More TV-related whingeing (mostly Lucifer)

[shapinglight]

Sorry I haven't answered all your comments from the other day (not something I have to say often these days). In truth, I was/still am embarrassed by how upset I am about Lucifer being cancelled (not to mention The Expanse and Mozart in the Jungle, which I haven't said about before. Now, it only needs FX to cancel Legion (which they may or may not), and for the last three episodes of The Americans to air, to mean every show I'm currently enjoying on TV has been cancelled/come to an end, and only one of them with proper closure - assuming The Americans doesn't blow it at last knockings).



Where it comes to Lucifer, I'm embarrassed because I know it's only a TV show and doesn't matter at all in the grand scheme of things. In a few months' time - less, even - everyone involved will have moved on and the fans will turn to other shows and forget this one. But I am still upset - not because I'm naive enough to think anything but money matters in TV land, but because the bloody writers seem to have been that naive, and as a consequence have let the fans down hugely.

Okay, so Joe Henderson (co-showrunner) was saying on Twitter the other day that they must give the fans proper closure, even if it's only himself and Ildy Modrovich writing fanfic (because he must know the chances of Fox paying for a Sense8 style special to end the series properly are nil). But if he gets other work he'll probably forget about that soon enough, and it wouldn't be the same anyway, would it? The fact remains they've ended the show on a cliffhanger and I'll never forgive them for it. Idiots!

So as you can see, I'm still pretty pessimistic about the show being picked up elsewhere. The Expanse has a better chance, frankly, because it's 'critically acclaimed' (deservedly so). Lucifer is just a daft, fun show with a great cast and good writing that helps it (at times) transcend the boring procedural format Fox chose to stick it in (I suppose they wanted a replacement for Bones?). Despite the fan outpourings on Twitter, with signal boosting from the likes of Neil Gaiman and William Shatner, bless him, I think it's doomed.

Needless to say, I'd be delighted to be wrong.

I'll probably write a review of the finale at some point, but it may not be rightaway.

The only upside to this I can see is that I won't have to grit my teeth to make myself watch a Fox show again. Also, maybe I've finally learned my lesson about never watching anything until it's over for good, or is a huge GoT-type production that's never likely to be cancelled before it reaches a proper conclusion.

Comments

[yourlibrarian]

I don't think I remembered you were watching Legion. I just plowed through a bunch of episodes yesterday.

I don't think you have any reason to feel embarrassed about being upset. I was never particularly fannish about Lucifer, in fact I think Mike liked it more than me. But caring about a show's future and the quality of its storytelling and everything else is part of what being a fan is. Losing a canon early is always upsetting though it's one that's particularly common for TV fans. (Of course, for fans of bands a breakup or split from a group can be pretty monumental too -- and the wait for content can really drag on).

Your comment about it overcoming its procedural format and what the network wanted from it are particularly on point for me. I think a lot of the problems Lucifer suffered from had to do with not really going in the direction that its premise would suggest but instead making it this awkward hybrid. In fairness, I think that it did often work, the motivations behind the murders leading Lucifer to realize things about his life and connections to others. But I suspect that this effort to connect different audiences didn't happen the way they wanted it to and the network's expectations dragged down the show.

As for never watching something until it's over, well that has its pluses (for one thing, it can make it very optional whether or not one ever watches something unfinished). But I can say that even though I wasn't very fannish about Lucifer, because I knew you and others would be watching it promptly and posting about it, it made me watch it sooner and then look for your posts. There's something about responding to content in real time that I had been missing. I am, for example, happy about the new Good Place community and even though I have not been doing rewatches, I am looking forward to having a place to discuss it when the show returns which was not the case when I was just catching up on it.

I'm also going to suggest that it's possible the cliffhanger could be better for the fandom than simply tidying everything up at the end. (I'm thinking, for example, of how controversial Rowling's decision was for the coda at the end of HP). Leaving openness can result in a lot of fan productivity and action whereas putting in an ending that is too closed can kill interest off. It does kind of depend on the nature of the cliffhanger though.

[shadowkat]

I agree a lot with this post.

In particular?

I don't think you have any reason to feel embarrassed about being upset. I was never particularly fannish about Lucifer, in fact I think Mike liked it more than me. But caring about a show's future and the quality of its storytelling and everything else is part of what being a fan is. Losing a canon early is always upsetting though it's one that's particularly common for TV fans. (Of course, for fans of bands a breakup or split from a group can be pretty monumental too -- and the wait for content can really drag on).

See Sense8, Firefly, and Farscape for examples -- took forever to get new content, although we did. And it was painful.

I liked Lucifer a lot, it was actually one of the few shows I posted regularly about and watched not long after it aired. If it were up to me, a lot of other shows on Fox and elsewhere would have been cancelled instead. But alas, no power in that regard. The networks really don't care what I think. It's very upsetting.

But I suspect that this effort to connect different audiences didn't happen the way they wanted it to and the network's expectations dragged down the show.

Saw the same thing happen with Sleepy Hollow (although I gave up on that one long before it disappeared and it lasted longer than Lucifer). But it had similar issues -- do we do the mythological/metaphysical arc or the procedural? Horror fans and fantasy fans don't tend to like cop shows. And cop show fans don't tend to like horror/fantasy. There are some who overlap, but most don't. So every time they do a hybrid they run into that problem. I've no clue why Gotham is still working -- except it's not really a buddy cop show a la Bones meets supernatural fantasy series. (I don't watch it, don't like Gotham at all. So.)

I'm also going to suggest that it's possible the cliffhanger could be better for the fandom than simply tidying everything up at the end.

Good point from a fandom perspective. I've noticed the fandoms that lasted are the ones that weren't neatly wrapped up. Buffy, Angel, Firefly, Star Trek, Star Wars, etc. The ones that are too neatly wrapped up tend to lose the fandom faster. People need something to play with.

But it also depends on how the series wraps it up.

Harry Potter fandom is still going rather strong and that play, Harry Potter and The Cursed Child? That sold out on Broadway a full year in advance. Tickets are going for over $200, it's the highest priced play in Bway history. So, I don't think her coda hurt the franchise that much.

[yourlibrarian]

Saw the same thing happen with Sleepy Hollow (although I gave up on that one long before it disappeared and it lasted longer than Lucifer).

Ugh yes, I only lasted one season with it. It could have been something great but it only got more mishandled as it went along.

Horror fans and fantasy fans don't tend to like cop shows. And cop show fans don't tend to like horror/fantasy. There are some who overlap, but most don't.

Yeah, and even when they overlap I suspect they lean strongly one way or the other. I've watched some procedurals but very few, especially given how many air.

I've no clue why Gotham is still working -- except it's not really a buddy cop show a la Bones meets supernatural fantasy series.

No, on the face of it one would think that's what the show is about, but really it's a comics superhero show. There are things I've liked about it but not enough overall to stick with it. My guess is that it has a good male demo though and that's why it's continued on.

[shadowkat]

Yeah, and even when they overlap I suspect they lean strongly one way or the other. I've watched some procedurals but very few, especially given how many air.

Only one that succeeded at this was Supernatural -- which did the following: 1) two brothers that fight demons or hunt demons, not male/female romance or buddies, 2) focus on demon hunting, mysteries are intertwined with supernatural, and they work outside of the law.

The demographic wants simple. Also simple relationship dynamic, preferably plationic (can't get much more platonic than brothers) and something can identify with (parental/child, siblings).

Also on a channel that forgives lower ratings and wants 18-25 male demographic -- CW.

That's why it made it 14 yers and counting.

Male/female buddy --will they or won't they is hard sustain and hard to do well. Particularly if you want a male horror crowd. Love relationships in procedurals tend to turn off the coveted 18-35 male demographic who buy cars. The love triangles turn on the twenty-something female heterosexual demo, who they don't really care that much about -- or FOX doesn't. FOX is very geared towards the 18-35 male demo. ABC is geared towards the 25-45 female/family Demo.

No, on the face of it one would think that's what the show is about, but really it's a comics superhero show.

Actually, I'd say it's more of comic book anti-hero series, where the series protagonists are the villains. The people who adore it love the villains. The heroes of that series are the bad guys. That's why I gave up on it. I'm tired of anti-hero shows.

[yourlibrarian]

Oh yes, there's no way that SPN would have made it so long had it not been on the CW. It wouldn't even have made it out of its first season (and wouldn't that have been a cliffhanger!)

I had been surprised to hear that Wayward Daughters wasn't going to be picked up after all. There was so much positive talk about it, it seemed a done deal but maybe the network looked at getting only a fraction of SPN's audience with a spinoff and decided that wasn't worth investing in.

I came across the following today about pilots greenlit and passed on and found it pretty interesting to see the number of shows with well known people attached which fell by the wayside on the way to the fall schedule, some at a very late stage.

I was thinking of this when you mentioned anti-heroes (I agree with your take on and classification of Gotham) as one of the series mentioned at the link was a version of L.A. Confidential which could have been quite intriguing but was also likely to go that route. One of its creators was part of the Gotham team, which suggests it would be the more procedural version of that show.

Some other curiosities -- the plot of "25" looks exactly like the setup for Crazy EG, and it looks like Danny Strong has cast Vincent Kartheiser as one of the leads in his new legal drama.

[shadowkat]

A couple of things that I've learned about Hollywood and the TV industry from various friends, books, Q&A's, commentaries, and my brother who have worked in it or know people who have:

1. It's about who you know, who you have dirt on, and connections. It's a small town. And it's cliquish.

2. Focus groups and demographics. A lot of it is based on focus groups, and budget. If you cost a lot -- you have to be able to bring in the big ad dollars. What they do is set up a focus group -- they watch the television pilot, and possibly first two episodes -- if it has a rating of say, four star or above, by the focus group, it gets greenlit. Also they will often change cast and story based on suggestions by the focus group. That's what happened with the Buffy pilot. The Focus Group hated who they cast as Willow originally, so they changed that. Every network has a marketing division that employs focus groups. I googled and found television city which hires people to act as "focus groups" for CBS. These people are paid to meet in a room and discuss whether a television show is "marketable". They do it in the publishing industry as well.

3. Money counts. If the network is developing the show itself -- that often is more profitable than buying distribution rights. And marketing folks tend to be conservative -- they want shows that are proven to work. Also that are affordable. So if you have a high-profile, high budget drama, you will buy cheap ones to fill the time slot. And it helps if the show can get a foreign market as well as domestic. Although they are more interested in the domestic market -- due to ad dollars. Netflix cares more about foreign markets -- subscriber based.

4. When they develop it and put it forth for pilot season -- they show it to foreign and domestic distributors, also critics, if the critics like it -- that helps. As do focus groups. I've met professional critics who go to pilot season.
The number of failed pilots outnumber the ones picked up.

I had been surprised to hear that Wayward Daughters wasn't going to be picked up after all. There was so much positive talk about it,

I wasn't. Actually I knew it wouldn't be after I watched it. The cast lacked the charisma and chemistry of Dean, Sam and Castiel. There was no one in that cast that stood out for me. And none of them had much chemistry. In fact I had troubles remembering who was who.

They needed to grab new viewers, not Supernatural fans solely. And the cast just didn't have it. Also that episode was not well written. It had potential. But I had watched five seasons of the show, and that episode just...it was so cliche in places and just didn't grab the audience.

Spin-offs are hard. You really have to grab the audience immediately. Example? Angel - had a couple of test episodes in S3 and S2 that grabbed the audience and showed they'd watch a show with just Angel and few others. But you really have to have a "Strong" lead, who the audience adores. Blacklist tried it with the heroine's husband and failed miserably, and he had more charisma than the ladies in Wayward Sisters...

It's not just a good idea that is required, you also need good casting, chemistry, and someone to grab viewers. Often casting mixed with good writing is everything. Tom Ellis is an example of someone who has great chemistry with the screen and can sell just about anything. So too can Jensen Ankles and the guy who plays Sam. You can be an excellent actor and have no screen chemistry. OR have screen chemistry but without good writing, makeup, costume and direction, fall flat - example James Marsters in pretty much everything post Buffy/Angel.

I'm getting really good at predicting what will succeed and what will get cancelled. Although Mozart in the Jungle and The Expanse surprised me. As did Lucifer, I thought it had a chance and am upset about Lucifer.

[shadowkat]

Okay, I went through the list of pilots. Most are really boring rehashes of cop shows that have already been done. Or
sitcoms..about singles hunting sex love that have been done.

I actually found some of the ones they passed over more interesting.

The one Danny Strong is doing has been done before and recently, it starred the gal from Agent Carter, and I got bored in the pilot. Can't they come up with anything new?

Sigh.

I like Lucifer better than anything on that list. None of it interests me. Was a bit surprised to see both the Cagney & Lacey reboot and the Greatest American Hero reboots were passed over...those could have been interesting.

[saraqael]

Don't feel bad about being upset over Lucifer's cancellation. I'm still bitter about HBO cancelling Carnivale and Deadwood, and those were cancelled back in 2005 and 2006. I was furious when the original Twin Peaks ended on a monstrous cliff-hanger back in 1991! I did not get over that until the recent revival on Showtime.

Fox cancelled Brooklyn Nine-Nine and NBC snapped it up the very next day so I suppose in theory there's hope for Lucifer if there is enough of a fan push to get another channel to pick it up. Not sure, though B99 was a critical darling as well as a fan favorite. I don't think the critics paid any attention to Lucifer.

[yourlibrarian]

Oh yes, a lot of it is variations on the same theme -- either it's a procedural with some angle or it's a "main character must reinvent their life" scenario. And perhaps the most striking thing is that there were at least 5 reboots proposed in that list.

[yourlibrarian]

Although they are more interested in the domestic market -- due to ad dollars. Netflix cares more about foreign markets -- subscriber based.

That's an interesting angle there that's fairly recent, yes. I mean it was always true in that production companies could sell their shows overseas and often did very well in it, but in recent years the time between airing here and airing elsewhere has shrunk, with some shows airing almost simultaneously around the globe. It certainly makes the foreign market revenue more present instead of the back end.

It also helps shows with weak numbers like Crazy EG. When CW sold their shows to Netflix post-season they became aware of levels of interest that their ratings weren't giving them. (And being able to, essentially, syndicate them after just 13 episodes is very different from waiting 5 years to do so). And Netflix has the motherload of all viewing analytics, providing what Nielsen does not.

[shadowkat]

Which is why Netflix is killing the broadcast network channels in the viewer game. It's also why Disney wants Hulu so badly, they want a piece of Netflix's pie. They've figured out that broadcast cable is a losing option. It is. I'm thisclose to giving up on it. If it weren't for NY1, I would.

[shadowkat]

Yep. Very derivative. And far too many reboots, a couple of the more interesting reboots got passed over. Netflix and Amazon are actually getting the more interesting shows. But there's nothing on that list that interested me...a few of the ones they passed over did. (shrugs)

[lyr]

At least they filmed some "bonus episodes" that were supposed to air between seasons, and Fox will probably put them on at some point. But yeah, it is sad to see it canceled, and especially outrageous to leave us like that.

[shapinglight]

But yeah, it is sad to see it canceled, and especially outrageous to leave us like that.

Yes! Still feeling really sad about it, and more than a week has gone by now. :(

[shapinglight]

I don't think the critics paid any attention to Lucifer.

No, they didn't, and I can see why. It's just a fun, silly show that I happened to love (the first time this has ever happened to me, I think). I still very much doubt anyone will pick it up, even though the fandom on Twitter made a huge amount of noise.

Thanks for your comment. I appreciate it. Nice to know I'm not the only one who can feel bitter about these things. I'm pretty sure I won't get over that in a very long time indeed.