Although there is no chance of any new episodes, I like the idea. "Jericho" obviously had a following and exposing the genre to an ostensibly younger audience (The CW) is a good thing.

This did get me thinking, though. There are a ton of other shows like "Jericho" - shows that were good quality, but cancelled well before they found their audience. It seems to me that many of these shows would be well received if exposed to a new audience. Of course, if I am going to propose a few shows, I have to set some rules. Shows that were on for several seasons can't be considered, since this type of re-airing is designed to bridge from season to season - not to be a permanent replacement. Thus, shows like "Buffy" (144 episodes), "Babylon 5" (110 episodes), "Dark Angel" (43 episodes) and "The 4400" (45 episodes) are eliminated. They just have too many episodes to be a fill-in.

So, without any further complications, here is my list of cancelled Sci-Fi shows that the networks should consider re-airing:

(1) Firefly (15 episodes)

I can't believe that Firefly has been off the air for six years. For those of you that are not familar with the Browncoats and Captain Mal...just go to the link, read up on the show and then go out an get the DVD. This is still one of the best Sci-Fi shows ever aired - and, of course, FOX screwed it up. I would set the TiVo for this - again!

(2) Roar (13 episodes)

"Roar" featured a very young Heath Ledger as a prince who has to reunite his tribes to oppose the Romans and a very mystical figure in Loginus. It's a pretty decent show in the vein of "Xena" or "Hercules", but with Mr. Ledger's death, I am surprised someone hasn't already rerun the series.

(3) Jake 2.0 (16 episodes)

"Jake 2.0" was "Chuck" before "Chuck" was conceived. Jake, rather than having all the secrets of the government embedded in his head, instead was infected by nanobots, which provided him super abilities. The star, Christopher Gorham, was recently seen on "Ugly Betty", so I could see some interest in reviewing this series.

(4) Odyssey 5 (20 episodes)

When I still had Showtime, I was enamored with a show about five astronauts, who when they return from a space mission, find things 'different'. As far as I know, the last six episodes were never aired on Showtime, so even old fans will have something to see.

(5) Miracles (13 episodes)

Even though I berate FOX for show mismanagment, ABC's treatment of "Miracles" was the worst that I have ever witnessed. They aired two shows, then took an extended break before airing three more episodes. Then it was summarily cancelled, with the final seven episodes never seeing the airwaves. Poor Skeet Ulrich - first this, then "Jericho"!

Finally, even thought it has not been officially cancelled, ABC Family's The Middleman deserves another chance. This was my favorite show of the summer, with witty inside jokes and very likable characters. I really think this was one of those shows where you got it (and loved it) or didn't (and thought it was stupid). Either way, with a little more following and airtime, Dub Dub and crew might actually be saved!

Well, I didn't realize the power that I was wielding! Several sources are reporting that ABC "...opted not to order additional episodes of Pushing Daisies". Similar announcements were made for "Eli Stone" and "Dirty Sexy Money" as well.

Fans of these shows have been waiting for ABC to order a "back nine" for these shows, since the common practice is to order thirteen shows, then order nine to eleven addition episodes for the second half of the season. The announcement that ABC is not ordering any additional episodes is the effective cancellation of these shows.

So, for the remaining fans of "Pushing Daisies", series creator Bryan Fuller has suggested that he would "...love to continue telling this season's arcs in a comic book format, just to tie up all the loose strings -- and believe me, there are plenty." So, although the series may be dead, the "Pushing Daisies" world may live on. That's fitting, don't you think.

But, despite the hype and the obvious interest by most everyone, I am not really excited about the movie.

To find out why, let's compare and contrast the hype and marketing for "Twilight" with another recent vampire tale - "True Blood".

I really like "True Blood". However, I was sold prior to the first episode. Anna Paquin was cast as the star, so I knew it would be well-acted. I was not familar with the Charlaine Harris novels (on which the series was based), but I did know director Alan Ball's work, so I expected a quality production. And, finally, the HBO media blitz was witty and effective, with several websites and cool slogans, like "Friends Don't Let Friends Drink Friends".

"Twilight", on the other hand, seems to be marketed to the "Gossip Girl" crowd. The marketing is all about the extreme good looks of the two stars. The director is Catherine Hardwicke, who is best known for directing "Thirteen". She has skills. Once again, I am not familar with the author, Stephane Meyer. "Twilight" was her first book, though. For some reason, I am thinking "Eragon" here...which, for me, was not that readable. But, I want to be fair - and that means I need to actually try to read the novel before I make a true judgement.

Nothing has really captured my imagination regarding "Twilight". However, I am in the clear minority. A deal has already been struck to film the second and third books of the series - that's how much interest the movie has generated!

To be honest, I hope that I am pleasantly surprised by "Twilight". There is a chance that it might be one of those stories that doesn't sound all that innovative at first glance, but is executed so well that it transcends its origins. Something like, say, a story about a high school girl who is chosen to fight vampires. That would never work - except that was the basic concept for "Buffy the Vampire Slayer". That turned out pretty good, eh?

Take President-Elect Obama, for example. For people on the left (and center), Obama has an enormous set of expectations placed upon him. He's going to 'fix' America and make us part of the world. Even non-citizens are excited to have him in office.

Being a cynic (and a FairTax supporting, fiscally conservative, Sovereignty maintaining, somewhat socially liberal dude), I can't see how he will meet those expectations. They are just so high.

That's the problem with high expectations - if you don't meet them, you are a disappointment, even if you do 'alright'.

The Sci-FI TV season seems to have the same issue with expectations. However, the problem is that the expectations that they are not meeting were pretty low to begin with!

Let's take "Heroes", for example. I have been down on the show, but they always do something to make me watch the next episode. So, I set aside my desire for things like continuity and internal consistency and just tried to hang on for a ride. It was working for the first few episodes - I even considered writing a post stating "Heroes is not so bad"...but then came "Eris Quod Sum". That episode, with the fake Peter death...and the fake Matt and Daphne deaths...and the fake Ando death from the episode before...eh, get another plot device, could ya?

It should be easy to exceed low expectations - but not for "Heroes".

The same can be said for "Knight Rider" (already not watching), "Pushing Daisies" (bored, not watching), and even, to some extent "Sanctuary", although I haven't completely given up on that one yet.

Even one of the ostensible hits of the new season, "Fringe", has me worried. I initially had some misgivings, but wrote them off as 'nitpicks'. However, it seems that the issues were real. I find no surprises in the plot structure. I have been thinking about creating a drinking game on the show - "Drink everytime Walter says something scientific, and then Peter restates the same thing so that poor agent Olivia can understand the scientific mumbo-jumbo". It's really kind of insulting.

I think "Fringe" is falling prey to the network's desire to have people able to jump into the series without feeling totally lost. However, in their effort to satisfy that desire, they really have not developed the mythology or characters enough to maintain my interest. Right now, "Fringe" is one of the last shows that I watch each week.

To be honest, there are a few shows that meet my expectations each week - "Supernatural", "Chuck" and "True Blood" (with an honorable mention to "Terminator: The Sarah Conner Chronicles"). These shows all have running plots, well-developed characters and, more importantly, continue to deepen the relationships between these characters each week.

I wish more shows would follow their lead - but, I bet that expectation is too high.

I, personally, really can't get behind either candidate. I think Obama has mastered the Clintonian art of lying without actually lying. For instance, he has stated he won't raise taxes, but he will let the current tax cuts expire. Eh...that effectively raises the amount of tax that will be paid by those affected, doesn't it? McCain hasn't won me over either - I didn't vote for him in the primary, and he really hasn't wowed me in the campaign.

I found a site that helps undecided voters to make an informed choice based on the issues. Glassbooth.org has a short quiz that determines where you stand on the issues and then uses that information to compare how closely the candidates agree with you on those issues. My quiz pointed me narrowly to McCain, but with only a high-sixties percentile of agreement. Obama came in higher than I thought he would, with a low-sixties rating on the agreement meter. If either of these guys espoused the Fair Tax, I might have something to work with here. As it is, I am going to have to vote for who I think will cause the least amount of long term damage.

Of course, if you don't want to deal with all of these problems, you could just check out these 10 Sci-Fi Alternatives to our current choices. Heck, I have always been a big supporter of Laura Roslin!

November is "National Novel Writing Month". The goal? Write a 175 page novel in one month(that's about 50,000 words). The site NaNoWriMo is the coordinator, keeping track of your word count and providing a community for inspiration and support. The thought behind the 'novel in a month' concept is not to have a perfectly written novel at the end; it's to get the ideas on paper, which is the hardest part.

I tried (and failed miserably) last year. However, the NaNoWriMo staff has not given up on me. Here's an excerpt from the email reminder that they sent me:

Dear National Novel Writing Month Author,

The noveling season is almost upon us. If you have already come back to the NaNoWriMo site and signed up for another year of literary abandon, we say: Hello! We're so glad to have you back. If you are thinking about possibly sitting this year out, we say: Don't make us come after you.

Seriously. The world needs your new novel. You may not know what you'll write about. That's fine. You may think you're too busy to write a novel this year. That's okay too. We understand. You're busy. It's a fact.

But you know what? Every year, you spend so much of your time doing things for other people. You show up at work and school close to on time five days a week, and you do a good job there. You're nice to your friends. You take care of your family.

Is it too much to ask for a single month of creative playtime in return for all your labors? Don't you deserve a 30-day literary vacation? One where you set sail with 100,000 other adventurers and discover one of your great, unwritten novels?

We think you do.

They make a good point. I have some ideas, but, man, my schedule is filled to the brim. That new World of Warcraft release on November 13th, coupled with an actual job and kid's sports will make it difficult, but I'd like to see how many words I can capture next month.

Is anyone else attempting NaNoWriMo this year?

One that caught my eye was from my local newspaper, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. They are running a poll to determine which pop culture vampire is your favorite.

Here are their nominees:

• Count Chocula
• Edward Cullen in "Twilight"
• Stephen Moyer in "True Blood"
• Aaliyah in "Queen of The Damned"
• Bela Lugosi as "Dracula"
• David B. in "Buffy the Vampire Slayer"
• Sesame Street's "The Count"
• Brad Pitt in "Interview with the Vampire"
• Grandpa Munster
• Wesley Snipes as "Blade"

At the time of my voting, David Boreanez ("Angel") was leading, with Edward Cullen (and the "Twilight" juggenaut) in a close second. Fairly predictable, although I might have thought The Count from "Sesame Street" might have made a bit stronger showing.

However, there are some egregious misses in their list of nominees. Where is Nick Knight (from "Forever Knight")? Where is Selene (as portrayed by Kate Beckinsdale in "Underworld")? Where is our favorite vampire detective from "Moonlight", Mick St. John? I think Alex O'Laughlin would have made a run at winning this poll. I even found articles comparing Mick to Angel - heck, if the popularity wasn't there, no comparison would have been necessary.

But, the biggest miss of all was the exclusion of Spike. Spike, as you may recall, ended up having, argueably, a better redemptive arc than Angel himself. Plus, he went out in a blaze of glory - how can you top that?

So, I voted for Angel...but my real vote is for Spike as my all-time favorite vampire.

First up, FOX has ordered an additional nine episodes of "Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles". I am excited about this renewal, as there were rumblings that the show might be cancelled due to low ratings. However, according to the article, FOX noted that "...the show remains a favorite among advertisers". That's a great sign!

I do like "Sarah Connor". But, more to the point, it's one of my wife's favorite shows. That's where the value lies - it has crossover appeal to non-hardcore Sci-Fi fans. So, although it's certainly not my favorite show, I am very pleased to see it renewed.

On the flip side, NBC has extended nine more episodes to "Knight Rider".

I'll have to be honest here - I haven't been watching this show. I watched the premiere and decided that it just wasn't good enough to stay on the TiVo list. Even my fanaticism toward Val Kilmer (who supplies the voice of KITT and also was the source of this post's tagline) was not enough to save the show for me personally. In addition, I don't know anyone else who is actually watching the show. Ausiello is with me, speculating that "Knight Rider" must be popular "...among young men who like bad TV".

However, my hope is that the renewal of a show like "Knight Rider" is a good overall sign for the Sci-Fi genre in general. I just hope that a show like this does not take up a renewal slot for a much superior show, like "Chuck". We will see.

Yippee! As you know, the show split its final season into two parts. This "January debut" is actually the second half of the fourth season, which will be comprised of the 10 remaining episodes.

The season will run through March 20th. In addition, there is a two-hour special planned, which will center around two cylon agents on human ships. Obviously, the special will be set well before the events in the final episodes. Still - the more BSG, the better!

If you are guessing, you would be correct in the assumption that the show is based on the famous Daniel Dafoe novel, "Robinson Crusoe" (or as the wiki entry lists the actual title "The Life and Strange Surprising Adventures of Robinson Crusoe (of York, Mariner Who lived Eight and Twenty Years all alone in an un-inhabited Island on the Coast of America, near the Mouth of the Great River of Oroonoque; Having been cast on Shore by Shipwreck, where in all the Men perished but Himself. With An Account how he was at last as strangely deliver'd by Pyrates)". Yipes!)

Notwithstanding the length of the actual title, the tale of Robinson Crusoe is well known. He was shipwrecked, meets up with Friday, survives and finally is able to return home after many years.

The new series seems to stick to that storyline. I was initially afraid that this would be a modern-day adaptation, with some present-day lawyer being shipwrecked and somehow rigging his cellphone as a radio (or something like that). I would have been against that...since we already have "Lost" and I have seen "Castaway".

However, this is really a period piece. From the previews, the language and setting of the show are clearly aiming for a 17th century feel. The directors haven't been complete immune to the 'update-it' syndrome, though. The script "...does not pretend to be a close adaptation of the Defoe novel. While it tries to pay heed to the cultural, religious and political values of the era in which the story is set, it seeks to have "Pirates of the Caribbean"-type fun with the genre". So, we should have sword fighting and musket shooting and plenty of action. I can dig it - if it is done well.

The two hour series premiere of "Crusoe" is scheduled to air on Friday, October 17th at 8:00 PM and has an initial 13 episodes order.

Here's the rundown:

"Chuck"
"Chuck" (5.9 million, 2.2/8) dropped 18%, which is a series low. Last season, "Chuck" averaged approimately 8.7 million viewers per week.

"Pushing Daisies"
"Pushing Daisies" was down 3.1 million viewers from its average last fall. As a side note, it is still on the TiVo - unwatched.

"Heroes"
"Heroes" is a puzzler. Despite recognition that its third season is creatively the best that the show has offered, ratings dropped 20%.

"Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles"
"Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles" has recovered a bit. Although there were rumors of cancellation after some very dismal numbers, the show was up 15% after the most recent episode. I think it is safe - for now.

"Fringe"
"Fringe" is a success story. The paranormal crime drama is by far the most-watched new show, drawing at 15 million-ish viewers each week.

"Supernatural"
This was surprising when I found out - "Supernatural" has generated the most positive upswing in viewership of all returning shows this year! According to several sources, "Supernatural" has experienced more ratings growth among the 18-49 demographic this season than any other show on television. It's up over 40% from last season's numbers - people are noticing this show!

Conclusion
Although I am ecstatic about the ratings for "Supernatural", I am very concerned about the status of most of the other shows on my viewing slate. "True Blood" and "Sanctuary" both look very safe; however, I anticipate a leveling off in the ratings for "Fringe". I think it's decent, but not off-the-charts good, so I think we will be seeing the 'core' audience number in a few more weeks, which will be somewhat lower than the debut, but still in the safe zone. Unfortunately, that leaves most of the others in danger of cancellation for the remainder of the fall. This situation is exacerbated by the fact that so many anticipated shows (like "Lost", "Battlestar Galactica", "Dollhouse" and "24") will be making their debuts in January.

Thus, I foresee some cancellations. Let's just hope it's "Knight Rider" (is it just me, or was this show much better when it was called "Fastlane"), rather than "Sarah Connor".

"Ambush" (available at http://www.fox.com/terminator/ambush ) has two versions - an online mode, and an iPhone/iTouch mode. In fact, "Ambush" is touted as the "first MMO playable on iPhones and iTouch devices", so if you are a proud owner of one of those devices, you are in luck.

The online gameplay involves trying to predict and trap the movements of the iPhone players, while the iPhone player's goal is to survive in the virtual city and avoid the traps set by the online players. The iPhone's GPS location is transmitted to the game, which maps to your online movement within the city. Sounds pretty innovative to me!

The game is currently free, so if you have an iPhone or iTouch device, it's probably worth checking out.

And, remember, the inspiration for the game, "Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles", airs Monday nights at at 8:00 PM EST (7:00 PM CST) on FOX.

In an interview with SciFiWire, here is how Tapping describes the show:

"It's centered around my character, Helen Magnus, who is a 157-year-old doctor from Victorian England who runs a sanctuary for all manner of abnormal creatures. She pulls into the fray a young forensic psychiatrist named Will Zimmerman [Robin Dunne], who has always sort of thought outside of the box and has therefore been shunned by regular law-enforcement agencies, but in fact now realizes that the things that he's tried to investigate are real."

So, I set up the TiVo. But, I do have tempered expectations. "Sanctuary" started off as in the webisode format, which hasn't yet been effectively transferred to a real TV series. It also is being billed (by SCI FI) as the "first television series to feature live actors against primarily virtual sets". So, they have a lot of 'firsts' to deal with, but, hey, it's about monsters - how bad could it be?

In my research, I found a good article comparing my current fav "True Blood" to "Sanctuary". Their analysis gave the show high praise, stating "...along with Fringe, Sanctuary has more of a fully realized world than any of the other fall offerings". They predicted that the show is a "shoo-in" to be renewed past its inital thirteen episode run.

Sanctuary premieres with a two-hour episode on Friday, Oct. 3 at 9:00 PM EST/PST.

According to the source article, Fox has ordered nine additional episodes of "Fringe", which upgrades it to a full 22 episode season. Remember, most new shows recieve an initial 13 episode order (just like "Fringe" did) and if they do well, they get the extension.

"Fringe" has been doing very well, drawing 10.7 million viewers, which makes it the top-rated new series of the season.

I like "Fringe" - especially "Walter Bishop", as played by John Noble. He is, by far, the best part of the show. I am not as high on "Olivia" (Anna Torv), though. I think she is being portrayed as a 'one-note' character - there is not a lot of variation to her. When people are describing your lead character as 'wooden', it should be a cause for concern.

In addition, I think the show is a bit sloppy in tying up loose ends. For instance, they decided to burn the airplane in Episode 1 - which contained an *airborne toxin*. I think that might have spread the toxin around, don't you think? Or, how about the fact that "Nina" (the redheaded Massive Dynamics executive) removed a glove to show us her an robot arm in Episode 1, yet in Episodes 2 & 3, she had a normal-looking arm with no glove. Unless I missed the "we have awesome artificial skin, but I decided not to use it the first time I met you" line, that's sloppy.

But, overall, these are minor nitpicks. I am entertained with "Fringe" - and I want to find out more about the Pattern!

So, I have to make some tough choices to make. I will have to delete some shows from my Season Pass list, which almost never happens for a non-cancelled show. Obviously, I have a few that are on the no-touch list, like "Supernatural", "Chuck" and "True Blood". But, there are several others that I really have to consider removing.

After some discussion, the one show that came up the most was "Pushing Daisies".

"Pushing Daisies" started off very, very good. I loved the color and the unique viewpoint (and the narrator, with the specific mention of time, i.e. 2 days, 23 minutes and 42 seconds ago). But, as the series progressed, I lost interest in the Piemaker and his power to raise the dead. The storylines, although still somewhat original and campy, didn't keep my attention as the season continued. The thrill is gone, so to speak.

I think I may be alone in this viewpoint. TV Guide's "Ask Matt" column had a comment that referenced the show as "the utterly brilliant Pushing Daisies" and Matt Roush himself noted that he's "...just thrilled Pushing Daisies is returning this Wednesday. It's been an awfully long wait".

And I am thinking of dropping the show entirely.

So, have I lost my mind? Or, am I a part of a silent majority, who thinks that the show's concept was great for a few episodes, but now just lacks any real power to draw viewership?

I have to make a decision soon, as Pushing Daisies starts its second season Wednesday night at 8:00 PM EST on ABC. Will you be watching?