TV Series by Companion

GENERAL DISCUSSIONS

TV Series

POSTED BY: COMPANION
UPDATED: Thursday, January 15, 2004 19:15
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 3505
PAGE 1 of 1

Wednesday, January 14, 2004 10:39 AM

Any chatter at all about bringing back the TV series? It had great characters, great dialogue, great stories, and great writing!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 14, 2004 10:53 AM

CAITLYN

It also was too expensive to produce, which is why other networks that could have bought it from Fox all passed.

Besides, since when are TV networks interested in quality programming?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 14, 2004 11:12 AM

BROWNCOAT1

May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one.

Quote:
Originally posted by Caitlyn:
It also was too expensive to produce, which is why other networks that could have bought it from Fox all passed.

Besides, since when are TV networks interested in quality programming?

Where does that info come from? What I understood was that other networks turned it down due to the ratings it had when Fox cancelled the show.

Don't worry Companion, from the looks of things & the way the DVD is selling, Universal is looking at a script for a movie Joss Whedon is proposing. Many of us here believe that a successful movie, coupled w/ the strong DVD sales could lead to the series being picked up by a network. Universal owns Sci Fi Channel, so it is possible they may pick it up if all goes well, and it is profitable.

"May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one."

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 14, 2004 11:15 AM

GWYNETHH

Oh yes SciFi. The Farscape killers

Are you asking me to dance?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 14, 2004 11:32 AM

CAITLYN

To Browncoat1: To answer your question, my roommate, who turned me on to Firefly, read a while back that that cost was even more of a consideration than the poor ratings.

Considering what Fox did to the show, airing it out of order and all, how could it not have poor ratings? I mean, when I first saw it I felt like I had been dropped in the middle and they weren't explaining things. Of course, that was because "Serenity" hadn't been aired.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 14, 2004 11:51 AM

SEGURANT

Yeah FOX sucked for that. I am envious to those who never watched Firefly until they got the DVD. They got the see the story as it was meant to be shown.

Segurant

"You know what the chain of command is? It's the chain I go get and beat you with until you understand who's in ruttin' command here. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 14, 2004 12:03 PM

CAITLYN

Quote:
Originally posted by Segurant:
Yeah FOX sucked for that. I am envious to those who never watched Firefly until they got the DVD. They got the see the story as it was meant to be shown. "

I honestly gave up on it while Keith kept watching. He kept trying to get me to watch and I did catch a couple towards the end including "Serenity". We both cursed Fox that night. We knew right then and there that if they had shown it in order we would have loved the series from the start.

I really wonder what the ratings could have been.

I still think a TV serial is the best format for a space western.

"I don't care 'cause I'm still free."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 14, 2004 12:22 PM

ANJIN

I have to admit that the only reason I read this thread is because of the disturbingly vague subject line.

---
Raven's Prayer
http://webpages.charter.net/anjinm

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 14, 2004 4:01 PM

KURUKAMI

Actually, from what I'd heard the costs weren't that high. I seem to recall reading somewhere that the true production cost per episode was around $800,000 per episode, and that the Fox distribution costs (I have no idea what that category entails) were around $1,200,000 per episode.

Compared to the $6,000,000+ that was spent on pretty much every one of the later "Friends" episodes, I'd say that's quite affordable.

History doesn't always repeat itself. Sometimes it merely shouts "Weren't you listening the first time?!?" and lets fly with a club.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 14, 2004 5:30 PM

DRBORIS

But then Friends (much as I hate it) had the rateings to support the cost. The networks, as has been said many times, are most interested in the money.

Mabey (I hope so) Firefly will be good money yet if some network can pick it up and treat it right instead of abuseing it like Fox did...

"If I ever kill you, you'll be awake, you'll be facing me, and you'll be armed." - Mal

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 14, 2004 6:25 PM

VETERAN

Don't squat with your spurs on.

Quote:
Friends (much as I hate it) had the rateings to support the cost.

Yeah, frankly I don't get it. Judging by the few episodes of Friends I've seen,it's got to be one of the dumbest things on TV and yet, it's had a great run. Firefly was so good and it's already gone. Maybe if it had a better timeslot. I really think they should have challenged Enterprise on Wednesdays.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 15, 2004 6:02 AM

BROWNCOAT1

May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one.

Caitlyn wrote:

Quote:
To Browncoat1: To answer your question, my roommate, who turned me on to Firefly, read a while back that that cost was even more of a consideration than the poor ratings.

I would like to know where he read that information. I have not seen it or heard it mentioned before. Not saying I doubt he did read, just wondering how reliable the source is that he got the information for that statement.

Quote:
Considering what Fox did to the show, airing it out of order and all, how could it not have poor ratings? I mean, when I first saw it I felt like I had been dropped in the middle and they weren't explaining things. Of course, that was because "Serenity" hadn't been aired.

I was one of the many who watched Firefly on Fox and was confused by them showing the episodes out of order. The lack of advertising was disappointing, and the preempting for baseball grew tiresome. I can see how people would get easily discouraged. It might also explain the influx of fans since the DVD set was released showing the episodes in the intended order.

Quote:
I honestly gave up on it while Keith kept watching. He kept trying to get me to watch and I did catch a couple towards the end including "Serenity". We both cursed Fox that night. We knew right then and there that if they had shown it in order we would have loved the series from the start.

I really wonder what the ratings could have been.

I think you were not alone in giving up and tuning out of the show. I, like I am sure many others, felt like we got dumped into a story in the middle of the book, instead of at the beginning. It was hard to get to know the characters or like them without knowing something of where they came from or why they were on Serenity in the first place.

Shame on Fox execs for thinking they knew better than the creative minds on how to air the episodes. This to me was the worst mistake in handling the series.

Kurukami wrote:

Quote:
Actually, from what I'd heard the costs weren't that high. I seem to recall reading somewhere that the true production cost per episode was around $800,000 per episode, and that the Fox distribution costs (I have no idea what that category entails) were around $1,200,000 per episode.

Compared to the $6,000,000+ that was spent on pretty much every one of the later "Friends" episodes, I'd say that's quite affordable.

See this is more in keeping w/ what I had heard and read around the net. The cost of production was not abnormally high, and from what I had read, was less to produce than an episode of Space Above and Beyond.

I know "Friends" was high, but if you look at the grossly high salaries of its stars I think you will find that about 75% of the production costs went there.

"May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one."

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 15, 2004 7:05 PM

DRBORIS

Runing Firefly against Enterprise would be nearly as bad for rateings. 7 PM Wednessday in addition to Enterprise, also contains the WB hit Smallville. Thats a three way audience devide for scifi type shows.

Better would be to have run it some time when NOTHING good comes on, like Tuesday at 8 (appologies if you have some favorite show then, but I don't) or some other empty slot. That would be how to encourage a new hit to break out, instead of sticking it against established competition.

-------------------------
"If I ever kill you, you'll be awake, you'll be facing me, and you'll be armed." - Mal

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 15, 2004 7:15 PM

SAINT JAYNE

Quote:
Originally posted by BrownCoat1:
I was one of the many who watched Firefly on Fox and was confused by them showing the episodes out of order.

I just thought it was a charming flashback episode, like Objects in Space only less jumpy.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER	POST DATE

USER

POST DATE