USA Sci Fi Channel Sucks!

POSTED BY: Succatash
UPDATED: Thursday, July 10, 2003 16:55
VIEWED: 6095
PAGE 2 of 2

PREV PAGE 1 2

BAMADAVE

Monday, July 7, 2003 1:48 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Sarahetc:
< executive thought process >

Hey! We cancelled all those good shows and turned down that one show about bugs with that one chick. Hey! She was in Cleopatra 2525. Let's show that.

(later)

Dammit! People are watching the show. How'm I ever going to rob this company blind if people watch shows? Get it off! Get it off!!!

< /executive thought process >

Heh Heh, Guess you had a little fly on the wall in the programming meeting at the Stargate Network. What is with all the freaking Stargate anyway?

If you're trafficing with Dave, there's a Jolly Roger flying.

BRTICK

Monday, July 7, 2003 4:57 PM

stargate is good. thats about all i still watch on that channel. sci-fi used to be real good. alas, no longer.

Keep Flying!

-=ZERO=-

Monday, July 7, 2003 8:47 PM

Couldn't agree more, nice thread. ScfiFi Channel has really gone down hill. Let's retrace the steps (not in any particular order) they took to their own demise:

1.) Dropped Farscape after 4th season cliff-hanger.
2.) Dropped the mini-series Roar before it even finished, even though they advertised that they were going to air the unaired episodes.
3.) Dropped The Dead Zone after reviving it from ABC.
4.) Dropped fledgling shows like The Invisible Man and Good Vs. Evil, which showed great potential.
5.) Dedicated all its efforts to the crappiest scifi show on tv, Stargate SG-1. Simply put: Sad and underdeveloped characters laced with uninteresting plotlines. When a channel has a show of that caliber as their flagship, they are destined to fall.
6.) Invests in new shows like Scare Tactics and Tremors The Series, thinking they might actually make it. Scare Tactics is mildly funny, but utlimately just like every other hidden camera show. The Tremers is just sad. Everything beyond the first film just shouldn't have happened. They're just kicking a dead horse with that one.
7.) The only reruns they show are Twilight Zone, Star Trek: TOS, Stargate SG-1, Knight Rider, X-Files, & Farscape. Farscape is showed at midnight so it isnt readily available, while Knight Rider is just old and boring. Star Trek and The Twilight Zone aren't really my cup of tea, but they overplay them. Reruns of Stargate SG-1 should burn in hell, while reruns of the X-Files are one of the channels only redeeming qualities.
8.) Between Stargate SG-1 and reruns of old shows, the channel fills out its schedule with made-for-tv scifi movies and shouldn't-be-replayed-on-tv-because-they-were-bad-the-first-time-around-in-the-theaters scifi movies such as The Beast, Crocodile, Crocodile 2, Critters, Lake Placid, Body Snatchers, Roswell, Species, and Tremors.
9.) One of the channels only good qualities, Scifi Pictures, which brings original mini-series and movies, isn't exploited enough. They show a series or movie twice, one original air date with a rerun usually the next day, and almost never play them again. Instead they opt toward the crappy horror / scifi movies they drown their schedule in.
10.) Last bust not least, THEY DIDN'T PICK UP FIREFLY. However, after seeing them butcher everything else good and wholesome on their channel, I guess this is a good thing.

Well thats my two cents. Any fans of Stargate SG-1 who are thinking about flaming me, feel free. Just don't think for a second that its gonna do any good. You can squeal all you want, the show still sucks.

------------------------------------------
-=ZERO=-
Check me out on WinMX, I have all Firefly episodes in SVCD format.

CALHOUN

Monday, July 7, 2003 9:55 PM

Heya Succatash,

Consider yourself lucky to have a sci fi channel at all...

I had Fox over here in Australia for 2 years and for 2 years I lobbied the eggheads in charge for a sci fi channel... the best they could do was a sci fi 4 hour athon once a week and it was garbage!.

I rang and told them to take the damn dish off my roof they aint getting any more of my money...

now, the only sci fi i get is what i download... and my connection is active 24/7 :)

-=ZERO=-

Monday, July 7, 2003 11:28 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Calhoun:

now, the only sci fi i get is what i download... and my connection is active 24/7 :)

Ditto and good point ;) The quality of scifi on tv today is so bad that the only good scifi we can get our hands on is the stuff we dl. Its kinda sad if you think about it.

------------------------------------------
-=ZERO=-
Check me out on WinMX, I have all Firefly episodes in SVCD format.

KOFFEE

Wednesday, July 9, 2003 7:03 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by BRTick:
stargate is good. thats about all i still watch on that channel.

I ditto that. Stargate is one of the few shows I ever watch on that channel. Ry on the other hand watches a little more stuff than me. He is enjoying seeing some of the shows that he used to watch as a kid like Battlestar Galactica and Buck Rogers. Personally my opinion of those shows is less that stellar, so thank goodness we have more than one tv.

----------------------------------------------
“It's a real burn, being right so often.”

CHRISTHECYNIC

Thursday, July 10, 2003 2:09 AM

Sci fi is dedicated to a tradition, the cheap sci fi horror movie. These movies are distinguished by bad special effects, a bad plot, and bad acting. In fact the tradition goes further, if there is a small group then three will survive, the main character, a romantic interest, and another guy. I have never seen a cheap sci fi horror movie in which the main character was a lesbian. Also the kid, if there is one, will live. Sometimes the kid (if male) is in the position of the “other guy” at other times the kid is a fourth survivor. Aliens followed this mold well. Also it’s always something new, for example in Alligator it wasn’t just an alligator it was an alligator the was huge as a result of growth hormones. In Tremors 2 it was the “shriekers.” If the movie is a large group it is usually a town movie, and example of this is Jaws.

There are more common threads, and in many movies one of them is broken (in Tremors 2 four people survived and not one was a kid.) Provided that you watch them with a MST3K attitude they can be quite fun. The worse the acting and the script are the more hilarious the movie is. I would have never thought you could mess this up, if it’s bad then it’s funny, and if it’s good then it’s good (like Aliens.) That said sci fi has done it. These new movies are crap, and considering that to be good they have to be bad, that is a low I would have thought impossible.

How can you make a movie so bad that it doesn’t please the audience that likes movies with bad scripts bad premises, bad effects, and bad acting? I don’t know how they did it, but they did.

I think it’s amazing that they made a show as good as Farscape or picked up a show as good as Stargate SG-1. After all they specialize in bad sci fi. Yes they did other shows that were good too.

I don’t know, Scare Tactics, Tuesday Declassified, the crap channel is getting bad.

On a different note there was only one “The Beast” it is a mini series (in two parts), I think it is about 6 hours long, and it is probably the best, and certainly the most plausible, made for TV sci fi horror creature movie. The guy who did Jaws did it.

You guys should think about watching this kind of movie for humor, there is no claim it is good sci fi, because its not. It’s crap and it should be, that’s what makes it worth watching. It’s not a replacement for Firefly, and its not what you should watch if you want something engaging, but it is fun to sit down and watch a classic (e.g. It Came from Beneath the Sea, 1955.)

TVDIR

Thursday, July 10, 2003 5:42 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by -=ZERO=-:

3.) Dropped The Dead Zone after reviving it from ABC.

The Dead Zone is showing on USA Network, SciFi's parent company. Right now, USA Network wants viewers to watch their first-run episodes. Dead Zone should be repeated later on SciFi.

BOBOTHEBRAVE

Thursday, July 10, 2003 11:50 AM

I agree that the Sci Fi channel sucks, and shows very little that could actually be considered "science fiction", but to digress slightly ...

Quote:
Originally posted by Succatash:
When did horrible low budget horror movies become popular sci fi?

Uh, since the 1930s (at least).

And, to echo christhecynic's point, low-budget horror does often provide trashy fun. And every once in a while, a no-rent horror flick will turn out to be a genuine masterpiece (the first "Invasion of the Body Snatchers", George Romero's "Living Dead" trilogy, this year's "28 Days Later").

SUCCATASH

Thursday, July 10, 2003 4:55 PM

You know, it's funny how in literature, Sci Fi and Fantasy are always grouped together.

But in movies, it's Sci Fi/ Horror. Why? When I hear Sci Fi, I think of stories in space, the future, technology, etc.

I am of the extreme opinion that Shark Attack 3 is a dumb horror movie and has NOTHING to do with Sci Fi. Why the hell is Sci Fi channel showing it!

PREV PAGE 1 2