TiVo Community Forums Archives - Alias gets the boot!

TiVoCommunity.com
(c)opyright 1995-2005 All rights reserved
indexcheckTC
This area is a static history of posts in the TiVo Community Forum Archive.
This archive history was made for the simple indexing of search sites like Google.

Pages:1

Alias gets the boot!
(Click here to view the original thread with full colors/images)

Posted by: Rob Helmerichs

...until mid-season, that is.

http://66.51.173.18/cgi/gofuton.cgi...ewswire&id=6590

Why is this good?

Because they will then run the entire season uninterrupted!

Posted by: VegasVic

I like the idea of running Alias without reruns like they used to do with NYPD Blue.

How does According To Jim keep getting renewed? Geez.

Posted by: cmontyburns

USA Today reports this morning that this decision isn't yet final. We'll know for sure today when ABC announces.

Posted by: Peter000

quote:
Originally posted by Medieval Guy
...until mid-season, that is.

http://66.51.173.18/cgi/gofuton.cgi...ewswire&id=6590

Why is this good?

Because they will then run the entire season uninterrupted!

Does this mean there will be fewer episodes than normal?

Posted by: Rob Helmerichs

quote:
Originally posted by Peter000
Does this mean there will be fewer episodes than normal?

I doubt it very much. They still have to get to a certain number of episodes for their syndication contract, and when they run NYPD Blue like this, it's full seasons.

Personally, I think they should do this with more shows, and perhaps with the move towards year-round programming, we'll see more of it. Having to spread a show out through 3/4 of a year with only enough episodes for 1/2, plus having to load sweeps months, makes for truly annoying gaps in most shows. This is a solution, especially for those shows that are continuity-heavy where the gaps really hurt.

Posted by: Graymalkin

Excellent news! Unless, of course, this gives them more time to come up with bizarro dream sequences.

Posted by: cwoody222

I sure hope the finale this week isn't TOO much of a cliff hanger, then!

Posted by: rtype

Awesome news for me. I have three seasons worth to catch up with between now and January and I like the idea of getting a new ep each week, especially since people say it has a "cliffhanger" like approach. (Maybe I'd have not bailed on 24 if they had done something similar this season.)

Posted by: GoodN

Does "Alias" have enough of an "audience" to hang around until January? What happens if it loses the audience share it has now? Ma

Posted by: Rob Helmerichs

quote:
Originally posted by GoodN
Does "Alias" have enough of an "audience" to hang around until January? What happens if it loses the audience share it has now? Ma

I don't think waiting until January vs. waiting until October will make much difference. They probably lose MORE people during the course of the season when they go away for weeks on end, and people can't remember what was going on in thelast episode!

Posted by: ClutchBrake

I like the idea of starting it in January. Though, to be honest, I quit watching it earlier this season. I think I have all the episodes but I can't make myself watch them. It got to be a major chore to sit through an entire episode.

Posted by: windracer

As long as ABC doesn't start pulling the "mini-season" thing like USA has done to "The Dead Zone" and other shows on that network.

No new "Alias" until January? Man ... time to start buying the DVDs.

Posted by: grecorj

quote:
Originally posted by cwoody222
I sure hope the finale this week isn't TOO much of a cliff hanger, then!

You're kidding, right?

This stinks. Sure, reruns are terrible for shows with continuing storylines (24 has been terrible this year, huge gaps), but no new eps until January 2005? What is this, HBO?

I wonder what happens if the new show in Alias' timeslot tanks/get canceled? Is production on next season being shifted as well, or will the new eps be "in the can" and ready to go early if need be?

Posted by: Sromkie

This is good news for me. I have a friend who I am trying to catch up on the show via the DVDs. This news means that Season 3 will be out enough time prior to 4 airing for us to watch them all :)

Posted by: HTH

quote:
Originally posted by grecorj
You're kidding, right?

This stinks. Sure, reruns are terrible for shows with continuing storylines (24 has been terrible this year, huge gaps), but no new eps until January 2005? What is this, HBO?

/ Showtime / Sci-Fi Channel?

Seems everyone is jumping on the season-starts-in-January bandwagon these days.

Posted by: Mikkel_Knight

quote:
Originally posted by grecorj
You're kidding, right?

This stinks. Sure, reruns are terrible for shows with continuing storylines (24 has been terrible this year, huge gaps), but no new eps until January 2005? What is this, HBO?

I wonder what happens if the new show in Alias' timeslot tanks/get canceled? Is production on next season being shifted as well, or will the new eps be "in the can" and ready to go early if need be?

I dunno... I'd rather see a season occur over the course of 5 1/2 months than spread out over 9... Networks are looking at the Cable setup with the way their model is working (their shows develop (cult)followings where as people follow (when convienient for them) network shows). It's difficult for a series like 24 when there is a whole month, month and a half between episodes. I'd like to see networks go the way that cable shows are going than the other way around...

Posted by: Rob Helmerichs

quote:
Originally posted by HTH
/ Showtime / Sci-Fi Channel?

Seems everyone is jumping on the season-starts-in-January bandwagon these days.

...maybe some day Showtime and Sci-Fi (who start their new seasons in the summer) will jump on the bandwagon, too! :D

Posted by: dansee

I loved it the year "NYPD Blue" was run that way. New show every week, no waiting for a month and forgetting the plotline. I think it would be great to see "Alias" (or any other cliffhanger-type show) that way.

Posted by: rtype

Embrace the future.

There are so many channels on TV and consumers have so many other entertainment options today, that it has been impractical for many people to keep track of when their favorite shows are in rerun or when they're showing new episodes. That programs sometimes go in "hiatus" and then return for 2 or 3 episodes is even more disruptive, and for dramas especially, it's easy to forget where you left off (or forget to care). One thing "reality" television has reminded us is that people like to tune in week after week to find out "what happens." TV was like this at one point in time and the radio drama invented it.

Consistent schedules and new content are, IMHFO, the best way for networks to keep their audiences when faced with competition from other networks and cable. Just the very idea that you can tune in every week at the same time and see a new episode for the entire season, to me, is a good thing. How can you possibly be upset about that? Especially if it increases the liklihood that we'll get another good series out of it too.

Basically it's
Pros: consistent schedule, no reruns, more new series
Cons: later season starts for some series

I'll take midseason replacements over reruns any day. People are already turning to DVD and cable channels for reruns because the "random rerun" as fill-in for network channels was not meeting the customer need. Isn't this the obvious thing to do?

Posted by: HTH

quote:
Originally posted by dansee
I loved it the year "NYPD Blue" was run that way. New show every week, no waiting for a month and forgetting the plotline. I think it would be great to see "Alias" (or any other cliffhanger-type show) that way.

That was great, until an episode got missed for one reason or another. Then it's time to set a WishList and wait for it to appear in syndication a few years later, and hopefully the episode will have the same name (and be spelled the same) when it does. (Episode titles can get a bit punny and an overzealous proofreader at Tribune may revise it.)

Posted by: RichardHead

How about TV folk get off their collective asses and work all year with a month or two off rather than 22 weeks of shows and the rest of the time off? Yes, I know some shows take more than a week to produce. I want to be entertained more than four and a half months of the year!

Posted by: Graymalkin

quote:
Originally posted by RichardHead
How about TV folk get off their collective asses and work all year with a month or two off rather than 22 weeks of shows and the rest of the time off? Yes, I know some shows take more than a week to produce. I want to be entertained more than four and a half months of the year!

They can't afford to. The advertisers simply won't pay them enough, especially since the mass audience for network TV continues to shrink.

Posted by: tivospav

I'm skeptical of this. They've said more than once this season "All new Alias till the season finale" and I remember it being bumped twice. Once for some awards show, and this latest 2 weeks off, one week was the survivor finale, and last week was The Practice (which made more sense since they're on the same network).

I hope it works like they say it will, I think ABC will have a better chance to keep viewers watching with a schedule like that since the episodes depend so much on previous continuity.

Posted by: Rob Helmerichs

quote:
Originally posted by RichardHead
How about TV folk get off their collective asses and work all year with a month or two off rather than 22 weeks of shows and the rest of the time off? Yes, I know some shows take more than a week to produce. I want to be entertained more than four and a half months of the year!

The production schedule for a 22-week one-hour show is the better part of a year, and that's 12-16 hour days. I suspect if you made the season significantly longer, the only people you'd be able to find to act in them are beginners who would do anything for a break--and once they got famous, they'd bail.

Posted by: AJRitz

quote:
Originally posted by tivospav
I'm skeptical of this. They've said more than once this season "All new Alias till the season finale" and I remember it being bumped twice. Once for some awards show, and this latest 2 weeks off, one week was the survivor finale, and last week was The Practice (which made more sense since they're on the same network).

Ahhh, but they did keep their word to you. It was all new Alias til the season finale - there were no Alias re-runs, just other programming usurping Alias' timeslot.

Posted by: cmontyburns

I can't help feeling like this is very bad news, indeed. I certainly understand the appeal from a viewer's perspective of having a long uninterrupted string of new episodes (which may be especially important for a plot-driven show like Alias) but in general I think history demonstrates it's always better for a show to be on than not on, no matter what reason the network gives for not having it on. NYPD Blue has been cited as an example of a show that the delay tactic works for, but that is also a show that has consistently pulled better ratings than Alias does. Delaying a lower-rated show like Alias until midseason is just asking for its replacement to do just well enough to not bring it back at all. I remember a similar thread earlier this year when ABC pulled Karen Sisco -- also a critical darling pulling comparable ratings -- promising to bring it back mid-season. Many posters felt like that would be a good thing, and of course we never saw Karen Sisco again.

I'm curious if the fact that ABC will be airing another JJ Abrams show ("Lost") this fall factors in here at all, and if so whether it is good or bad. Desire to expand the relationship with a producer they have faith in? Or quid pro quo for possibly canceling Alias?

Posted by: rasheed

quote:
Originally posted by Medieval Guy
I don't think waiting until January vs. waiting until October will make much difference. They probably lose MORE people during the course of the season when they go away for weeks on end, and people can't remember what was going on in thelast episode!

I suspect some of the practical reasons for this is to allow Abrams to work on Lost (which has an incredible cast) and make sure that show lives up to its potential.

It seems by this decision that ABC is willing to let this show remain a low-ratings deal and only for dedicated fans. Perhaps it was too late to get new people to watch anyway (I guess they can promote the DVD and hope for a Family Guy effect), but I find any show with a midseason label to just have it that much harder (even if it is already established).

In the worse case scenario, Abrams could be told they are going to drop Alias later this year and with the airing delay, he could write a real series finale. A lot can happen between now and midseason (so maybe they don't want to make any cancellation announcement to be headlines overshadowing the rest of the new shows).

Rasheed

Posted by: Rob Helmerichs

Alias is almost certainly around for another two seasons, because of the syndication deal. I doubt they're cutting their losses; I suspect they're trying to find a way to make it work. And by running the entire season in one continuous run, they may be on to something.

Posted by: smak

quote:
Originally posted by cmontyburns
I can't help feeling like this is very bad news, indeed. I certainly understand the appeal from a viewer's perspective of having a long uninterrupted string of new episodes (which may be especially important for a plot-driven show like Alias) but in general I think history demonstrates it's always better for a show to be on than not on, no matter what reason the network gives for not having it on. NYPD Blue has been cited as an example of a show that the delay tactic works for, but that is also a show that has consistently pulled better ratings than Alias does. Delaying a lower-rated show like Alias until midseason is just asking for its replacement to do just well enough to not bring it back at all. I remember a similar thread earlier this year when ABC pulled Karen Sisco -- also a critical darling pulling comparable ratings -- promising to bring it back mid-season. Many posters felt like that would be a good thing, and of course we never saw Karen Sisco again.

I'm curious if the fact that ABC will be airing another JJ Abrams show ("Lost") this fall factors in here at all, and if so whether it is good or bad. Desire to expand the relationship with a producer they have faith in? Or quid pro quo for possibly canceling Alias?

Well, with Karen Sisco, they pulled it, and for a long time, there was no word on it. Then they said they'd bring it back in March, and people were happy.

They didn't annouce that KS would be back at all when it was first pulled.

ABC is in dire straits, they are friggin' putting on a wife swapping show, that's how much trouble they're in. They will keep Alias at least through 2006.

-smak-

Posted by: cmontyburns

quote:
Originally posted by Medieval Guy
Alias is almost certainly around for another two seasons, because of the syndication deal. I doubt they're cutting their losses; I suspect they're trying to find a way to make it work. And by running the entire season in one continuous run, they may be on to something.

Don't get me wrong; I'm on your side, and hope you're right. But that deal will never come to fruition if there is no money in it, and the way that there will be money in it is to have viewers. Which Alias really doesn't have in compelling numbers. So I don't see it as a significant factor in whether ABC brings the show back or not.

ABC has been one of the worst-run networks for a while now, so their decision-making is suspect anyway, no matter what logic would dictate. On the plus side, they've cleaned house at the programming level and hopefully the new people have better heads on them. On the minus side, it seems that a lot of the problems have originated all the way up at Disney (with Eisner himself wanting to approve schedule changes) and that structure is still in place. So we'll see!

Posted by: dssdbs

quote:
Originally posted by VegasVic
How does According To Jim keep getting renewed? Geez.

Because it's an excellent funny show.

Posted by: cmontyburns

quote:
Originally posted by smak
Well, with Karen Sisco, they pulled it, and for a long time, there was no word on it. Then they said they'd bring it back in March, and people were happy.

They didn't annouce that KS would be back at all when it was first pulled.

Actually, IIRC, bringing it back mid-season was their justification for pulling it. Not that it matters now.

quote:
ABC is in dire straits, they are friggin' putting on a wife swapping show, that's how much trouble they're in.

Can't debate you here. I'm a bit surprised that show hasn't raised more eyebrows in among the media reporters than it has. I know the premise isn't as salacious as the title makes it out to be, but come on. We're in Fox territory here, or worse.

Posted by: rtype

Alias gets consistently good ratings and critical praise, both rare for an ABC show. I'm not sure I understand why people are so eager to think that it may be cancelled?

Posted by: jerobi

I found this to be equally good news...

As for "Arrested Development" and "Tru Calling," both series are definitely on their way back.

I must have missed the AD thread on this one.

Posted by: brott

quote:
Originally posted by RichardHead
How about TV folk get off their collective asses and work all year with a month or two off rather than 22 weeks of shows and the rest of the time off? Yes, I know some shows take more than a week to produce. I want to be entertained more than four and a half months of the year!

I agree with Medieval Guy on this one. I mean assuming that they can actually pull off an episode every 2 weeks, they still only have two or three weeks per year for vacations. Everyone deserves a little rest. I'm sure the actors don't spend the entire two weeks, but the long hours the put in during the days they are there surely more than make up the time difference.

I'd love to be paid the salaries that some of the people (Jennifer Garner) are getting, but I have to believe that at a minimum, they are actually working for a living.

Posted by: Rob Helmerichs

I think it's more like 10 days for an episode, but that's 10 days of getting up before dawn and working until late at night.

Posted by: rasheed

quote:
Originally posted by rtype
Alias gets consistently good ratings and critical praise, both rare for an ABC show. I'm not sure I understand why people are so eager to think that it may be cancelled?

Critical praise? Yes.
Good ratings? Uh, no.

quote:
Originally posted by jerobi
I found this to be equally good news...

As for "Arrested Development" and "Tru Calling," both series are definitely on their way back.

I must have missed the AD thread on this one.

Fox has not officially announced its schedule yet, but the indicators appear as such.

Rasheed

Posted by: rtype

quote:
Originally posted by rasheed
Critical praise? Yes.
Good ratings? Uh, no.

http://members.tripod.com/~t_d_farr...as/ratings.html

Looks better than most stuff on ABC to me.

Posted by: smak

I think the syndication and DVD sales seal the deal for Alias being around for a few years.

Those 2 seasons are 100% definate for syndication and DVD sales.

Whatever show they would put on to replace it has bad odds to make it to syndication, and probably would never be be popular on DVD.

-smak-

Posted by: lew

quote:
Originally posted by rtype
http://members.tripod.com/~t_d_farr...as/ratings.html

Looks better than most stuff on ABC to me.

But your previous post said its ratings were good. BTW look at the ratings (your link) for 1/26/03. ABC let the superbowl post game show run past 11:00p so the ratings didn't count.

Ratings are poor.

http://www.allyourtv.com/ratingsseason.html

The fact that abc owns the series means it makes some money off DVD sales and syndication (although the syndication sale was a fraction of what ABC though it would be). That additional revenue and abc overall poor ratings is the only thing that saved the show. The fact that the show was renewed is a gift.

Posted by: dtle

I don't believe ABC would let their Sunday's night be to two low-rated reality shows and two freshman shows. They'll get slaughter with NFL overruns in the Fall. If this is true, then new management is worst than the old.