TV Ratings (Wednesday 11th May)
- Thread starter Jax
- Start date
J
Jetfire
Guest
I still think FOX is dumb for canceling 'Breaking In' 7.65 million & 2.4/6 seems pretty good to me for that type of show. 
And it was even with last week. 
And it was even with last week. 
I still think FOX is dumb for canceling 'Breaking In' 7.65 million & 2.4/6 seems pretty good to me for that type of show.
It was wasting too much of Idol's lead in and based off those numbers with Idol, on its own it would of flatlined. If Breaking In had aired in a different slot with those numbers we might be talking about a 2nd season but I can't say FOX got it wrong especially with FOX already renewing one low rated comedy in Raising Hope.
Not enough People just didn't like it
J
Jetfire
Guest
And how many people should be liking it? It isn't a show that would have grabbed half of AI's audience.
Whatevs, I think it was a mistake and I will leave it at that.
Whatevs, I think it was a mistake and I will leave it at that.
FOX has little room for more shows so Breaking in never stood a chance really after Raising Hope was renewed and 2 comedy pilots impressed the execs. Not on Idol night, those ratings might of been enough but FOX wants a comedy that can do around 3.0 in the demo out of the Idol and soon X Factor wednesday slot.
J
Jetfire
Guest
It won't happen and I will be surprised if it does. I have no reason to watch FOX now. 
If NBC doesn't pick up Wonder Woman...I won't be watching them either. 
If NBC doesn't pick up Wonder Woman...I won't be watching them either.
Last edited by a moderator:
J
Jetfire
Guest
As Temis posted in the 'Breaking In' thread 
I hope they give it another shot.
FOX is thinking of un-cancelling it???
They should keep it, just move it away from American Idol where it's wasting the lead-in. Beef up the shallow writing and get some clarity on the main character. He was supposed to be blackmailed into taking the job, but now he seems upset at the idea of losing the job.
It's okay if the character is evolving (which is the generous interpretation, it's probably just sloppiness), but him being blackmailed was part of the premise, so does this show have a new premise? Why do we care if some nerd keeps a job working for a weird creep? And the romantic rivalry between him and Dutch is never going to work because Dutch is not being written douchey enough. Keep Dutch the way he is, drop the romantic rivalry.
I hope they give it another shot.
I am so sick of american idol.
and all most all of reality tv.
Amen brother!
J
Jetfire
Guest
The lead in stuff is BS...the people who watch AI aren't watching anything after it is over...they are too busy blowing up the phone lines, texting and stuff getting their votes in.
Lead in shows are important unless your a very well established show. If your a new show and the show before you has a big audience, there is a good chance a good amount of them will see the whats next bit at the end of their show and think something new, I'll give it a shot and never ever underestimate lazy fuckers who cba to change the channel
I think its more important though in half hour shows because your unlikely to grab viewers away from other shows 30 mins into their 1 hour episodes so you need a good follow up show to bring over its own audience....Generally :30 shows have smaller audiences than their lead in show that start on the hour.
There are shows that are proped up by their lead ins and without them fade bad...
Mike n Molly, Private Practice, Coguar Town, Parks and Recreation to name some.
I would of moved the season finale of Breaking In to join Glee/Raising Hope next week before making the call.
Lead in shows are important unless your a very well established show. If your a new show and the show before you has a big audience, there is a good chance a good amount of them will see the whats next bit at the end of their show and think something new, I'll give it a shot and never ever underestimate lazy fuckers who cba to change the channel
I think its more important though in half hour shows because your unlikely to grab viewers away from other shows 30 mins into their 1 hour episodes so you need a good follow up show to bring over its own audience....Generally :30 shows have smaller audiences than their lead in show that start on the hour.
There are shows that are proped up by their lead ins and without them fade bad...
Mike n Molly, Private Practice, Coguar Town, Parks and Recreation to name some.
It just seems ridiculous to me. British TV doesn't work like that. Shows are on when they're on, and whatever is on before or after it has no bearing on its viewership.
It's official: Ashton Kutcher is replacing Charlie Sheen on Two and a Half Men.
J
Jetfire
Guest
That's it! I am done with Two and a Half Men! I hate Kutcher!!!
Ok I might check out an ep or two.
Two & Half Men is going to flatline and I also want TBBT back on Mondays 
because despite a solid start against Idol, its starting to chip away at its demo, Plus CBS could do with the help between 8-9.
As for the whole British tele thing Servo, welcome to American TV, its one screwed up place
because despite a solid start against Idol, its starting to chip away at its demo, Plus CBS could do with the help between 8-9.As for the whole British tele thing Servo, welcome to American TV, its one screwed up place
I don't know Jax, I think the networks have unrealistic expectations when it comes to this "lead-in" stuff. EXCEPT for the half hour shows that start on the half hour, you have a point on them. But Servo is right, people are going to watch what they're going to watch on whatever network they want to watch, regardless of what comes on before or after them.
It's not 1950 anymore. We have remote controls. We have, in some cases, dozens if not hundreds of channels to choose from. There's NO REASON WHATSOEVER that a viewer has to be married to a channel once their show is over.
I know this is a network thing, but it just goes to show you how unrealistic they are. Again, for the shows that start (or end) on the half hour, I get the theory and it's probably valid for THOSE shows. But you can't convince me, that in today's TV world, that it's valid for competing hour long shows that start and end on the hour.
It's not 1950 anymore. We have remote controls. We have, in some cases, dozens if not hundreds of channels to choose from. There's NO REASON WHATSOEVER that a viewer has to be married to a channel once their show is over.
I know this is a network thing, but it just goes to show you how unrealistic they are. Again, for the shows that start (or end) on the half hour, I get the theory and it's probably valid for THOSE shows. But you can't convince me, that in today's TV world, that it's valid for competing hour long shows that start and end on the hour.