Flash Gordon

[sniffles]

I didn't hold out much hope that this would be great, but I did hope it would be like Eureka and surprise me. No such luck, sadly. It was 90 minutes of sheer boredom. I could forgive the changes to the story, but the acting was mediocre at best and the story was full of gaping plot holes.

I realize that sometimes the pilot episode of a new series is weak and that it improves over time, but I won't be making any effort to watch the rest of the series. There just wasn't anything going on to bring me back for another try.

To Sci Fi I say, dump this disappointment and bring back The Dresden Files.

 

[horacethegrey]

Judging from the previews I've seen on the net alone, I could tell this show didn't have the flash needed (pun intended ) to be a hit show.

Memo to the producers, it ain't f***ing Flash Gordon without the bloody spaceships or that rocking Queen theme.

 

[Ankh-Morpork Guard]

To Sci Fi I say, dump this disappointment and bring back The Dresden Files.

Agreed.

Though maybe there's the chance this will get better. Still, it just didn't even have a slight feel of Flash Gordon for me. I mean, even though BSG got a similar change, there were more than just nods to the old series in the form of names and such to tell you it was BSG, even if it was different.

This just...bah. Not that Flash Gordon was ever realy amazing, but one could hope.

 

[Nonlethal Force]

I didn't think it was all that bad. But then again, Eureka just bored me so much that after 2 episodes I haven't come back. Dresden files, OTOH, absolutely rocks and should be brought back.

Having said that, I might tune in for the next few weeks and give it the same benefit of the doubt that I gave Eureka. But, I'll likely not stick with it. It is going to be a Friday show ... so I'll need something to replace Man vs. Wild since Discovery has decided to put on Survivorman and Lobstermen (What the heck?).

But, I digress (and badly so). I didn't think Flash Gordon was all that bad. But, it didn't really "catch me" either.

EDIT: I should say, I haven't really liked Sci Fi since Doctor Who. When BBC decided to pull the first Doctor in place of the second ... I dropped watching the show and haven't been impressed with Sci Fi since - Dresden Files being the exception.

 

[Mouseferatu]

EDIT: I should say, I haven't really liked Sci Fi since Doctor Who. When BBC decided to pull the first Doctor in place of the second ...

Assuming you're talking about Doctors 9 and 10--Eccleston and Tennant--I should point out that it wasn't the BBC's decision. Eccleston signed on from day one with the intention that he'd only do one season.

 

[stonegod]

I'll need something to replace Man vs. Wild since Discovery has decided to put on Survivorman and Lobstermen (What the heck?).

Oh, I can explain that one. Discovery is trying to save face since the show is really Man vs. Hotel.

 

[horacethegrey]

IEDIT: I should say, I haven't really liked Sci Fi since Doctor Who. When BBC decided to pull the first Doctor in place of the second ... I dropped watching the show and haven't been impressed with Sci Fi since - Dresden Files being the exception.

Mate, you've really missed out. Many of the episodes with David Tennant as the Doctor have been just brilliant. Even if seasons 2 and 3 have not matched the overall brilliance of the season 1, that's no reason why you should drop the show.

 

[Christoph the Magus]

My wife and I watched Flash and agreed that it sucked. I wasn't holding out much hope for a good show, but I thought that it would be better than what we got. Oh well, here's hoping that Dresden comes back.

 

[Nonlethal Force]

Assuming you're talking about Doctors 9 and 10--Eccleston and Tennant--I should point out that it wasn't the BBC's decision. Eccleston signed on from day one with the intention that he'd only do one season.

Fair enough. Then I blame Eccleston!

But, thanks for the info. When my wife heard that Eccleston wasn't back for season two, she said that it really didn't surprise her. It seems that British television does more "character/actor swapping" than Americans are used to. I don't know if this is fair or not, just going on my wife's words.

Mate, you've really missed out. Many of the episodes with David Tennant as the Doctor have been just brilliant. Even if seasons 2 and 3 have not matched the overall brilliance of the season 1, that's no reason why you should drop the show.

While this may be true, I am the type of person who is very visual oriented. I simply cannot watch a show with a stand in actor/actress and believe it. For me (since I never saw any of the original Doctor Who episodes) the Doctor is always Eccleston. Even if the new show is good, and it may well be, it won't be good to me. But I am glad that others are enjoying the show!

If they wanted to keep me (and people like me) - they should have found a reason to actually "replace the doctor with another character." Granted .. being the last of the Time Lords that would be difficult.

Oh, I can explain that one. Discovery is trying to save face since the show is really Man vs. Hotel.

Heh, that's kind of funny! Although, hotel or not ... I still enjoyed the show and would probably continue to enjoy it. To be honest, though, I always assumed there was behind the scenes help. I mean, nobody can go out into that many bad situations and succeed all the time without help. Nobody is that good. Eventually - even if you are good - a string off bad luck is bound to come about.

 

[Mouseferatu]

While this may be true, I am the type of person who is very visual oriented. I simply cannot watch a show with a stand in actor/actress and believe it. For me (since I never saw any of the original Doctor Who episodes) the Doctor is always Eccleston. Even if the new show is good, and it may well be, it won't be good to me. But I am glad that others are enjoying the show!

If they wanted to keep me (and people like me) - they should have found a reason to actually "replace the doctor with another character." Granted .. being the last of the Time Lords that would be difficult.

The thing is, changing appearance/persona is a staple of Doctor Who. It's part of the character, and has been for... What, over forty years? That's why we're on the Tenth Doctor. Not the tenth actor--the tenth Doctor.

Tennant is a "stand-in." He's not supposed to be the exact same character as Eccleston; he's a new regeneration, and that means new appearance and new persona. In essence, he is a new character.