Fox Cancels Firefly Indefinitely (1 Viewer)

[Adam Lenhardt]

There should be some WGA/SAG etc LAW that says they get to do a wrapup TV movie or whatnot if they are not informed in time to avoid a cliffhanger ending

It'd be nice, but what's to say that wouldn't tip the balance away from greenlighting these shows at all? "There's too much red tape for such a risky venture. Let's bag it."

 

[Will_B]

8pm Friday isn't the best slot, but Fox didn't have many better places to put it. They promoted it heavily,

With so few people watching television nowadays, they need to give us a little more of a clue. Firefly could have been called Starship Firefly, and Bird of Prey could have been called Batwoman: Birds of Prey. Or something.

I just found both of these shows myself, and want more episodes. Hopefully another network will pick it up.

 

[Keith Mickunas]

Personally I think Fox has changed a lot with the way they treat shows now. Married With Children and The Simpsons were two shows that never would have been given a chance on another network yet made Fox a success and have continued to be a success in syndication.

But now Fox doesn't often give a show a real chance. Heck, they almost seem to be sabotaging shows that could be successful, look at Futurama as an example. They won't broadcast it in primetime, they let it get stomped on by football, then expect it to have decent ratings. What's up with that?

Then there's shows like The Tick and Greg the Bunny and many others that get bumped around, or under advertised and aren't given much of a chance in a bad time slot. Now there's Firefly, which is aimed to an audience that's not typically home watching TV on Friday nights but it was given a lot more episodes than some shows to find an audience.

I don't know, Fox is weird. I almost wonder if there's two different groups doing the programming and they're able to mess with each others stuff every now and then.

As for Nielsen giving boxes to whoever wants them, are you sure you want that? The most vocal minorities could organize to get them so they could influence programming. I don't really want to get into politics or religion, but I'll go ahead a relate some info from a friend of mine that works as a CSR for a cable company. When their company would add a religion channel, they'd get numerous phone calls and thank you letters, when they added things like comedy central they'd here very little from their customers. Nielsen numbers wouldn't be the least bit accurate without control over their sample population. They'd become as reliable as online polling.

 

[Jason Seaver]

The fact is, most other networks wouldn't touch the stuff Fox greenlights. Without Fox, there wouldn't have been The Tick, or Family Guy, or Undeclared, or Space: Above and Beyond, or Brisco County, or Firefly, or any number of other shows that everyone critizes them for cancelling.

Damn straight. Would you rather have the occasional aggravation of watching a different show fail on Fox or would you rather they were ABC?

 

[Robert Ringwald]

That's why I loved how Joss handled the original 12 episodes of Buffy.

The whole first season can be viewed as one long movie basically. Everything was nicely wrapped up, but there were some plots to pull into season 2. Had that show been cancelled, it would have worked perfectly.

More creators should do this type of thing. I hope Joss makes episode 15 of firefly a type of finale just in case...

 

[Barry Woodward]

Firefly has not yet been cancelled. Entertainment weekly is wrong as usual. Fox recently has made a point in saying they have not yet cancelled Firefly and that it is only on hiatas until they find a proper time slot. It ain't over yet.

 

[Chris Beveridge]

You don't know. In fact, if you and others like you don't watch, that becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Pretty much my way of "getting back" at the networks. They've screwed me over in the past so many times now, I can't begin to care anymore. What few shows that do get me to watch, I know in the back of my mind that they'll probably get the axe. The payoff just isn't there anymore for the level of committment. I'd rather take the 13 hours of Firefly that I would have watched and put it towards something else.

I hope people do keep watching shows they like. But some of us are just giving up, like many did before us. Some of it's probably just simple life changes/perspectives as well. There are shows I will make the committment to (hell, I watched about 500 different discs this past year, if not more; that's a freakin committment). I've ridden the Alias wave for as long as its gone on now and will continue to do so. That's a show I'm amazed has survived. It goes against everything that a network wants and goes against everything a network believes about its audiences.

 

[Jason Seaver]

Pretty much my way of "getting back" at the networks.

Except you're only "getting back" at yourself. You're not only missing out on a good show, you're helping assure that there will be fewer shows like that in the future (though, of course, in a kind of third-hand way if you're not directly measured, by not giving it word-of-mouth that could get to somebody who does keep a ratings diary).

Don't think of it as being about "commitment". Don't worry about blocking out a space on Friday nights every week, especially if you've got one of them spiffy PVR suckers. Watch the show. If you enjoy it, watch another. Eventually, there may be no more, and that's a bummer, but you'll only be coming out behind if you watch it and don't like it - so long as the show's worth your time, you're still ahead of the game even if it doesn't last as long as planned.

 

[Ken Seeber]

Firefly has not yet been cancelled. Entertainment weekly is wrong as usual.

No, EW isn't wrong in this case, simply misquoted by Jeffrey Scotts, who started this thread. I have the issue of EW in question, and it quite clearly states the show has been put on hiatus, not canceled.

 

[Joel C]

But now Fox doesn't often give a show a real chance. Heck, they almost seem to be sabotaging shows that could be successful, look at Futurama as an example. They won't broadcast it in primetime, they let it get stomped on by football, then expect it to have decent ratings. What's up with that?

Except it does get decent ratings, even with football pre-emptions. The last new episode got a 6.9/10 I believe, and the one before it (which aired nationwide w/o preemption I think) did even better. Futurama has a *very* loyal fanbase. I've heard it is simply a situation where some suits at Fox don't "get" the show (which also reportedly led to the cancellation of MST3K on SFC).

 

[Jeffrey_Scotts]

ALL:

Entertainment Weekly - December 13, 2002

Page 73:

"Fox swatted Buffy creator Joss Whedon's little-seen Friday-night sci-fi drama off it's schedule indefinitely."


Ken:

You are WRONG, as the article clearly states. Read it more carefully from now on, it says "indefinitely" which means no more ever. It did not say on hiatus, until next year, etc. so therefore my post is 100% correct and yours is the one that's not.

 

[Jeff Kohn]

Well, there's another way of looking at it. Indefinitely doesn't mean forever, if it did we wouldn't need both words. It could just mean they don't have a set date for it's return yet. Also they don't don't explicitly use the 'c' word.

 

[Michael St. Clair]

Indefinitely does not mean forever. It means it might come back at some currently undetermined point in time.
However, EW reporting it like that will likely only drive away viewers.

 

[Tom Keels]

in·def·i·nite: adj
in·defi·nite·ly: adv.


Not definite, especially:
Unclear; vague.
Lacking precise limits: an indefinite leave of absence.
Uncertain; undecided: indefinite about their plans

Just so there is no confusion on the definition.

 

[Michael Reuben]

Not definite, especially:
a. Unclear; vague.
b. Lacking precise limits: an indefinite leave of absence.
c. Uncertain; undecided: indefinite about their plans.

M.

 

[Bob McElfresh]

EW also said something about Friday being a good night for Firefly because most of it's target audience would be at home anyway.

Except you're only "getting back" at yourself

Well... does my watching of FireFly have anything to with it's success/failure? I dont think so. I have more influence over the presidental election since my vote is recorded & counted.
(To be honest, I'm not sure I WANT my viewing habits recorded/counted. But thats another issue.)
I do feel powerless to influence ratings. There ARE web sites for petitions - but I'm not sure if they are effective. And the fact that I have FireFly setup as a regular recorded event on my PVR could actually hurt because I can skip over commercials. :frowning:
(Note: If anyone wants to do a petition to save FireFly, post the link and I'll sign.)

 

[Jason Seaver]

There ARE web sites for petitions - but I'm not sure if they are effective.

I'd go so far as to call them useless. Once, they may have been, but they've become so easy and so prevalent - and require so little commitment from the signatories - that they their targets have wised up.

 

[TheLongshot]

Exactly... So if you don't (or Chris doesn't) watch Firefly to "get back at" Fox, who's actually being hurt? Not Fox - just the person who's missing out.

It isn't to "get back at Fox", it is not wasting my time getting involved with a TV show that has little or no chance. It is why some people don't even bother with shows in their first season, since more often than not, it will be canned.

It is why I have written off the Sci-Fi channel. They have proven to me that they don't want my viewership, canning the only show I thought was worthwhile (Farscape), and not really developing quality programming.

The problem with Fox is the mindless "lets throw a bunch of shows at the wall and see what sticks" attitude. Yes, they do develop some interesting shows, but they never last, and we are left hanging. I almost think it would be better for them just to develop "One Season" shows, especially with the success of "24". That way, if the concept fails, we at least don't feel robbed.

I feel pretty helpless in this process. My viewing doesn't matter one iota in whether a show survives or not. Personally, I think that's wrong.

Jason

 

[CharlesD]

Anyone who wants one should get one to contribute to more accurate sampling

Uh..no. The whole point of statistical sampling is to get a random sample. Giving a box to anyone who wants one would guarantee a non-random sample and therefore inaccurate results.

Statistical sampling works, it is simply math. If the sampling is done correctly, the numbers are accurate within the margin of error and confidence level survey. There's no point questioning the value of sampling just because you don't like the results.

So far from reading this thread it is unclear to me whether Firefly is off the air immediately or whether they will still air the remaining shows.

 

[Jeff Kleist]

To once again put out facts on Farscape

The German company that owns Henson UPPED THE PRICE PER EPISODE for season 5. Sci-Fi has already budgeted their cash for next year, and it's all spent. Therefore they DID NOT HAVE ENOUGH $$ TO PAY FOR SEASON 5

Showtime and UPN apparently do and are looking to pick itup