Bonnie Hammer opens ass, inserts head

Forums Cult Sci Fi Series Farscape Bonnie Hammer opens ass, inserts head

Viewing 13 posts - 1 through 13 (of 13 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #37807
    SadGeezerSadGeezer
    Keymaster

    http://www.tvguide.com/newsgossip/insider/%5B/url%5D

    quote

    If all of those incredible fans who wrote in and sent notes and flowers and [whatnot] had actually watched it every week, we would have been able to do the 22.

    quote

    Even though Stargate is sci fi, it’s very broad sci fi. It’s not serialized. Every episode, you can come to it whether you’ve watched the one before [or not]. They are self-contained. … Farscape, on the other hand, got very, very serialized. It got very “in.”

    #59143
    ADM
    Participant

    quote:


    Originally posted by stormsweeper:
    http://www.tvguide.com/newsgossip/insider/%5B/url%5D


    TVGO: And that’s a bad thing… ?
    Hammer: They had brilliant and sophisticated writing, but it was so narrow that it basically was an invitation to not tune in if you weren’t totally familiar with the show. It was brilliant when you got it, and some of the characterizations were truly amazing, but it took a little too much work.

    I think she hit the hammer (no pun intended)on the head with that statement, I personally didn’t like it for other reasons, but it’s no surprise not many chose too tune in, it didn’t cater for newbies and unlike SG-1 it just wasn’t something you could get straight into.
    Also if you caught it when a bad ep was shown you’d realise that as it was more serialised and that it could have been the norm.
    I found the answers she gave to make sense, Lexx pretty much went the same way, but the Lexx fans got the answer from the producers and makers and we accepted their decision for the best part, Lexx was not likely too pick up any more viewers because like Farscape it was too serialized and ultimately too difficult to get into, so Lexx went out on a high.
    Unfortunately the makers of Farscape should’ve have acknowledged the same and didn’t and even now they refuse to admit that the show was on a downward spiral, if they had then maybe they could’ve cut a deal with Sci-Fi to air and produce the final shows and give the programme a proper send off.
    Then Henson and Co started throwing their weight around and tried to dictate terms to Sci-Fi, and if that happened to me I would react the same way, i.e get stuffed, so if anyone’s too blame it’s Henson, he got greedy and paid the price.
    ADM

    #59144
    Anonymous
    Guest

    Gee, I never knew expecting your business partners to hold to a contract was a greedy act.

    #59145
    ADM
    Participant

    quote:


    Originally posted by stormsweeper:
    Gee, I never knew expecting your business partners to hold to a contract was a greedy act.


    There was something quite recently about Henson requesting more money for Farscape, and basically was told that he could not have it.
    Besides the fact that many shows (especially in America) get cancelled due too poor ratings at a whim, Farscape is no different, is performed badly…it got shelved, couple this with the more money issue and it was an easy decision to make.
    And too highlight that, SG-1 did very well and was rewarded with a seventh season.
    I know Henson is trying too resuurect it by seeling it too other studios, from what I understand Henson studios are in a bad way financially and Farscape was their only hope, but I think the other studios will come too the same conclusion as Sci-Fi, not enough interest and too high an expenditure.
    ADM

    #59146
    Anonymous
    Guest

    1. The “Henson asking for more money” was the first excuse Sci Fi put out there, although it was shot down for not being true.

    2. Farscape was their #2 rated show.

    3. SG-1 costs SciFi at least twice as much, possibly three times as much as Farscape did. For ratings that were at best .3 better than Farscape.

    #59147
    ADM
    Participant

    quote:


    Originally posted by stormsweeper:
    1. The “Henson asking for more money” was the first excuse Sci Fi put out there, although it was shot down for not being true.

    And this news came from where?,it seems that Sci-Fi have kept a low profile on this and they had their reasons which appear to be related to poor ratings.
    And bear in mind that Sci-fi saying such a thing would no doubt result in a libel action from Henson, as Henson have not done so it’s either a case of just gossip or is actually true and Henson did not have a case against them.

    2. Farscape was their #2 rated show.

    That really doesn’t say much when you consider the amount of Sci-fi actually on the channel, but regardless of this, it’s doubtful Sci-fi will pull a show just too pi*s off it’s fans.
    All the Farscape fans have been swept up in a tide of emotion, to the stage where you all think it’s a personal vendetta against you by the Sci-Fi channel.

    3. SG-1 costs SciFi at least twice as much, possibly three times as much as Farscape did. For ratings that were at best .3 better than Farscape.


    I’d like to see proof of that, as SG-1 came with an established set-up that didn’t need to start from scratch, also SG-1 appears to use less effects than Farscape.
    And as for the ratings, well I’m gonna go with Mrs Hammer’s statement of saying that it was at least 1.0 ahead of Farscape, obviously she released that interview too make both Farscape fans and the general public realise there was just cause for the axing, I’m sure Henson productions would refute this if it weren’t true…let’s see if they do shall we.

    #59148
    pet
    Participant

    I don’t believe she cancelled Farscape deliberately to **** off sci-fi fans. My problem with Farscape being cancelled is that it was the last in a long line of changes made to the station that are resulting in less and less Sci-Fi. It is hard to ignore that their new line-up appears to ignore Science Fiction in favor of cheapness.

    While there’s nothing wrong with making things that are less expensive, “cheap” is an entirely different story. And she’s doing “cheap” with barely any sci-fi at all. “Tremors” is the closest thing, but I never liked the movies. The only monster movies I like are childhood Godzillas and Alien.

    Dream interpretation, talking to dead people, rehashing In Search Of, and Blair-witch/Candid Camera hybrids don’t seem to involve sci-fi at all, unless I’m missing something.

    I realise she’s trying to “broaden the definition of sci-fi”, or whatever, but I’m sorry, unless I missed the part where William Wallace harnesses lightning to kill the Loch Ness monster, or Longshanks invents the Rover, I can’t find the Science Fiction in Braveheart.

    Pet;D

    #59149
    Anonymous
    Guest

    Fine, curently production costs are less for Sg-1 this season. 1.3 million per episode (cf. Variety mag) vs. 1.4 or 1.5 million for Farscape. However, the cost per episode to Sci Fi includes extensive rerun rights. They paid extra for the reruns to the first four seasons of SG-1. The cost of the 7th season is under wraps, but is reported to be much higher due to negotiations with Shanks and Anderson. Farscape was locked at the 1.4/1.5 figure.

    As for ratings:

    quote

    A summer Nielsen report conceived by Turner Research showed that “Farscape” had fallen to only a 1.2 rating in cable homes, or 958,000 households, from May 27 to Aug. 18. By contrast, “Stargate: SG-1,” the Friday-at-8 original series on Sci Fi, averaged a 1.7 rating for the same period, or 1.32-million homes.

    quote

    “Farscape” is averaging only 958,000 households (a 1.2 rating) for the same 10 weeks, but its adults 18-49 number is a gaudy 913,000.

    Also, in 2001 and 2000, Farscape was their highest rated series. Numbers were on par with what SG-1 did this season.

    (All data from Variety. YMMV)

    #59150
    ADM
    Participant

    Originally posted by stormsweeper:
    [QB]Fine, curently production costs are less for Sg-1 this season. 1.3 million per episode (cf. Variety mag) vs. 1.4 or 1.5 million for Farscape. However, the cost per episode to Sci Fi includes extensive rerun rights. They paid extra for the reruns to the first four seasons of SG-1. The cost of the 7th season is under wraps, but is reported to be much higher due to negotiations with Shanks and Anderson. Farscape was locked at the 1.4/1.5 figure.

    **Sci-fi also took SG-1 on too raise their profile and that there may well be a movie in the near future, which Sci-fi will do quite well out of, as opposed too doing a movie for Farscape.
    I think the truth is, is that Sci-fi may have realised they could not afford both shows and the weaker of the two got the axe.
    They may have paid for the re-runs but it made sense to do so, and it’s proving to be a success with the average rerun figure at 1.8.
    And again the reports on costing for S7 (SG-1)is sheer speculation, but even if it were the case Sci-fi can now afford that luxury by lifting Farscape’s burden on the channel.
    And as for the quoting of Farscape’s costing, well obvious those figures reflected the series when it ran, it’s quite reasonable to believe that the costs were due to rise if they continued.

    As for ratings:

    Also, in 2001 and 2000, Farscape was their highest rated series. Numbers were on par with what SG-1 did this season.

    **Again please offer a link that confirms as such, but I think it’s more likely that both series can only get a certain rating due too the amount of viewers Sci-fi actually has.
    **It’s a well known fact that Sci-Fi would play Farscape before programmes like Lexx, so most times the figures were not a true reflection of it’s popularity.
    In the UK it’s different, the sci-fi channel is for free, as I understand it in the U.S you need to subscribe to the sci-fi channel to view, so I think it’s safe too say that Sci-fi has a limited amount of viewers, so there is a cap too it’s peak audience which SG-1 has matched.
    If you compared SG-1’s ratings on it’s previous network then you are likely to find that Farscape didn’t hold a candle too it.
    ADM

    #59151
    Flamegrape
    Participant

    To hell with all that [email protected] I’m still not watching the [email protected] channel anymore. Screw them with a wiffleball bat. Just like I said here on the day I found out that they cancelled Farscape, the only time I’m going to watch that “channel” is to watch the remainder of the last season of that show. After that, bye-bye. And even though I’m a huge Dune fan, I don’t think I’ll bother watching it when it airs and instead wait until the DVD comes out. Screw them. Screw them with a sandpaper-covered mace with no lubricant.

    #59152
    Anonymous
    Guest

    You want links?
    http://www.variety.com/index.asp?layout=story&articleid=VR1117853475&categoryid=14&query=farscape&display=farscape&cs=1

    quote:


    he Sci Fi Channel has engineered the biggest program commitment in its history, a two-year, 44-episode renewal of the network’s highest-rated weekly series “Farscape.”

    The Jim Henson Co. and Hallmark Entertainment laid out a production budget of $1.4 million an hour, making “Farscape” one of the priciest series in all of basic cable. Sci Fi’s license fee to Henson/Hallmark comes to about half of the production cost, which gives the network exclusive rights, including reruns, to “Farscape” in the U.S. Hallmark sells the show worldwide.


    http://www.variety.com/index.asp?layout=story&articleid=VR1117782421&categoryid=14&query=farscape&display=farscape&cs=1

    quote

    NEW YORK — The Sci Fi Channel has renewed “Farscape, ” its highest-rated original series, for a third full season encompassing 22 hourlong episodes.

    Another link here: http://www.snurcher.com/reactions/ratings.html#Splain

    #59153
    ADM
    Participant

    quote:


    Originally posted by stormsweeper:
    [QB]You want links?
    http://www.variety.com/index.asp?layout=story&articleid=VR1117853475&categoryid=14&query=farscape&display=farscape& cs=1

    And???…that’s not what my last post requested, I asked you to show me a link that showed SG-1’s performance against that of Farscape’s, I’m not interested in what Farscape did a year or two ago.
    This only shows the cost of production, which you said yourself is costlier than SG-1 currently is, you’re dragging facts up that you’ve already mentioned.

    Another link here: http://www.snurcher.com/reactions/ratings.html#Splain[/ QB]


    Again, the point please???…this again is something that is not in dispute, it was the highest rating series at it’s time, but let’s be honest it got a much better deal than any other show on this network, i.e it was shoved in your face 24/7, got the prime time slot and programmes like Lexx were shown right on the back of it, all adds up to inflated viewing figures too me.
    But most of you have provided nothing that has been said already.
    ADM

    #59154
    trillian
    Participant

    quote:


    Originally posted by Flamegrape:
    To hell with all that [email protected] I’m still not watching the [email protected] channel anymore. Screw them with a wiffleball bat. Just like I said here on the day I found out that they cancelled Farscape, the only time I’m going to watch that “channel” is to watch the remainder of the last season of that show. After that, bye-bye. And even though I’m a huge Dune fan, I don’t think I’ll bother watching it when it airs and instead wait until the DVD comes out. Screw them. Screw them with a sandpaper-covered mace with no lubricant.


    Ouchies.

Viewing 13 posts - 1 through 13 (of 13 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.