Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Archangel
I respect your opinion, but I do disagree with it. In 78-79, the US only had 3 real networks (ABC,NBC, CBS), so the viewing choices were extremely limited, whereas Firefly (FOX) was in competition with how many ntworks? (I haven't got a breakdown of American cable networks) If there were more networks back then, TOS would never have achieved those numbers.
Ironically, I do believe that a Classic BSG feature would succeed today, It would fare a little better than Firefly, but only because it's a well-known product that's been around for almost three decades, compared to Firefly's three years.
As for better, that would depend on the writer.
|
You act as if when there were fewer channels, people were forced to watch tv shows on those fewer channels. NOT. People watched BSG b/c it was GOOD. TV shows still succeeded and failed, based on them being tv shows that people wanted to see and enjoyed. Why do you think BSG sold millions of dollars in merchandising (lunchboxes, comic books, toys, models, etc)? I was b/c the tv show was very good and millions of fans loved the show. Are you telling me today, b/c there are many more channels that a science fiction/fantasy tv show, cannot achieve double or more the ratings success of nu/fake BSG? I beg to differ. How do you explain STAR TREK's continuation tv shows that dwarfed nu/fake BSG's ratings numbers? ...same for FIREFLY. Sorry, but you can't discredit or belittle BSG's success by the simpleton explaination of "there were less channels" back then. When STAR WARS first came out, it initially opened on few screens and there were less science fiction/fantasy movies back then. ..yet, til this day STAR WARS dwarfs the competition. Sorry, even you have to give credit to where it's due. If not, you are only in denial.
p.s. Even to this day, there are tons more people familiar with real BSG, Cylons and Vipers (from the old show) than what the term BROWNCOAT means or any of the characters from FIREFLY or SERENITY.
