Though I don’t always agree with Alan Sepinwall on all his show’s critiques, I do almost always agree with him down the line about LOST, and though he generally opines on TV show quality rather than the business end, I found his thinking particularly interesting in a post of his on the coming upfronts:
Mo Ryan suggested yesterday that these pick-ups might reflect a new kind of thinking at the networks, where the broadcast ratings aren’t the only factor. (”Dollhouse” gets a significant bump, for instance, once DVR and Hulu viewing is factored in.) But I also wonder if the bad economy, and the splintering TV audience, might also make the networks reluctant to let go of even some of their more marginal performers. Simply put, these shows are the devil they know. “Chuck,” for instance, may have drawn mediocre ratings on Monday nights, but “Deal Or No Deal” did dramatically worse in the timeslot a week later. The idea that a new show automatically has a better shot to draw viewers than a marginal returning series may not be the case anymore, and in this scary environment, a steady number is a steady number.
I figure outside of FOX and the advertisers themselves, I looked at the DVR data on Dollhouse more than practically anyone. I think it more likely whatever potential FOX saw via Hulu and FOX.com was far more meaningful than the DVR viewers. Not particularly meaningful, perhaps, but better than nothing meaningful. At least they can make some money on the online viewing, even if it’s nowhere near as much as they’d make if people were watching live.
None of the networks has a good story for showing DVR viewers are valuable for 30 second commercial spots, and especially with the reports we hear that “Remote Free TV” limited commercial interruptions won’t be back for FOX next year, the DVR numbers make for good PR for Dollhouse, but little else.
I think there was something else in play with Dollhouse besides “the devil you know” aspects. I call it the CW effect. Many people don’t understand how the CW even can exist. The CW is bleeding red ink, but the way it works out, it doesn’t seem to matter to Warner Brothers and CBS because the studios wind up making more from the shows CW airs than they lose on the CW. As a stand alone entity, the CW losing money doesn’t make much sense, but if its investors wind up ahead in the deal, who cares?
Something similar seems likely for Dollhouse. If you look at it just from the aspects of FOX broadcasting, it doesn’t make sense. People will (and have) tried to slice it in a lot of ways to make it make sense, but in the end, from that view, it still really doesn’t make any sense singularly from the view of FOX Broadcasting. But since Fox’s studio division is in on the deal too…
If News Corp winds up making more money than it spends on the show, and more money than it would’ve made from doing something else, it’s a good deal. It’s not crystal clear to me that is actually the case, but that seems to be what they’re betting on — that News Corp comes out ahead in the deal. That the real DVD dollars will roll in, plus whatever they can make online, and internationally, plus whatever they can make in TV advertising make it all a good deal for News Corp, a better deal than airing reruns of House – even if it doesn’t look like a good deal from just the perspective of the network.
Plus, they apparently got the costs for Dollhouse down to something extremely (rivaling cable production costs, and in some cases cheaper from what I hear) low.
An income in this day and age is still an income. Everyone is fighting for pennies. Even more now than ever.
Chuck, Dollhouse and to an extent Scrubs all have steady incomes. Especially in DVD sales and online viewing. Right now networks need stability and Chuck certainly gives them that.
As i asked Nick C and i think this is true but still awaiting to hear his thoughts. Its not that Chuck needs NBC to renew it to carry on. Its the fact NBC, FOX and ABC need Chuck, DH and Scrubs to keep bringing whatever income they generate in to the network.
Robert, I’m rather positive that the CW deficit is more than CBS Productions brought in from their shows on the Network by millions. Warner on the other hand makes slightly more than they spend on the CW and only because of SMALLVILLE.
Nick, but if CBS’s SHARE of the deficit isn’t millions it might not matter. If it is millions, it doesn’t seem like a good investment for CBS. If it’s a loss leader, fine, but if it’s just a loss…
Sorry if I sound cynical, but this is basically like, one day on an article about a bubble show you hear stuff like ‘International ratings doesn’t matter, online viewing doesn’t count, Nielsen live ratings is all that matters’. Then when something is surprisingly renewed, it does matter.
In hindsight, I’m not so surprised. Have you seen that Goddamned Dollhouse set? All the Fox executives and their families could live on it for five years and barely brush and elbow.
It’s cheaper to continue a show than launch a new one. Unless you’re T:SCC. Rest in peace, overblown CGI!
Hey I was wondering maybe one day you could possibly start doing articles telling us how much every show costs per episode, i’ve always been intrigued to know but i can never seem to find any actual numbers.. well anyways keep on doing what you do best
Robert, it’s a loss for CBS. Remove SMALLVILLE from the lineup and its overseas sales, and its massive DVD sales and Warner would be losing money on the CW too.
Which is why since next season is the last for SMALLVILLE I don’t see Warner wanting to keep it around, and Dawn is going to fail massively at getting her prized shows to resonate with the demo she’s after. Which means they will continue to lose money, and CBS Productions won’t make more than CBS loses again. Then Sumner will pull the plug.
However I think Sumner will sell their portion of the CW first.
I’m not sure Dollhouse was what I consider stable, it never once shown the capability of recapturing the audience. Going back through the archives I saw a theme developing: “series low, drops again” etc.
I’m also sure that the other show on Friday did just as well with the other channels factored in, save the DVD sales not contributing.
If they wanted stability, they should have kept Cops there.
Dog I think Robert was making the point that he doesn’t believe DVR or online viewing really made much difference in the case of renewal beyond the fact that online viewing adds a tiny amount to Fox’s profit margins for the show. The overall point for the Dollhouse renewal seems to be that its going to makes News Corp money so everyone within News Corp wants to keep the show on the air. Nick might be able to correct me on this but from everything that’s been said Dollhouse was predicted to turn a profit before online viewing was factored in and international rights were sold – in fact they earned significantly less from international rights than they’d originally planned so I’m almost positive that’s the case.
The point of this article seems to be (from how I’m reading it at least) that right now with the industry and economy as it is networks are more willing to stick with shows that are under performing but making a minimal profit than gamble on new productions that might not produce better results and could in fact produce worse results.
If this is true, then long live the devil!!! Anything that brings back Dollhouse is a win-win-win!!!
DOLLHOUSE is profitable now before DVD sales are even taken into consideration.
FOX wants Friday to work. So they’re providing stability on Friday for viewers. Viewers will find DOLLHOUSE on Friday next fall. It will show them it’s ok to get involved because FOX is in this for the long haul. Meanwhile FOX continues to profit on DOLLHOUSE.
Yes, they could profit on ARE YOU SMARTER THAN A FIFTH GRADER yet that means they have to give up on a scripted Friday.
Chad – except Cops isn’t about to sell millions in DVD revenue. Anything Joss Whedon touches will. It’s the almost certain residual revenue from his extremely loyal fanbase that makes business sense for Fox/ NewsCorp to renew Dollhouse.
Last year at Cannes there was a lot of increased discussion about content management and broader (bordering subjective) analysis of potential residual revenues for films (particularly international VOD). I’m far more involved in the feature film aspect of the business, but I’d be willing to bet this same discussion has been the theme for network execs this upfront season.
When you say cheap, how cheap are we talking relative to other broadcast shows?
Wouldn’t Terminator make a better choice if what you’re saying stands? It’s been on for a year longer, has a much stronger brand identity (plus the movie is coming out), and it was the only new show among pirates’ top 10 last year. (I know pirates don’t count, but they’re a more accurate measurement of audience loyalty independently of the advertising a show receives, and piracy in general gives the consumption of any kind of content a big boost, as the Wolverine movie illustrated the other week.)
But I also wonder if the bad economy, and the splintering TV audience, might also make the networks reluctant to let go of even some of their more marginal performers.
Dollhouse isn’t “Marginal” it’s down right CW numbers! It’s horrible numbers!
letthieri – T:SCC was a higher budget show, and so almost certainly made a loss, if not for Fox then for Warner. Everyone in the chain has to make some kind of profit on it.
I think that’s partially Nick C’s point. Dollhouse is going to be on a shoestring budget, so it’s kind of like a run of Cops (ok, exaggeration… I hope…) but with the added bonus of substantial DVD sales.
And with that, Robert’s argument comes into play: do you cancel a profitable Dollhouse in the hope that something with three times the budget might appeal to four times as many people, or do you stick with what you have and ratings be damned until the economy improves and you can afford to make bigger gambles. (I think that’s the argument anyway, I’m tired, I just had a curry and beer.)
letthieri, TSCC is produced by WB, not FOX, so FOX won’t make anything off DVD or international sales.
Sounds like a sort of backtracking that DVR, Hulu, etc aren’t meaningful there, Robert
No one at this point (outside of FOX) knows why DH was renewed. Monday should be very interesting, as will the next season, to see which decisions made now will be seen as genius or disastrous by this time next year.
This also ties in with why I think WB would like to keep some form of Terminator show on the air IF it makes money for the studio. The problem for WB is that it can’t keep the existing show on the air because a) it makes no money, indeed it costs them money even as a PR loss leader for the movies, and b) aside from a few die-hard fans, it doesn’t do the franchise any favors in terms of attracting new Terminator franchise fans.
But if they completely revamped and rebooted a Terminator show – even with the same lead actors (provided they could distinguish this show from the earlier version in promo) – I think they would do it. And I think they COULD do it and make it a success (provided once again they did enough promo and PR buzz to convince those burnt by TSCC that the new version was worth checking out.)
It’s not even a question of putting it on cable rather than broadcast. I think a Terminator show could be a huge hit on broadcast if it were done right. The only question is how badly has TSCC damaged that notion so that viewers couldn’t be lured back regardless of the promo.
TSCC arrived too soon if they wanted to thrive off of movie buzz. As much as I disliked Friedman’s pace and focus at times, he did open up the series to Anything in the finale.
I’m not sure how they’ll keep everyone in place if the show returns at a later date. The important components of Headey, Glau, and Dekker need to return.
I think the TV project is entirely dead, and the movies aren’t too spaced out to need a series to keep interest in the franchise.
Sounds like a good year to be an advertiser. low advertising revenue = fewer new shows?
Why are people continuing to compare TSCC and DH. TSCC had a Superbowl kickoff and 19 million viewers; now people are mad that it isn’t being renewed over DH in a race to the ratings bottom.
No, I think it’s pretty clear WB wanted the series to establish a lead-in to T-4 and then hopefully maintain the franchise name between movies, even if the movies are only a year or two apart. Again, IF the TV series made money. Otherwise, there’s no point since it’s unlikely the TV series would really increase movie ticket sales enough to offset the cost of the series. But if the series made money AND increased ticket sales even by a small margin, as well as being PR, it would have made great sense to do it.
Had TSCC done a good season 2, it would have made an excellent lead-in to T-4. Almost perfect timing, especially if it had been picked up for season 3 a few days before the opening. But they picked the wrong show runner. Now they have to keep the lid on to prevent bad PR before the opening of the movie which is why all the actors either haven’t been told or have been told to lie about it.
As for the finale, Friedman didn’t open it up, he locked it down – and in a way that nobody can do anything with. The whole concept of sending a sixteen year old John Connor to a future where he never existed invalidates the entire Terminator canon. It’s an attempt to rewrite the whole concept – and Friedman isn’t that good to take that job on. That’s a recipe for immediately jumping the shark.
Which is why I personally believe Friedman deliberately sabotaged the show by doing the finale in that way. He knew the show was doomed – and he didn’t give a damn. As he put it on his blog, he “blew up the frakkin’ barn” – meaning he was sinking the show and tough luck with whatever happened next.
However, if a Terminator show is redesigned, I think they could get the three leads back depending on their upcoming projects. I think all three of them liked being on the show enough that they would reprise their roles. Lena and Thomas are best friends, Thomas just said he thought those two years were the best of his life, and Summer has repeatedly said how much she loved playing Cameron – and her behavior at WonderCon lends credence to that. Not to mention they could probably command higher salaries.
I just wish someone would find out for me what WB wants to do next with a possible Terminator TV series.
The Dollhouse set is cool in an upscale gym sort of way. But I’m kinda bored of it already after 12 episodes. Sounds like they’ll wring as much usage out of that set as possible next season to save money. The last episode was an improvement, but was also pretty cheap looking for the non-batcave locations.
I still can’t believe dollhouse was picked up over terminator. 9 episodes with reduced budget, but still. Also, people who are fans of the tv series couldn’t care less about the upcoming movie, most of us would rather have a season 3 than Salvation. It’s not the explosions and special effects that made Chronicles great, which is exactly what the movie will be about, just like that T3 flop few years back.
I really do not believe that Friedman was that sinister. He wanted to take the show where he wanted, suits be damned. But to purposely crash the series months before the episodes aired? That’s a little much I think.
I really felt the finale opened it up. John can stay and see a war lost without him leading at the onset. Or he could develop into the leader and scale the ranks in the Resistance.
John could return to 2009 with another fighter, or even a rebuilt Cameron courtesy of Weaver/Henry. Allison can replace Cameron, who may have been erased, etc.
I still think Friedman’s lying about not knowing. TSCC will die as quietly as possible on Monday as Fox focuses on the returnees and pilots.
how come people whine about chuck taking over threads, but when terminator does it, nobody complains?
Because TSCC is awesome! Seriously though, I think the TSCC posts, for the most part, are about the numbers, the dynamics that lead to the numbers, or about a show in a similar position. I haven’t noticed TSCC popping up out of context as much as Chuck did when it was a race to be the first Chuck post in a thread. Most of that was good humored though. Anyway, Fox married TSCC and Dollhouse with their SciFi Friday scheme. So when one of the two gets picked up and the other doesn’t, I think references to this fact are not out of line. It isn’t much fun talking about a renewed show anyway
…: Nope. The left over fans of TSCC may not be interested in T-4 (and I doubt that statement very much!), but the wider audience tuned in to see Terminator, NOT “Friedman’s Mortality Study”, or “The Crazy Sarah Psych Study” or “As the Terminator Turns” soap opera.
I know there are a bunch of female viewers who just soak up Sarah Connor like a drug, but sorry, there’s no market for that on broadcast TV.
Chad: The problem with each of your concepts is that they either lead no where or they can’t be properly realized within the few seasons most shows have to tell their story. If Connor does nothing, it’s uninteresting. And we can’t wait another ten years for him to grow into the leader of the Resistance – besides which that happens to be what T-4 is about and again, there’s no intention to marry the series and the movies that closely because it affects audience perception for both and it’s too hard to keep them synched. Besides which, there’s really no way Connor at sixteen is going to be taken seriously by the Resistance because HE NEVER EXISTED IN THAT TIME LINE! If he tells them the whole story, they’re going to treat him like Connor treats Wright in T-4 – disassemble him and find out what he’s really about!
Connor could return to 2009 but then why bother sending him to the future in the first place? There had to have been a reason for that (if the writers simply weren’t throwing everything against the wall at that point, which frankly I think they were). John Henry is back in the present day with Cameron’s chip but no Summer Glau body – which is a fail right there. Weaver is gone – because Shirley Manson ain’t coming back to the show, I got that message clear from her appearance at WonderCon. (Of course, they could replace her.) Allison isn’t nearly a replacement for Cameron, and the Summer Glau fans have said that and I think Summer would agree although she’d never say so.
And any attempts to solve these problems would require a massive revamp that probably would jump the shark in episode one.
And that’s why I think Friedman really did sabotage the show. I just can’t see any way to solve the problems that finale introduced. Unless of course, as I said, his intent is to rewrite the entire Terminator canon. Which is just stupid in my view.
And I don’t think WB would be interested in that. Too much risk. The show already failed massively on TV. Who the hell is going to trust Friedman to rewrite the whole of James Cameron’s epic?! They’ve got a big enough risk just with McG refreshing the thing in the movies.
And McG IS treating T-3 as canon, because otherwise you wouldn’t see Kate Brewster in T-4. How do you square Allison/Cameron with Kate Brewster IN THE FUTURE? Alternate time line? It’s the only way. But that invalidates everything that’s been done. At least Abrams had the sense to make his “alternate dimension” look like this one on Fringe. He can play with it without having to invalidate anything.
No, that finale was a major disaster. And that’s not even bringing up the hideously bad “sex scene” between John and Cameron that completely ruined the fan anticipation brought about by the spoiler clip at WonderCon. That, too, was a middle finger shoved at the fans.
Getting back on topic, I think Robert is right. I think it’s “huddle down in the bunker” time for the networks. Don’t take any risks, it’s too dangerous.
Personally I think they should go the other way and take MORE risks, but that’s just me.
I think he’s also right about the parent companies looking at the overall financial picture rather than just their network’s financial picture. But that’s also part of the “huddle down” reaction.
I also think the networks are “on the bubble” the way the music industry has been with the rise of P2P and the fragmenting of the music people listen to. They just don’t know what’s going on and have no idea how to deal with it. They’re dinosaurs watching their eggs get eaten by fast moving mammals.
Read this piece for an example of where these guys are coming from:
Sony Pictures CEO: “I’m A Guy Who Doesn’t See Anything Good Having Come From The Internet. Period.”
http://current.com/items/90049647_sony-pictures-ceo-im-a-guy-who-doesnt-see-anything-good-having-come-from-the-internet-period.htm
If that isn’t a guy who is stuck in the 1970’s, I don’t know who is.
I think all the surprising renewals this season are going to come down to show costs being shaved like never before. My sense is that in the recent past profit maximization was primarily pursued by revenue (=ratings) maximization, with far less attention paid to cost control. Not no attention, just not fight to the death, who’ll give me their show the cheapest sort of cost control that seems to be happening this spring.
As for folks who’d like us to publish how much show’s cost, so would we! We’ll never get good numbers for that, and can only guess.
As for folks piling on the “see I told you Live+7 and Hulu.com and sunspots all mattered, suckers!” bandwagon, I don’t think Robert wrote that at all (although he is welcome to correct me), and I certainly don’t feel that way.
It’s always been all about profits, it’s still all about profits. But now it may be somewhat more about the expense side of the equation than the revenue side.
Well, the problem with cutting costs instead of increasing revenue is that only works if you have excessive costs you CAN cut. If you’re cutting your base costs, it’s going to mean your product is going to start to suck (bear with me here, I know most of the networks products already suck!)
Bill may be right that the studios can afford to cut out a lot of unnecessary costs. They should perhaps start with executive salaries given the poor performance.
But my suspicion is that, as usual, management will cut the quality of their product while retaining management perks and BS.
Although again, I don’t know how they can produce worse crap than they already do.
Anyway, the one thing you can count on is that things will get worse everywhere and at the worst possible time, so none of that will be a surprise.
Dollhouse is OK, I guess, but I really love Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles. I have only watched TSCC on regular TV once. I watched the first season on DVD rented from Blockbuster, then the second season online. I loved the fact that it was on the FOX website because I could watch it on my schedule.
After I heard TSCC was due to be canceled I started a Facebook group to help save it and within the last two weeks 500 people have joined. There are fans from all over the world and they are all shocked that FOX is threatening to cancel the show, as am I.
I hope that the executives at FOX don’t think Dollhouse is an adequate substitute for Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles.
Richard,
I’m skeptical about the cost-cutting resulting in a poor product. We’re living in a decentralized time, where consumer entertainment spending is growing more and more fragmented and spread between many alternatives. At the same time, technology has opened up some remarkable capabilities in terms of what you can achieve on a limited budget.
What you have is an untenable situation for people who CAN’T cut costs, but you also have a much greater ability TO cut costs than ever before.
Take a look at Whedon’s own Dr. Horrible, or some of the stuff produced for the web, like this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q1UPMEmCqZo
I’m of the opinion that people need to become more agile in the entertainment business, more creative about how they control spending. It’s going to become increasingly difficult to draw huge audiences to one product amidst the competition, so you fragment with the market. Meet niche demands, do it for low cost. This is what the network seems to be doing with Dollhouse.
I have a completely different guess as to some of the factors involved in the decision, although I agree that the ability to dial back the cost considerably was on the plus side.
Having decided to abandon Virtualities but go ahead with Human Target, I think Fox needs the Dollhouse audience to make Human Target work. There’s some superficial overlap in concept (the lead character in Human Target, based on a DC comics series, is a private investigator who takes on the identity of someone who has been threatened “from busboy to King.” He solves the case through sleuthing while in the identity of the person in danger, and the 2002 graphic novel explored the psychological impact of always living someone else’s life).
I think Fox needs the Dollhouse fans to want Human Target to succeed–which they’re much more likely to do with Dollhouse renewed. Then both become examples of edgy Fox programming on the very 21st century topic of identity, rather than one looking like a replacement for the other. And the lack of Virtualities will probably get no press at all, since Dollhouse’s renewal becomes the big story.
So it’s a branding decision, and I agree that they can probably make some money off of Dollhouse and so it earns a second shot–but I think protecting the investment in Human Target may also have played into it.
All pure speculation, but sometimes the business decisions are about more than the numbers for just one show. FWIW.
(By the way, if I’m right on this it means I was completely wrong in thinking that Fox wouldn’t have room for both Dollhouse and Human Target, obviously. It becomes a synergy decision. But I do think broadcast synergies still have more impact than potential hulu viewers.)
I think I agree that Dollhouse and Human Target have similar audience potential. I know I intend to watch both. But then I’m far from the typical audience member!
Clearly the concept of someone “filling in” for someone else resonates in both shows.
The problem with Human Target is that the premise is difficult to pull off well. I liked the original series, but it failed quickly. Also I think a part of the audience will have difficulty with the premise. In the original series, they used complicated technology to make Chance look like his clients. I don’t think it went over well. If they try to do it like the old Mission: Impossible series where they had one of the team able to pretty much imitate anybody, they might pull it off.
I think they’ll need to minimize the technology stuff. They’ll also need to minimize the idea of using a different actor to play Chance imitating the client, since that screws up the ability to connect to your lead actor. You’re watching other actors half the time. Same problem Dollhouse has – nobody to connect to.
This is going to be a very hard show to do well. Really they need to not over-emphasize his ability to imitate his clients, but rather have him choose clients that it’s really reasonable he could imitate. Otherwise the audience is going to have a serious problem suspending disbelief.
But we’ll see. Given the ability these days to make actors look like anything but you still know who the character is (take Hellboy for example), it could be made believable that one person could imitate many other people.
Doing things on the cheap could actually make for a more creative show. A lot of Buffy the Vampire Slayer was done on the cheap. Once case in point: A scene originally called for Buffy to bash a door down. To save a few bucks they just had Buffy turn the door knob and dubbed in the sound of it breaking as it turned.
RSH, I think you’re missing something in the whole “no one knows John Connor in the future” thing… There’s someone who *does* know him – Savannah Weaver. John just has to repeat that line he used to teach her to tie her shoes, and she’ll remember. That’s John’s ticket to getting a foothold in the future.
Plus, I don’t think he’ll stay in the future for long and become the leader and such… I think he’ll find John Henry, do the mission with him, then return to the past with Cameron’s chip.
No, Gusar. The time-line Connor is in is one where he NEVER EXISTED AS JOHN CONNOR, not who knows him or not. Nobody knows him because he never existed, he never was trained by his mother, and he never was the guy who “put the Resistance together” to quote Derek. And even if he can convince them that he knows stuff about Skynet, the fact that the Resistance is already fighting shows that they know more about it than he does!
In T-4 Connor has to convince the existing Resistance that he’s capable of leading it. That alone is against canon to some degree because in all the movies, especially T-1, Connor is described by Reese as “the man who turned it all around.” He can’t be the “savior of mankind” without being the guy who created the Resistance, and he can’t do that when the Resistance already exists. In T-4, at least I think, apparently the Resistance exists but it’s fragmented and he presumably makes it more successful over T-4 and the subsequent movies. I can just buy that. But as a 16-year-old kid that simply can’t happen.
It’s purely an alternate time line concept that requires rewriting the whole concept – and Friedman is not up to that task. And even if he was, it wouldn’t play with the Terminator fans who want to see a continuation of existing canon. And it would confuse anybody not familiar with the canon if they then see any of the movies, including T-4 and the subsequent movies.
It’s just not a good idea.
As for John Henry, it was my impression that he did not go into the future. John and Catherine Weaver did. John Henry bugged out with Cameron’s chip in the present. I may be wrong, I might have to re-watch that scene, but my impression is that Sarah remained behind, stepping out of the time bubble, Cameron did not go through despite being in the time bubble due to her exposed metal (which, by the way, makes HASH of Friedman’s explanation for Cromartie’s head going through in episode two of season one! LOL! Talk about inconsistency!), and John Henry disappeared before the Connors and Weaver got to the lab.
Sorry. None of this works, nor can it be made to work without a lot more work than I can conceive of Friedman or the clowns he calls writers being able to do.
Also if he comes BACK from the future, then why send him there – especially one in which he is completely unknown because he doesn’t exist? It’s quite clear to me that the intent is to try to play the T-4 concept with a too young actor, and allow Summer to play Allison (who nobody particularly cares about compared to Cameron).
If they wanted to make sense, they should have sent him into the future to meet HIMSELF AND CAMERON, THEN be told important things by his future self, and be sent back by himself WITH Cameron to the present time, thus allowing Cameron to “jump over her death”. That might have made some sense to me in that then he can defeat Skynet in the present by having been told how to do it in the future by his future self. At least that’s a closed time loop!
See, I really can write this stuff better than freakin’ Friedman! LOL!
Sorry, guys, that was a bit long. I’ll try to tone it down.
Right, like I’ll be successful…
The time-line Connor is in is one where he NEVER EXISTED AS JOHN CONNOR, not who knows him or not.
Excuse me, but where did you get *that* from? It makes no sense. No one thinks that.
John existed 1984-2009, then disappeared (because he jumped time) until he appeared again in whatever year he is now. It IS about no one knowing him (well, except Savannah). I thought that’s everyone’s view, this is the first time I see someone thinking something different.
Minor correction to the above: John didn’t exist the entire 1984-2009 span, there were eight years (1999-2007) in which he was missing. But the rest I said still applies.
When John introduced himself to Derek and his squad in the future, NOBODY RECOGNIZED HIS NAME! Therefore he does not exist as the John Connor we know in that time line! That should be obvious. In that alternate time line, he never was trained by his mother, he never formed the Resistance – or they would know who he was!
It was an alternate time line – I thought everybody knew that. The whole point of that stuff about Derek never having been tortured by Fischer is part of the whole alternate time line stuff. In fact, I believe BAG explicitly said the finale puts John in an alternate time line.
And we don’t even know if Savannah Weaver survived Judgment Day to know him. The last we see of her, Catherine Weaver is telling Ellison to pick her up after Weaver goes with John to the future.
Richard you’re not making any sense.
The reason no one recognizes his name is because he jumped over judgment day – therefore true, he did not form the resistance. But that does not mean he’s now suddenly a different person. He’s still the John Connor we know, the John Connor that was trained by his mother in the sixteen years he’s existed.
I just re-watched the last minutes of the show. Apparently John Henry is CLAIMED by Weaver to have gone into the future – or more precisely, “not where – when” – with Cameron’s chip – but there was no evidence provided for that. So I may be wrong about him remaining in the present. And what’s the point of Cameron giving him his chip and saying “I’m sorry” about it – the chip is glitched! He could clone it, of course, but again what’s the point?
But there’s absolutely no doubt they made it very clear when Derek turned to his squad and said, “Anybody ever hear of a John Connor?” that he just was totally unknown in the future. Which means by definition he never did anything involving setting up the Resistance, or being trained by his mother – and by definition he doesn’t exist in that future prior to his arrival, otherwise he would be meeting HIMSELF at some point.
Now one could argue that that was always the time line. That he disappeared sometime after T-2, ended up in the future, did all the stuff he was supposed to do, etc. That would make him the one and only Connor.
But that makes T-3 utterly non-canonical. And again, T-3 IS canonical because it’s referenced in T-4. So Friedman is rewriting the canon. And it also violates T-1 because Connor is specifically supposed to be the guy who set up the Resistance, Derek himself said in “Goodbye to All That” that the other guy helped Connor set up the Resistance. And no 16-year-old kid is going to set up the Resistance, especially one that already exists. The Connor from the series isn’t remotely in a position to do that without futher personal development.
Canon is that Connor survived Judgment Day – not skipped over it – and that he set up the Resistance from his bunker with his wife, Kate Brewster.
It’s a rewrite of the whole concept. And why? What’s the advantage? Why not keep the time line singular and straight? What advantage does Connor get being in the future without further years of personal development (other than that he gets to be younger, presumably, when he takes over the Resistance, if he does)?
It makes no sense. It’s just hubris on Friedman’s part that he can re-do Cameron’s concept.
@RSH
Why would John return? Because future scenes were expensive, that’s about it. I do not believe the war could be won without John leading from the very start. I also do not believe, or want to believe, that John Connor would need John Henry. So that’s why I feel John would make a return (for story purposes). Without John Connor as general, Skynet wins. Without John, Weaver and Henry will not survive.
I would be immensely bothered if the Resistance was doing just fine with Kyle or Derek in charge.
In a comic book format they could have John developing and working his way up the ranks. There’s no budget concerns there. I’m also sure in T4 that John keeps much of the past to himself and Kate, instead of blabbing on about being the messiah and being targeted by machines from the future. He just uses the knowledge to his advantage.
I did find the comments from Brian Austin Green to be interesting. John simply does not exist, in any form in this future. So Savannah won’t know him, not Martin Bedell, not Lauren Fields, or potentially an old Jesse that survived. John may know a few personal stories about Derek and Kyle that still happened in their childhoods to convince them.
he never did anything involving setting up the Resistance, or being trained by his mother
This is the part that does not make sense. In what way are these two connected? See my post above.
And no, this is not a rewrite of canon – if what I said happens, namely that John’s stint in the future will be brief, that he’ll return to the past quickly.
This is the last I’m going to say about this. You’re clearly too set in your ways to consider other options. And I thought I was stubborn.
RSH u seemingly have taken over this thread
i agree with many on the numbers part
and audience for Human Target stuff
however i disagree-being a a fan on RSH topics of terminator canon
Who knows where the writers could hasve taken it
you cant judge something you havnt seen yet
i liked the ending and would love to see where it went from there
i dont think the show was “thrown’ or any conspiracy to fail was done
Look at lost- at first id didnt like their time jumping etc
and now its answering some questions in some fun ways
im sure they had plan to make something new that WOULD fit with terminator canon
and btw if they didnt i dont think i would have minded as long at iot was engaging and entertaining
i am a realist i think this show is done
i agree it will die a queit death tomorrow and not be on the schedule
and if it is i will buy that lotto ticket
But that other stuff -we wont know and its speculation and conjecture
and just so you know from what i hear the movie messes up the terminator cannon as well….
I think there are two reasons for Dollhouse renewal. One is that something probably isn’t ready yet to replace it and is being reworked – similar to the Jericho situation – and will begin after the Dollhouse run.
The second is that Whedon is not short on hustle. He promises everything, delivers on about half, and makes an effort on most of it.
All he needs are viewers. Although viewer passion means nothing, Whedon is an example that producer passion still means a lot.
Viewers are not going to grow for Dollhouse unless it drops its initial main concept. Viewers don’t tune in to see a completely new character each week. Even on “Quantum Leap,” it was the same character every week. Echo doesn’t even know who she is from week to week.
An extreme example of this are passionate TV series fans. Passionate TV series fans are the most boring people on Earth. They despise variation – sometimes even on their own show. They strangle creativity.
TV viewers want the same characters in the same setting doing the same things each week – only slightly different each time. You can’t even cut a character’s hair – see Felicity for an example.
RSH – I don’t think the way you’re wording it is making any sense. John Connor has obviously been “trained by his mother”, that’s already happened. What’s been skipped is the “Bomb drops, Connor gathers together the survivors and becomes de-facto leader” part, and yeah, that’s a big hole.
But that actually enters into what I sincerely believe, despite being told I’m wrong so many times, that the ending of T:SCC S2 wasn’t a “We’re taking the show in a new direction” thing, but a “We know we’re doomed, so this is the the end of the show. Look at the questions we’ve left you!” type thing. I genuinely believe JF made it believing there was no chance of renewal at that point, at least, not of that show.
I know you’ve said some fairly insulting things about the guy, but I don’t think he’s involved in evil conspiracies to destroy TV networks, hurt his own fans, or any of this other BS. I think on one level he’s proven he’s fairly talented, enough to show that he couldn’t have made this ending without knowing its limitations. At the very least, I don’t think he’d make an ending where the John Connor dynamic is absent, where Cameron – who was very much the center of the show and deliberately so – is suddenly non-existant, and which, if continued, would actually put up the costs of the show (those episodes set in the future are very expensive compared to the “bunch of actors walk around in a WB generic log cabin set and talk about how unhappy they are” type episodes), unless it was intended as the end of T:SCC.
Which, of course, raises the question of what it is Josh actually talked to Fox about bringing for a hypothetical season three. But to believe it was a continuation of season two and the already-filmed season two ending is to believe that Josh actually went to Fox and said “We’ve got some great ideas. We’re going to push up the prices, and we’re going to have an entire season without Summer Glau, or maybe we’ll have her, but she’ll just be some ordinary human teenager John wants to get it on with. How does that grab you?”
And even if Josh was the evil monster you and Nick C are making him out to be, that, frankly, is not believable. I suspect any talks would have centered around a reboot. It’s hard to see what the new version would have looked like, because I’m not entirely certain JF knew where the faults were in the first version. But in any case, the “frackin’ barn” was burned down. He did it. All that was left was to build an entirely new one. With blackjack, and hookers. On second thoughts, forget the barn.
Getting back on topic: Dollhouse is teh awesome. Well, from Episode Six onwards.
There was nothing steady about Dollhouse’s numbers. It kept on going down and down, particularly after TSCC left. I would have like to see TSCC renewed instead since it was getting more viewers before its season ended compared to Dollhouse. TSCC is just a much better quality show.
Jeez,
The reason John Connor never existed in the future is simple. RSH is right and you Fanboys will not accept it. Here is the break down as I see it.
John Connor jumped over J-Day to the year 2025-ish, as evidenced by Allison being 16 or 17 in the final scenes. Her mother was pregnant with her in “Alison from Palmdale” in the year 2008/2009.
JC never existed, he is not the leader of the Resistence and therefore can never send Kyle Reese back to battle Arnold in 1984 or father John Connor. I know we get into the whole “Time Paradox” travel situation but you Fanboys cannot pick and choose to support your denial.
Friedman sabotaged this series by making it impossible to bring back the Cameron character. While Summer Glau has a huge fanbase, it is Summer Glau as Cameron that made this show and this is what I think pissed off Friedman. Glau as Allison will not cut it.
No Cameron, No show
~Lanie~
Well obviously Lanie. Friedman couldn’t possibly be so stupid that he’d write out Cameron (played by Glau). Like I’ve said, Summer herself mentioned that Cameron would return if they had a third season.
You may lack the particular imagination to see how, but there’s always a way in sci-fi. It’s notorious for bringing the dead back to life.
We’re dealing with John Henry, the twin brother of Skynet. If Skynet can build Cameron or the advanced T-1001, so could Henry with the proper resources in the year 2027ish.
LG – I’m not a fanboy (as millions of angry readers of the T:SCC wiki can attest, as well as anyone reading what I’ve posted here) but I think if that’s the argument for RSH’s somewhat extreme “Connor never existed” point being true, then it’s obviously flawed.
Connor obviously does exist, otherwise he wouldn’t be there. All that’s changed is that he’s not the leader of the resistance. How he was born simply becomes another question, with Kyle obviously sent back later.
If that’s not the explanation, then you haven’t been watching T3 or T:SCC, because both posit a “truth” that both the show and the post-T2 movies rely upon: that the future is set, and that effing around with it merely postpones the inevitable. Judgment day keeps changing, but it’s inevitable. Sarah is apparently going to die of a radiation caused issue, regardless of whether it’s a split second one million degree sun burn or leukemia.
That’s how the show has worked thus far. Arguing it doesn’t apply to John being born is ridiculous.
Connor obviously does exist, because he’s there! He’s gone forward in time and skipped being leader of the resistance. In the hypothetical T:SCC fan’s dream where the show somehow gets renewed for a third season, John is going to have to figure out how to become influential enough that he can send Kyle back in time and make the circle complete, in an odd kind of parallel with Cameron’s attempts to save parts to ensure she gets built in the future.
I think RSH knows enough to know that’s how it works, he’s just not wording it clearly.
I know “Remote-Free TV” is going away on Dollhouse, any solid word on whether FOX is dumping it for Fringe as well? Or do we have to wait for the upfront to find out?
I believe that the impetus for this trend may have been Moonlight. This was a show that was doing ‘okay’ but not great. CBS said that it was doing good enough to be renewed, but then decided that they wanted to go for a new show they thought could be turned into a hit (rather than nurture what they already had into a hit) and canceled it.
The replacement show, The Ex List, was a complete disaster.
This trend featured on a number of other networks as well, but in less obvious form, and the result was a slash-and-burn first half of the last year.
Jeff, the problem with that theory is that CBS is probably the one network that won’t be doing this, while if Moonlight were the impetus, they would be renewing shows like Eleventh Hour.
nick c, why do you believe smallville only has one more year? tom welling signed for two years, and if its as profitable as you say, shouldn’t it come back for two more?
Interesting news on the T:SCC front BTW: JF apparently told people in an online chat yesterday that unless the Fox network renews T:SCC the show is over. Which I take to mean the show is over.
http://terminatorwiki.fox.com/thread/2839280/Ashley+Edward+Miller+and+Josh+Friedman+on+savethescc.com+chat+%3F!?offset=60&maxResults=20
Perhaps this is an attempt to make sure the campaigns don’t continue after Monday, after presumably everyone being told that Warner hasn’t found a buyer for the series.
Fox has indicated that Remote Free TV didn’t work for any series, including Fringe. They were able to charge more per ad, but not enough more to make up for the lost ad minutes. They could still change at any time, of course.
Quantum Leap is a good example of how to let the audience see the regular actor while the characters are viewing someone else. It can certainly be done. (Isn’t Ghost Whisperer doing something similar this season?)
squiggleslash, what is Warner doing shopping the series if FOX hasn’t declined it? That would be a breach of contract. There is the proof you guys have been looking for.
sean, because it was my understanding that Warner signed Welling to 2 years with the idea being the 2nd year would be the spin-off.
o cool thanks for the info, i hope you’re right. do you have any idea about what the spin off will focus on as of now?
Despite my prior comment, this has turned into a hijack. But since I love the show I’ll play too. A series that deals with time travel and alternate timelines can do whatever it wants. Sarah could step out of the bubble and turn around and a bearded John, having spent X amount of time in the future, could be right behind her “Back to the Future” style. That would be silly but the whole thing is silly when you think about it.
I think JF was told to give closure to the series. All he did was provide a method for how John survived judgment day. The show separated itself from T3 from the beginning. The fans can use their imaginations on how he rises to lead the resistance. Being able to scrub Terminators will probably give him ALOT of street cred. Knowing about Skynet’s time machine will help too.
JF being an optimist, tried to be vague just in case he got a 3rd season. If a 3rd season came, John would probably just spend the first few eps trying to get a chip and access to a time machine to go back to mom and Cameron. Cameron’s body and mind (she downloaded herself to John Henry’s hardware) are back at Zieracorp and he just needs a chip. See if they hadn’t spent all season breaking them, he would have had one. Or, it would be cool if her chip in the future contained both Cameron and JH and it got downloaded into a freshly minted t1001. Good luck finding the cash for a T1001 Cameron based series though.
Feel free to disagree with what I said, most of it was silly but possible. My only point is that they can keep the main characters in tact and continue the show with ease; or it can be the end. That was the beauty of the finale in my opinion.
Nick C, well I’m sure Warner wouldn’t have gone to Syfy and said “Wanna buy this before Fox does?”, I assume it would be more “We’re not sure Fox are going to want this, are you going to be interested if Fox pulls out”. Or is even that banned?
Still, whatever the case, I think we can assume no more T:SCC on any channel, in any place. It was obviously not going to end up on Fox, but it looks dead anyway.
squiggleslash, first right of refusal means just that. Warner can’t take it anywhere else until Fox has refused.
Julia – yeah, I get that. How does that stop WB asking networks if they’d be interested if Fox pulls out?
Nobody’s proposing WB went to Syfy and said “Make us a better offer than Fox”. That’s what FROR bans, not speculative “If the deal we have falls through, are you interested?”
@Lanie: Yesterday we agreed on something. But it seems that will be the only thing we’ll agree on. Because today, I definitely do *not* agree with what you said.
I don’t need to go much further, because squiggleslash already said everything very well. I will add this though:
Even if, because of all the changes, Kyle is not sent back and such… *This* John will continue to exist – as a “temporal orphan”. Yeah, deal with that concept!
I thought this article was about Dollhouse? If TSCC was to be continued the time line problems several of you are concerned about could be corre3cted with just one more jump im time. This is SciFi and anything can be rewritten and corrected with a simple new scene in any show.
I have several of the last episodes of TSCC on one of my DVRS that I am yet to watch, I just refused to invest the time in the story if it was being cancelled.
If Chuck is coming back I have about five episodes of that show to see as well.
I agree the DEVIL we know might be better than the unknown Devil in a new untested show. I think broadcast TV may be at the beginning of the end of its life and likely will only get less and less viewers in the future. We the viewer may wake up one morning and find TV gone except for downloads from the net. The costs may exceed the genre as delivery system from surviving. Maybe even Movie Theaters.
As for Dollhouse, it was much bewtter in the end of the season than the first couple of shows. The opportunity to use the technology concept of the show is endless if some imagination by the writers can be opened up .
TV isn’t going away anytime soon–there are more people watching for more hours now in the US than at any time in the past. True, they’re also likely to be watching other things, but the INCREASE in television viewing is one of the things making possible all the original series now being shown on “secondary cable” like TNT’s Leverage, USA Network’s multiple series, Damages, Mad Men, and many more. Plus, of course, the big investments from relatively small premium networks like HBO and Showtime.
Even teenagers today watch more television than teens just 10 years ago.
http://www.adweek.com/aw/content_display/community/columns/other-columns/e3i123610bbb7b491bf3d78828c20065cc4
The biggest change is in the “fracturing” of the viewing audience. Free broadcast television is going to have to change some of its business model simply because there’s so much competition. But a lot of the competition is coming from other television options.
It will be awhile before all television is on the Internet. But meanwhile everyone at the big four is going to be looking at ways to cut costs on a show by show basis.
The devil is also in the details. The economy is down to the point where the companies that the government for most intents has bought and now runs are being ordered to cut advertising in 1/2.
Possibly meaning shows that can bring in other revenue(DVDs, downloads, character goods, cheezy t-shirts, etc.) streams maybe just as valuable as a show that brings in big rating numbers.
squiggleslash, it’s a breach of contract. Look at THE NEW ADVENTURES OF OLD CHRISTINE. CBS is haggling on it. ABC has said “Hey if CBS doesn’t want it we do!” However there has been no official talking between ABC and OLD CHRISTINE. ABC made it public they’d be interested. Putting out a feeler is one thing like you’ve suggested. However you still can’t do that until you’ve been given permission. Networks don’t give permission generally to shows they definitely plan on keeping.
TSCC IS OFFICIALLY CANCELLED. Media will be reporting it in moments.
Just to drop one more line on the time travel stuff: yes, if you want to jump the shark, you can do anything you want with time travel.
Which is why the show is now officially canceled – Friedman did what he wanted.
Lesson: No, you CANNOT do anything you want.
Nick C – the only thing I’ve suggested is putting out a feeler. Next time I’ll write in gibberish, I’ll be more likely to get replies relevant to what I’ve written.