quote:

Originally posted by Chimera:
She dropped out because of Britney Spears??! Wow!

Worse yet, the article reports that she dropped out because she feared being overshaddowed by Spears. Why work to create anothe rrole for her if her 9and her handlers) are that insecure?

quote:

Originally posted by Bruce:
CBS and CW - no

ABC - highly unlikely, tone too different

NBC - somewhat likely given recent history of several female slanters

It might have been an interesting candidate for the Sun 10pm slot on CBS out of similarly female skewing Cold Case. It would be more compatible and it looks to me like it's stronger creatively than Shark.

The only possibility on ABC is on Friday, and even that probably wouldn't work. And an offbeat idea, but I wonder if it could've gotten something going out of Apprentice on Thurs 10pm. And I'm not just saying that because that's the slot where the lead was on ER for many years. It may appeal to Apprentice watchers more than Lipstick Jungle did, with a different approach to the promos than what Fox took.

I think the best cable choice would be what pisher said, A&E, but I don't think the prospects there would be great either. Creative tweaks could make it viable on FX, but the other cable options wouldn't work.

quote:

Originally posted by Obveeus:

quote:

Originally posted by Chimera:
She dropped out because of Britney Spears??! Wow!

Worse yet, the article reports that she dropped out because she feared being overshaddowed by Spears. Why work to create anothe rrole for her if her 9and her handlers) are that insecure?

I don't know the exact reason she dropped oou. But one thing's for sure: the media and the general public are more interested in weired talentless singer/actress (remember Crossroads?) than in a good actress.
So clearly Silverstone would be overshadowed

quote:

I think the best cable choice would be what pisher said, A&E, but I don't think the prospects there would be great either.

I wasn't being entirely serious (the show should simply be given a few weeks, then canceled), but yeah, A&E is the best fit. Except I doubt they'd want to spend the money. CL was budgeted as a FOX drama. I don't think they could pare it down enough.

quote:

Creative tweaks could make it viable on FX, but the other cable options wouldn't work.

If by 'creative tweaks' you mean 'a lot more sex scenes', yeah.

But then you lose a lot of the audience it already has. Quite a bit of which it'll probably lose next week.

When was the last time a FOX show with over 7 million viewers got under a 2.0 in the demo? As someone mentioned earlier, even Drive started with bigger ratings...

quote:

Originally posted by robert:
I don't know the exact reason she dropped oou. But one thing's for sure: the media and the general public are more interested in weired talentless singer/actress (remember Crossroads?) than in a good actress.
So clearly Silverstone would be overshadowed

Only in Hollywood would there exist a mentality that both pay and quality of work should take a back seat to quantity of 'press' coverage in comparison to your coworkers.

quote:

Originally posted by Chimera:
When was the last time a FOX show with over 7 million viewers got under a 2.0 in the demo? As someone mentioned earlier, even Drive started with bigger ratings...

Yes. Canterbury's Law failed right out of the starting gate.

Well in all fairness, there's not a lot of press coverage for my co-workers. :-)

quote:

Originally posted by Obveeus:

quote:

Originally posted by robert:
I don't know the exact reason she dropped oou. But one thing's for sure: the media and the general public are more interested in weired talentless singer/actress (remember Crossroads?) than in a good actress.
So clearly Silverstone would be overshadowed

Only in Hollywood would there exist a mentality that both pay and quality of work should take a back seat to quantity of 'press' coverage in comparison to your coworkers.

quote:

Originally posted by Obveeus:

quote:

Originally posted by Chimera:
When was the last time a FOX show with over 7 million viewers got under a 2.0 in the demo? As someone mentioned earlier, even Drive started with bigger ratings...

Yes. Canterbury's Law failed right out of the starting gate.

Why it has failed? I know it's gonna get canceled beacause of the demos, but the fact that 7.5 million individuals tuned in to watch the show is far from a failure.

quote:

Why it has failed? I know it's gonna get canceled beacause of the demos, but the fact that 7.5 million individuals tuned in to watch the show is far from a failure.

Well, any show that gets canceled right away is a failure, for one thing.

For another, it's not a success for a show to have its premiere watched by such and such a number of people, whether you take their age and income brackets into account or not.

Premiere audiences are not about the quality of the show--they are about promotion, subject material, and the popularity of the stars.

Lots of people like lawyer shows. Lots of people like Julianna Margulies. Lots of people just watch any new drama they see promotion for, out of curiosity. Most premieres do pretty well.

If it holds most of that premiere audience next week--and I THINK there will be a next week--you could argue that's a form of success, even if it's canceled shortly afterwards.

It's a very qualified form of success, and not the kind anybody working on the show was hoping for.

IMO, any open-ended scripted series on a major network that doesn't last at least three or four full seasons is an unmitigated failure--I guess you could make a partial exception for shows like Twin Peaks, which started as big hits, then fell to pieces--and were hugely influential. Or shows like Arrested Development, which never connected with audiences, but won lots of awards and the love of critics.

But really, those shows are failures too. They're exceptional failures, but failures all the same.

CL is just an ordinary generic run of the mill failure.

quote:

Originally posted by robert:

quote:

Originally posted by Obveeus:

quote:

Originally posted by Chimera:
When was the last time a FOX show with over 7 million viewers got under a 2.0 in the demo? As someone mentioned earlier, even Drive started with bigger ratings...

Yes. Canterbury's Law failed right out of the starting gate.

Why it has failed? I know it's gonna get canceled beacause of the demos, but the fact that 7.5 million individuals tuned in to watch the show is far from a failure.

My post wasn't a statement, it was a question. I find it really odd that a FOX show would do reasonably well in Households and overall viewers, but do so poorly in the demo. When was the last time that happened? (Really, I'm asking).

quote:

Originally posted by Chimera:
My post wasn't a statement, it was a question. I find it really odd that a FOX show would do reasonably well in Households and overall viewers, but do so poorly in the demo. When was the last time that happened? (Really, I'm asking).

Was there something special on one of the other networks that might have pulled viewers from the 18-49 demo 8-11 yesterday?

quote:

Originally posted by Chimera:

quote:

Originally posted by robert:

quote:

Originally posted by Obveeus:

quote:

Originally posted by Chimera:
When was the last time a FOX show with over 7 million viewers got under a 2.0 in the demo? As someone mentioned earlier, even Drive started with bigger ratings...

Yes. Canterbury's Law failed right out of the starting gate.

Why it has failed? I know it's gonna get canceled beacause of the demos, but the fact that 7.5 million individuals tuned in to watch the show is far from a failure.

My post wasn't a statement, it was a question. I find it really odd that a FOX show would do reasonably well in Households and overall viewers, but do so poorly in the demo. When was the last time that happened? (Really, I'm asking).

I vaguely remember that Head Cases opened old, with the same low demo/viewer ratio.

I have the impression Mondays in general are skeweing rather old

quote:

I vaguely remember that Head Cases opened old, with the same low demo/viewer ratio.

Google says:

quote:

Fox's Head Cases, starring O'Donnell as an uptight lawyer teamed up with a hot-head litigator, didn't exactly flunk the bar. But its 48th place opening (6.2 million), opposite a rerun of Lost on ABC (38th place, 7 million), didn't bode well for when the real competition starts.[quote]

and

[quote]Writers devoted plenty of strongly worded column inches to the show's premise: two lawyers (Chris O’Donnell and Adam Goldberg) are paired together after meeting in a mental hospital. Yet the show itself didn’t make much of a dent: a 2.4 rating/6 share among 18-to-49-year olds, according to Nielsen fast national data.