Sign in or 

|
Zable_Fahr |
New Friedman Interview
Jun 8 2009, 10:18 AM EDT
| Post edited: Jun 8 2009, 10:24 AM EDT
Canuckinator directed me to this new interview with our showrunner: http://scifiwire.com/2009/06/what-sarah-connor-creator.phpSorry if it's been posted before, I checked the last two pages but I didn't see any threads about it. Edit: I see Accept already mentioned it in the Josh Blog thread. Oh well. 7 out of 7 found this valuable. Do you? |
|
DeadpooI |
1. RE: New Friedman Interview
Jun 8 2009, 10:38 AM EDT
| Post edited: Jun 8 2009, 10:49 AM EDT
Cheers Zable,I don't want to read it though (and not because I'm a jackal who despises the man and wants to rip him apart, like some people on some threads.) How about some Age of Empires 2? 0 out of 1 found this valuable. Do you? |
|
The_GodfatherSJP |
2. RE: New Friedman Interview
Jun 8 2009, 10:44 AM EDT
| Post edited: Jun 8 2009, 10:47 AM EDT
Just read it, and it's confirmation of what he said in the io9.com interview. WB/Halcyon isn't interested in taking this version of the Terminator story any farther. Moreover it seems that outside of bribing FOX to get the back 9 (and therefore prevent negative buzz for months before T4's release), they haven't done anything for the benefit of the show, no shopping to Cable networks, no pitches, nothing. WB doesn't want to sell TSCC anymore. They've decided to focus on the movies and media related to that.Or at least, they DID, before T4 was a disappointment. If most of the fan clamor from the Terminator fanbase is for TSCC they'll do something. When, of course, is the obvious question. But it is clear from JF's interviews that if WB does something in the near future, he won't be a part of it unless they ask really nicely. This does mean one thing though: yes, go to see the movie, but if you want TSCC to be the focus of the franchise rather than T4, that means no T4 merchandise buys. No action figures, no T-shirts, no lunchboxes. Yes, buy the DVD, but that's it. Why? Because we've got to make TSCC somehow more profitable for WB than T4 in some way. If T4 is only getting revenue really from the movie and nothing else, this helps our cause. 2 out of 2 found this valuable. Do you? |
|
thecrusadingknight |
3. RE: New Friedman Interview
Jun 8 2009, 10:47 AM EDT
I feel so sorry for Josh. I know that he's not the only one who went through something like this, but man, the studios really slammed the door shut on his face with this cancellation.
3
out of
3 found this valuable.
Do you?
|
|
Alexsw |
4. RE: New Friedman Interview
Jun 8 2009, 10:54 AM EDT
I repeat myself:Don't blame Josh. He loved TSCC like we fans do! 4 out of 5 found this valuable. Do you? |
|
SummerDream |
5. RE: New Friedman Interview
Jun 8 2009, 11:02 AM EDT
"Just read it, and it's confirmation of what he said in the io9.com interview. WB/Halcyon isn't interested in taking this version of the Terminator story any farther. Moreover it seems that outside of bribing FOX to get the back 9 (and therefore prevent negative buzz for months before T4's release), they haven't done anything for the benefit of the show, no shopping to Cable networks, no pitches, nothing. WB doesn't want to sell TSCC anymore. They've decided to focus on the movies and media related to that.It is not WB's job to sell Halcyon's show. Do you find this valuable? |
|
SwanSun |
6. RE: New Friedman Interview
Jun 8 2009, 11:03 AM EDT
hmm, the picture I'm forming based on his past veiled comments, his recent venting blog post, now this interview is that WB didn't really care very early on. WB's behaviour looks like: Support TSCC as an ad for T4; TSCC turned into something else WB didn't predict and didn't want to financially support; WB hoped TSCC would quietly die.Yep, I like this conspiracy. 3 out of 3 found this valuable. Do you? |
|
Lethal76 |
7. RE: New Friedman Interview
Jun 8 2009, 11:17 AM EDT
"hmm, the picture I'm forming based on his past veiled comments, his recent venting blog post, now this interview is that WB didn't really care very early on. WB's behaviour looks like: Support TSCC as an ad for T4; TSCC turned into something else WB didn't predict and didn't want to financially support; WB hoped TSCC would quietly die.Which I started to believe when they tied in TSCC cancellation with the premiere of T4. They basically told TSCC fans in their press release sorry TSCC was canceled but now go see T4. Now I wonder if all of the hate towards Fox was really warranted. 2 out of 2 found this valuable. Do you? |
|
SummerDream |
8. RE: New Friedman Interview
Jun 8 2009, 11:32 AM EDT
"hmm, the picture I'm forming based on his past veiled comments, his recent venting blog post, now this interview is that WB didn't really care very early on. WB's behaviour looks like: Support TSCC as an ad for T4; TSCC turned into something else WB didn't predict and didn't want to financially support; WB hoped TSCC would quietly die.Seems Josh made too good a show and Halcyon needs a new company if TimeWarner has nobody to figure out what they got in their hands. 1 out of 2 found this valuable. Do you? |
|
DeadpooI |
9. RE: New Friedman Interview
Jun 8 2009, 11:34 AM EDT
"Which I started to believe when they tied in TSCC cancellation with the premiere of T4. They basically told TSCC fans in their press release sorry TSCC was canceled but now go see T4.Hate towards FOX is *always* warranted. Even if they didn't cancel TSCC, FOX News still exists. 5 out of 6 found this valuable. Do you? |
|
Zable_Fahr |
10. RE: New Friedman Interview
Jun 8 2009, 11:56 AM EDT
| Post edited: Jun 8 2009, 12:05 PM EDT
"Hate towards FOX is *always* warranted.This! LOL! Edit: Oh, and you really should read the article. If nothing else because there are some nice hints at what the original plans for S1 were and such. Do you find this valuable? |
|
The_GodfatherSJP |
11. RE: New Friedman Interview
Jun 8 2009, 12:04 PM EDT
FOX decided to can the show. Were they justified? That's debatable, but I will say that most non-fans will answer yes just on TV ratings alone, which is the be all end all for the television business. Of course, non-fans also don't care about the show to begin with regardless of quality, so that's a normal reaction.But WB certainly hasn't helped matters any. It's hard to think of a studio that's so unenthusiastic about its own property, given the money making potential here. The last time I can remember this occurring was with Paramount and Star Trek. Yes, you're reading that right, Paramount initially cared little for Star Trek the Original Series, and no one blamed them at the time. It was losing the studio a lot of money and had little chance of becoming a syndication success. In fact, Paramount actively cut the show's budget during the 2nd and 3rd seasons. In the 2nd season, they cut a lot of services the show normally got for free, so while the budget was nominally the same, in fact the showrunners were paying a lot more money. In the 3rd season the budget was cut from 186,000 to 179,000 an episode, even after NBC increased the amount of money they were paying for it. Paramount also just let the show die off and didn't fight for it. Star Trek became a huge hit in syndication when Kaiser Broadcasting, a UHF network based in 5 cities, began broadcasting the series at 7PM instead of news and it took off. From there the fan conventions followed, and Trek wound up being resurrected from the dead after 10 years. In this case, fan demand got the studio back on the wagon, and from there the ball started rolling again. If we want the TSCC story to continue, we have to do the same. Moreover, we have to demonstrate a bigger demand for the TV show instead of the movies. That's a tall order. Do you find this valuable? |
|
thecrusadingknight |
12. RE: New Friedman Interview
Jun 8 2009, 12:15 PM EDT
Fox is really the only place where I've directed my anger, but I can only justify that up to a point. It's showbusiness. Showbusiness is harsh and doesn't give a lot of chances, especially not second chances.TSCC was a show geared toward a certain type of audience. Though I think that it touches on universal issues, a lot of people don't wanna examine those issues. As BAG said, Josh was not interested in dumbing the show down for people. Unfortunately in the neverending battle of art vs. industry, industry always wins. And TSCC is one of the casualities. 2 out of 2 found this valuable. Do you? |
|
Zable_Fahr |
13. RE: New Friedman Interview
Jun 8 2009, 12:17 PM EDT
"Star Trek became a huge hit in syndication when Kaiser Broadcasting, a UHF network based in 5 cities, began broadcasting the series at 7PM instead of news and it took off. From there the fan conventions followed, and Trek wound up being resurrected from the dead after 10 years. In this case, fan demand got the studio back on the wagon, and from there the ball started rolling again. If we want the TSCC story to continue, we have to do the same."The difficult thing for us is that we don't have ten years. At least if we want the original actors to play the roles and the story to continue where we left off. Time does what it does and Thomas and Summer are not going to pass for 16 year olds forever (it's debatable if they even do so now). Do you find this valuable? |
|
SummerDream |
14. RE: New Friedman Interview
Jun 8 2009, 12:19 PM EDT
| Post edited: Jun 8 2009, 12:20 PM EDT
"Moreover, we have to demonstrate a bigger demand for the TV show instead of the movies. That's a tall order."Not really. Only problem is that most of the movie fans have never seen the tv show and therefor bash it, as they never seen it want to see a big guy acting like he was simple like the movie fans, not speaking much instead of a good show. But the Halcyon guys should be able to understand we are not the same crowd as the movie fans. At least I hope so, of course I do not know if they have seen any of the tv or the movie. But since they bought more scifi rights than only terminator, according to wikipedia, they should have seen both. Do you find this valuable? |
|
timbo77083 |
15. RE: New Friedman Interview
Jun 8 2009, 12:48 PM EDT
"Fox is really the only place where I've directed my anger, but I can only justify that up to a point. It's showbusiness. Showbusiness is harsh and doesn't give a lot of chances, especially not second chances.right on Crusader Do you find this valuable? |
|
jht53 |
16. RE: New Friedman Interview
Jun 8 2009, 2:41 PM EDT
Let's just hope MGM somehow gets ahold off the rights to distribute the next Terminator film. If that happens, maybe WB will reconsider their position regarding TSCC with it being the only way they can make money from the franchise.
Do you find this valuable?
|
|
mr_green |
17. RE: New Friedman Interview
Jun 8 2009, 3:34 PM EDT
"Not really. Only problem is that most of the movie fans have never seen the tv show and therefor bash it, as they never seen it want to see a big guy acting like he was simple like the movie fans, not speaking much instead of a good show."Guilty, but I wasn't bashing "the show" though. I was bashing because the multitude of boring lame-ass TV "entertainment" had turned me off TV completely. What happened to TSCC just strengthens my earlier attitude. There is something about TV that kills off interesting shows and keep useless ones going forever. Do you find this valuable? |
|
PyroDude |
18. RE: New Friedman Interview
Jun 8 2009, 4:28 PM EDT
"Guilty, but I wasn't bashing "the show" though. I was bashing because the multitude of boring lame-ass TV "entertainment" had turned me off TV completely.My grandfather called it the 'idiot box' for a reason. Except for news and a few programs, TV has never been anything except dumb, "entertaining" TV shows. Do you find this valuable? |
|
The_GodfatherSJP |
19. RE: New Friedman Interview
Jun 8 2009, 4:29 PM EDT
"Guilty, but I wasn't bashing "the show" though. I was bashing because the multitude of boring lame-ass TV "entertainment" had turned me off TV completely.It's called "broadcast audience demand." A show like Hee-haw (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hee-haw) ran for over 20 years, a record at the time, and it was one of the dumbest comedy shows I've ever seen. Sid Caesar's Hour ultimately got kicked off the air because of Wilbur Berch, it was simply and less sophisticated. There's a reason why TV is called The Boob Tube. Many people don't want mind bending TV. They want the same kind of entertainment, the same kind of stories. It's very rare when you find something both popular AND good. A dark show isn't popular. Neither is Sci-Fi. TSCC was both. IF you want to blame Friedman for anything, it's sticking to that conception, but that's the very idea of Terminator. Even with perfect episodes those are two huge hurdles. I don't think the show ever could have succeeded on Broadcast just on its premise. 2 out of 3 found this valuable. Do you? |