A small conspiracy theory
POSTED BY: Sickdude
UPDATED: Thursday, April 21, 2005 05:02
VIEWED: 5356
PAGE 1 of 3
While reading Finding Serenity and some of the threads recently, a thought occured to me. Thought I might trot it on out there, and see if anyone has comments.
As we are all painfully aware of, Fox has certainly cancelled its fair share of good shows. Much more than any other network. Firefly, Wonderfalls, Tru Calling, John Doe, Greg the Bunny, Andy Richter Controls the Universe, etc. The list goes on and on (and on). Almost all of these were quite original, out-of the-box shows with respected talent working on them. Also many were cancelled after just a few episodes, hardly any time to give them a chance.
So, here's my theory: What if Fox is buying them and then cancelling them just to keep other networks from getting them. Similarly, maybe they're cancelling them a few episodes in to tie up the talent (e.g. keeping Joss from doing something for WB that whole season).
Take Wonderfalls. A whole lot of critical acclaim, and only four episodes aired. Further, due to changes and preemptions, no two aired at the same time. Definately not someone sane would due to a promising show. Or Tru Calling, where they order a second season and then cancel it months later after six episodes are in the can but none of those new ones have aired.
While this may not work for shows that got a full season (John Doe), but it seems to hold true the more revolutionary or out-of-the-box the show was.
Anyway, just thought I'd brighten everyone's day. As always, apologies if this has already been discussed on another thread.
"Don't say 'ka' until you've tried it." Daniel Jackson
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Actually a pretty interesting theory...but I still stand by the old reliable "never attribute to malice that which can be reasonably explained by stupidity"
Jayne, your mouth is talkin. Might want to look into that.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Shiny:
Actually a pretty interesting theory...but I still stand by the old reliable "never attribute to malice that which can be reasonably explained by stupidity"
Excellent point! As fun as it is to weave conspiracy theories, I think this is the parsimonious bottom-line answer to most conspiracy ideas.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I think the advent of DVD box sets has something to do with it as well. If the show doesn't get steller ratings out of the gate, just cancel it and sell the show on DVD... and don't forget, you can get all the un-aired episodes, too! Buy 'em quick, they're going fast!
Fox has no incentive to back a show. If it is a genre show, they know they'll make money with the DVDs, with very little risk to the bottom line. Show's a hit, great! In rolls the ad revenue. Show flops! So what, pump out the DVDs & watch the fans buy them up!
Jerks.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Sickdude:
Or Tru Calling, where they order a second season and then cancel it months later after six episodes are in the can but none of those new ones have aired.
Actually, they finally decided to air those, Thursdays at 9/8 central, after the OC. And I must say, there is HUUUUUUUUGE improvement over season 1.
You bring up an interesting idea. Still doesn't make sense, though - if they were worried that another network might get the talent, then they think that that talent would draw ratings. If Fox thought they'd draw ratings for NBC, then why would Fox kill them and keep them from drawing those ratings for Fox itself?
I mock you with my monkey pants.
Oh, yeah - check out my rock band: http://www.readyempire.com/index.php?option=com_artistdirectory&task=s
howCD&id=1
Click on "Play Entire CD"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I suppose it's possible, but it seems a little farfetched.
My own opinion is that what we're seeing is a triumph of marketing over content. What I mean by that is that the networks have convinced themselves that it's not what you produce, but how well it can be marketed that makes the difference. You can produce a pile of crap, but if the concept can be made to seem appealing in a fifteen second ad, they'll run with it, confident that enough people will show up and sit through it.
It's going on in movies too. If a movie isn't a hit on the opening weekend, before any reasonable assessment of its entertainment value, most companies will pull the promotional plug and push it off to DVD-land. The long and short of it is that Firefly didn't fit Fox's notion of something they could be marketed in the quick, flashy way that they think works.
It's all about instant gratification and short term profits.
SergeantX
"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
It's an interesting theory, but the industry doesn't really work that way. Unfortunately, not much value is placed by the networks in a "raw idea" or concept--certainly not enough to warrant keeping it from the other networks. and even if the odd concept came along that was "too good to let the other networks get" and yet "not good enough to develop ourselves", the networks would simply option it and sit on it--not develop a pilot, then a second pilot, then a short-lived series. The sad truth (and I say this as a working tv writer myself) is that ideas are a dime a dozen (granted most are bad, few are great) and the network execs with rare exceptions are unable to tell the difference.
The point at which your theory (and it's a good one) would really make sense would be in the case of developed properties. While it might not be the most brilliant or financially sound conspiracy theory, it's more likely that a network might develop a property--that is, bring a raw idea to a full-fledged series, and then cancel it and sit back and collect royalties as it goes on to draw revenues from books, games, movies, etc., finally to come full circle and be reinstituted as a second series with much more backing behind it.
(^Now don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that this is the case, or even a financially sound business model, but in the realm of "conspiracy theories, it's a more likely one...)
Another possibility, which is more in tune with your original theory, is that show which are developed and produced by PROVEN HEAVYWEIGHTS in the industry (Ron Howard = Arrested Development, Joss Whedon = Buffy, Angel, Firefly) would be scooped up to keep them from other networks. But still, it wouldn't make sense for the networks to cancel them unless they honestly thught that they could make more from "back-end" (books, games, etc.) royalties, movies, syndication, etc...
Chief Editor, AFM
www.apocalypsefiction.com
Writer/Producer, The NUKE Brothers
www.nukebrothers.com
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Sardonica:
and even if the odd concept came along that was "too good to let the other networks get" and yet "not good enough to develop ourselves", the networks would simply option it and sit on it
Yeah, good point. I'm not saying I believe this to be the case, just something to think about. You know, trying to give Fox execs credit. As my wife points out, Fox execs ARE concentrated evil. Thanks, all, for the comments.
Quote:
Chief Editor, AFM
That wouldn't be Air Forces Monthly, my favorite magazine, would it?
"Don't say 'ka' until you've tried it." Daniel Jackson
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
^Nope. It's "Apocalypse Fiction Magazine." www.apocalypsefiction.com
Chief Editor, AFM
www.apocalypsefiction.com
Writer/Producer, The NUKE Brothers
www.nukebrothers.com
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Shiny:
Actually a pretty interesting theory...but I still stand by the old reliable "never attribute to malice that which can be reasonably explained by stupidity"
Can I use that?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME