 | | Sci-fi Developing a new science fiction show would go a long ways towards keeping and bringing in new subscribers. The offerings on the siffee network are lacking (though I enjoy Warehouse 13). | |
|
 | | | Re: Sci-fi I agree. A Sci-Fi show would be great! The Sci-Fi offering are all but non-existent on TV right now.
How about picking up Firefly? I'd love to see more of that show! | |
|
| |
1 edit | Re: Sci-fi Firefly is on the Science Channel | |
|
| | | | | Re: Sci-fi Just the re-runs. Fox still owns the TV rights, unfortunately. | |
|
| |  tuarisYou Clicked on the Apple
join:2001-10-19
Naples, FL | I second that request for Firefly. Also throw in the Stargate franchise. | |
|
| | |  JCohenPremium
join:2010-10-19
Nepean, ON
kudos:2 | Re: Sci-fi said by tuaris:I second that request for Firefly. Also throw in the Stargate franchise.
+1 | |
|
| | |
| | |  GuspazGuspazPremium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
kudos:16 | Re: Sci-fi Weekly, no. British-style short season or miniseries, maybe. Television shows don't shoot year-round, after all.
--
Developer: Tomato/MLPPP, Linux/MLPPP, etc »fixppp.org | |
|
| | | |  SnakeoilIgnore Button. The coward's feature.Premium
join:2000-08-05
Mentor, OH
kudos:1
 ·RoadRunner Cable
 ·magicjack.com
| Re: Sci-fi Some don't. But shows like 24 [of which there is nothing on as complex as it was], did take nearly a year to shoot.
But that was because of the car chases and explosions they had to plan out, get permits, insurance and the right weather to film in.
I remember Keifer making a comment about the long shooting schedule on 24.
Currently all the TV shows lack the explosions, car chases, recon from helicopters that 24 had.
NCIS/NCIS LA came a tad close, but they keep that stuff to a bare minimum.
--
Is a person a failure for doing nothing? Or is he a failure for trying, and not succeeding at what he is attempting to do? What did you fail at today?. | |
|
| | | | Red Dwarf is coming back.  | |
|
| |
| | | The most popular sci fi series is a reflection of where we are headed as a nation. In the 80's we had startrek etc since we were leaning towards science. Now that we are headed back to the dark ages with the anti science crowd we have witches etc. but would be cool to have a sci-fi series. The last good series was stargate atlantis . the scifi network has turned into another reality show/drama network especially with the stupid ghost hunter series | |
|
| | Reviews:
·Insight Communic..
 ·Windstream
·Comcast
| Re: Sci-fi Pretty good analysis. I think you're pretty much right on with sci-fi shows reflecting where we're headed. Anytime a space-type sci-fi show comes out, I give it a shot but it usually doesn't do well in ratings & gets cancelled fast (Stargate Universe). However you have shows like Supernatural that have been around for 6 seasons are are still going strong. I personally don't see the draw to ghosts & witches, but apparently popular culture eats it up.
Perhaps I could be wrong, but the last semi-successful sci-fi series (which actually dealt with space/technology) was Battlestar Galactica in 2003? | |
|
| | | SnakeoilIgnore Button. The coward's feature.Premium
join:2000-08-05
Mentor, OH
kudos:1 Reviews:
·RoadRunner Cable
·magicjack.com
| Re: Sci-fi I like Supernatural because of the dark humour. Also, it has a few production people from X-files, so at times it has an X-files feel to it.
I wouldn't mind seeing an "x-files" type of show. Granted the original cast maybe tied up in other projects to join in, but I still think there are enough conspiracies/cover ups that it would have an audience. Or maybe reboot the old original UFO show, Project Bluebook.
I think Person of Interest is considered sci-fi, because of the "Machine".
Then you have Fringe, Chuck. I consider POI and Chuck to be sci-fi lite. As it has some plot elements that are sci-fi, the show isn't showcased by the sci-fi.
Battlestar may have been the last succesful true sci-fi show on syfy, but there have been others on other networks. Then again, Battlestar was also a reworking of the older series.
--
Is a person a failure for doing nothing? Or is he a failure for trying, and not succeeding at what he is attempting to do? What did you fail at today?. | |
|
| | | more science fiction is always a good thing.
I do not see anyone mentioning watching FRINGE.
Fringe is the only show I am currently watching from any MPAA Source.I have no intention of ever buying anything from Big Content except to finish off Fringe whenever that one ends.
Others have mentioned Farscape,SGU,SGA........
I liked all three of those as well. | |
|
| | Switched to Blockbuster Used to watch the obscure/indie/foreign movies on NF streaming, which used to be a great selection, but seems they are losing those licenses too. Not into TV shows that much.
Switched to BB for the in-store exchange, games and less delay for new movies. Works great for those who live near a store but given they have closed many stores, they need to get the kiosks setup for an exchange with mailed discs. | |
|
|
| | | Re: No Longer $7.99 You mean sales tax? | |
|
| | | I've always had to pay taxes on my Netflix subscription.
Did your state recently enact a new tax requirement for Netflix? | |
|
| | | | Re: No Longer $7.99 I dunno, they don't say what it's for but it just started in November. | |
|
|  BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | There is no "phoney" tax. It's called sales tax and I've been charged it from the beginning. Netflix doesn't have a choice but to charge sales tax. Blame your state government not Netflix. | |
|
| | | | Re: No Longer $7.99 There shouldn't be any sales tax on data, there isn't from anyone else or my ISP. | |
|
| | | | | Re: No Longer $7.99 Lol Your not buying data. Your buying content. You get data access from your ISP and I'm sure your paying sales tax there too. | |
|
| | | | | | Re: No Longer $7.99 Nope, no tax on CenturyLink. | |
|
| | Lillyhammer series was pretty good I just finished watching the 8 episode Lillyhammer series on Netflix. It was pretty good. And I enjoyed watching 45 min shows with no commercials. | |
|
| |
| | BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | Re: Lillyhammer series was pretty good said by aciddrink:said by fAcEtIOUs:I enjoyed watching 45 min shows with no commercials.
Which is why so many people use torrents & usenet No they use them because they work at Burger King for minimum wage and expect everything for free because they are bums. Most shows are available commerical free at Itunes and Amazon. | |
|
| | | Reviews:
·Insight Communic..
·Windstream
·Comcast
| Re: Lillyhammer series was pretty good said by BF69:No they use them because they work at Burger King for minimum wage and expect everything for free because they are bums. Most shows are available commerical free at Itunes and Amazon.
Lol. Stereotype much? I'd be willing to bet the majority of people who engage in torrent/Usenet based piracy aren't 'bums', but rather people with decent computers and fairly versed in technology.
That being said, anybody that defends the TV/movie industry is a lobbyist and hates cute little animals (I can stereotype too). | |
|
| | | | BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | Re: Lillyhammer series was pretty good said by aciddrink:said by BF69:No they use them because they work at Burger King for minimum wage and expect everything for free because they are bums. Most shows are available commerical free at Itunes and Amazon.
Lol. Stereotype much? I'd be willing to bet the majority of people who engage in torrent/Usenet based piracy aren't 'bums', but rather people with decent computers and fairly versed in technology. That being said, anybody that defends the TV/movie industry is a lobbyist and hates cute little animals (I can stereotype too). Then why do they use torrents and not purchase the content legally if the issue is commericals? | |
|
| | | | | Reviews:
·Insight Communic..
·Windstream
·Comcast
| Re: Lillyhammer series was pretty good said by BF69:Then why do they use torrents and not purchase the content legally if the issue is commericals?
Why must they work at Burger King or be bums? (or have any low wage job according to you) I can't speak for everybody, but I'm sure many people do it simply because they can - because it's easy. Many people have been doing it since way before there were legal commercial-free alternatives out there (Itunes, Amazon).
Anyways I'm done debunking this thread with a pointless argument. Obviously you're against something, others aren't, so there will never be agreement here. | |
|
| | | | | | BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | Re: Lillyhammer series was pretty good said by aciddrink:said by BF69:Then why do they use torrents and not purchase the content legally if the issue is commericals?
Why must they work at Burger King or be bums? (or have any low wage job according to you) If you have to torrent a show that cost $2 at Amazon then yeah you're a bum. If you were at a store and saw someone get busted for shoplifting a couple of candy bars you think "What a fucking bum. He couldn't afford 2 candy bars?" now wouldn't you?
Also how is torrenting "easier" than downloading something at Amazon? It's not. | |
|
| | | | | | | Reviews:
·Insight Communic..
·Windstream
·Comcast
| Re: Lillyhammer series was pretty good said by BF69:Also how is torrenting "easier" than downloading something at Amazon? It's not.
Again, matter of opinion and technical knowledge. Many people have their downloads set up to either 1-click or even automatic so it's sitting on their fileserver when they get home.
PS. side note - I like how your previous statements referred to 'they' and now you're just saying 'you' (as in me). I can tell you feel quite strongly about this topic lol. I never said I download these things, I just understand why people do. (BTW, for your own sanity, never venture into this site's very own filesharing section of the forums) | |
|
| | | | | | | Also, because they are either poor or cheap. | |
|
|  HD_RidePremium
join:2000-10-18
Trenton, NJ
·VoicePulse
| said by fAcEtIOUs:I just finished watching the 8 episode Lillyhammer series on Netflix. It was pretty good. And I enjoyed watching 45 min shows with no commercials.
yep, it came up as a recommendation so I figured I give it a try. right after train scene on episode 1 I was hooked. I didn't think I would like it with the Subtitles/Translations but it was easy to follow. It was refreshing watching something with a bunch of no-names vs. the same old Hollywood trash. IMO very well written and very funny, I can't wait for Season II. | |
|
Reviews:
 ·AT&T U-Verse
 ·Clearwire Wireless
·AT&T Southeast
| ! I recently signed up for Netflix and I am loving it, still think it's the best option so far, just wish they had some movies available for instant streaming. I stopped downloading torrents because of it especially because they have the content I am looking for. It also works great with my Google TV so I have no complaints so far. | |
|
| BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | Re: ! Blame Hollywood. Trust me Netflix would LOVE to offer newer movies for streaming. | |
|
|  antdudeA Ninja AntPremium,VIP
join:2001-03-25
kudos:2 | I wished Netflix had on demand payments instead of monthly subscriptions since I don't watch a lot of movies, etc. | |
|
| | BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | Re: ! said by antdude:I wished Netflix had on demand payments instead of monthly subscriptions since I don't watch a lot of movies, etc.
It's called Vudu if you rather pay per movie. | |
|
| | | | You can use Amazon on a Roku box and if you later want to get Netflix it's right there on the box | |
|
| | Hmmmm... If you could bring back better off Ted, that would be good.
I know its too much to ask but scrubs would be WONDERFUL! You could even to it in its last state sans Braff, but just call it Scrubs University. | |
|
| | Nonsense There are 168 hours in a week. People like lots of different things. There is absolutely no way 4 series can provide anywhere near a significant share of Netflix viewing.
So how much do the content owners want for their product from Netflix? I am thinking it is probably something on the order of 5% of total revenues that content generates. So how can paying 100% (for their own shows) be cheaper? | |
|
| BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | Re: Nonsense When HBO and Showtime started making their own series the naysayers had the same doubts.
For the record Starz wants $300 mil per year( up form $30 mil ) PLUS they wanted Netflix to maddate that people that wanted Starz streaming also get the $8 DVD rental susbcription too. In other words if you wanted Starz streaming you had to pay $16 a month. And people got mad because Netflix said no to Starz. | |
|
SnakeoilIgnore Button. The coward's feature.Premium
join:2000-08-05
Mentor, OH
kudos:1 | How about a retooled Bab5? It's been a few years, how about an "update" on the Bab 5 universe?
Or even update on Andromeda. | |
|
 lordfly
join:2000-10-12
Homestead, FL
·SkyNet360
·AT&T Southeast
| Fan created material A thought would be fan created series and movies. There are lot of budding directors out there would love to jump at a chance to create something original. This can be financially difficult. Netflix sponsorship could boost their creativity by providing a financial source of income.
Just a thought | |
|
|
|
