• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

pilots passed on this year sound dreadful!

I wasn't looking forward to 17th Precinct (just what TV needs: More cop shows!), but I do like RDM. The description of the series makes it sound like half tired TV cliche (rookie cop, veteran cop) and half what the hell (a terrorist group called Stoics valuing a mystical concept known as science over the humdrum, concrete reality of magic).

Sounds like a rehash of Caprica, where the "acceptable" religion was polytheism and the monotheists were a fringe cult with a terrorist branch.

And really, it sounds to me like a misunderstanding of what the word "science" means, the same one that's all too pervasive in the media. Science isn't a specific set of ideas, but a process for observing and understanding how the universe works. In a universe where magic was demonstrably real, there could easily be a science of magic, a discipline applying observation, deduction, and experimentation to derive the rules of magic and how it interacts with the other laws of nature.

In a universe such as this they would have come up with a word that described the workings of the world without considering magic as a source.
 
Last edited:
Ok, someone read the article for "Area 57" and tell me someone didn't just try to make a live action American Dad.
 
First off, every religion has its terrorists, so please don't single out just one.

Muslims are monotheists.

Yes, and so were the Catholics who tried to blow up Parliament in 1605, the IRA and Orange Volunteer terrorists in Northern Ireland, the fanatics in the United States who bomb abortion clinics, the militant Jew who assassinated Yitzhak Rabin, etc. Terrorism is not associated with any single religion.


I was observing that there is such a thing as real-life monotheist terrorists (and the Muslim ones are almost certainly the main real world influence on STO).

So it's not quite as simple a pattern as Precinct 17.

You're so fixated on the single tree of terrorism that you're missing the forest of my overall point. It's the same in that what's normative in our society is treated as a fringe belief in the Moore fantasy universe.
 
Yes, and so were the Catholics who tried to blow up Parliament in 1605, the IRA and Orange Volunteer terrorists in Northern Ireland,

I'm sorry, do you think I don't know about Northern Ireland? Are you seriously saying that?

You're so fixated on the single tree of terrorism that you're missing the forest of my overall point.

I am, see above, have a working understanding of the IRA. I haven't finished watching Caprica yet (the back half is still airing here), but if I was going to draw an IRA analogy, the attempts at gun-running to Tauron probably fit best. In these episodes Tauron emigrants living on Caprica feel a patriotic interest in sending money back to Tauron to fight the struggle - something that actually happened with Irish-Americans and the IRA.

The approach of the STO and the ideology of the STO are clearly more inspired by Islamic terrorism and, to be specific, international Islamic terrorism (the absence of any apparent nationalist agenda means it's not as like, let's say, Hamas). So we are dealing witha particular kind of terrorism.

The closest one gets to a nationalist type of terrorism - more akin to the Basque, Irish, and Palestinian situations - would be on Gemenon, where the church is based and fights wars with the Gemenese polytheists. Even here the church is portrayed as an international organization, though, which happens to have its spiritual center at Gemenon.

Irish terrorism, for example, is explicitly couched in nationalist terms: On the Unionist side, it is about maintaining the link with Great Britain, and on the Republican side, it is about uniting the island as one republic. Religion works tribally - Unionists are traditionally ethnically Scots-Irish and denominationally Protestant, while Republicans are traditionally ethnically Irish Gaels and denominationally Catholic. This is not universally true, obviously, but it's the baseline it's drawn across. So while religion is part of the identity politics - bound up with race and professed nationality - it does not have a stated internationally religious component.

The terrorism of al-Qaeda, however, has an internationalist bent influenced by Sayyid Qutb and a broad, specifically pan-Sunni Islamic agenda... which is a little closer to STO than the IRA.

It's the same in that what's normative in our society is treated as a fringe belief in the Moore fantasy universe.
No, I'm aware of that. What I was pointing out that in Caprica, a normative belief - monotheism - is relegated to a fringe belief, but in a way that mimics the real world place one variety has as a fringe belief. So it works on the first level (beliefs reversed) but then it's interesting to note the way they have not been reversed.
 
I don't believe it's from a movie (though, in fact, there was a short film that used the expression as a title). It was (and remains) a cliche that referred to movies -- to the deus ex machina of the cavalry charging up the hill just as everything seemed lost. It's a cliche about the Western movies.
I'm just curious where it might have originated. Maybe in the movie biz, but in an newspaper article talking about the cliche, perhaps. There must be some original source for the term, somebody who first came up with it.

Edit for News: Damn, it looks like Locke & Key has been shelved for good. :(

I doubt even a good reaction at ComicCon could turn it around.

That was depressing so I went and found something to cheer me up before I bail on this place for today: Powers pilot is filming soon. :) They're going for a Jan 2012 debut.

The FX pilot based on Powers is nearing fruition, according to executive producer and comic book series co-creator Brian Michael Bendis.

"We're filming in just a few weeks," Bendis said to Newsarama. "Our cast is being locked down. Literally, the deals are being closed as we speak — some really surprising names."
I wonder who those surprising names will be? Charles S. Dutton is already onboard. I've heard rumors about Kyle Chandler and Katee Sackhoff for the leads. The former seems more likely than the latter.
 
Last edited:
Here's a pilot that made it, but I'm not sure whether to care about: A Gifted Man.

I'd written it off because it involves a sappy sounding ghost scenario and it's on CBS. But maybe it's worth giving a shot?

"A GIFTED MAN is a drama about a brilliant, charismatic surgeon whose life changes forever when his deceased ex-wife begins teaching him the meaning of life from the "hereafter." Michael Holt (Patrick Wilson) is an exceptional doctor who lives a materialistic life of luxury thanks to his work-obsessed career and powerful and wealthy patients; however, Michael's ordered world is rocked when his ex-wife, Anna (Jennifer Ehle), an idealistic free-clinic doctor and the love of his life, mysteriously appears to him. Michael's off-beat sister, Christina (Julie Benz), a single mom to her teenaged son, Milo (Liam Aiken), is thrilled that Anna's back in her brother's life, even as an "illusion," because Michael was always a better person with her.

Sounds nausea-inducing, huh? But, ironically the part that caught my eye is filed under "what didn't work":
That being said, the pilot doesn't firmly establish what the show will be week to week. There's no "case of the week" in the traditional sense as Michael coasts through his patients with ease, their purpose more to show his changing attitude rather than be mysteries to be solved.

That sounds hopeful to me, because it points to something less formulaic than I'd feared.



 
damn shame about locke and key and poe + 17th prescent. to bad they did'nt even air. :scream::scream::scream::scream::scream:
 
The networks should at least show the pilots or at very least, put them on YouTube. From the looks of things, it would do more to bolster our faith in their judgment than the reverse.

I guess I can't fault them for not picking up Locke & Key since the reasons were financial. They have a business to run after all. But there's a definite PR downside to letting the public see a great pilot that they killed. Evil FOX suits, Firefly, grrr...
 
I wish networks would consider burning off unused pilots at some point. Even on a Saturday night in the summer. I have to imagine it would draw better ratings than whatever random show/movie they air, and the costs are already sunk.

But there is no excuse for not picking up a pilot because the show costs too much. That data should be determined before the pilot is commissioned. If a show can't be produced for a reasonable enough budget to be affordable for the network, then there is no reason to even produce the pilot.
 
But there is no excuse for not picking up a pilot because the show costs too much. That data should be determined before the pilot is commissioned. If a show can't be produced for a reasonable enough budget to be affordable for the network, then there is no reason to even produce the pilot.

In a perfect world, projected budgets would always align with the cost of the finished product, but sometimes costs are underestimated and budgets increase. Thus the pilot -- if it turns out producing the show week to week would be much more money than originally estimated, the network can nip it in the bud before they start bleeding money.

In this case, though, it seems like the Network didn't like the pilot and alternative venues on cable couldn't afford the price tag of a network show. It happens.
 
In a perfect world, projected budgets would always align with the cost of the finished product, but sometimes costs are underestimated and budgets increase. Thus the pilot -- if it turns out producing the show week to week would be much more money than originally estimated, the network can nip it in the bud before they start bleeding money.

Exactly. You can't determine the actual cost except by making the pilot. If you don't actually try it for real, all you can do is estimate what you think it'll cost. As Twain said, "Supposing is good, but finding out is better."
 
Right, the pilot is the shakeout cruise for determining a show's viability and it's also not the only factor. If Alcatraz had fallen through, FOX might very well have decided that Locke & Key looked good after all.

There was a last minute meeting with FOX suits and JJ Abrams in which he mollified their (perfectly justifiable) fears that the show would be another plotline-to-nowhere experience that sheds viewers en masse. He outlined his plan for the show, and the suits were happy. But what if that meeting hadn't gone well? What if Abrams' plan sucked? That's why the suits order more pilots than they can hope to pick up.

The budget problems would be worse on a cable network, which is where Locke & Key was being shopped. Maybe FOX could have afforded it, but not Skiffy. The only place it could hope to survive is on premium cable, which has larger budgets, but that's a pretty high hurdle. Who doesn't want the creative freedom and largesse of HBO? I'm sure the competition there is fierce.
 
The networks should at least show the pilots or at very least, put them on YouTube. From the looks of things, it would do more to bolster our faith in their judgment than the reverse.

I guess I can't fault them for not picking up Locke & Key since the reasons were financial. They have a business to run after all. But there's a definite PR downside to letting the public see a great pilot that they killed. Evil FOX suits, Firefly, grrr...

i totally agree...how much would it cost them to do that? Next to nothing, right?

And from comments, they might glean some useful info, like a supporting character people really liked, or a concept that could be re-tried.
 
They're scared to show the pilots because if the pilots are good, they'll face fan wrath for killing good stuff like we all suspect they do.

And if the pilots are bad, they'll look like fools for paying good money to greenlight pilots that should have died at the elevator pitch phase.

How are they going to explain killing Locke & Key? There might be a perfectly good reason: it's too nichey, complex and scary for network TV, and too expensive for basic cable. Premium cable has its own development slate and they're very unlikely to pick up a network reject because if they can't come up with stuff that beats network TV on their own, they should find another line of work. But will fans accept that reasoning? They just want what they want.

So really, it's a no-win situation for the suits.
 
They're scared to show the pilots because if the pilots are good, they'll face fan wrath for killing good stuff like we all suspect they do.

And if the pilots are bad, they'll look like fools for paying good money to greenlight pilots that should have died at the elevator pitch phase.

I disagree on both counts. Showing a pilot that has been rejected and then having it a) score big ratings and b) critical acclaim would simply result in the network saying "OK, we changed our minds - we listen to the fans and they have spoken. Watch for it in the spring". And they become heroes.

On the other hand, showing a failed pilot that a) flops in the rating and b) is critically lambasted results in the network saying "now you can see our good judgement in action. We gambled a million on the pilot, but had the wisdom to say this sucked and killed it. Watch our far superior product offerings this fall." And they become heroes.

The only reason why a network couldn't show a pilot is if there were rights issues, or if the pilot is being shopped around to other networks. Just because Wonder Woman (for example) was rejected by NBC that doesn't mean it wasn't offered to The CW or some other network. Alternately there might also be a licensing issue - Warners and DC might not have given David Kelley the authorization for any public release of the pilot if it doesn't go to series. That's probably why we've never officially seen the Aquaman thing.

Alex
 
I disagree on both counts. Showing a pilot that has been rejected and then having it a) score big ratings and b) critical acclaim would simply result in the network saying "OK, we changed our minds - we listen to the fans and they have spoken. Watch for it in the spring". And they become heroes.

Not necessarily. It's not like the people who made the pilot could just sit around doing nothing for months afterward. Once the pilot was rejected, they'd move on to other work, the sets would be torn down, etc. So it might be difficult to get them back together if the decision were reversed.


On the other hand, showing a failed pilot that a) flops in the rating and b) is critically lambasted results in the network saying "now you can see our good judgement in action. We gambled a million on the pilot, but had the wisdom to say this sucked and killed it. Watch our far superior product offerings this fall." And they become heroes.

Except they wouldn't become heroes with their advertisers, because they would've filled an hour of airtime with a money-losing show. And since the advertisers are the ones who provide the money, the network execs are going to be a lot more concerned with their opinions than with the fans' opinions.

Networks did once air unsold pilots packaged as "showcase" specials, but it was in summer months when their only competition was reruns and they weren't expecting substantial ratings anyway. It was basically a way of cutting their losses. These days, networks do the same with unaired episodes of shows they've cancelled, calling it "burning off" the episodes, and the same rationale applies. It's done with the full expectation that nobody's going to be paying much attention anyway, that ratings are going to be so poor that even the lousy ratings they'll get from premiering a failed pilot or episodes of a failed series will be marginally better than they'd get for a rerun. So not that many people are going to notice the results of their judgment, good or bad.

Of course, the Wonder Woman pilot has gotten enough press and buzz that it would likely be an exception to the rule. But they still wouldn't put it in a major time slot or spend much money on promoting it.
 
Plus Wonder Woman isn't finished, it's still a rough cut. In order to show it, they'd have to invest even more money into it.
 
Showing a pilot that has been rejected and then having it a) score big ratings and b) critical acclaim would simply result in the network saying "OK, we changed our minds - we listen to the fans and they have spoken. Watch for it in the spring". And they become heroes.
What if they can't pick it up because:

a) their schedules for the coming year are full (they've done their pickups for 2011-12);

b) they can't make any promises about 2012-13, because it's way too soon to know what they'll need to pick up and what their options will be; and

c) they loved the pilot but it was just flat out too expensive for broadcast or basic cable (which seems to be the case with Locke & Key)

Another network might pick it up, but then that other network becomes the hero. The original network that rejected it only looks worse then.

If Locke & Key is a big hit at ComicCon, I don't see Fox magically changing their minds, or SyFy either. If it was too pricey before, it'll still be too pricey. Even if it does surface somewhere in 2012-13, a lot of the cast members will have gotten other gigs by then, and those roles will have to recast. That, and having to reduce the cost of the show, may result in something very different and not as good as the original pilot.
 
Well, why not release these unprofitable pilots which would be a bad choice for a TV timeslot as a web bonus for premium payers on their websites?

Or something like that.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top