Defying Gravity

[Jackie]

In the near future, eight astronauts from five countries (four women and four men) undertake a mysterious six-year international space mission covering thirteen billion kilometres. With the eyes of the world upon them - everything they do is monitored, and every emotion they feel, scrutinized - they soon discover that their real assignment is not at all what they thought.

I watched the 2 hour premier and it was better than I thought. Anyone else watching it? What do you think so far?

[Robyn]

I dvred it so I could watch it with my hubby. I only saw real small mentions of this show so I wasn't sure what to think of it.

[Jackie]

Me too. The commercials didn't show much, and I thought it would be the usual drama and romance, only set in space. There's more to it than that and I really liked it. It definitely has a lot of potential.

[Robyn]

I saw about the first 5 minutes. I also didn't realize it is set in the future.

[Jackie]

Me neither. The commercials didn't do it justice. Stupid really, if they're trying to get viewers, they didn't do a good job of advertising it. This will probably be just another good show that gets cancelled for lack of interest. Not the show's fault, but the network for not advertising or pushing it.

Another one that looks good for the fall schedule is Flash Forward. For 2 minutes, everyone on the planet blacks out and has visions of the future. Great potential. I'm actually looking forward to that one.

[Jim]

Are they going to show the 1st episode again? I missed it Sunday. It looked interesting on the commercial.

[Jackie]

http://beta.abc.go.com/watch/clip/def...
Look where it says: Latest Full Episodes, you can watch the Pilot episode and the next one called Natural Selection. It was a two hour premiere, both of those episodes were aired back to back.

[Allen]

I was considerably let down. Ron Livingston's last show Standoff was really good, but was regrettably canceled. This had potential, but yet again the networks fail at anything more than interpersonal sexual drama.

I think the alien artifact ploy is a bit contrived at this point, especially when set in 2052(Eureka did it once, and happens to be doing it again right now). Plus, we won't be using rockets in 40yrs, and if we are we deserve to be blown up. Second, if we were using rockets, and a 'International Space Organization' were to exist, it would not be based in Houston, it would be some where on the equator, or at the very least French Guiana.

I don't see this lasting...

The whole space scene was pretty bad, as she would have started flying back in as soon as the cable caught, whole equal and opposite reaction thing ya know. And I'm pretty sure you can't have sex in zero g stark naked either for the same reason.

Someone on the TV.com forum said: everyone is expecting everything to be exact about the facts presented in the show. some people have to remind themselves that this is just tv, its meant to entertain people. you have to put the logistics aside in order to enjoy some of the shows out there

But there are other shows they have/listen to science advisers, such as Eureka, Stargate, and BSG. Plus, there are a lot of smart people(or perhaps those who actually paid attention in high school physics) out there nowadays who watch TV, and when disappointed with rampant disregard for scientific facts, will talk sh*t about the show to other, perhaps not so smart people, who then when thinking about watching it will trust their friend's opinion and not watch, thus preventing audience gain. When network execs realize this, and start hiring competent continuity editors and advisers, they will probably start making more money. This show will at the least lose out to Virtuality, which while slightly better I doubt will survive either.

If shows like Eureka, which is considerably campy, can entertain 'normal people'[middle america:] and 'nerds'[people who have a basic understanding of physics:], then surely the broadcast networks can do just as well, as I am guessing they have much larger budgets than Siffy.

[Robyn]

Jackie - I have not heard of Flash Forward. Interesting concept. What channel is it set to air on?

[Jackie]

ABC. I've been getting the million commercial push for it. I wish they'd just air it so they can stop with all the commercials, LOL

The premiere date is 9-24. It is an interesting concept, I hope they don't screw it up.

[Jackie]

I'm behind on my TV Guide, but I read a write up today from the 7-27 to 8-9 issue. In it, it says how this is more about romance than actual sci fi. Ya think? This second episode mostly revolved around romances and sex, past and present.
From the article: "Rather than a problem of the week, themes will include loneliness, friendship and loss, and don't expect aliens, robots, time travel or any of that, you know, science fiction stuff." What????
Why bother with the sci fi theme then? If it's going to be another Desperate Housewives or Grey's Anatomy, you don't need to be in space to do it.
This really annoys me. Why do the networks think that real sci fi isn't good enough? I'm tired of the same exact shows, only different people and different locations, but they're still all basically the same. Network TV is CRAP!
This show could have had potential if they explored the sci fi aspect of it. Instead, they opt for the same old boring who's screwing who. Been there, done that, I want something NEW!

[Allen]

Regrettably Fox is the only network to really attempt 'real' sci-fi, which they then go and cancel before it even airs(Firefly), or put it in the worst timeslot possible(Friday) and when it is critically acclaimed cancel it(Sarah Connor Chronicles).

They still do have Dollhouse, but I am still on the fence with it.

In the end I blame the Nielson scheme, I don't think it can or will ever accurately represent true viewership. But it is still the grand arbiter, especially with the networks.