Another Sunday another STV round table prepped only for you guys ^_^ . Welcome to another edition and this time to share their thoughts about this week's big news are Babar (BS), Angela (AN), Samantha Benjamin (SB), Jamie (JC), Lisa (LM), Jennise (JH), Milo (MI), Jaz Shoone (JZ) and Abi Baker (BK). So just sit back, enjoy the read and as always feel free to share your thoughts on the topics in the comment section down below.
1. Sense8 will get closure! This is the 2nd show in the last two months which gets "uncancelled" by the power internet community. How strong do you think is the influence of the online community in this Peak TV era?
JZ: I personally don’t believe fan “petitions” or “campaigns” have much of an impact when it comes to networks making renewal decisions.
Timeless had social media campaigns to renew the series long before it was initially cancelled. NBC’s statement that they were “listening to the fans” when they decided to revive the series seemed like complete service. If NBC cared about the fans wishes, they would have listened to them in the first place and renewed Timeless before the Upfronts. It wasn’t until the producers met with the network that a new deal was struck. That alone suggests to me that there was more to it than just fan interest.
Netflix and Sense8 seems to be a different kettle of fish. Due to the secrecy with Netflix not releasing ratings and statistics, we are unable to tell just how successful (or unsuccessful) the series was. We don’t even know how Netflix determines that success and this made the fan outrage a little more complex and open to so many different interpretations.
In my opinion as a fan of the show, the 2-hour movie wrap up seemed like the only decent thing the network could have done after receiving the negative fan response, but why wasn’t it the FIRST option? Why did the network choose to release a statement squashing all hope of any sort of renewal only to change their minds later? Perhaps in the case of Sense8, it was indeed a win for internet campaigns. But I’m far too cynical to believe that. It seems far too cultivated and seemed like it was Netflix trying to gauge if they could get one last payout from the series.
Despite my little faith in “power to the people” it does make me wonder if “outrage campaigns” are going to be important in the future. Is this a new way for companies to gauge whether there is still money to be made in a flatline series? Can some dying series’ ratings be revived if a network can tap into the fear or anger of a viewer’s favourite series being cancelled? Will this perhaps determine what shows get “rebooted” in the future?
I’m also curious to see whether these campaigns follow through with their interest now the ball has been put in their court. Will we see Timeless ratings rise? Will Sense8’s finale gets enough interest to see a 3rd season? These sorts of renewals also test the conviction of the internet community. It’s time for us to put up or shut up!
MI: It depends a lot on the show as to how strong the influence of online community is. I know for example the influence on fans in shows like Arrow has had a pretty negative effect as fan influence ended up dragging season 4 in particular down a lot in terms of quality to the point where it was borderline unwatchable at times. But other times it's a real bonus when shows get revived because of fan acclaim, as is the case of Sense8 and Timeless, and the power of fan influence can really be used to great effect. Like with any situation though not all the results are positive.
JH: In some cases I think it’s too strong, in other cases Yay! When it comes to persuading the money people to allow a show’s creators the ability to finish telling their stories I think it is a great thing. However, I don’t think the idea of bringing back a cancelled show (in an effort to recapture the magic) is a fight the fans should win. It’s not something that’s been successful thus far. The other fan pushed thing is paring up characters a subset of vocal fans want is a good idea. My feeling is that we are watching the stories that the creators and writers are telling and forcing them to take their characters into a direction they weren’t created to go in is not the best idea. I’ve seen it ruin characters that the show has to then scramble to put right. (I’m not referring to the case where the creators discover something in their work they hadn’t seen before I’m just thinking about those cases where the writers do it more because they they’re being begged to and not because they feel it is organic to the story they’re telling.)
LM: I think fan influence is increasingly huge in this era of Peak TV. Studios/networks are able to cater to smaller audiences as long as those audiences are passionate and committed. I don't see Sense 8 coming back for more than a short tenure to provide closure because it's so expensive to produce, but giving the fans closure will build a lot of goodwill and loyalty for Netflix. And fans who lobbied for more are sure to tune in thus making it viable financially. A show like Timeless is still going to have to really earn its way - so the broadcast network is going to want to see an increase in ratings - or at least that they stay steady. But it is nice to see this change, especially on a network. Revivals like the Gilmore Girls make this a more typical move for streaming channels that really got their start with re-runs, making this type of fare more of the same kind really.
SB: I really don't like the online fan community. In the cases I have witnessed they have had an extremely negative influence on shows, and in other cases led to shows being brought back that I think were better off cancelled, and of course the shows that are superb but have little online presence to go along with the small viewership & end up cancelled when they deserve to live on. Fan campaigns to renew shows in danger of cancellation seem to be becoming the new norm, and when networks and streaming sites like Netflix appear to give into that, I think it sets a very bad precedent. What happens if a show ends because the story is complete, but fans make enough noise in campaigns that the money people see there is still milk to be taken from the cow, and push ahead with more? Or because they've played a part in the show staying on air, fans (even more aggressively in some cases than now) tweet people involved with the show constantly demanding that particular things they want happen and when it doesn't scream abuse? I think all decisions on cancellations needs to be based off viewership & production cost, and the fan community stick to being just that.
AN: I don’t know that fan campaigns alone are the reason some shows get saved-if that were the case, every fan campaign to save a show over the years would’ve worked, and sadly, that hasn’t been the case for every show. I agree with the other comments that there’s often other factors involved as well. That said, however, I certainly don’t think it can hurt for fans to make their voices known when a show gets unceremoniously canceled. If nothing else, at least that way the network in question can see just how passionate the fanbase truly is, and maybe they might take the whole “dedicated viewership” mindset into consideration with other shows that develop followings in the future. And even if a network doesn’t bring back a show, sometimes other networks/streaming services might see the fans’ reactions and do their part to try and help, or consider doing so at the very least. For instance, CMT may not have ultimately picked up “Last Man Standing”, but I’ve no doubt the fact they even thought about doing so was due in part to the fans’ reaction to its cancellation.
2. CBS strikes again. Another questionable choice was made last Friday when the network and producers apparentlly decided to write off the two Asian characters of their Hawaiin based show cause they've wanted to be payed like their Caucasian co-stars. How will this affect the shows future? How do you feel about the media putting accent on the leaving actors ethnicity?
BK: I'm tired of CBS. I really really am. This year alone we've had issues with parity between white male co-stars and either female co-stars or their co-stars of colour. If any of you follow me on twitter then I semi-regularly talk about how some of the decisions CBS make are the absolute worst. Just last month we have Damon Gupton leave (or more like fired) from Criminal Minds to essentially free up money in order to pay AJ Cook and Kirsten Vangsness more money so they were in line with Matthew Gray Gubler and Joe Mantegna, and then a week later hire someone else. The message they could send across when they do things like this, is that no matter if you put in one year, or seven years, or even longer, if you are not the white male lead of a show then you are not indispensable. I think we should bring up their race and we should bring up their gender, because with a lot of CBS cast decisions, these factors play a huge role. If they wanted to leave, then fine, but if they were fired in preference of keeping on their white co-stars, then that's absolutely not fine. I don't watch Hawaii Five-0, so I don't know how it will affect the show, but any cast change on any show is of course going to affect how the show looks and feels. They will probably be replaced by someone cheaper, but it remains to be seen whether it will be a good decision both writing wise and for viewer enjoyment. I do not think this was a good call on CBS' part at all.
MI:This is the first I've heard about that decision from CBS but seriously, what the hell? That's a major screwup from them and it really shows that despite all their claims to try and embrace diversity, they really haven't listened at all. The only show I watch on their lineup is Elementary but honestly, I'm fed up with them at this point and after Elementary wraps up I likely won't return to that network unless something ends up being really good. I don't watch Hawaii Five-0 anymore but I know it has a passionate fanbase on this site, and as this is just something that shouldn't be happening full stop in 2017. Pay your lead cast the same, especially if they've been on the show this long - what more do they have to do to prove themselves to you?
JC: I hadn’t caught that news yet. It’s a big honking issue. I’m African American and have been very aware that the (painfully) slow in the balance of diversity on the television landscape has all but ignored Asian and Native American people. Seems like a stupid decision on the network’s part but they have a long long history of hard core salary battles. This is the network that fired the NAMED lead of one of their shows (Valerie) because she wanted more money. They dropped two central cast members from Criminal Minds and, in both cases, went back to them with their tails between their legs. I tell people that there is color that is important to Hollywood and it’s green. I hope this is a decision made by the actors and not the network. If it is a network driven decision it’s not well thought out. If they need to cut the cast down, why not let the actor, who from what I’ve heard, wants to return to LA full time? The show has been responsible for a lot of improved feeling of locals toward Hollywood. This might be a step backward. Regardless, CBS should negotiate in good faith and they have a very long history of NOT doing that.
LM: Sadly, I doubt this will hugely impact the ratings as the show has a pretty passionate fanbase (don't hate me, but I don't get it). However, CBS needs to do a LOT better in showing diversity. I think it's a travesty.
JC: I'm starting to think CBS is broke because the amount of exits lately is just insane. I've only seen 4 seasons of Hawaii Five-0 but I think losing these two characters will have a huge impact. They've both been on the show since the beginning and are just as important to me as the other two leads. The media is putting accent on the actors' ethnicity because it was probably a factor. White male actors still get paid the most. More than women and more than people of color. I'm glad that the media is even mentioning this, because this is usually something that gets ignored. They should've gotten paid the same amount.
SB: CBS have been in my bad books since they axed 2 Broke Girls (which I will never be over) , then there was the Criminal Minds stuff and I just really hate I watch a few shows on the network because they are awful. I've seen a couple of episodes of Hawaii Five-0 over the years, and I know the focus is heavily on the bromance, but I was still so shocked when the news broke about Daniel & Grace leaving because their characters have been part of the show since the beginning. CBS have massive issues with 90% of their shows casting being made up of white dudes, and pay parity. It's disgusting and shouldn't be happening in this day and age. As for Hawaii Five-0 I know Alex has been quite vocal on his future, but I wouldn't be shocked if it gets a 9th season.
AN: Ahahaha, ohhhhh, I very much sympathize with the H50 fans right now. Others have aptly noted CBS’ nasty history with this “pay dispute” business in relation to “Criminal Minds”, and sadly, the mess with that show isn’t the only instance of the network treating, or possibly treating, its actors like crap. I’ve heard about Jennifer Esposito butting heads with the network over her health issues, and some fans of Cote de Pablo seem to think the network shafted her, too. So honestly, CBS not doing more to support its Asian actors wouldn’t surprise me, really. The network clearly has some issues it seriously needs to address and deal with.
The only pay-related argument I could sympathize with is the idea that it’s determined by who the main leads of the show are, or how long they’ve been on the show/how big a name they are in general. In the case of “Criminal Minds”, Joe Mantegna’s had a very long showbiz career in comparison to AJ Cook and Kirsten Vangsness, so I could see why the network might take that into consideration when deciding how much the cast gets paid. But on the other hand, if they base pay off who’s been on “Criminal Minds” the longest, well, Cook and Vangsness were there before Mantegna was. And even if the women weren’t looking to match him in pay, they certainly should at least match Gubler.
But from what I’ve heard about the cast of H50, Kim and Park were on there from the very beginning as well, and one of the main leads doesn’t always appear in some of the episodes throughout some of the seasons. So I do think those are issues that should be taken into account as well.
Whatever the reason, though, it is sad that it came down to this. It’ll be interesting to see how losing Kim and Park will impact the show going forward.
3.No more Caramichael! The Caramichael show's star Jerrod Caramichael decided to drop the show cause he found something new to be exiceted about and following his exit NBC decided to cancel the show`. How do you feel about this stunt by JC in the middle of the season? And how much do you think that this is related to the incident when NBC pulled the Mass shooting episode the other week.
MI: It's probably no coincidence that the two events happened so close to another but the cancellation of the show regardless of what events happened off screen is really disappointing, it was one of my favorite network comedies and fell under the radar of a lot of people. I really hope the cast move onto new things and that Carmichael's new project is worth leaving The Carmichael Show for...
JH: If the decision is related to the mass shooting episode I think it’s a short sighted unwise reaction. The networks pull these type of episodes every time something like this happens. The episodes usually wind up being aired. If it is, as described here, a decision made because the comedian’s interest in doing the show (which is a much different working environment than stand up) has lagged. Bad on him. You accepted the responsibility of a lot of people’s livelihood. The situation could probably have been handled a little better. But then again we could all do with remembering that just because it’s reported in the news doesn’t always mean that is the whole story. There may be information we’re not privy to that would make this the best way to handle the situation.
LM I'm really broken up about The Carmichael Show. This show is cutting edge and so very brave. I suspect it might be too smart for a mainstream audience. I haven't been as impressed with his standup as with the show. There is no doubt in my mind that he pulled out over NBC pulling the plug on the shooting episode. In his interview on Chelsea, he was clearly incensed about it - and I don't blame him. I'm betting he's had to fight with the network at every turn. The show is just too cutting edge for network. I hope they can ressurect it in/on a format that can and will give them the freedom they need to really tackle these important subjects - but I'm not holding my breath. I'm sad to lose the show, but definitely understand why Carmichael would feel the need to pull out.
BS: The cast options were supposed to expire for The Carmichael Show on June 30. With little movement between 20th Century FOX and NBC for renewal, I think Jerrod decided to take matters in his own hands and exited the show so he could end the show on his terms.
A week filled with some really exciting and shocking news came to and end and hope you enjoyed our POV. If you think we didn't say something head down under to the comment section and share your thoughts. Till next week. . .
