Slashdot Mirror
Andromeda And Mutant X Cancelled
dmehus writes "Science fiction fans may be dismayed to learn that "Mutant X" and "Gene Roddenberry's Andromeda" have been cancelled, despite the fact "Andromeda" had been cleared for a final season beginning in the fall. That prospect seems highly unlikely as the show's producer, Fireworks Entertainment, is shutting its doors for good and owner CanWest Global Communications (which also owns canada.com, the National Post, Global Television, and a bunch of other media assets) announced it will take a $159 million writedown on Fireworks. The news means "Mutant X" has a series total of three seasons and 66 episodes, while "Andromeda" will have a series total of 88 episodes in four seasons. Slashdot has previously covered 'Andromeda'."
Science fiction fans may be dismayed to learn that "Mutant X" and "Gene Roddenberry's Andromeda" have been cancelled
Though fans of quality television will rejoice. Mutant X? It has to be one of the worst TV shows I've seen more than 5 minutes of in the last 10 years.
AccountKiller
Science fiction fans may have be dismayed when they learnt that Firefly was being cancelled, but I buy the DVDs of Andromeda here in Australia and I'm far from dismayed. Not saying I know when it jumped the shark, but I almost stopped buying it at DVD 4.6.
Enterprise gets picked up for another season.
Isn't it obvious? GOOD SF doesn't sell. Cheap commercialized tripe does.
Heh, more likely they won't. Save your pity for Firefly.
I haven't seen much Andromeda, but I can't say I'm surprised to see Mutant X cancelled. All it was, really, was a very cheap ripoff of the X-Men (Scientist provides place for young and confused mutants and together they fight crime.), and it didn't even seem to want to hide that fact. Good riddance.
"I Just Want You To Hurt Like I Do" - Randy Newman
I'm sorry to say that I haven't been able to watch either show because they are just so bad. I've never been able to stomach Mutant X but I liked Andromeda at first, but now to watch episodes I originally liked I stand stand it. I believe the reason for this is fantastic shows like Farscape and Firefly which just make these shows look like steaming piles. Okay I've got to admit I little offense is actually intended. How do people whatch that dren?
vampirical
I mean...seriously...these shows are unwatchable. Completely. Why in God's name would anyone mourn these shows being cancelled?
There's no science. Please, someone find me the gene that lets a guy turn into some kind of Lava monster. That's a more amazing evolutionary feat than the bombadier beetle. It's like the worst parts of the worst episodes of X-Files all jammed into an solid 40 minutes, with an entire rip on the whole X-Men concept to boot.
And Andromeda...starts out with this gimmick of a holographic hot chick representing the ship (sort of a video version of Star Trek's talking female ship voice). Then they drop all pretense and somehow she becomes a walking talking hologram. And then later, I'm not sure, but did she end up turning into a real girl somehow? And those stupid names. God, who the hell green lights crap like "Rev Blem" or "Trance Gemini"...oooo! So alien! So spacey future sounding!
Forget it. Other shows, like Farscape or whatever, hey...I'm not a fan, but I can be appropriately sad to hear another Sci-Fi show bites the dust. But Mutant X? No. Andromeda? Quit beating the dead Roddenbery. These shows should die...every dollar not wasted on them is perhaps another dollar that can maybe somehow through a miracle end up going towards new Firefly episodes.
- JoeShmoe
.
-- I wonder which will go down in history as the bigger failure: the War on Drugs or the War on Filesharing
When the name above the title was dead years before the show started... you're running a show based on an idea that wasn't good enough to go forward when he was alive. That's the first sign you're in trouble.
Andromeda's best point, imo, was that it didn't take itself seriously. It never pretended to be anything other than a cheesy science fiction show, and had a lot of fun with some of the sillier conventions of sci fi. To me, it was the perfect antidote to shows like DS9, which seemed to be so concerned with being "serious" sci fi they forgot about things like character, dialog or plot.
I am a believer of momentum and curves.
I must be the only person on the face of the planet who actually liked both of these shows. I watched them, not to learn some profound truth, or for their rigid adherance to sound scientific principles, but because they entertained me. Don't get me wrong, neither were my favorite shows, I wouldn't go out of my way to watch them, but if they were on, and I wasn't watching something else, I would watch them.
Even if I hated both of these shows, I would still be sad to see them go. The main reason is... With the trend of sci-fi shows being cancelled, eventually all we will be left with are the vapid teeny-bopper soap operas (Smallville anyone?) that seem to be so prevalent lately.
IANAL... But I play one on
That's why lots of excellent true fictionary science books have never been touched for televised media. Average Joe does not really understand science, and he/she does not want to be bothered with operating their brain.
Throw a little soap opera in there, and you may have a winner.
Finally, I would note that the idea of Sci-Fi funding enough episodes just to round out to 100 is just silly. After all, they're the only network that's likely to be interested in rerunning Andromeda ANYWAY, so why would they want to make the property more valuable (and thus more costly) unless they truly think that making new episodes is a profitable proposition (as they did with SG-1)?
Consider the oldest stories, like the Indian epic the Mahabharata or the Greek's Iliad. It's not about the wars or conflicts. It's about the interplay between people. It's always been about the context of the people. We as people want to see other people experiencing things.
Now, look at the lastest successful sci-fi, IMHO Babylon 5. Sure, they made space fighting a lot more realistic. But it was the story of the Shadows vs. the Vorlons, Sheridan's heroic sacrifice on Z'ha'dum, and the betrayal of Garibaldi. Really, look at this summary about the conflict:
Little here talks about science, the reality of evolution, or the underlying science. It's about philosophy, life, and the questions we all encounter along our own life. That's the story, and that's what made it more interesting than any show about cool tools. It's never been about the tools. They just get us to start watching. It's always been about the relationships, whether we want to admit it or not....tizzyd
It was like a grown up 90210 with only pretty people allowed. But it is nice to see that a secret superhero crew can find the time to get the latest in high maintenace hairstyles. Not to mention it had 70s style special effects made with 21st century technology.
Mutant X was so bad it made my teeth hurt.
Deltron 3030 - Virus (music video)
Yes, and, at least in Andromeda's case, it's a good thing (tm). I liked Andromeda when it first came out, but when they canned the lead writer because, as Sorbo put it, he created plots that were too subtle for most people to understand, I knew it was headed for trouble.
Then, then next season, the credits started with a line like "The universe can be a dangerous place." I almost shut it off right there, but wanted to give it a chance. I thought that season opener (where they rescue Becca and Tyr) was weak, but John DeLancie was on the next one, so I watched it. They took a character (DeLancie's), who had been defined as definitely evil and suddenly tried to make him only unpredictable. I've never watched another episode since.
That one jumped the shark long ago.
The SciFi channel is in a "Oh my God, you want us to SPEND MONEY on PRODUCTION!?" phase.
Try the entire TV industry. Unless it's cheap to make and extremely sucessful (Ie: Friends) they are "gambling".
In the old 13 channel universe, they could get with having so-so shows that developed into great shows over 1-2 season period. viewers had no choice to watch filler sometimes. The rating system was primitive so that bad shows may not show as such for months.
In a our 500 channel universe, however, filler shows do not last more than 4 shows, never mind even 1/2 a season! The rating system delivers real-time numbers. The only thing they are willing to "Gamble" on is BS-reality shows because they know that viewers do not have attachments to these types of shows.
Obama's legacy: (N)othing (S)ecure (A)nywhere and (T)error (S)imulation (A)dministration
...because everything after the first season sucked.
I loved the first season of Andromeda. The scripts were intelligent, the science was intelligent, the crew was interesting, and their ongoing mission (to restore the Commonwealth) was huge, and seemingly impossible -- just right for good sci-fi.
But then came the second season. They fired the original head writer (he must have been too difficult, asking for authenticity, and crap like that), they dumbed down the scripts (the dialogue became truly painful), and they dumbed down the mission (now it was just to do good in the universe -- I guess an ongoing storyline was also too difficult).
So I stopped watching after the first season.
This is now the second, intelligent, high quality science fiction I've seen started by Majel Barrett (the other was Earth: Final Conflict), just to see it ruined by the studio in the second season.
This suggests to me that Majel is a very intelligent woman. Now, if she could just find a way to keep creative control...
Sci-Fi fans will also be painfully aware of how the studios pulled the rug out from under Firefly, and of the fact that Straczynski is no longer in charge of Jeremiah.
I'd love to see a new studio formed to challenge those bureaucratic monoliths in Hollywood. Instead of trying to compete with the regular networks for the 80% greatest common denominator (i.e. dumb) audience, who watches crap like Fear Factor, and Big Brother, this studio would cater to the niche market -- the 10% who want esoteric programming, that doesn't appeal to the majority.
Such a studio could invest in creative people like Joss Whedon, J. Michael Straczynski, and, yes, Majel Barrett, and trust them to create what appeals to the niche market. And that studio could bypass the current limited-bandwidth broadcast channels (where competition for the majority audience is key), and explore other options, such as Internet broadcasting, or direct-to-DVD sales.
I am dying for some intelligent programming. And, as much as I like the Gilmore Girls, I need some science fiction!!! I WILL PAY MONEY!!! PLEASE, SOMEONE, FILL THIS MARKET NICHE, AND TAKE MY MONEY!!!
For a while I tried to get into Earth: Final Conflict, but I couldn't stand the bad costumes or get the whole Plot. I gave up on it and then just recently as it's been on Sci-Fi channel in the mornings while I get dressed, I'm hooked now.
I still don't like the cheesy plots or bad costumes, but I like the underlying struggle and Sci-Fi technology. I love a mystery.
I say good riddance to Andromeda and Mutant X. Who needs to be addicted to more TV? Let's bring some live action ROBOTECH!!
God No!
Can you imagine how horrible it would be if they tried? Imagine Starship Troopers on a TV budget! Cheap cockpit views made of poorly-constructed plywood, and cheap CGI animations of robots. They'd just spoil the whole damn series in the memory of the fans, or worse, make it into another power rangers clone.No matter what they did, though, they'd have to make it similar to what they recently did to the Transformers: Ruin it to appeal to the Short-Attention-Span, "reality-tv" watching Pokemon generation. I'm coming to the conclusion that's the only way to get something new onto television these days, and make it so that the TV Executives will buy off on it. Look at what happened to the live-action version of The Tick. That series was brilliant, and the acting superb, but it was too cerebral and off-beat for the TV execs to give it time to catch the attention of the consumer.
All for the love of Profit!
-113 grams, 10 milliliters... He's lead, Jim.
I could have seen this coming a mile away. Not only is kevin sorbo quite possibly the worst actor known to human kind, andromeda is uninsightful, and not really up to the standard set by some of gene's other great works. I'm sure neither of these shows will be missed.