I can get into all the other reasons why the show failed, but I don't necessarily agree with many listed here. No one watched Mythbusters for the science either. At least no one with ANY science knowledge. All these shows are entertainment with a science element.
But the problem with Smash LAb is that it failed in both science AND entertainment. It was impossible to follow due to the terrible directing. Most obvious was the over use of super slow motion. Smart directors know how to use effects to the benefit of the viewers. For one thing, always have the first cut be at normal speed. That allows viewers to see what happened as if they were there. It also shows the full impact of a collision, or speed/acceleration of an object, or whatever they were trying to show. But with Smash Lab, just as they got to the "pay off", they started with the slow motion. And also the repeated angle changes. It never allows the viewer to actually focus on what is going on. And then they show the same 5 seconds over and over again from a different angle trying to make it appear as if it is continuous rather than a repeat of the same action.
It really makes you wonder how directors are able to actually receive paychecks if they are so clueless into what makes good entertainment.
But the problem with Smash LAb is that it failed in both science AND entertainment. It was impossible to follow due to the terrible directing. Most obvious was the over use of super slow motion. Smart directors know how to use effects to the benefit of the viewers. For one thing, always have the first cut be at normal speed. That allows viewers to see what happened as if they were there. It also shows the full impact of a collision, or speed/acceleration of an object, or whatever they were trying to show. But with Smash Lab, just as they got to the "pay off", they started with the slow motion. And also the repeated angle changes. It never allows the viewer to actually focus on what is going on. And then they show the same 5 seconds over and over again from a different angle trying to make it appear as if it is continuous rather than a repeat of the same action.
It really makes you wonder how directors are able to actually receive paychecks if they are so clueless into what makes good entertainment.