:36 PM
There also seems to be alot more SciFi on the BBC nowadays. Not sure the quality is really that great, but Doctor Who is a fun little distration. Kind of like McGuiver with a time machine.
Title: Re: The State of T.V: Sci-Fi Edition
Post by: MaryJane on April 01, 2011, 07:06:30 PM
If American adults were more accepting of non-humorous "cartoons" I would think more shows like Star Wars: The Clone Wars would come out. I like that show, and it's quite obvious it would be far too expensive to do live-action, and you would also have to use different actors, so it fits well. That would curb the cost of the show, but as I said before, it's a cartoon and for some reason people can't take them serious. They should make a Sci-Fi show about how science will be so widespread one day, that Sci-Fi shows will be as readily made as reality shows; that would certainly classify it as fiction...
Title: Re: The State of T.V: Sci-Fi Edition
Post by: ShyGuy on April 01, 2011, 07:56:46 PM
Some of my favorites of all time were Sci-Fi, but I am kind of picky when it comes to the genre.
X-Files Buffy* Angel* Lost SuperNatural*
*- do these qualify?
Title: Re: The State of T.V: Sci-Fi Edition
Post by: Morari on April 01, 2011, 08:16:12 PM
I've never seen that one [Twin Peaks]. I think it's coming to Netflix Instant soon, like maybe today, so I'll throw it on my queue.
I'd definitely recommend it if you're in the mood for a more surreal, humorous X-Files. I'm a huge David Lynch fan though, so I'm probably a bit biased. Unfortunately, the show left off on a cliff hanger at the end of season two (it's final season). Also, due to the nature of the narrative, a good chunk of season two revolves around boring side stories starring characters no one really cares about. :P
There also seems to be alot more SciFi on the BBC nowadays. Not sure the quality is really that great, but Doctor Who is a fun little distration. Kind of like McGuiver with a time machine.
While I have enjoyed the newer Doctor Who, I don't think it really has the staying power the older series. The new series makes far too many pop culture references that will quickly date it.
Title: Re: The State of T.V: Sci-Fi Edition
Post by: BlackNMild2k1 on April 01, 2011, 08:41:47 PM
Some of my favorites of all time were Sci-Fi, but I am kind of picky when it comes to the genre.
X-Files Buffy* Angel* Lost SuperNatural*
*- do these qualify?
I think all of those fall under Supernatural (which should be MJ's next themed topic), and I'm referring to the genre, not just the TV show.
Title: Re: The State of T.V: Sci-Fi Edition
Post by: broodwars on April 01, 2011, 09:07:43 PM
It's disappointing that so many people disliked Enterprise. That was a not a bad series, even before the show got tremendously better in Seasons 3 and 4. While the show had its faults that it gradually corrected, I have a feeling much of the hatred is a mis-directed response to Star Trek Voyager and Insurrection/Nemesis, who really ran the Trek franchise into the ground. When taken on its own merits, it's a fine show that I enjoyed watching nearly every week with a cast I enjoyed seeing on-screen (who didn't have that annoying arrogance that most Star Trek series have where the characters seem to think they've "evolved BEYOND lesser peoples".)
As for the state of Science Fiction, what more really is there to say? We're in the middle of a global economic recession, with notable exceptions Sci-Fi's always had a niche appeal, and Sci-Fi shows are expensive to produce and hard to catch the attention of fans. Despite my love for Science Fiction, I have to admit I've never seen more than the occasional partial episode of StarGate or its decendents. Nothing against the show, but by the time I had any interest in it the show had gone on for so long I didn't think I could possibly join in at that point and fully appreciate it. I'm at the same point with Dr. Who: I've heard a great many good things about it, but at this point with that show's incredibly long run I don't know if I could get onboard and still appreciate it.
While I'm currently watching (somewhat under duress. It's one of my best friend's favorite shows, so we tend to watch it together) the comically sloppily-written and edited Fringe, the last Sci-Fi show I tried to watch was Caprica. Man, that show was a mess on so many levels. And before that was Battlestar Galactica, a show that would have been nearly perfect if most of Season 4 (including the ending) didn't exist. I've heard that "Siffy" is making another prequel series to BSG that's going to focus on the Cylon War that should be great, but we'll just have to wait and see.
Title: Re: The State of T.V: Sci-Fi Edition
Post by: NWR_insanolord on April 01, 2011, 09:14:03 PM
All of Stargate (I'm pretty sure all three series) and Doctor Who are on Netflix Instant, and I have them in my queue, but I understand that there's pretty much no way I'll ever get around to them.
Title: Re: The State of T.V: Sci-Fi Edition
Post by: Morari on April 01, 2011, 09:51:18 PM
It's disappointing that so many people disliked Enterprise. That was a not a bad series, even before the show got tremendously better in Seasons 3 and 4. While the show had its faults that it gradually corrected, I have a feeling much of the hatred is a mis-directed response to Star Trek Voyager and Insurrection/Nemesis, who really ran the Trek franchise into the ground. When taken on its own merits, it's a fine show that I enjoyed watching nearly every week with a cast I enjoyed seeing on-screen (who didn't have that annoying arrogance that most Star Trek series have where the characters seem to think they've "evolved BEYOND lesser peoples".)
I've stated my opinion on Star Trek elsewhere on the forums before. But since you brought it up...
Enterprise was a good show. I absolutely hated Season 3 though. The Xindi conspiracy was far too boring to dedicate literally every episode of an entire season to. That portion of the series was dull and plodding with little to no pay off. They should have continued to explain away the Temporal Cold War through the occasional episode instead. Aside from a season-sized mistep, the only other real problem was the final episode. I don't know of a single person who actually liked the finale though.
I liked Voyager. I've never understood why it gets so much hate. The characters themselves were a bit cheesier than they should have been, but it wore off quickly enough (except for Tom Paris). Besides, it had two of the best characters of the franchise: The Doctor and Seven of Nine.
My least favorite series has always been Deep Space Nine. I thought that the majority of the characters were dull, with the only real exceptions being transplants like O'Brien and Wolf, or the always under-utilized Garak. I felt that the show fell pretty hard toward the end anyway. It, like Enterprise, suffered from a terribly boring war story during the last two (three?) seasons. Add onto that the utterly ridiculous inclusion and validation of the Bajorian religion and it became pretty damn laughable by the finale.
Despite their flaws, I've yet to see a Star Trek series that hasn't been worth watching. Even the Animated Series is worth sitting through. :)
Title: Re: The State of T.V: Sci-Fi Edition
Post by: broodwars on April 01, 2011, 09:59:55 PM
Aside from a season-sized mistep, the only other real problem was the final episode. I don't know of a single person who actually liked the finale though.
I liked the Xindi story. Sure, it was stretched-out way too far (they could have easily trimmed down the "searching" section of the arc a good 4-5 episodes and lost nothing), but the sheer amount punishment the Enterprise takes in that season goes far beyond what you see on every other Star Trek series and there's a pretty epic finale.
And I haven't seen a single person who didn't like the final episode of Enterprise: Terra Prime. That's right, "Terra Prime". Any other episode you may have thought followed that one was just a figment of our collective imagination. ;)
Title: Re: The State of T.V: Sci-Fi Edition
Post by: Morari on April 01, 2011, 10:15:56 PM
And I haven't seen a single person who didn't like the final episode of Enterprise: Terra Prime. That's right, "Terra Prime". Any other episode you may have thought followed that one was just a figment of our collective imagination. ;)
Ha! :)
Title: Re: The State of T.V: Sci-Fi Edition
Post by: NWR_insanolord on April 01, 2011, 11:03:47 PM
Morari, I still don't understand how you, or anyone, can not love Deep Space 9. I thought the war storyline was great; it showed a different side of the Federation that you'd never seen before or since. Calling the characters dull is mind-boggling. No other Trek has as good a set of characters (save maybe the original series, but that's not really a fair comparison), though I will agree with you that Garak was great and should have been more of a factor. DS9 is the only show where I felt that the female characters were among the strongest (though, to be fair, it's been a while since I've seen Voyager; it's coming to Netflix this month, so maybe that will get me to watch it again, even though I own the DVDs). I never thought Worf was that good of a character on TNG (hell, TNG is probably my least favorite Trek series), but DS9's writing staff made me love him.
Deep Space 9 is really ahead of its time. It's hard to imagine that a darker, more complex, serialized show was from the '90s.
Title: Re: The State of T.V: Sci-Fi Edition
Post by: Morari on April 01, 2011, 11:14:42 PM
DS9 is the only show where I felt that the female characters were among the strongest.
Dax was one of the better characters. I thought that Kira was ridiculously annoying however. She was bitchy and cried all of the time, yet somehow always had a romantic interest on the show.
Title: Re: The State of T.V: Sci-Fi Edition
Post by: NWR_insanolord on April 01, 2011, 11:52:55 PM
I don't remember Kira being like that too much. Sure, she would get that way sometimes, it was part of her character, but I never felt that it became a problem. And what love interests did she have besides that priest guy and Odo?
Title: Re: The State of T.V: Sci-Fi Edition
Post by: Morari on April 02, 2011, 12:50:47 AM
Bareil, Shakaar, Mirror Universe Bareil, and Odo. ...Dukat?. Even if she wasn't interested, I recall there being numerous characters that were instantly infatuated with her. Regardless, I guess just about everyone had a romantic subplot shoehorned in during the final couple of seasons.
Title: Re: The State of T.V: Sci-Fi Edition
Post by: NWR_insanolord on April 02, 2011, 01:26:45 AM
Most of those romances were handled well. Jadzia and Worf getting married worked really well, and Ezri and Bashir's thing was somewhat creepy because of his feelings for Jadzia, but intentionally so. Kira and Odo kind of had to happen. Garak and Dukat's daughter felt shoehorned, but I don't mind it as much because it gave Garak something to do. I never really cared about Sisko's girlfriend/wife, though, and she makes my issue with what happened to him in the finale even worse.
Title: Re: The State of T.V: Sci-Fi Edition
Post by: Plugabugz on April 02, 2011, 07:46:57 AM
The thing about science fiction is that its cyclical, and it's dying out again. SGU was cancelled and that was the last american space sci-fi on air.
The only stable ones left are all the British ones. But i reckon part of the reason is that our seasons are so short the quality is kept up. To make it worse, Doctor Who this year will be split into 2 mini-seasons of 6/7 episodes with a 8 week gap in between.
If you want a short series watch Paradox. It's like 5 episodes (60 mins each) and bows out quickly.
Title: Re: The State of T.V: Sci-Fi Edition
Post by: Morari on April 02, 2011, 11:34:33 AM
Most of those romances were handled well. Jadzia and Worf getting married worked really well, and Ezri and Bashir's thing was somewhat creepy because of his feelings for Jadzia, but intentionally so. Kira and Odo kind of had to happen. Garak and Dukat's daughter felt shoehorned, but I don't mind it as much because it gave Garak something to do. I never really cared about Sisko's girlfriend/wife, though, and she makes my issue with what happened to him in the finale even worse.
I disagree. I think that Bareil was the only one to have really been handled well. The others felt really superficial, with Odo being the worst. Wolf and Jadzia worked well enough, but didn't fit with a lot of what had been explained of Wolf's character throughout TNG. I always thought that Garak was actually gay... I think Dukat's daughter was thrown in just to defuse any doubts. :P
Title: Re: The State of T.V: Sci-Fi Edition
Post by: MaryJane on April 02, 2011, 12:03:55 PM
Okay, so I fell behind a little, a lot of things were said, and I don't feel like going back to quote everything I'm going to mention, so just bear with me.
I tried to enjoy Enterprise so much. As I mentioned before, I loved all the Star Trek series (DS9 a close second to TNG) and I wanted to at least like Enterprise, and I just could not. The suits threw me way the **** off, the classless acting of the first season (the only one I watched) was often laughable, and the storylines just weren't intriguing to me. The characters of DS9 were some of the best, but I think that may be because they were mostly restricted to the ship, and we were able to delve deeper into their character than in other series where the character's character came out individually in contrived situations with one-episode aliens that we almost never saw them interact with again. DS9 was the opposite, you could see one person dislike someone, than something happens where they get trapped in an elevator together, form a comradery, and that comradery comes back when the station is under attack or duress. The romances of DS9 were also very compelling, but again I feel that is something that can only properly be done in the setting of DS9. I liked the on and off relationship of Riker and Troi because it fit into the space exploration setting, marriages and long term romance made a lot more sense when people were on a non-moving spacecraft together for years and years.
As for the state of Sci-Fi TV, what I'm asking, is why does it fail to capture audiences? Don't people dream anymore? Or are they content with the dreadful realism of life? Sure I enjoy my life, but imagining things beyond it, and being told stories of such things, I find very entertaining. Why doesn't our general population? Perhaps I'm just thinking about too much, but it's another thing that interests me. Sci-Fi movies often do well in theatres and DVD releases, but make a TV show and you're lucky to average 2million viewers an episode.
Title: Re: The State of T.V: Sci-Fi Edition
Post by: oohhboy on April 02, 2011, 12:12:53 PM
Garak is neither gay or straight, he was a PIMP.
Kira was was ok as a supporting actor, but I never really like the stories that focused on her. If you really want someone to strangle to death, it would be Kai Winn. What. A. Bitch.
In the pale moonlight is the episode that exemplifies what DS9 is about. It's a world where people are tested and at time broken. The illusion that is the Federation is shattered with a single death.
I really wished instead of making Enterprise(Blech), they had made something based off Section 31. Having existed at the beginning of the Federation, they could have gone to any time period at anytime to show turning points in Federation history. Or the Temporal Investigations Division. Whatever it might have been, it would have needed better writers than what Enterprise had, along with better opening credits. I mean gees, what a sappy load of rubbish that was.
Title: Re: The State of T.V: Sci-Fi Edition
Post by: Morari on April 02, 2011, 01:32:27 PM
I really wished instead of making Enterprise(Blech), they had made something based off Section 31. Having existed at the beginning of the Federation, they could have gone to any time period at anytime to show turning points in Federation history. Or the Temporal Investigations Division. Whatever it might have been, it would have needed better writers than what Enterprise had, along with better opening credits. I mean gees, what a sappy load of rubbish that was.
Actually, a series focusing on the Temporal Investigations Division could have been pretty neat. I don't think that I would have much cared for a Section 31 show though, as it seemingly exemplified a lot of what I felt was wrong with DS9.
Enterprise did have one of the worst opening credit sequences ever... I'll give you that. I think it was worse after the tempo change, even.
As for the state of Sci-Fi TV, what I'm asking, is why does it fail to capture audiences? Don't people dream anymore? Or are they content with the dreadful realism of life? Sure I enjoy my life, but imagining things beyond it, and being told stories of such things, I find very entertaining. Why doesn't our general population? Perhaps I'm just thinking about too much, but it's another thing that interests me. Sci-Fi movies often do well in theatres and DVD releases, but make a TV show and you're lucky to average 2million viewers an episode.
I just don't think that the general masses are educated enough or have the attention spans to appreciate science fiction. That's why you see supernatural and fantasy content doing better, because there's nothing to explain... it's just magic! This could also easily tie into religious preferences, but we won't get into that here. ;)
Title: Re: The State of T.V: Sci-Fi Edition
Post by: oohhboy on April 07, 2011, 06:28:47 PM
Yesterday I managed to score most of DS9 for 90NZD or 69USD sans season 1. I could have gotten most of Voyager, but I remembered that I was only fond of only a few episodes, mostly the doctor ones and the odd adventures or Paris and Kim, Year of Hell and other time travel episodes.
I am sure there are episodes I haven't seen of DS9 and seeing them in sequence is going to be epic. I might chase down season one as it doesn't cost too much more, although I didn't like it too much.
Title: Re: The State of T.V: Sci-Fi Edition
Post by: Toruresu on April 07, 2011, 11:04:10 PM
You know what I really want to see? A new Babylon 5 series.
Showtime started the whole Stargate SG-1 series, and screw you guys, SG-1 is awesome :D
Title: Re: The State of T.V: Sci-Fi Edition
Post by: Morari on April 08, 2011, 01:20:31 AM
I've never watched any of the Stargate shows. I was immediately turned off by the idea when it was announced that they were recasting the film's characters instead of simply writing them off.
Title: Re: The State of T.V: Sci-Fi Edition
Post by: Plugabugz on April 08, 2011, 03:23:41 AM
I've never watched any of the Stargate shows. I was immediately turned off by the idea when it was announced that they were recasting the film's characters instead of simply writing them off.
Only one major character AFAIK was recast which is Daniel Jackson.
O'Neil (in the film) is a different person to O'Neill (Two L's!) in SG1 and in one episode explicitly says so.
And none of the characters from SGA or SGU are from the movie film.
Title: Re: The State of T.V: Sci-Fi Edition
Post by: ShyGuy on April 08, 2011, 03:50:24 AM
Stargate, like Buffy, is a case where the TV show eventually exceeded the original movie. Highlander is probably better too, if you average it out with the movie sequels.
Title: Re: The State of T.V: Sci-Fi Edition
Post by: MaryJane on April 08, 2011, 07:34:22 AM
Wow I totally forgot about Highlander. I used to love that show, but it was the also the show that opened my eyes to eyes the folly of immortality.
Title: Re: The State of T.V: Sci-Fi Edition
Post by: oohhboy on April 08, 2011, 09:57:52 AM
With Highlander, there can only be ONE.
Highlander was never meant to have a sequel(s) or increasingly terrible TV serie(s) made from it. It's far easier just to say there was the one movie and that's all they made. There is only one.
Stargate is great. While Mcguyver will never quite escape his past, you have to hand it to Michael Shanks for making the character his own. Season 1 he is effectively impersonating Spader, but as the character develops, he moves away, while adding and keeping the essence of the character. Michael is also an awesome dude. A kid asked him what it felt like going through the Stargate and he came up with the most awesome, cute and funny answer without breaking the illusion that the Stargate isn't real.
You have to love the SG-1 Pilot though, I am sure those bare sweater puppies convinced the execs to give SG-1 the green light.
Title: Re: The State of T.V: Sci-Fi Edition
Post by: Morari on April 08, 2011, 10:33:15 AM
Stargate, like Buffy, is a case where the TV show eventually exceeded the original movie. Highlander is probably better too, if you average it out with the movie sequels.
I liked the Buffy film a lot better, personally. The show started taking itself way too seriously somewhere along the line. Besides, only one of them had Paul Reubens. :)
The only Highlander films really worth watching are the first two, and that's only if you watch the "Renegade Version" of the second one. The anime was alright (Search for Vengeance?)... The shows were kind of up and down, with the Raven being more so.
