TV thread

User avatar
Banedon
Curse You!
Posts: 66096
Joined: Wed Jun 18, 2003 9:36 pm
Location: Kidding Myself
x 4867
x 4874

Re: TV thread

Postby Banedon » Fri May 11, 2018 1:49 pm

Maybe the worst part about the Brooklyn 99 cancellation...it may be part of a plan to bring back Tim Allen's Last Man Standing...

https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/20 ... ng-revival
0 x
Image

User avatar
Sammy Sofa
Licks Butts
Posts: 76763
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 3:45 am
Location: Washington DC
x 9249
x 12381

Re: TV thread

Postby Sammy Sofa » Fri May 11, 2018 1:56 pm

Someone explain to me how re-launching LMS makes sense. Despite its ratings, it was cancelled because it was too expensive; the cast (namely Allen) were making too much and the ad revenue was not good because the audience was so old. That's not going to change simply by being on a different network (unless Allen and co. are willing to take big pay cuts). Roseanne's ratings are still good, but settled WAY down after the initial fervor of its relaunch.

I get that it technically has broader appeal than the shows that were cancelled, but if cancelling those shows is tied directly to being able to afford LMS, how is that a gain for Fox?
0 x

User avatar
CyHawk_Cub
5-Time All-Star
Posts: 6529
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 9:24 pm
x 103
x 1729

Re: TV thread

Postby CyHawk_Cub » Fri May 11, 2018 1:58 pm

I hope The Expanse does get picked up elsewhere, and that if it happens, its feel & production values aren't changed too much.

0 x

User avatar
Banedon
Curse You!
Posts: 66096
Joined: Wed Jun 18, 2003 9:36 pm
Location: Kidding Myself
x 4867
x 4874

Re: TV thread

Postby Banedon » Fri May 11, 2018 2:04 pm

Sammy Sofa wrote:Someone explain to me how re-launching LMS makes sense. Despite its ratings, it was cancelled because it was too expensive; the cast (namely Allen) were making too much and the ad revenue was not good because the audience was so old. That's not going to change simply by being on a different network (unless Allen and co. are willing to take big pay cuts). Roseanne's ratings are still good, but settled WAY down after the initial fervor of its relaunch.

I get that it technically has broader appeal than the shows that were cancelled, but if cancelling those shows is tied directly to being able to afford LMS, how is that a gain for Fox?


I don't have answers on this. Clearly it's going to have to come back in a much cheaper form, if it comes back.
0 x
Image

User avatar
Ding Dong Johnson
Crap Bag
Posts: 33772
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2005 3:42 am
Location: Durnsville
x 740
x 5228

Re: TV thread

Postby Ding Dong Johnson » Fri May 11, 2018 2:29 pm

who the horsefeathers would ever purposefully watch a Tim Allen show?
0 x
Image

User avatar
CyHawk_Cub
5-Time All-Star
Posts: 6529
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 9:24 pm
x 103
x 1729

Re: TV thread

Postby CyHawk_Cub » Fri May 11, 2018 2:33 pm

Ding Dong Johnson wrote:who the horsefeathers would ever purposefully watch a Tim Allen show?


Judging from my girlfriend's family: old, white & racist adjacent
0 x

User avatar
Sammy Sofa
Licks Butts
Posts: 76763
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 3:45 am
Location: Washington DC
x 9249
x 12381

Re: TV thread

Postby Sammy Sofa » Fri May 11, 2018 2:33 pm

Definitely not any of the fellow coke dealers he ratted out.
0 x

NonProfitCow
All-Star
Posts: 4450
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 7:15 am
x 103
x 336

Re: TV thread

Postby NonProfitCow » Fri May 11, 2018 2:35 pm

Ding Dong Johnson wrote:who the horsefeathers would ever purposefully watch a Tim Allen show?

Image

The red part.
0 x

User avatar
Transmogrified Tiger
Inner-Circle HOF
Posts: 55565
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2003 4:23 pm
Location: Greater St. Louis
x 417
x 5703

Re: TV thread

Postby Transmogrified Tiger » Fri May 11, 2018 2:49 pm

My understanding is that the appeal of LMS was in what they say, not that any of the cast were particularly beloved. If the issue is that it's too expensive, why not just make the equivalent show with cheaper actors? Do they think LMS has that much of a brand name that it'd attract way more than an ad campaign about random pilot 3000 that espouses 'traditional family values' or whatever? Is no one but Tim Allen willing to front that show?
0 x

User avatar
Sammy Sofa
Licks Butts
Posts: 76763
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 3:45 am
Location: Washington DC
x 9249
x 12381

Re: TV thread

Postby Sammy Sofa » Fri May 11, 2018 3:39 pm

Transmogrified Tiger wrote:My understanding is that the appeal of LMS was in what they say, not that any of the cast were particularly beloved. If the issue is that it's too expensive, why not just make the equivalent show with cheaper actors? Do they think LMS has that much of a brand name that it'd attract way more than an ad campaign about random pilot 3000 that espouses 'traditional family values' or whatever? Is no one but Tim Allen willing to front that show?


Yeah, the only way this makes sense is if they somehow did it on the cheap like TBS (I think?) did with those Tyler Perry and Charlie Sheen shows where they made, like, 100+ episodes at an insane pace within 2+ years for almost no money outside of paying the big name involved.
0 x

User avatar
javy knows my name
previously Beertown Cubbie
Posts: 9061
Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2007 10:46 pm
Location: Chicago
x 1344
x 553

Re: TV thread

Postby javy knows my name » Fri May 11, 2018 3:53 pm

Guys, stop trying to make last man standing happen
0 x
neely wrote:but in reality
2006 .364
2007 .351
2008 his one big year
2009 .347
2010 90 games played
2011 .323
what do you call that?

User avatar
Proven Veteran
All-Star
Posts: 2143
Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2004 6:47 pm
Location: Oakland, CA
x 805
x 176

Re: TV thread

Postby Proven Veteran » Fri May 11, 2018 4:06 pm

B99 may be coming back. Supposedly NBC and Hulu are interested.
0 x

User avatar
Ding Dong Johnson
Crap Bag
Posts: 33772
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2005 3:42 am
Location: Durnsville
x 740
x 5228

Re: TV thread

Postby Ding Dong Johnson » Fri May 11, 2018 4:09 pm

Proven Veteran wrote:B99 may be coming back. Supposedly NBC and Hulu are interested.

also heard TBS and Netflix. seems pretty likely
0 x
Image

User avatar
Sammy Sofa
Licks Butts
Posts: 76763
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 3:45 am
Location: Washington DC
x 9249
x 12381

Re: TV thread

Postby Sammy Sofa » Fri May 11, 2018 4:20 pm

NBC/Hulu seems to make the most sense since Hulu is already its subscription streaming home. Make it happen, dammit.
0 x

User avatar
Banedon
Curse You!
Posts: 66096
Joined: Wed Jun 18, 2003 9:36 pm
Location: Kidding Myself
x 4867
x 4874

Re: TV thread

Postby Banedon » Fri May 11, 2018 4:20 pm

0 x
Image

User avatar
snoodmonger
Superstar
Posts: 11922
Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2004 4:53 am
Location: LA
x 191
x 210
Contact:

Re: TV thread

Postby snoodmonger » Fri May 11, 2018 5:51 pm

Sammy Sofa wrote:Someone explain to me how re-launching LMS makes sense. Despite its ratings, it was cancelled because it was too expensive; the cast (namely Allen) were making too much and the ad revenue was not good because the audience was so old. That's not going to change simply by being on a different network (unless Allen and co. are willing to take big pay cuts). Roseanne's ratings are still good, but settled WAY down after the initial fervor of its relaunch.

I get that it technically has broader appeal than the shows that were cancelled, but if cancelling those shows is tied directly to being able to afford LMS, how is that a gain for Fox?


Networks are just super reactionary. They saw Roseanne get huge numbers, and it's a multicam with a conservative star, so everyone started tripping over their dicks to do more multicams with "red state" appeal.

It takes all of 3 seconds to figure out why Roseanne was a hit: because it was a huge hit before and thus had a built-in audience.

That said, there are also tons more variables. Twentieth Century Fox's TV arm took a bath last year, and the shows they just cancelled are extremely expensive, Last Man and Brooklyn in particular. They can save a ton of money on multicams and likely do similar same day ratings, though I doubt they'll come close in Live +3 and Live +7 (which are the metrics networks should really focus on.)
1 x

abuck1220
Hall of Fame
Posts: 21989
Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2003 12:03 am
x 1
x 168

Re: TV thread

Postby abuck1220 » Fri May 11, 2018 6:13 pm

i'm so depressed about last man on earth.
1 x

User avatar
Banedon
Curse You!
Posts: 66096
Joined: Wed Jun 18, 2003 9:36 pm
Location: Kidding Myself
x 4867
x 4874

Re: TV thread

Postby Banedon » Fri May 11, 2018 8:46 pm

Fox cancels Lucifer, and officially brings back Last Man Standing.

Fox says original cast members Nancy Travis, Jonathan Adams, Amanda Fuller, Christoph Sanders and Jordan Masterson will also return. It did not say whether the show will return in the fall or later next season, nor did it say how many episodes would be produced, although a full season of 22 installments is expected.
0 x
Image

User avatar
Proven Veteran
All-Star
Posts: 2143
Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2004 6:47 pm
Location: Oakland, CA
x 805
x 176

Re: TV thread

Postby Proven Veteran » Fri May 11, 2018 9:24 pm

snoodmonger wrote:
Sammy Sofa wrote:Someone explain to me how re-launching LMS makes sense. Despite its ratings, it was cancelled because it was too expensive; the cast (namely Allen) were making too much and the ad revenue was not good because the audience was so old. That's not going to change simply by being on a different network (unless Allen and co. are willing to take big pay cuts). Roseanne's ratings are still good, but settled WAY down after the initial fervor of its relaunch.

I get that it technically has broader appeal than the shows that were cancelled, but if cancelling those shows is tied directly to being able to afford LMS, how is that a gain for Fox?


Networks are just super reactionary. They saw Roseanne get huge numbers, and it's a multicam with a conservative star, so everyone started tripping over their dicks to do more multicams with "red state" appeal.

It takes all of 3 seconds to figure out why Roseanne was a hit: because it was a huge hit before and thus had a built-in audience.

That said, there are also tons more variables. Twentieth Century Fox's TV arm took a bath last year, and the shows they just cancelled are extremely expensive, Last Man and Brooklyn in particular. They can save a ton of money on multicams and likely do similar same day ratings, though I doubt they'll come close in Live +3 and Live +7 (which are the metrics networks should really focus on.)


Feel free to not answer, but was cost the reason you guys avoided the ax? I think your ratings were similar to the cancelled shows. I'm glad you're sticking around, btw.
0 x

User avatar
snoodmonger
Superstar
Posts: 11922
Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2004 4:53 am
Location: LA
x 191
x 210
Contact:

Re: TV thread

Postby snoodmonger » Fri May 11, 2018 9:56 pm

Proven Veteran wrote:
snoodmonger wrote:
Sammy Sofa wrote:Someone explain to me how re-launching LMS makes sense. Despite its ratings, it was cancelled because it was too expensive; the cast (namely Allen) were making too much and the ad revenue was not good because the audience was so old. That's not going to change simply by being on a different network (unless Allen and co. are willing to take big pay cuts). Roseanne's ratings are still good, but settled WAY down after the initial fervor of its relaunch.

I get that it technically has broader appeal than the shows that were cancelled, but if cancelling those shows is tied directly to being able to afford LMS, how is that a gain for Fox?


Networks are just super reactionary. They saw Roseanne get huge numbers, and it's a multicam with a conservative star, so everyone started tripping over their dicks to do more multicams with "red state" appeal.

It takes all of 3 seconds to figure out why Roseanne was a hit: because it was a huge hit before and thus had a built-in audience.

That said, there are also tons more variables. Twentieth Century Fox's TV arm took a bath last year, and the shows they just cancelled are extremely expensive, Last Man and Brooklyn in particular. They can save a ton of money on multicams and likely do similar same day ratings, though I doubt they'll come close in Live +3 and Live +7 (which are the metrics networks should really focus on.)


Feel free to not answer, but was cost the reason you guys avoided the ax? I think your ratings were similar to the cancelled shows. I'm glad you're sticking around, btw.



We have not been renewed, and I don't think we will be. Waiting to hear, which is miserable. Also, the delay has the potential to cost us other jobs. We had a great meeting on another show, but they've been advised not to offer positions to hire LA2V people because it's fate is unclear. They are also in a hurry to staff. I'd prefer LA2V come back, but I'd also hate for the wait to be what stopped me from working elsewhere.
0 x

User avatar
jersey cubs fan
Inner-Circle HOF
Posts: 58379
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 6:38 pm
Location: Hoboken squat cobbler
x 2283
x 7541

Re: TV thread

Postby jersey cubs fan » Fri May 11, 2018 10:01 pm

I hope you get renewed but if you do not then please make the rounds on all my favorite podcasts.
0 x
longhotsummer wrote:I realize now, any opposing viewpoint, will not be tolerated.

User avatar
Proven Veteran
All-Star
Posts: 2143
Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2004 6:47 pm
Location: Oakland, CA
x 805
x 176

Re: TV thread

Postby Proven Veteran » Fri May 11, 2018 10:04 pm

snoodmonger wrote:
Proven Veteran wrote:
snoodmonger wrote:
Networks are just super reactionary. They saw Roseanne get huge numbers, and it's a multicam with a conservative star, so everyone started tripping over their dicks to do more multicams with "red state" appeal.

It takes all of 3 seconds to figure out why Roseanne was a hit: because it was a huge hit before and thus had a built-in audience.

That said, there are also tons more variables. Twentieth Century Fox's TV arm took a bath last year, and the shows they just cancelled are extremely expensive, Last Man and Brooklyn in particular. They can save a ton of money on multicams and likely do similar same day ratings, though I doubt they'll come close in Live +3 and Live +7 (which are the metrics networks should really focus on.)


Feel free to not answer, but was cost the reason you guys avoided the ax? I think your ratings were similar to the cancelled shows. I'm glad you're sticking around, btw.



We have not been renewed, and I don't think we will be. Waiting to hear, which is miserable. Also, the delay has the potential to cost us other jobs. We had a great meeting on another show, but they've been advised not to offer positions to hire LA2V people because it's fate is unclear. They are also in a hurry to staff. I'd prefer LA2V come back, but I'd also hate for the wait to be what stopped me from working elsewhere.


Ahhh, that sucks. I hope you get to come back.
0 x

User avatar
Ding Dong Johnson
Crap Bag
Posts: 33772
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2005 3:42 am
Location: Durnsville
x 740
x 5228

Re: TV thread

Postby Ding Dong Johnson » Fri May 11, 2018 10:21 pm

I’ll be pissed if I get no more LA2V and last man on earth
0 x
Image

User avatar
snoodmonger
Superstar
Posts: 11922
Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2004 4:53 am
Location: LA
x 191
x 210
Contact:

Re: TV thread

Postby snoodmonger » Sat May 12, 2018 2:44 am

Proven Veteran wrote:
snoodmonger wrote:
Proven Veteran wrote:
Feel free to not answer, but was cost the reason you guys avoided the ax? I think your ratings were similar to the cancelled shows. I'm glad you're sticking around, btw.



We have not been renewed, and I don't think we will be. Waiting to hear, which is miserable. Also, the delay has the potential to cost us other jobs. We had a great meeting on another show, but they've been advised not to offer positions to hire LA2V people because its fate is unclear. They are also in a hurry to staff. I'd prefer LA2V come back, but I'd also hate for the wait to be what stopped me from working elsewhere.


Ahhh, that sucks. I hope you get to come back.


I appreciate that, guys. And to answer your initial question, if we get renewed, I think cost will be a factor. We're definitely way cheaper than those other shows. Also, I'm sure 20th Century FOX would love to keep Steve Levitan happy. I believe his deal expires soon, and they don't want to lose him to Netflix (or wherever) like they did with Ryan Murphy.
0 x

User avatar
jersey cubs fan
Inner-Circle HOF
Posts: 58379
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 6:38 pm
Location: Hoboken squat cobbler
x 2283
x 7541

Re: TV thread

Postby jersey cubs fan » Sat May 12, 2018 4:04 am

2 x
longhotsummer wrote:I realize now, any opposing viewpoint, will not be tolerated.


Return to “Social”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Proven Veteran and 8 guests