"TERMINATOR: The Sarah Connor Chronicles" Season 2 Thread (1 Viewer)

[Zack Gibbs]

^^ Wow, I never new his performance in the show was such a... performance.

 

[Diallo B]

^^^^^that dude was high out of his mind...^^^^^

 

[Inspector Hammer!]

I don't know quite what to say about that.

 

[Joe_H]

Yeah, if he's really like that, wow, what an amazing actor.

 

[Andres Munoz]

I know...John Connor was a cool kid...this Thomas Dekker seems like a dick, LOL.

I didn't know he was in the Freddy Krueger remake. I wonder if he's going to have the Johnny Depp character...

 

[shadyguy]

Hope that all was an act, cause he seemed a jerk and kinda imature to put it mildly!
He'd been better off if had never made it !

 

[Jeff Jacobson]

Now he can't even afford a shirt!

 

[Jeffery_H]

Yes, I know, but that does not negate the fact it was a quoted source which most people want, not just to making it up. If that news had broken on any other site I would have quoted them and given a link as well to it, but it was not and EW was first to break it.

In fact you and a few others are wrong about it being just one feature I am referring to. It was in fact from three different features they did, PLUS the Summer EW Insider interview on the web site for paid subscribers.

What I was pointing out time and again is this show was dead LONG before it was "official" due to everything that was already leaked about it. The delusions of some here that it was a good show or had any hope of making it was just that. Like it or not, those were and are the facts.

The show had dreadful writing and very little viewership to support it. I did say I liked about 12 shows total and it may have done OK had they had MUCH better talent in place. But this was all discussed before in several of the features EW has done since October 2008. If other known news sources had broken the same info, I would have referred you to them as well. Just because you have some sort of problem with a known news source that is EW does not mean it is any less true as has been proven here.

In the case of other shows, not just TSCC, I will be happy to supply links and quote them as well when they call out shows and have inside scoops on news or show problems too. I am not picking on any one show, just stating the facts and supporting them with a known news source be it EW or anyone else.

 

[Jeff Cooper]

I think you misinterpreted my post. I have nothing at all against EW, and wasn't bashing at all what EW reported.

My main beef was that nearly every single one of your posts was just a carbon copy of the same statement repeated ad nauseum. It drove me nuts, to the point where I would see the posters name "Jeffrey H" and say to myself, "hm, how much you want to bet he mentions EW and the three core characters?..... Yep, there it is!" You made your opinion heard, with the first few posts, so why the overactive photocopier?

And I don't see how you can keep quoting your source as fact. At the time of the EW article nothing was set in stone regarding the shows fate. The article was an editorial; speculation, a guess, nothing more. True, it was a very educated guess, but certainly not fact. That it actually came to be a correct guess, also does not retroactively make it a fact.

And your quote "The delusions of some here that it was a good show or had any hope of making it was just that. Like it or not, those were and are the facts. " is also quite puzzling. Whether someone thinks the show is good or not is called an opinion. Yet you go on to state that it is a fact. As spock would say: "Illogical".

 

[roygrady]

I will miss this, season two was much better imo.

 

[Hugh Jackes]

Well, so was Edward Furlong, so he fits right in.

 

[PhilipG]

^^ The real reason for the show's cancellation...?

He's high as a kite, and a camp legend! Who'd have thunk it?! Hilarious!

 

[Will_B]

Re: Entertainment Weekly

Dude, just find one source, anywhere, that got it WRONG. If Entertainment Weekly had said something unique, that would make Entertainment Weekly's pundits different or special. But fact is, they and every other entertainment reporter everywhere, magazines and blogs and such, got it right about season two being the last. There's no need to bow down before EW in particular, or to promote their phrasings as better.

Their interview with Summer was an exclusive, as I haven't seen Summer speak badly of the show anywhere else. I haven't actually seen the EW video, or a transcript of it, so I'm just trusting you about that. So I'm not dissing EW - they have a nice budget and pretty pictures, and maybe better writing than some amateurs.

But the worship of it was a bit heavy, that's all.

 

[Will_B]

I think he had a crush on his tv-mom, too:



But who wouldn't!

 

[Will_B]

It may be hard to top this one for bad looks he's done, but, he can indeed top it:


fullsize:ImageBam - Fast, Free Image Hosting and Photo Sharing

 

[Josh Steinberg]

Apparently he's on his way to an audition for the American Idiot musical when that shot was taken...

re: Entertainment Weekly, agree with you, Will, and everyone else who made the same point. EW wasn't saying anything that was particularly unique to their publication about this show, and even most of their insights from "spys" for why it would be canceled ("Brian Austin Green is signed to do a pilot", "All of the sets were taken down") turned out to have more to do with plot points than some kind of otherworldly sixth sense about the future of the show.

What depresses me is that sci-fi shows seem to automatically always be in trouble and always be on life support. What is it about sci-fi that has everyone running away and ducking for cover? You'd think it might be more constructive for studio heads to recognize the kind of audiences these shows get, and find a way to make the program profitable through combinations of smart writing that reduces the number of different locations and special effects required to tell the story, along with some scheduling that reflects when the audience for this kind of show is most likely to watch it. And maybe, in general, not everything needs to be a blockbuster... if this is a show where three million people would watch it live every week, and a million more on DVR, with some good DVD sales thrown in, there should be a way to make a show with that kind of audience feasible.

The anti-sci-fi thing... I just don't get it. Take a show like Lost, which I had never watched until recently (I've only seen the first three seasons so far)... this is like the number one show on TV, right? At least, ratings wise, it's pretty up there, isn't it? How is this anything *but* a sci-fi show? They just haven't (at least, not at the point I'm at with the show) come out and said it, but there's no way that there isn't some kind of supernatural something going on there. So why are people OK with watching that, but not something that just comes out and admits its sci-fi? Kind of makes me think about Heroes... when it was just a drama on NBC and characters started discovering they had superpowers, people went for it, but then once the show established that it was indeed a sci-fi/comic book series and that the people with powers would, you know, actually use them, viewership dropped off like crazy. So it's OK when it's quietly a comic-book show, but when it's overtly one, then it's bad?

I also don't think the show was terrible, and certainly not worthy of the kind of complaints that some people had. I actually thought the first two or three episodes of the first season were dreadful, and it's been better ever since. Not every single episode was genius, but find me a show, any show, where that isn't true.

It would just be really nice if there could be a way for science-fiction shows that tell continuing story arcs over multiple episodes or seasons could find a way to thrive and survive as long as some of the longer-running dramas and comedies that are on TV. You get shows about cops and lawyers and doctors all night long every night, and it would be a welcome change to be able to get invested in a sci-fi show without having that thought in the back of my mind each week that the show is on the verge of being canceled.

 

[Will_B]

I suspect that anyone who grew up when sci-fi was on the "outside" is still culturally conditioned to refer to it in slightly insulting terms. I.e., the nerds who were attacked by bullies for liking science fiction still remember their beatings, and will subtly negate the success of anything in that area, so as to avoid future beatings -- even though they're now in their 40s and working at a network, far from the thugs. This should change, since with the advent of the internet, no one knows what is "outside" anymore. In ten years, we'll have executives raised in the era of now, and people won't assume that anything good is doomed to fail. That will effect the sentiment side of the equation.

And the numbers will be affected once the Neilsen system is replaced with something that actually measures everyone rather than their annointed sample.

Of course there will still be the flyover states' love of the bland sitcoms and such, but, that doesn't preclude a large portion of the programming schedule being interesting.

 

[MikeyWeitz]

Wow, u must be really old becuase I am 37 and do not remember those times growing up.

 

[Jason Seaver]

When Stargate ended, how many American shows had been running longer - it can't be a whole lot beyond Law & Order and The Simpsons. Conversely, there are a lot of less fantastical shows getting cut down at the 13 episode mark, and they're not nearly so likely to get a DVD release or picked up in some other medium.

Sci-fi's got some unique challenges, no doubt - you have to explain the premise frequently (boring regulars) or risk not getting new viewers to tune in, for instance, getting on the right side of the uncanny valley, effects-wise, is tough on a TV budget. I think a big part of the problem is that most of today's shows are too focused on the big story - rather than doing what Star Trek, Doctor Who, Stargate, etc., have done and creating a situation where you can tell any story you want every week, any of which could hook a new viewer, most are focused on telling one story over many weeks, and if that one story doesn't hook the audience, they're more or less done for good.

 

[Dave Scarpa]

Apparently he went out an got Zonked when he found out he lost his gig...