Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Television Media

Andromeda And Mutant X Cancelled 442

Posted by timothy
from the not-quite-your-rights-online dept.
dmehus writes "Science fiction fans may be dismayed to learn that "Mutant X" and "Gene Roddenberry's Andromeda" have been cancelled, despite the fact "Andromeda" had been cleared for a final season beginning in the fall. That prospect seems highly unlikely as the show's producer, Fireworks Entertainment, is shutting its doors for good and owner CanWest Global Communications (which also owns canada.com, the National Post, Global Television, and a bunch of other media assets) announced it will take a $159 million writedown on Fireworks. The news means "Mutant X" has a series total of three seasons and 66 episodes, while "Andromeda" will have a series total of 88 episodes in four seasons. Slashdot has previously covered 'Andromeda'."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Andromeda And Mutant X Cancelled

Comments Filter:
  • by LostCluster (625375) * on Wednesday April 28, 2004 @03:39AM (#8994103)
    In TV-land, 100 is a magic number for a weekly series. When you hit 100 episodes, you have enough episodes to go 5-a-week and last 20 weeks without a repeat. That's good enough to survive on cable or syndication with a nearly infinite life. Lesser series have done it, but you've gotta be really deep to not risk burn-out.

    So, Andromida stopping at 88 is kinda an ugly number to get caught at. Sci-Fi might have an interest in funding a series-ending run of about 13 episodes to run as an exclusive event, and therefore give the show some life in daily reruns. 88 with an abrupt-stop ending just isn't that valuable for reruns in comparision.

    Of course, that depends on Sci-Fi being able to see the value in rerun rights. If the library of Fireworks assets including the 88 existing episodes get sold to a party that's not interested in letting Sci-Fi have the show on a 5-a-week daytime basis at a reasonable price... then there's no point in doing the deal.

    The Sci-Fi saves the show thread is a longshot, but it could happen so it can't be ignored. The show's not dead yet, but it's taken a usually-fatal blow.
    • Shows have survived in syndication with less. There were, if I remember right, 79 episodes of Star Trek (plus the original pilot, which remained unaired til the mid-1990s, although it was released on video around 1984-85) when it went into syndication.
      That said - the original Star Trek was a good series. I've seen some Andromeda, and while it looked okay and had the occasional interesting moment (not to mention some impressive visuals and sets - I remember seeing a giant observation deck with a diplomatic function going on), it never hooked me. Probably part of it was that I can't stand Kevin Sorbo - although DeepWater Black's Gordon Michael Wolvett was a welcome addition to the cast, and Lexa Doig is reasonably easy on the eye.

      No offence to those who like Andromeda, but I think it's about time people stopped cashing in on Gene Roddenberry's name just to get ratings. (modern Trek's high point was DS9 - since then, it's just been flogging a dead franchise!)

      DISCLAIMER: The above views of TV shows are just my opinion. Yours may vary. Remember, opinions are like assholes - kindly stop shoving yours in my face ;-)
      • According to Episodes Guide [epguides.com] (an address worth memorizing - you won't need need a bookmark for it), there were seventy-nine articles not including the pilot. The pilot is labelled "UNAIRED".
      • by TheWanderingHermit (513872) on Wednesday April 28, 2004 @08:48AM (#8995120)
        No offence to those who like Andromeda, but I think it's about time people stopped cashing in on Gene Roddenberry's name just to get ratings.

        Actually, Andromeda did have a basis in Roddenberry's work -- at least more so than Earth:Final Conflict did (unless I missed something). The original idea was a show called "Genesis II" about a man named Dylan Hunt who was put in some kind of suspension for an experiment, and found by a group called Pax something like 150 years later, after Earth had been through bad events and balkanized. He and the Pax teams would use subshuttles to get to all the different city-states that had grown up after a technological and civil collapse. The intent was to give the characters access to many different cultures, like the Enterprise had in Trek, and let us watch as Pax and Dylan rebuilt society. There was another pilot, very similar, called "Earth II" (I think), that, again, had Dylan Hunt sleep for a long time (this time on a space station), before returning to a balkanized Earth to help rebuild civilization.
        • There's a lot of stuff in Roddenberry's notes, and I acknowledge that Andromeda was drawn from there. But basically, the Andromeda we have now was made from those notes and updated by other people, and Gene's name was only used as a crowd-puller (i.e. brand recognition for Trekkies).

          All I'm saying is, Gene's been dead for over a decade. Isn't it about time TV stopped making shows from his thirty year-old rough drafts? Strikes me as a combination of authorised plagarism (his widow and son are involved in it) and grave robbery...
    • by brucmack (572780)
      I was under the impression that 75 is the magic number for a show to be sold into syndication... That was the supposed reasoning behind making sure there was another Sopranos season, to get it to or past 75 episodes.
    • Actually, 100 is the magic number for "big money" syndication. There are many (many) TV shows in perpetual rerun land nowadays because there are so many channels with relatively little content. Given the number of awful movies that Sci-Fi Channel trots out on a regular basis, they'll probably have Andromeda in reruns for the duration.

      Finally, I would note that the idea of Sci-Fi funding enough episodes just to round out to 100 is just silly. After all, they're the only network that's likely to be interested in rerunning Andromeda ANYWAY, so why would they want to make the property more valuable (and thus more costly) unless they truly think that making new episodes is a profitable proposition (as they did with SG-1)?

  • by Walt Dismal (534799) on Wednesday April 28, 2004 @03:40AM (#8994106)
    -- They're dead, Jim.
    • by mphase (644838) on Wednesday April 28, 2004 @03:49AM (#8994145) Homepage
      And so the Bad Shows were executed in the mannor most befitting virgins.
      • And so the Bad Shows were executed in the mannor most befitting virgins.

        Hey, at least the 88 episodes aren't being sent to a far away planet where a young energy beam can become the only surviving fan other than somebody frozen for 1000 years.
        • Slashdot, the only place you can make a Futurama reference and then have it expounded upon.
          • Re:One could say ... (Score:5, Informative)

            by LostCluster (625375) * on Wednesday April 28, 2004 @04:00AM (#8994190)
            Slashdot, the only place you can make a Futurama reference and then have it expounded upon.

            Futurama lasted only 72 episodes, yet is still doing perfectly well in 5-a-week infinite reruns on Cartoon Network's Adult Swim. It is possible to survive with less than 100 episodes... but the show has to be detail-filed and good in general.
      • Yes, and, at least in Andromeda's case, it's a good thing (tm). I liked Andromeda when it first came out, but when they canned the lead writer because, as Sorbo put it, he created plots that were too subtle for most people to understand, I knew it was headed for trouble.

        Then, then next season, the credits started with a line like "The universe can be a dangerous place." I almost shut it off right there, but wanted to give it a chance. I thought that season opener (where they rescue Becca and Tyr) was we
        • Re:One could say ... (Score:3, Informative)

          by tbannist (230135)
          That one jumped the shark long ago.

          The exact episode was Ouroborus. They fired the head writer, dropped the character "Rev Bem", (actor Brent Stait chose to leave), threw out the character bible for Trance Gemini and didn't both to replace it with anything. Every episode after that one was pretty bad, it was often glaringly obvious that episodes that had originally been written to star another cast member had been rewritten to expand Sorbo's role.

          Gordon Michael Woolvett and Laura Bertram were the highl
  • by Vellmont (569020) on Wednesday April 28, 2004 @03:40AM (#8994108)

    Science fiction fans may be dismayed to learn that "Mutant X" and "Gene Roddenberry's Andromeda" have been cancelled


    Though fans of quality television will rejoice. Mutant X? It has to be one of the worst TV shows I've seen more than 5 minutes of in the last 10 years.
    • Mutant X yes, Andromeda had some very good episodes.
    • Action/Sci-Fi is a very expensive form of TV show due to the need for special effects. To do it cheap always results in looking bad...

      Maybe CanWest is doing a good thing by putting FireWorks out of its misery rather than delivering sub-standard final seasons.
      • by clickety6 (141178) on Wednesday April 28, 2004 @04:28AM (#8994265)
        Action/Sci-Fi doesn't always need special effects. Sci-Fi isn't just laser guns and spaceships and giant sand worms and 3D holographic simulations. The trouble is, everybody wants to be Star Trek these days.

      • Some great sci-fi can be done on the cheap. People can even find it endearing.

        I think the problem is more likely to be that they concentrate so much on being flashy that they forget other aspects that go to make a good program.

        That said I've never seen Andromeda and couldn't bare to sit through either of the episodes of Mutant-X I tried started watching.
        • by mpe (36238)
          I think the problem is more likely to be that they concentrate so much on being flashy that they forget other aspects that go to make a good program.

          e.g. the writing and acting :)
    • by sTalking_Goat (670565) on Wednesday April 28, 2004 @04:19AM (#8994245) Homepage
      "Mutant X" has a series total of three seasons and 66 episodes

      That's 67 episodes (I'm fining them an extra one...) too many as far as I'm concerned. Andromeda was just barely watchable and only because I of Keith Hamilton Cobb's (Tyr Anasazi) overacting while he was still there. I tuned in to see just how much he would ham it up this week.

      Mutant X on the other hand was unexcusably horrible on all levels.

      Sci-Fi Channel must be kicking themselves in the ass. The passed on Firefly to get a show whose studio goes belly-up before they even air an original episode.

    • I agree wholeheartedly. They both deserve to die.
    • It was like a grown up 90210 with only pretty people allowed. But it is nice to see that a secret superhero crew can find the time to get the latest in high maintenace hairstyles. Not to mention it had 70s style special effects made with 21st century technology.

      Mutant X was so bad it made my teeth hurt.
    • I own the first three comics of Marvel's Mutant X series and I think this TV series has single-handedly killed their value :^(
  • by Kris_J (10111) * on Wednesday April 28, 2004 @03:41AM (#8994116) Journal
    Science fiction fans may have be dismayed when they learnt that Firefly was being cancelled, but I buy the DVDs of Andromeda here in Australia and I'm far from dismayed. Not saying I know when it jumped the shark [jumptheshark.com], but I almost stopped buying it at DVD 4.6.
    • by Anonymous Coward
      Hmm my sentiments exactly. I got into Andromeda first, liked the first season dvd's immensely, then got introduced to firefly and now Andromeda just seems... tired, or tiresome.

      In anycase I've bought all the Andromeda dvd's.
      The most recent one that came out was 3.4 though, so how do you get access to season 4 dvds??

      • Hmm my sentiments exactly. I got into Andromeda first, liked the first season dvd's immensely, then got introduced to firefly and now Andromeda just seems... tired, or tiresome.

        Snap. I'm almost ashamed to have the Firefly box set in the same media tower as Andromeda.

        In anycase I've bought all the Andromeda dvd's. The most recent one that came out was 3.4 though, so how do you get access to season 4 dvds??

        Apparently Australia has been getting DVDs the fastest. Might have something to do with the fact t

    • Not saying I know when it jumped the shark

      One good (bad) thing I can say about Andromeda is that it excelled at shark jumping. Too many characters for one thing. While some shows can make that work (Firefly) Andromeda didn't seem to have the budget (or the writing talent) to have all the characvters in each episode. Also whats the point of having a ship staffed by thousands if 6 and an AI can do the job just as well. I could go on and on, but I'd rather go to bed...

    • " I almost stopped buying it at DVD 4.6"

      Unfortunately, Andromeda is not a show that you can refer to by episode numbers and have it make any sense: perhaps in 10-20 years, when there have been multiple conventions, a balding Kevin Sorbo can do a skit on some lesser comedy show and when DVD 4.6 is brought up, he can say "Get a Life." THEN you can start refering to Season X, Episode Y.

      But that time has not yet come.
  • And yet... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Jhon (241832) on Wednesday April 28, 2004 @03:41AM (#8994117) Homepage Journal
    Enterprise gets picked up for another season.

    Isn't it obvious? GOOD SF doesn't sell. Cheap commercialized tripe does.
    • Re:And yet... (Score:5, Interesting)

      by LostCluster (625375) * on Wednesday April 28, 2004 @03:58AM (#8994182)
      Enterprise keeps getting renewed because UPN needs something, anything, with the Star Trek brand in order to hold the network together. UPN is a constant sixth who sometimes risks falling to seventh behind Spanish-language Univision. It's main problem is any time Paramount has a good show, sister network CBS grabs it. Having to eat CBS's leftovers, and then having its backbone major-city affiliates also being treated as CBS's little sister just is no way to run a network.
    • Enterprise, while lacking, still blew away Andromeda with its entourage of effeminate aliens. And MutantX? Seriously, who even watched an entire episode?
    • Re:And yet... (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Zenithal (115213)
      Alright, I'd be the first to say that Enterprise, compaired to TNG is crap. But Enterprise compaired to much of the much WORSE crap out there is pretty darn stellar. We should be at least somewhat happy it's still around.

      There's a lot of TV hours out there per-week. One of Enterprise isn't a plague on humanity, and it beats the living crap out of yet another our of reality TV.
    • Re:And yet... (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      As long as they don't cancel StarGate SG 1. It is the only *good* Scifi on the air right now. Not that this means anything to cancel-bots who will cheerfully favor horrid garbage -- as long as it is cheap to make.
    • Dude, I hote your not talking about Mutant X. That was the worst rip-off show I have ever seen. The acting was so bad, one couldn't even watch it to laugh.
    • Re:And yet... (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Scrameustache (459504) on Wednesday April 28, 2004 @07:34AM (#8994777) Homepage Journal
      Enterprise gets picked up for another season.

      Isn't it obvious? GOOD SF doesn't sell. Cheap commercialized tripe does.


      Did you just call Andromeda and Mutant X good sci-fi?

      Andromeda has spaceships making race car noises, and Mutant X had its Xavier-wannabe use communication satellites to download the DNA needed to stop an epidemic in mutants!

      Not that I'm defending Enterprise, I think Rick Berman should be stoned to death, but Andromeda? Mutant X? Good riddance!
  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 28, 2004 @03:41AM (#8994119)
    First goatse.cx gets shutdown, now Andromeda.

    Is nothing sacred anymore?

    What's next - Lucasfilm is cancelling Episode III!!?!?

  • 88? (Score:4, Funny)

    by kahei (466208) on Wednesday April 28, 2004 @03:42AM (#8994120) Homepage

    *88* episodes? The fact that someone kept Andromeda going for 88 episodes is deeply disturbing. I always assumed there were only about 4, and they got repeated a lot.

    • Re:88? (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Kris_J (10111) *
      You're thinking of the space battles. There were only about 4 space battles that were rendered and the rest a remixes with the same 3D graphics. There were some "girl of the week" episodes that hardly had any space battles. But it is a worry that a show only as tenth as good as DS9 could go on for half as long.
  • Not really (Score:4, Insightful)

    by laiquendi (688177) on Wednesday April 28, 2004 @03:43AM (#8994125)
    Science fiction fans may be dismayed to learn that "Mutant X" and "Gene Roddenberry's Andromeda" have been cancelled

    Heh, more likely they won't. Save your pity for Firefly. [amazon.com]

  • Mutant X (Score:5, Insightful)

    by thisfred (643716) on Wednesday April 28, 2004 @03:44AM (#8994126) Homepage
    I haven't seen much Andromeda, but I can't say I'm surprised to see Mutant X cancelled. All it was, really, was a very cheap ripoff of the X-Men (Scientist provides place for young and confused mutants and together they fight crime.), and it didn't even seem to want to hide that fact. Good riddance.
    • Ripoff... yes... (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Raptor CK (10482) on Wednesday April 28, 2004 @11:56AM (#8997000) Journal
      In fact, it was such a ripoff that they even had Marvel slap their name on it!

      As I recall, the reasoning behind Mutant X was that Marvel has some agreement with Fox regarding any X-Men TV series, but they weren't getting anywhere, so they scrambled to get *some* mutant-related show on the air with any other network.

      Mutant X is basically just X-Men tweaked to the point where isn't legally X-Men, and can therefore be aired on UPN. Of course it's crap, but I doubt it can be called a ripoff when it's done by the same people. Unoriginal, sure. Derivative, certainly. Ripoff? Not so much.

  • by mphase (644838) on Wednesday April 28, 2004 @03:44AM (#8994127) Homepage
    I'm sorry to say that I haven't been able to watch either show because they are just so bad. I've never been able to stomach Mutant X but I liked Andromeda at first, but now to watch episodes I originally liked I stand stand it. I believe the reason for this is fantastic shows like Farscape and Firefly which just make these shows look like steaming piles. Okay I've got to admit I little offense is actually intended. How do people whatch that dren?
    • Andromeda really irritated me because it had so much potential. The story ark of restoring the commonwealth could have generated a lot of good stories, and the characters could have developed into interesting personalities. Instead, it became predictable and formulaic.

      I watched the first series thinking `well, first series' are often bad. It will get better.' I watched the second, thinking `it is going to get better, right?' I didn't watch the third at all.

    • I've never been able to stomach Mutant X but I liked Andromeda at first, but now to watch episodes I originally liked I stand stand it.

      Andromeda suffered from the Earth:Final Conflict syndrome - an interesting beginning that rapidly degenerated into unwatchable crap after creative team / cast changes. Andromea had me hooked at the start, and turned me off completely by the start of the third season after Robert Hewitt Wolfe was forced out as head writer.

      There's little to mourn about Andromeda or Mutan

    • by slashdot_commentator (444053) on Wednesday April 28, 2004 @07:59AM (#8994902) Journal

      How do people whatch that dren?

      Simple, the majority of people are idiots, and TV networks look to attract as many viewers as possible. If its a well written show with many plot twists and great dialogue, its bound to confuse a significant portion of TV viewers, who find it uncomfortable. The key is to find an acceptable level of mediocrity. If people weren't getting dumber and less literate, there would be no motivation to reduce the reading level of news magazines.


      • > uncomfortable. The key is to find an acceptable level of mediocrity. If people weren't getting dumber and less literate, there would be no motivation to reduce the reading level of news magazines.

        Would you mind explaining that again, without using so many big words?

  • No, not Andromedia. I will miss Tyr, even though he has been seriously lacking in season 4. I loved him in the previous seasons. Great wit.

    And Rommie? My favorite sci-fi babe? Oh man......that is a though blow.

  • by RadRafe (632260) on Wednesday April 28, 2004 @03:48AM (#8994143) Homepage
    Blame Canada.com!
  • by JoeShmoe (90109) <askjoeshmoe@hotmail.com> on Wednesday April 28, 2004 @03:49AM (#8994147)
    I mean...seriously...these shows are unwatchable. Completely. Why in God's name would anyone mourn these shows being cancelled?

    There's no science. Please, someone find me the gene that lets a guy turn into some kind of Lava monster. That's a more amazing evolutionary feat than the bombadier beetle. It's like the worst parts of the worst episodes of X-Files all jammed into an solid 40 minutes, with an entire rip on the whole X-Men concept to boot.

    And Andromeda...starts out with this gimmick of a holographic hot chick representing the ship (sort of a video version of Star Trek's talking female ship voice). Then they drop all pretense and somehow she becomes a walking talking hologram. And then later, I'm not sure, but did she end up turning into a real girl somehow? And those stupid names. God, who the hell green lights crap like "Rev Blem" or "Trance Gemini"...oooo! So alien! So spacey future sounding!

    Forget it. Other shows, like Farscape or whatever, hey...I'm not a fan, but I can be appropriately sad to hear another Sci-Fi show bites the dust. But Mutant X? No. Andromeda? Quit beating the dead Roddenbery. These shows should die...every dollar not wasted on them is perhaps another dollar that can maybe somehow through a miracle end up going towards new Firefly episodes.

    - JoeShmoe
    .
    • by Kris_J (10111) * on Wednesday April 28, 2004 @04:02AM (#8994198) Journal
      And Andromeda...starts out with this gimmick of a holographic hot chick representing the ship (sort of a video version of Star Trek's talking female ship voice). Then they drop all pretense and somehow she becomes a walking talking hologram. And then later, I'm not sure, but did she end up turning into a real girl somehow?
      There are three distinct versions. A screen-only, all-business personality. A cynical hologram. And a modified "we robots don't have emotions and sometimes that makes me really sad" robot. It is to Lexa Doig's credit that she unflinchingly maintained these three distinct versions of the same character through all the bad scripts and questionable editing.
      • by JoeShmoe (90109) <askjoeshmoe@hotmail.com> on Wednesday April 28, 2004 @04:15AM (#8994234)
        Thank you for clearing that up...not that it really matters but...I really question the direction and general quality of a show when major plot points are subject to such huge revisions. Case in point...

        Enterprise was sold on the principle of a "simpler, earlier Trek". Remember the exolinguist Hoshi? Remember the struggle to communicate? Wasn't that supposed to be a major theme of the series? It took precisely five episodes for the show to go from "omg omg omg the computer will take six hours to translate this so we know if this alien is hostile" to "I'm Captain Archer onboard an alien prison ship but apparently everyone speaks English or the Universal Translator is now small enough to fit invisibly in my ear". Enterprise has pretty much thrown out everything it was based on, giving us episodes involving time plots and DeathStars more complicated that anything from the other so-called advanced series.

        Back to Andromeda...I gave it a try or two for the first half season or so then promptly forgot about it. A couple years later when I revisited it during a bout of insomnia, I remember thinking that absolutely nothing was the same. The angry fend for himself bounty hunter was somehoe like the chief ship security officer, the pacifist preacher was doing some kind of ninja kung fu, and the hologram of the ship was somehow walking around and trying to get laid. Or something like that. Anyway, I got the sense that the series had probably been through two or three shark jumps and flipped back to Cheers reruns for the 10000th time.

        - JoeShmoe
        .
        • I got the sense that the series had probably been through two or three shark jumps...

          Yes. The show was never great television, but really, the first season had more promise than I think people like to give it credit for. The show's head writer (and the real creator, despite the Roddenberry name), Robert Hewitt Wolfe, was floundering toward a long story arc with a dark, complex background. The first season had perhaps too much of a penchant for visiting old Trek tropes, but it frequently found rather cleve

    • There's no science. Please, someone find me the gene that lets a guy turn into some kind of Lava monster.

      I'm not sure, but i think it's a slightly mutated descendent of the Roddenberry gene :)


    • > And Andromeda...starts out with this gimmick of a holographic hot chick representing the ship (sort of a video version of Star Trek's talking female ship voice). Then they drop all pretense and somehow she becomes a walking talking hologram.

      In a low-cut miniskirt.

      That's where the series lost me. (In more than one sense of the word.)

  • by ScriptGuru (574838) on Wednesday April 28, 2004 @03:51AM (#8994159)
    Science fans may be excited to learn that "Mutant X" has been cancelled.
  • is the combination of the void left by these shows being cancelled and their actual sound as shows just "suck".

    what if all the crap shows got cancelled so they could produce a good one? hmmm.

    btw, whatever happened to battlestar galatica? i thought that had potential.
  • He's dead, Jim. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by LostCluster (625375) * on Wednesday April 28, 2004 @04:08AM (#8994217)
    When the name above the title was dead years before the show started... you're running a show based on an idea that wasn't good enough to go forward when he was alive. That's the first sign you're in trouble.
  • Too bad (Score:4, Insightful)

    by noewun (591275) on Wednesday April 28, 2004 @04:22AM (#8994248) Journal
    Andromeda's best point, imo, was that it didn't take itself seriously. It never pretended to be anything other than a cheesy science fiction show, and had a lot of fun with some of the sillier conventions of sci fi. To me, it was the perfect antidote to shows like DS9, which seemed to be so concerned with being "serious" sci fi they forgot about things like character, dialog or plot.
    • Re:Too bad (Score:3, Insightful)

      by phoxix (161744)
      it was the perfect antidote to shows like DS9, which seemed to be so concerned with being "serious" sci fi they forgot about things like character, dialog or plot.

      I disagree

      Unlike all the other Star Trek series, DS9 had the interesting "Advantage" of being situated in a space station. Which essentially was a non-moving set/location. So while all the other Star Treks were about mindless exploration (and meeting new species in each episode), DS9 was all about building what was there because it was
      • Re:Too bad (Score:3, Funny)

        by Mulletproof (513805)
        "So while all the other Star Treks were about mindless exploration"

        Kinda missed the point of the franchise there, didntcha?
  • La Femme Nikita comes to mind. Anything else halfway decent done by Fireworks?
  • Holy cow! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by natet (158905) on Wednesday April 28, 2004 @04:39AM (#8994293)
    I must be the only person on the face of the planet who actually liked both of these shows. I watched them, not to learn some profound truth, or for their rigid adherance to sound scientific principles, but because they entertained me. Don't get me wrong, neither were my favorite shows, I wouldn't go out of my way to watch them, but if they were on, and I wasn't watching something else, I would watch them.

    Even if I hated both of these shows, I would still be sad to see them go. The main reason is... With the trend of sci-fi shows being cancelled, eventually all we will be left with are the vapid teeny-bopper soap operas (Smallville anyone?) that seem to be so prevalent lately.
  • Farscape and B5 and Crusades and Mutant X and Andromeda and Enterprise is going down the chute pretty soon I hear (next season is the last bla bla)...

    Are they making Sci Fi TV anymore or is this like the moon landing, where they pretend to but they actually did it in a hurry then shut everything down years ago?
  • Rommie!!! (Score:2, Funny)

    by theolein (316044)
    I think the only thing everybody can agree on is that Lexa Doig is so amazingly sexy.

    That said, she never did get to wear any skimpy costumes or space bikinis in Andromeda. Perhaps now she'll have time to find a show where she can really, uhm, display her qualities.
  • by Hungus (585181) on Wednesday April 28, 2004 @05:07AM (#8994381) Journal
    This is pulled directly from the official andromeda bboards: [prospero.com]
    From: JeremyTII Apr-21 7:51 pm
    To: Rayhana (27 of 56)
    11360.27 in reply to 11360.26

    While I cannot answer every question everyone has about the issues discussed in this thread, I believe I can offer some encouraging information.

    From speaking with TPTB, I can tell you this: Mutant X and Andromeda have not been written off; Tribune very much wants to&#160;produce another season&#160;(meaning S4 and S5, respectively) of both shows.

    Beyond that, I&#160;really don't know many details.&#160; Bottom line: You, the viewers, want the shows to come back.&#160; Tribune is trying very hard to make sure that happens, I assure you.

    On another note, Marta is no longer with Tribune.&#160; In the interest of preventing future rumor-mongering, I will say that she was not fired or laid off; she left voluntarily, and on good terms.&#160;She may log in here again sometime, but that's up to her.

    Hang in there, folks; we're tryin' our hardest.
    &#160;&#160; Jeremy D. Horowitz
    &#160;&#160; Website Producer/Moderator
    &#160;&#160; Gene Roddenberry's Andromeda
  • Its still running? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by OriginalChops (773524) on Wednesday April 28, 2004 @05:20AM (#8994411)
    You know that momnet in time where you switch the TV on and it shows you something on the channel you left it, just before you decide to change channels?

    Well, thats probably all the entertainment i got out of Andromida after the first episode. The quote "Did you see the size of him? He looks like some ancient Greek God or something!" did it for me...

    Did any of you manage to see "John Doe"? Now that I was sad to see canseled. And canselation of Firefly should be considered an act of treason, any an all people involved in that decision should be procecuted to the full extent of the law in all countries Firefly was shown.

  • by master_p (608214) on Wednesday April 28, 2004 @05:26AM (#8994428)
    That's why lots of excellent true fictionary science books have never been touched for televised media. Average Joe does not really understand science, and he/she does not want to be bothered with operating their brain.

    Throw a little soap opera in there, and you may have a winner.
    • A lot of people (myself included, for a long time) were put off by the perceived arrogance of its hardcore fans, and statements like that, i.e. if a guy like that watches that show, then I probably wouldn't be interested... it had nothing to do with not really understanding science. One of the reasons I can't stand Star Wars is because the rabid fans have just completely ruined any enjoyment I got out of the films by almost making a religion out of it (Matrix was another one.)

      A lot of people perceive sci-

    • by tizzyD (577098) <{tizzyd} {at} {gmail.com}> on Wednesday April 28, 2004 @06:10AM (#8994537) Homepage
      Really, even look at CSI. It's not a show about the science of forensic analysis, how they can use DNA to determine a 1 in a billion chance of who did it, or how lasers help them solve crimes. It's about the story. It's always been about the story.

      Consider the oldest stories, like the Indian epic the Mahabharata or the Greek's Iliad. It's not about the wars or conflicts. It's about the interplay between people. It's always been about the context of the people. We as people want to see other people experiencing things.

      Now, look at the lastest successful sci-fi, IMHO Babylon 5. Sure, they made space fighting a lot more realistic. But it was the story of the Shadows vs. the Vorlons, Sheridan's heroic sacrifice on Z'ha'dum, and the betrayal of Garibaldi. Really, look at this summary [midwinter.com] about the conflict:

      The Shadows, awakened years earlier from a millenium-long slumber on their ancestral home of Z'ha'dum, gradually made their presence known, and their purpose became clear: weeding out the weak and defenseless among the younger races to promote rapid evolution. Moving largely behind the scenes, they set the younger races upon one another, causing wars and inciting genocide. The Shadows are the embodiment of the question, "What do you want?" They seek not military victory, but philosophical dominance, a universe in which younger races scramble madly to attain their goals without regard for the consequences. Such an environment demands chaos, and it's chaos the Shadows have so effectively brought upon the major races.

      When the other First Ones departed for reasons of their own, the Vorlons were left behind to oppose the Shadow philosophy. If the Shadows represent chaos, the Vorlons are lords of order: they seek the same outcome, the advancement of younger races, but on their terms, whether their charges like it or not. The Vorlons prefer to ask the question, "Who are you?" It is a question that leads to introspection and spiritual growth, but not to expansion or scientific advancement.

      Unfortunately, the struggle between the two philosophies is played out not among the ancients, but among the younger races, unwitting pawns in a game few yet realize is being played.

      Little here talks about science, the reality of evolution, or the underlying science. It's about philosophy, life, and the questions we all encounter along our own life. That's the story, and that's what made it more interesting than any show about cool tools. It's never been about the tools. They just get us to start watching. It's always been about the relationships, whether we want to admit it or not.
  • by mrshowtime (562809) on Wednesday April 28, 2004 @05:48AM (#8994493)
    Really, Mutant X was beyond horrid and Andromeda had some good moments, but both were shitty in just about every aspect. But, this brings up an interesting topic; what is left to watch that is "Sci-Fi?" Stargate? Enterprise? What else? I am so beyond glad that the best Sci-fi show EVER is coming back, Dr. Who of course!
  • Scifi? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Mukaikubo (724906) <gtg430bNO@SPAMprism.gatech.edu> on Wednesday April 28, 2004 @06:49AM (#8994635) Journal
    The SciFi channel is in a "Oh my God, you want us to SPEND MONEY on PRODUCTION!?" phase. They kinda forgot the spending money part of "You have to spend money to make money" proposition... Witness, Farscape, and only funding a measly 4 extra episodes after the biggest fan backlash in history against them, and every company that advertises with them.
    • *cough*

      This was, er, supposed to be a reply to one of the posts speculating that Scifi would bring the show back to get it to 100 eps.

      Oh, just go ahead and mod me offtopic. So embarrassing to do this early in the morning...
  • by Yo Grark (465041) * on Wednesday April 28, 2004 @06:56AM (#8994650)
    1. Mutant X was not a cheesy ripoff of X-men, it was sanctioned by Marvel in a struggling time and helped keep Marvel going even in a small capacity. Besides it was filmed in Canada, most in Toronto, how much quality can you REALLY get? :P

    2. Andromeda WAS good with good story arcs till Sorbo decided that his "fans" couldn't handle anything more than 1 story long and became "episode adventures" after he fired a true writing guru...

    "Robert Hewitt Wolfe has parted company with the last bastion of scifi for people with half a brain - Andromeda. Wolfe said: "Basically, they want the show to be more action driven, more Dylan-centric, and more episodic. They also want more aliens, more space battles, and less internal conflict among the principal characters. Also, they want a lot less continuity so as not to confuse the casual or new viewer with too much backstory."

    Well congrats Sorbo, your simple plan worked perfectly. Maybe they'll invite you back on a Young Hercules episode. Wait...that was cancelled too you say? HA!

    Yo Grark
  • That's sad... (Score:2, Informative)

    by NateKid (44775)
    Andromeda could have been a great show. The Nietzscheans were a terrific race, I'd hazard to say a bizarre melding of the Vulcans, Klingons and Borg. I thought the acting was great and the whole show had a happy-go-lucky campiness about it.

    I stopped watching it, though, because it pissed me off constantly. I never saw a show fall so far short of its potential.

    Interesting note - some writer said the Nietzscheans were going to be called the Dawkinites (or something similar) initially, because they strong
  • Finally (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Snaller (147050) on Wednesday April 28, 2004 @08:28AM (#8995042) Journal
    Now perhaps we'll get to see Lexa Doig (Rommie) on Stargate SG1, she's married to Michael Shanks who plays Dr. Jackson on that show - (damn him) - he's done a guest show on Andromeda, so there was talk about her doing the opposite.

If it's worth doing, it's worth doing for money.

Working...