What were they advertising??
"So Say We All!!"
What were they advertising??
"So Say We All!!"
But, they never thought of that either.
Isn't it amazing all of the things that never occur to "Peacock-Streaming?"
Especially with "Science Fiction / Fantasy" always going strong on all of the other streaming services.
"So Say We All!!"
1. Without a plan.
2. Without a vision.
3. Without a concept.
4. Without any idea of what a streaming service really is.
5. Without a discernible "Identity Marker" like a new "Battlestar Galactica" series.
6. Without sufficient funding.
7. Instead, you just make your alleged streaming service like the failed "SyFy Channel", piling one endless rerun after another (of old shows) in your schedule.
"So Say We All!!"
https://www.pajiba.com/tv_reviews/why-is-peacock-so-bad.php
"Alas, the streamer has no signature style, no signature show, and doesn't know how to properly leverage the assets it does have. David Zazlaf's incompetence over on Max gets most of the attention, but what's going on with Peacock is on another level."
"No signature style, no signature show".....
....What if it didn't screw this up every which way for five frickin' years?....
"So Say We All!!"
You...."Sit On It"....and do nothing with it, and do nothing constructive with it (ATTENTION: The Abomination "GINO") for...."47 Consecutive Years."
"So Say We All!!"
"Peacock-Streaming" has never known how to be a "Streaming Service."
II. "SyFy" pretends to be a "Science Fiction" Channel. Very poorly.
"Peacock-Streaming" pretends to be a "Streaming Service." Very poorly.
III. "SyFy Channel" has never liked the "Battlestar Galactica" property.
"Peacock-Streaming" has never liked the "Battlestar Galactica" property.
IV. "SyFy Channel" has never been successful.
"Peacock-Streaming" has never been successful.
V. On the rare occasions when "SyFy" does attempt something "Science Fiction" oriented, the negative reactions always are "What the F*ck is that?"
On the rare occasions when "Peacock-Streaming" does attempt something "Science Fiction" oriented, the negative reactions always are "What the F*ck is that?"
VI. Both "SyFy" and "Peacock-Streaming" always hire "Z-Grade" - (Underwhelming) producers, writer's, directors, and actors (in everything they do) that you have NEVER heard of before.
VII. Both "SyFy" and "Peacock-Streaming" are pretty much IGNORED no matter what they do and don't do.
VIII. "SyFy" and "Peacock-Streaming" are only known for being insignificant components of much larger entities.
IX. You can always watch what you already own on Blu-Ray and DVD instead of watching "SyFy" and "Peacock-Streaming."
X. Everyone still wonders how "SyFy" and "Peacock-Streaming" can still exist after their endless series of "Business Prat-Falls."
"So Say We All!!"
OK, it has nothing to do with the fact that "Peacock-Streaming" still only has 30 million subscribers after 5 years.
"So Say We All!!"
His apparent "job description" associated with all of the "Never Existing Battlestar Projects" from 2001-2024 was....
"Shepherding The Projects" along....
From what this blog can gather, that really meant "doing nothing" from 2001-2024 yet still getting a paycheck for it.
While we're at it, let's also add all of the people he was apparently in charge of during those decades.....
1. Sam Esmail
2. Simon Kinberg
3. Frances Lawrence
4. Michael DeLuca
5. Scott Stuber
6. Tom DeSanto
7. Bryan Singer
8. Jack Paglen
9. John Orloff
10. Lisa Joy
If I were Mr. Clark, I wouldn't mention anything having to do with "Battlestar" on my resume from 2001-2024. He might want to just "Fill-In-The-Blanks" with "Make Believe" information.
"So Say We All!!"
1. Covid-19
2. Y2k
3. 9 / 11
4. Writer's / Producer's / Director's Strikes
For "Battlestar" never returning.
"So Say We All!!"