In 1952 nearly 70 million Americans watched each new episode of I love Lucy, as it aired.
Today the highest rated sitcom is the Big Bang which is getting 20 million viewers per new episode.
It's a whole new world.
It certainly is.
In 1952 nearly 70 million Americans watched each new episode of I love Lucy, as it aired.
Today the highest rated sitcom is the Big Bang which is getting 20 million viewers per new episode.
It's a whole new world.
Well at least we can't blame Obama for that..... It was the Brits fault.
We like quality over quantity.The fucking British were too cheap to make more than 4-5 episodes every few years that TV Networks are like "Let's be cheap and do the same!"
I've only seen the first season, but I loved it, and intend to catch up sometime. Glad to hear it ended on a high note.I'm sorry to see Man Seeking Woman got cancelled.
http://tvline.com/2017/04/04/man-seeking-woman-cancelled-season-4-fxx/
I found it to be very clever and quite funny.
Still, it ended in a perfect way, so I guess I can't complain.
Oh there are plenty of things to blame Obama on, like fucking over the country for the next 50 years by being a weak bitch, but sitcoms aren't one of them.
Will and Grace reboot is getting 12 episodes, up from 10.
The 20+ episode seasons are still very much a thing on the American broadcast networks. Most shows, unless they're mid-season replacements, cancelled early, or deliberately designed to have a limited season, are still in the 20-24 episode range.On the other hand, over-saturation and tired writing is the risk on the opposite end of the spectrum, with 20+ episode seasons per year (do any of those even exist anymore?) - burn-out potential for both the writers and audience becomes high. 13-15 episodes per season seemed to be a good compromise. 5 or 6 per season? Fuckall!
^^^ Quality is a fine thing, to be sure, but when the seasons are too short, and there is too much hiatus downtime between them, people tend to forget to care about the characters and/or storylines, regardless of how good they may be. Yes, I, too, blame the British for beginning this trend years ago that American show-runners have gleefully adopted much to my chagrin - infuriated me to no end with "Red Dwarf". It's like paying $80 for a dinner that occupies about 15% of the plate's surface area. There's a word for that - "pretentious". Your shit has to be REALLY good to make people want to put up with that. There comes a point of diminishing returns on such a dangerous business model.
On the other hand, over-saturation and tired writing is the risk on the opposite end of the spectrum, with 20+ episode seasons per year (do any of those even exist anymore?) - burn-out potential for both the writers and audience becomes high. 13-15 episodes per season seemed to be a good compromise. 5 or 6 per season? Fuckall!
13-15 episodes per season seemed to be a good compromise. 5 or 6 per season? Fuckall!
I think producers have come to realize that they can craft stronger stories and put them out quicker by going with that amount, particularly if they have story arcs, which seems to be the case with most shows these days. I know that with around 15 episodes, I tend to feel satisfied when a season ends.
But 8 episodes for a 22 minute long shows?! That's not enough.
Maybe we do know and it's just we don't like to make a fuss.I just started the third season of Primeval, it's really fun and crazy. Kind of reminds me of Sliders if they also slide through time.
And why don't the British now about the dinosaurs... same reason why they don;t know of the dinosaurs and aliens in Doctor Who, Brits are really stupid.![]()
Maybe we do know and it's just we don't like to make a fuss.![]()
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.