Terminator Terminated

[SummerDream]

The fans have not given up hope:

http://terminatorwiki.fox.com/threa...ay+at+8:00+PM+on+SCI+FI+Forms+to+support+TCSS

This time (same time as TSCC used to air) on Friday there is a fan meet at scifi.com forums.
http://forums.scifi.com/index.php?showtopic=2332484

I can't believe I'm saying this but let it go. Friedman has already said that they're not going to move it to a new network so move on.

I think most people have let it go, but if by some extreme miracle the show returns, we'll know who to thank.

britt179 from the forums would be first I can think of. Very dedicated.

Friedman is not a decision-maker so what he says does not matter.
Offtopic: Look what I just found!
http://www.cerebus.de/psi5/code/anniversary.html
(Almost finished remake of psi-5 trading company)

 

[Samurai8472]

New Target

 

[SummerDream]

Oh Cameron.

So sweet is your smile, so beautiful your walk.

But Cameron your eyes look so tired,
has John not been treating you well? Have you not been sleeping well?
You love him so but he says your only a machine.

Cameron you look so thin, have you not been eating well?

Oh Cameron you would be better off with me.
I would not call you machine, I would cook for you and I would always love you back.

And with you I would dare go out at night in my neighborhood, with you I would be so safe.
Oh Cameron, I would love to love you so.
Oh Cameron, if you wish to stay with John, at least send me Allison.



​

 

[nx1701g]

Friedman is not a decision-maker so what he says does not matter.

He created the show, I think he gets a vote.

The truth is Sci-Fi, CW, they couldn't afford the show before it moved to the future war so the chances of them being able to pay now that they're in it are even slimmer. Would I love the show to continue? Yes I would. Is it going to happen? I highly doubt it. They're moving Terminator back to a movie property from the look of things with Salvation and that, also, most likely played a part. It's like Paramount said when they made Generations: "Why would people watch it in a theatre when they can see it on TV for free?"

 

[nx1701g]

They did well with the human enemies, the criminals, the police, Kaliba.

Actually Kaliba was Skynet.

 

[hyzmarca]

Kaliba was a front company controlled by or related to Skynet. It's employees were human.

 

[Marc]

One critic's take on the why T:TSCC failed. He puts it down to a combiation of
a) the story approach -an overall arch that made it hard for latecomers to pickup
b) the producer refusing to change this approach
c) The Terminator name being more of a hinderance than a help
d) being on a network that expects instant big bang ratings

Sarah Connor was a non-populist, meditative, complex piece of television on a smash-bang, show-me-the-ratings kind of network. The two were never going to get on, but kudos to Fox for giving it two seasons to prove itself, especially when it was obvious after the first, unsuccessful season, that showrunner Josh Friedman had no intentions of changing the formula.

http://denofgeek.com/television/254607/terminator_the_sarah_connor_chronicles_why_it_failed.html

 

[SummerDream]

a) why so? that is common on tv
b) see a
c) only because of false advertising, they advertised to wrong kind of people
Instead of those horrible adverts with Eliza, they should have shown Summer
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSzN6zf4zLM&feature=related
d) i doubt that

Having read some other comments from critics, some of them are not very clever and did not understand the show, if they even watched it. Maybe they put those they cannot find any real job for to the job.
This show would have been really easy to promote by having the cast on talk shows, Summer glows all around so she would have caught the viewers.
To associate Summer with Eliza Dushku and having her act there something like that, huge fail:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=snLEZoMmop4

Friday, 8pm:
http://terminatorwiki.fox.com/thread/2848659/Let+all+get+on+Friday+at+8%3A00+PM+on+SCI+FI+Forms+to+support+TCSS

 

[Captain Fine]

I'm saddened by this, but the writers do kind of deserve it for nearly putting me to sleep mid-season 2. I thought season 1 was pretty good and watched through it really quickly and enjoyed it. S2 just didn't have the same pull for me. There wasn't enough Cameron for sure. Half the time I was wondering where she was. Riley annoyed me. The lack of sharing information a la Lost annoyed me.

The sad part is that it really picked up at the end, learning more about the T-1001 Weaver and John Henry. And the fact that they were fighting Skynet was fascinating to me. That's what I wanted to see more of.

I feel like TSCC suffered from having 20 episodes in its 2nd season. IMO, sci-fi shows (except for Lost maybe) should not receive 20 episode seasons, since most of the time they do get them, we get filler. Stick to 13 episodes please. Keep the writing a lot more tight, and stop deviating from the main mysteries that we want to learn about.

 

[Zeppster]

I'm saddened by this, but the writers do kind of deserve it for nearly putting me to sleep mid-season 2. I thought season 1 was pretty good and watched through it really quickly and enjoyed it. S2 just didn't have the same pull for me. There wasn't enough Cameron for sure. Half the time I was wondering where she was. Riley annoyed me. The lack of sharing information a la Lost annoyed me.

The sad part is that it really picked up at the end, learning more about the T-1001 Weaver and John Henry. And the fact that they were fighting Skynet was fascinating to me. That's what I wanted to see more of.

I feel like TSCC suffered from having 20 episodes in its 2nd season. IMO, sci-fi shows (except for Lost maybe) should not receive 20 episode seasons, since most of the time they do get them, we get filler. Stick to 13 episodes please. Keep the writing a lot more tight, and stop deviating from the main mysteries that we want to learn about.

I think you are right about arc type shows. That's why Star Trek worked, a lot of the filler episodes work in star trek. But in most of the other shows today you have to keep the story lines going.

 

[Saul]

I'm saddened by this, but the writers do kind of deserve it for nearly putting me to sleep mid-season 2. I thought season 1 was pretty good and watched through it really quickly and enjoyed it. S2 just didn't have the same pull for me. There wasn't enough Cameron for sure. Half the time I was wondering where she was. Riley annoyed me. The lack of sharing information a la Lost annoyed me.

The sad part is that it really picked up at the end, learning more about the T-1001 Weaver and John Henry. And the fact that they were fighting Skynet was fascinating to me. That's what I wanted to see more of.

I feel like TSCC suffered from having 20 episodes in its 2nd season. IMO, sci-fi shows (except for Lost maybe) should not receive 20 episode seasons, since most of the time they do get them, we get filler. Stick to 13 episodes please. Keep the writing a lot more tight, and stop deviating from the main mysteries that we want to learn about.

I think you are right about arc type shows. That's why Star Trek worked, a lot of the filler episodes work in star trek. But in most of the other shows today you have to keep the story lines going.

I think that's partly why Star Trek failed is that people want more than filler these days. I think it's hard to do filler on the type of show that Terminator was unless you're going the Smallville route and do a Terminator of the week.

 

[Zeppster]

TOS was only non arc shows really and out of it came 11 movies and 4 spin offs. I think it did something right.

 

[Deckerd]

It was never going to survive after they failed to pronounce Cromartie correctly. You'd think Shirley Manson would have told them.

 

[Saul]

TOS was only non arc shows really and out of it came 11 movies and 4 spin offs. I think it did something right.

No shit Sherlock. I am in no way dismissing that. But 43 years ago doesn't apply to today's TV and today's Star Trek. That's why the most recent series failed. Tv has moved on since then. Trek on TV didn't follow.

 

[SummerDream]

TOS was only non arc shows really and out of it came 11 movies and 4 spin offs. I think it did something right.

No shit Sherlock. I am in no way dismissing that. But 43 years ago doesn't apply to today's TV and today's Star Trek. That's why the most recent series failed. Tv has moved on since then. Trek on TV didn't follow.

Thing with Trek is, they would also have to do something better than TOS and TNG if they make more of it.
I at least was very disappointed of some of the holo deck episodes, if they made TNG now, those would need to be scrapped.

 

[Captain Fine]

It was never going to survive after they failed to pronounce Cromartie correctly. You'd think Shirley Manson would have told them.

How is Cromartie supposed to be pronounced? What kind of name is it anyway?

 

[Zeppster]

If drama is to be done right you need a little bit of stagnation with it for an episode to make it more dramatic. Just like comedy and drama in a show or movie you usually see those go together well it's because you can't try and be serious and make something all drama/arcs and get away with it. It ends up getting boring.

 

[Messianni]

TOS was only non arc shows really and out of it came 11 movies and 4 spin offs. I think it did something right.

No shit Sherlock. I am in no way dismissing that. But 43 years ago doesn't apply to today's TV and today's Star Trek. That's why the most recent series failed. Tv has moved on since then. Trek on TV didn't follow.

The vast majority of TNG's run wasn't arc-based either and was all "filler" by the inappropriate definition being thrown around in this thread. TNG, in particular, wasn't written as filler. It was written for purpose of syndication. That way anyone could jump right in and enjoy themselves. Last I checked, TNG was also highly successful.

 

[Blue_Trek]

I was kind of souring on this series, then the last three episodes hit, and I really wanted to see more. It was just getting going, what a waste.

 

[Kelthaz]

TOS was only non arc shows really and out of it came 11 movies and 4 spin offs. I think it did something right.

No shit Sherlock. I am in no way dismissing that. But 43 years ago doesn't apply to today's TV and today's Star Trek. That's why the most recent series failed. Tv has moved on since then. Trek on TV didn't follow.

The vast majority of TNG's run wasn't arc-based either and was all "filler" by the inappropriate definition being thrown around in this thread. TNG, in particular, wasn't written as filler. It was written for purpose of syndication. That way anyone could jump right in and enjoy themselves. Last I checked, TNG was also highly successful.

TNG was over 20 years ago. That type of story telling simply doesn't work in sci-fi in the 21st century.