What will be the NEXT Casualty of the Fall 2012 Season? - Page 3

My vote is either for The Mob Doctor or Last Resort.

I'm currently still watching Last Resort, so I hope it's not that, but it's looking iffy...

No, to both your suggestions. I like both shows and want them to hang around.

I got last resort and revolution recorded and haven't watched. If one gets cancelled, I guess that'll free up some space.

Too bad about animal practice. Honestly, there are worse things on tv than that monkey, and I don't even like monkies, usually.

I called dibs on the second victim.. do I get a cookie?

Both shows' days are numbered. It's a wonder The Mob Doctor is still on at all.

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2012/10/16/abc-last-resort-666-park-avenue-are-certain-to-be-canceled-but-when-will-it-happen/152948/
http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2012/10/16/fox-raising-hope-is-certain-to-be-renewed-the-syndication-gods-strike-again/152955/

Might as well post these for everyone else:
http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2012/10/16/cbs-will-vegas-be-canceled-un-canceled-like-unforgettable/152950/
http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2012/10/16/cw-90210-would-be-canceled-elsewhere-but-expect-a-short-final-season-on-the-cw/152953/
http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2012/10/16/nbc-guys-with-kids-is-a-toss-up-for-renewal-or-cancellation-but-theres-no-margin-for-more-declines/152957/

You probably wouldn't say "there are worse things on TV" if you were the monkey. Chimp actors live a pretty tough life. And it gives the impression to millions of people that these animals can be trained to make good pets. They can't, and the results are often tragic for both simian and human. My opinion, and that's all it is, is that this show's cancellation is kind of karmic. They should have known better.

I kind of like Mob Doctor and hope it sticks around. Two of the shows I looked forward to were Revolution & Last Resort and I can't get into either of them, so if they get booted it will be no big loss for me.

I'm kind of feeling that way about all the new shows.

None of them are making me go "wow, I really can't wait for the next episode". It seems like I feel that way about more shows every season.

Maybe it's because each season, more shows feel "safe". Few of them seem different, including the many attempts at creating that "quirky character that lacks social skills" every procedural has to have now. Add to that none of the shows seem to really explore any new and different storylines - or take any chances with them. They feel like mashups of other stuff.

FX and AMC seem to be the only networks that are willing or able to pull off having shows you really, really want to see.

For example, "American Horror Story" is genuinely creepy and keeps you on edge throughout. The last season really turned the way we think of a series on its head, and the new season seems like it might live up to that precedent.

On the other hand, "666 Park Avenue" feels like "The Haunted Mansion" at Disneyland. It has a few jump scares and some great effects, but there's no sense of fright. You find yourself giggling with your friends as you tumble out the exit door at the end of the ride, talking about how cool the main hall ghost effect still is. In the end, 666 feels like a 70's or 80's horror movie where people get picked off one by one because no one seems to pay any attention. It feels like a mashup between "The Shining", "The Omen" and "Burnt Offerings" - that is, if none of them were scary at all.

"Revolution" feels like a cross between movies like "Twilight" and "The Hunger Games" with shows like "Terra Nova" and "The Event" mixed in - and seems to take on the worst traits of each.

"Elementary" feels like "House" if he investigated mysteries (making the wrong deduction before settling on the correct one later), was cranky and had a drug prob.....oh, wait...

"Last Resort" seems to try hard and certainly keeps things moving, but it feels unsustainable as a series.

"Beauty and the Beast" feels like another turn at "Grimm", with fewer freaks. It could probably benefit from a little bit of "Dark Angel" (at least season one, anyway) if they're not going to keep the dynamic of the original.

"Vegas" feels like the 60's version of "The Shield" - if Vic Mackey mugged for the camera and said "ma'am" every time he took out a perp with a punch to the head. "Vegas" has the under the table payoffs and the corruption, but could use an injection of "Goodfellas". Each show, it seems like there's an offer you can refuse if you snear hard enough and say something witty while tipping your cowboy hat.

On cable, "Copper" seems to follow the same formula each week with the main character brow beating his way through an investigation with several red herrings which get sorted out by his on call pathologist, all while dealing with Annie's antics, the odd partnership of his two high society friends.

"Arrow" has promise, assuming they skew more toward "Smallville" and less toward "The Cape".

None of the new comedies seem compelling. I've been trying to like Ben and Kate, but I'm giving up on it. They seem to include the daughter less and less, who really added to the show by being the easy going, up for anything character who manages to keep everyone in check.
Edited by NetworkTV - 10/20/12 at 8:54am

Thank you, NetworkTV, for providing summaries for so many shows that I don't think I would bother watching for fifteen minutes.

I noticed that for the first time ever, no commercial network shows were nominated for Outstanding Drama Series at the Emmys this year. They were all cable shows with PBS's imported Downtown Abbey series being the only OTA nomination.

I'm giving Arrow one more episode before I give up on it. It looks like they're finally going to address one of the two things that bothered me most: How someone stranded on an island alone learned to be an expert at archery, knife throwing, and martial arts.

The other, the police detective who is more concerned with the vigilante who catches the bad guy each week than he is about the actual bad guy, has been done to death.

I think the problem is, the broadcast networks have so much more time to fill with new content, verses cable networks that can run just a few new shows multiple times in a week with plenty of syndicated fare to fill in the blanks throughout the day. That means, networks like AMC or FX only need 3 or 4 hit shows each season to draw in viewers (and not as many, to boot) verses the broadcast nets that need 2-3 unique shows nearly every night.

That quantitiy problem often creates a quality problem when you have to be careful about not filling your grid with risky shows that might flop against the other guy's safe bet.

The thing is, cable networks and broadcast networks have different types of viewers. The majority of cable channel viewers deliberately tune in to specific shows. The majority of broadcast channel viewers tune in because that's what's on the TV.

Broadcast channels thrive on lead-ins. Cable channels thrive on the suggestive sell.

It probably wouldn't hurt the networks to go for a more cable network approach, do few but better shows and repeat them for folks without DVRs. It would take a pretty bold executive to do that which as we know they don't exactly grow those anymore. Also FOX has been leading the way to do away with FCC restrictions on content so they can compete better with premium networks. As for the younger demographic, you might to as Charlie Ergen (Dish Network) about that as he said demographics show that the younger generation if they watch TV shows at all tend to watch them online. We're not living in the analog 20th century anymore.

Network prime time is just two or three hours a night just like it has been for fifty years. Something else has changed.

Here's one difference. In the 70's each network would fill an entire night with a movie. In 1976 ABC not only had a highly rated movie on Sunday but they would also air a movie on Monday after football season was over which got nearly as good ratings. Cable along with home video has greatly devalued the network movie which is now usually limited to low ratings nights like Friday and Saturday.

Some networks like CBS have chosen to rerun their own shows on Saturday, just like cable channels rerun their shows. There's another night they don't have to fill with new programs.


Networks are not even coming up with three or four hit shows each season.

They could have picked up shows like Mad Men but they passed on them, and there's no telling what other shows they turned down that never got on any network. Why is Homeland on Showtime instead of a network? Remove the rare nudity and obscenities and a network would have had a critically acclaimed show and probably the highest rated new show last season. Some edited episodes of Dexter were even aired on CBS during the writers strike.

Honestly, I think the nudity and obscenities are just proxies for something else: the fact that the cable and premium networks don't meddle. When I look at a show like Last Resort, I see a trainwreck. An absurd premise that has only been thinly supported; terrible acting besides Andre Brauer (even by some generally dependable actors, like Robert Patrick); and cliches and stereotypes coming at you a mile a minute. I doubt the show was envisioned that way, but I'm betting (and ABC certainly has a history of this) the network got its hands on it and turned it into the kind of soft serial that they were willing to take a chance on.

I cannot envision a show like Homeland on network TV. And therein lies the problem. I only watch a handful of network shows anymore, most of them are in their final season, and besides Fringe, all are comedies (The Office, 30 Rock, Community, Parks & Rec, and Modern Family).

Broadcast and pay-TV are completely different markets. As an example The Good Wife is a very well done drama. If it was on pay-TV (even better commercial less) it would be a gigantic hit. There more than likely would be less viewers but it would still be a darling. Versus being moved around in the schedule like a unwanted child with constant worry about being cancelled.

Yeah, it's really hard to fill up all those hours.

Could Mad Men keep up the high level of production and writing if it had to crank out 22eps a year? Could Breaking Bad be so intense? Even in previous seasons with 13 episodes, there were a few that felt very much like fillers.

Homeland would still be critically acclaimed if it were on ABC, but the ratings might not be enough for a network show, and it would incur the wrath of cultural warriors for portraying jihadists in any sympathetic light. Can we say boycott?

It's hard out there for network tv execs.

Still I agree the networks need to do more shows with fewer episodes.

Which of the big 3 will be the first to drop to 2 hrs of programming a night?

NBC. The ghost of 'The Jay Leno Show' is probably still walking the halls.

It's only 2-3 hours, but it's all unique, first run content. For example, even AMC only has 3 unique shows in first run at any given part of the season. That would fill one night on the broadcast networks. The broadcast networks fill up to (or even exceed in some cases) 20 hours of first run content each week.

Cable stations may program 24 hours, but of the 168 hours a week, only 3 is first run content. The rest is repeats of the first run content and syndicated stuff.
The network movies were almost always on Saturday or Sunday. Since Saturday doesn't program shows in their place anymore, the only thing that has happened is we've lost the movies for the most part. That still leaves roughly 20 hours of programming to fill the rest of the week for everyone but Fox and The CW, which go to local programming at 10PM.
Sure they are. Maybe this fall is a bit lean, but last season each network had shows that did quite well - some surprisingly so, like "Once Upon a Time", for example. That doesn't even count shows like American Idol, Survivor and Dancing With the Stars that were held over from previous seasons.

Cable may be getting a lot more glory than previous years, but the highest ratings are still on the broadcast networks.
Maybe, maybe not.

Remember, with cable, the people that are the best audience for the shows tend to tune in. The niche audience finds the niche show. The broadcast audience is meant to appeal to a much wider audience. Cable channels tend to program with similar types of shows. If you want slow burn drama, you go to AMC. If you want quirky comedies, you go to USA. If you want hard edged drama, you go to FX or TNT.

There's no guarantee there would be any significant increase in audience for show like Mad Men on broadcast. It's not like people haven't heard about the show the last few seasons, yet 90% or more of people with access to AMC don't watch the show. If the only issue with Mad Men was the smaller pool of people from cable, you'd think they'd get more of the share of that pool with such widely regarded and well known programming.

That simply isn't the case. The season 5 premiere of Mad Men pulled in 3.5 million viewers. That's not even half the numbers of a broadcast hit. There's no reason to assume they would double their numbers or more on broadcast (considering well more than half of TV viewers have cable or satellite) - which they would have to in order to stay on the air. Broadcast doesn't get nearly the carriage fees to offset the cost of lower viewership numbers that would lower advertising revenue.

Finally, Mad Men might not get as many viewers on broadcast since al lot of the smoking, drinking and racial overtones would be toned down making it a limp noodle along the likes of "Pan Am".

I doubt Homeland would really have the same feel, either.

Those shows are exactly where they belong: on cable, where they can be themselves.
Edited by NetworkTV - 10/21/12 at 12:20am

First off, there are no 10pm shows in the Central and Mountain time zones. That said, I used to watch a Canadian series that used f**k a lot and it was on at 9pm Central. Great show.

Not in this screwed up country where A-holes that don't like anything to do with sex, or real life swearing, have been ruining U.S. television for decades. If they don't like what is on, don't watch it. Just do not tell me that I can't.

For us Central/Mountain viewers, it is weird having primetime start at 8 pm and end at 11.

I've been to East and West timezones for stays of 10-13 days and it kinda sucked having Nightline be so late when I had to get up early to go to work.

The 7 to 10 hours really seem to be the best.

Oh, as for the technology to have all time zones be 8-11...

Of all the networks, Fox is the only one that could actually do it today, maybe. As for the other networks, CBS doesn't even have a Mountain feed. All stations there must capture the East feed. So, they could do it. But, no one in the Central area is equipped to do anything but take the network in pattern. Same goes for the CW.

ABC and NBC have Mountain feeds, so they could change the feed to a different hour. But, like CBS, the Central stations are only equipped to take the network in pattern.

NBC does have a separate feed for Central, but I've never really seen it used. They are at least able to have a separate Central feed if necessary.

The problem is in the logistics at the network operation centers. Without spending lots of money on equipment in order to be able to do such a thing, it isn't likely to happen.

So, ya, it is down to tradition. I like the tradition as it is.

For the most part DVRs make this irrelevant. Since 2000 I haven't worried about when a show airs and at times I'm not even aware what day it's on. I just happen to see it listed in my recordings. Quite often I start the nightly viewing with The Late Late Show. With today's DVR penetration shows air at anytime for a growing (close to majority) of viewers.


Largest 18-49 Demo Percentage Increase From DVR Viewing for Broadcast TV Shows:

Rank Programs Net 18-49 Live+SD (rating) 18-49 Live+7 (rating) Post Airdate 18-49 Rating Absolute Increase From DVR Viewing Post Airdate 18-49 Rating % Increase from DVR Viewing

1 Grimm NBC 1.6 2.8 1.2 75%
2 SUPERNATURAL CW 0.8 1.4 0.6 75%
3 REVOLUTION NBC 3.2 5.3 2.1 66%
4 Private Practice ABC 1.6 2.6 1.0 63%
5 PARENTHOOD NBC 1.6 2.6 1.0 63%
6 GLEE FOX 2.6 4.2 1.6 62%
7 FRINGE FOX 1.0 1.6 0.6 60%
8 Mentalist, THE CBS 1.6 2.5 0.9 56%
9 666 PARK AVE ABC 1.7 2.6 0.9 53%
10 CASTLE ABC 1.9 2.9 1.0 53%
11 Last Resort ABC 1.9 2.9 1.0 53%
12 30 Rock NBC 1.4 2.1 0.7 50%
13 Up All Night NBC 1.4 2.1 0.7 50%
14 Blue Bloods CBS 1.2 1.8 0.6 50%
15 OFFICE NBC 2.2 3.3 1.1 50%
16 ELEMENTARY CBS 2.5 3.7 1.2 48%
17 BONES FOX 2.1 3.1 1.0 48%
18 NEW NORMAL NBC 1.7 2.5 0.8 47%
19 New Girl FOX 2.8 4.1 1.3 46%
20 REVENGE ABC 2.6 3.8 1.2 46%
21 Hawaii Five-0 CBS 2.0 2.9 0.9 45%
22 Grey'S ANATOMY ABC 3.8 5.5 1.7 45%
23 MINDY PROJECT FOX 1.9 2.7 0.8 42%
24 Parks and Recreation NBC 1.9 2.7 0.8 42%
25 Scandal ABC 2.0 2.8 0.8 40%


http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2012/10/22/live7-dvr-ratings-revolution-again-leads-adults-18-49-ratings-and-viewership-gains-grimm-leads-percentage-gains-in-week-2/154125/
Edited by Charles R - 10/23/12 at 5:10am

Not just Monday ....
Anyone remember "Tuesday Movie of the week or Wednesday Movie of the week" ... Intros:

I haven't watched network programming in-pattern in ages. I get my shows via other means.

But, what is affected is when the local late news starts, as well as Nightline. They are affected by when primetime ends.

CBS may not have a mountain feed per-se, but they can have up to 8 feeds for HD. It used to come in handy for the NCAA tournament, now it's just the one or 2 Sundays when they have 8 NFL games.

ABC and NBC have Central feeds because GMA/Today starts at 7 CT/8 ET for Central Time Zone viewers.

I like having prime time be from 7-10. I can get to bed earlier and it's what I've come to expect*.

*That's not really an argument and ET viewers would say the same thing about 8-11, but I don't care.

Their main transponder, and the backup, have only two program, East/Central and West. Bringing up other transponders costs money. For them to go to a single transponder with 4 program feeds, they would have to convert from 4:2:2 MPEG-2 to 4:2:0 H.264 in order to have the 4 programs. That would be changing out all of the affiliate IRDs. The CW is currently a single 4:2:0 MPEG-2 program mux. They too would have to spend a lot of money, that they don't really have, on upgrading the infrastructure.

I don't know about Today, but GMA feeds the 2nd hour to the Central viewers as their first hour and the first hour is fed as the 2nd. There are only three H.264 streams on the main network ABC mux: East/Central, Mountain, Pacific.

Cable channels aren't bound by the same restrictions as the broadcast networks, because they aren't freely available over the air. Since people have to pay for cable, the idea is that if a channel shows something offensive, it's the responsibility of subscribers to cancel their subscriptions. Unfortunately, since cable channels are still beholden to advertisers, they usually end up performing self censorship so as to not lose sponsors.