firehawk12
Subete no aware
Talking Thrones with Bill.
2015-16 TV Cancellations: The Beast, having been fed, asks waiter for his bill.
- Thread starter Sober
- Start date
- Status
Stumpokapow
listen to the mad man
I never imagined a reality where HBO would think it to be prudent to be more like AMC.
I believe I saw a headline saying Orphan Black is doing one too. Maybe it's a web thing, however.
It's the evolution of those little soap opera digests that are sold in grocery store checkout lines. Official show propaganda with additional advertising opportunities.
RatskyWatsky
Hunky Nostradamus
The AMC talk shows exist to soak up piles of ad-dollars for next to nothing. HBO's excuse is...
Agenda #1: Make an after show talk show.
Agenda #2: Make a zombie show.
Agenda #3: Make quality dramas.
hbo tryna reverse engineer amc's success
firehawk12
Subete no aware
I'm waiting for someone to make a recap show about what's said on these recap shows and put it on some mobile exclusive platform.
It is intended to be the major draw to their "new" service, so they might be willing to spend the money required. It will première on CBS before moving to their digital platform, no word if that just means if the entire run will air on CBS or just an episode or two.
Tbh, I don't get why they're doing it in this manner. They have one service for CBS, one for Showtime, another one possibly coming for CW. Consolidate your online platforms motherfuckers, you're almost worse than Sony.
While you're at it, buy Starz and merge them with Showtime. It makes a surprising amount of sense from a business viewpoint (expanded film library and Starz originals, Starz is looking to get sold anyway and since the Lionsgate deal went bust they're not awfully expensive) and will make your new consolidated online platform more attractive. But more importantly give the entity a new name+logo so we can get rid of one of he ugliest logos (Showtime) and one of the worst names (Starz) in the industry.
firehawk12
Subete no aware
You know if they consolidated, someone would complain that they only want Showtime shows and shouldn't have to pay for CW shows.
Link
The Autumn Wind
Talk It!
dead souls
Member
There are television fans who don't love both Showtime and The CW?
What's wrong with them?
firehawk12
Subete no aware
The twist is everyone has to talk in drag.
TheAbsolution
Member
Why do you still somehow remember that show?
Yes, as there are people complaining about Adam Sandler on Netflix. But the important thing is whereas they are complaining, they are also subscribing. And there just isn't much sense in luring the geeky crowd in with Star Trek if what you're offering them in terms of a show library is 50 shades of NCIS. I just don't get what they think they're doing.
The entire point is that CBS should stop treating online as an extension of their traditional linear offerings/brands. And Star Trek is the opportunity to do so.
RatskyWatsky
Hunky Nostradamus
Sounds like something perfect for SeeSo.
You don't forget perfection.
firehawk12
Subete no aware
Well, to be fair, I don't even know who is supposed to be a Star Trek fan now given how the franchise is so old and irrelevant. Maybe the people who would pay for Star Trek IS the NCIS: New Orleans crowd.
Then someone needs to launch a website writing recaps of tv talk show recaps of recaps.
Then someone needs to start a website talking about how long until the recap-recap show is going to last before it's cancelled.
RatskyWatsky
Hunky Nostradamus
hope they do one for The Leftovers too.
RatskyWatsky
Hunky Nostradamus
Personally I can't wait for the Ballers recap show~
"What will happen next week on Ballers? Vote now in our poll! (Your responses may be read live on air!)
A. The Rock aimlessly drives around Miami in a sports car.
B. The Rock wears a fancy suit to an off-the-chain party and then bangs a hawt model.
C. The Rock does coke.
D. The Rock douchebros out with Rob Corddry.
E. Denzel's son makes a rookie mistake and The Rock has to help him make amends.
Tune in next week for our guest panelists David Milch and Jack Black!"
Stumpokapow
listen to the mad man
maybe one of the 7 subscribers could step up to the plate
Stumpokapow
listen to the mad man
crazygambit
Member
It shows as private to me. Did you just out yourself as a member?
Stumpokapow
listen to the mad man
lol no that's my point it's a 5 member private subreddit
morningbus
Serious Sam is a wicked gahbidge series for chowdaheads.
In other news, Mark Pedowitz has signed a new multi-year contract to remain President of the CW.
Some interesting tidbits from that article:
Some interesting tidbits from that article:
"Arrow, The Flash and Legends Of Tomorrow.... are the networks three most-watched and highest-rated series in Live+7: The Flash (5.67 million viewers, 2.3 in 18-49), Legends of Tomorrow (4.00 million, 1.6) and Arrow (3.98 million, 1.6)."
"The Flash ranks as the No. 1 show (broadcast or cable) in the Tuesday 8 PM hour this season among adults 18-34."
"The CWs balance this season is 52% female-48% male, compared to 70% female-30% male in 2011."
"The Flash ranks as the No. 1 show (broadcast or cable) in the Tuesday 8 PM hour this season among adults 18-34."
"The CWs balance this season is 52% female-48% male, compared to 70% female-30% male in 2011."
RatskyWatsky
Hunky Nostradamus
They're going to make it into a nightly show.
OdysseusVA
Banned
The guy has performed amazingly, so it is good he comes back. I hope he keeps my favorite shows alive and adds some new ones over the coming years.
Stumpokapow
listen to the mad man
That would be so awful. Extending the show to an hour is fine (you could plausibly use the extra half-hour for interviews, which hopefully would be better than the shitty book tour crap on the Daily Show), but making it nightly would force it to cover the weekly rat race garbage that the show has thusfar avoided.
Nah, that's what Vice is for. They're fucking flooding the world with content, and will launch their daily HBO show by the end of the year.
He needs to grow a pair and cancel Supernatural already.
That makes as much sense as killing NCIS and Grey's Anatomy.
RatskyWatsky
Hunky Nostradamus
MHWilliams
Member
It's a solid show with solid ratings and a steady audience. It's literally one timeslot he doesn't have to worry about.
morningbus
Serious Sam is a wicked gahbidge series for chowdaheads.
Supernatural is a solid performer for the network, plus fans seem to be digging the latest season.
And I know they're technically a sister channel, but Supernatural makes up 1/6th of TNT's programming day, so they must be making some money off that.
KonradLaw
Member
Isn't Supermatural like their 4th biggest show, after Flash. LoT and Arrow? It's not going anywhere. Especially since it's got pretty small regular cast, so it's probabaly cheap to make.
The franchise which in the last six years has had two multi-multi million blockbusters and a third on the way is irrelevant???????Well, to be fair, I don't even know who is supposed to be a Star Trek fan now given how the franchise is so old and irrelevant. Maybe the people who would pay for Star Trek IS the NCIS: New Orleans crowd.
Hate. You.
It's the bad stripper name of channels.
Grizzlyjin
Supersonic, idiotic, disconnecting, not respecting, who would really ever wanna go and top that
I had forgotten how female heavy The CW used to be. One Tree Hill, Gossip Girl, Melrose Place revival, 90210 revival, etc. Then they snagged the males with the superhero shows.
firehawk12
Subete no aware
A moderately successful reboot that's nearing a decade old, a second movie that is perhaps as reviled as Batman v Superman, and a third film where they had to add in a new character after principle photography ended (which I'm sure is a sign that the movie is GREAT). It's a nerd franchise that's probably less relevant than Doctor Who these days, buoyed only by Big Bang Theory reference jokes and the like.
Hell, I bet you anything that Scott Bakula is known more for NCIS than Enterprise - and that's the most recent Star Trek series that young people might have seen as they were growing up.
(Then there's the question of modern TV reboots just fizzling out... do 90210 and Dallas even exist anymore?)
KonradLaw
Member
Hey..let's not go overboard with that Doctor Who comparisions. That's the very definition of irrelevant IP that only the most hardcore of hardcore people care about.
Anyway, ST should do good. The movies did decently and there's still very big recognizability. It's second only to Star Wars in it's genre and it can get similiar (altough of course smaller) reneissance if done correctly. The brand alone will make huge numbers of people tune in for premiere. Up from there it's up to showrunners to keep that audience returning.
I'm sure there are way more Medici shows. Da Vinci's Demons about Da Vinci and the Medici, Reign about Catherine De Medici, the children television show Leonardo, ...
Dallas managed three seasons. If Larry Hagman hadn't died, it could have done more. 90210 did five years. Girl Meets World, Fuller House also perform well. You can also count Scream and the likes if you think about reboots on movies.
It's not "nearing a decade old". It's, very nearly, six years old. Six.
It's not "moderately" successful. It's plain successful.
It's not "as reviled" as BvS (which is a bit too recent to asses right now I'd say) by any publicly available metric (e.g. user scores and reviews).
Reshoots, even those adding a character, are not an accurate indication of quality.
My argument isn't about exactly how popular the franchise is. It's that calling it irrelevant is hyperbolic at best. If Star Trek Beyond crashes and burns, then I will concede this point, but I just do not agree that it is irrelevant.
I'd even argue he is more known for Quantum Leap than Enterprise.
Of course he is more known for currently being in one of the biggest franchises on TV than being in a show which is more than a decade old, and isn't the most popular entry in it's franchise. But then again, I don't see the relevance of one actor's notability when I'm talking about how Star Trek isn't "irrelevant". Is Bakula in the films? No. Is he in one of the franchises most notable entries? No. Is he already associated heavily with a particular role? Yes.
I do not get what you're going for. Should I counter by asking which roles you think William Shatner or Patrick Stewart are most known for? It's not a good argument.
What does 90210 have to do with anything? What are you arguing about? It ran for five years. Five. That's not fizzling out. It has been cancelled for nearly three years. Just, what?
My argument is this; the Trek brand still carries weight. It is mostly popular amongst an audience which I think do not overlap with the audience of most CBS shows. I do believe that the audience which cares about Trek are more interested in properties that are made by Showtime or the CW, hence why I feel that the attempt to lure people into CBC-all-access is going to fail unless CBS consolidate their online platforms.
firehawk12
Subete no aware
I feel like there's some measure of desperation when they are suing fan films into oblivion though. Like there's obviously a fanbase, particularly if there are people willing to pay for fan films/episodes to be made. What it lacks in numbers it makes up for in dedication. It's no way close to being second to Star Wars though. I mean if GAF is a subsection of general nerd culture, just look at the fact that people can find ways to talk about The Walking Dead and compare that to the generally slow Star Trek threads that pop up.
90210 went for 5 years? Jesus. The critics I listened to must have just stopped caring, because other than the premiere I never heard anyone really mention it again.
Girl Meets World I don't really count because it's clearly aimed at kids with an "entrance" for old people who like to relive their youth. But I suppose Fuller House is proof that anything can be brought back from the dead.
(I'd almost want CBS to pay Patrick Stewart a lot of money to star in the new show as Uncle Picard)
firehawk12
Subete no aware
Well, my argument is that Star Trek is at best a nebulous brand that doesn't really mean anything to anyone today. People remember the whales, Khan, and the triumvirate of the original series. The people who do care about Trek are probably mostly older people - the type of people who gave Tim Russ half a million dollars to make a fan film starring himself - and the very same people that might find the CBS catalog appealing because of their age.
And maybe I'm underestimating people in their 20s, or simply too old and out of touch, but I just think that the people who care about the Berlanti DC shows or shows like the 100 and Vampire Diaries probably don't care about Star Trek. And if they try to make Star Trek relevant to that crowd by having a 20-something cast of handsome actors playing characters with various relationship woes, it's going to immediately alienate the 30-50 somethings who spent hundreds of dollars buying TNG on Bluray.
I mean, would it make sense to have a service that appeals to as many people as possible by having a broad catalog? Of course it would. But I don't think you can just write off the people who might be interested in a CBS streaming service either. Because I honestly don't know what it means to be a "core" Star Trek fan these days.
Either way, who gives a shit about another show like that? Why? There are so many options, why this? Who looks at this and thinks "Wow, that sounds interesting. I have to watch that"?
If they have to do this, go full bullshit and make it fictional history. Not just minor fictional history, but stuff like 'Italy conquers Europe' .
- Status