Some Topics...
Favorite shows that got cancelled... i liked UC:Undercover on Fox
Worst show still airing......"Baby Bob" on CBS
Worst new movie (due to hype) matrix re-loaded - What script?
Etc....................
Where I'm at, of course, in the last couple of years, is "Dark Angel". IMNSHO, the problem was that the show's most visible feature (a genetically engineered super-gal on a motorcycle, in black leather) was, ironically, also its chief *liability*.
Follow me, here: Not Jess' Alba's fault --- it was a case of "Well, it gave the ad compositors something 'easy to latch onto' ", and what suffered was that a lot of the people who "just happened" to see the ads never got the chance to find out that there was a real, legitimate sci-fi premise here, just around the corner, as it were.
The coming world of bio-engineering --- as you have probably gathered from my Mailbag contributions, sci-fi is a main focus with me. and I *particularly* like the near-future, post-"holocaust" flavour of it.
"DA" had a considerable flavour of Robert Heinlein about it, which is a pretty good place to start . Ever read "Friday"? It could have been the blueprint for "DA", although Cameron denies this, publicly, while at the same time admitting to having read "everything RAH ever wrote". Most curious --- I think the lawyers made him do it! LOL
"i liked UC:Undercover on Fox"
I confess to some laziness on my part --- the promos always looked good,but somehow or other I never got around to checking it out. Looked to be a good, tense drama, with lots of conflict on the team, and between them and the higher-ups. Is this an accurate assessment?
"Still working on the look.........."
Looks fine, to me! By the way, I just had a post on the other thread, and answered it. Received the notification just fine, so I don't know what the deal is where I was being notified of my *own* posts --- could be a quirk resulting from the fact that, up to that time, I was the *only* poster other than you. Sounds like a typical gremlin, to me, essentially harmless and "minor", so no worries.
I'll keep you posted on the "beta-testing"; I imagine you are doing some of that, yourself! *Chuckle!*
Steve
P.S. Why do you think that "DA" was so expensive to produce? It can't have been the locations, or set construction, nor anybody's salary with the possible exception of John Savage's (and he was worth it!). Y'figure it was just mismanagement? Could be, since Cameron has long been used to having a *really* big budget to play with :-).
Re: Re: Dark Angel
I think that the Post affects were what cost a lot of money. It's what killed "Battlestar Galactica" a looooong time ago as well. It took so much time in the post/editing room - and time = money. It did look fantastic, but it needed to be bringing in way too much money for a FOX show. Maybe if DA were on a 'big three' network because their shows get much higher ratings due primarily to superior dial placement around the country. FOX still has a lot of UHF stations and "rim-shot" stations compared to full powered VHF's.
"Network of Denial" (*Chuckle!*)
"Worst show still airing......Any sitcom on UPN"
ROTFLMAO! Couldn't agree more --- totally unwatchable!
About the only thing Un Proven Network has going for it is the Trek franchise, and, even there, "Enterprise" has some problems which are well-known.
I have a suggestion for them, though, even though "it hurts": They would be doing *much* better if they would just go ahead, face reality (heheheheh!) and start plugging in things like "Deep Space Nine" in prime-time! I am *not* kidding --- they would do much better in the Nielsens with an old-but-much-beloved show than they are doing with their current product. It'd at least give 'em better revenue, while they are trying to get their bearings . . .
Better still, they should take a page "as a network" from what my local UPN affiliate does, and go full speed ahead with picking up some syndication, and putting *that* in prime time, too! Specifically, I would be totally tickled if they would drop "Starhunter" into something remotely resembling a decent time-slot --- not a bad little sci-fi show, but it is on in such a weird-assed timeslot here that even *I* need to use my VCRs to see it, most of the time!
That is *bad*, when you consider *my* weird hours :-)! AAnd hey . . . they should not feel denigrated to do so: My local Fox affiliate does quite well with "SG-1", etc., which they pick up a year out of date and run after "X-Files". If a Fox station can do this, UPN shouldn't turn their nose up at such a "plan".
Steve
(who is obviously a sci-fi geek, but watches other things occaisionally, also --- I was just goin' with what first came to mind)
Pay to Play :-) (Production,Placement, Power, and Glory)
I'm baaa-aaack . . . was distracted for a bit (sorry) . . .
"I think that the Post affects were what cost a lot of money [on "Dark Angel"]. It's what killed "Battlestar Galactica" a looooong time ago as well. It took so much time in the post/editing room - and time = money."
That's an interesting take, on both accounts! I had been under the impression that what ran up "Galactica's" bill was not so much the editing, but the sheer elaborateness of the sets. However, "BG" *did* have elaborate opticals, mainly model-work influenced by "Star Wars", that were pretty gee-whiz (for a TV show) in the late 70s. Nothing on what we have now, of course, but "perspective" is everything, to appreciation . . .
On the other hand: What are you getting at in terms of post-prod on "DA"? The only thing that I can think of that probably required lots of "post" is that, in certain standing sets, there *were* a multitude of camera positions. "Crash", the basement bar, was a typical example; a more surprising one was the interior of Logan's apartment --- I recall a couple of shots on that (relatively simple) set that must have had something like six different views!
It was visually sumptuous, of course, but an editor's acid trip --- is that what you were getting at? Otherwise, I can't see all that much that would count as "conventional" production or post-prod costs, e.g. "DA" didn't have a whole lot in the way of even "subtle" opticals, and next to no model or stunt-work after the first few eps.
Then again, I'm an amateur student, so I may be missing something which is obvious to a pro.
"Maybe if DA were on a 'big three' network because their shows get much higher ratings due primarily to superior dial placement around the country. FOX still has a lot of UHF stations and "rim-shot" stations compared to full powered VHF's."
Again, very interesting --- I was under the impression that, *if* it so chose, FOX TV could (and did) spend as much on a show as the Big Three ("X-Files" wasn't cheap after about Season Three, for example). I can see that there would be a smaller limit on the *number* of highly produced shows they could float, vis-a-vis the rest of the Alphabet Gang, but I thought they could compete on a per-show basis, one on one.
Thanks for the add't'l info on the "nature" of Fox's affiliates --- I didn't know they had any *VHF* at all! I thought, actually, that as long as you had the sheer wattage, UHF was actually *better* (silly me!).
Local Fox in Houston (KRIV / 26) has a lot of ooomph, signal-wise, but that may be reflective of this being a pretty major market (although I understand that metro-Houston is only considered "market # *11*, which is weird because we are " *city* #4" --- how does that work?).
Otherwise, copy you on "rimshots" --- local UPN and local WB (UHF 20 and 39, respectively) just don't have the "punch", over the air. WB is *trying*, at least --- they *have* reached the point of doing a late/early news broadcast like Fox (9 PM).
Interestingly, I live only about 7 or 8 miles from the towers for "everybody", and, ironically, I sometimes have problems with two of the big three, on VHF (have a very good TV, too --- late-model Phillips). Local CBS and NBC can be sketchy (11 and 2, respectively); only ABC (the horror!), local 13, is pristine.
Again, isn't it more sheer *power*, rather than the band you're on? KTRK-13 is clean, but of course it is *also* an absolute "blowtorch", close on to 300 MW --- I'll bet you can pick 'em up in New Orleans! *Chuckle!* (KTRK is network-owned)
Re: Pay to Play :-) (Production,Placement, Power, and Glory)
I don't know the specifics of transmission, but I do know that VHF-2 always has a crappy signal. The higher up you go (11,12,13) the signal is better. It takes more power to push a UHF signal than a VHF. I worked at a 5 million watt UHF on Long Island who's signal wasn't nearly as strong as VHF channel 8 from New Haven CT, operating at much less power. There also is cable placement issues. An ABC affiliate on channel 7 would likely be channel 7 on area cable systems. A FOX affiliate on channel 61 could end up lost at the upper end of the dial, less likely to have people tune to it. People still look at VHF 2-13 as the locals, which definately gives them an edge. FOX also has a lot of "rim shots" in different markets. These were independent UHF stations that are transmitting 20 or 30 miles from the target city, transmitting from the rim. By the time UPN and WB came along, not much was left in most areas except rim-shots that they purchased from religious broadcasters and shopping networks! A lot of small markets like Salisbury-Ocean City MD don't even have a FOX affiliate. They pipe in DC's WTTG FOX5.
FOX's programming ends an hour earlier than the big three, 10PM instead of 11. An hour a night adds up. Most of their shows are pretty cheap, only a few that aren't like "The Simpsons" - but that gets good ratings. An expensive show would probably be more likely to get the axe on FOX before, say NBC for budget reasons. The overall revenue is so much higher still at the big three.
DA did have a lot of post. Computer generated "feel' to it...the gloominess, etc. That all takes a lot of time - the old standard was every minute takes an hour of post. It's probably more with something that has an artistic integrity like that show did. You would be surprised at just how much is done in post - things that you wouldn't even think of that add a feel to the show.
Re: Pay to Play :-) (Production,Placement, Power, and Glory)
Quote:About the only thing Un Proven Network has going for it is the Trek franchise, and, even there, "Enterprise" has some problems which are well-known.
Actually, Smackdown does pretty well also. At least for UPN, it does pretty well.
CBS lost a lot of affiliates to Fox back in the 90's, so there are VHF Fox stations out there to be found. For example, in Detroit, Fox moved from 50 to 2, 50 became a UPN station, and CBS was stuck moving to 62, which up until then had been independent (and very "low rent", mainly shows like Soul Train knockoffs and religious stuff.)
Some other stuff, 62 didn't even bother with a local newscast until last year, and then it was just pretty much a rehash of the channel 50 10 O'clock news (the stations are co-owned, I guess). Shortly thereafter 50 got some second stringers on their news, and their old anchors switched to just being on 62. After a few months, they got slaughtered in the ratings I guess, so 62's news totally went away, everyone fired, and everyone was fired from the channel 50 news as well, and now channel 50 has their 10 O'clock news produced by channel 7 (the local ABC affiliate.) Very weird.
Re: Pay to Play :-) (Production,Placement, Power, and Glory)
The TV news biz is the worst. I did that in NY for a few years, then at CNN in Washington DC. It's like getting paid for a 30 hour work week, but putting in 80 hours. Bad pay, lousy environment, no appreciation, no life. Add that to no job security and......I have no idea why anyone would want to get into that field! I just fell into it, that's my excuse!
Some Topics...
. Ever read "Friday"? It could have been the blueprint for "DA", although Cameron denies this, publicly, while at the same time admitting to having read "everything RAH ever wrote". Most curious --- I think the lawyers made him do it! LOL
Pay to Play :-) (Production,Placement, Power, and Glory)
Nothing on what we have now, of course, but "perspective" is everything, to appreciation . . .
Email This To a Friend
Topic Commands
Click to receive email notification of replies 
Click to stop receiving email notification of replies