Re: Battlestar Galactica

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Julia Thompson" <julia-ZgY6uBjK2T4=@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <brin-l-r0TUnz/JSrZWk0Htik3J/w==@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sunday, April 18, 2004 10:03 AM
Subject: Re: Battlestar Galactica


> Robert Seeberger wrote:
>
> > SciFi bats at a bit less than .100 IMO. I know a lot of people
*like*
> > SG1, but it seems fairly pedestrian to me, and people like it
mainly
> > because there is nothing substantially better offered.
>
> Interesting.  SG1 started out as a Showtime series.  It may have
gone
> downhill a bit since SciFi picked up the production.

It doesn't seem all that different to me.


>
> I'm sure someone here has been tracking it a lot more closely than I
> have.  Has anyone seen a shift, and not for the better, after
Showtime
> passed it off to SciFi?  (I don't have dates as to when that
happened,
> unfortunately.)
>
SG1 is a pretty good series in comparison to other current SFnal TV
series.
My contention is that the state of TV SF is pretty poor.

It think the problem boils down to the people in charge of the various
series are quite clueless regarding a genre they care nothing about
('cepting its financial rewards), and viewers who are latching on to
any SFnal crumbs they can manage to scrabble for.

The truely unfortunate aspect is that TV SF people seem to think they
are doing a *great* job and providing us with *wonderful* programming.
This is in contrast with the much better fare one finds if one is
looking for Horror on television.


xponent
Spotty Records Maru
rob