Andromeda To Become Less Complex? 339
Prehensile Plant writes "After 7 years of Voyager and now the godawful Enterprise, the guy responsible for everything good about Deep Space Nine has just been sacked from the show he developed. 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." Slipstream has the full scoop.
godawful Enterprise? (Score:4, Interesting)
About the only thing objectionable about Enterprise thus far has been the contrivance of the distrust between Vulcans and Humans. It's as if the writers simply wanted to invert tradition for the pure hell of it.
Other than that it has been somewhat entertaining.
Re:godawful Enterprise? (Score:2)
Re:godawful Enterprise? (Score:2)
unfortunately, all the canonical and non-canon references refer to the vulcan/romulan split happening easily over a millenia before humans ever got into space. The written and spoken languages have diverged greatly, as well as their facial features
</geek>
Re:godawful Enterprise? (Score:2)
But geeze, I've seen cardboard with better personalities than the the people in the show. The effects and constumes are good, but the plots are HORRIBLE. If executed properly would be pretty cool, but every episode has failed utterly. I mean UTTERLY, with a gag me with a spork factor that I havn't seen since Mars 2.
Re:godawful Enterprise? (Score:2)
...
You forgot to mention the theme song
Worst Episode Ever (Score:3, Informative)
After 7 years of Voyager and now the godawful Enterprise,
In the immortal words of Bart Simpson:Hey, I know it wasn't great, but what right do you have to complain? ...
They're giving you thousands of hours of entertainment for
free. What could they possibly owe you? If anything, you owe
them.
No, I don't owe them. (Score:2)
Re:Worst Episode Ever (Score:2)
I'd say, in essence, from those people who are watching it. And concerning Star Trek (and probably SciFi in general) this compromises a small fan(atic?) group of viewers.
The whole Star Trek thing would have stopped after The Original Series, if it wasn't for the fans.
In the immortal words of Bart Simpson:
Listen to yourself man, you're hanging with nerds!
I can see the point... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: "no one runs it anymore" (Score:4, Informative)
Sci-Fi (http://www.scifi.com/babylon5/ [scifi.com]) has been running Babylon 5 episodes (and the movies, and the 13 episodes of the follow up series Crusade on occasion) in order for over a year now. I missed it during the original run, but have since seen the vast majority of the show during this new run.
Moreover, they funded a new B5 movie which will air in January, B5: Legend of the Rangers (http://www.scifi.com/b5rangers [scifi.com]).
Re:I can see the point... (Score:2)
Re:I can see the point... (Score:2)
It's also impossible for people in North America to see series in order anyway. Because of the strange way they are shown. Which a US or Canadian production company may well take account of, one from elsewhere in the world wouldn't be likely to.
Attn span is brewing in our kids though. (Score:2, Interesting)
It's sad that continuity can be seen as a bad thing for Sci Fi when it is the most important element in Soap Operas. If you can have a guaranteed audience for soaps, even if it's not us geeks
Writers shouldn't see a problem with continuity. Apparently, the excruciatingly slow pace of Dragonball Z is what got so many American kids into it. When you think about it, our (male) kids and future Scifi watchers will prove in the far future that they can withstand the effects of neverending plots. IMHO. Japanese animation like Kenshin and DBZ is showing americans that long hours of characters commenting after every move is no longer taboo.
Another thing: I have friends who are disgusted at the simple sight of humanoid makeup on Sci Fi. There is not much chance for the 'new' plots to attract anyone but dedicated Sci Fi people.
Re:I can see the point... (Score:2)
I hear you. I caught about half of it on its first airing, but that's still not enough to let me dip in to individual re-runs.
But it can be done. Farscape and Stargate SG-1 both have continuity in the sense of internal consistency, continuing plots and a strong story, but they aren't dominated by it. Each episode can be viewed as a standalone mini-movie. B5 also has some splendid one-off episodes, but suffers from having too many episodes that are almost entirely plot and character development.
I can appreciate why it did this, but bearing in mind the compromises that were made to get series 5 on the air, it was effort that was (I think) ultimately wasted. Earth: Final Conflict has just gone down a similar road, and here goes Andromeda as well.
It would be nice to see more SF series that start as cheesy and episodic tits-and-ass fests aimed at the lowest common denominator, and then once they've got the ratings, develop into something richer. Enterprise has certainly started the right way to do that. ;-)
Re:Star Trek is in the TV (Score:2)
Re:I can see the point... (Score:2)
I see it as the difference between a collection of short stories (TNG, etc.) and a whopping epic series of novels, such as Dune (B5).
IMHO, I think B5 will be remembered as the first made-for-TV epic novel.
Re:I can see the point... (Score:2)
My favorite quote (Score:5, Insightful)
Translation:
"Despite the fact that the average Sci Fi viewer is ten times more intelligent than the average soap opera viewer, we didn't think they'd be smart enough to follow a complex story line. Also, it doesn't make a difference if the episodes are bad, just as long as more people watch them. Only Star Trek geeks have pride in their work."
Re:My favorite quote (Score:5, Funny)
"We will finally do something I can understand - less 'Star Trek' and more 'Hercules'. I'll be able to read my script without getting a headache. And I hope to be wearing tight leather pants soon."
Complexity != Quality (Score:2)
I think there's good reason for a SciFi TV show to focus on aliens, technology and action and shy away from overly involved narratives and excess character development. Most SciFi writers, when aiming for "deep" narratives make Paradise Lost look like an Archie comic and they're terrible at character development. I can't think of a single Voyager character that was either memorable or even interesting.
Speaking of Soaps, have you ever actually *tried* to watch one? I think they're unbelievably complicated. We tried in college to follow All My Children one quarter (on before lunch, no classes, etc) and found it inexplicable. Yet I've known people (mostly women) who can describe months of plotlines and intricate character motivations. Don't underestimate the soaps.
Re:Complexity != Quality (Score:2)
Point taken, however this is pretty much a generalization.
The point is that Andromeda does have good narratives, and one of the things that makes it good (fun to watch, at least for me - and probably 90% of the rest of the audience) is the complexity.
The science and scientific references are FUN - I get cryptic refeerences to the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, even if my wife doesn't - and it doesn't bother her that she doesn't, it's still enjoyable for her.
While in general you're right that complexity and quality are not interrelated, in this case you're wrong, and in this case, "Too complex" for an actor doesn't mean "too complex" for the audience.
Re:Complexity != Quality (Score:2)
Heh, just because you think that soaps are stupid that doesn't mean that all soap viewers are stupid. It may be that soap viewers are very intelligent, but their intelligence is focused on relationships and emotions and psychological motivations rather than technology.
Personally I think that SciFi is most interesting when positing social questions (Philip K Dick, Ray Bradbury or even Heinlein) or when doing the aliens and gadget routine (Star Wars, etc). I think its weakest when it tries to focus on character development. I have yet to see characters in mainstream scifi get developed beyond the cardboard cutout stage. If I want good human interest (eg, people and social situations are the focus), I'll read someone who's a real fiction writer.
Re:My favorite quote (Score:2)
Re:My favorite quote (Score:2)
SciFi fandom is kinda odd like that. There's a whole slew of questionable works that are idolized. Even if part of that appreciation is the acknolodgement of the individual work's flaws. It would seem that sometimes there is more to a work than its obvious flaws. Or maybe there's some enjoyment in the horrid aspect of a work (MST3K!).
Or sometimes SciFi fans are so desperate for scifi that they'll support anything that comes remotely close to their interest.
That's exactly what's wrong with Enterprise (Score:5, Interesting)
I liked the pilot, but all the other episodes are hardly original and even kind of boring. Perfect example is a few weeks ago when they went to the planet colonized 80 years ago that got irradiated and the humans now live underground. They should fire the writers. It sounded so stupid trying to invent a new dialect for those people and making it sound like bad Shakespeare.
Re:That's exactly what's wrong with Enterprise (Score:2)
that is where the interesting plot line is
Re:That's exactly what's wrong with Enterprise (Score:2)
Well... (Score:3, Funny)
Wait on second (Score:2, Insightful)
isn't that what sitcoms are for?.....SCiFi is for smart people, not for the retard who watched "Jerry" or the pop culture people who watch "will and grace" or "Survivor"
Re:Wait on second (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Wait on second (Score:2)
Something like Jerry Springer, following some drunk people on holiday, editing footage from police cars together gets "stale" rather quickly though...
Re:Wait on second (Score:2)
Or maybe it's too hard to find genuine "freaks" who will shout and fight on stage. Problem is that it gets to the point that the only difference between the real thing and the Austin Powers take off is that the latter used better known actors.
Re:Wait on second (Score:4, Funny)
- StarFleet's Most Exciting Chases
- When Klingons Go Wild
Oh yeah, and several stupid "reality TV" dating/elimination shows. (But with aliens)
Maybe they'll turn TROOPS [theforce.net] into a series...
Re:Wait on second (Score:2)
- StarFleet's Most Exciting Chases
- When Klingons Go Wild
Oh yeah, and several stupid "reality TV" dating/elimination shows. (But with aliens)
It's surprising that there arn't many spoofs of these so called "reality TV" programmes. Since the whole thing appears ripe for poking a lot of fun at. Either of the making with aliens, demons, etc or even simply making one then revealing that all of the so called "normal people" are actually actors
Re:Wait on second (Score:2)
This type of comment is just more masturbation in the style of "is code art?". Code is for monkeys. Sci-fi is for people who are impressed by make-up. Books are for clever people (they also contain less adverts.
Disclaimer: I write code, I watch Star Trek, I read very few books, and I know I am not Stephen Hawking.
not_cub
Re:Wait on second (Score:2)
Do you forget to close brackets in your code as well? And if you read more books, you might realise that they have fewer adverts. ;p
What I want for Andromeda (Score:2)
However, they need to find a damn timeslot for it and keep it there. I haven't seen the show for quite a while because it seemed every week it was on at a different time, or pre-empted.
Nice way to develop viewers.
And yes...I know my problems would be solved if I could convince my wife of the benefits of a Tivo!
Re:What I want for Andromeda (Score:2)
Re:What I want for Andromeda (Score:2)
December 25 was invented as the pretense for solving those types of problems. Use it wisely.
son of a! (Score:2)
At the very least we have Stargate SG-1 to entertain us? The entire show is only about continuity!
On the other hand, remember that whole Tabasco fiasco with Roswell? I don't watch Roswell, but there was some massive campaign to keep the show from being cancelled, maybe something like that can be done to prevent this loss of what makes Andromeda cool?
Re:son of a! (EFC) (Score:2)
You've gotta be kidding me (Score:2)
Re:You've gotta be kidding me (Score:2)
Re:You've gotta be kidding me (Score:2)
To the extent that utterly predictable and stereotypical portrayal of flat, anodyne, uninvolving characters is "well acted", I agree. Similarly, I appreciate the skill that goes into the selection and production of Muzak, but I don't have to want to listen to the awful stuff.
Re:You've gotta be kidding me (Score:2)
I guess the Roman numeral "V" should tip me off that you're not a fan, but I don't see how you could have watched any fair sampling of Babylon 5 and concluded it had plotlines on the order of, say, Galactica (or Andromeda). The show had its share of flaws but generally B5 treated its audience as intelligent and, amazingly, as possessing an attention span longer than the 6-10 minutes of a typical TV act.
A Sign of the Times (Score:5, Informative)
The scary thing is the producers might be right. The steps probably will improve ratings for the show, which is a pathetic comentary on television audiances.
Also, I periodically watched 'Earth: Final Conflict' but this season the producers decided to trash the plot arc and introduce an episodic action driven cookie-cutter plot strategy. There really isn't any good Sci-Fi out there, except perhaps Stargate-SG1 and The Outer Limits.
On the other hand, since none of us are actively producing television series, we don't really have much of a right to complain. Some may say that producers should listen to us because we, the audience, are the 'customers' and are always right, but certainly the changes being made to these shows are based of viewer feedback and focus groups, with the intent to improve ovarall ratings and thus proffit.
Perhaps the programming via subscription model that as tried several times a few years back, needs to be applied to Sci-Fi series. I havn't heard much about this model ($19.95 per season per viewer) recently which leads me to believe the original attempts ere spectacular failures, but perhaps with the more dedicated audiences of Sci-Fi, it would work better.
--CTH
Re:A Sign of the Times (Score:2, Insightful)
We, the audience, are not the customers and whether we are right or not doesn't matter. The advertisers are the customers and the media executives pay the producers to create a product that will deliver the eyeballs to the advertisers. Sometimes the producers, perhaps to avoid boredom on the job, forget about the eyeballs and make something good but if it doesn't deliver the eyeballs the executives will find a monkey who will get the job done.
Re:A Sign of the Times (Score:2)
--CTH
Re:A Sign of the Times (Score:3, Interesting)
intentionally texdured and compled material.
As I write this, I just got finished watching "Jaywalking" on the Tonight show. It was the thanksgiving episode, and this time Jay pitted people on the street vs first graders on thanksgiving knowledge. People on the street didnt know that the pilgrims came over on the mayflower, in 1620, landed at plymouth rock or wore hats with buckles (actually they probably didnt wear hats with buckles, but for the sake of tradition) People also didnt know that the first thanksgiving was between the pigrims and the indians. My favorite line went something like this:
Jay: So who was at the first thanksgiving?
inDUHvidual:It was the Pilgrims and um, i guess the white guys
Jay: So the pilgrims sat down with the white guys
inDUHvidual: yeah
Jay: So who were the pilgrims if they werent white guys?
inDUHvidual: They were the indians
Granted, Jay does all his stints in southern califronia, but keep in mind that most TV shows are made there too, and these are the type of viewers that TV execs think populate the rest of the country.
Re:A Sign of the Times (Score:2)
--CTH
Re:A Sign of the Times (Score:2)
Not really. When Jay Leno comes up to you on the street and asks you trivia questions, if you're smart you know that the only way you're going to be on TV is if you give stupid answers, so that's exactly what people do. It's the people that waste their time answering all the questions correctly, oblivious to the fact that they aren't going to be on TV, that are the truly stupid.
Re:A Sign of the Times (Score:2)
Someone who answers questions for Jay Leno in front of a video camera is doing it solely so that they can get on TV, if they didn't want to get on TV then they wouldn't take time to answer any of the questions. I'm not saying that the desire to be on TV is smart or stupid, but if you want to be on TV and the only way to be on TV is to give stupid answers, giving smart answers is absurdly retarded.
Petition Tribune Entertainment Company! (Score:2, Informative)
Re:A Sign of the Times (Score:2)
But Boone is back this week, I think.
I guess I'm a glutton for punishment.
What you talkin' 'bout, fool?? (Score:2)
I think Enterprise rocks. DS9 was my favorite Star Trek series, and Enterprise is climbing rapidly.
What I especially like about Enterprise is that it's interesting watching the humans do their thing while being the "clueless newbies" on the block.
I also particularly like the way they've handled the Vulcans. It really shows how one dimensional the Vulcans have been in previous episodes. At their best, they are cool toward humans, and at their worse (e.g., the Starship captain) they are downright rude jerks. It's interesting seeing that the Vulcans have done some growing in the later centuries as well.
The characters are still learning their role, but so far, I really like the show.
The only thing negative is that they've embraced time travel plots. I hate time travel plots. There are very few plots that require time travel, and couldn't be rewritten without it. RM101's rule: All time travel episodes suck*.
*Well, except for the original series' City on the Edge of Forever where Kirk, Spock and McCoy go back to the 1930s. But that's the exception that proves the rule.
Re:What you talkin' 'bout, fool?? (Score:2)
I wouldn't say that it rocks, but by god it's far better than Hercules in Space.
As far as time travel, it's like the freeken Holodeck episodes. Horrible. At least the Enterprise series doesn't have those.
Babylon 5 was good, and Farscape has it's moments - but it has gotten stale.
Otherwise it's time to read a book.
Re:What you talkin' 'bout, fool?? (Score:2)
Why?
Because time doesn't exist. It's a concept made my man only. Look up the definition. Time is what we use to measure change, so how the hell could we travel "back in time" when time itself is a measure of change?
Re:What you talkin' 'bout, fool?? (Score:2)
I WISH Andromeda was as good as Hercules in Space. Herc & Xena both had this quirky charm that made them very appealing to me -- and there was lots of fightin' and good-looking women. Sorbo even at least TRIED to act -- and his supporting cast was good enough to carry the show despite his wooden nature.
Andromeda has almost nothing going for it, and I say that as a rabid SF fan who will watch nearly any piece of sh!t with a spaceship in it. I tried, I really did, but Andromeda made me cringe every time I watched it. Andromeda makes Enterprise look like high art, like something worthy of a government grant, even though Enterprise doesn't have a hottie ship's computer. And if there is one thing I can't get enough of, it's a hottie hologram... but even that can't get me to watch the show.
(I can't stand Lexx either. Farscape I have tried to watch but it's been weak... I am hoping that it was just bad luck with the episodes I saw, I will give it another shot some day under friends' advice.)
If you are depressed by Andromeda or Enterprise, let me recomemnd "24." So far, 24 is the best TV series I have ever seen. Ever. They replay it once a week on FOX and also on FX, I think... look for it Sunday night, then catch the new one. You'll be glad you did.
(well, M*A*S*H is hard to beat, but classic TV is a different category...)
Re:What you talkin' 'bout, fool??-Books (Score:2)
Eh. It's all in the writing. The really good sci-fi TV productions have been written by accomplished print authors like Ellison and Sturgeon.
Woe that Babylon 5 never produced the Ellison script for the sequel to "Demon with a Glass Hand".
Re:What you talkin' 'bout, fool?? (Score:2)
Gag me. My 1 year old neice demonstrates better judgement than the characters on the show. And she sticks random objects off of the floor in her mouth.
This is old news. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:This is old news. (Score:2)
Same guys as EFC? (Score:2, Insightful)
Keep Majel happy. [cinescape.com]
Petition? (Score:2, Interesting)
The first season, was, by far, the best season of science fiction on TV ever. The finale was awesome. And yes, things started sucking even at the beginning of season two... although it is still a great show.
Intelligent Sci-Fi (Score:2)
Good Interview here [scifi.com]
The hope is that this will go on to become a series
As far as Andromenda, this sounds like Paramount is trying to do what TNN wanted to do with the Bab5 sequel, turn it into a Science fiction version cross mix of WWF and Baywatch.
If it was that easy, why doesn't someone try to write stuff like that? Or don't they know that that it is easier to write stuff that sucks vs stuff that is good?
Re:Intelligent Sci-Fi (Score:2)
You won't find many bigger B5 fans than I, but B5 doesn't have a very good track record with the movies. Also, even if the show does get picked up, it's quite a long way over the horizon.
Re:Intelligent Sci-Fi (Score:2)
Mini-series Trek (Score:2)
This way, there's tremendous continuity between episodes of each 'series', but you need only have a smattering of knowledge about Star Trek to pick up on a new one. Also, there's enough time to do some character development, but not enough that they have to get radically desperate for ideas the way they did with some episodes.
Re:Mini-series Trek (Score:2)
That's a neat idea and lots of us would like it. It can never happen, though.
A TV show or any other entertainment property is all about building equity. You invest in the characters and the stories... you need to be able to sell lunch pails and action figures. A show that jumped around could never build that kind of momentum. While it might be a GREAT show, it wouldn't be the KIND of great that the studio would really support... I think it would be the dreaded "critically acclaimed" type of thing.
(I also think that you'd lose the majority of the public by jumping all over... the STUPID majority, sure, but you gotta play the numbers.)
Case of mistaken identity.. (Score:2)
But you know what - I still like the show.
If anyone can remember back to when shows like "Gunsmoke" and "Bonanza" ruled the airwaves, you'd notice the similarities between them and Andromeda immediately. There's that deep announcer-type voice over for the opening, that grand idea of "taming" the hinterlands and a cast whose story revolved mostly around their "homestead". Then we have the fact thatthe characters are almost one-to-one. For example, the leader and visionary would mean Dylan Hunt can be equated to Ben Cartwright, the "cute" Trance would probably be Little Joe, and so on. Then there's the fact that all episodes (except maybe season finale/premier) are an hour or less and the episode is mostly self contained. Finally, you can add in the gun fights, which seem pretty much bang on to those moments when we see those neat "force-lances", and the horse'n'buggy stuff matches right up to the Andromeda's crew using the Eureka Maru to go off on whatever "mission" is necessary..
All in all, it looks like we're back to the *serial-western*, except in space. So I'd say what's really been done is to revert to the core of TV history - simple mindless entertainment with no strings attached.
FarscapeFarscapeFarscape... (Score:2, Insightful)
Apparently the poster hasn't really been watching all that sci-fi has to offer of late. Farscape has been and continues to be-
1. Very continuity driven, yet accessible through genuine humor. Enterprise has apparently been passing all of the inhabited planets with jokes on them. Farscape succeeds by making the continuity-heavy bits multi-parters (there've been 2, if memory serves, THREE PART episodes), and the less continuity-heavy parts character driven...so even if you're not quite sure what's going on, the interactions between crew members (whether they're pissed off with each other or having mad sex) makes up for it.
Ah yes, Stargate SG-1 gets continuity points as well. Great show. Nearly every episode feels like a movie in itself (okay, that's just because they're no commercials built in, and it has super high production values, but i'm not complaining!)
2. Full of well-acted changing characters. Emphasis on the _changing_. The only other show I can cite where characters change so dramatically and _believably_ is B5. It's such a joy to watch characters you love go through hell and back and come out the other end with scars that they keep with them for episodes and episodes.
3. Unafraid to push boundaries. Farscape, near the end of the 3rd season it is in currently, ran an episode that was almost entirely a cartoon--a looney toon, in fact. It was funny, and touching, even.
4. And on the subject of being touching. Call me what you like, but Farscape makes me cry. Pretty often. So there. B5 did it, but Andromeda? Too bad what potential _was_ there has just gone the way of the dodo. And voyager? Man would I have jumped for joy if Janeway had bitten it...
So that's all. I _hope_ the poster takes the time to look into Farscape...I like to think of myself as a pretty smart guy, and that I've seen enough crappy sci-fi to know that Farscape is pretty darn smart.
Of course, this is all just my opinion.
Octavian
Re:FarscapeFarscapeFarscape... (Score:2)
And the cartoon episode was awesome. Even the live "in brain" moments managed to keep a cartoony feel to them.
"Take Revenge John!" (Harvy: big grin, nods up and done rapidly)
"Uuuuhhhh, nope." (Dargo: prior to chasing John around more)
Re:FarscapeFarscapeFarscape... (Score:2)
One other thing about Farscape is that the vast majority of the cast are aliens. Even the ones who look like humans do not necessarily act like humans. Aliens should be alien, indeed for that matter "humans" in the supposed future probably shouldn't behave according to contempoary sterotypes.
Why must everything be dumbed down? (Score:2)
Re:Why must everything be dumbed down? (Score:2)
I think we all know the answer here: It's not necessarily that the audience is too dumb to appreciate the intelligent series that exist. It's that the typical TV executive is too dumb to appreciate them. While watching the deep storylines, the corporate drones feel bewildered and oppressed by an unnerving sense that everyone else gets it but they do not -- that there is a sly joke going on, and it's on them.
They dumb things down not because they have any empirical evidence that this will help ratings. They do it, rather, because they have no other ideas -- no clue what else to do. This is how a ratings slump has always been solved, so this is how they must be solved. Never mind that, in the actual history of television, these shennanigans have never actually solved a ratings slump.
Although television is allegedly a creative art, the very top levels are infested with groupthinkers and sheep. Good science fiction, true science fiction, escapes them and they are threatened by it.
Re:Why must everything be dumbed down? (Score:2)
And the same fan is dying for the reruns to start so he can see the backstory.
So, wouldn't tons of backstory give reruns more value than as filler between seasons?
If you'll notice... (Score:2, Interesting)
It gives us characters we can care about. It gives us history, its interesting to see the beginings of things that were taken for granted in earlier series. It gives us incite and perspective with which we can better appreciate some of the things we already know about.
Vulcans seem more "real", they aren't treated as infalible as they were in other series. Its intriguing to see. The first contact with the Klingons was perhaps what we expected but yet from the very first they seem honorable. It will be fun to see the first contact with the other races that we know about.
Its refreshing to see what the rest of the universe looks like without the all powerful all pervasive Starfleet getting in the way. Hopefully there will be more glimplses of earth life beyond the frieghters. No more searching for excuses on why the transporter can't be used to save the day or why the replicators, just this once, can't produce what is needed. This crew is facing real limitations on ability and knowledge...it will make for better stories.
Yes, it has its problems...I find the opening annoying, lose the vocals, the imagry works and would be more powerful without them. The time travel crap that infested Voyager is threatening to raise its ugly head and I hope they can keep it to a minimum.
Andromeda? Who cares what happens to it. Give me Enterprise and Farscape and I'll be a happy camper.
Stargate! (Score:2)
Stargate SG-1
Stargate SG-1
Stargate SG-1
Even if you don't get cable, catch it this week in syndication -- it's a hilarious episode where they make fun on conspiracy theorists.
Stargate SG-1 is good, too (Score:2, Informative)
The only two shows that are on par with it are Babylon 5 (which is in reruns), and Farscape (which is a hard show to compare it to, since it has a much different feel to it).
While most of the first season of SG-1 sucked, and part of the second had problems, it gets REALLY good after that point. Every season of the show has been getting better and better (much like Babylon 5 did, with its slow start).
If you've never seen the show before, and are interested in trying it, here is the order I'd suggest to "sample" it:
You can skip the rest of season one if you're just sampling the series to decide if you like it. Before watching much further you should go back and watch the rest of season one, however - while not all of season 1 is important to the ongoing plot, 9 of the remaining 16 episodes contain information that is important/vital to understanding events later in the series.
--The Rizz
"Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidise it." --Ronald Reagan
Re:Stargate SG-1 is good, too (Score:2)
People dealing with realistic problems like running from aliens fighting aliens and alien conspiracies...?
I think the Simpsons has more real-life problems, and that includes the episode where they try to find the silver tongue of Jeremiah Springfield.
I miss Star Trek TAS!!! (Score:2)
More Lexa Doig (Score:2)
I've said it before, and I'll say it again: more Lexa Doig! More Rommie!
If you don't understand how the incredibly sexy avatar of the most powerful starship is the bestest geek girlfriend ever, you probably shouldn't even be reading Slashdot. :)
Re:More Lexa Doig (Score:2)
From the Slipstream article [slipstreamnews.com]:
Okay. I see their point now. Robert Hewitt Who? =)
Lucy Lawless... (Score:3, Funny)
Wonderful! Next thing you know, you'll start seeing a few guest appearances by Lucy Lawless... [frodisman.com]
And in other news... (Score:2)
TV that doesn't suck (and some that does) (Score:3, Insightful)
shows I like with few reservations
24 (VERY GOOD, try it out.)
ER (there's more to life than SF)
Buffy
Angel (I actually far prefer this to Buffy these days, it has a "quirkiness" that reminds me of Herc & Xena)
Stargate SG-1 (best SF currently on, ties with B5 overall, on course to overtake it)
Junkyard Wars
Good Eats (the cooking show that's so good it inspired me to learn to cook)
The Sopranos (on hiatus)
Six Feet Under (on hiatus)
Malcolm in the Middle
shows that I watch despite some pretty serious flaws, though I feel kind of dirty after a viewing
Enterprise
Alias (Sidney has terrible, terrible fieldcraft and most of the tech is totally silly, otherwise pretty neat)
X-Files (increasingly incomprehensible!)
shows I really wish I could learn to like
Farscape (Saw it twice: blue-girl got a cold, and a monster in a cheap-looking mine. Lame.)
shows that even prisoners of war should not be made to watch
Lexx
Andromeda
Earth: Final Conflict
Dark Angel (She has cat DNA, so she goes into HEAT. That was the last of many straws.)
It's late and I have probably forgotten something obvious.
That's what Wolfe does (Score:2)
Like it or not, it's a fact that if the masses don't like it, it doesn't make much money, and if it doesn't make enough money to justify airing it instead of something more marketable, we don't get to see it at all.
Action-oriented? Little continuity of plot? Sounds like the original Star Trek to me...
Split the cast! (Score:2)
How about: A new drug is developed which - when used in a Wayist, super(wo)man, love machine setting with the right dodad in the neck-jack - transforms members of various (sub)species into truly peaceful, cooperative, enlightened folk. The crew realize that among them they have the resources to transform civilizations by distributing this drug. Sorbo won't go along because the "High Guard" mission statement holds too much consciousness to be a bad thing. Sorbo becomes recurrent guest character Last Unhappy Man - sort of a Flying Dutchman against the background of expanding waves of utopian transformation.
Re:Discovery Channel anyone? (Score:2)
The changes to the Enterprise series shows that too many TV producers for the major over-air networks are dumbing down their shows unneccessarily.
Re:Discovery Channel anyone? (Score:2)
Probably most of the people you deal with on a day to day basis are tech-savvy educated and fairly intelligent.
I BELIEVE that this is not the case in the general population, and maybe the networks are dumbing down the content in order to match the new audience.
--jeff
Re:Soooo..... (Score:2)
Well, you do know that he was cremated and some of his ashes were sent up with the Shuttle and scattered in outer space? Hard to find, these days...
Re:I don't know (Score:3, Insightful)
How I hate when people spout tripe like this. Sci fi is not about "escaping reality". It is not. It never has been. If it is "escapist" at all, it's about escaping into reality -- into a Universe larger and more awe-inspiring than the insipid little minutae with which we fill our lives.
Science fiction is not about spaceships and little green men, time travellers and miracle cures. It's not about gadgets and gizmos. It's not about a million different outcomes to the roll of the dice. Science fiction, at its best, is about being open to new ideas and new ways of thinking about things
Perhaps three quotes by John Campbell typify what science fiction really is:
Re:Allright! (Score:2)
Um, the last original episode of DS9 aired in, I believe, 1998 or 1999. A little late for creative feedback, I'd imagine (unless you run across one of the many spacetime anomalies...)
Re:Allright! (Score:2)
-Restil
Re:labotomized show?? - leave it for the kids!! (Score:2)
If Andromeda-lite is more successful than Full Strength Andromeda, I don't hold a lot of hope for more intelligent shows to be produced. Maybe Babylon 5 will be available on DVD, but if skiffy sells, who will take a chance on something better?
Hey, Andromeda isn't perfect (oddly and unrealistically choreographed gunfights stick out as of late), but there's a lot of intelligence and planning in the backstory and in the development so far. It would be a shame to give that up for episode after episode of "Good guy in silver starship, bad guy with funny forehead and dark starship with lots of pointy bits."
On the other hand, they could pull a Chris Carter and pretend they weren't aliens all along. "We're sailors. This is HMS Andromeda." That would be worth watching for the irony value alone.
Re:Why is this so bad? (Score:2)
Most notably "The Inner Light" #125 [sttpd.com], which won the 1993 Hugo award for Best Dramatic Presentation [hugo.org].
For 99% of everything else though, you're right... The action episodes at least give us something to look at. We already know with the Prime Directive episodes what's going to happen: The primitive people have a secret weapon called a "rock", which is impervious to phasers, undeflected by shields, and pops a rivet on the starboard nacelle causing plasma to vent. Picard must use his clever intellect to get the enterprise out of harm's way before the barbarians hurl another "rock" at them which will surely breech the warp core!
Re:There's Still Good SF (Score:2)
Re:There's Still Good SF (Score:2)
Good luck.
Re:There's Still Good SF (Score:2)
This is actually the first of a series, which ends on one almighty cliffhanger. but I've never been able to find any subsequent books.
Re:A note on Andromeda (Score:2)
I'm really miffed that they got rid of her tail. This show had two things going for it; Harper, and Trance. Anyone who's seen the episode Harper 2.0 knows what I'm talking about. And anyone who saw it and still doesn't should go back to watching Voyager reruns.
Honestly, is the whole of Slashdot against Andromeda, or do you people just need something to bitch about? I'll bet that 90% of the people who're complaining in here haven't watched half the episodes. I've watched them all; every single episode since it started. And yes, there is a large plot arc over the whole thing, and that's part of what makes this show so fricking cool. Sure it's not as deep as Babylon 5, but this is the closest thing to the deep plots of anime that Canada and the US are going to pump out any time soon without being a soap opera.
Btw, what are you people talking about, calling the character designs ugly? You wanted some innovation in character designs--you got it. Quit complaining. The designs here have got to be some of the most original (and logical, evolution-wise) that we've seen in decades. A species that blinds then predigests their food outside of their body, and then a religion that attempts to curb this behaviour and make the race more civilized. A species of intergalactic purple genetically-engineered superbeings who will occasionally destroy civilizations out of boredom. The Nietscheans.. if you've taken any philosophy or religious studies at all, and enjoyed it, then it's really interesting to see the whole dynamic of a religion on a species, or at least the series' take on this idea, from a viewpoint where the religion is so completely different that you can have no prejudices about it.
This show is deep, because it examines not how humans interact, but how entities interact. These aren't people in alien costumes, these are aliens coming to grips with the divide between theory and practice in their personal philosophies. It's about the clashes between their philosophies. The Andromeda is a place where people of completely different philosophies and hopes for the future are all working together for a common goal; peace. This show is about how they'll reach that goal, despite their personal and societal differences. That is the plot; not how many Nietscheans Hunt can kick the butts of in a week.
This show isn't about good versus evil. This show is about people versus themselves. It's about self-discovery, a shared voyage with a common purpose, and the internal clashes that result. Honestly, I think it's about everything that Voyager promised, but never delivered on. Perhaps that's just too deep for some of the people out there to grasp, but this is a show for thinkers, not for people with an "oo! I like swords!" mentality. Go find a show of your own, if you don't like it; don't go wrecking ours..