Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Storm Raven" data-source="post: 588909" data-attributes="member: 307">Re: Sci-Fi Channel finally discusses Farscape’s cancellationHere is the problem with Bonnie: she lies. Before Farscape and Stargate were flipped in order on Friday nights, Farscape was getting the higher ratings that Stargate. It was only after the netowrk decided to reorder the shows that Farscape started getting worse ratings than Stargate. Plus, she completely fails to point out what is likely a major reason why the early episodes of Stargate get good ratings: a lot of people didn't get them when they were on Showtime and are now seeing these episodes for the first time. It isn't likely that Stargate has some sort of magic staying power, it is more likely that these episodes were in limited circulation before, and have now gotten wider circulation.She also lies about something else: Stargate has a lot of continuity in its stories. This is one of the things that is good about the show, but to say Farscape has a problem because it has continuity and Stargate doesn't have this problem is just willful ignorance of the facts. For example, this past Monday, they ran a show that centered around the Quantum Mirror (an element from a previous episode), the Asgard (introduced in another episode), and a fluke device created by Colonal O'Neill (from yet another episode), as well as several other elements (the journey to Chulak in the first episode, the villain Apophys who has been killed prior to Monday's episode) and so on. If you had not seen the series, most of these elements would have made no sense in the context of Monday's show.But according to Bonnie, all Stargate episodes are self-contained. Right.I like Stargate SG1. I also like Farscape. But basically just about everything Bonnie said about the two shows in this interview was either a lie or a tortured distortion of the truth. I hope the Sci-Fi network goes down in flames under her watch, because she is a really despicable person (but then again, so are many network executives).</blockquote>

Verification