BellaOnline Forums TV and Movies Prime Time TV Why do all of the shows I like get canceled?

I was posting on the Movie Mistake forum about movies like “The Blair Witch Project” and I thought of the show “The River,” which was about a woman who goes into the Amazon in search of her missing husband. Like the “Blair Witch Project,” she has footage which provides clues to the path he has taken.

I was all into this show, never missing a week and then boom one week it doesn’t record on the DVR and I find out it’s been canceled. Same thing with my “Happy Town” and “Ringer.”

Right now I am not into any shows at all. I watched “Elementary” for awhile, but it didn’t maintain my interest. “Once Upon a Time in Wonderland,” looks appealing, but I hate to get attached only to be disappointed yet again.

Leah -

It is interesting what lasts and what doesn't. Look at all the "Real Housewife" shows that keep going on and on, while shows that involve immense effort on the parts of writers and costumers and actors and such get ignored.

Maybe part of it is salaries. Maybe shows just don't make enough any more to pay those bills, with people skipping commercials. Maybe they can only afford fairly "free" reality people.

And some shows [FIREFLY] just get screwed by the networks.

Jilly -

I think it's fair to say, though, that if Firefly was pulling in a huge audience the network would have made it work. The question is why people weren't watching it in those numbers ...

Lisa, respectfully, you should look up the shenanigans that went on with Firefy's airing schedule. It never had a chance. It was shown out of order, was frequently bumped due to airing sports games instead, the pilot was entirely skipped, and two of the later episodes weren't even shown. It also had a terrible slot (Friday night). I do know something about this. ;-)

Dear Jilly -

One of my absolute favorite TV shows is Blue Bloods and that's on a Friday night.

I think a stellar show will always thrive.

Firefly never had the numbers - even at its beginning - that other shows have garnered. So again the question is why? Why do people watch some shows and shy away from others? Does it seem too much of a "mental challenge" to take on a show in a sci-fi universe, for example?

I.e. I think if they put Dancing With the Stars on a Friday night, it wouldn't be cancelled. Even if it got bumped, I think that would just rouse the troops to be even more excited for when it came back.

I guess we will just have to agree to disagree about station shenanigans. Everything else I said is valid.

Thank you for your thoughts Jilly and Lisa.

I find it hard to tolerate Reality TV with few exceptions. Let’s say over the last 20 years I regularly watched about 4 or 5 reality shows—one of them being “The Real World” when it first came out. The other had people living in a colonial village—with stockades and everything. Another was about a hip hop artist from the 80s and her friends looking for love. These were all pleasant little shows.

Then there were two others I watched that involved huge celebrities. Like everyone else I was watching and laughing and shaking my head at how terrible they were behaving. Then a few years later, the stars of both of the shows died. That’s when I swore off watching those kinds of Reality Shows, where the entertainment value is watching people self-destruct. They needed help, not cameras following them around.

Earlier this year I watched a marathon of “Dancing with the Stars” with my mother. I suffered through the first few episodes but after a while I was like—“you call *that* a cha cha?!?” I can see how people get hooked, but still I prefer my shows with actors, scripts and a little quirkiness that probably does not appeal to enough people to keep a show afloat.

Jilly -

I agree wholeheartedly that the network did not do its best to create an ideal environment for the show.

I suppose what I was sensitive to was the idea that this meant it "never" could possibly succeed .

I know many shows which had hurdles but which still thrived and succeeded due to a powerful, instant connection with a large group of fans.

I think sci-fi shows have a much harder time thriving than other types of shows, so they need a more perfect incubation environment. And Firefly in particular had quirks which meant its fan base was not going to be "most of the world".

I.e. why wasn't Serenity a blockbuster movie, when it already had a developed, loyal fan base? Compare Serenity with movies which come out completely unknown, without any fan base, and were instant blockbusters. Why didn't Serenity fall into that category when it had a head-start over those others?

I think Serenity got pigeon-holed into the "cult-movie" status, and many people don't like being associated with "cult" films. Plus, a lot of people assumed that since it was based on a TV show, that they would not have the background to understand the film, so passed it up. (Although the film is perfectly fine as a stand-alone.)

I agree that sci-fi shows have a harder time getting and staying on TV - except on the ScyFy channel. It seems that people overall like their SciFi/Fantasy in small doses, and not on a regular basis. Although that seems to be changing - especially with the paranormal shows and lately with fantasy shows.

I, too wish the majority of "reality" shows would just die (with the exception of So You Think You Can Dance, LOL!). Mainly the ones that center around people's lives. I'm busy living my own, I don't need to take on somebody else's!

This is exactly why the shows I like don't succeed, too many quirks. I'm just glad for those small shows that last a few seasons but have somewhat satisfying endings like "The 4400"

Right, I agree wholeheartedly with this. This is what I was attempting (poorly) to say earlier.

I think there are built in "hurdles" for thought-involving sci-fi shows.

Networks could pop out ten more Desperate Housewives and put them under all kinds of inane stresses and even so the shows would build up a massive following. It wouldn't matter if they were interrupted or rearranged - people would eat them up. The kinds of shows that get renewed just boggle my mind.

But when it comes to something that involves layers of meaning, an appreciation of sociology, and a knowledge of history, it's almost as if you have to do something exceptional in order to draw in a minimum fan base. Part of what's bizarre about this is that you would think people would crave this type of show and be *willing* to surmount hurdles to watch it. What's their alternative? To watch the drek that is normally on TV?

I.e. let's assume there IS that minimum volume in existence in the TV watching world. Why would they be discouraged over minor issues? Aren't they actively craving shows that meet their criteria? Are there really so many awesome shows out there that they would pass by one that wasn't on every week?

I don't even know half the time when my shows are on - I just get them off the DVR. If I adore Bones I don't care that it's on or not on - I just keep watching it. Why didn't Firefly connect with people like that? Are most peoples' minds so dulled by standard TV fare that when they hit a challenge they turned to something easier?

(And even while I mention Bones, some of their writing recently has been iffy. It's bothered me a lot).

Bob and I tried watching Once Upon A Time in Wonderland last night. I had high hopes. I ended up yelling at the TV every five minutes because of sloppy writing and poor acting. I had the same issue with Burn Notice and several other series. When something like Firefly is on, I appreciate it and DVR it and watch it. If people weren't doing that, they must have had a better alternative (in their mind). That makes me wonder what that might have been.

I think a number of people have gotten used to / trained to satisfy with lower quality writing. Maybe part is that they're so burned out by their daily life that they don't want any "effort" (intellectually) in their relaxation time.