Who will watch Dark Shadows?

Will you watch Dark Shadows?

  • Yes, I will watch

    Votes: 1 3.7%

  • No, i will not watch

    Votes: 17 63.0%

  • I have not decided

    Votes: 7 25.9%

  • I don't care

    Votes: 2 7.4%
  • Total voters
    27
Found this yesterday:

Ratings for both "Smallville" and "Everwood" have taken a hit this season, mirroring The WB as a whole, which is off about 9 percent in total viewers compared to this time last season.
Click to expand...

here

http://tv.zap2it.com/tveditorial/tve_main/1,1002,271|87459|1|,00.html

I found this laying around my hard drive. I think the information originated at the Warner Bros site. It seems to me I saw it there one time also.

Quoted from the "City of Angel website:ANGEL outperformed "The West Wing," "King of Queens" and "Becker" in the time period to rank #3 among persons 12-34 (2.0/5) and men 12-34 (2.1/6). The series defeated both CBS and NBC in women 12-34 (1.9/5) and female teens (1.8/5). ANGEL also posted year-to-year gains in all 12-34 and teen demos as well as among adults 18-34 (up +6%) and men 18-34 (up +27%).
Click to expand...
 
Often sponsors contract to advertising agency to buy their time from them. However, the advertisers then go out and buy spots that target the demographics the company wants to reach. They can get better rates from the networks when they buy for all their clients at one time, instead of each company having to negotiate individually with the network.

Crap network tv survives because thats where advertisers can get to a broad audience - they don't always want to target just one group. Interesting factoid: I forget who told me this - think it was an agent - advertisers pretty much made Gilmore Girls. They needed an inoffensive show to put advertising on, so they worked with the producer or the WB not exactly sure to get that show made.

But really, tv shows were created to fill in the time between advertisements, not the other way around.

🙂
 
That is interesting. Why is it though, everytime I learn something I just get more confused. I'm going to try to make sense of it, OK?

Let's assume Levin is telling the truth for the first time since the Angel cancellation was announced, and his newest excuse of "the advertisers won't buy into Angel" is true.

One thing WB likes to brag about is their younger audience. Angels ratings with that audience have been rising during Season 5. (Sidebar: thus disproving Levin's previous "no possibility of growth, and bad ratings" excuse). The 18 to 34 ratings with Everwood and Charmed are falling. (btw I'm watching Charmed out of the corner of my eye as I type this, and it is stupid tonight beyond the telling of it).

OK, so Angel 18 to 34 ratings - rising. Charmed 18 to 34 ratings - falling. WB's attraction is supposed to be it's youth audience. Levin claims the sponsors aren't interested in Angel. Why not?

I also have an interesting factoid I can't immediately link to (it's at Collinwood.net, but I don't want to read through every article to find it). Someone connected to Dark Shadows claims this version will not be directed at WB's traditional youth audience.

Could this be why Angel is sluffed off in favour of Dark Shadows?

Charmed and Everwood are falling in the ratings, and can be justifiably slashed by mid-season of next year to make way for more content directed at to an older audience. Angel would be tougher at that time because it's experiencing a rise in ratings.

Let's assume this is all part of a plan to attract an older audience to sell things to. Why can't I be angry about that? They're cancelling the best show on television to sell someone Depends and Viagra. Why shouldn't I say, "Screw you pricks. I'm not watching your Dark Shadows".
 
My answer to that is that only 2 networks made money last year. (CBS and I think its NBC).

So, I mean, this is someone's job. A lot of people's jobs actually. I can't fault people for making business decisions that affect their jobs. Executives have to cancel shows they personally love to do what's best for the business.

I think it very well could be that they want to reach a broader audience. CSI gets 10 million viewers every week. If those viewer's all watched Angel, I don't think we'd be here right now. But they don't.

So I blame the people who watch crap on tv - the stuff targeted at the lowest common denominator. Because that forces the networks to do more of the same in order to try to be profitable.

As I said before, the saving grace of network tv vs cable tv is that broad audience. That is what they provide advertisers. Without that, network tv would not exist in 5 years. If that long.
 
Perhaps, but none of that explains how cancelling the one program on the network that's rising in the ratings in a prized demographic is a good business decision.

As long as that happens people have the right to question the decision, and say wait a minute, there's more to this than a simple business decision. We're being screwed. We're not going to watch their stupid programs.

How is that going to help the network, or their sponsors.

Cancelling Angel is spite of the most active, and best supported "Save the program" campaign in television history looks a lot like a bad business practice. Trying to replace it with a similarly themed program is practically guaranteed to make fans angry. How is that going to help WB become CBS. Wanna bet there's going to be backlash, and "Shadows" bashing when the Program comes out. (BTW didn't I read somewhere that WB has ordered 5 episodes as well as the pilot?)

Maybe Angel isn't CSI Miami, but you're going to have a real hard time convincing me Dark Shadows is. Also, Jordan Levin is not Les Moonves. Levin's obvious incompetence needs to be pointed out. (I'm not the only one who thinks so. Check this out: Jordan Levin WB thread )
 
I don't really want to read that thread.

And I don't really want to argue about this any more. Here's the thing. If it was making money, they wouldn't get rid of it. The networks don't have some deep dark plan to ruin shows people like. If it was making money and they though it would make money next year, they wouldn't have cancelled it.

My real point here, is that it is not their job to put good shows on the air. It is their job to make money for the company. People get fired for not only losing money, but for not making enough. So ultimately it is not these people who are just doing their job that is at fault. It is all the other things that make them have to cancel good shows. Like people who think the Littlest Groom is entertainment.

I am just really really sick and tired of the lets kill Jerry Levin threads. Because if it was you in his place, you would do it too or lose your job. And despite what you might think, this is a business that at many levels in the hierarchy, once you are fired or if the show you work on ends, you could never work again.

Can I sit here and say "This is a great show it sucks that they cancelled it."? Yes. Can I say "I think they are wrong." Yes. But they aren't evil. They are acting in what they, with all the research and all the analysts and data at their disposal, feel is the right thing to do.

The best place for a show like Angel is HBO. Where they are able to let shows develop, where they can have really intelligent stories that don't get resolved at the end of every episode. Networks can not affords shows like that.

One more thing - Angel is very expensive to produce. So it has to do a whole lot better to be profitable. Just doing better than other shows is not enough.

Plus, Smallville is the top rated WB show, not Angel.

As for CSI and Dark Shadows - my point was not that Dark Shadows is going to be the ratings guru for the WB. My point was that you can talk about how '50,000 people signed the petition!' but in the grand scheme of things that's not a lot of people. And I still don't believe Dark Shadows is mean to replace Angel. Two different shows, it could not be picked up (and it had less of a chance back in january). If they wanted to replace Angel with DS they would have waited until they announced their Fall schedule to say that Angel was cancelled. It can just as easily be North Shore that is really replacing Angel.
 
I don't really want to debate this any more either, but you gave your closing remarks so I'm going to assume you want to afford me the same courtesy.

As far as I know I've never suggested any kind of physical harm should come to Jordan Levin. I would like to say now though, I think he should be fired. I think he's incompetent.

That's my opinion. I've had some experience at the corporate level, and I disagree with you when you suggest only motivations of pure business drive the corporate machine. Jealousy, graft, and incompetence are as prevalent in the heirarchy as they are on the street.

That also is my opinion, and I'm hoping I have a right to it. I stand by my theory Jordan Levin's actions do not appear motivated by reasons of pure business. I continue to believe Dark Shadows was used as a pressure technique from Levin. Joss wouldn't play, and Levin cancelled his show.

That's my theory. I continue to believe it's as good as the "coporate leaders only act for the greater good of the company, never make mistakes, and are therefore exempt from any criticism" theory,

Jordan Levin cancelled Angel in spite of growing popularity, and comparatively low production costs. Stupidity may very well be Levin's right as CEO of a failing company, but I'm not watching Dark Shadows, and that's my right as a viewer.
 
That's a good point. And a valid one 🙂 My problem is only when people simply say people are wrong / evil / should be fired solely because they cancelled a show that they liked.
 
I don't think I will if the WB picks it up. I am use to the 60's version of Dark Shadows. Everything about that show was perfect! The cast, the stories, and the writing. I hope if this remake is picked up it wont make Dark Shadows as a joke. Some remakes tend to make the original look bad.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom