• 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!

J.J. Abrams Almost Human

It's actually been better recently. But, although I wasn't a fan of Almost Human, the show fits the narrative of Fox being indifferent to sci-fi to a tee.

Which is odd, because that "narrative" was out of date. The executives that cancelled Firefly left the network years ago, and their successors were vastly more supportive of shows like Dollhouse and The Sarah Connor Chronicles. It's odd that they'd revert to the old pattern and show the episodes so badly out of order.

But then, I found Almost Human to be an awful, mindless show, a complete failure at futurism with a lead character who committed cold-blooded murder and was celebrated for it. It was like some kind of retro-1980s action-movie vision of the future, and trapped in the '80s in its gender attitudes too. So I can't say I regret seeing it go.
 
I thought it had potential.

There were enough unanswered questions, which could have been answered in a season 2.

Love the screen name :bolian:

I think the highlight of this was the casting.

Carl Urban and Michael Ealy were just fantastic off each other.

5.5 million folks and it gets the axe.

Rated 8.3 at IMDB. Anything over 8 is usually pretty popular.

I just don't get it.
 
Fringe was not successful and was continually renewed despite disproving results.

The fact that Anna Torv is Rupert Murdoch's niece had NOTHING to do with that.
 
Once again, they give us just enough to engender curiosity surrounding the worldbuilding and then BAM! The rug gets yanked out from under us.

What was the deal with Dorian? Why was he special?
What was the deal with Kennex's Terrorist GF?
What was behind THE WALL?
Why did they intentionally air episodes of a series out of order? (again!)
 
Fringe was not successful and was continually renewed despite disproving results.
It was a five-season show that ran for 100 episodes. That's a success. Anna Torv's connection to Rupert Murdoch is pretty distant. It's a lame conspiracy theory to think Fox ran a show for 100 episodes on that basis.
 
You're saying it was successful because it was renewed.

I'm suggesting that it was fraudulently renewed.

Ditto for Sliders.

The ratings sucked, but some suit near the top kept renewing it when s/he had no sane financial reason to do so, because "They liked it".
 
They don't renew shows just because they like them. They renew them because it makes financial sense. Most shows don't get beyond one or two seasons. If a show amasses 100 episodes it becomes a commodity that will earn significant revenue over the long haul. Thus it is a success. Sometimes a show that is produced by a studio separate from the network it airs on will stay on the air because it's a good performer in international and home entertainment sales. They'll work out a suitable license fee to stay on the air even if ratings have slipped to a marginal level. That's likely what happened between Fox and Warner Bros for the last couple of seasons of Fringe.

What's more likely, that they renew shows for no sane financial reason or that they have a sane financial reason and you just weren't aware of it? If your answer is the former, try again.
 
What do you mean try again?

I said that something irrational happened and you reply that it can't have happened because it wasn't rational?
 
If that's a little performance piece then you probably actually grasp matters. If not, I don't have an inclination to go further with this. So, either way, there we are.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top