Postmortem thoughts on Star-crossed's cancellation and other CW programming decisions
A couple of people asked me about how I feel in regards to The CW cancelling Star-crossed. As with any TV programming topic I have a complex opinion about it and I tried to answer this with tweets and just couldn’t. But then I remembered I have a blog, precisely to post all my crazy ramblings on TV!
Let’s start by talking a little bit about “bias”.
People call my blogposts biased all the time, which I never really get. This is
an “opinion” blog, I am not a journalist and I don’t claim to be “reporting
without bias”. I will say one thing, I hate when people say “X show is so much
better than Y, that’s why I’ve never seen an episode of Y”. It is impossible to
compare two things unless you are equally familiar with both! So one thing I
promise, I NEVER write comparisons about two TV shows unless I have seen every
single episode of both and only then I write my opinion. An opinion which is probably
“biased” by my personal tastes, preferences, experiences and personality in
general. But that is what I do, write my opinion and I don’t think it is the
law or universal, just mine.
That’s why I MUST start by saying I have never
watched an episode of Star-crossed. So
my personal feelings on the subject are completely worthless. Therefore I’ll
stick to explaining my opinion from a business point of view.
Some shows must die: BatB vs. Star-crossed
 |
| Beauty and the Beast |
Did they make the right choice?
They both SUCKED in the ratings: Beauty and the Beast had a 0.3 average Star-crossed had a 0.32 average [less
episodes, slightly less competitive time-slot]. The difference is insignificant
from a mathematical point of view, so it means nothing. SC didn’t have high enough ratings to give it an advantage over the
other CBS shows. BatB had a couple of
things that gave it an edge. 1) It already has 44 episodes. Syndication deals,
international sales, online sales and all those money making deals are agreed
upon a “per-episode fee”. So more eps=more money. Star-crossed only had 13 eps so far. 2) Beauty and the Beast does extremely well internationally. It is a
hit in many countries and it has a recognizable brand that is easy to market. Finally
3) BatB has a cult-following. I think
Star-crossed had cult hit potential.
I really can’t comment on the strength of its fandom because I wasn’t a part of
it, but for what I’ve seen the fans are very passionate about it. However,
fandoms grow with time and Star-crossed just
didn’t have the time to reach all of its potential viewers [and wasn’t airing
in that many countries yet]. I don’t know if there were any fan campaigns for SC. I know BatB fans did everything from sending cake to M-Ped to raising
$15,000 for the charity Austin Basis supports. I don’t think fan campaigns are
solely responsible for saving a show and TV reporters looove to say fan
campaigns are useless but I don’t think they are. I think they have an impact
on the programmers, even if it is just something on the back of their minds.
They certainly don’t hurt as part of the larger picture.
As for The Tomorrow People, Mark Pedowitz stated the following: "We have situations where shows like Beauty and the Beast have created upside potential... it's a fan favorite, it has a great international interest (...) The Tomorrow People was a great show... it just didn't have the same level of social engagement or digital side that Beauty and the Beast gets"
From that statement I get 1) Digital and social media are starting to matter 2) International dollars can make a difference. Mark's statement [which I read after writing this post] is pretty much in line with everything I've been saying. However, I think The Tomorrow People had to take it with The 100 rather than BatB due to the whole ownership thing (WB shows). Unlike Star-crossed I did watch The Tomorrow People and I quite liked it. But some shows had to go so I wasn't hoping for a renewal even though I liked it.
Read my review of "The Tomorrow" People HERE
Most promising new shows of 2013-14 season
Was it fair?
| The 100 |
It’s never
fair! The way TV works is completely unfair. The fate of so many shows is
decided by a handful of people and I get annoyed every year because shows don’t
get the chance to find their audience. In an ideal world shows would never get
cancelled before they get at least 2 seasons and creatively strong shows would
be kept on the air until they find the audience they deserve!
I was asked if I thought The CW mishandled Star-crossed and I think in a way they
did. I don’t think marketing was the best [that is a common concern with CW shows] and it seems like The CW is
always plotting to cancel the midseason shows before they even premiere! I
think it was a surprise to EVERYONE that The 100 turned out to be a hit. And I think it was an accidental hit. It
probably just caught the zeitgeist of the “teenagers surviving in the wild” trend. I believe The 100 is one of those shows that just premiered at the right
time, just when that Hunger Games thing
is “in”; which is exactly what happened with the post-Twilight TVD. If The 100 had premiered any other time, it probably would have
failed. Or maybe people saw Henry Ian Cusick and what looked like an island and
thought Lost? I really don’t know.
Read my review of "The 100" HERE
You may also want to read "The Battle of the abs, when expectations and reality don't meet"
Meanwhile Star-crossed
was getting that “Roswell” inevitable comparison and that is just too
outdated of a reference. It would be like someone pitching a Dawson’s Creek remake to teenagers of
today… it wouldn’t mean anything to them.
So yeah, in a way it is likely Star-crossed was doomed since the
beginning or that the “odds were never in their favor” [Hunger Games pun
intended].
Read my review of "The 100" HERE
You may also want to read "The Battle of the abs, when expectations and reality don't meet"
Dare I say it yes I have watched all of these shows out of the four if only 2 were an option they definitely got it right
ReplyDeleteAgree, agree & agree with all your reasoning. :-)
ReplyDeleteThank you :)
DeleteI watched both. StarCrossed is infinetly the better show. CW got it wrong. Btw, clearly you didn't watch it or you would have realized StarCrossed had infinetly more competion in its timeslot. The Voice, The Blacklist, The Olympics, How I Met Your Mother Finale and Dancing with the Stars. Really? Those who sampled the show stayed. It's rating may have been low, but it kept the ones who started unlike BATB which lost 50% of it's fanbase due to horrible writing in the second season. It has an even bigger following in the international community than BATB already. CW is probably kicking itself right about now.
ReplyDeleteNo, I have not watched. Which is why I will not make any comments about the content and about which is the better show. I think it is perfectly acceptable for people to like one and others to like the other. I would never try to impose my preference on anyone, but I can't even have a preference because I haven't watched both. I wrote this [per request] just to analyze the potential revenue generating potential and why I think they made some of their programming decisions. If you have a theory as to why Star-crossed could have generated more money in the next five years (taking account all revenue streams and international distribution) I'd love to discuss it. I really don't see a way to come up with a future cash flow projection that is high enough to justify keeping it around instead of other shows, but there might be something I am not taking into consideration. Having said that, I would have kept SC on a million times before commissioning Jane the Virgin.
Delete