Thursday, February 10, 2011
Ronald D. Moore + Innate Failure = Endless, Irrational Regurgitation on the SyFy Channel
http://www.amazon.com/Blood-Chrome-Interpretation-Battlestar-Galactica/dp/1456493604/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1297377321&sr=1-1
There is no one in the world looking forward to the SyFy Channel's upcoming and doomed to low ratings production called "Blood & Chrome." There is also no one in the world who has enjoyed the production partnership of Ronald D. Moore and SyFy Channel, since the partnership itself has come to symbolize all that is wrong in televised Science Fiction, and all that is wrong in how Universal Studios and SyFy Channel has been managing the Battlestar Galactica property. The partnership has been all too characteristic of "status quo run-amok" in television politics, where personal favors back and forth go too far in the production of television series.
"Blood & Chrome" will be "status quo run-amok" within Universal Studios / SyFy Channel, just as "Caprica" and "GINO" were "status quo run-amok" within Universal Studios / SyFy Channel. The years and decades may slip away, and the world may change, but nothing that will ever change, is how Universal Studios / SyFy Channel have been totally fucked up in how they have been managing the "Battlestar Galactica" property, and how fucked up they have been in continuing to green light Galactica themed television series from Ronald D. Moore, despite his shameful financial track record of being unable to come up with a "Battlestar Galactica" named series that the public would like. Two consecutive ratings failures from Ronald D. Moore weren't enough for the SyFy Channel ("GINO", "Caprica"), they have an instinctive need apparently to fail for the third consecutive time...."Blood & Chrome."
I think I may finally have psychological insight into what makes Universal Studios / SyFy Channel tick, at least partially. These string of failures with Ronald D. Moore are bringing them attention. Universal Studios / SyFy Channel crave attention even if the attention is.....Notorious.....Even if the attention eventually paints them as Knuckleheaded Dimwits who don't know a damn thing about the profession they are supposed to be in. "GINO", "Caprica", and the upcoming "Blood & Chrome" have certainly achieved this for them. These three series have notoriously achieved for the SyFy Channel, the revelation that they don't know a damn thing about producing Science Fiction for television, and they also don't know a damn thing about what made the "Battlestar Galactica" series from the year 1978 so successful. Yes, Universal Studios / SyFy Channel crave attention. They have a psychological starving need to announce to the cable world that....."Look over here!! Here we are!! We exist!! Fucking up really badly with every series we green light for Ronald D. Moore....but we still exist!! Acknowledge our existence!! Acknowledge that you notice us!!" That's what it's all about with them, isn't it? That's what it has always been with them, hasn't it? It isn't financial or intangible success that Universal Studios / SyFy Channel wants. They want someone (anyone) to look at them, and notice them. It hasn't happened yet with "GINO" and "Caprica", but maybe....just maybe....someone might notice and look at them when they debut their low rated crap fest...."Blood & Chrome." They want to be regarded as geniuses for having put "GINO" and "Caprica" on the air (it hasn't happened yet), and they also (desperately) want "Blood & Chrome" to financially succeed in the ratings (the way that "GINO" and "Caprica" didn't) so they can be regarded as geniuses for having the foresight to stick with Ronald D. Moore's concept this long (after a decade of consecutive failure with Ronald D. Moore's concept.) This isn't rational business thinking.....it's ass backwards self indulgence for ego maniacs. Because Ronald D. Moore's flawed take on "Battlestar Galactica" will continue to fail no matter how long Universal Studios / SyFy Channel sticks with it, and no matter how long they continue to blow the shareholder's money on it.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.