General Discussions

So why couldn't the Sci-Fi network pick up Firefly???

POSTED BY: OPPYH
UPDATED: Monday, November 7, 2016 10:09
VIEWED: 15903
PAGE 3 of 5

ECGORDON

Sunday, April 27, 2008 9:00 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by biggestdamnhero:
Quote:
Originally posted by ecgordon:
Quote:
Originally posted by biggestdamnhero:
Never cared for Buffy or Angel. Never watched a single episode.

How can you know you don't care for something you've never seen?

ecgordon;
Because I did not care for a woman slaying vampires. Van Helsing was a better vamp-slayer.
Angel: A Vampire show again? Really the Whedon take on Anne Rice was questionable. Really the whole Vampire genre is been there, done that!

I'm like Auraptor here. I didn't think much of Buffy/Angel prior to Firefly, have several pre-conceived notions of what it was about (teeny-bopper vamp slayer, meh!) and I also didn't care for the original movie. Then I realized that the brilliance of Firefly doesn't just appear out of nowhere, and I learned that not only Joss, but a lot of the other writers and directors on Firefly had worked in the Buffyverse. I started renting the discs through Netflix, but along about the middle of season three I splurged and bought all the seasons on dvd. Haven't regretted that for a second. Also got all five seasons of Angel, and actually like it more than Buffy.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME

PSYCHOTIC

Monday, April 28, 2008 3:30 AM

This explains how TV execs think. Just substitute "Hiatus" with "Firefly". I love this comic series.

http://savehiatus.com/2008/04/14/critical-mass/
http://savehiatus.com/2008/04/18/executive-derision/

FIREFLYPASSENGER

Monday, April 28, 2008 4:30 AM

If you never watched Buffy or Angel you don't know what you're missing. The same as those dismissing Firefly without watching it.

Joss' writing and storytelling is great.

Back on topic. SciFi was not interested at the time. That is the short answer. Joss tried, no on was buying. Very sad.

VALKREY

Monday, April 28, 2008 5:42 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by rickker:
because Firefly is a non-reality sci-fi show. It costs money to make and the sci-fi channel can't spend money on sci-fi programing cause it costs to much. theyll spend it on nonquality crap programming rather than quallity, if it has quality they cancel it quick; Farscape, Stargate SG-1, Battlestar Galactica, Dresden Files. And to a lesser extent of quality First Wave and Invisible Man. But we get plenty of Frakkin' ghostfacers(Supernatural is awsome) / ghost hunters, and destisnation crap.

Just a quick reply to try and get this thing back on some sort of original flight plan. SG-1 ran for 10 seasons total. Not a quick cancel at all. BSG is ending because the creators say it is time and the story will be finished. To the other shows, I agree. Also now that SG-1 is done and BSG is almost done why not pool some funds for the greatest show ever to return to television on the SciFi channel.

PARTICIPANT

Monday, April 28, 2008 6:27 AM

Scifi channel would rather air wrestling

BOOKREADER

Wednesday, April 30, 2008 6:10 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by participant:
Scifi channel would rather air wrestling

It is more profitable for them. The ratings for wrestling are pretty good, and the cost is dirt cheap. They are in business to make money and they make a lot of it with wrestling.

PENTHOS

Wednesday, April 30, 2008 6:13 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by BookReader:
Quote:
Originally posted by participant:
Scifi channel would rather air wrestling

It is more profitable for them. The ratings for wrestling are pretty good, and the cost is dirt cheap. They are in business to make money and they make a lot of it with wrestling.

Exactly, don't blame scifi for showing wrestling, blame the wrestling fans... that's what I do.

STORYMARK

Wednesday, April 30, 2008 8:39 PM

Wait, wait, wait.....

Did someone just talk about how important good writing is.... and then say Van Helsing was better than Buffy?

Seriously??

And Angel had virtually nothing in common with the Anne Rice Vampire books. It's like saying The Howling and Teen Wolf are the same, just because they have werewolves.

If you watch the shows, and don't like them, fine. But making such daft statements without ever having see of what you speak....?

Staggeringly stupid.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

PENTHOS

Thursday, May 1, 2008 12:37 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Penthos:
Exactly, don't blame scifi for showing wrestling, blame the wrestling fans... that's what I do.

Actually, after thinking about it, I'm going to qualify my above statement by saying that the "Science Fiction Channel" SHOULD NOT BE SHOWING WRESTLING IN THE FIRST PLACE!

They don't show murder mysteries on the Food Network. And ESPN sure as hell doesn't show Star Trek.

Come to think of it; maybe we should petition SciFi to change the name of their network to just "Fi", because that's all pro wrestling is, fiction. Or maybe we should stop watching the SciFi channel all together. I mean if they'll show "pro wrestling" but not do what it takes to get new Firefly\Serenity episodes made then why shoudl we be loyal to them at all.

Maybe the thought of losing a hundred thousand or so viewers would convince them to try just a litle bit harder to bring the show back in some form or another.

STORYMARK

Thursday, May 1, 2008 6:18 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Penthos:
Or maybe we should stop watching the SciFi channel all together.

That's what I did.

Quote:
Maybe the thought of losing a hundred thousand or so viewers would convince them to try just a litle bit harder to bring the show back in some form or another.

The unfortunate reality being, if that happened, their revenue would go down, which would make them more inclined to do even more cheap programming.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."