Originally posted by Bruce: I think the marriage of NCIS LA to the original will prove to be a double edged sword. The show's early existence will have been secured, but LA appears more to more of an adjunct to the original, barely a spinoff. Compare this handling to the evolution of the L&O's and the CSI's. Debate the differences in the franchises as you will, but LA is shaping up as the overprotected first son. I have only seen 2 eps, but my guess is that it could have gotten this demo in any number of hours as it should slant a bit younger than the orig and doesn't need the viewer totals to reach the desired demo.
Great points. CBS can certainly say that they have one of the more successful new shows this season, but I think when you greenlight a spinoff, you really ought to aim a little higher than finding something that can pull serviceable retention when aired directly out of the original. CSI and L&O extended their brand across multiple nights, even Grey's made a spinoff that kept Wednesday from being a disaster area for a couple half seasons before settling for that secondary role.
The Original BSG was initially a BIG time series, but as the series failure was because most of the stories were similar and structured the same. The Original STAR TREK had this problem too. Its ratings really began to fall, thus making its BIG budget not worth the trouble.
So far, the only Remake/Reboot/Reimaging to be a true success has been Star Trek: TNG
quote:
Originally posted by pisher: Those talking about how the new BSG succeeded by reimagining the original are kind of right, but maybe oversimplifying a bit--for one thing, the original was far MORE popular--just not enough to justify its huge budgets at a time when networks were accustomed to having most of the viewing audience to themselves.
BSG succeeded in capturing the imaginations of a tiny desirable audience, on a niche cable channel. It would have been a failure anywhere else, and it really wasn't a very sustained success--the ratings kept falling from the miniseries highs, and from season to season, to the point where the finale got truly disappointing #'s (and rightly so, because it was a truly disappointing finale).
You can draw a lot of curious people by remaking shows like this--but nobody's ever managed to make any of these remakes work for more than a season or two. Most of them fail much sooner--like V.
The Original BSG was initially a BIG time series, but as the series failure was because most of the stories were similar and structured the same.
Um--and shows where the stories are similar and structured the same never do well?
quote:
The Original STAR TREK had this problem too. Its ratings really began to fall, thus making its BIG budget not worth the trouble.
Nonsense. The problem with Star Trek was that its core audience wasn't big enough for NBC in the 60's, though they certainly liked the demographics (which mattered a lot less then), hence the unexpected third season pick-up.
The very formula you speak of made Star Trek an incredible success in syndication, and ultimately led to the revival of the franchise--and yet more similar episodes structured the same. But GOOD FREAKIN' TV, man.
quote:
So far, the only Remake/Reboot/Reimaging to be a true success has been Star Trek: TNG
My pick for top genre show of all time (well, it co-reigns with the original Twilight Zone).
But you can't very well say it wasn't formulaic. Formula isn't an inherently bad thing--it's what you do with it.
They made Lost last and the producers of Flashforward have said they have a 3 year plan for the show so I think a 2nd season could happen but ABC does need to find it's new 'Lost' because Flashforward and V are not it.
I have to agree with Pisher that ABC won't find the next Lost and they really shouldn't be looking for one. What ABC should be developing is their next great drama (actually more than one would be preferable because they can't rely on DH and GA forever), regardless of the genre. Something that will bring in a mass audience and they can build as their signature show(s). V and Flash Forward aren't going to be that show. I think ABC got so into the idea of the next Lost that somehow the signature drama plan escaped them. I don't see anything in their Fall of 2010 development so far that could be that show either. Perhaps Hotscotch but I'll have to see the casting.
For all of ABC's great fall efforts, it looks like ABC is going to walk away with Modern Family and a utility player in Cougar Town and not much else.
I agree about a dull script. ABC just ran with the concept. Having a person in charge with a great, clear new vision for an existing franchise is what is always needed. Look what Abrahms did for STAR TREK and Chris Nolan did for BATMAN. Even Rodenberry 22 years ago had a clear vision of what he wanted for the STAR TREK Reboot with TNG.
You are right, he success rate of remakes is pretty low. But, IMO, it is because of poor development and vision than it is of just rebooting a franchise.
quote:
Originally posted by pisher: Well, making a dull pointless scripted drama of any type is a mistake, and one ABC makes constantly these days.
But I don't see how any remake of V could have really worked, once initial curiosity wore off.
And I think remakes pretty nearly always stink.
V was by no means terribly original, but it wasn't a remake of some earlier show or film.
ABC's last decent development season was 2004-'05.
It gave them Desperate Housewives, Lost, and Greys Anatomy (in midseason). Dancing With the Stars (adapted from a British series) started in Summer '05.
They are still leaning heavily on those four shows today.
We looked at this string of successes, and figured ABC was going to become the dominant network.
For me, this V is a simple REMAKE, unlike BattleStar was a complete reimaging. V needed that Reimaging to be successful.
I have to agree... the scope of the story seems very limited. I can't see how this show can have more than 2 seasons worth of stories unless they majorly expand the mythology... "zomg! We are building a resistance" is gonna get old after a while
How expansive can the scope of the story get in 3 eps? Hopefully, the producers will put a bit more emphasis on the "Anna" side of the show and not the intrigues of the resistance, which is more predictable. I enjoyed last nite, thought a few doors were opened.
Ratings wise I would class last nite as a mild disappointment but not a drop through the floor.
We've got this series in the PIF microwave, jumping a bit too quickly to conclusions about ratings for a show whose early numbers figured to be jaded, and judging its story potential on just a few eps. I think the story is moving along nicely. And whoever thought this was going to be more than a niche type of show anyway? Unless it turned into some major tv event like the early Lost, this was the range it was headed to.
I agree with Bruce. Compared to Flash Forward and numerous other programs, V is moving at warped speed!
Aren't they changing the show runners for the second half of the season? My guess is this could really help the program become its own show.
quote:
Originally posted by TV-aholic: I agree about a dull script. ABC just ran with the concept. Having a person in charge with a great, clear new vision for an existing franchise is what is always needed. Look what Abrahms did for STAR TREK and Chris Nolan did for BATMAN. Even Rodenberry 22 years ago had a clear vision of what he wanted for the STAR TREK Reboot with TNG.
You are right, he success rate of remakes is pretty low. But, IMO, it is because of poor development and vision than it is of just rebooting a franchise.
quote:
Originally posted by pisher: Well, making a dull pointless scripted drama of any type is a mistake, and one ABC makes constantly these days.
But I don't see how any remake of V could have really worked, once initial curiosity wore off.
And I think remakes pretty nearly always stink.
V was by no means terribly original, but it wasn't a remake of some earlier show or film.
I think its far too early in the season to argue ABC has failed this season. Hell, getting two players any year is an accomplishment. The only difference is that ABC is nearing the point where it needs to find that next big show. I still think we could end up with the Middle being a decent player and Flash Forward has tweaked some lately so who knows. Happy Town, the Deep End, and Copper don't sound like overly promising projects.
quote:
Originally posted by WlcmZapataTexas: I have to agree with Pisher that ABC won't find the next Lost and they really shouldn't be looking for one. What ABC should be developing is their next great drama (actually more than one would be preferable because they can't rely on DH and GA forever), regardless of the genre. Something that will bring in a mass audience and they can build as their signature show(s). V and Flash Forward aren't going to be that show. I think ABC got so into the idea of the next Lost that somehow the signature drama plan escaped them. I don't see anything in their Fall of 2010 development so far that could be that show either. Perhaps Hotscotch but I'll have to see the casting.
For all of ABC's great fall efforts, it looks like ABC is going to walk away with Modern Family and a utility player in Cougar Town and not much else.
A franchise like Star Trek or Batman is a very different order of things than a cheesy miniseries like the original V, which was really just a guilty pleasure.
There was no reason to remake it, and most remakes are similarly pointless.
Technically, most Star Trek shows are SEQUELS--and Abrams' version of Star Trek is a movie.
They have never stopped reimagining Batman.
I'm not saying no remakes ever--but there are far too many now, and of films & shows that either aren't worth being remade, or which had a magic unique to their time period that can't be recaptured. You either dig up something that should have stayed buried, or desecrate something truly special.
Remakes are a big part of what is wrong with entertainment now. The entire industry has lost faith in its ability to create. But still acts like it's 'creative' to tweak other people's ideas, instead of coming up with your own. Newsflash--that's the opposite of creativity.
quote:
Originally posted by TV-aholic: I agree about a dull script. ABC just ran with the concept. Having a person in charge with a great, clear new vision for an existing franchise is what is always needed. Look what Abrahms did for STAR TREK and Chris Nolan did for BATMAN. Even Rodenberry 22 years ago had a clear vision of what he wanted for the STAR TREK Reboot with TNG.
You are right, he success rate of remakes is pretty low. But, IMO, it is because of poor development and vision than it is of just rebooting a franchise.
quote:
Originally posted by pisher: Well, making a dull pointless scripted drama of any type is a mistake, and one ABC makes constantly these days.
But I don't see how any remake of V could have really worked, once initial curiosity wore off.
And I think remakes pretty nearly always stink.
V was by no means terribly original, but it wasn't a remake of some earlier show or film.
