cry moar sgu
Facetofcathy linked to an editorial titled Atlantis fans need to stop punishing Universe, which is about as ludicrous as it sounds. The comments were almost uniformly derisive of the notion that bitter SGA fans were somehow responsible for the steep decline in SGU's ratings. (It's been steadily shedding viewers since its heavily-promoted premiere.)
I left a long comment that's still in moderation that I'll repeat here.
I'll break from the pack here. I do think devoted fans can make a difference in the success of a show.
Stargate fans created active fandom communities around the previous two shows that added value to the franchise. Thousands of merchandise-buying, show-promoting fans got into those shows because they were attracted to them by the fandoms.
It's well known that TV shows benefit from a "water cooler effect": when people discuss a show socially, it serves to reinforce their interest in it, and promotes the show to others who overhear and get interested, or would like to participate in the "water cooler" conversations.
For whatever reasons, SGU turned off a lot of the active Stargate fans who helped to create a conversation around the previous shows that rippled out to casual viewers.
But no show on TV is ENTITLED to benefit from the water cooler effect. That's something a show has to inspire, not something showrunners can assume will automatically happen. And it's certainly not something they can blame viewers for failing to provide.
Maybe it's scheduling, maybe it's the wrong moment for a show of this tone; maybe it's just not a good show.
If SGU struck a chord with audiences, no amount of embittered griping would keep viewers away. A core of Star Trek fans loathed the 2009 movie, but they couldn't keep it from being a hit.
If you really want to know why SGU is doing badly, Abigail Nussbaum wrote a lengthy, intelligent review of SGU's first season that explains the show's many problems in detail.
In my opinion, the main problem is that these writer-producers are complacent. You quote David Blue saying, "We didn’t want to do the exact same thing, because there’s only so many times you can do the same thing again before it gets boring."
That's very true! So why did the SGU episode "Water" repeat a plot from the SGA episode "Hide and Seek"? Why is SGU so derivative? "The same thing again" is all these writers seem interested in doing. They've only moved from ripping off Star Trek and Star Wars to ripping off BSG and Lost.
I watched SGA, but I never thought it was a great show. The writing was often lazy. Plots were recycled and simplistic. Storylines showed the characters committing ethically bankrupt and idiotic actions, while the show continued to hold them up as smart, principled heroes. The writing of female characters and characters of color was usually reductive and stereotypical.
I watched anyway because the concepts of Stargate had endless possibilities, there was a sense of camaraderie and some decent humor, and I liked the actors and the way they brought life to the characters. (It's hilarious that Mallozzi complains Stargate fans spurn SGU because they only want "square-jawed heroes" when SGA's John Sheppard was one of the most underwritten leading men ever-- yet as acted by Joe Flanigan, Sheppard became an offbeat and appealing character, much loved for his quirks and oddities, no square jaws in sight.)
These writers haven't changed much. They're still derivative, lifting elements from everything from The Last Starfighter to BSG and Lost to their own back catalog. They're still writing the same Teal'c/Ronon character, only now he's Greer and he's an angry black man stereotype instead of a noble warrior stereotype. SGU's Wray is as underused and poorly written as SGA's Weir. Eli is McKay Lite.
But in SGU, the writers aren't even letting the characters form relationships or show a sense of humor, when character bonds and comic relief were two of the main saving graces of SG1 and SGA.
None of this adds up to compelling television. It doesn't attract enough of the active community-building fans and it doesn't attract enough casual viewers.
How is that the fault of anyone but the people who run the show?
http://cesare.dreamwidth.org/87776.html |
comments | Comment at Dreamwidth
I left a long comment that's still in moderation that I'll repeat here.
I'll break from the pack here. I do think devoted fans can make a difference in the success of a show.
Stargate fans created active fandom communities around the previous two shows that added value to the franchise. Thousands of merchandise-buying, show-promoting fans got into those shows because they were attracted to them by the fandoms.
It's well known that TV shows benefit from a "water cooler effect": when people discuss a show socially, it serves to reinforce their interest in it, and promotes the show to others who overhear and get interested, or would like to participate in the "water cooler" conversations.
For whatever reasons, SGU turned off a lot of the active Stargate fans who helped to create a conversation around the previous shows that rippled out to casual viewers.
But no show on TV is ENTITLED to benefit from the water cooler effect. That's something a show has to inspire, not something showrunners can assume will automatically happen. And it's certainly not something they can blame viewers for failing to provide.
Maybe it's scheduling, maybe it's the wrong moment for a show of this tone; maybe it's just not a good show.
If SGU struck a chord with audiences, no amount of embittered griping would keep viewers away. A core of Star Trek fans loathed the 2009 movie, but they couldn't keep it from being a hit.
If you really want to know why SGU is doing badly, Abigail Nussbaum wrote a lengthy, intelligent review of SGU's first season that explains the show's many problems in detail.
In my opinion, the main problem is that these writer-producers are complacent. You quote David Blue saying, "We didn’t want to do the exact same thing, because there’s only so many times you can do the same thing again before it gets boring."
That's very true! So why did the SGU episode "Water" repeat a plot from the SGA episode "Hide and Seek"? Why is SGU so derivative? "The same thing again" is all these writers seem interested in doing. They've only moved from ripping off Star Trek and Star Wars to ripping off BSG and Lost.
I watched SGA, but I never thought it was a great show. The writing was often lazy. Plots were recycled and simplistic. Storylines showed the characters committing ethically bankrupt and idiotic actions, while the show continued to hold them up as smart, principled heroes. The writing of female characters and characters of color was usually reductive and stereotypical.
I watched anyway because the concepts of Stargate had endless possibilities, there was a sense of camaraderie and some decent humor, and I liked the actors and the way they brought life to the characters. (It's hilarious that Mallozzi complains Stargate fans spurn SGU because they only want "square-jawed heroes" when SGA's John Sheppard was one of the most underwritten leading men ever-- yet as acted by Joe Flanigan, Sheppard became an offbeat and appealing character, much loved for his quirks and oddities, no square jaws in sight.)
These writers haven't changed much. They're still derivative, lifting elements from everything from The Last Starfighter to BSG and Lost to their own back catalog. They're still writing the same Teal'c/Ronon character, only now he's Greer and he's an angry black man stereotype instead of a noble warrior stereotype. SGU's Wray is as underused and poorly written as SGA's Weir. Eli is McKay Lite.
But in SGU, the writers aren't even letting the characters form relationships or show a sense of humor, when character bonds and comic relief were two of the main saving graces of SG1 and SGA.
None of this adds up to compelling television. It doesn't attract enough of the active community-building fans and it doesn't attract enough casual viewers.
How is that the fault of anyone but the people who run the show?
http://cesare.dreamwidth.org/87776.html |
comments | Comment at Dreamwidth