Last night, the CW started airing and the first show up on the lineup was "America's Next Top Model" and the network launched huge! (Well, for what it might ever do.)
"Top Model" won the night the hardest to reach, 18-34 year olds, being the most watched program of the night for that group. That's enormous for a network to start and win the night in the key demographic. I'm sure that folks in Burbank have to be overjoyed today. I'm sure they're hoping to continue that roll next week when "One Tree Hill" settles back into its old time slot.
For those who are asking what that demographic is key, the answer is simple. 18-34 year olds are the group advertisers want to reach more. For some reason, advertisers think that this age group has more money to burn, are more interested in spending it, and are a more lucrative audience than say 50-65 year olds. Most of the real reason they're so popular is that they're probably the ones that are setting the culture, establishing the trends and determining the products and items consumed in masses for the next few months.
In the write-up for last night's overnight ratings: "Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip" averaged a decent 8.6/14 for NBC but lost a significant number of viewers in its second half-hour.
Ouch. That's not good.
The numbers are fine. Nothing the size of a "Lost" or a "Desperate Housewives"-sized phenomenon, but reasonable ratings. However, losing a signficant number of viewers in the second half-hour is a bad thing. A really bad thing.
Why? Because the point of a television program is to keep viewers watching. One of the things that has kept a number of programs on the air is the fact that they build viewers. They may start out with a small number people watching, but more and more come to it during the course of an hour. If you're gaining an audience, then it means that people like what they're seeing. If they turn away however, it means they aren't interested and they probably won't be coming back for a second helping, which means more viewers for the advertisements and product-placement next go-around.
So what does this tell us?
It could mean any number of things, but here's probably the top 3:
1. Despite what Hollywood thinks, most of America isn't enamored with Aaron Sorkin or his writing.
2. The audience came for Matthew Perry and when he wasn't in the show until approximately the 20 minute mark, they left.
3. The show is too "Hollywood." It feels like you have to be in the know to get it, and people didn't, and they weren't interested. (I'm still formulating a thesis on this one and I'll wait to unveil it till next week after the second episode.)
NBC's long road to the top is exactly just that--a loooooooong, difficult road, which isn't going to be any easier probably with the premiere of the too dour for words "Heroes" next week.
Last night, the WB signed off the air by showing the series premieres of some of its landmark shows--"Felicity", "Angel", "Buffy, the Vampire Slayer", and "Dawson's Creek," During the night of nostalgia, the network aired some very classy promos, reminiscent of promos the network ran during various seasons, as a tribute to the talent that had a home at the network. And the list was impressive: Sarah Michelle Gellar, Keri Russell, Scott Foley, Scott Speedman, Katie Holmes, James Van Der Beek, David Boreanaz, Seth Green, Allyson Hannigan, the Wayans Brothers, Barry Watson, Lauren Graham, Michelle Williams, Jessica Biel, and Jamie Foxx. Some of the ads big aideu to the network, claiming that it was the "network that defined a generation."
And the thing, it's right.
Well, almost.
It's a little inaccurate to say that it defined a generation. Sure, there are texts that define generations. ("The Graduate" comes to mind). However, saying that a generation was shaped by the WB is pretty off.
Saying that it represented a generation is more accurate. There's no denying that the moment "Dawson's Creek" hit the air, Gen Y had their seminal film--in a television series. (Just like "Fight Club" and "Reality Bites" are the seminal Gen X films.) It highlighted the generation as what it yearns to be--precocious, intelligent, sex-talking adolescents that skip being a teenager and move straight into adulthood. It was a formula that had its limitations, but was surprisingly successful. Sure, "Dawson's" never transcended much beyond guilty pleasure, but the show was groundbreaking for its view of teenage sexuality, as well as gay teens.
But in quality, the show never held a candle to the real cream of the WB's shows--"Buffy, the Vampire Slayer". Sure, there have been some great shows on the WB, but none of them broke down the walls and toyed with the idea of genre and gender roles the way that "Buffy" did. The serio-comic show took that idea that high school is hell--literally and milked every metaphor out of it. Yet, it went beyond that bag of tricks, transcended the form and became about so many things and ideas--rare for any television show, and even rarer for a "teen show." Some of the episodes of "Buffy"--"The Body", "Once More, with Feeling", "Hush", and "Becoming Part I & II" and "The Gift" are among some of the best hours of television ever produced. And they all came from one show.
The other show that is frequently overlooked and less heralded in the pantheon of WB shows is "Felicity." This is the only show to win the network a major award. Keri Russell picked up a Golden Globe in the show's first season--and with good reason. The program perfectly captured the angst of a teenager burgeoning into adulthood, trapped by a sense of duty to parents and their wishes and a desire to become her own person. Sure, most people can still debate over whether she should've ended up with Noel or Ben, but the fact that after four seasons, this was still a question worthy of discussion proved how real those characters were and how well the writers had created them. They were as real to us as any college buddy. Sure the show was angsty and that angst got on some people's nerves, but guess what? College is angst. That's what made it so brilliant was its honesty. Plus, introducing us to JJ Abrams and Jennifer Garner would never be considered a bad thing.
So, so long to the WB. Hopefully the new shows of the CW (if and when there are any) will be as memorable as these. Just hopefully it won't take two or three years for them to be discovered.
I've been on a huge Snow Patrol kick for the last couple of days. Their new album, Eyes Open really had to grow on me. When I first got it off ITunes a few months ago, it did nothing for me, but the more and more I've listened to it, the more I think it's almost as good as their last album, "Final Straw." Lyrically it's not advanced, but it's got some amazing hooks. And "Chasing Cars" is a beautiful song. Maybe it's the simplicity that makes it work, but whatever it is, I just adore this piece.
We're getting closer and closer to the fall season. Sure, FOX has started, but it's not like any of the shows they've premiered is worth putting in the TIVO season pass, or watching more than twice. This season, the networks are trying several things to get viewers into their shows--particularly the new ones. As mentioned earlier, you can rent the Pilots for "Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip" and "Kidnapped" on Netflix. If you get a special card from a local movie theater, you can download the Pilot for "Heroes" from ITunes. Additionally, now AOL is streaming "Studio 60" and "20 Good Years".
MSN has also announced that it is going to stream the new CW show, "Runaway", along with the season premieres of "Veronica Mars" and "Everybody Hates Chris" a week before their airdates. "Runaway" hits MSN on Sept. 18, prior to airing on the new network, Sept. 25. The world's favorite "Mars" girl hits the Internet on Sept. 26, before coming to the air, Oct. 5. Finally, the Internet audience can "hate Chris" on September 24, while the television audience will have to wait till October 1.
And I'm hearing disturbing things that a central character is gonna die on "Veronica" in the season premiere. It better not be Logan. Cause then half the snark goes and so might I.
Friend: I'm more excited about this than I am the upcoming season of "Lost."
Me: Well...
Friend: Maybe not that excited, but at least as much.
Me: Very good, but why did you think I was gonna lie to you?
This is the same friend who watched "Arrested Development" on my encouragement and then spawned his own cult of devoted fans. So why it took him so long to get on the bandwagon, I don't know.
Believe me, I've seen a lot of good TV and a lot of bad TV. I know awesome TV when I see it. "Veronica", at its best, is awesome TV. If you doubt it, the first and second seasons are DVD. Pick them up. This friend has managed to get through the entire two seasons (save four episodes) in less than two weeks, so it can be done.
And if you give yourself over to watching a couple of episodes of "Veronica" and fall in love with her, like any sane, normal person would do, you should also feel free to open your heart to a very beautiful "Ugly Betty" this fall. It has all the makings of another great series, like "Veronica."
This sounds funny. And oddly familiar. Wait. Wait. OH! I had this idea years ago when I wrote it up as a mock PSA for one of my writing classes. If only I'd known I could take an idea that had 45 seconds worth of material and turn it into a full-length feature, I would've gladly done so.
"Seann William Scott is in talks to headline edgy comedy "Big Brother" for 20th Century Fox reports Production Weekly.
The story concerns a selfish businessman who's forced to participate in the Big Brother program and is paired with a tough teen.
The two loathe each other, but they develop a twisted father/son relationship once the businessman begins teaching the youth all of the immoral things he used to get ahead in business.
"The Bourne Identity" screenwriter W. Blake Herron penned the script and Luke Greenfield ("The Girl Next Door") will direct."
Last night saw the premiere of the final one-hour drama from Fox for the fall, "Standoff." The show, about two hostage negotiators who are also sleeping together, suffers from probably the worst buzz of any one-hour on this fall. Expectations were low.
Maybe that's why I was so surprised when I saw it. It didn't suck.
I mean, don't get me wrong, it wasn't great television, but compared to Fox's other pilots, it actually felt like somebody tried to do some interesting writing and wanted to keep surprise us, while never forgetting that sometimes, television needs to be fun.
While I'm still not convinced that I buy Ron Livingston as a hostage negotiator, but his partner, Rosemarie DeWitt was slick and capable. She (along with Gina Torres, playing their boss) was able to hold the piece together and somewhat juggle some very clumsy tonal transitions.
Sure, there were problems with the story. I felt like the show almost careened off a cliff in the first ten minutes when Livingston's character announced to the world that he and his partner were sleeping together. Why someone would feel the need to self-disclose in the middle of a hostage negotiation is beyond me. And in some ways, the show never managed to recover from that, but then it just kind of got dropped. What should have been a big deal wasn't, but served merely as fodder to pad the story until the real hostage negotiation started. And there, at least the writer tried to keep it interesting, by at least having a surprise up his sleeve, unlike "Justice" and "Vanished" which is supposed to be all about surprises up your sleeve.
It might not be something I TIVO (especially since Tuesday night is looking to be a crowded TV night with "Gilmore Girls", "Veronica Mars", "Friday Night Lights", "Smith", and "Nip/Tuck" on, but I might catch it in repeats. Assuming it stays on that long.
And then there's the show that consistently fails to live up to its potential, because it insists on reveling in its own audacity. "Nip/Tuck" really should be the best show on television. It goes where no other show goes, not only in terms of the stories that it tells, but the places that it takes its characters. However, as last night's bloated premiere demonstrates, sometimes the show finds itself too clever by far.
The premiere found Sean and Julia back together, while Christian is in therapy, trying to determine why he is incapable of having an adult relationship. He's offended by his therapist's logical suggestion as to why and instead, tries to take power and "butch" up his life. This is only further enhanced by the surgery of an aging medical corporate raider who "wants a bigger pair of balls." (seriously). It's a great metaphor as on the nose analogies go (and that's what this show does so well), but the episode somehow got muddled and lost. It felt like this was supposed to be a 90 minute episode that could've been 45. The vocal chord lift of a phone sex operator (played by Kathleen Turner) was a good idea that had no thematic relevance to the script and should've just been left out. Likewise, the opening sex montage, while shocking as intended, was overly long, and could've been reduced as well. And then there were things that were shrunk that ended up making no sense--like the reversal in Christian's therapist.
Still, there was a lot to admire about the show. First and foremost, is the continually complex and complicated relationship between Christian and Sean. The fact that the show is now asking Christian to examine the sexual nature of their friendship also speaks volumes about where we are in terms of relationships in 2006. (We can't believe that people can be intimate and not be sexual.) And the impending birth defect of Julia and Sean's son promises to be fascinating, while providing the show with even more dramatic ground to plunder.
So in the meantime, figure out what you don't like about yourself. It might just show up on this show.
