I Hate When Shows Get Cancelled So Quick

Discussion in 'TV Shows' started by Jim Beaver, Nov 6, 2003.

  1. Jim Beaver

    Jim Beaver Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2003
    Messages:
    604
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Here me out as this is a little Rant.

    Shows are getting so quick lately sometimes after only 2 episodes. This is so unfair and should not happen. I think every show should at least get a full season to see how it is played out. It's not fair to only a show have a few shows and then "Oh no we don't like the responce so far so your gone" I read something that totally intrigued me it said shows like Mega-Hit Seinfeld didn't do well its first season it didnb't become number 1 until later. So how do Networks if they have a hit or a Flounder unless they at least give it a chance and see. Who knows howmany shows could have been Seinfeld or Sopranos big if only given a chance. At least if given a full season you'd get an idea and then that be ok to cancel it none of the episodes clicked. But to give up so soon who knows what could have happened if it stuck around a whole year and then it exploded how stupoid would the Networks feel if they found out their recently cancelled show made MILLIONS of Dollers. Talk about Schizophrenix Slap in the Face.

    So all i'm saying GIVE ALL SHOWS at LEAST A SEASON to Prove themselves. If they don't preform then you can take emout. But at leasdt give them that time to prove themselves. You just might have anoather Hit on your hands. And remember alkl the little shows you gave chances to like Seinfeld who then bloomed into MEGA HIT & MEGA BUCKS. Imagine if you had cancelled Seinfeld before it's Prime huh?
     
  2. Patrick Sun

    Patrick Sun Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 1999
    Messages:
    38,751
    Likes Received:
    482
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Then again, it's always easier to spend other people's money. [​IMG]
     
  3. Brian Lawrence

    Brian Lawrence Producer

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 1998
    Messages:
    3,634
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    110
    Real Name:
    Brian
    I think a whole season is asking too much, for a show that is a complete ratings turkey. But I do wish that new shows would at least have all the episodes that where completed, aired.

    Most recently SKIN has been a colossal flop for FOX, but it would of been nice if they at least showed all 8 eps before yanking it.

    For this reason I prefer see a shows that intrigue me, come on UPN, WB or a basic cable channel like FX or USA, as they don't seem to be as quick with the axe.
     
  4. Mikel_Cooperman

    Mikel_Cooperman Producer

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2001
    Messages:
    4,183
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Real Name:
    Mikey
    Because networks do this now, I think it makes people more reluctant to sample anything thats new because if they like it and it doesnt do well it's yet another show they like and lose.
    I am one of them.
    I didnt sample Boomtown for that reason and started watching Miracles and had it cancelled after only a few episodes sot it's a tricky thing.

    Thing is if networks did that say 10-15 years ago we would never have had hits that took a while to build like Seinfeld, Cheers and The X-files.
     
  5. Jonathan Carter

    Jonathan Carter Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2003
    Messages:
    535
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    well, in the networks defense, it's hard to attract advertisers to a show that does terrible as far as ratings go.
     
  6. WillG

    WillG Producer

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2003
    Messages:
    5,920
    Likes Received:
    317
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    I agree, Shows are not given much of a chance to develop an audience anymore. Didn't I hear once that the 1st episode of "Cheers" scored 2nd to last in the ratings. Just an example
     
  7. MickeS

    MickeS Producer

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2000
    Messages:
    5,058
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I think one of the problems is the "season" thinking. How about just creating a show that's interesting, even if it'll only be on for maybe 6 episodes? Then if after that people want more, do it then. And I'm not talking about ordering 8 episodes to try it out and then getting a full season's worth.

    The difference is that if I knew that the show would only be 6 episodes, I'd watch it and enjoy it. If I know it'll be 8 episodes that won't lead anywhere because it was planned for 23, then I won't watch it in the first place. Right or wrong, I think many people feel this way.

    And it doesn't just have to be dramatic miniseries, but sitcoms and other stuff too. It seems like the only time they do this kind of stuff is in the "off season", but maybe they need to see the whole year as an off season...
     
  8. Diallo B

    Diallo B Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2002
    Messages:
    1,076
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I am puzzled because networks cancel shows that are somewhat interesting like Miracles and then put on repeats. WTF???? Like the repeats are going to fare any better in the ratings.

    I like the suggestion above that new shows get at least a 6-8 episode run to see how they rank over the long haul. A 2-3 episode run is no way to judge the potential of a show as evidenced by the examples above. Fox is running so many repeats now it is ridiculous.
     
  9. Jonathan Carter

    Jonathan Carter Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2003
    Messages:
    535
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I wish Friends had done this the past 3 years. Ugh, I may be able to put together 22 or 23 good episodes from their last 3-4 seasons. The problem with that is that it probably leaves programming execs in a bind if they don't have anything else but full seasons of stuff to put on after that.
     
  10. Robert Ringwald

    Robert Ringwald Cinematographer

    Joined:
    May 16, 2001
    Messages:
    2,641
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Exactly. You have to admit that "Firefly" for example, didn't do very well in the ratings. FOX at least aired most of the filmed episodes (I still think that the reason for not airing the final 3 was a marketing idea for the DVD sets ***3 NEVER BEFORE SEEN!!! EPISODES!!!) before officially dropping the show.

    It's true. Seinfeld was nearly canned and then given a short episode (2-6) pick-up for the first season. It wasn't the rating's hit it was until like the 3rd season.

    Some shows just need time to build an audience. Sadly, some shows just aren't given long enough.
     
  11. Jason Seaver

    Jason Seaver Lead Actor

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 1997
    Messages:
    9,306
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
     
  12. Patrick Sun

    Patrick Sun Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 1999
    Messages:
    38,751
    Likes Received:
    482
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
  13. Jim Beaver

    Jim Beaver Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2003
    Messages:
    604
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I didn't like L.A. Dragnet and i wish they would havew just keep Ethan Embry & Ed O'Neil. I liked how the show was before and i thought it worked.
     
  14. Malcolm R

    Malcolm R Executive Producer

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2002
    Messages:
    13,274
    Likes Received:
    940
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Real Name:
    Malcolm


    Can anyone imagine TV history without any of these shows? They've all become icons of television, yet all would have been cancelled today.

    The networks seem to blame the transformation from a three-network field to a six-network field plus all the cable channel options for changing viewing habits. When there were only a handful of channels, the viewer might watch a show for several weeks, even if they didn't really think it was that good, for lack of any other entertainment options. This allowed the show to find its rhythm and build an audience as it improved in quality.

    Today, unless the show grabs the viewer immediately, that viewer is more likely to switch to one of the other hundreds of channels on their cable/satellite, or pop in a DVD. There are too many alternative options available to viewers for them to return to a show they didn't like based on the first 1 or 2 episodes.
     
  15. Will Cunningham

    Will Cunningham Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 1999
    Messages:
    90
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I have to admit fear of a show getting cancelled does affect my viewing habits. The best example I can think of is last night. I TiVo'ed Survivor, and watched Friends in live TV while that survivor recorded. I wanted to watch Tru Calling and was debating between watching Friends and Tru Calling live. I ended up going with Friends even though I don't care about it that much because I am so sure Tru Calling is going to be cancelled. I feel like I have to skip the first seaon of a show and see if it is still around to decide if it is worth watching.
     
  16. TheLongshot

    TheLongshot Producer

    Joined:
    May 12, 2000
    Messages:
    4,118
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The funny thing is, all of these cancellations are chasing me away from TV. This is probably the first season where there isn't a show that is a "must see" for me. My VCR is gathering dust because there isn't much that I just have to see. If I miss something, I don't care much that I did...

    Jason
     
  17. Qui-Gon John

    Qui-Gon John Producer

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2000
    Messages:
    3,527
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Don't forget the big Fox network screw they did to JOHN DOE. Oh, we're gonna pick you up for a second season, so you can do a cliff-hanger Season Finale. After last episode airs, sorry, no second season. [​IMG]
     
  18. MikeAlletto

    MikeAlletto Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2000
    Messages:
    2,369
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Another thing they do with shows is screw up their scheduling. They'll put a show on a certain day and it doesn't do well so they move it to a different day at the last minute and hardly advertise that they've moved it. The show gets even worse ratings and then they wonder why moving it to a new date didn't work. Also networks should learn that they can't schedule brand new shows to compete against established shows that have been on for years. In choosing my recordings I'll record older shows that I've always watched then if I have spaces empty I'll slide in new shows. If there is a conflict its very rare that a new show will get priority in recording for me over a show that I already know. I think over analyzing their scheduling and moving stuff around kills shows more than the show not getting any viewers.
     
  19. TheLongshot

    TheLongshot Producer

    Joined:
    May 12, 2000
    Messages:
    4,118
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I also hate when multiple networks compete for the same demographic at the same time slot. I mean, is it really best practices for Smallville and Enterprise to be in the same time slot?

    Jason
     
  20. Patrick Sun

    Patrick Sun Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 1999
    Messages:
    38,751
    Likes Received:
    482
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Do they really share the same demographic? I tend to see Smallville with a younger demographic, and Enterprise having an aging and diminishing demographic in terms of viewership.
     

Share This Page