http://www.drhorrible.com/Also: Dr. Horrible already showed what you can do with almost no budget.
I have no clue what that is... is it a nick name for Aliens 4?
http://doctorhorrible.net/about/
Dude...where have you been last year??
Dollhouse renewed?
- Thread starter Colin Xavier
- Start date
http://doctorhorrible.net/about/
Dude...where have you been last year??
I'm sold.
Well, color me surprised. Like basically everyone else, I figured this show was as good as cancelled.
But Human Target the comic book has a sci fi twist and from what I've read the TV show won't use that.
Well the show was way better near the end. Too bad it didn't get reflected in viewership but if online views/DVR + poor Fall options is a reason or THE reasons for Dollhouse's renewal I'll take it. Too bad that couldn't have happened with Firefly.
I'll take Dollhouse over Bionic Woman and NuKnight Rider though anyday.
I'll take Dollhouse over Bionic Woman and NuKnight Rider though anyday.
I see a lot of people on here saying the same thing "How can fox keep this show going when they've canceled so many good ones?"
Well, I think they finally learned their lesson from Firefly. They asked for a Whedon show, and he's given them one. Did it have good ratings? Nope. Neither did Season one of Buffy. Neither did Firefly. And yet both have huge cult followings now. I think the only show Joss actually piloted that did well in the first season was Angel, but it wasn't really a pilot now was it? When Dollhouse aired, they knew they were getting a huge number of people that were just Whedonists and would watch no matter what. They even knew ahead of time that TV ratings would be low due to the current trend to watch TV online. But since they host all the episodes on Hulu themselves, they aren't actually losing much money there.
I think, for Fox, the bottom line is that they screwed the pooch with a lot of their better shows. Now they've got one that maybe isn't great but is similar to other stuff that they didn't give enough of a chance to. So they're going to let it run for another season and see what happens.
Well, I think they finally learned their lesson from Firefly. They asked for a Whedon show, and he's given them one. Did it have good ratings? Nope. Neither did Season one of Buffy. Neither did Firefly. And yet both have huge cult followings now. I think the only show Joss actually piloted that did well in the first season was Angel, but it wasn't really a pilot now was it? When Dollhouse aired, they knew they were getting a huge number of people that were just Whedonists and would watch no matter what. They even knew ahead of time that TV ratings would be low due to the current trend to watch TV online. But since they host all the episodes on Hulu themselves, they aren't actually losing much money there.
I think, for Fox, the bottom line is that they screwed the pooch with a lot of their better shows. Now they've got one that maybe isn't great but is similar to other stuff that they didn't give enough of a chance to. So they're going to let it run for another season and see what happens.
I dunno. I'd have to look up the numbers on that to be sure. I don't think anyone can fool themselves into thinking that the first season of Buffy was a "good" season. It was cheesy, it had very little plot progression or character developement, the special effects were bad...If it wasn't for some damn witty writing I don't think it would have made it to season two. And then look what we got..MAGIC!
So I'm hoping that we shall see something similar with Dollhouse. We've had the crappy first season. Now it's time for Spike, Dru, and Angelus to rock this joint, know what I mean?
So I'm hoping that we shall see something similar with Dollhouse. We've had the crappy first season. Now it's time for Spike, Dru, and Angelus to rock this joint, know what I mean?
I've pointed the same thing out many times, Temis continues to say the exact same thing every time anyway. I can see her point, advertisers see it that way so that's all that counts.
You might have missed the salient part:
So DVR viewing is worth half regular viewing. My point is, that DVR viewing is not equal to TV viewing.
This jibes with the figures I've seen tossed around, that the number of ads actually watched are something like 40-60%. And yes, the advertisers know this very well. Everyone sees the same data.
The other issue in the mix is if advertisers can get away with not even paying half for the ads, they'll do that, and that depends on their negotiating skills. (They currently do pay something for ads, but only if seen w/n three days of viewing, since ads have expiration dates and many become worthless if viewed after that time period. So if you want to be precise, DVR viewing is worth less than half regular viewing.)
The real point here is that DVRs give advertisers a weapon to use against networks and in various ways, reduce the amount of money they give to the networks. With the recession, it's a seller's market for ads. The upfronts next week will be bloody.
The figures also tend to change somewhat depending on who is doing the measuring, and everyone should check the source of reports like this, because networks have been fudging the numbers to make themselves look good. Those reports have confused some people at places like this but rest assured they don't fool the advertisers. But 50% sounds accurate compared with some of the bullshit I've seen tossed around.
Someday, somebody is going to have to find out why anyone with a DVR would watch an ad in the first place.
^which is why I said I can see your point, but you always say it like everyone with a DVR skips all the ads.
Not arguing, just clarifying on what I said.
I can only speak from my own experience, but I own a PVR, and I watch a mix of live & recorded TV, when watching something on a PVR I will always skip the ads.
I dont actually see why anyone would watch the ads if they are watching a show on a PVR, so I have to side with the advertisers on this one.
yes sure chances are I am still watching the screen whilst FFwd the ads, but when each ads lasts about 3 seconds, there is no way it can have any impact.
I dont actually see why anyone would watch the ads if they are watching a show on a PVR, so I have to side with the advertisers on this one.
yes sure chances are I am still watching the screen whilst FFwd the ads, but when each ads lasts about 3 seconds, there is no way it can have any impact.
There's research that refutes that. It says because you're concentrating on the ads more, to see when the break ends, you actually register the logo more.
Also there are other reasons why you wouldn't skip the ads. Whether it's because you're doing something else at the time, like the usual things you do during ads when not watching a recording. You notice something in the ads that makes you stop to pay attention, your mind wandered during the show and you just forget you can fast forward it.
I can honestly say that I do not forget that I am watching something on a PVR.
not all the ads have logos, and my PVR is not the type that shows ffwd smoothly, so even if I am watching the picture is not as clear as it could be.
and noticing something in the ads, well as I say I watch a mix of live & recorded TV, so if by some fluke I was paying enough attention to an ad to see something interesting, I would not stop as I figure I would see it whilst im watching live TV.
That said my PVR has been really good for the Kia Soul ads, ive seen that way too many times, and actually alot of my live viewing is on the BBC these days.
im betting if I wasn't trying to, I could not watch a ad break on ffwd and pay enough attention to recall what they were.
not all the ads have logos, and my PVR is not the type that shows ffwd smoothly, so even if I am watching the picture is not as clear as it could be.
and noticing something in the ads, well as I say I watch a mix of live & recorded TV, so if by some fluke I was paying enough attention to an ad to see something interesting, I would not stop as I figure I would see it whilst im watching live TV.
That said my PVR has been really good for the Kia Soul ads, ive seen that way too many times, and actually alot of my live viewing is on the BBC these days.
im betting if I wasn't trying to, I could not watch a ad break on ffwd and pay enough attention to recall what they were.
I watch almost recordings almost exclusively. I only really watch HD stuff live which, a majority of, is on the BBC, and media centre does 30 second skips so I very really see ads. I do occasionally rewind to see something that looked interesting. Even skipping 30 seconds at a time I see tons of logos, Jet 2, Thompsons, Haven, Birds Eye, and Daily Mirror are ones I recall seeing recently. I do let the ads play while I go off to the toilet, or go make a drink, and I have on occasion just sat here with the ads going while I'm looking at something online, so I can say most of those things do/have/can apply to me.
