I'm just experimenting. I hate the word "blog" and am fascinated with how the net seems to nurture *everyone's* vanity.

So this network still pronounces its name sci-fi even though they felt a need to change the spelling to gibberish that reads "siffy." ECW remains on their lineup, along with a stupid 'reality' series that seems to be spawning spinoffs, so maybe they really shouldn't call themselves SciFi any more, but still...

How can folks who've milked the Stargate franchise to the max and gleefully ridden the success wave of Moore and Eick's Battlestar Galactica not consider it their fiduciary and aesthetic duty to rescue a show like the Sarah Connor Chronicles from the clutches of even greater idiots like the execs at The WB? Do they only have room for one show led by a strong woman? Are they afraid of a show that subordinates excellent action sequences to a real sci-fi plotline that makes viewers think, and even pulls in folks like me who generally hate things involving time travel? WTF?

Comments (Page 2)
on Jan 07, 2010

yeah, I got season 1 on DVD for Christmas, and am currently watching season 2 on TV (not ATM, but over the course of the season). When season 2 hits DVD, I intend to grab it.

And you are right, "SyFy" has been going on a downhill grade that has been growing gradually steeper at an increased rate.

on Jan 08, 2010

Sactuary might be going somewhere, I'm not sure yet though.  Season 2 has been much less repetative than Season 1, but then they've already blown the long term plot they set up in the first with just a few episodes.  I think a cast change took them out and required a restart from their original intentions, in which case they've got real writers hiding in there.

on Jan 24, 2010

I'm rather fond of Odo myself...... but I fear we won't be getting anything approaching DS9-level (or even Enterprise level!) for an inordinant amount of time.


If you liked DS9 watch Babylon 5:






Some people don't like it, my brother says to much talking, not enough explosions, but trust me if you watch it long enough things really pick up. And plus I liked the diplomatic aspect of it. Here's the Season 5 intro,


on Jan 24, 2010

If you liked DS9 watch Babylon 5:

Yes, but also be prepared to be driven away from an old show with then-revolutionary space opera graphics and a fascinating setting/backstory by a remarkable train wreck of mediocre acting and bad dialog writing.

I've never been able to watch that show start to finish because the wince-to-wow ratio is wrong for me now matter what series I start with...

on Jan 24, 2010

Some of the acting was awfully bad at the start...  It's not too bad by season 3 though, you just need to watch some shit from the sixties first, then it's all good.  Smooth as glass after some Lost in Space.

on Jan 24, 2010

Smooth as glass after some Lost in Space.

Beg pardon, but I think of Lost in Space as a campy classic, not a 'serious' space opera. I can have fun with Lost in Space because of the laughs, and as a plus the show threw out the occasional chunk of thoughtful sci-fi despite being an Irwin Allen production. B5 just failed to live up to how seriously it tried to take itself, at least as far as the character shots go. It pisses me off to this day that no one helped the face-based side of B5 catch up to that show's excellence in terms of imaging space-based comabat.

on Jan 24, 2010

I'll agree with psychoak, by season 3 the show is much smoother.