Update from JMS

[MartinRoth]

You seem to know what you are talking about,

Thanks. Sometimes it's good to know that there are people to whom that matters...

 

[gkarfan]

I've had to deal with Bicker over at the SFC newsgroup before, & I feel that he is *much* worse than Martin could ever be. So I am not really bothered by Martin. I might disagree with some of what he says, but he is definitely not annoying like Bicker (or Ford, or Theron, or the other newsgroup trolls).

Tammy

 

[KoshN]

Like Bicker, he's fine as long as you agree with him.

 

[**DONOTDELETE**]

Since there is an audience at The Sci-Fi Channel which has demonstrated an interest in watching B5-universe shows, there might be a sizable enough audience out there who'd want to see a story that was started, get finished. After all, who likes listening to only the first line of a song, reading only the first chapter of a novel, or watching only the first 15 minutes of a movie?

Amazon puts excerpts up on their site, to act as an enticement, a tease, something that will cause people to order a book. When you order the book, they don't send you just the first chapter. They send you the whole thing. People like to finish a story. Making the excerpts available helps to create demand. What Sci-Fi is doing with the Crusade reruns is like showing only the first 15 minutes of a movie, over and over and over again, with zero hope of continuation.

Gees, could it possibly be that the reason for less than great ratings numbers for Crusade is the fact that everybody knows there's no continuation or ending? Who wants to start a story when they know for a fact that there is no continuation or ending? Answer: Only the people who watched it in the first place, who just want to experience something good again, those who appreciate what's there. The rest are going to feel bitten when they get to episode 13 and there is nothing else.

You know, this argument can be applied to Space: Above and Beyond. Or Earth 2. Or Prey. Or Strange World. Or Now and Again. Or any other defunct, short-lived sci-fi show that they've picked up over the years. All those shows got Crusade-like ratings when they first aired. And like Crusade, the audience isn't big enough for them to drop tons of money in order to produce new seasons. The only show that they've revived is Sliders, which they owned outright, and didn't really do well until it became part of their Friday Original Series along with Farscape. They wouldn't own Crusade, which was the same reason why Legend of the Rangers had to garner a certain high rating in order be turned into a series.

They pick up these shows because (a) they have a core following, (b) they garner a decent rating wherever they put them, and (c) they fill air time for a low price. Revival is a whole nother matter, and has to do with the ratings that Crusade *always* got on SciFi, even before Rangers aired.

 

[FlipperPA]

Garibaldi: I guess it wouldn't be a good time for me to suggest we all join hands and sing 'Kumbaja'?

Sheridan: Mr. Garibaldi!

Lighten up folks - its only a posting board. Agree to disagree. Can't we all just get along? ;-)

-Tim

 

[KoshN]

You know, this argument can be applied to Space: Above and Beyond. Or Earth 2. Or Prey. Or Strange World. Or Now and Again. Or any other defunct, short-lived sci-fi show that they've picked up over the years.

They were all spin-offs of a completed show (e.g. Babylon 5) that Sci-Fi was already airing, and is still airing???

The only show that they've revived is Sliders, which they owned outright, and didn't really do well until it became part of their Friday Original Series along with Farscape.

The only show? Stargate SG-1 - cancelled by Showtime and revived by Sci-Fi. It's the only "in-production" series on Sci-Fi that I find worth watching.

Revival is a whole nother matter, and has to do with the ratings that Crusade *always* got on SciFi, even before Rangers aired.

Crusade always got ratings around what most shows get on The Sci-Fi Channel, between 0.7 and 1.0 (as reported by scifiwire; couldn't find any current numbers). If Sci-Fi would have re-started Crusade (not necessarily in 2001), there would have been considerably more buzz, and very likely better ratings. Sci-Fi going with the Rangers pilot in 2001 instead of Crusade (at some point when they could have gotten enough of the stars back), was a massive screw-up, IMHO.

 

[gangster]

Stargate Sg-1: Not quite true, KoshN. Stargate was picked up by scifi with the intention of making Season Six and after Showtime decided not to pick up its option for Season Six. In other words, it simply moved to another network and continued to air on more or less the same schedule. It was one of the smarter moves Scifi has made.

 

[taichidave]

I'm not lazy, taichidave, but I am too lazy to compile them all into one SUPER LONG post as Recoil wants. Instead, I do a reply to each, and I think it helps break 'em up.

It's especially helpful to break things up when posts are viewed in "threaded" mode.

 

[Kyehlar]

Stargate Sg-1: Not quite true, KoshN. Stargate was picked up by scifi with the intention of making Season Six and after Showtime decided not to pick up its option for Season Six. In other words, it simply moved to another network and continued to air on more or less the same schedule. It was one of the smarter moves Scifi has made.

Probably the only smart move that Sci-Fi has made.

They cancelled Farscape, which was their original 'original series', yanking them from their fifth season.

The Chronicle and Invisible Man. Both great ratings, low budget, but they cancelled them too.

Tremors had great potential, and good ratings. So what do they do? They cancel it.

Scare Tactics, which has nothing to do with Sci-Fi, but has scantilly clad Shannon Doherty as it's host. So they keep that.

What other good ideas have they had lately?

Rommie