# Falling Skies: “Live and Learn” & "The Armory" OAD 6/19/11 ***spoilers***



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

I am deliberately starting a new thread for the episodes so that we can discuss the show without hearing complaints about spoilers.

As last night's "Falling Skies" made a transition from the first hour to the second, it became immediately obvious that these were two separate episodes. I grimaced when my wife said: "I didn't know this was going to be another hour."

The thing is, you must begin with the title "Falling Skies." Is this about Chicken Little? Fortunately, in case you were like my wife who found episode 1 a bit disappointing, it took both episodes to present us with two different historical perspectives and a couple of additional important characters.

The first episode perspective is offered by Noah Wyle's character, Tom Mason, a history professor and father of three boys, who has to cope with a quantum leap in the evolutionary history of Earth - an invasion of evolved carbon-based life forms. He rationalizes that, as Second In Command, the fighters of the 2nd Mass are actually like the American Revolutionary Army, re-fighting the Revolutionary War against the superior equipped army from over there, wherever "there" is. He believes humans can win - he has hope.

In the second hour, we meet the anti-hero of the series, John Pope, played by Colin Cunningham who we all know from ... well, from many, many shows as the evil-doer-to-anti-hero. Pope says Tom has it all wrong - humans are the Indians and the Aliens represent the inevitable onslaught of Europeans.

And so in two hours (including commercials) we meet a three-generation assortment of potentially interesting characters. And we are introduced to the aliens, one of which appears to attempt to express itself with a pleading human look in its eyes while dying from wounds.

As the second episode ended, we see some of our rag-tag freedom fighters headed off to find Tom’s middle son, Ben, who has been kidnapped and “harnessed.” 

What we were introduced to is one-third soap-drama reminiscent of the human relationships dynamic in "Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles", one-third weird aliens reminiscent of the aliens in "District 9" and one-third children-are-our-hope reminiscent of "Jeremiah."

Combined together with a biology student posing the query "If the Skitters have six limbs, why are the Mechs bipedal?", it all makes me wonder if, in the end, the lesson of this show will be: "We have met the enemy and he is us."


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

Incidentally, by the end of the second hour, my wife decided the show had real promise. I think it is going to be an entertaining hour.


----------



## Raidertank (Sep 29, 2009)

My intrest was peaked enough to keep it in the scheduler for a few more weeks


----------



## pfueri (Jan 22, 2007)

Raidertank said:


> My intrest was peaked enough to keep it in the scheduler for a few more weeks


A little slow . Feel asleep a few times . I'll give it a couple more weeks . But I think it will get axed !


----------



## BubblePuppy (Nov 3, 2006)

I was looking forward to this show, after all it is Spielberg... turns out to be just another over used, clichéd freedom fighters vs aliens plot line. I'll give it a couple more episodes to show me that it is unique..if it needs 7 episodes.. don't think so.


----------



## MysteryMan (May 17, 2010)

I place this one in the same boat with "The Event". Again, Hollywood franchising.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

BubblePuppy said:


> I was looking forward to this show, after all it is Spielberg... turns out to be just another over used, clichéd freedom fighters vs aliens plot line. I'll give it a couple more episodes to show me that it is unique..if it needs 7 episodes.. don't think so.


From everything I can find, this is a 10-episode miniseries .. At this point, we're already 20% done with the entire series.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

The problem with being a tough crowd is that soon nobody will be playing to us. Are scifi fans all that jaded? If so, we're never going to see serious scifi series on TV again (and because of that there will be nothing to stream at Netflix).

The combined cable and broadcast ratings for Sunday night were as follows:








For scifi fans, here's a reality. "Lost" got six seasons, was a wildly big hit among the scifi community, was thought of as a success. Here's the overall ranking for "Lost":

Season 1 #15
Season 2 #15
Season 3 #14
Season 4 #17
Season 5 #28
Season 6 #31

In its best season, over the course of the spring its ratings would plunge to as low as 11 million viewers before recovering to near 14 million for the season finale. The ratings drop was partially explained when Nielsen released DVR ratings, showing "Lost" as the most recorded series on television. IMHO that's where the dedicated scifi fans were.

Believe it or not, those are pathetic rankings given the cost of producing a scripted, large ensemble cast series using more than minor post-production special effects.

A survey of 20 countries by Informa Telecoms and Media in 2006 concluded that "Lost" was the second most popular TV show in those countries, _*after*_ "CSI: Miami." Oh well, those are ratings in other countries.

The 2006-07 season was the best for "Lost" at #14 in the U.S., while that same season "CSI: Miami" while #11. "CSI: Crime Scene Investigation" was #4. In the last two poorly ranking seasons of "Lost" even "CSI:NY" did as well.

Scifi fans went bonkers when CBS canceled "Jericho", but so did CBS for economic reasons. In its first season it averaged 9.24 million viewers. In the second season essentially offered by CBS after a huge fan effort it averaged 6.16 million viewers.

CBS is unlikely to ever pay a significant amount for anything in the scifi genre again. If you were to review the initial reactions to "Jericho" by diehard scifi fans, you'd see highfaluting "it just doesn't meet my standards" criticism. If scifi fans won't support uneven, complicated scifi TV shows, particularly at the time of the pilot when it reflects "getting organized", they'll never get anyone else to watch them.

TNT commits to shows based on budgets that generally far exceed Syfy's budgets. Syfy's cheap, fluffy, short-attention-span oriented, no deep thought-provoking "what really is evil" underpinning, shows like "Eureka", "Warehouse 13", etc., have trouble finding a sufficient paying (meaning willing to watch commercials) audience.

For TNT this is an experiment partially funded by the likes of Spielberg to see if there's any reliable audience in the U.S. for a somewhat sophisticated, but only modestly expensive to produce, scifi/fantasy _*Summer*_ show.

It's a miniseries which could be expanded. Based on whether non-scifi fans will be pushed hard by scifi fans to watch it so it keeps getting numbers - numbers that count, not DVR users like dedicated scifi fans - TNT will determine whether to try the genre again. What I know now from the ratings is that this show and the future of scifi on TNT has a chance if we scifi fans don't bail on it because all we want to see is fast action alien-killing.

Keep in mind that Fox keeps trying to give us a scifi show on network TV hoping that based on a cost-benefit analysis it will make a profit. With luck, a lot of luck, this Fall's Fox/Spielberg already-over-budget "Terra Nova" might not get shifted to Friday by the end of week 11.

Maybe it will take off, who knows? But here's the problem - there few new plot ideas in scifi just as there are no new plot ideas in crime procedurals. But critics are already panning "Terra Nova" because it has dinosaurs and that's "already been done." Man, what a tough crowd!


----------



## spartanstew (Nov 16, 2005)

Since most people reading this thread will have seen it, I won't spend a bunch of paragraphs recapping the episode, but will just say that I enjoyed it.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

Phrelin, I get it .. and unfortunately I think SciFi fans are a bit too fickle at times. Perhaps the reason B (or even C) SciFi movies have done so well at times is that they didn't try to go too big.

I've said it in the past and will say it again, a 10 to 13 episode summer miniseries for things like this would definitely be watched by me. It's always "new" even if only in characters, it's short lived meaning the investment isn't overwhelming and for producers, the budget is known in advance. Get enough of these in your library and you can rerun the entire series over the next summer (having both the current year's run and the previous year's run for additional revenue with no extra cost).

To me, good SciFi is about the characters anyway. Yeah, some of the lines are old, but deliveries change and every once in a while you get really surprised. Warehouse 13 and Eureka survive on characters .. The "stuff" is crazy wacko stuff that is SO no rooted in any universe. Sliders was a hit (generally speaking) for such a long time for that exact reason. Good characters make good shows and those characters don't have to be known quantities, they just have to have the proper delivery of lines.


----------



## t/a guy (Jul 7, 2010)

Just firing out my opinion,but I really didn't like it. Rest in peace Battlestar Galactica.


----------



## dbconsultant (Sep 13, 2005)

So far, we like it enough to keep watching. I didn't realize it was going to be a 10-episode mini-series (thought it was a regular series) but that may be better. With the way series that we like get cancelled, maybe a mini-series with an actual conclusion will be better.


----------



## RunnerFL (Jan 5, 2006)

The first hour was kinda slow but I expected that. How else can you introduce characters really? The second hour picked up the pace and kept me interested. We'll see where this goes.

I do however think that if we Sci-Fi fans weren't so picky we'd have more shows on the air. As it stands right now if we don't start to like a few then we won't have any. Sci-Fi shows are the most expensive to make and if we don't make one or 2 a hit soon studios are just going to say "screw you guys, we're going home".


----------



## gilviv (Sep 18, 2007)

I liked it! IMHO it will have its following and do well.
>>>Too add to the comments about _LOST_, ABC/producers also spent a great deal of $$$$$ and time promoting the show in a "false" ad campaign involving the average Joe in/with _Oceanic Airways_ and things relating to the numbers and the hatch. The promotions sucked in an enormous number of NON Sci-Fi fans only based on the interactive experiences created by the show with regards to its "find the secrets" and scavenger hunt feel. Throughout the course of its run _LOST_ was unique in that way and at least for me, it's never fair to compare new shows to it(Lost) that although spend a great deal on the promo don't have the clever interactive envolvement.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

t/a guy said:


> Just firing out my opinion,but I really didn't like it. Rest in peace Battlestar Galactica.


I can relate to that. There will be scifi folks who simply don't like it.

For whatever reason, I never could get into "Farscape." I couldn't tell you why, as it was generally well done. But I didn't do a "well, I'll watch it but...." that tends to discourage non-scifi-fans to even give it a try.

This show will probably do fine. But as I look around the web, sometimes I wonder if scifi fans aren't their worst enemies.



gilviv said:


> I liked it! IMHO it will have its following and do well.
> >>>Too add to the comments about _LOST_, ABC/producers also spent a great deal of $$$$$ and time promoting the show in a "false" ad campaign involving the average Joe in/with _Oceanic Airways_ and things relating to the numbers and the hatch. The promotions sucked in an enormous number of NON Sci-Fi fans only based on the interactive experiences created by the show with regards to its "find the secrets" and scavenger hunt feel. Throughout the course of its run _LOST_ was unique in that way and at least for me, it's never fair to compare new shows to it(Lost) that although spend a great deal on the promo don't have the clever interactive envolvement.


You're right and TNT doesn't have the enough summer episodes to permit as effective promotion.

They do have an online experience game-like site called Falling Skies - Last Defense.


----------



## Maruuk (Dec 5, 2007)

Good aliens and mechs, but brutally tired plotline and insufferable blabby drama scenes in-between the action. Noah Wiley is badly miscast, he has zero charisma as an action hero. He's an expert on the American Revolution. Oh, and all other war scenarios, kinda sorta. Yeah, there's a believable scenario.

Surprisingly, his grizzled superior officer is quite good and that lead bad guy with arrows and the gang was terrific--good dialog, completely overshadowed the rest of the cast.

It's just tired V meets War of the Worlds meets etc etc etc. Spielberg has way jumped the shark. Amazing Stories, that silly submarine show back in '94...him and TV don't mix.

BTW, writers: do a little homework! NW to Revere??? That would place our intrepid band of resisters somewhere in the Mass Bay! And all other town relationships are completely screwed up, and the region doesn't even look right. Cheez, map research somebody, please?

And they don't even TRY to do any local accents. Which I suppose is a blessing as they usually screw them up horribly, but would you set a show In New Orleans and have everybody talk like they're from upper middle Ohio???

Weak.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

Maruuk said:


> Good aliens and mechs, but brutally tired plotline and insufferable blabby drama scenes in-between the action. Noah Wiley is badly miscast, he has zero charisma as an action hero. He's an expert on the American Revolution. Oh, and all other war scenarios, kinda sorta. Yeah, there's a believable scenario.


Well actually, I know a guy like Wiley's character who is even less likely as an action hero from appearance, but who is a West Point graduate and was a real action hero in Vietnam. He's just a "thinking man's" action hero.

And blabby drama scenes are the price you pay to draw a viewer or two from the half of the viewing public that pay for the shows because they don't DVR and don't skip commercials.


> Surprisingly, his grizzled superior officer is quite good and that lead bad guy with arrows and the gang was terrific--good dialog, completely overshadowed the rest of the cast.


I agree they are going to be key to the enjoyment of the show, but I also find the younger cast is kind of interesting.


> It's just tired V meets War of the Worlds meets etc etc etc. Spielberg has way jumped the shark. Amazing Stories, that silly submarine show back in '94...him and TV don't mix.


OK, I certainly hope you turn out to be wrong about Spielberg and TV. Unlike TNT, Fox has dumped a lot of money into "Terra Nova." Back in January we had this reported in The Hollywood Reporter:


> ...Some of that extra cash has already been spent on Steven Spielberg's time-traveling drama _Terra Nova_, which will get a two-night preview in May and join the Fox schedule next fall....
> 
> "It's on budget," said Rice. "It's a very expensive television show. It's a very ambitious television show."
> 
> ...


That was in January. They missed the two-night May preview.

What do we have in this "highly anticipated" show? _Jurassic Park_, Spielberg's most financially successful film, meets time-travel. That's it.

IMHO it will be "scifi-show-at-Fox-bank-breaking" if it typically draws less than 14 million viewers as it really can't be profitable without some episodes in the 16-18 million viewers range.

By "scifi-show-at-Fox-bank-breaking" what I really mean is the guys at Fox who have been trying to give the scifi genre a chance only to find no audience may find themselves unemployed.

If Spielberg as producer working with Brannon Braga as co-producer and showrunner ("Star Trek: The Next Generation", "Star Trek: Voyager", "Star Trek: Enterprise", "Threshold", "FlashForward"), and Peter Chernin co-producer (former President and Chief operating officer of News Corporation, and Chairman and Chief executive officer of Fox Entertainment Group) fail with "Terra Nova," for the next decade we scifi fans will be looking all over our fall-winter guides in dismay and frustration trying to find scifi shows that aren't syndicated shows of yesteryear rerunning on channels like Spike, while wrestling on Syfy is playing in the background.


----------



## RunnerFL (Jan 5, 2006)

Maruuk said:


> It's just tired V meets War of the Worlds meets etc etc etc.


I have to disagree with the V comparison. In V the aliens took human form, tried to mix in with us and claimed they came in peace. The aliens in Falling Skies do none of that.


----------



## trainman (Jan 9, 2008)

Maruuk said:


> Spielberg has way jumped the shark. Amazing Stories, that silly submarine show back in '94...him and TV don't mix.


I disagree about "Amazing Stories" -- and Spielberg was also responsible for (as executive producer) some excellent animated TV shows, such as "Animaniacs" and "Freakazoid."


----------



## Maruuk (Dec 5, 2007)

V in the sense that menacing aliens have giant ships hovering and have basically taken over and it's up to humans to throw the bums out via guerrilla actions.

I mean, I guess it's ok "Summer fare"--disposable background media while the barbecue rages on. Wouldn't stand up to Winter scrutiny, though.

Speaking of SS, "Super 8" is getting widely panned as "ET" meets "Close Encounters". Another toothless predictable magical alien fairy story from the Tower of Treacle that is Amblin. From "Hook" on out, SS has been sliding down the long and slippery slope to Panderland.

I might watch a little more just to learn about the aliens being the original "humans" on Earth and the fact that we're the invaders. At least that's the standard path these hackneyed tales tend to trod.


----------



## RobertE (Jun 10, 2006)

Maruuk said:


> V in the sense that menacing aliens have giant ships hovering and have basically taken over and it's up to humans to throw the bums out via guerrilla actions.
> 
> I mean, I guess it's ok "Summer fare"--disposable background media while the barbecue rages on. Wouldn't stand up to Winter scrutiny, though.
> 
> ...


Always the ray of sunshine arn't you. 

With an "alien invasion" show/movie, there really aren't a whole lot of major variables to the story.

If the show isn't to your liking fine, but I happen to enjoy it. Please take the threadcrapping elsewhere.


----------



## trainman (Jan 9, 2008)

Maruuk said:


> Speaking of SS, "Super 8" is getting widely panned as "ET" meets "Close Encounters".


Widely panned by anonymous curmudgeons on the Internet, you mean? 82% of critics tracked by Rotten Tomatoes gave it a favorable review.


----------



## RunnerFL (Jan 5, 2006)

Maruuk said:


> V in the sense that menacing aliens have giant ships hovering and have basically taken over and it's up to humans to throw the bums out via guerrilla actions.
> 
> Speaking of SS, "Super 8" is getting widely panned as "ET" meets "Close Encounters". Another toothless predictable magical alien fairy story from the Tower of Treacle that is Amblin. From "Hook" on out, SS has been sliding down the long and slippery slope to Panderland.


I still see no comparison to V... Again, in V they aren't out right invading and the ships hovering over haven't taken over. 95% of the population in V still believed the aliens were there for good. in Falling Skies 100% of the population know it's an invasion force up to no good.

Oh, and thanks for ruining Super 8 for those of us who haven't seen it!


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

I'm about 1/3 through the second hour. It's strenuous watching for me because I just don't think the acting is very good. There is some basic tension but it just isn't quite "there yet." Maybe the rest of it will improve.

Also, for anyone raised in New England, there are downright painful parts. I'm not sure that the writer ever visited New England; it seems more like he got the place names from Google Maps. Certainly the production designer has never been to New England. When they are in "Back Bay," (and folks, it's referred to properly as _the_ Back Bay) it looks like a quiet, woodsy suburb.

Here's the real Back Bay:










At least no one is even attempting a Boston accent.


----------



## RunnerFL (Jan 5, 2006)

Stuart Sweet said:


> At least no one is even attempting a Boston accent.


And that's wicked cool by me.


----------



## oldschoolecw (Jan 25, 2007)

Stuart Sweet said:


> I'm about 1/3 through the second hour. It's strenuous watching for me because I just don't think the acting is very good. There is some basic tension but it just isn't quite "there yet." Maybe the rest of it will improve.
> 
> Also, for anyone raised in New England, there are downright painful parts. I'm not sure that the writer ever visited New England; it seems more like he got the place names from Google Maps. Certainly the production designer has never been to New England. When they are in "Back Bay," (and folks, it's referred to properly as _the_ Back Bay) it looks like a quiet, woodsy suburb.
> 
> ...


Hey Stuart, where would you like me to park your car


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

Harvard Yard of course. Although a true Bostonian knows that's nowhere near the Back Bay.


----------



## djlong (Jul 8, 2002)

Oh for an editor who could have edited one line to say "take route 3 northwest to {Burlington|Lowell|Nashua NH}"... (instead of REVERE!)


----------



## trainman (Jan 9, 2008)

djlong said:


> Oh for an editor who could have edited one line to say "take route 3 northwest to {Burlington|Lowell|Nashua NH}"... (instead of REVERE!)


Hey, at least they didn't have them say "take _the_ 3," as Southern Californian writers sometimes manage to slip into scripts.


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

djlong said:


> Oh for an editor who could have edited one line to say "take route 3 northwest to {Burlington|Lowell|Nashua NH}"... (instead of REVERE!)


Mr. Long, you're from an area near where I grew up, so I figured you'd see my point.


----------



## Maruuk (Dec 5, 2007)

RobertE said:


> Always the ray of sunshine arn't you.
> 
> With an "alien invasion" show/movie, there really aren't a whole lot of major variables to the story.
> 
> If the show isn't to your liking fine, but I happen to enjoy it. Please take the threadcrapping elsewhere.


Disagree all you want on the show content. Take the personal cyberbullying elsewhere pal. It violates forum rules. 'Nuf said.


----------



## Maruuk (Dec 5, 2007)

Gee, I hope it's not a spoiler to say the V aliens are, in fact, invading including massive infiltration and media control, and they have giant ships hovering over our cities! And they look like monsters. Oh wait, the thread title literally says...SPOILER.

There is some talk that Falling Skies gets better as it goes along. It would practically HAVE to. No place else to go but up. BTW, it was filmed in Toronto. Sounds like it was CAST in Toronto from the dialog. Heck, maybe in Toronto Rt. 3 goes...EAST!


----------



## RASCAL01 (Aug 2, 2006)

I did not know that frank was an actor 

Did you see the Florida billboard? I have never seen a Florida billboard in MA.:nono2:


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

As I noted above:


phrelin said:


> For TNT this is an experiment partially funded by the likes of Spielberg to see if there's any reliable audience in the U.S. for a somewhat sophisticated, but only modestly expensive to produce, scifi/fantasy _*Summer*_ show.
> 
> ...Man, what a tough crowd!


Maybe they should hire good continuity and fact checkers rather than use interns, but geesh, the aliens don't look like the aliens one typically sees in the Boston area either.:nono2:


----------



## pfueri (Jan 22, 2007)

pfueri said:


> A little slow . Feel asleep a few times . I'll give it a couple more weeks . But I think it will get axed !


Tried to watch another week ! Had to drop it off my series link . Fell asleep watching it again ! Why is it when big movie directors try todo TV they mostly fail ?


----------



## oldschoolecw (Jan 25, 2007)

phrelin said:


> As I noted above:Maybe they should hire good continuity and fact checkers rather than use interns, but geesh, the aliens don't look like the aliens one typically sees in the Boston area either.:nono2:


Whatcha talkin bout Willis:lol:


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

Maruuk said:


> Gee, I hope it's not a spoiler to say the V aliens are, in fact, invading including massive infiltration and media control, and they have giant ships hovering over our cities! And they look like monsters. Oh wait, the thread title literally says...SPOILER.


For the record .. SPOILER in the title is only for the two episodes in the title name. Oh and while 'V' is probably OK due to it's age and (apparent) similarity (I didn't watch), Super 8 is out right now, today in the theaters. I'm not a spoiler freak myself, but it's bad form to talk about those plot lines in a thread NOT devoted to Super 8. SPOILER does not mean you can spoil every show .. Just the one we're talking about.


----------



## yosoyellobo (Nov 1, 2006)

Anybody have any theories on why the aliens have a need for human slaves?


----------



## RunnerFL (Jan 5, 2006)

yosoyellobo said:


> Anybody have any theories on why the aliens have a need for human slaves?


To gather scrap metal...


----------



## Galaxie6411 (Aug 26, 2007)

I thought maybe they were used to run the mechs, especially after the comment about the mechs being bipeds and the aliens not.


----------



## RunnerFL (Jan 5, 2006)

Galaxie6411 said:


> I thought maybe they were used to run the mechs, especially after the comment about the mechs being bipeds and the aliens not.


I think that the mechs are 100% mech, no one inside "driving" them, with the skidders/skitters controlling them.


----------



## t/a guy (Jul 7, 2010)

Oh well I tried to watch it again.It's just not doing it for me.


----------



## Charise (Jan 25, 2004)

Wow, I can sure see why scifi has a hard time succeeding on TV or in theaters. With many viewers just ignoring anything with the scifi label, it's amazing that we who like it don't just have books. You all are much more discerning viewers than I when you know after an hour of a series that you won't watch anymore. I guess I'll be glad for the shows we still have, because I don't see anyone taking the chance on many more. No wonder _Firefly_ failed--it was just the wild west in space anyway, right?

I don't live in the area depicted in the program, but we're all hicks in the Midwest according to TV anyway, so how would I know what's accurate and what's not.  For example, I love the Dresden books, but Jim Butcher admitted that he hadn't even visited Chicago before writing the first few. That didn't keep me from reading the series, but it sounds like many here wouldn't bother.

I like seeing what others envision and the f/x used and how they vary from what I've seen before. Thanks to the few of you who are trying to discuss the show. I'll be watching, but I guess I'll stay away from this thread. :nono2:


----------



## Laxguy (Dec 2, 2010)

Stuart Sweet said:


> Harvard Yard of course. Although a true Bostonian knows that's nowhere near the Back Bay.


Near the Back Bay is this spectacular vessel*.... I lived on Bay State Road for a bit.... it parallels *Back Street*!

_* OK, not quite as spectacular with most of the standing rigging gone; she was under repairs. _


----------



## klang (Oct 14, 2003)

yosoyellobo said:


> Anybody have any theories on why the aliens have a need for human slaves?


I'm guessing they are gathering raw materials to build something and the 'ships' are actually factories.


----------



## woj027 (Sep 3, 2007)

My wife and I had just watched "Battle Los Angeles" the night before watching "Falling Skies" and she essentially said, isn't this the same show, except "Battle Los Angeles" was shown from the point of view of the Marines. 
I thought the movie was actually pretty good. It wasn't super story sci-fi, and is very similar. With it being a mini-series I think we can have closure in the show since the planet was invaded, something should happen (see the movie "Skyline" for no closure).

We are hoping for good things in Falling Skies, I think it has potential, especially since its a mini-series with an expected outcome.

now some ramblings.......

I think when a Sci-Fi movie or show presents an "event" that must be dealt with, you must have a conclusion. And because of this "event" and how resolution is sought for, is where you need to have good character development for the resolution to be worth waiting for. Typically the bad guys don't win.

I also believe that when you have a series (think star trek, but more recently Stargate and SGU) you have your mission you accomplish each day, with little steps towards accomplishing the larger problem. Character development can happen a bit slower.

I think thats where SGU had trouble getting off the ground, their daily mission was that they didn't have enough of this vital something or other, their big mission was that they couldn't get home, but they spent all this time on character development like they were a movie or a mini series with an end solution (Just ask Dr. Rush about what the mission was). I think they put too many strikes against the crew so they could never move beyond, not having food, not having water, not having shields, not having, not having. But you knew the show was intended to be a long running series but you never really felt that like they were getting anywhere. That is until word got out that the series was being canceled, so they pulled all the good story lines out for one last push, which I would say the last 5 episodes were the best ones, too bad they didn't tie together well. What happened to their descendents? Although I liked the series finalle, since it left the door open to start the show up again, why not just kill em all off? Have the bad guys win?


ramblings over (well still going on in my head)


----------



## renbutler (Oct 17, 2008)

Apparently it's not just a miniseries. (Or they changed their minds.)

Falling Skies picked up for a second season

Another ten episodes in the summer of 2012.


----------



## Dario33 (Dec 15, 2008)

It'll also be getting a new showrunner next season -- Remi Aubuchon, who created Caprica.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

renbutler said:


> Apparently it's not just a miniseries. (Or they changed their minds.)
> 
> Falling Skies picked up for a second season
> 
> Another ten episodes in the summer of 2012.


Guess TNT likes these numbers:



> Live + 7 audience of 8 million viewers and ranking it as cable's top series launch of 2011.


... AND ...



> In the opening stages of its rollout in more than 75 international markets, it has already drawn strong - and in some cases record - audience deliveries


I'm hooked and while I'm not generally live .. I'm same day .. A second season is a good thing for me.


----------



## RobertE (Jun 10, 2006)

renbutler said:


> Apparently it's not just a miniseries. (Or they changed their minds.)
> 
> Falling Skies picked up for a second season
> 
> Another ten episodes in the summer of 2012.


I never saw anything (other than here) that said it was a mini series.


----------



## paulman182 (Aug 4, 2006)

The discrepancies between the named locations and character accents and those of our planet indicate that this show takes place on an alternate Earth which gives the writers/directors great flexibility in plot lines.


----------



## trainman (Jan 9, 2008)

paulman182 said:


> The discrepancies between the named locations and character accents and those of our planet indicate that this show takes place on an alternate Earth which gives the writers/directors great flexibility in plot lines.


Well, yeah, it takes place on an alternate Earth that's been invaded by aliens. That hasn't happened here, as far as I know. 

Of course, technically, all TV shows (at least the scripted ones) take place on an alternate Earth/in an alternate universe -- or else in the mind of Tommy Westphall.


----------

