WB Cancels Angel 447
Ray Radlein writes "Despite a 36% increase over last year's comparable ratings, the WB Network announced today that they are cancelling Angel as of the end of this season." Unfortunate since this season was stronger than the last. " The link also makes taunting mentions of movie plans.
Re:Say it Ain't so! (Score:5, Insightful)
A Sad Day (Score:5, Insightful)
Unfortunately, they did a major format change (they went from the underdogs to in charge of a mega-million evil corporation), and most of the original characters are gone.
But it was still one of the better shows on TV.
Hopefully they will have a chance to end the series with some sort of of finality, unlike Farscape.
Re: Wha? (Score:3, Insightful)
> Ok, I don't even watch Angel, most on account a' I don't have a TV, but what is up with the networks cancelling TV shows? Are they only looking for "The NExt Big Thing"tm? I wonder if they figure that a possible smash hit will earn them more money in the short term, rather than a steady show that will earn them money at a regular rate...
That's the way every other business in the USA operates these days. Regular incomes don't impress the shareholders anymore.
Who decides this stuff anyway? (Score:5, Insightful)
Its basically what Fox did with Futurama; even though it had high ratings and a good viewer following, they kept manipulating its timeslot and pre-empting it over and over. Then they finally cancelled it because its 7:00pm Sunday timeslot (that was pre-empted by baseball or football four out of five times) didn't garner enough ratings for it.
At least we can look forward to WB presenting us with "Showgirls: The Series" or "Lawn Care Crisis: The Reality Show"
Re:Replacement. (Score:3, Insightful)
-B
Typical (Score:2, Insightful)
Viewers not as active in support of Angel (Score:2, Insightful)
Cult shows (such as Farscape) with leading male demographics, but with lesser performance and market shares than Angel seem to have survived longer.
--CTH
Highest rated does not mean it stays (Score:5, Insightful)
Costs. This is what actually happened with Buffy that forced the move to UPN. Although it was a very highly-rated show for WB, the per episode cost had gotten to be in the (IIRC) $2.2 million range. If we assume that, say, Everwood generates $1.2 million on a budget of $300,000, and (in this peculiar example), Buffy generates $2.9 million, then we realize that ratings aren't what it's all about.
Who is watching? This feeds into the above, because certain fan-bases aren't as profitable as others. Way back in the day, CBS cancelled "The Beverly Hillbillies" because (despite high ratings) the only people actually providing the high ratings were older, rural people (Surprise!), and advertisers don't like them as much. Now, I would assume Angel's target and bulk of viewership is a younger, teen and twentysomething crowd, but I might be entirely wrong.
Or it could just be "creative differences". Maybe Joss is a bastard to work with. Maybe some new exec came on board who has a different, not so sci-fi direction for the network. Maybe Boreanaz had made some secretive noise about being sick of playing the same characters for 7 some-odd years. But more likely, I'd peg it to one of the above theories.
Cancel All Programs! (Score:4, Insightful)
Display nothing but a "Technical Difficulties" announcement on all stations!
-kgj
This sucks, but go out nova style. (Score:5, Insightful)
Angel was one of few shows worth dow... watching. I totally dig the combination of humor and darkness.
I guess the only good thing about this is that they can go out with a bang. C'mon writers, let's fuck us good in the last few episodes. Have Angel yearn for the Angelus years. Kill off Lorne. Kill off Gunn. Push Westley back into the darkness, and have him take Fred with him.
Boom, sooner or later... boom.
Re:Never seen it... (Score:3, Insightful)
xfiles (Score:2, Insightful)
Er, but why? (Score:5, Insightful)
It's nice that they told Joss early so that he could wrap up the series. But it never feels like TV shows are cancelled at the right time. Either a show gets cancelled just as it seems to be hitting a good stride (Futurama), or it gets dragged out until it becomes a tired self-parody (Friends, and to some extent, The Simpsons).
Maybe after it finally wraps up, fans can look back on a very satisfying conclusion. But I tend to think that it had a couple of solid years left.
Pay Per View (Score:5, Insightful)
Better than lego pictures (Score:2, Insightful)
While Angel being cancelled in itself is not news, the dynamics that cause a successful program on a struggling network to be cancelled are worth thinking about, because they do apply to other things.
Lego stuff is just stupid. I avoid it like you should avoid anything related to cancelled programs.
Re:OH MY (Score:5, Insightful)
The pitfall is, you lose out on the opportunity to make fun of people for caring about things you find boring and trivial. But you save hours upon hours of time, which you can put towards important things like blogging, or trying out yet another test release of Fedora Core, or any of those other things that you personally enjoy but 99% of the world finds pointless and trivial.
Give it a try.
No suprise here (Score:5, Insightful)
1) The writing for Angel recently hasn't been up to par with the Angel/Buffy tradition. The recent story line where they brought back that EVIL lawyer from the first season...meh. If they're not saving the world, then it ain't a Buffy/Angel story line.
For me, a recent low point arrived in the Cordelia return episode (two weeks ago). Angel tells her "It's not like I made a deal with the devil here" and then immediately turns to make lunch-date arragnements with a red-skinned, horned demon sporting a goatee. Give me a break.
2) All the actors in the Angel/Buffy series are talented and it would be great to see them move onto other projects. Actaully, yesterday I was thinking to myself that it would be cool to see James Marsters (Spike) have a role in some drama (not even a blockbuster - even a small, indie film). Now that they're not locked into the rough schedule of filming a TV show, it'll be possible.
Why isn't Nicholas Brendon (Xander) a star yet? Ditto for Amber Benson (Tara). It's a conspiracy, I tell ya!.
3) There are still dozens of hours of entertainment left for people who got to the series late:D I missed the first few years of Angel, so now I'll just watch it in syndication (did the same with Buffy on FX channel).
4) If everyone goes out and buys up all the Angel DVDs, maybe they'll resurrect the series (or a spin off) like they did with Family Guy?
5) Charisma Charpenter is going to be in Playboy later this year [fark.com]. Coming soon: Cordelia the Animated Series on SpikeTV. 'Nuff said.
Hmmm... (Score:3, Insightful)
Oh, those TV execs -- they're wily ones alright, but I see their plan. Take a show they don't trust enough to give another season, take it off the air so people start to miss it, then pump millions of dollars into a big motion picture production! Ya, that's really gonna happen!
Ya, sorry folks, it ain't happenin'.
Re:Replacement. (Score:3, Insightful)
The thing is, Angel probably costs hundreds of thousands of dollars per episode, while a pile of shit from the Wayans brothers costs, well, whatever the going rate for piles of such stuff goes for (a lot less). So the piles can get much worse ratings and less advertising dollars but be more profitable.
Re:critical news (Score:3, Insightful)
And your point is? I know at least three other geeks that do watch the show.
Mutant Enemy produced three well written cult series that played with their respective genre conventions, and I for one will be sad to see them gone.
Re:xfiles (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:missing URL... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:I thought I would do this... (Score:5, Insightful)
Farscape and Firefly - I can't fathom why these shows got cancled, except for the fact that they were intelligent, interesting, and compelling. About two weeks ago, I watched the last Firefly DVD and the next day I watched the first Babylon 5 DVD. I know lots of you think B5 is great, but honestly, the acting, the plots, the characters, the effects, litterally everything about B5 was "B" quality - right down to the hulking slow walking "creature from the black lagoon" type monster in the 4th episode. Firefly went 13 episodes - B5 goes on for years. Makes absolutely no sense.
While I was watching the Farscap discs, I tried to watch Andromeda. I got through 3 or 4 based solely on the fact that Andromeda was cute. Otherwise, everything but the special effects sucked. For real - one character's costume was purple makeup and a tail attached to a belt as if it was some Halloween party. The stories and most the characters were just lame. And even if there were two interesting characters (the tech kid and andromeda), the lousy acting of everyone else and the boring unoriginal stories just can't compennsate.
I don't know what it is with the networks. They have no understanding of what is good. And I can't understand what it is with viewers - are we so deprived of sci-fi that we will accept anything at all? I'm bitter. Sorry for the rant.
...it WAS great (Score:5, Insightful)
But I do want to say that I think Angel has done great things technologically and cinematically. They were one of the first shows to be presented in widescreen, and were one of the first -- and are still one of the only -- shows to be presented in High Def. No matter how far downhill the show has gone, nobody can take these kudos away.
Glad I'm a Neilson family this week (Score:5, Insightful)
Keeping track of what I watch has brought home to me how little I DO watch. Angel is one of the shows I watch.
The great thing is this datum will be entered into Nielson's computers - that Angel has a person making damn good money watching it, and NOT MUCH ELSE on WB.
Since most of television today is either
a) "Reality" shows (HEY KIDS! LET'S STAB EACH OTHER IN THE BACK TO GET AHEAD!)
b) Sit-coms (HEY KIDS! LET'S HIT THE LAUGH TRACK EVERYTIME SOMEBODY SAYS SOMETHING! THAT WILL MAKE IT FUNNY!)
c) CSI (HEY KIDS! LETS MAKE A SHOW ABOUT SCIENCE THAT GETS IT WRONG ON EVERY SHOW)
d) Law and order (HEY KIDS! LET'S PULL SHIT THAT NO REAL JUDGE WOULD TOLERATE!)
After all, you now have NBC (All "Law and Order", all the time), CBS (All "CSI", all the time), WB (All Pokemon, all the time), and UPN (All crap, all the time.) Yeah, I *really* want to run out and buy a HDTV.
Re:UPN (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:I thought I would do this... (Score:4, Insightful)
When I watched the first season of B5 I thought it was nothing special especially with Deep Space 9 as an alternative. However, the story arc really tightens in the second and the wait between episodes suddenly becomes unbearable. This continous on towards the fourth season. Because of uncertainty as to whether there would've been a fifth season JMS had to wrap up a lot of story lines by the end of the fourth and so the fifth season ended up being a bit of dissapointment in comparison.
Re:Wha? (Score:3, Insightful)
Don't get me wrong, when I was a kid, I was a TV junky, but it seems that it's getting worse today. Gotta wonder what long term effect this will have on society and/or culture. Someone already mentioned how business is even reflecting short-term gains, and ignoring longer term stability. What's influencing what? Hmmmm.
-Alex
Re:UPN (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Wha? (Score:3, Insightful)
And when they do their spending levels go down. Faced with real responsiblities and lack of funding from daddy they spend less on clothes, CDs, and other doo dads. Most of their money goes to food, beer and school.
Re:Oh, you had to do it.... (Score:3, Insightful)
Assuming it was actually broadcast in such a way. There's a good argument that anything with any kind of "arc" should not have it's first showing on any of the American networks. Because their scheduling methodology tends to be mutually exclusive with simply showing the episodes in order.
Re:Go Out with a Bang (Score:3, Insightful)
Whatever Joss really needs to get out of Hollywood. Since his talent is not apreciated there.
Re:I thought I would do this... (Score:3, Insightful)
Or at least that's the view of the TV executives.
Truthfully, if I could "subscribe" to a show like firefly for even $5 an episode, I would (I would want to have a DVD to keep). 20 minutes of my time (commercial breaks) is worth a hell of a lot more than $5 so even at $5/ep.
Or you might even get nearly an hour of actual content. One thing to remember is that without the commercial breaks the structure of the programme would have no reason to follow the US broadcast norm.
it would be a steal, and probably make the studio money.
But it would do nothing for the broadcaster...
Re:I thought I would do this... (Score:3, Insightful)
Not helped by real world events. When most of characters qualify as "terrorists". Or that the only "legit" member of the crew is a postitute.
Like beggars can be choosers or something (Score:3, Insightful)
Face it, fellas, if a woman like Charisma Carpenter walked near you, you wouldn't know what the hell to do anyway.
Guys on SLASHDOT criticizing the physical beauty of hollywood actresses? Isn't that like starving men saying "sorry, but the caviar just isn't as good as it used to be"?
Re:Wha? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Say it Ain't so! (Score:2, Insightful)
The holideck was MADE for resorting to crap.
Once more with feeling (the Buffy musical episode) was creative and well done, and certainly if an episode is made for 'fans' of the show, then it can hardly be said that it was resorting to music.
It may have been amusing for the fans of the show, but most of the watchers couldnt stand it.
And if you're not a fan, why are you watching? By season 6 you either like the show of you don't, and if you just started watching, then downloading or buying the earlier seasons on DVD is the best way to get into the show. It's like watching only LOTR: ROTK and complaining about not liking or understanding it.
As far as I know, Giles was the only watcher made to sing and he stood up to it pretty well :)
Note correlation: (Score:2, Insightful)
So, let's draw the lines.
You don't watch the shows when they're on TV. As such, you (or the people like you with the nielsen boxes) do not factor into the networks' decisions as to what makes a TV show good.
Yet you wonder why the networks don't know what you think is good?
Re:Glad I'm a Neilson family this week (Score:3, Insightful)
I think you're reaching there. Since MacGyver went off the air, CSI has been the only prime time show I've watched that has depicted those who do science in a positive light. I agree things are not 100% accurate, but that is not necessarily a bad thing. Knowledge is power and if power is used irresponsibly, bad things happen. The folks who did MacGyver knew this and always omitted one key ingredient in whatever MacGyver was concocting to keep kids from blowing up the living room. (anti-violence is reinforced in the series also where Richard Dean Anderson's character hate guns because when MacGyver was young, one of his friends was killed when a bunch of them fooled around with a revolver. Despite the jingoistic nature of the show, his current series, Stargate SG-1, also has an important anti-gunn stance where the main character's son accidentally shot himself with his own father's weapon.) If CSI made an effort to get it right for every show, criminals would be that much wiser. CSI was criticized by a right wing group for being too grusome, but the overall message that science is a tool to fight crime is a positive one.
You Are The Product (Score:5, Insightful)
Perhaps some of you have heard the logic that goes along the lines of:
In a buyer/seller arrangement, the buyer can make demands upon the seller. After all, the buyer can always just not buy the product. The seller will usually pander to the buyer as long as the seller gets the price that he wants. Note the term price. When you watch network television, you aren't paying a dime to the network. It's free. That means that you're not the buyer.
Who does pay money? Advertisers. They are the buyer, the network is the seller. You? You're the product.
This cancellation should be a good demonstration of this proposition: the buyer wants teenage eyes watching the TV, so the seller will arrrange for shows that will get as many teenagers as possible to watch it. So there we are: "your" show gets cancelled, you non-teenager, you. In turn they put on something that is likely to capture the (perceived) average teenager.
This isn't a cynical post, it's just a working through of logic, and a possible solution: if you want to watch the shows you want to watch, pay for them.
DVD sales potential has changed some of the thinking of the networks, but still the best way to pay for your shows is directly, through pay channels: HBO, Showtime, etc, etc.
I like being a customer (or a collaborator, see open source). It's why I'm willing to pay for good work. Try being a customer, you'll get what you want more often.
Re:Say it Ain't so! (Score:3, Insightful)
I can't say that Buffy ever "jumped the shark". Ending the show when they did was probably a good thing. There's something to be said about going out on top. Buffy and Angel both had a good long run; there's nothing to be sad about. If you want to mourn the passing of a TV show, mourn shows like Firefly and Farscape, which died in their infancy and never had the chance to live up to their full potential.
As I said on the Bronze:Beta board... (Score:2, Insightful)
STUPID NIELSENS! (Score:3, Insightful)
Check it out for yourself. 5,100 homes tyrannically decide what we watch on television here in America. Bland, unsophisticated, dumbed down crap thanks to these fools:
http://www.nielsenmedia.com/
Hate to say it.. (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm a big fan of JW (Woohoo Firefly!) and I followed Angel closely for many seasons. However, this show jumped the shark for me when Angel's son come into the picture. At the end of that season (which had some very strong supporting characters with Holtz and assistant) I found myself hoping ardently that Angel would die, that someone would kill him.
The Angel character was tired, completely eclipsed by the cast around him both in writing and in acting ability. Seeing him week after week eventually became too painful and I had to stop watching.
Best Angel moments:
- Spike's mocking monologue as he watches Angel talk to a would-be client
- Almost everything involving the Wolfram&Hart firm, especially scenes with Lyla, and the "evil hand" scene.
- The Holtz character
- Their cool run-down ex-hotel.
- The Kate policewoman character from the early seasons.
Worst Angel moments:
- In the first few seaons, every 3 or 4 episodes would feature gratuitously underdressed women for no plot-purpose.
- Charisma Carpenter got really annoying to listen to and to look at after a few seasons.
- David Boreanaz writing and acting level got really annoying to listen to and watch after a few seasons.
- Without fail, all of the strong, complex supporting characters and foils were killed off while the more one-dimensional, less interesting characters stuck around.