The Official Star Trek Movie Forum

The Official Star Trek Movie Forum > Star Trek > Off Topic Discussions > Why Fringe’s Finale Marks the Decline of Sci-Fi on Network TV
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 01-18-2013, 11:51 AM
omegaman's Avatar
omegaman omegaman is offline
Admiral
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Penrith NSW Australia
Posts: 4,609
Default Why Fringe’s Finale Marks the Decline of Sci-Fi on Network TV

http://www.wired.com/underwire/2013/01/fringe-finale/
__________________
TREK IS TREK. WHATEVER THE TIMELINE!

The next TV Series should be called STARFLEET!
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 01-19-2013, 08:11 AM
martok2112's Avatar
martok2112 martok2112 is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: River Ridge, LA
Posts: 6,480
Default

Well of course folks don't want to watch intelligent sci-fi anymore. It's reverting back to the time when shows like Beverly Hillbillies were number one, except in this case, it's juvenile, dumbassed "reality" shows.

Why waste your time actually using your imagination when you can watch a bunch of unemployed punks living some so-called "dream" for their fifteen minutes of fame? Total trailer trash television.
__________________


Last edited by martok2112 : 01-19-2013 at 08:47 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 01-19-2013, 10:06 AM
samwiseb samwiseb is offline
Commander
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,207
Default

I think it's more complicated than that.

Reality TV is not only cheep, it's really cheep compared to more professionally produced TV programs. And what we're seeing is corporatism and media running just completely out of control in their ever-competitive grab for people's attention spans. More channels means less viewers. More internet and devices means more distractions besides TV. TV networks are producing/selling what they can afford to produce with the numbers they have, and consumers are buying.

A person with a smart phone can't even sit in a darkened movie theater anymore without forgetting that he just paid $11.50 for this experience; so great is his need to be plugged in. Car Crash Guy's ST09 review at one point summed up exactly what is happening with our media. What's one TV network in the face of all the ever-exploding media options available?

Even LOST would not generate the numbers today that it did in 2004-2010. And a 'hardware' oriented sci-fi show? Who knows. BSG may very well remain the last of those to get a successful run.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 01-19-2013, 11:16 AM
kevin's Avatar
kevin kevin is offline
Federation Councillor
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: East Kilbride, Glasgow, UK
Posts: 21,077
Default

I think this is why I'm not holding my breath for a new Trek TV series anywhere in the immediate future. And even if one does arrive I'm not sure network would have the resources for it. I think pay cable would be somewhere that would and even then it's not guaranteed.

I think another issue is the old problem of network shows not really getting time to breath and exist before cancellation beckons. In that sense the article is right. In the case of Fringe it really shouldn't have lasted five seasons as it never had fantastic ratings after the first season. The irony now (for ENT fans anyway) is if that show today was getting the ratings it did when it was canned it would probably qualify as a major hit, things have changed so much so quickly. By the standards of the network it was on anyway.

It still wasn't in great shape but stuff like that is kinda relative nowadays.
__________________
'If the Apocalypse starts, beep me!' - Buffy Summers
'The sky's the limit.....' Jean-Luc Picard, 'All Good Things'


courtesy of Saquist

Last edited by kevin : 01-19-2013 at 11:26 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 01-19-2013, 12:49 PM
samwiseb samwiseb is offline
Commander
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,207
Default

Of course, what numbers would ENT actually be pulling in if it were one today?

Pay TV seems as likely a place as any, what with the presumed success of Game of Thrones on HBO. I mean I've never seen it, but I would assume it's a top quality production (for whatever its budget is). Ten episodes per season seems to be the standard with them now. It used to be thirteen. I remember wishing BSG could have remained at thirteen episodes, since most 'space' shows are already stretched in their budgets anyway and the variable quality usually suggests they could have been 40% shorter.

But meanwhile the market continues to change. Would even a pay TV option be practical by the time CBS considered it? And as you said, even now it's already not guaranteed.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 01-19-2013, 01:03 PM
kevin's Avatar
kevin kevin is offline
Federation Councillor
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: East Kilbride, Glasgow, UK
Posts: 21,077
Default

I think it was down to around 3 million viewers (give or take a few hundred thousand either way) by it's final season on UPN.

Granted, the current TV output of the successor network The CW also suggests that Star Trek would not fit it's style of programming but there have been shows getting by for years on ratings less than even that on it the last couple years (Supernatural, Nikita, etc).
__________________
'If the Apocalypse starts, beep me!' - Buffy Summers
'The sky's the limit.....' Jean-Luc Picard, 'All Good Things'


courtesy of Saquist
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 01-19-2013, 06:25 PM
martok2112's Avatar
martok2112 martok2112 is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: River Ridge, LA
Posts: 6,480
Default

CW never really struck me as a "Star Trek" conducive network either.

I agree that it would be cool if ST were a pay-cable series with 10-13 eps per season that allowed it to focus on quality story telling and production values.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 01-19-2013, 08:08 PM
samwiseb samwiseb is offline
Commander
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,207
Default

That's the theory anyway. Even if it happened that way it might not pan out.

But it would seem preferable to having 625 episodes with only 20-30% of them having real replay value.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 01-19-2013, 09:21 PM
martok2112's Avatar
martok2112 martok2112 is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: River Ridge, LA
Posts: 6,480
Default

Agreed.

Even though this was not on a pay network, shows like Falling Skies definitely have a good replay value. I was enthralled by the first season.

I have "The Walking Dead" season one, and still have yet to watch it, but I know it's good. Lots of acclaim, and my roomie enjoys it. (Big time zombie genre fan.)
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 01-20-2013, 04:48 AM
horatio's Avatar
horatio horatio is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 9,282
Default

Game of Thrones is a good example for why people are still willing to see and pay for good television shows. If the folks who market it would be smart enough to sell it on the net via stream services to foreigners they would even make more money.
It's like with music, once the possibility to legally download music was created pirating went down.

So yeah, I don't join the "people are getting dumber" chorus. The only dumb people are the ones who do not see the ample opportunities to sell their stuff.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:07 AM.


Forum theme courtesy of Mark Lambert
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2009 by Paramount Pictures. STAR TREK and all related
marks and logos are trademarks of CBS Studios Inc. All Rights Reserved.