Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="LightPhoenix" data-source="post: 1300366" data-attributes="member: 115">Farscpae didn't have a set time of length to run - it was renewed for it's fourth and fifth seasons, which SFC then reneged on, cancelling it only a couple of days before filming ended.  Crusade was nixed from the beginning by TNT.  Firefly was shown out of order and on a crappy night.  The Trek franchise has been dying for years.  You forgot Stargate, but that aired on Showtime and so was unavailable to a large cable-based audience. But I agree, the most successes have been in the miniseries.  Well, Farscape was hugely successful, Stargate is hugely successful... it's not that people are getting bored, it's that writers aren't taking risks, and aren't being innovative, and networks aren't taking risks, or being innovative.  Both.  There's good and bad points for either, and I don't particularly see why it has to be an either/or situation.  You could use mini-series with the usually higher ratings and cheaper production to make up for the losses incurred by the traditional series format.  You use the series you already own (B5, Stargate, Farscape, among others) as lead-ins to your evening programming to increase ratings, since they cost relatively little to air. However, let's also keep in mind that there's really only one station that will even show Sci-Fi shows nowadays (in the US) - SFC.  SFC is pretty much the sole provider of both series and mini-series.  So it's really which is more beneficial for them - which is obviously the mini-series approach, since it costs less and requires less thinking about programming schedules.  I suspect we'll be seeing more of this sort of thing, and having the series be the cheaper stuff. Obviously I'm an outspoken opponent of SFC's programming and business strategies, and I feel that this question really doesn't have to be an issue, if SFC managed their station a little better.  I also feel that some of the other stations that might show Sci-Fi, like WB, Fox, and UPN, look to SFC to see how they are doing before accepting a Sci-Fi show of their own, and the (IMO) mismanagement of SFC hurts the genre as a whole, because it just "proves" that the risk is too great.</blockquote>

Verification