The Finals are out on ENT. Believe it or not, ENT got 3.03 million viewers vs the BSG premier's 3.1 million, and this with ENT preempted in several markets for basketball and coming off a month's hiatus. Wonder if that will be reported anywhere?
SG:Atlantis on the very same Sci Fi Channel got something like 4.1 million viewers at its premier over the summer, which is probably the least watched time of year save some of the big holidays. In fact, I believe that BSG's miniseries airing in Dec. 2003 got more viewers than this.
And the spin goes on... ;-)
--------
"I think the show talked to people through the characters. They're stories that speak to the heart. They talk about love, they talk about friendship, they talk about loyalty, they talk about patriotism, exploration, curiosity, reaching out... And I think all those things still touch people. Even when you look at a 30-year old show, it still has something to say." - D.C. Fontana, Sci Fi Channel Special Edition TOS 1998
----
"If the season finale involves the re-built USS Reliant coming back in time to the 21st Century crewed by Moogie, Dr. Selar, Morn, Transporter Chief Kyle, and the Salt Vampire, then we'll know that Coto has gone too far." - tomba1701
3.1 million might be good on Sci-fi but if this show was on a network like enterprise is, this would be a major disappointment. Why does it have to be one or the other. I like Enterprise and I like BSG. But BSG is not the messiah to the religion we call science fiction. It is a sad state of affairs when we have to beat down one show to raise another up. What if enterprise were shown 5 times a day and 3 or 4 days a week(like BSG is)...how much exposure would it get? I think enterprise is getting a bad rap.
--------
I don't like to lose.
James T Kirk, TWOK -
Michael Moore is an idiot!
Congradulations Ron. You and your show deserve this. :)
--------
The autumn days swung soft around me, like cotton on
my skin. But as the embers of the summer lost their
breath and disappeared, my heart went cold, and
only hollow rhythms resounded from within.
Congratulations to RDM
Not at all surprised that this was the outcome of Friday night. Ron, you deserve this, the show is fantastic.
I had a feeling it would be quite the big night for BSG when I found myself turning off a new episode of Enterprise to watch the Lowdown special. Both were being TiVo'd, but still, I was into Enterprise, and just flipped it off halfway into it (mostly to see the interviews with Katie Sakhoff and Number 6 (or is that six of twelve)).
Manny's doing a good job with Enterprise, but there is no doubt that Berman lost a great writer when he let RDM go
I suppose with these ratings, even with a little drop off; given the already great success in the UK, we can probably expect another 13 hopefully still by the end of 2005 and they won't go with the UK showings early.
--------
Cancel it... Nomore anti-trek.
-
Because if it isn't trek, it just can't be any good, right Hbasm? That IDIC thing was just a merchandising gimmick, anyway... ;-)
With all the incredible hype and positive press for BSG, all it got for its premiere was 3.1 million viewers? Stargate: Atlantis scored higher than that for its premiere. I'm not sure I'd be bragging about that so quickly. If ENT's fast nationals held up, it probably scored about 2.9 million viewers after a break of 5 weeks with zero advertising. It's numbers will probably creep back up to its season average of 3.1 to 3.3 million like it did last year after "Damage" scored so low after the break. It gained back a million viewers within the month.
Look, I don't want BSG to fail. I don't care one way or the other. If people are enjoying it--that's great. But obviously it's very important to Ron Moore and company to "beat" ENT. That makes Moore seem a little insecure and petty. He's got critical praise. Why doesn't he let his work stand on its own merit? Maybe he expected a little more than 3.1 million for a premiere?
-
QUOTE: "But obviously it's very important to Ron Moore and company to "beat" ENT. That makes Moore seem a little insecure and petty. He's got critical praise. Why doesn't he let his work stand on its own merit? Maybe he expected a little more than 3.1 million for a premiere?"
Thats an incredibly ill informed and immature comment. Do you honestly think that Ron Moore cares how Enterprise is doing. His past comments regarding his thoughts on BSG demonstrate a person who is very proud of the show he is working on. Who of us has worked on a project and not been proud of it. We all take a measure of pride in the things we do, and if we dont then we're going to pretty miserable with life.
In the past, when he has made comments comparing his show with Star Trek, he has not attempted to bash Star Trek, but has tried to emphasize how much he has tried to avoid slipping into the overly familiar and tired formula that many sci-fi shows seem to fall into.
I personally cant blame a guy who really wants to try something different even if people feel his efforts arent that original.
-
Why do some people feel compelled to turn Ronald D. Moore into their personal archnemesis? You can't tell me there isn't a component of wish fulfillment in these attempts to view him as some sort of vain, over-reaching figure, setting himself up for a fall.
I doubt Moore himself sat down and typed up that PR statement -- that's what they have Public Relations people do! That statement probably wasn't really even directed towards fans. Remember, Star Trek is still the most recognizable sf brand name out there, but at the same time, it's also well known that the franchise isn't doing that well. The PR folks probably compared BSG's and Enterprise's ratings to ensure that people get the word that Battlestar Galactica is a healthy franchise--and that includes current and potential advertisers.
As far as the numbers go, for a cable show to have ratings that beat out or are comparable to a network show in the same genre is a big deal (admittedly, UPN is the weakest network).
-
...personal archnemesis. I'm not concerned with what the man does one way or the other. If BSG takes off, that's cool. I wouldn't recognize Moore if I saw a picture of him. I'm just surprised that the numbers for BSG's premiere were so low with all the hype is all. My jaw dropped when I realized that Atlantis' premiere beat it by a million viewers. Didn't Atlantis score over 4 million viewers for its premiere?
You have to understand, I'm not that big a science fiction fan. I like Trek, but I've never seen an episode of Atlantis or Firefly. I've only seen a few of SG-1 and I didn't like them. The only reason I ever saw Farscape was that my husband bought the DVDs. I just find all the panic and hype really, really annoying. I watched the first two eps. I won't be watching anymore. My husband is a big time sci-fi fan and he didn't like Galactica either. In my opinion, Farscape is an infinitely better product. So....I'm annoyed with the Galactica hype. I'm completely neutral about Ron Moore. That PR sounds just a little hyped up to me is all. If I were a betting woman, I'd wager that the suits at BSG are spitting nails and breathing fire that it didn't score in the 4 millions. Think about it. Those numbers are sure to drop a little. Atlantis's did. I'm sure the suits at sci-fi were counting on Galactica dropping from the 4 millions into the 3 millions instead of dropping from the low 3's. Doesn't Galactica cost 1.6 million an episode? Farscape was expensive, too....
-
Just a side note, because I'm an obsesive crazy person, but if you like Farscape I'd definately recommend checking out Firefly. You may like it, you may not--it's one of those shows that some people can't get into, but it does have a lot of intellegence.
Lol, as for the topic at hand--I think you make a good point, but I'd argue the ratings are still really strong even if they aren't the greatest ever. In comparision Farscape struggled to get just a million viewers in its final season(in fact the number being thrown around for the show to be picked up was just that, a million viewers). I'd agree Farscape is the better show, but BSG is sitting pretty, 4 million viewers or not. The next few weeks though will likely take some of the wind out of the PR sails, as I doubt you'll be the only person turned off by BSG's unrelenting darkness.
--------
"Time is a face on the water."
-Stephen King, The Dark Tower Series-
-
If I can find Firefly at the DVD store I'll check it out. Yes, I did like Farscape but on the whole I'm not someone who seeks out new science fiction as enthusiastically as some. That's just me. To each her own.
I'm with the others in the thread. Why can't people just enjoy both if they wish? Why does one have to be the "death knell" of the other? It's just inane competition is all. Hey, I like the innovation of "The Shield," but I still enjoy NYPD Blue. It's possible. I swear, people go into some sort of December holiday psychosis when Trek goes on break during December. It's bizarre. The rumors fly on line; Bakula said this; trekspy said that...yada yada yada.
As far as it being important to Ron Moore to beat Trek, perhaps I'm mistaken. Perhaps it isn't. But it's sure important to BSG's P.R. department. ;) They made it sound like BSG was millions of total viewers ahead. ENT's final viewer numbers last week were 3.03 million, and that was with preemptions in Wisconsin all over the place for hockey, in Dallas, in Orlando and a few others. With all the god d*mned sports preemptions (yankee games may start as early as April on a local UPN affliate in NYC) sometimes I think UPN doesn't get any more coverage than Skiffy. One of my on-line friends from Tennessee couldn't watch ENT last Friday because a local highschool football game was playing on her local affiliate instead. Nielsens don't count delayed airings later on or during the weekend. It's different for cable.
Now I'm sure BSG is very well written. I hope it's a success for those who like it. It's just that it seems like it will be a little too unrelentingly dark for my tastes. To each our own. If I had a choice, I'd rather Farscape were still on the air.
-
But remember it's on Sci-Fi. It's not on a traditional network and it's not syndicated.
Sci-Fi is not like your normal UPN or CBS or NBC, it's a completely different animal. And like the title of the article says, 3.1 million is a record turnout for a show on Sci-Fi.
--------
- Steve Lee
http://www.steveleenow.net/
-
But it isn't a record. The premiere of Atlantis on Sci-fi drew over 4 million. It's a record for January. Yes, those are nice numbers for sci-fi channel. Very nice numbers. But they aren't the record, and I'd wager that the suits were banking on record numbers. At least 4 million.
-
I wouldn't wager on betting what the suits wanted. Marketing plans build into them targets and the first rule of business is to aim low, avoid disappointment... i.e. having conservativism in your estimates and in setting measurable goals that have reasonable expectations of being met.
--------
- Steve Lee
http://www.steveleenow.net/
-
Oh I think you are being hard on Ron. He was pretty much pushed off Voyager by Braga, and Berman let him go-- He has this new baby and is proud and is pumping it up as much as he is allowed. I think the side benefit is that he gets to rub it in Berman, Braga and Paramounts face a little.
By the way, Ron used to look a little clean cut during DS9, he is looking rather shaggy these days, no?
--------
Everybody says this is the series premiere of BATTLESTAR GALACTICA ... I'm confused, the torrents list this week's episode as 1x12. Shouldn't this be 1x01 or am I missing something??? Are there 11 episodes I missed or something? Does that constitute the miniseries? How many episodes was the mini-series?
I haven't really been following the New BSG at all so far, so I'm not gettin' it.
--------
"What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived."
~Picard
I have been a member here for years and this is my very first post.
Why?
Because BSG is everything that "enterprise" should be. Kudos to Ron Moore for reinventing a franchise exactly how he said he would. It has enough continuity to the old show to make it familiar but creates a dramtic new environment where nothing is predictable.
I would stack the drama of the first two episodes (as well as the pilot) against anything that the "Star Trek" has produced in the past ten years. It's dramatic... gripping... exciting.
Look at the way the show is produced. The battles... the effects... the lighting. Is so fresh... so unlike the same look and feel that has existed on "Trek since 1991. Yes... at the time, it's what "trek" needed, but we are ten years removed!!! I applaud what Manny Coto (sp?) is doing this season... but the bottom line is this. Trek today still looks like a TV show. It's overlit... the drama is bland... the endings are entirely predictable and even when we get a great Brent Siner guest shot, it underwhelms at every turn. Were any of the "augments a tenth of the presense of Khan? Where's the drama? Where are the theatrical quality episodes? Great effects do not make a great viewing experience.
In 1991... I would NEVER miss an episode of TNG. NEVER. It was must-watch TV an I spent my money on the mags, the toys and the videos like a good Trek fan. But those days are OVER! Do you know when I watch Enterprise? When I remember to... and that isn't very often. I might try to tune in for the Klingon/Bumpy Head episodes... but I know that the look/feel/story/acting and effects will be exactly as I remember Voyager looking like in 1998. Sorry... I'd rather watch sports center.
The last piece of Star Trek entertainment that really mattered? That really meant something? That made me have an emotional reaction? First Contact?Generations?
Perhaps... but I would have to say the last time that the Berman era made me care for Star Trek was, ironically, All Good Things.
Say what you will about people "growing up"... "changing tastes" or "moving on". I say that the sci-fi geek is alive and well inside of me waiting for something to come along to get me excited. To move me. To entertain me. I wanted that to be Enterprise so bad. But Enterprise is simply Voyager without the courtesy to actually change the historical look of show (except for a font change).
BORING!
Berman had the chance to doing something great! To create a look that predated The Cage. To go retro! To use the sound effects that make you think STAR TREK! To create a history within the show that made sense!!! Thirty five years of Star Trek history and we are only now seeing the NX01?
CRAP!
Berman had the opportunity to honor a classic show while making it a dramtic piece of entertainment that sat the indusry on it's ear. He didn't do it. Instead... Ron Moore did it and it SUCCEEDS! Good for you, Ron!!!
BSG is must watch TV for me... I am alrady hooked. Hopefully, I'll won't be too disappointed with the Klingo/Bumphead episodes... that is, as long as it doesn't air during BSG.
-
QUOTE: Because BSG is everything that "enterprise" should be. Kudos to Ron Moore for reinventing a franchise exactly how he said he would. It has enough continuity to the old show to make it familiar but creates a dramtic new environment where nothing is predictable.
And it's everything Voyager should have been too. How often did Voyager struggle for water or food or energy or fuel?? Almost never and that's something that is interesting about Galactica. Galactica is not predicatable, Trek is.
For the longest time, Paramount thought they could just crank out show after show and expect Trek Fans to watch it but I think that time is over.
Time for Galactica to show.
I watched BSg series opener '33 and water' and they were incredibly entertaining episodes. The mini-series hooked me and the BSG season primeier further solidified its hold on me. If they keep the series as tense, taut, unpredictable and movie like as it currently is, I dont see why the number wont hold strong. Might be a slight drop over time but should remain strong as word of mouth on BSG is very strong.
Wow. Now the question is whether BSG can sustain those ratings. Other genre shows (Enterprise, The Dead Zone) have shown a pattern of premiering well, but then showing a dwindling of the numbers thereafter.
-
The numbers will definitely drop, especially since it's regular slot is Fridays at 10 p.m. whereas this premiere was at 9 p.m. Still, I expect the numbers to stay fairly high for Sci-Fi. Whatever figures we get will still probably not tell the whole picture, because Sci-Fi seems intent on repeating the regular series ad-nauseum at different times. So the total number of viewers who watch it will almost certainly be higher than whatever ratings get reported in the future.
-
I think BSG will continue to do well, too, especially if it maintains the level of quality. But does anyone know if BSG is more/less expensive than Stargate to produce? I heard somewhere -- may be just a rumour -- that SciFi expects BSG to maintain ratings in the 2.5 range, otherwise they won't renew the show.
(1)
| 
