Why Firefly failed to draw rating? suggestions by Bebop

GENERAL DISCUSSIONS

Why Firefly failed to draw rating? suggestions

POSTED BY: BEBOP
UPDATED: Thursday, March 27, 2003 18:10
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 3898
PAGE 1 of 1

Saturday, December 14, 2002 11:34 AM

hi, First time poster, First time visitor

I was disappointed to learn that Fox had cancelled Firefly, but it came as no surprise. I am not a Buffy fan nor a Josh fan, but Firefly was totally enjoyable. Kudos for Firefly to being original. I just want to discuss why Firefly failed to draw a crowd.

1) The Hand Held Camera shooting techniques. I don't know about you guys but I find it quite annonying at times. I just felt it cheats, and doesn't do TV experience justice.

2) I'm not an avid TV watcher, but I feel there's not alot of science fiction going on in this series. And They didn't do a good job of defining the Firefly universe, e.g. how the overall system works, or what power sources are. Instead they just proclaimed human terraformed dozens? hundreds? of planets

3)Joss focused on too much! character dramatization I felt the audience really couldn't relate to, and why everybody has to talks funny western English is beyond me. Don't get me wrong here, I perferctly understand the western theme. I have my own DVD of Cowboy Bebop

There alot more. I am sure you all of you have some take of your own

P.S. I feel Josh has taken some materials from Cowboy Bebop or maybe not, at least now Joss knows American mainstream is not ready for this genre.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, December 14, 2002 12:15 PM

HKCAVALIER

If you're expecting a sci-fi shoot 'em up, then sure, your complaints are valid, the characterization, the lack of explicit backstory, the hand-held intimacy of the camera work, the inexplicable quirks of the dialogue, all weird, extranious, and precious. But if you're looking for an adult, character-driven story of what it might be like to actually live 500 years in the future in a tiny spacecraft on the outskirts of an interplanetary fascist regime, then everything you mentioned serves to make the experience all the more authentic.

I think what might be more fundamental to the problem of reception by the popular culture is that there are no weird aliens. None. Joss don't believe in 'em. Aliens give a sci-fi show's weirdness a face. You see an ad for a show with green-faced, pointy-eared lazer toting aliens and you check out the show, at least once. On the surface Firefly has nothing more remarkable than some spaceships. All sci-fi shows have aliens. More now than ever.

The closest thing I can think of to the kind of mature, humane themed sci-fi I love on Firefly is the old X-files, but you see, X-files had weird aliens, to say nothing of full-fledged monsters. At the end of every episode you got a glimpse of next week's critter--woo hoo, Mulder's going head to head with vampires, I can't wait! That's the kind of thing that ropes 'em in.

Remember, no matter where Firefly goes, there she is.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, December 14, 2002 12:39 PM

HJERMSTED

I don't think Firefly itself was the reason the larger audience never showed up. Not at all. Yeah, the show was new and different and tried things other prime time network shows hadn't, but this is all good. Audiences, when an effort is made to find them, are very adaptable creatures.

Joss and Co. did their job and put together an excellent show with fantastic acting and character development. What you mention as a weakness was actually Firefly's greatest strength! I want to know more about this group of people!

After the first episode ('Train Job'), I never noticed the handheld camera again... in other words I got used to it. Camera work was never the focus of what was happening on screen.

The questioning of "is Firefly sci fi? is it western?" is pointless and moot. The show is first and foremost a drama. Everything else is the backdrop that, to paraphrase Joss, "keeps the show from taking place in a law office, hospital, or police station" like every other US produced drama on TV.

It was Fox that killed this show (on their network at least).

With Firefly, I believe Fox dug themselves into a very shallow hole that they were unwilling to explore ways to step out of. Fox advertised the show extremely poorly. Those initial ads to the tune of "Walking on the Sun" were totally misrepresentative of Firefly's tone. This isn't an MTV show. It's more cerebral than that.

Fox's expectations were way too high. Essentially the network was looking for a consistent draw of five or six million+ viewers in the Friday at 8PM time slot of doom. I can confidently predict that the network will NEVER enjoy those numbers no matter what new weekly show they place in that time slot. They might be able to pull those numbers once or twice with a special or reality show but never consistently with a 22 episode run of a show. Those days are gone. There are too many TV channels to choose from nowadays and audiences prefer to have lives away from the TV on Friday nights.

Fox never intended to nurture this show into an X-Files like numbers phenom. The network was (and is) experimenting with ways to boost their ratings during the timeslot of death when they should be happy with the results they received. 4.5 million dedicated viewers is no lump of coal in the stocking.

We should have all seen the writing on the wall when Fox wouldn't even air Firefly's pilot first!! And when Fox pre-empted new episodes of Firefly, was it so they could show a Firefly repeat from earlier in the season? No. No repeats at all in fact, not even on sister network FX (like Fox does with 24).

Had the network truly been behind the show, the advertising campaign would have been more imaginative and far more consistent than it was. Obviously more Firefly commercials on Fox, but why didn't Fox buy ads for Firefly on other networks? How about during Buffy and Angel? Or during Taken (Sci Fi channel's best rated show ever)? Where were the billboards and ads on the sides of buses?

Sensing how a potential hit was languishing in the wrong timeslot, a caring Fox with foresight would've moved the show to a new timeslot once, maybe twice, to find a more numbers nurturing hour.

Lastly, if Fox was behind the show, they would've shown the pilot "Serenity" first instead of last.

Obviously, none of this happened. Fox was half-assed about this show from day one. The network wanted Firefly to do all of the work. In other words it expected a TV ratings miracle. Fox itself is what killed any chance Firefly had on its network.

Let's hope UPN or some other network has a little more vision and understanding of what backing a show really means.

mattro

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, December 14, 2002 1:20 PM

SERGEANTX

I think you've pretty much nailed it Hjermsted, but I'd like to address Bebop's points, because they've been voiced more than once as detractions from the show.

The real thing Bebop is getting at in all of his points is that viewers aren't getting what they expected. What people like Joss Whedon understand and what the very few really good network people understand is that the real fun of getting into a new series is having your expectations tweaked. Now a network worth the time understands that they can lead people's expectations and create the core audience that will allow a real following to materialize.

Most people out there will tune into a show when they get curious about the buzz, and they'll stick around, even if its not quite what they expected. Then, if the show has done its job, they find they are really enjoying something they didn't expect. But the buzz has to be there.

The point is the network has to actually SELL the show to the audience. If its all about business, as the apologists keep saying, then the job of the networks is to SELL the products(shows) to the customers. If they're not going to do that, they should get the hell out of the way and let the producers and directors run the networks.

SergeantX

"..and here's to all the dreamers, may our open hearts find rest." -- Nanci Griffith

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, December 14, 2002 1:22 PM

WILLIAM

Hjermsted, you are right !

FOX did all that, and expected ratings to the roof, it's like they thought a miracle was gonna happen. Basically they thought "Joss Whedon's fans will tune in, lets not bother with any good advertising"

After this, I don't think Joss will ever place any of his future shows on FOX TV.

It's really funny how the cancellation came about, FOX said that
they'll give Firefly more time, how they'll promote it heavily, but did they ? NO !, they plainly lied their sock right off ! They said that'll they will look at the ratings for December's ratings. ONE episode has been shown in December ! Cancellation...

For goodness sake, They gave Fastlane a full season, a silly non-creative show like that deserves to be dumped, BUT NOT FIREFLY !

I really hope the nice executives at UPN who picked up Buffy, and are very willing to pick up Angel, if theWB decides to cancel it, DO pick up Firefly :)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, December 14, 2002 4:18 PM

GB1701

Although I have never seen an episode of Buffy and only heard of Joss Whedon before from Alien Resurection (which did not bode well for fans, as well as I suspect his resume), I have found Firefly a very unique show and though it is sad to see it go, it is not unexpected.

After years of devotion to the overmilked Trek concept, I find quasi-sci-fi shows like Firefly a breath of fresh air and I think that very uniqueness is what kills shows like it.

Like several comments alluded to here, I think the mainstream viewers have a real problem with concepts so vastly different from the same old cop, lawyer, medical and sitcom clones whos only concept is 30 minutes of risque humor and put-downs. This is what the majority of viewers seem to want (or network wonks seem to think they want). Also I think despite much quality inroads in sci-fi in recent years (excluding post DS9 Trek), most of the public still sees the genre as third-rate and something for children. There are still people who view sci-fi fans as weird and think you must automaticaly believe in real aliens or even seen some just because you watch them on TV. As if they somehow think Friends reflects reality and how people relate to each other.

I have gotten used to being in the minority when it comes to my viewing choices and long learned that when a vastly different premise like the former Brisco County Jr. or Mercy Point come along I will:A. Like it and B. It will be gone before its time.

From the first mention of Firefly I saw in TV Guide I knew it was a show I wanted to see and would likely look forward to every week, yet also knowing in the back of my mind it was doomed to begin with.

Then again alot of the lack of ratings could be the choice of a network that has still failed to shake its early reputation. "When Accident Attorneys Attack 3!" indeed.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, December 14, 2002 6:00 PM

ANTARIUS

One thing you might be overlooking folks, is the Dark Angel anti-Firefly backlash. Dark Angel fans weren't going to watch this show, period. At least a good majority of them anyway.

As DA fans understood things, DA was on course for renewal for this season, and Fox, which hated Whedon's original pilot for Firefly, told him to rewrite it and try for a mid-season replacement slot. Instead, Whedon rewrote the pilot vitually overnight, and Fox loved it so much they canned DA and gave it's slot to Firefly. DA fans went into a frenzy, and with a large portion of an audience that might have watched Firefly otherwise now alienated, Firefly's chances of success were cut down.

If all this is factual or not I'm not certain, but that's how DA fans understood things. I know I stayed away. Maybe I'm a loser for doing so, but that's just how it was. Maybe if Whedon had taken more time and aimed for spring he would have had a better shot.

DA was limping along in season 2, and maybe it deserved the boot, but Fox wasn't too swift in angering the same audience it expected to tune into Firefly. Just shows you how smart Fox is.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, December 14, 2002 7:17 PM

QIXOTL

Antarius, I am more under the impression that you were in the minority. I was a fan of Dark Angel (but was not thrilled with the direction Season 2 took) and I watched Firefly from the beginning. I know several people who did the same thing (but many of us liked Buffy and Angel as well). While Fox was very unfair to the DA cast and crew in how they handled the cancellation, I understood the decision eventually. Fox could not afford both shows and DA's ratings were not growing. It was time for a change IMHO.

To my eyes, the series was mismarketed from the start. While humor and a Old West feel are a part of the series, Firefly at its heart is a complex character drama. The summer broadast ads portrayed the show as more of a Green Acres in space (Look at all of these crazy hicks! In a spaceship even!). Despite being a fan of Whedon's previous creations, I was not confident that I would enjoy this series. Casual sci-fi fans who are familiar with Whedon's style probably didn't give the show a try. The campy robbery in "The Train Job" caused one friend of mine (who is more of a Whedon fan than I) to give up on the show after one episode.

If Fox wanted an instant hit, they did it the wrong way. Sticking the show in the Death Slot and making it look like an bizarre program months before it premiered put up a brick wall that was going to take a season or two to break down. Fox could not wait for the hole to be punched open since Firefly is not cheap to make, so it was retired well before its prime.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, December 14, 2002 7:29 PM

EVANS

Quote:
Originally posted by SergeantX:
I think you've pretty much nailed it Hjermsted....Most people out there will tune into a show when they get curious about the buzz, and they'll stick around, even if its not quite what they expected.

Yes! I have never seen Farscape on TV, I don't have cable, but all the buzz made me curious, and I have read the transcripts and bought all the DVDs available. And...another good show down the tubes.

m.
------------------------------------------------
"But ... not boring, like she made it sound." Wash, in ARIEL
"None of it means a damn thing." Mal, in OBJECTS IN SPACE

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 25, 2003 3:42 PM

MOYASELENE

As a Dark Angel fan (and more relivantly a fan who had nothing to do in the time right after it's cancellation) I believe the above description of events is correct. Dark Angel got cancelled in the 11th hour of the final decision day. This was of course after the fanalie had been produced and after tv guide had released a stament saying it had a definite season 3. With my loads of free time, i spent way too much time on-line. you can believe me.

i always thought that fox made a lot of mistakes with firefly. the dark angel audience was a big part of those they were trying to attract, but they effectivly alienated them. i am practicaly the exact fan they were hoping to attract. i'm 20 years old, in college so have some education (granted my internet writing doesn't back that up), have been watching scifi for about 13 years, and i am a huge fan of joss. they totaly lost my faith. apparently, i would have been mad too. had i spent my summer on the dark angel campaign and then turned to firefly, i would have been greatly .....angered.... at it's unnanounced mid-season demise.

there are always reasons, but shouldn't there be something somplace that says cancelled shows get to wrap it up before being taken away?

also, the advertising was rediculus. to broadcast it as a "space western" was a bad idea. thjat's not exactly a pre-established market. also, what little i did see had nothing to do with with what the privews said.(hang on, dark angel flashback! fox advertising bites)

i definatly would have watched, but w/ the exit of dark angel, i went back to farscape. look where that got me! it was a great show with only one more year contracted anyways. also, i hate, absolutly HATE, to see the words "TO BE CONTINUED" at the end of a cancelled show.

congradulations, to the scapers though. there was a fan sponsored commercial for renewal in the middle of the epp. maybe, seeing as farscape never suffored a drop in ratings (only a lack of advancement) scifi will listen.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 25, 2003 5:49 PM

AKFIREFLY

Quote:
Originally posted by Qixotl:
...The campy robbery in "The Train Job" caused one friend of mine (who is more of a Whedon fan than I) to give up on the show after one episode...

OH HOW TRUE!!I also belong to a Enterprise forum and a lot of them said that they did NOT like Firefly after the frist episode. But what they failed in seeing is that Joss in his wonderful brain has combined what is good in all of our favorite TV shows. Humor

, suspence, a bit of a love story

, in space, with a bit of the shoot 'em up bang bang

for action. What Trekkies should be asking is where is this type of writing when it comes to Enterprise?? The thing that kept us (my friends and I)watching(Firefly) week in and out was in "The Train Job" episode. It suprised the heck out of us to see a "good guy" kick a guy into a running engine, and then to follow it up with a bit of humor. WOW!! Oh how I miss this show *sigh*...and with Buffy coming to an end this season...what ever shall we do for good entertainment. Unfortunatly, up here in Alaska we do not get the WB. Therefore we have just begun to watch Angel (on DVD). Anywho, one more thing is that I to was a DA fan, but was unhappy with the turn they took on the season 2. And I could never get past how in interviews Jessica Alba; showed her 19 year old side. It just threw me how very teenagerie (if that is a word) she was. I expected someone with less giggle, and more grown-up. But that is IMHO.

Thanks for letting me vent.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 27, 2003 6:10 PM

CHAOSIUM

I believe some of the 'blame' for poor ratings belongs in the category of 'competition rather than cooperation.'

Television networks engage in a war of ratings.
'Who owns what night' etc. They regularly put shows designed to draw a specific demographic in direct competition with another network on the same night, at the same time.

Friday nights are/were owned by the Sci-Fi channel and their lineup of Stargate SG-1 and Farscape.
Who in their right mind would put a new/another Sci-Fi show up against direct competition?
Television Execs who want to split an audience, that's who.
Well, I doubt it will ever change either.
Would Firefly have done better on a different day? I don't know, but I believe it would have.
The demographic that Firefly was trying to reach aren't exactly the type of people who sit at home on Friday nights either.
We set the VCR and head out to meet our friends at the bar, club, whatever.
I can always watch the episode on Saturday. It's not like I have to see it that very moment.
I chose to record Firefly every Friday because I knew that I could always catch those other shows on the Sci-Fi Channel 1AM rerun.

Time for a paradigm shift? Could be!
Hey Joss! If you or your folks read this, I had one of my 'moments of inspiration.'
Take it directly to the consumer.
Chuck Barris took his Gong Show directly to the Syndication stations and shocked the major network execs a bit. Time to deliver a little shock of your own?
I for one, would pay $5.00 plus a buck or two S&H each week to have a DVD of my Firefly episode arrive in my mailbox. I'm gonna buy them if they ever come out on DVD anyway... why not have them right away?
As for funding? Coupons, baby, coupons.
As long as there will be television, there will be companies trying to get viewers to use their products. A coordinated effort at providing subscibers with coupons from major product manufacturers that were complementary, rather than in weekly competition would get subscribers to use coupons included with their DVDs.
(Hell, I'd buy DelMonte one week and Green Giant the next week.)

And I saw this land a battlefield,
with a hundred-thousand men,
fighting hand-to-hand.
And I head the sound of Victory.
And the rivers ran red with the blood of our enemies.
(Chris DeBurgh - The Leader)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER	POST DATE

USER

POST DATE