Why Does the Sci Fi Channel Hate Me?
By Lisa Fary
The cancellation of Stargate Atlantis was announced this week, which launched what seems to be my monthly rage train against the Sci Fi Channel.
I’m going to start calling Sci Fi Channel rage “my period”.
Oh, I’m not personally offended that Stargate Atlantis is being canceled after this season – I don’t even watch it (but Wolfen Moodaughter does!). What aggravates the pudding out of me is the fact that the series not only gets good ratings and continues to grow its audience, it’s also going to end on a cliffhanger.
Yes, there will be at least one direct-to-DVD movie, but that’s not the same and I don’t believe you when you say it’s just as good. I also don’t believe Brad Wright and Robert C. Cooper when they say, “We’re excited to tell Atlantis stories on a bigger canvas.”
That’s like getting fired and calling it “an opportunity to explore new life paths.” Life paths that include being outdoorsy (i.e., homeless) and taking up running (i.e., running away from the cops as they chase you down for assaulting your former boss with a two day old hot dog and jar of something white and frothy you found at the outdoorsy camp under the overpass).
So, with the demise of Stargate Atlantis as a series and the imminent end of Battlestar Galactica, what will the Sci Fi Channel have for original programming? There’s Eureka. Presumably, there’s Crapica (no, that’s not a typo – yes, I’m prejudging). Also in development are an untitled Bryan Singer mini-series and something called What If?, a Cloverfield-esque show about Earth descending into another Ice Age.
Beyond that, it’s all reality programming and wrestling. Programs such as Relic Quest (in which real life relic hunters go on quests for relics) and Soul Evidence, starring “self-styled psychic, Alison DuBois” and her team of “so-called psychics, scientists, and investigators” solving cold case murders.
That’s not me making fun of Alison DuBois – that’s how the Sci Fi Channel described Soul Evidence. I’m sure it will become the Amateur Scientist’s new favorite show, ranking just behind Paranormal State.
With killing a strongly performing show and throwing so much reality programming and so many crappy monster movies at me, I have to ask:
Ummmm. . . Sci Fi Channel? Why do you hate me?
Are you ashamed of me because I’m a geek? Are you ashamed to have geeks watch your channel? Do you hate geeks so much that you feel it necessary to send us to Amazon or Netflix to watch sci-fi programming instead of letting us watch it on your channel?
I mean, sci-fi is in your name, you know.
Never miss an update. Subscribe to Pink Raygun by Email or subscribe via RSS
|
|
Lisa Fary’s early exposure to classic Battlestar Galactica in 1979 is largely responsible for her lifelong interest in science fiction and her childhood ambition of being an intergalactic space cowgirl. She thinks diagramming sentences is a fun alternative to Sudoku.
Nooooooo! How could they! I agree with u, why do they hate geeks.
(On a side note, did u notice that Stargate Atlantis is gaining in popularity worldwide)? Keeping that mind, Atlantis should go the Dr Horrible route and go online. I agree with u, movies are not the right format. Sigh! Sucky Friday.
OK, so Sci Fi announced this morning that they greenlighted Stargate Universe, which will be the third series in the franchise.
I’m sure they still hate me, though.
They do hate you. And me. And more than that, they hate themselves, and they’re taking out their self-hatred on their audience.
I mean, come on, SG1 put them on the freakin’ map and killed Trek, and they killed it mid-season at the peak of it’s form. Atlantis was never nearly as good a show, but come on! It’s their 2nd or 3rd highest rated show. What the hell?
Sci-Fi (“Skiffy” as Harlan Ellision and I derisively call it) is looking to be the first SF-free network just like MTV was the first completely music-free network. The bastards! The Bastards!
Nose meet face! Stupid!
I vaguely remember the time when MTV played music. . .
I don’t know that they hate themselves, but the definitely hate you and me. And I’m sure they have little idea of what makes good sci-fi.
While I am concerned at the waning amount of science fiction programming on SciFi, and I’m sad to see Atlantis ending, I can also understand the reasoning behind it.
Standard television contracts last five years, and then have to be re-negotiated (generally for a larger salary and better perks) every year or two. That’s why Showtime opted out of SG-1 after five years, giving SciFi the opportunity to pick them up. It’s why SciFi decided not to renew SG-1 after its tenth season (five more years). And, I suspect, it was a large factor in their decision not to renew Atlantis.
You’ll notice I’m not using the word “cancel” here. They’re not pulling a FOX on us and dropping the hammer after a handful of episodes, leaving the season unfinished and never to be broadcast. They will air the rest of season 5 as planned. They have simply chosen (after much consideration, I might add, most of which the public is not privy to) to move from a weekly series to a feature-length format.
I frequent several Stargate-related sites, and most of their commenters are throwing hissy fits, railing against The Powers That Be, and vowing to never, ever, on pain of death watch the forthcoming Stargate Universe series or play the MMORPG. As much as I enjoy Atlantis, I can’t bring myself to do that. Five years is a great run for a series, particularly a genre series, in our current thrive-or-die environment. SG-1 and Atlantis have given us hundreds of great hours of TV and I expect the same from the future movie(s) and series.
I wish I could say the same for the SciFi Channel in general, but they do seem to be shooting themselves in the foot with all this “broader audience” hooey. They don’t need to appeal to more people. They just need to provide quality shows for the dedicated audience they’ve got and trust that we’ll get more people interested because it’s just so good. Geeks do that.
Aw, now… nothing kills Trek, save for perhaps Trek. Yes, I’m looking at you “Enterprise” but then I’m looking away and pretending I never, ever, saw you, show.
@ Trish: No, actually, when SG1 started running on Skiffy, the channel was only available in about 1/4th of the country and yet it was pulling down consistently better ratings than “Enterprise” which was on a broadcast network, and available in pretty much the entire country. They were on in the same timeslot. This was noticed by suits at Skiffy, UPN, Paramount, and MGM, and it directly led to the massive re-tooling that Enterprise got in it’s final season, and the Skiffy/MGM decision to start a Stargate spinoff. So: in industrial, real-world terms, SG1 bust a cap in Trek’s ass, yo! But in more metaphorical terms, you’re right: Trek killed itself by decades of telling the same boring story over and over and over, just with different casts, and by its steadfast desire to avoid adapting w/ the times.
(sorry, I got called away for a bit there before I could finish my thoughts)
@ Robin: Yeah, they were negotiating a new contract, since the old one expired at 5 years, but there are ways around that. Case in point: MGM invested a TON of money in revitalizing SG1 for “The Long Haul.” And while it’s true that Tapping, Shanks, and Judge were getting a mint, it’s also true that Browder, Black, and Bridges (Which sounds like a New England lawfirm) were not getting between them nearly as much money as Anderson had been getting all by himself. The plan appears to have been to gradually cycle out the old cast and introduce new people, such as Landry, Vala, and Dr. Lam, and keep the show going indefinitely. I’ve heard MGM types saying they’d hoped to get another 7 years out of it, or more. So while contract negotiations for a new 5-year-deal would have potentially made a costly show moreso, it probably wouldn’t have been as ungodly expensive as everyone says since the old guard were on their way out, one by one.
But it never even got that far. Last I heard, negotiations hadn’t even started, Skiffy just showed up after the 300th ep and said “You’re cancelled. Wrap up your story.” This may be just the kind of stuff you hear on the playground, but I’ve heard that Showtime and CBS were both interested in buying the show, but Skiffy activated a clause in their contract that said “If we’re not broadcasting the show, no one else can have it.” which shut that down. So not only did Skiffy not want the show anymore, they didn’t want anyone else to have it, they wanted it dead.
Assuming this is true – and I don’t know that it is – there’s only one thing I can think of that explains this behavior: SG1 was already a popular show that they bought. SGA was *their* show, original to them. W/ SG1 around, SGA was always gonna’ be the “Younger brother,” and w/ SG1 on another network, there was always the risk that the audience would follow that show and not stick around for the inferior spinoff. So they killed it entirely so they could be the “Only” Stargate in town.
Assuming that’s true, they screwed MGM, their audience and the cause of SF TV in general simply because they’re self-serving dicks.
Assuming any of that’s true, of course. A lot of it is my own supposition.
@hoobajoobah Ahh, you meant in that sense. I meant in that the rocking of the Trek Universe can never be equalled– because I was a loyal toddler from loyal parents and the brainwashing runs deep… oh, and that Enterprise sucks and anally rapes the Vulcan culture.
Additionally, my cynicism runs so deep here that I can’t help but agree that Skiffy is just trying to drive us all crazy so they can be Lifetime II or something.
Their original films are just plain sad. Sometimes they get a ‘name’ in them and I just sit agape, wondering what dirty pictures they had of these people.
Intelligent contributions today: 0
Random emotions: Infinity
@hoobajoobah: I never heard any rumblings about SG-1 going to another network, and can’t imagine any of the “big four” being willing to pick up the cost of an effects-heavy genre program in its eleventh season. From what I understand it would simply be cost-prohibitive. I did hear that they were considering ER-style cast cycling or rolling into an anthology spinoff called Stargate Command that would follow a different SG team on a mission each week rather than just SG-1 (which I thought was pretty clever, actually).
Yes, it was pretty crappy of the network to make the announcement so close to the 200th episode celebration, but it would’ve gotten out whether they said it officially or not. Better to be open about it than have it trickle out as a rumor.
@Trish: I’m with you on the original movies. The best explanation I have for some of them was given by Michael Shanks when he was asked about his role in Mega-Snake. Basically, he agreed to do it because he needed to take a job that would allow him to renew the paperwork that makes it legal for him (a Canadian) to work in the U.S. (Well, that and a feeling of loyalty to SciFi, who have kept him steadily employed.) With his SG-1 job security ending and three kids to raise, he couldn’t afford to close any doors to future employment. A lot of actors spend most of their time unemployed, so they take whatever work comes along. It’s a rare thing for someone to have the financial freedom to pick and choose their roles.
@Robin: I do know for a fact that Showtime was in discussions to buy the show back before Skiffy killed it w/ their legal wrangling. I’ve heard that CBS was interested, but I’ve never heard any specific details about that, so if that happened at all, it might never have gotten further than “We’d like to buy your show. It costs *How Much?* Good God, we could make 11 separate sitcoms aimed at retirees for that kind of money, and we’d still have enough left over to get Bob Newhart!” I’d heard the SGC rumors, but the ones I heard were that it would be the same exact show w/ a different name to get around the legal wranglings. I also heard a rumor that they were looking at re-naming it Stargate:SG2 for the same purposes, but I’m assuming that’s just an urban legend
@ Trish: Yes, I once loved Trek too, and some would say that my hatred of it now is because my love was abused and ultimately spurned. But I think my hatred is mostly based on them honestly thining they could tell the same 10 stories over and over and over for 20 years w/out anyone catching on.
@Robin — one key factor — The SGA actors, I’ve been told, all had SIX year contracts, not five. So that was no excuse not to go another season.
As for my feelings on the subject, I wrote an article of my own, so I’m not gonna bother stating it all here, LOL.
Holy crap, six years?
So that means, what, that they had to buy the actors out of their remaining contracts?
WHere’s your article on the subject? I’d like to read it.
Meh. Less original series means more Sci Fi Original Movies.
Lava Rats, ElePhantom, and Car-goyles here I come!
Have you seen the Sci Fi Original Movie The Last Sentinel? I recommend that for Bad Movie Night. It goes nicely with some Arbor Mist and strawberry pop tarts. Or fish sticks and Mountain Dew. We’re talking quality stuff.
Wolfen: “The SGA actors, I’ve been told, all had SIX year contracts, not five.
Huh. That’s very unusual for the TV industry. What’s your source? (Not doubting you, just curious. I don’t have time to go look for it right now, but I thought I remembered Joe Mallozzi saying it was five on his blog. I could easily be wrong, though.)
Hoobajoobah: “Holy crap, six years?
So that means, what, that they had to buy the actors out of their remaining contracts?”
Nope. The length of a contract is somewhat imbalanced in that it means the actor is legally obligated to work on the show for the duration of the contract (or until the writers decide otherwise), but the show is not only obligated to employ them for as long as they feel like it. If an actor is let go — fired or has their character killed off for dramatic purposes a la Beckett — or the entire series is canceled, the production company is no longer obligated to pay them. Just as in any other industry (except professional sports), actors don’t get paid for work they’re not doing.
That isn’t to say that actors can’t ask to be let out of their contract, of course. From what I’ve heard over the years, producers are generally pretty good about letting their talent move on if they’re feeling dissatisfied or are offered a big opportunity elsewhere. It creates a better chance that an actor might come back for guest appearances if they aren’t forced to stay longer than they want — something which would make for a very stressful set, as well. For example, when Seth Green was feeling a bit superfluous in the fourth season of Buffy, he talked to Joss Whedon and they agreed to write his character, Oz, out of the show but leave the door open for him to come back; and he did guest star in an episode the next year. To this day, Seth and Joss remain good friends and fans of each other’s work. [/somewhat off-topic]
Yeah, or Sinclair leaving after the 1st season of B5, to return in the 3rd, or bringint Lyta bakc on the show, though that’s a bit different. Anyway, my mistake, I thought they had more like pay-or-play contracts. Stupid me. Anyway, thanks!