Sci-Fi we can do without

[Gwyddyon]

Farscape from "Dog with Two Bones" on*.  "Into the Lion's Den" is the series finale as far as I'm concerned.

* i.e., the last episode of Season 3, all of season 4, and the "Peacekeeper Wars" miniseries.  Nothing to redeem any of it.

I wouldn't go quite that far, but I can see the frustration.  As Farscape season finales go, it was weak.  Really weak.  And Noranti's introduction has always seemed poorly done to me.  On the other hand, there's enough in season 4 to keep me at least entertained if not thrilled, and I'm one of those sick few who absolutely loved the way season 4 ended (Peacekeeper Wars doesn't exist as far as I'm concerned).

[Heradel]

I think you're addressing this to TAD, not me.  B5 is my all-time favorite SF show and I have never spoken a word against it (though I could; the final season left much to be desired.)

Yeah, sorry, I was. I was just lazy and didn't snip out your part.

On the final season — I've had problems with it too, but I still think it was better to have that season than cut B5 off at season four, which was the plan from conception. And there were some good episodes, Paragon of Animals and the Very Long Night of Londo Molari have always been favorites of mine.

[Boggled Coriander]

On the final season — I've had problems with it too, but I still think it was better to have that season than cut B5 off at season four, which was the plan from conception.

I think the plan for B5 from conception had been to go for 5 full seasons, but when it looked like the 5th season might not happen they moved the resolution of several plot and character arcs to the 4th season.  It made for something of a jarring transition from the 4th to the 5th season, but it's better than having lots of plot threads left unfinished if the 5th season hadn't happened.

I was a big, MAJOR fan of B5 when it was first on.  Haven't seen it in years now.

[Darwinist]

On the final season — I've had problems with it too, but I still think it was better to have that season than cut B5 off at season four, which was the plan from conception.

I think the plan for B5 from conception had been to go for 5 full seasons, but when it looked like the 5th season might not happen they moved the resolution of several plot and character arcs to the 4th season.  It made for something of a jarring transition from the 4th to the 5th season, but it's better than having lots of plot threads left unfinished if the 5th season hadn't happened.

I was a big, MAJOR fan of B5 when it was first on.  Haven't seen it in years now.

I was a huge B5 fan and heard the same thing about the original 5 year story arc which was compromised a bit when it was in danger of being canceled.   I also haven't seen it in years now and wonder how if holds up.    I would probably still dig it, I thought it had a lot of interesting characters, especially the evil Mr. Morden (and his associates). 

[Russell Nash]

On the final season — I've had problems with it too, but I still think it was better to have that season than cut B5 off at season four, which was the plan from conception.

I think the plan for B5 from conception had been to go for 5 full seasons, but when it looked like the 5th season might not happen they moved the resolution of several plot and character arcs to the 4th season.  It made for something of a jarring transition from the 4th to the 5th season, but it's better than having lots of plot threads left unfinished if the 5th season hadn't happened.

I was a big, MAJOR fan of B5 when it was first on.  Haven't seen it in years now.

I was a huge B5 fan and heard the same thing about the original 5 year story arc which was compromised a bit when it was in danger of being canceled.   I also haven't seen it in years now and wonder how if holds up.    I would probably still dig it, I thought it had a lot of interesting characters, especially the evil Mr. Morden (and his associates). 

That's the story as far as the commentary an the DVDs goes.  A friend has all five seasons and all of the movies.  Every couple of years I borrow them again and rewatch the whole thing.

TAD — On the cheesy graphics bit —>  Mid nineties. Amigas were costly, and it's only in the last few years graphics have gotten really good. At least they followed physics (for certain values of physics).

The graphics got better as the show went on.  Also NASA called the producer of B5 to ask if they could use the design of the starfury.  It seems they had gone through all sorts of designs for a forklift kind of vehicle for the spacestation and the starfury was the best design.  I don't know if they are still planning on buiding it, since Bush gutted the budget and gave them the Mars goal, I think it got axed.

[Tango Alpha Delta]

I think you're addressing this to TAD, not me.  B5 is my all-time favorite SF show and I have never spoken a word against it (though I could; the final season left much to be desired.)

Yeah, sorry, I was. I was just lazy and didn't snip out your part.

Ouch... between goring sacred oxen and snipping out peoples' parts, this thread is getting dangerous!

But, in defense of my previous obnoxious remarks:
1. "Weak Graphics" - I appreciate the constraints of technology and budget, but it was the combination of elements that threw me out of my zone-of-willing-suspension-of-disbelief.  The only show I have ever decided to hate based on the shite-ness of the graphics (so far) was Daredevil.

2. "Small Sample Group" - If it "gets better later", then I may try again... later.  I had similar issues with ST:TNG (I hated Dr. Pulaski enough that I didn't start watching the show again until season 5), and DS9 (as I've explained elsewhere).

3. I don't have a number three.. and we're late!  Bye!

[stePH]

I think the plan for B5 from conception had been to go for 5 full seasons, but when it looked like the 5th season might not happen they moved the resolution of several plot and character arcs to the 4th season.  It made for something of a jarring transition from the 4th to the 5th season, but it's better than having lots of plot threads left unfinished if the 5th season hadn't happened.

Threadcrossing here ... one thing I'd look for at the "Impossible Dreams" video store is a version of Babylon 5 that turned out just as JMS had planned it -- or at the very least, one that had Claudia Christian staying on for season 5 instead of being replaced by Tracy Scoggins.  I never warmed to Cmdr. Lochley.

[wakela]

Hey, wakela was WAY meaner then I was! 

I dunno, man.  I think we were about the same level of meanness.  Though it did take a swipe at trek. 

Disclaimer: never watched Buffy.

You're right... but I was smiling REALLY big when I typed my comment. 

Good point.  I was eating puppies. 

2. "Small Sample Group" - If it "gets better later", then I may try again... later.  I had similar issues with ST:TNG (I hated Dr. Pulaski enough that I didn't start watching the show again until season 5), and DS9 (as I've explained elsewhere).

Yeah, I got this about Buffy from a fan.  It's not worth it to me if I have to sit through a crummy season or two to wait for it to get good.

[Russell Nash]

2. "Small Sample Group" - If it "gets better later", then I may try again... later.  I had similar issues with ST:TNG (I hated Dr. Pulaski enough that I didn't start watching the show again until season 5), and DS9 (as I've explained elsewhere).

Yeah, I got this about Buffy from a fan.  It's not worth it to me if I have to sit through a crummy season or two to wait for it to get good.

The problem is that some of the best stuff takes a while to find it's stride.  When someone says it takes a while, you need to take into consideration who is saying that.  I have a friend, who thinks the ending of Armegeddon is so strring and inspiring, he cries at the end everytime he sees it.  If he tells me I need to watch something for a while to get into it, I know to never watch it.  I have others I follow blindly where ever they send me.

[birdless]

This is just going to be pure blasphemy to most, if not all, and bear in mind that I haven't seen it in probably 15 years or so, but I totally didn't like 2001: A Space Odyssey. 

I need to watch it again, probably, but all I remember is being bored and confused. Maybe I need to watch it with some commentary.

Am I the only person who doesn't like that movie? I need some validation! lol

[stePH]

This is just going to be pure blasphemy to most, if not all, and bear in mind that I haven't seen it in probably 15 years or so, but I totally didn't like 2001: A Space Odyssey. 

I need to watch it again, probably, but all I remember is being bored and confused. Maybe I need to watch it with some commentary.

Am I the only person who doesn't like that movie? I need some validation! lol

I'm with you all the way.  Totally overrated toss.  I've even mentioned this before in another thread here: a film should not require reading the novelization in order to be comprehensible.

[wintermute]

This is just going to be pure blasphemy to most, if not all, and bear in mind that I haven't seen it in probably 15 years or so, but I totally didn't like 2001: A Space Odyssey. 

I need to watch it again, probably, but all I remember is being bored and confused. Maybe I need to watch it with some commentary.

Am I the only person who doesn't like that movie? I need some validation! lol

My wife hates it. And, according to legend, Rock Hudson walked out halfway through the premier shouting "Can someone tell me what it's about?", so no. You're not alone.

And I can understand why people don't like it: the structure is very different from any other movie, before or since; the plot changes abruptly and without warning several times; major events (including the entire conclusion) are presented without any explanation or even context; there's no dialogue for huce chunks of the movie. Any one of those points can easily kill a movie, and probably should.

But, somehow, it works.

If people don't like, say Casablanca, or Nosferatu, I would say that is indicative of poor taste (or possibly congenital insanity). But not liking 2001 is entirely understandable and excusable.

[birdless]

Ha! Thanks, StePH!

And I literally laughed out loud at

If people don't like, say Casablanca, or Nosferatu, I would say that is indicative of poor taste (or possibly congenital insanity). But not liking 2001 is entirely understandable and excusable.

I'm glad you understand Mute!

I no longer feel like a SciFi leper.

[Liminal]

Stargate - at least all of the tv iterations. Not that they are the worst things in the world, but is there ever any deviation from the plot formula of those shows?

BTW - Babylon 5, for all its faults (and as much as I am a fan, I know it has many), certainly offered three-dimensional alien races. The seemingly most violent race produces one of the more spiritual characters in the show and there are good and bad people in all of the races. If anything, the actors playing the aliens all tend to be more nuanced and interesting than the actors playing humans.

[stePH]

BTW - Babylon 5, for all its faults (and as much as I am a fan, I know it has many), certainly offered three-dimensional alien races. The seemingly most violent race produces one of the more spiritual characters in the show...

O hellz yeah G'kar was awesome (of course most of the credit must go to Andreas Katsulas' performance) ... and Mollari, the character whom we're meant to see as just a drunken buffoon in the beginning, turns out to be one of the darkest characters in the show.

[Windup]

I'm with you all the way.  Totally overrated toss.  I've even mentioned this before in another thread here: a film should not require reading the novelization in order to be comprehensible.

I agree completely.  Clarke's novel, which I read first, is awesome.  But no movie should depend on the moviegoers reading a book first.

[wintermute]

I'm with you all the way.  Totally overrated toss.  I've even mentioned this before in another thread here: a film should not require reading the novelization in order to be comprehensible.

I agree completely.  Clarke's novel, which I read first, is awesome.  But no movie should depend on the moviegoers reading a book first.

I disagree. I've never read the book, and the first time I saw the movie, I didn't even know there was a book. But I still count it as one of my favourite movies, and I don't think it's all that difficult to follow.

[birdless]

Is there any way I can watch that movie with you so you can tell me what the hell is going on?? lol 

It's one of those I feel like I'm supposed to like, but I just don't.

[Cybic]

Sorry for this but I really didn't like Farscape (muppets in space) and Firefly (cowboys in space).  I mean what was with those Mexican style gun belts?  Really, shotguns in space?  If you can break the speed of light, you don't need shot guns.  The tech level would supply something a little better.

[wintermute]

Sorry for this but I really didn't like Farscape (muppets in space) and Firefly (cowboys in space).  I mean what was with those Mexican style gun belts?  Really, shotguns in space?  If you can break the speed of light, you don't need shot guns.  The tech level would supply something a little better.

Just for the record, there's no FTL travel in Firefly. Just a dozen habitable planets in the same system. Travel between them takes weeks, at best.

[Cybic]

Oh, my mistake.  I couldn't get past the gun belts...

Still their tech level should be sufficient to progress beyond chemically based projectile weapons.

Thanks

[Russell Nash]

Oh, my mistake.  I couldn't get past the gun belts...

Still their tech level should be sufficient to progress beyond chemically based projectile weapons.

Thanks

The tech level did exist.  Firefly was a show about haves and have nots.  The inner planets of the alliance had all the cool tech you could want, but the poorer planets didn't.  Serenity itself can hardly stay in the air for lack of money for parts.  If they could afford energy weapons, they would have been able to fly a better ship.

[wintermute]

Oh, my mistake.  I couldn't get past the gun belts...

Still their tech level should be sufficient to progress beyond chemically based projectile weapons.

Thanks

The tech level did exist.  Firefly was a show about haves and have nots.  The inner planets of the alliance had all the cool tech you could want, but the poorer planets didn't.  Serenity itself can hardly stay in the air for lack of money for parts.  If they could afford energy weapons, they would have been able to fly a better ship.

Yeah. Think of the nose-bleed weapon that the blue-hands use, or the sonic rifle, which was like a Airzooka powerful enough to knock a man down...

[Whiskey and Nutmeg]

Dr. Who.
The recent series from the past few years are okay, but I just can't stand any of the older ones. I'll never understand how it got popular.

I'm probably going to get flamed for saying that.

[Kaa]

By the way, not that any of you were being kept up nights worrying about the name of the really bad movie I mentioned way back (on page 1 of the comments) where the HIGH point of the movie was a guy getting his head cut in half by a laser, but a friend informed me, finally, that the movie in question was "Nightflyers."  http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0093626/