Voting for cable or network by RavenWhyteWing

GENERAL DISCUSSIONS

Voting for cable or network

POSTED BY: RAVENWHYTEWING
UPDATED: Wednesday, April 21, 2004 02:26
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 2506
PAGE 1 of 1

Tuesday, April 20, 2004 7:29 AM

Okay, this may sound depressing anal or selfish, but I recently took the little pole at the homepage as to where Firefly should go should it be successful in the box office (*holds down head, hands clasped* let us pray. . .)
I was more than a little upset to find most people voted for cable as opposed to network. Now this is just hunkydory for those of you who actually own cable, but for us network bottomfeeders, this is a serious restraint. And if they actually base their decision on that pole, what happens to us freeloaders? I'm not going to argue, I'm just questioning the idea of whether or not it matters to have it on cable besides slightly better reception? My friend has cable, and I know you can access local channels using cable. So besides that, why vote cable?

You see I cannot be forsaken/Because I'm not the only one.

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

Tuesday, April 20, 2004 7:57 AM

JUSTDAVID

My reason is that I fear another cancellation if network ratings aren't stellar. Cable networks offer a place for niche shows to continue without the intense ratings demands of the networks. I don't subscribe to any premium channels, but I would pay huge amounts of money to get new episodes of Firefly on my TV. Even if I were unable to get that channel, I would seek out other means...have a friend tape it, get it over the net, wait and buy the dvd. I just want it to go where its most likely to survive and have the episodes keep coming year after year.

"Light it."

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

Tuesday, April 20, 2004 8:15 AM

ZOID

RavenWhyteWing:

Taking a little "pole" definitely sounds anal, and to me would be depressing, though definitely not selfish (would make you a 'good sport' in some circles, I'd suspect). I believe you meant to say that you took a 'poll' and that networks might use that poll against us; as opposed to the 'pole' Fox used against us -- selfishly depressing our collective anuses -- when they cancelled Firefly.

All kidding aside, I'd like to see Serenity kick some serious Sith ass next Summertime, and get back to TV. This time, however, I'd like to see it on CBS or one of the other 'Big 3', where they might do it justice, and where you might be able to pick it up with just a pair of rabbit-ears, n'est-ce pas? CBS did a great job with JAG after it got cast off (NBC wasn't it?).

Problem is, I think Joss and Tim may have an exclusive development contract with Fox for TV stuff. So, we'd have to convince Fox TV that it would be the right thing to do to release them from that contract, rather than just cancelling all their shows after 'poling' them for a couple of weeks. You know, make Fox an offer that they can't refuse... Old school.

Respectfully,

zoid
_________________________________________________

"River and me was best friends, back then. I named my first-born daughter after her. 'Course, you can't swing a dead cat 'round here on I-Day without hittin' a River..."

- Kaywinnit Tam, wife and mother of 6, A Child Shall Lead Them: A History of the Second War of Independence Wilkins, Richard

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

Tuesday, April 20, 2004 8:37 AM

SEVENPERCENT

Quote:
Originally posted by RavenWhyteWing:
I'm not going to argue, I'm just questioning the idea of whether or not it matters to have it on cable besides slightly better reception? My friend has cable, and I know you can access local channels using cable. So besides that, why vote cable?

The main reason for me is some of the things Joss said in the commentary, about how dark and edgy he wanted the show to be- Cable offers you darker, edgier, sexier- I've been watching the new western show on HBO, Deadwood - And what it lacks in witty dialogue it more than makes up for in realism and atmosphere- Now, I'm not suggesting we lose the wit, because that's what makes Joss cool to me; but imagine how dark we can see Mal get, how gritty they could make the frontier worlds- And, as someone previously posted, cable networks will give low-rated shows a chance to grow- It was a very strong vote for cable from me-

------------------------------------------
He looked bigger when I couldn't see him.

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

Tuesday, April 20, 2004 9:22 AM

BROWNCOAT1

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

I agree w/ JustDavid. I voted for cable, not because I own it, but because a show like Firefly would find a better fit on cable tv. Network killed it once, and most likely would again if the show did not rake in huge Neilsen ratings. The problem w/ sci fi is that it will not do well in a battle of networks against reality shows and the thousands of rehashed cop dramas out there.

Sci fi is a niche and would do best on cable where niche shows can find a home & be successful because the expectations are more realistic. Look at the lineup on Sci Fi Channel. There are shows there that have been on for several seasons that do not pull the ratings that Firefly did in its run.

As for not having cable, if Firefly was back on tv, I would get cable. If it meant working a second job, eating nothing but bologna sandwiches, or whatever it took. If I couldn't afford it, I would wait for one of the many nice Browncoats to upload the episodes for me to download, have someone burn copies, or buy the DVDs when they became available.

You see, this isn't about cable owners vs network viewers, this is about getting Firefly back on TV and back into homes. This is about what is best for the show and will insure it a long, happy run and I truly feel that would be with the show finding a home on cable.

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

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

Tuesday, April 20, 2004 9:23 AM

BROWNCOAT1

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

Gorram double posts.

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

Tuesday, April 20, 2004 10:26 AM

GHOLA

Well if Serenity is a huge box office success I'm betting that they'll make sequels rather than going back to TV(note I'm saying that's what I think will happen not what I want to happen). I don't really care if it goes on network TV or cable TV they both have their benefits just so long as it stays on the air.

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

Tuesday, April 20, 2004 4:19 PM

KARENKAY99

Quote:
Originally posted by zoid:
Problem is, I think Joss and Tim may have an exclusive development contract with Fox for TV stuff.

Say it isn't so!!!!

"They say the snow on the roof is too heavy. They say the ceiling will cave in. His brains are in terrible danger."

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

Tuesday, April 20, 2004 4:41 PM

KARENKAY99

all you guys without cable, come on over to my house!! BYOS, (bring you own snacks).

also, been trying desperately to get in to deadwood on hbo. love the opening credits, music, horses, mud, etc. then the show starts and very boring. josh could certainly punch up this one. anyone loving it? what am i missing?

"They say the snow on the roof is too heavy. They say the ceiling will cave in. His brains are in terrible danger."

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

Tuesday, April 20, 2004 5:30 PM

MACBAKER

Sorry, but my vote is for a cable station like the Sci-Fi channel. The reasons are simple. A cable channel will use more care promoting the show properly (unlike Fox's horrible mis-management of Firefly), and their ratings expectations are less strict. If Firefly has ratings equal to any of the big networks during their timeslot, Sci-Fi will probably be thrilled.

For those that don't get cable ot sat stations, would you rather that Firefly has a long run on the Sci-fi channel or Spike, or have it on UPN or Fox where there is a good chance of Firefly being mis- managed and canceled again? Even if you can't see it during it's first run, you probably will be able to catch it on a local network station in reruns, or buy the season boxs sets as they come out.

I'd given some thought to movin' off the edge -- not an ideal location -- thinkin' a place in the middle.

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

Tuesday, April 20, 2004 5:43 PM

MACBAKER

Quote:
Originally posted by zoid:
Problem is, I think Joss and Tim may have an exclusive development contract with Fox for TV stuff.

Let try to clear this up again. The FOX network doesn't have any exclusive contract with Mutant Enemy! The FOX network lost any rights to Firefly the minute they canceled it! 20th Century Fox Television Productions has an exclusive TV deal with Mutant Enemy. They sell shows to several networks including but not limited to FOX. So, you are right, but also wrong, Joss and Tim may have an exclusive development deal with 20th Century Fox, but they don't have a deal with the FOX network. There is a big difference!

I'd given some thought to movin' off the edge -- not an ideal location -- thinkin' a place in the middle.

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

Tuesday, April 20, 2004 10:44 PM

MALORA

I can't remember what I voted now--I think I voted cable. In a perfect world, Firefly would get amazing ratings and I'd be happy to have it on a network channel. But cable allows shows with lower ratings to continue with relatively little interference.

Think about Deep Space Nine vs. Enterprise. Many fans feel DS9 was a higher-quality show. Granted, there are many factors involved, but one of them is that DS9 was syndicated, while Enterprise is on a network channel. While there were some disagreements with the higher-ups, DS9 writers pretty much had free reign, as long as they kept it under budget. Enterprise, unfortunately, has way too many cooks in the kitchen. Network executives who have no background in storytelling have influence on the show.

I'd prefer Firefly had a set-up similar to DS9: the opportunity for a nice long run and relatively little interference from execs. A network slot might offer a bigger budget, but what good are special effects when Network President Joe Blow is dictating the story?

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

Wednesday, April 21, 2004 2:26 AM

ECGORDON

There's no place I can be since I found Serenity.

Unfortunately, I do not think there is an ideal situation for Firefly on television. I voted for network, simply because I want it to have the highest exposure possible, but with that you risk the high ratings expectations of network execs. But let's remember, there are now SIX networks, not just the three I grew up with. A cable outlet might offer the show more leeway in the ratings game, but the budget would be less, and there is no reason to expect the executives of those outlets to be any less likely to interfere with the show.

Sci-Fi has not had a good track record in this regard. They totally ruined Sliders, canceled Farscape in favor of the god-awful Tremors, they no longer are running Babylon 5, and Star Trek is relegated to the wee hours of the morning or occasional mini-marathons during weekdays. The fact that they didn't seem to care to bid high enough to get the other Trek shows seems to indicate they are not that interested in space related shows anymore, at least on a regular series basis. They have been doing more of that in the mini-series line, which might be a possibility for Firefly as well. Spike will probably not be interested, since they have the rights to three Trek series tied up, and TNT is not likely to go for it after their problems with B5 and Crusade.

Syndication might be the best solution overall, although I think it is as likely it will become a film franchise rather than a tv one.

wo men ren ran zai fei xing.

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

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER	POST DATE

USER

POST DATE