• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

Hot In Cleveland

T

The Voice of Reason

Only three episodes left for this season! WTF! The show just made its debut.

What ever happened to the days when a TV program aired in September and ran until March, and then there were reruns of the program during the summer months?

This six (6) episode season, (or less) then going on hiatus for several months, is ridiculous.

Anyone else agree?
 
They will be back. My guess is only 6 shows were ordered because they weren't sure the show would work.

Don't worry, TV Land will reurn those 6 shoes about 88 times before the new ones begin.
 
"What happened?" Cable's model is generally different. Short flights--8,10,12 episodes or thereabouts (often on the lower end the first time out to minimize potential costs in the event it doesn't catch on), generally in a row without repeats (those airing in slots outside of the "primary" run notwithstanding). And considering it works for many cable series, it's apparently a good way to run the business.
 
imhomerjay said:
"What happened?" Cable's model is generally different. Short flights--8,10,12 episodes or thereabouts (often on the lower end the first time out to minimize potential costs in the event it doesn't catch on), generally in a row without repeats (those airing in slots outside of the "primary" run notwithstanding). And considering it works for many cable series, it's apparently a good way to run the business.
Click to expand...

Well I think this model you speak of stinks. One gets interested in a show (Sons of Anarchy is the perfect example) and then has to wait several months before the program returns. Then the first episode is spent refreshing the audience as to what happened previously.

TV shows don't catch on if you don't provide the viewing audience with enough of them. To me this is poor programming at its finest.
 
Obviously not everyone is going to like it, and some will prefer the short bursts as opposed to "September through May," which ends up being a couple of episodes in a row, then reruns or specials, then a few more in a row, etc. Can't please everyone.

That said, the big numbers for shows like (to pick some recent "returnees") like The Closer or Royal Pains indicate that those shows' viewers do accept that kind of programming approach. They're voting in large numbers with their remotes--if and when that approach stops working, something else will evolve to take its place.
 
The Voice of Reason said:
This six (6) episode season, (or less) then going on hiatus for several months, is ridiculous.
Click to expand...

WRONG! When the final episode of this season airs on August 18th it will be the 10th episode. Season 2 will begin in January and will have 20 episodes.

gregg75 said:
Don't worry, TV Land will reurn those 6 shoes about 88 times before the new ones begin.
Click to expand...

It's 10 episodes. And TVLAND already airs them a million times. I've noticed all TVLAND originals air new episodes on Wednesday and are repeated several times a day 7 days a week.
 
Six episodes is the gold standard for some shows in England. Case in point: "The Young Ones," one of my favorite sitcoms of all time, had but a total of one twelve episodes, six in 1982, and another half-dozen in 1984. I had learned around the time I got into the show that there were other series in that country with similar orders.

As Vyvyan would say, "Oi!"
 
DToTheJ said:
Six episodes is the gold standard for some shows in England. Case in point: "The Young Ones," one of my favorite sitcoms of all time, had but a total of one twelve episodes, six in 1982, and another half-dozen in 1984. I had learned around the time I got into the show that there were other series in that country with similar orders.

As Vyvyan would say, "Oi!"
Click to expand...

Joining Police Squad amongst the most memorable TV sitcoms with fewer than 13 episodes.
 
DToTheJ said:
Six episodes is the gold standard for some shows in England. Case in point: "The Young Ones," one of my favorite sitcoms of all time, had but a total of one twelve episodes, six in 1982, and another half-dozen in 1984. I had learned around the time I got into the show that there were other series in that country with similar orders.

As Vyvyan would say, "Oi!"
Click to expand...

Fawlty Towers would be another example......and pure genuis even to this day!
 
kms575 said:
DToTheJ said:
Six episodes is the gold standard for some shows in England. Case in point: "The Young Ones," one of my favorite sitcoms of all time, had but a total of one twelve episodes, six in 1982, and another half-dozen in 1984. I had learned around the time I got into the show that there were other series in that country with similar orders.

As Vyvyan would say, "Oi!"
Click to expand...

Fawlty Towers would be another example......and pure genuis even to this day!
Click to expand...


They do have rats in Spain, don't they, Manuel? Or did Franco have them all shot? :D
 
As mentioned, 6 episodes for a season (series) is very common in the UK, Series 4 of "The I.T. Crowd" just finished a few weeks ago and then something of an Adult Puppet show called "Mongrels" was also a 6 episode series as well. Only big shows like Doctor Who or Britain's Got Talent seem to have the power for longer series. I don't think it was always this way as when I did some reading about crassic British TV, not unlike here in the states, some shows actually made 36 episodes in a series in a year.
 
I've noticed that the shows seem to be getting worse instead of better. They are going to
need some ax murderers or Jehova's witnesses to keep my interest.

I suggest they bring in more whacky townfolks and neighbors (expand the cast like the
Simpsons) to keep it fresh.
 
I will put it plainly cable series are killing themselves, creating a slow death. People are about to the point of frustration that soon they will give up on watching new shows altogether since in just a little while they will be gone again right after they get started good watching them. This subject as come up with many many of my friends in the recent months and most agree that with many other things to do other than watching TV that have to be done just to live that they often don't have time to catch the few episodes that cable offers before it's gone again and they don't ever build any interest in the shows since all they catch is one or two episodes then can't find it. This will lead to the slow death of cable shows unless they change the way they do things.
 
Gatekeeper007 said:
I will put it plainly cable series are killing themselves, creating a slow death. People are about to the point of frustration that soon they will give up on watching new shows altogether since in just a little while they will be gone again right after they get started good watching them. This subject as come up with many many of my friends in the recent months and most agree that with many other things to do other than watching TV that have to be done just to live that they often don't have time to catch the few episodes that cable offers before it's gone again and they don't ever build any interest in the shows since all they catch is one or two episodes then can't find it. This will lead to the slow death of cable shows unless they change the way they do things.
Click to expand...

Yeah, because the fact they keep drawing in millions of people is clearly on the path of a slow death. Boy those shows like Royal Pains or The Closer or Always Sunny in Philadelphia sure are doing poorly.

::)
 
I just saw the episode with Joe Jonas playing Valarie's son.

That guy is HORRIBLE when it comes to acting. OK he is a handsome guy but he sounded like he was reading from a cue card and he was reading it in monotone.

He had absolutely no chemistry with anyone on the set, which is probably why he was supposed to be estranged from his mother.

I never heard him sing, but that kid needs some acting lessons and fast.

Outside of him the episode was amusing.

Jane Leeves is absolutely great in her role as the "loser" of the group. It's nice to see her playing such a different type of role from her "Fraiser" and "Throb" and the like.
 
imhomerjay said:
Gatekeeper007 said:
I will put it plainly cable series are killing themselves, creating a slow death. People are about to the point of frustration that soon they will give up on watching new shows altogether since in just a little while they will be gone again right after they get started good watching them. This subject as come up with many many of my friends in the recent months and most agree that with many other things to do other than watching TV that have to be done just to live that they often don't have time to catch the few episodes that cable offers before it's gone again and they don't ever build any interest in the shows since all they catch is one or two episodes then can't find it. This will lead to the slow death of cable shows unless they change the way they do things.
Click to expand...

Yeah, because the fact they keep drawing in millions of people is clearly on the path of a slow death. Boy those shows like Royal Pains or The Closer or Always Sunny in Philadelphia sure are doing poorly.

::)
Click to expand...

I agree. Look - I'm not thrilled when I get attached to a cable show, and it disappears for months after only 6 or 8 episodes - but that's the way it is. Look on the bright side - the viewer is getting more choices than ever before. Also, it's typically true that the quality is higher when the writers and producers don't have to churn out so many episodes. And if you have a DVR or On Demand, you shouldn't have to miss episodes.
 
Ditto--and for many people, it may be more convenient to only have to devote 8, 10 or 12 weeks to a show at a pop, without figuring out when the reruns (or other special programs) keep them from seeing a new episode.
 
Gatekeeper007 said:
I will put it plainly cable series are killing themselves, creating a slow death. People are about to the point of frustration that soon they will give up on watching new shows altogether since in just a little while they will be gone again right after they get started good watching them. This subject as come up with many many of my friends in the recent months and most agree that with many other things to do other than watching TV that have to be done just to live that they often don't have time to catch the few episodes that cable offers before it's gone again and they don't ever build any interest in the shows since all they catch is one or two episodes then can't find it. This will lead to the slow death of cable shows unless they change the way they do things.
Click to expand...

You forgot to mention that the first episode of the new season is devoted to remind people what happened the previous season.
At one time a TV series started in September and ran all the way through March. Now it's 10 episodes, then a hiatus for several months or longer.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom