August is pretty dry. Most of these are borderline for inclusion as genre material but it was so light I just threw them in. Probably Quatermass and Hook are the only that solidly qualify. All times Eastern, days start/end at 6AM as per TCM schedule. So August 8th@3AM is technically August 9th. FRI AUG 02 1000p The Uninvited WED AUG 07 0800p Harvey THU AUG 08 1115p Pandora and the Flying Dutchman TUE AUG 13 0630p The Quatermass Xperiment WED AUG 14 0745a Lost Horizon THU AUG 22 0800p Freaks SUN AUG 25 1215p Hook
They didn't show it in widescreen at all? I thought they were usually pretty good about showing stuff in it's usually picture type. Just out of curiosity, when was the last time you watched Syfy? They've got great stuff on there. I heard people talk about Syfy like that years ago when the only genre stuff on their was Eureka and Warehouse 13, but the last decade or so they've had tons of great stuff. In the last few years I've really enjoy 12 Monkeys, Dark Matter, Continuum, Lost Girl, The Magicians, The and The Expanse. I watched about 1/2 the first season of Krypton, and I thought it was pretty good. It's really done a lot to repair the reputation it had started to develop for a while.
I don't understand why people are so dismissive of those shows. Sure, they tended to be light and fun, but no more so than Farscape or Stargate. And they were good, solid shows with engaging writing and characters and ideas (even though W13 jumped the shark and landed badly in its final season). Indeed, Eureka is one of the truest science fiction shows I've ever seen, in that it was fiction about scientists doing science, even if said science tended to be fanciful most of the time. Oh, and those two were never the only genre shows on the network. Eureka's contemporaries included Battlestar Galactica, Stargate Atlantis, Stargate Universe, The Dresden Files, Painkiller Jane, Flash Gordon, Sanctuary, Caprica, Haven, Being Human, Alphas, and Lost Girl (not all at once, of course, but overlapping), and the last couple of seasons of W13 also overlapped with Continuum, Defiance, Primeval: New World, Helix, Bitten, and Metal Hurlant Chronicles. So it's strange that people have this perception that the network was light on genre shows at that time. It's true that there was a phase when the network was light on space shows (nothing from the end of SGU and Caprica in 2011 until the debut of Dark Matter, Killjoys, and The Expanse in 2015, unless you count Defiance), and some people have a prejudice that it's not "true" science fiction without spaceships and aliens, but that's nonsense. A lot of quality SF over the decades has been in Earthbound or present-day/near-future settings.
Oh no, I didn't mean to be dismissive of Eureka and W13, they are actually two of my all time favorite shows, I just meant that I hadn't seen that kind of an attitude towards Syfy since that time. I have admit, I was thinking most of the stuff you mentioned was on either before Eureka and W13, or after they ended. I didn't realize those shows all overlapped with them. This was pretty just another example of my horrible memory, because I do agree those shows are all definitely SFF series, and I wouldn't have said there wasn't any sci-fi on Syfy other than Eureka and W13 at the time, if I'd realize they all overlapped with them.
I find that a lot of folks who bash Syfy (not JD) rely on outdated generalizations. "It's nothing but wrestling!" They showed wrestling one night a week several years ago. "They cancel everything good!" Usually after four or so seasons, which is a better track record than, say, Fox or NBC has when it comes to genre shows. "I hate that they changed the name to Syfy." That was ten years ago. I think the statue of limitations has run out there. And, yes, I loved both WAREHOUSE 13 and EUREKA. Those were great shows.
Except the only reason FOX cancelled more genre shows than other networks is that it aired far more genre shows than other networks. Of the commercial broadcast networks, only UPN, The WB, and The CW had anywhere near as high a percentage of SF/fantasy among their scripted shows as FOX did, while NBC and ABC had a much lower percentage of genre shows and CBS the lowest of all. So FOX has kind of an unfair reputation in that regard. It cancelled shows at about the same rate as any other network, but it just had so many more genre shows, and so many more that had strong fan followings, that it felt like it kept killing our darlings. The other networks were just as quick to cancel their genre shows, but they just didn't have as many, or as many that people cared about. And really, most TV shows on any network and in any genre get cancelled after 1-3 seasons. Shows that get canned after one season or less are far more common than shows that make it to 4 seasons or more, but the small percentage of long-running shows make a stronger impression on our memories, creating the false perception that they're the norm rather than the exception. Also, the bottom line is that networks don't kill shows, audiences do. Networks keep the shows that make a profit, and profit on a commercial network depends on ad sales and thus on ratings. Viewership is what feeds and sustains a show. A network's execs may love a show and want to make it forever, but if the viewers aren't there, it just can't afford to. So fans keep blaming networks for killing shows when they should be blaming the general public that would rather watch dumb reality shows or wrestling. Commercial networks are at the mercy of the questionable tastes of the masses.
It aired in a 1.79:1 ratio (or 16:9) so it fits the typical HDTV screen without black bars but Star Wars was originally shot in 2.35:1 or 2.39:1. Consider that is as far off from its original ratio as an HDTV screen is from an old tube TV (@1.33:1). Not everyone is sensitive to that but it often bugs me as scenes will just look off. I recorded Enter the Dragon off IFC the other night and couldn't watch it because it was similarly cropped. EDIT: Actually, thinking about it my math may be off about that being the same difference but regardless, it can be noticed.... Star Wars is shown as an example here: https://widescreen.org/examples.shtml
Thank you for posting this, btw. "The Uninvited" is a classic ghost story for those who have never seen it.
Freaks is also an excellent, but often overlooked, film. The DVD has a nice little documentary on it, too. I'm not sure if I'm familiar with Pandora and the Flying Dutchman.
I remember it as being a fairly turgid melodrama. There's an actual fantasy element (the Flying Dutchman), but it plays like a dull mainstream drama. Ava Gardner is drawn to a mysterious, brooding seaman (played by James Mason), who, surprise, is actually the Flying Dutchman of lore, still alive in modern times. Lots of angst and romantic complications ensue.
That is annoying that they didn't use the original aspect ratio. Thanks for sharing the link, I've always been a bit confused by all of the different aspect ratios.
Hello all. What I was referring to mostly was the IDEA that the SyFy channel has strayed quite a bit from the channel it began as in the early 1990s. I actually watched LEXX and First Wave in 1997. The Battlestar remake in the 2000s and Caprica, and some of Warehouse 13. I really dont devote much time to a tv show per se, because of my schedule. All I was referring to is that for 25 years TCM has been consistently a good quality channel in its programming and not chasing the latest fad of the day. It's due to quality leadership and decisionmaking at Turner. Im sorry if my opinion means nothing at all. Im not offended. But please try and defind the merits of Syfy having a classy movie like Oscar winning opus called Sharknado. Anyone? I believe Harlan Ellison would taken the management of Syfy to task over their dubious choices. Again if my opinion means so little its ok. But i felt singled out. Im sorry. To @Christopher and @Mr. Adventure if my view about the theory about Marcia Lucas and the original theory holds no truth. Then what could it be then? Honestly? I ask you both. I'm tired of the arguments over the original trilogy. It is what I grew up with and supported as many others did. If Disney and Lucasfilm want to ignore the fact that others want a choice of films. That's ok. I have purchased digitally and on dvd and blu ray the special editions and have all versions, so Im ok in that regard. Thankfully Harmy has given people an alternative that those in power have ignored. I DO NOT CONDONE PIRACY IN ANY WAY THOUGH To @Christopher and @Greg Cox I have nothing but respect for you both as authors, writers, and contributors to this forum. I have thanked you both for your works and your opinions and taking your time to respond to my posts and others on here as well. I want to apologize to you both and anyone else in this thread or anything I've said. Im not here to offend or off put anyone in any way. Apparently David Mack must hate me for some reason I dont want other Star Trek writers or authors to dislike me or hate me for any reason. I admire and support your works and talents always as a fan. Still in the end, TCM is after 25 years world class for its great programming choices all these years. All the best. -Koric
Why do you not think that Lucas being the auteur of the works isn't simply dissatisfied and trying to retroactively tweak his works to improve them in his mind (however ill-advised that may be)? Did Marcia edit THX-1138 and The Phantom Menace as he changed those after release as well (and also hasn't provided access to the theatrical versions). Hell, he's even added a digital sunset to American Graffiti. EDIT: I checked IMDB and it turns out she did edit American Graffiti but I doubt that one shot would be able to prevent her from getting royalties. EDIT2: And Assistant Editor on THX but not Phantom Menace, dammit!
Hey Mr. Adventure. Lucas tweaks every release he has done for the last 14 years since the DVD release. He publicly disavowed those movies over and over fighting petitions and backlash. Lucas himself testified to Congress in 1987 or 1988 on record to the preservation of films in their original form. Why? Because Ted Turner started Colorizing old black and white films to make more money on syndication and broadcast rights. Lucas wouldnt even turn over the original trilogy theatrical versions to the Library of Congress even after it was requested. I see it as this, this even violates a long standing tenant of both Disney and TCM to show or broadcast or sell the original versions of theatrical works. Is there a Disney movie that has ever been released and sold to the public that was altered and yet the original version wasnt unavailable? Im asking honestly because I dont know. All Im saying is that there is more to meets the eye with this situation, and sadly who knows if we will ever know the truth, but I believe that the movies were altered as such that Marcia Lucas gets credit as always for her work on the films. But the films themselves have a new catalog number and designation as to avoid additional royalties maybe. Marcia Lucas made tremendous contributions to the films, as did Gary Kurtz, irvin Kershner, Richard Marquand , and even Leigh Brackett and Lawrence Kasdan and many others. But over time, the acknowledgments are there except for Marcia Lucas. The only reason I mentioned any of this was the broadcast and showing of Star Wars on TCM like others on here. Its a film we all love, and enjoy and the excuses for not having it available make zero sense anymore in 2019. Whether it was Lucasfilm not releasing or Disney. Disney owns the movies for crying out loud. 4.5 billion doesnt get Disney the original versions of the films at all? Think about it. Disney could spend the time and money to get them, but why not. Nothing about it makes sense at all. I am Star Wars fan/Sci-Fi through and through. But I'm sick and tired of the argument or the excuse as to why or why not we will ever see the release of the theatrical versions. Hell, even Star Trek the motion picture and the director's cut from 2001 should be releasing in HD soon. I sincerely hope one day the films will be preserved and released for all to enjoy. Or at the very least someone like Harmy can restore and keep releasing the originals to future modern formats. All the best, -Koric
I'm no Disney expert but Fantasia comes to mind. Though with Disney it's usually due to controversial material rather than simply artistic vision. I do think the purchase by Disney may indeed mean we will see the theatrical versions eventually and it hasn't been long enough to rule out that isn't in the works. Perhaps similar to how we see Prince on Youtube and commercials now that he has passed.
Nothing wrong with that. It would've been foolish for a commercial network not to change and adapt to shifting audience tastes and business realities. If anything, Syfy has changed far less than plenty of other niche cable channels. A&E was originally a classy channel whose name stood for Arts & Entertainment, trying to do PBS-type stuff, but now it's mostly lowbrow, generic "reality" stuff. So is Discovery, which used to be a science/educational channel. AMC used to be American Movie Classics, with the same kind of programming Turner Classic Movies has now, but these days it's known more for its original scripted dramas. CourtTV, which showed live, commercial-free coverage of trials and legal news, abandoned its entire identity to become the "reality"-based TruTV. The country music-focused The Nashville Network became the more generic TNN and then mutated into Spike TV, and is now the Paramount Network. And so on. Heck, even MTV doesn't show music videos anymore. The problem with commercial TV is that it's dependent on ad revenue and ratings to survive, so time and time again, niche programming targeted at limited audiences has been forced to give way to more generic programming with mass appeal, and so most of the specialty channels have ceased to exist or mutated into homogenized, interchangeable entities. Yet Syfy remains what it always was, a network focused primarily on SF and fantasy. It's adapted and changed over time, yes, as any living entity does, but it's retained far more of its original character than most of the other niche/specialized cable networks we used to have. It pays the bills for the good stuff. TV networks have always had a range of different kinds of programming, from prime-time dramas and sitcoms to daytime soaps and game shows to late-night infomercials. Nobody has ever been expected to watch or like 100% of the programs a single network broadcasts. They're not all supposed to appeal to a single set of tastes. They're supposed to fill the schedule and bring in ad revenue that keeps the network in business. The cheesy stuff and the infomercials bring in the profits that the network can then invest in producing the better stuff that defines it. It's no different than an award-winning actor doing commercials or working as a handyman or waitress between gigs, or a novelist making a living by writing ad copy or delivering pizzas. We all need to pay the bills. Besides, the stuff like Sharknado is cheesy on purpose. It's satirical and knowingly winking at the audience about how ludicrous it is, and the audience is in on the joke and willingly playing along. You missed the part where I already answered that. Again, most creators would welcome the chance to revisit their earlier works and fix the parts they were dissatisfied with. Lucas is very, very far from the only creator to have done that. Many other filmmakers have done directors' cuts of their past movies. Many prose authors have rewritten their past novels or stories when they re-released them. (Heck, my upcoming novel Arachne's Crime is a reworking and expansion of my first published story, which I've already revised two previous times for its reprints on my old website and in my first story collection.) There's nothing here that needs explaining, because it's a perfectly natural thing for a creator to do.
It may pay the bills but I don't think it's unfair to say that Syfy is known by its poor movies. https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Film/SyfyChannelOriginalMovie
As I said, they're cheesy on purpose and the audience is in on the joke. Every network pays the bills by showing lowbrow stuff alongside the classier stuff. At least Syfy is doing something fun and winking at the audience rather than just running infomercials or "reality" crap. And if the audience has fun and the filmmakers have fun, then it's just snobbish, elitist, self-serving BS to look down your nose at it.