God I hate the SciFi Channel

[El_Phil]

On the (possible) plus side. A long season means you cannot use the same writers for the entire run (no-one has that many ideas) you might get some consistency.

Something about most US tv which has always annoyed is the massive ups and downs in episode writing/plot quality. Since most of the crew will change between first and last episode the production style is going to change as well.

And finally AT you should be glad you don't live in the UK where we have 'series' of about half a dozen shows not 'seasons'.

[Kana]

SciFi Inside...Battlestar Galactica last night...said that there were 10 ep of the first part of 2nd season, and there will be 10 more for the 2nd season...

Kana

[Atrocities]

The thing that got me the most was that they were selling an incomplete season. 10 episodes for $40.00 is just a rip off. Normally you would pay $40.00 for the ENTIRE season, not just half of it. Its a rip off and that is what got under my skin.

What appeared to be the "complete" 2nd season of BSG, 10 episodes, might well be only half of the season. So instead of buying the entire season for $40.00 to $60.00, you now have to shell out nearly $100.00. That is just excessive greed.

[Fyron]

Most of the boxed sets I have seen are 70-80 dollars a season...

[Hugh Manatee]

/me has aquired firefly for $23

Best bargain ever.....

[Atrocities]

Imperator Fyron said:
Most of the boxed sets I have seen are 70-80 dollars a season...

Man your really over paying if that is the case. I paid $44.00 for Season 1 of BSG, and about $45.00 apeace for all seven seasons of SG1 that I have. The same for B5, Crusader, 24, and the Saprano's.

Firefly was only $25.00, as was Space Above and Beyond.

The only series that know of that cost near or over a $100.00 are the Star Trek ones..... trying to bilk the fan ala Paramount style.

[Will]

Atrocities said:
The only series that know of that cost near or over a $100.00 are the Star Trek ones..... trying to bilk the fan ala Paramount style.

Farscape. Although to be fair, the production budget for Farscape was huge, bigger than the standard TV production by far, and a good deal bigger than a standard scifi TV production. It got cancelled for a combination of competition and cost, and they need to try to get their investment back.

I don't really watch TV, and haven't for four years now (since I started university), so I guess I have a little different view on the length of "seasons". As far as I'm concerned, a "season" is good in a scifi show if it has some sort of story arc that it follows, if it's multi-episode subplots have some sort of relation to the overall story (single-episode subplots are exempt, since they are usually comic relief), and if the conclusion of the "season" ties up the arc, but leaves more questions. Length, to me, is irrelevant.

I think part of the problem AT's got here is a mistake in marketing for the DVDs. If SciFi decided to call the two parts of a "season" Series A and Series B, and sold it that way, then there wouldn't be a problem, because they avoid the association everyone has with "season". I think they tried to do that by calling it "Battlestar Gallactica Season 2.0", with the second half presumably being called "Season 2.1", but that's not obvious from the start, and a lot of people probably think it's a computer software reference ("Hey, Cylons are robots, computers! Get it?!"), and the marketing team probably thought that too, but didn't think of the reaction to half of a "season" as everyone else sees it.