What's the real reason Farscape was cancelled?

RangerWickett said:

And because television executives don't seem to want to air shows for the 'geek' demographic. Not even on the Sci-fi Channel.

Click to expand...

It's really sad. I still think that we are just in a down-cycle for genre shows.

I can see the trend starting to reverse itself. Shows like BSG, the fact that we got the Farscape mini at all, and the retooling of Enterprise (!!) prove to me that competent people not name Whedon can make genre shows work. Add psuedo-genre shows like Lost and Alias to the mix and networks may just take a second look. Just keep them away from FOX.

MEG Hal said:

The article stated this:
"Despite evidence to the contrary, fans continue to believe the myth of the Roddenberry Principle and continue to stage massive write-in campaigns for their favorite shows, regardless of the ratings or any other factors involved. As of this writing, campaigns are underway to save or bring back Enterprise, Smallville, Andromeda, Mutant X, The Secret Adventures of Jules Verne, Starman and The Lost World, just to name a few. Producers continue to take advantage of starry eyed fans who are so in awe of the people that entertain them that those fans are willing to believe just about anything and networks continue not to care one little bit."

Is Smallville in trouble?

Click to expand...

Good question. It has never done the numbers that the WB wanted as far as I know. However, I'm not aware of any rumors about cancellations. Not that I am in-the-know, but I do pay very close attention to these things.

After looking at the article again, I do think that the author is coming from the money/executive/network side of things a bit much. But I'm sure there are little kernels of truth in his words. Maybe the producers of these shows do demand alot or too much. And I'm sure there is much debate over budgets, salaries and the like. However, to blame it all on "The Roddenberry Principle" seems like stretching. It's the job of the people making the shows to get as much as they can.

I've stated before the complexity of the Farscape situation. Chimera had much of it when he points the finger at bad advertising, a crummy time slot and just general lack of support for the show. What didn't help was that the weakest Farscape eps since the middle of season 1 happened at the time of the renegotiations (beginning of the aired season 4 eps).

Additionally, the end of season 3 took FOREVER to get to air. Farscape fans were used to waiting a fair amount of time to see new eps but it was to the point where a friend of mine couldn't even remember the plotline (which was some of the best TV ever made). 4 months was the typical wait time for new eps which usally came before the end of the season and then the next season would start quickly (http://epguides.com/farscape/).

As you can see it took over 7 months to get the last 4 eps of season 3 and then we had to wait another 6 weeks to get season 4 kickin (no pun intended). I thought it was a good idea to put the season break in the middle of season 4 and let the last 11 eps play straight through. The break was a little more than 4 months but it seemed longer because the season 3 and start of season 4 breaks. But the worst of it was: NO RERUNS. Now, I had all the eps TiVo'ed so I didn't care but I had friends who were trying to catch up and couldn't.

So, yeah, the shooting schedule and simply the amount of time it took to film the whole thing played a part in the delays but the beauty of cable is that the network can make their own schedule. I think it also bears mentioning that originally SFC tried to keep Farscape away from the Big 4's seasonal schedule. Meaning that they would run the new eps over the summer, during lulls (January/February) and never even came close to running a new ep during sweeps. Please note that the new eps aired after the announcement of the cancellation bucked this trend (starting with ep 4-12: Kansas). Running against non-cable network shows, in the Friday Night Deathslot, with little advertising and no reruns to help get people back on board or newbies caught up compounded things. It certainly seemed like SFC gave up to us, the fans.

Some of the blame needs to be put on Kemper and the production team for the delays and not being a little more flexible on the budget. Eps 4-10 were a little weak and scattered compared to other Farscape eps and this was seemingly during the critical re-negotiation phase. So, when the rockin' main storyline wasn't being advanced, the ratings took a hit. That is the fault of the production team, not the network.

So, even if all the things KJB said were true, the network still didn't help out at all to try and get more fans interested or keep fans watching. Compare this to early on when SFC would run Saturday marathons of nearly entire seasons or at least the plot-critical eps a few times a year. This is how I got on board. I didn't start watching until season 2. But the enough of the eps were re-run that I was able to catch most of what I needed to follow season 2 and on.

So saying that the producers cost us 13 eps and/or multiple mini-series doesn't hold a ton of weight with me. Especially since there was a contract in place for a full season 5 which is what the producers counted on when they did the story for season 4. We'll probably never really know what happened during those negotiations or what the specifics of the original contract were but to say it was all "The Roddenberry Principle" is seems like blame deflecting and to a lesser extent, some bitterness.

It was interesting to get a different take, I must say. I just think that it was a little extreme and one-sided.

RangerWickett said:

Sorry. I suppose the joke isn't as funny out of context. It was completely not intended to be serious. It's, like, a Simpsons or South Park or Family Guy quote.

Click to expand...

[hijack] One of my favorite quotes from Family Guy. Peter(as a kid) asks why the dinosaurs died, and that was the answer the guy at the museum gave him.
[/hijack]

It's an interesting look at the other side of the story, and I don't doubt that much of it is somewhat the truth.

However, I'm disturbed, as I am with most of the arguments defending SFC, with the abject lack of numbers and sources in the article. Not once does he mention anything substantial, just many vague references to "high costs", "producers' lies", and "bad negotiations". If SFC were in the right, then they should be able to whip out facts and show it like it was... which they aren't doing. They have no reason not to either, given his argument that the Save Farscape campaign is a total pain in the butt.

I remain dubious that this "KJB" has even worked at SFC... he just presents "facts" like he had. Maybe it's just me, but if you're not even going to attach your name to an argument like this, then not only are you a coward, but it's just another big reason to doubt if any of it is true, since now there's no fact checking that can be done on his article and it's, and his, credibility.

I highly doubt that we'll ever find out all the true reasons that Farscape was cancelled. I don't doubt that both had a hand involved. However, SFC's lack of producing any facts, especially when it would defuse much of the hostility towards them by these fans, is just a tiny bit suspicious.

Well Brisco County Jr went through something similar. For the longest time they seemed to be the next 'flagship' of Fox (after Married... With Children, The X-Files and The Simpsons) and was heavily advertised. But after the season ended, it went to rerun heaven and IIRC TV Guide had it as the #1 show to save.

My guess is it was all about the cash. It's cheaper to make shows like Scare Tactics (reality shows) or another talk show (remember the boom?) than anything requiring imagination.

Absolutly true.

Making Reality Shows shaves billions from the production budget! Why? You're not paying actors. And staff can get paid less. On a reality show the entire cast works for free. You recruit fame seekers and other people willing to put on a show for a small prize, typically between 25,000 and 1 mil. In the end you end up spending far less money.

Survivor for example. One might think that filming in all these exotic locations is expensive but the opposite is true. It costs near nothing to achieve a license from the nation where they film. In some places they dont even need one.

The networks will be in huge trouble come the time when the audience will be fed up with reality shows. Another year or two tops and there will be a rush of drama, comedy and other shows as ratings plummet for reality shows. Or reality shows will get more bolden till something horrible happens and the FCC bans them.

As for the Neilsons those are dying too. I learned about them in my TV/R classes and from day one I said they were I SHOULD REMEMBER NOT TO SWEAR AT EN WORLD. You'll never get a big enough sample of any demographic to learn a close enough number of who watches. Eventually all TVs will have a broadcast chip that lets someone know what you're watching. Some bills to allow them (and block them) have already been to the Congress.

In the end, allowing the monitoring of what we watch WILL be better. Despite the privacy issues. If the production companies knew the true numbers of watchers, then they could estimate the true value of a show and find a place for it. They could better program and insert commercials. Thats what TV has always been about. Commercials. We're not being entertained, we're being sold too. The TV show is just there to keep our attention till the commercial can buy us.

BrooklynKnight said:

As for the Neilsons those are dying too. I learned about them in my TV/R classes and from day one I said they were naughty word. You'll never get a big enough sample of any demographic to learn a close enough number of who watches. Eventually all TVs will have a broadcast chip that lets someone know what you're watching. Some bills to allow them (and block them) have already been to the Congress.

Click to expand...

We have a similar rating system in Germany. An interesting fact: We do have nearly the same number of "sample households" than the USA - but the US has 200 Million people, while Germany has only 80 Million.

Personally I think it's all about the puppets. Puppets, you say? Yep. When Henson does puppets for children's shows then they've got a ready source of continuing income after the release of the puppets. Elmo DDR. Cookie Monster Cookbook. Big Bird Chicken Nuggets. Farscape didn't have that, plus it was weird in "let's take a lot of drugs" sort of way that a lot of people, including a lot of scifi fans, just don't appreciate as much as some do. Flashback continuity is fine if you're religiously following the series, as is the "and we skip to the end" way that Farscape sometimes handled realtime, but it's damned hard for newcomers to find entry to. So basically they presented a huge barrier to new people watching the show, relying on their fan base to spread the pros of the show by word of mouth, while simultaneously not doing anything particularly normal on their own marketside to hedge their bets. If they were going to do puppets then they needed more puppets and some to sell to legions of the faithful. S&M guy masks. Farting hand puppets. Farscape generic leather pants. Anything.

James Heard said:

When Henson does puppets for children's shows then they've got a ready source of continuing income after the release of the puppets. Elmo DDR. Cookie Monster Cookbook. Big Bird Chicken Nuggets.

Click to expand...

I'm nearly positive that all of those characters are owned by CTW (Children's Television Workshop), and that Henson Co. doesn't see a penny of that.

it was management BS: investment vs return taking into account ratings and demographics. I don't think they concidered the DVD market, which on sales alone would pay for a season if sold 1.5 million, which I don't think they saw as possible.