Nothing is more damaging to the science fiction genre than The SciFi Channel.

[Orrex]

A whole century of shitty pulp fiction s/f stories don't make the genre look anywhere near as silly as one afternoon's worth of "SciFi Originals," such as "Gryphon" and "Ogre."

Often on DU we here legitimate complaints that Hollywood eschews clever and original science fiction stories in favor of tepid, mass-marketed remakes and mind-numbing videogame adaptations, but in reality The SciFi Channel is a much more egregious offender. In posturing itself as a dedicated outlet for the genre, it bears a greater responsibility for exposing a wider audience to the best that the genre has to offer. Instead, we get "Rock Monster" and "Komodo vs. Cobra."

What about BSG? One hour out of 168 per week. Hell, let's throw in Ghost Hunters and make it 2 hours out of 168. Far less on average, if we confine ourselves to the initial run of each episode.


As long as this idiotic channel has the de facto lock on televised science fiction, we might as well write off the genre as a whole.

:rant:

[YankeyMCC]

1. I really couldn't agree more

except two points...You're counting "Ghost Hunters" as a plus??

And I do question if the new BSG would've ever seen the light of day w/o the SciFi channel. That would really be a shame, but perhaps it would be worth the sacrafice for all the actual harm the rest of the crap is doing to the perception of SF as a worthwhile genre.

on edit: well I guess i could agree more...but i agree a lot anyway :)

[NewHampshireDem]

2. I agree

I don't know why they don't do more films like their versions of the Dune books. Well, I guess I do know why: money. But that said, there's a lot of terrific sci-fi they could adapt without having to spend billions of dollars on special effects.

BTW, on a related note: I'm living in New Zealand right now so I didn't get to see 'Tinman.' Was it any good?

[TechBear_Seattle]

3. Their series rock; their movies suck rocks

I liked "The Dresden Files" and, as much as I wanted to hate "Battlestar: Galactica" (Google "Mormons in Space" to see why) I've enjoyed it. They not only kept "Stargate" alive but added to the franchise is a reasonably decent way. If "Firefly" had been their project, it probably would be in it's 4th season right now and playing to critical acclaim.

However, their "SciFi Original Movies" almost always stink (I will make a big exception for "Tin Man" and I rather liked their production of "Dune" and "Children of Dune," but those were mini-series so I don't know if they count.) On the bright side, I can think of no better encouragement to read science fiction than the SciFi Channel. :hi:

[Hong Kong Cavalier]

5. I'm going to have to disagree with you about one thing.

I think Stargate SG-1 (And Stargate Atlantis) is part of the problem, not part of the solution.
It's "old" sci-fi. Heavily episodic and relying on gimmicks (Ben Browder and Claudia Black? C'mon, they should have just done the fifth season of Farscape instead of "The Peacekeeper Wars".)

It's mostly sci-fi that doesn't really make you think. Yes, I know that "they don't take themselves too seriously" and that "it's all in good fun", but I expect more from my science fiction. Especially after seeing what a show like Battlestar Galactica can do for the genre. I like to watch an episode and discuss it with my peers afterwards. I can't do that with Stargate, nor can I do it with most Star Trek shows, either. Galactica, on the other hand...I've had numerous rounds of discussion with my boss on that show, and we've loved them.

The Stargate series felt like they were milking the franchise for all it's worth. Get rid of one bad guy? Surprise! There's someone else out there who's even stronger! Get rid of him? Surprise! There's someone else out there stronger than him! (Lather, rinse, repeat)

I will admit that the two Stargate series are highly rated on the Sci-Fi channel, but after watching Galactica and Firefly, and seeing how a science-fiction show can bring even current topics into discussion, I simply can't watch either Stargate series anymore.

I think it's time Sci-Fi got past making science fiction for science fiction's sake. Even the original Star Trek addressed social topics of the day like the Cold War and racism.

But I still will admit that I might be wrong, since the Stargate series is highly rated on the channel. I just can't watch it.

[TechBear_Seattle]

6. I see your point but...

Some days, you don't want to have to think; there is a reason why "escapist" sub-genres are perennially popular. I don't have a problem with escapist science fiction, as some of it can be quite good. Of course, some of it can be quite bad, too, and the SciFi channel seems to have an affinity for the bad stuff.

[Hong Kong Cavalier]

7. Heh. I consider Firefly to be my "escapist" SciFI, and that still makes me think.

I'm weird. I really like thinking, even in my escapist scifi.
Stargate isn't my cup'o'tea, I guess.

[semillama]

4. It truly has become a wasteland, although it started out pretty strong.

It all went to shit in 1997 when USA bought it and it went through a series of sales. The original network had Asimov and Roddenberry on its advisory board.

And it had some great series, remember Farscape? and the anime saturday was awesome. They had MST3K for a while. Remeber Good vs. Evil and Lexx?

Granted, there's been some good stuff lately, like picking up BSG and Doctor Who. Taken was a good miniseries.

but recently it's gone straight to hell. ECW? Really?

[magellan]

8. Yeah, what is with SciFi showing ECW?

A couple of times now I've turned to SciFi as refuge of last resort and found ECW on. Fiction, yes. Science fiction? Uh, no, not by any stretch of the imagination.

If I'm ever even vaguely interested in watching sweaty men wrestle I'll watch Cops in Miami.

[semillama]

9. It's a result of the USA network acquisition

USA networks also show WWE shows like Raw and Smackdown on different nights and channels, and when WWE resurrected the ECW brand, to maintain the illusion of it being a separate entity in the WWE, they needed another network to put it on. I think as a cursory nod to the theme of the network, they had some "scifi/fantasy themed" characters such as a zombie and a vampire.

[magellan]

10. How absurd

But then mergers rarely work in the best interests of the consumers.

Thanks for explaining, I didn't know about the acquisition.

[jojo54]

11. Agreed!! Sci-fi just isn't sci-fi anymore!

There have been SOME good movies and I'm a big fan of BSG (it's a hell of a lot better than the original). But I'm of an age when the movies and tv shows kept you guessing what the monster/entity/paranormal state was until almost the very end; i.e. X the Unknown. The newer episodes of The Outer Limits are pretty good, but in my day there was Chiller, The Inner Sanctum and of course, The Twillight Zone. On a final note: I HATE the chop shop movies (all blood & guts, no imagination).

My opinion, for what it's worth.

[Forkboy]

12. I'd have no probs with the camp stuff if they balanced it with something intelligent.

I don't have cable but just spent a week at me mum's place and it was sad (all cable, not just Sci-Fi). I was watching some horrible movie and wondering why they couldn't try to make a serious sci fi movie along the lines of Solaris or something. You know, something that makes one actually stir a brain cell or two. :)

[TZ]

13. Have to agree with you

Although I LOVED their Dune and Children of Dune mini-series. I was hoping that they would air old sci-fi series more often. I still don't understand why if you want to see any ST series (except for Enterprise, which I loathe) you have to go to Spike TV...
The worst thing they aired though..was that Shannon Dougherty train wreck called "Scare tactics" where they deliberately scared the crap out of people as a prank. That was S+M at its best if you ask me.

[Babel_17]

14. There was one episode

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0745485/

from their "Welcome to Paradox" series that had me blubbering like .... some great big blubbery thing.

I never read the John Varley short story it was based on but the episode "Blue Champagne" really got to me, especially the ending.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welcome_to_Paradox

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Welcome_to_Paradox_episodes

[Fire Walk With Me]

15. You didn't like their film about the tornado hitting a nuclear power plant

that was in meltdown as the Earth fell into a black hole while being attacked by space zombies?

[cynatnite]

16. Totally agree...

I don't understand it myself. With all the great sci-fi material available, they resort to B-movie type of flicks. That's not to mention ECW :puke:

BSG, Stargate, and a few other shows really make it worthwhile for me. There is also the daily marathons. I do enjoy some of those, but I wish they'd pull out some of the older stuff more often.

[JitterbugPerfume]

17. BSG is really good ,but this is the last season.

I enjoyed the Dune movies , but other than that the SciFi channel sucks .

If you want some good SciFi read some Philip K Dick or something.



Jerico is really worth watching, and they are showing reruns on SciFi.

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

18. The best things they show are X-Files, Twilight Zone, and Outer Limits

The rest (especially their original productions) consists more or less of cheesy critter flicks that always seem to have the same plastic-looking young Hollywood wannabe stars who have no character. The actors they hire for their terrible monster pictures look more like they belong on a soap opera, with usually not a hair out of place or a lipstick smudge despite spending days in the forest or jungle and with zero personality in their acting. The plots are as predictable as the next George Bush failure.

And even the channel's, name "Sci-Fi", is incredibly grating to a lot of people. Most of the old time science fiction fans and writers never use the term "sci fi". It's considered a derogatory term. The great radio show devoted to science fiction on Pacifica Radio during the 1970s and 1980s, "Hour 25" hosted by the late Mike Hodel often had rants against the use of the term "sci fi" and the fact that the great writers in the genre like Harlan Ellison campaigned against the use of that term. It's almost as funny and inappropriate as "skiffy". The genre is science fiction, not sci-fi. It shows to me just how out of touch with the genre the Sci-Fi Channel really is.

[Orrex]

19. Every original film is the same

Honestly, if I wrote or filmed or acted in something as bad as "Ogre," I would work very hard to make sure that my participation in it never became public knowledge. These are--every last one of them--embarrassingly bad. I can't imagine how small their budgets were, but I would be amazed if they made it past six figures. Terrible, from start to finish.

I can understand the need to serve the mighty bottom line, since the channel is a profit-generating machine, after all. But for pity's sake, why not run some science fiction films not produced by the network? Surely there must be at least one film, in the entire canon, that's of greater quality than "Rock Monster," right? And a lot of older films would be dirt cheap to broadcast--probably a lot cheaper even than those aforementioned low-budget films, and I'd bet that more people would watch them.

Hell, they could dedicate one day each week to resurrecting an otherwise lost film, or maybe an old serial.


Good grief! Have we nothing to hope for except another sequel to "Vaguely Prehistoric CGI Crapmonster?"


And why is there no space-based programming on SciFi, outside of BSG?

[Touchdown]

20. Oh c'mon. You know you love Flash Gordon!

:evilgrin::rofl:

[comrade snarky]

21. I will

forever hate them for what they did to Dune.

But I will always love them for Mansquito. It's half man, half mosquito. Mansquito. Brilliant!

Oh, I didn't watch it, oh lord no...

[AnnieBW]

22. And they cancelled Farscape, too!

Sci-Lie is more like it!