![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
I am genre fan, hear me geek
Mar. 16th, 2009 05:01 pmSciFi decides to become SyFy.
This is like that time when Coke decided to come out with New Coke because it got all self conscious about Pepsi winning a taste test or something and then they found out that people hated New Coke, and just had to go back to Classic Coke.
Yeah, in about a year, we're gonna see the same thing.
I'm sorry, changing the spelling isn't going to shed your geeky facade, and it's just going to piss off the people who helped you get where you are. People are still going to see that and go, "Oh, that's a geek channel".
Sci-Fi wanting to not be seen as a "geek" channel is like Apple not wanting to seem like a computer company. They can change their name to the French, couture sounding Ahppel, but they're still going to be a frakking computer company.
But honestly? If Sci-Fi wants to go in for the Spears-esque head shave of a makeover, let them have at it. Once Battlestar Galactica is over, I won't have a reason to tune in anyway. Both the incarnations of Stargate are over, and the new one looks so skanky and completely whitewashed that I have no interest in it.
Their show Warehouse 13 looks about as appealing as a sledgehammer to the forehead, and after they canceled Dresden Files even with good ratings, I don't trust their judgment.
I think Sci-Fi might find itself getting better ratings and more respect if, instead of trying to awesome up it's image, it bothered to focus on better programming. Which, of course, it won't.
It's not the geeks that are the problem. It's the deliberately bad B-movies that are the problem. I'm sorry, you can't show such classic works as Mansquito and Frankenfish and then blame the geeky fans for making your image so uncool.
The problem with the channel is that all their best programming has been second hand. The Gateverse, Battlestar Galactica, Doctor Who, and so forth and so on were things they got second hand (and by the way, they were idiots for showing Doctor Who episodes months later than their original British airing dates).
Any original programming Sci-Fi tried it's hand at just looked so absurd that even the geekiest of geeks couldn't watch it and respect themselves in the morning. Painkiller Jane, for instance, was one of the more wince-worthy of their attempts.
I think the channel would be better served trying to develop really interesting, quality original programming.
I think Tin Man was a fabulous attempt at that, and if they'd concentrated on making more TV shows/movies of that caliber and with that kind of cast, they'd be looking at a much different strategy. But you can't expect one good miniseries to erase years of Mansquito.
Like I said, wait a year, and you'll get Classic Sci-Fi back. Just try to endure the nasty New SyFy flavor in the meantime.
This is like that time when Coke decided to come out with New Coke because it got all self conscious about Pepsi winning a taste test or something and then they found out that people hated New Coke, and just had to go back to Classic Coke.
Yeah, in about a year, we're gonna see the same thing.
I'm sorry, changing the spelling isn't going to shed your geeky facade, and it's just going to piss off the people who helped you get where you are. People are still going to see that and go, "Oh, that's a geek channel".
Sci-Fi wanting to not be seen as a "geek" channel is like Apple not wanting to seem like a computer company. They can change their name to the French, couture sounding Ahppel, but they're still going to be a frakking computer company.
But honestly? If Sci-Fi wants to go in for the Spears-esque head shave of a makeover, let them have at it. Once Battlestar Galactica is over, I won't have a reason to tune in anyway. Both the incarnations of Stargate are over, and the new one looks so skanky and completely whitewashed that I have no interest in it.
Their show Warehouse 13 looks about as appealing as a sledgehammer to the forehead, and after they canceled Dresden Files even with good ratings, I don't trust their judgment.
I think Sci-Fi might find itself getting better ratings and more respect if, instead of trying to awesome up it's image, it bothered to focus on better programming. Which, of course, it won't.
It's not the geeks that are the problem. It's the deliberately bad B-movies that are the problem. I'm sorry, you can't show such classic works as Mansquito and Frankenfish and then blame the geeky fans for making your image so uncool.
The problem with the channel is that all their best programming has been second hand. The Gateverse, Battlestar Galactica, Doctor Who, and so forth and so on were things they got second hand (and by the way, they were idiots for showing Doctor Who episodes months later than their original British airing dates).
Any original programming Sci-Fi tried it's hand at just looked so absurd that even the geekiest of geeks couldn't watch it and respect themselves in the morning. Painkiller Jane, for instance, was one of the more wince-worthy of their attempts.
I think the channel would be better served trying to develop really interesting, quality original programming.
I think Tin Man was a fabulous attempt at that, and if they'd concentrated on making more TV shows/movies of that caliber and with that kind of cast, they'd be looking at a much different strategy. But you can't expect one good miniseries to erase years of Mansquito.
Like I said, wait a year, and you'll get Classic Sci-Fi back. Just try to endure the nasty New SyFy flavor in the meantime.
