enigma777

WORD, Skippy Doo, WORD.

Hey Ron, is that a crack pipe, er, CHAD in your pocket, or are you happy to see us?

[img]smilies/lol.gif[/img] A little bitter, are we? [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img] Just kidding. I feel your pain and anguish.

I guess some Farscape fans are actually watching the new BG and say that it's not bad. Humph.

Def. -- Flawed heroes who are still extremely appealing and heroic: See "Farscape"

Thanks habibi for the details.

[img]smilies/lol.gif[/img] That's not saying much, but thanks for your input Trinity. [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img]

Thanks all, for your reviews and commentary. It's about what I expected (and hoped--sorry, my anti-Skiffy feelings made me want this miniseries to suck) from the rumors, reviews, and previews, not to mention Ron Moore's history and The Sci-Fi Channel's track record when it comes to producing quality television.

Magic: Sometimes, (hell, most of the time,) there is no accounting for taste. Sometimes TV Guide comes out with reviews that are really "off." It was probably some flunkie at TV Guide who was given the review assignment. I doubt it was Matt Rousch, their resident expert when it comes to great science fiction and usually, a damn good critic with whom I usually agree.

UnsilentMajorty: Hey!!! Thanks for stopping by and sharing your insight. Good to hear from you again.

As far as the Nielsen ratings, we all know what they are worth. Until the system gets a hell of a lot more accurate (larger sampling), the networks and advertisers are going to continue believing that a 3.9 rating really does mean that 3.9 million people watched.

And this just goes to show what advertising and marketing can do. We can only imagine what Farscape's ratings would have been if Skiffy would have put forth the same effort in advertising and marketing for it.

[ 12-11-2003: Message edited enigma777 ]

enigma777

WORD, Skippy Doo, WORD.

Hey Ron, is that a crack pipe, er, CHAD in your pocket, or are you happy to see us?

[img]smilies/lol.gif[/img] A little bitter, are we? [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img] Just kidding. I feel your pain and anguish.

I guess some Farscape fans are actually watching the new BG and say that it's not bad. Humph.

Def. -- Flawed heroes who are still extremely appealing and heroic: See "Farscape"

Thanks habibi for the details.

[img]smilies/lol.gif[/img] That's not saying much, but thanks for your input Trinity. [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img]

Thanks all, for your reviews and commentary. It's about what I expected (and hoped--sorry, my anti-Skiffy feelings made me want this miniseries to suck) from the rumors, reviews, and previews, not to mention Ron Moore's history and The Sci-Fi Channel's track record when it comes to producing quality television.

Magic: Sometimes, (hell, most of the time,) there is no accounting for taste. Sometimes TV Guide comes out with reviews that are really "off." It was probably some flunkie at TV Guide who was given the review assignment. I doubt it was Matt Rousch, their resident expert when it comes to great science fiction and usually, a damn good critic with whom I usually agree.

UnsilentMajorty: Hey!!! Thanks for stopping by and sharing your insight. Good to hear from you again.

As far as the Nielsen ratings, we all know what they are worth. Until the system gets a hell of a lot more accurate (larger sampling), the networks and advertisers are going to continue believing that a 3.9 rating really does mean that 3.9 million people watched.

And this just goes to show what advertising and marketing can do. We can only imagine what Farscape's ratings would have been if Skiffy would have put forth the same effort in advertising and marketing for it.

[ 12-11-2003: Message edited enigma777 ]

enigma777

WORD, Skippy Doo, WORD.

Hey Ron, is that a crack pipe, er, CHAD in your pocket, or are you happy to see us?

[img]smilies/lol.gif[/img] A little bitter, are we? [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img] Just kidding. I feel your pain and anguish.

I guess some Farscape fans are actually watching the new BG and say that it's not bad. Humph.

Def. -- Flawed heroes who are still extremely appealing and heroic: See "Farscape"

Thanks habibi for the details.

[img]smilies/lol.gif[/img] That's not saying much, but thanks for your input Trinity. [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img]

Thanks all, for your reviews and commentary. It's about what I expected (and hoped--sorry, my anti-Skiffy feelings made me want this miniseries to suck) from the rumors, reviews, and previews, not to mention Ron Moore's history and The Sci-Fi Channel's track record when it comes to producing quality television.

Magic: Sometimes, (hell, most of the time,) there is no accounting for taste. Sometimes TV Guide comes out with reviews that are really "off." It was probably some flunkie at TV Guide who was given the review assignment. I doubt it was Matt Rousch, their resident expert when it comes to great science fiction and usually, a damn good critic with whom I usually agree.

UnsilentMajorty: Hey!!! Thanks for stopping by and sharing your insight. Good to hear from you again.

As far as the Nielsen ratings, we all know what they are worth. Until the system gets a hell of a lot more accurate (larger sampling), the networks and advertisers are going to continue believing that a 3.9 rating really does mean that 3.9 million people watched.

And this just goes to show what advertising and marketing can do. We can only imagine what Farscape's ratings would have been if Skiffy would have put forth the same effort in advertising and marketing for it.

[ 12-11-2003: Message edited enigma777 ]

habibi

Anyone else think "Terminator" when they heard this?

I have to admit I thought the special effects were fair at best. The opening sequence really bothered me because I could see a greenish shadow over part of the screen.

That and they went all out on advertising. There were BG ads all over the place - TV, radio, internet, etc. I don't recall Farscape ever getting that type of publicity push.

Maybe I should restate my issue – I don’t like heroes that are so flawed that even they can’t recover from them. If you take the hero and make them do horrible things it’s hard for them to ever be redeemed in my eyes. IMO the Farscape characters may have had some small flaws but it was never anything that left them irredeemable.

habibi

Anyone else think "Terminator" when they heard this?

I have to admit I thought the special effects were fair at best. The opening sequence really bothered me because I could see a greenish shadow over part of the screen.

That and they went all out on advertising. There were BG ads all over the place - TV, radio, internet, etc. I don't recall Farscape ever getting that type of publicity push.

Maybe I should restate my issue – I don’t like heroes that are so flawed that even they can’t recover from them. If you take the hero and make them do horrible things it’s hard for them to ever be redeemed in my eyes. IMO the Farscape characters may have had some small flaws but it was never anything that left them irredeemable.

habibi

Anyone else think "Terminator" when they heard this?

I have to admit I thought the special effects were fair at best. The opening sequence really bothered me because I could see a greenish shadow over part of the screen.

That and they went all out on advertising. There were BG ads all over the place - TV, radio, internet, etc. I don't recall Farscape ever getting that type of publicity push.

Maybe I should restate my issue – I don’t like heroes that are so flawed that even they can’t recover from them. If you take the hero and make them do horrible things it’s hard for them to ever be redeemed in my eyes. IMO the Farscape characters may have had some small flaws but it was never anything that left them irredeemable.

habibi

Anyone else think "Terminator" when they heard this?

I have to admit I thought the special effects were fair at best. The opening sequence really bothered me because I could see a greenish shadow over part of the screen.

That and they went all out on advertising. There were BG ads all over the place - TV, radio, internet, etc. I don't recall Farscape ever getting that type of publicity push.

Maybe I should restate my issue – I don’t like heroes that are so flawed that even they can’t recover from them. If you take the hero and make them do horrible things it’s hard for them to ever be redeemed in my eyes. IMO the Farscape characters may have had some small flaws but it was never anything that left them irredeemable.

enigma777

habibi: I understood what you meant regarding heroes and heroines who are flawed, but are still redeemable, heroic, and appealing. I was just building on what you first said, and referred to the fact that Farscape is filled with that kind of heroes and heroines.

To contrast, the "heroes" and "heroines" in Roswell were anything but, and were so flawed that they could not recover. Hence the expression, "Max is an irredeemable ass," or MIAA for short. I've gone on at length in private messages (which were all lost several F4F crashes ago--LTLB) regarding the putrid stench of Roswell characters (Max, Liz, etc.) when they are compared to heroes and heroines in Farscape, Babylon 5, BtVS, and others.

enigma777

habibi: I understood what you meant regarding heroes and heroines who are flawed, but are still redeemable, heroic, and appealing. I was just building on what you first said, and referred to the fact that Farscape is filled with that kind of heroes and heroines.

To contrast, the "heroes" and "heroines" in Roswell were anything but, and were so flawed that they could not recover. Hence the expression, "Max is an irredeemable ass," or MIAA for short. I've gone on at length in private messages (which were all lost several F4F crashes ago--LTLB) regarding the putrid stench of Roswell characters (Max, Liz, etc.) when they are compared to heroes and heroines in Farscape, Babylon 5, BtVS, and others.

enigma777

habibi: I understood what you meant regarding heroes and heroines who are flawed, but are still redeemable, heroic, and appealing. I was just building on what you first said, and referred to the fact that Farscape is filled with that kind of heroes and heroines.

To contrast, the "heroes" and "heroines" in Roswell were anything but, and were so flawed that they could not recover. Hence the expression, "Max is an irredeemable ass," or MIAA for short. I've gone on at length in private messages (which were all lost several F4F crashes ago--LTLB) regarding the putrid stench of Roswell characters (Max, Liz, etc.) when they are compared to heroes and heroines in Farscape, Babylon 5, BtVS, and others.

enigma777

habibi: I understood what you meant regarding heroes and heroines who are flawed, but are still redeemable, heroic, and appealing. I was just building on what you first said, and referred to the fact that Farscape is filled with that kind of heroes and heroines.

To contrast, the "heroes" and "heroines" in Roswell were anything but, and were so flawed that they could not recover. Hence the expression, "Max is an irredeemable ass," or MIAA for short. I've gone on at length in private messages (which were all lost several F4F crashes ago--LTLB) regarding the putrid stench of Roswell characters (Max, Liz, etc.) when they are compared to heroes and heroines in Farscape, Babylon 5, BtVS, and others.

Kathy W

Well, that was an interesting review. I did enjoy the author noting all the "cussing" in the remake, given that fact that whoever wrote this obviously feels profanity is their true medium. [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img] The author has that in common with the remake, if nothing else. [img]smilies/biggrin.gif[/img]

Having never seen the original BG I can't speak to the differences, but I did very much enjoy the miniseries. It was a very dark storyline, and I've heard the original was more light-hearted. (The miniseries definitely isn't anything even remotely close to light-hearted.) Now I'm curious to see the original. SciFi ran a bunch of "classic" episodes in early December, but I missed them. They're running more on January 16th. They seem to be running them out of order, which is weird.

I also noticed that there seemed to be a second season of BG. I had heard it only ran for one season. Lorne Greene seemed to be the only returning actor. Does anyone know if this is correct, or was the web site I was looking at in error?

[ 12-15-2003: Message edited Kathy W ]

Kathy W

Well, that was an interesting review. I did enjoy the author noting all the "cussing" in the remake, given that fact that whoever wrote this obviously feels profanity is their true medium. [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img] The author has that in common with the remake, if nothing else. [img]smilies/biggrin.gif[/img]

Having never seen the original BG I can't speak to the differences, but I did very much enjoy the miniseries. It was a very dark storyline, and I've heard the original was more light-hearted. (The miniseries definitely isn't anything even remotely close to light-hearted.) Now I'm curious to see the original. SciFi ran a bunch of "classic" episodes in early December, but I missed them. They're running more on January 16th. They seem to be running them out of order, which is weird.

I also noticed that there seemed to be a second season of BG. I had heard it only ran for one season. Lorne Greene seemed to be the only returning actor. Does anyone know if this is correct, or was the web site I was looking at in error?

[ 12-15-2003: Message edited Kathy W ]

Kathy W

Well, that was an interesting review. I did enjoy the author noting all the "cussing" in the remake, given that fact that whoever wrote this obviously feels profanity is their true medium. [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img] The author has that in common with the remake, if nothing else. [img]smilies/biggrin.gif[/img]

Having never seen the original BG I can't speak to the differences, but I did very much enjoy the miniseries. It was a very dark storyline, and I've heard the original was more light-hearted. (The miniseries definitely isn't anything even remotely close to light-hearted.) Now I'm curious to see the original. SciFi ran a bunch of "classic" episodes in early December, but I missed them. They're running more on January 16th. They seem to be running them out of order, which is weird.

I also noticed that there seemed to be a second season of BG. I had heard it only ran for one season. Lorne Greene seemed to be the only returning actor. Does anyone know if this is correct, or was the web site I was looking at in error?

[ 12-15-2003: Message edited Kathy W ]

Kathy W

Well, that was an interesting review. I did enjoy the author noting all the "cussing" in the remake, given that fact that whoever wrote this obviously feels profanity is their true medium. [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img] The author has that in common with the remake, if nothing else. [img]smilies/biggrin.gif[/img]

Having never seen the original BG I can't speak to the differences, but I did very much enjoy the miniseries. It was a very dark storyline, and I've heard the original was more light-hearted. (The miniseries definitely isn't anything even remotely close to light-hearted.) Now I'm curious to see the original. SciFi ran a bunch of "classic" episodes in early December, but I missed them. They're running more on January 16th. They seem to be running them out of order, which is weird.

I also noticed that there seemed to be a second season of BG. I had heard it only ran for one season. Lorne Greene seemed to be the only returning actor. Does anyone know if this is correct, or was the web site I was looking at in error?

[ 12-15-2003: Message edited Kathy W ]