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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Whodat" data-source="post: 599700" data-attributes="member: 7386">At the risk of starting a firestorm, I have to take issue with this: I’m sorry, but your argument that serialization caused people to turn away from Farscape may have some validity, but it was only one link in a chain of reasons why the show failed. By your argument, daytime soap operas (such as General Hospital, et al) could never have become staples of daytime television viewing. They are the living embodiment of serialized viewing – and I defy you to pick up on any one of them without wading through several episodes, and trying to follow along with the characters and story. If you want to point to the REAL reasons viewership dropped, just look back at how Sci-Fi handled the show.  Mismanagement had a lot more to do with Farscape’s demise than complicated storylines. 1)    In the middle of season three, the show takes a 4-month hiatus. At which time Sci-Fi puts another show on in its timeslot. When season four rolls around, Sci-Fi this time puts the show into a 6-month hiatus in the middle of the season. At which time Sci-Fi once again puts another show on in its place. And for those of you playing along at home, you’ll note that Farscape was on hiatus during the latest September/October sweep period. No Farscape viewership during these crucial months equals lower overall Nielsen ratings.2)    There were no repeats when Farscape went on hiatus. Think about that. Sci-Fi basically runs the episodes once, and then drops the show after the new episodes run out. When Sci-Fi ran that 11-episode marathon this Christmas Eve, those were the first Farscape episodes we had seen since August! Should any new viewers try to pick the show up, they will have no idea about the show’s history, who’s who, or any of the character’s back-stories unless they cram in as much of that marathon as possible. This a pretty risky maneuver even when dealing with established fans.3)    Season 4 was moved from Sci-Fi’s primetime lineup to a later, 10 PM, timeslot. Keep in mind that Farscape is an hour-long show. This is not entirely convenient for a lot of viewers. Nor is it desirable to stay up until 11 PM to watch TV on a Friday night. Many, such as myself, have jobs, college (or have one of those “life” things). Friday and Saturday nights are generally when people like to go out, not sit at home and watch television.4)    Lastly, Sci-Fi failed to get the word out. Promotion for this show was half-hearted. Yes - they did place adds on their channel to attract the viewers who are already watching other programs, but that was the easy part. What they should have done was to place adds in TV Guide, genre magazines (like Starlog), newspapers, on and on their sister network USA Networks. Bottom line: They weren’t making the show easy to find. They weren’t making the show easy to follow. They weren’t placing it on at a convenient time. But they were keeping the show a secret. What exactly were they expecting to happen? Wouldn’t any show have a difficult time against those obstacles? Suppose you took a wildly popular show (like Friends or Sienfeld) and placed it into a late-night timeslot on Friday with little or no publicity, then put the show into hiatus for six months at a stretch without showing repeats. Would it matter if the show was episodic or serialized? Probably not. Farscape was doomed.Serialization was ONE reason Farscape was hard to follow. It was not THE reason Farscape was hard to follow.</blockquote>

Verification