PDA

View Full Version : Movies & TV shows that didn't do well becuz they came out too early or too late


Frankmillerfan
02-10-2016, 12:09 AM
https://a.disquscdn.com/get?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftctechcrunch2011.files.wordp ress.com%2F2014%2F06%2Ffirefly.jpg&key=Iw725mz5ooHeOWXjYErl2Q
would probably have done better had it come out sometime like now it would be better accepted..

https://a.disquscdn.com/get?url=http%3A%2F%2Fecx.images-amazon.com%2Fimages%2FI%2F51chPM9xkeL._SL500_SS500 _.jpg&key=m6q1o0VmzKQDrUPlAQGGAA
Always liked this flick but it came out JUST AS dice was getting over exposed and the backlash was growing..if it had come out a year or two earlier it would have been better recieved (at least by public not critically) and dice would have had a better acting career.

Luke Noonan
05-07-2016, 09:49 PM
I don't think Andrew Dice Clay is the only thing that movie didn't have going for it, although he was probably the biggest.

I think Clive Barker's movie Nightbreed was ahead of it's time, it used a lot of subversive horror/fantasy tropes later popularised by Wes Craven in Scream and Joss Whedon in Buffy and Angel, among others, while the violence is pretty light by 2000s standards. One of the worst cases of studio inteference ever, it's a shame it never became the ambitious franchise that Clive Barker envisioned. Still a cool film on it's own, I got the extended cut a couple years ago. Before there was Guillermo del Toro, there was this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CX0-AlytIXY

Buckyrig
05-08-2016, 12:33 PM
Firefly was on Fox.

If Buffy had been on an established network instead of the fledgling WB, it probably would have been canceled just as quickly.

What would probably help Firefly today is basic cable or Netflix.

Jason Powell
05-09-2016, 11:01 PM
If Buffy had been on an established network instead of the fledgling WB, it probably would have been canceled just as quickly.


I am not sure how you reach that logic. Buffy was extremely popular and so was its spin off. Now it's timing was perfect since Goth and teen screams where extremely popular at that time, but I don't think the network had anything to do with it's success other than they gave them a home.

Buckyrig
05-10-2016, 12:05 PM
I am not sure how you reach that logic. Buffy was extremely popular and so was its spin off. Now it's timing was perfect since Goth and teen screams where extremely popular at that time, but I don't think the network had anything to do with it's success other than they gave them a home.

It didn't do the kinds of numbers necessary to remain on the air on the established networks.

And just in terms of quality, Firefly's 15 episodes were much stronger than the first 15 episodes of Buffy or Angel.

Jason Powell
05-12-2016, 11:26 AM
It didn't do the kinds of numbers necessary to remain on the air on the established networks.

And just in terms of quality, Firefly's 15 episodes were much stronger than the first 15 episodes of Buffy or Angel.


Again I am not sure how you reached that logic, I recall it being extremely popular. Several books, spin offs, ect... Studios don't keep shows unless they make them bank and they surely don't make a spinoff, Firefly, while awesome, just didn't catch on and the cost vs profit caused it to end. I mean the Serenity movie was equally as awesome, better in some ways, but no sequel. Was that because of the Studio or the lack of fan support? True I think the time it came out hurt it. But the station it was on doesn't make a hill of beans. If so Schitt's Creek would not be still on the air. Now I am not saying popular shows don't get canceled by Studios without any logic. THE BEVERALY HILLBILLYS got canceled when it was extremely popular. But that is not the case with Firefly. And Buffy did not continue and make spin offs because the studio just liked it or it would of never got cancelled.

Also I looked it up, at it's prime Buffy had about 6 million viewers, Firefly only had about 4.5 million. That, combined with higher production cost, is why Firefly failed.

Buckyrig
05-12-2016, 11:42 AM
Again I am not sure how you reached that logic, I recall it being extremely popular. Several books, spin offs, ect... Studios don't keep shows unless they make them bank and they surely don't make a spinoff, Firefly, while awesome, just didn't catch on and the cost vs profit caused it to end. I mean the Serenity movie was equally as awesome, better in some ways, but no sequel. Was that because of the Studio or the lack of fan support? True I think the time it came out hurt it. But the station it was on doesn't make a hill of beans. If so Schitt's Creek would not be still on the air. Now I am not saying popular shows don't get canceled by Studios without any logic. THE BEVERALY HILLBILLYS got canceled when it was extremely popular. But that is not the case with FIREFLY. And Buffy did not continue and make spin off because the studio just liked it or it would of never got cancelled.

Also I looked it up, at it's prime Buffy had about 6 million viewers, Firefly only had about 4.5 million. That, combined with higher production cost, is why Firefly failed.

Buffyl (https://web.archive.org/web/20080216220433/http://home.insightbb.com/~wahoskem/buffy1.htm)

Firefly (https://web.archive.org/web/20080216135521/http://home.insightbb.com/~wahoskem/firefly1.html)

If you don't think that Fox had higher standards in 2003 or 4 or whenever that was than WB had in 1996 for a successful television show, I can't make you see it. There are plenty of reasons a show will stay on with less viewers. The demographic that is watching it, relative success for the cost of the show. Hell, this is going on with Supergirl right now! That show may move to CW because it's ratings aren't high enough to justify the cost of the episodes to CBS.

Duane Korslund
05-12-2016, 12:03 PM
Buffy really didnt pick up and become a well written cohesive show until season 2...season 1 was pretty weak...comparatively firefly's season 1 was very strong...BUT...expectations and time slot competition were a lot higher at the time firefly came out...plus the market was much harder for Firefly to nail...sci fi nerds were a tougher fish to shoot than teenagers/early twenties, which was buffy's original market .also...Fox seems to hate joss whedon...Buffy had to limp out seasons (I believe) 6 and 7 on the Wb, which is a big reason (among others) why angel didnt make it to season 6...Historically Whedon and Fox tend to go kerplunk. I dont have Nielson numbers or anything to back any of that up, but that's how I felt watching Buffy, Angel, and Firefly...so...I guess that's my viewpoint having been through all 3 from the beginning.

Jason Powell
05-12-2016, 12:09 PM
Buffyl (https://web.archive.org/web/20080216220433/http://home.insightbb.com/~wahoskem/buffy1.htm)

Firefly (https://web.archive.org/web/20080216135521/http://home.insightbb.com/~wahoskem/firefly1.html)

If you don't think that Fox had higher standards in 2003 or 4 or whenever that was than WB had in 1996 for a successful television show, I can't make you see it. There are plenty of reasons a show will stay on with less viewers. The demographic that is watching it, relative success for the cost of the show. Hell, this is going on with Supergirl right now! That show may move to CW because it's ratings aren't high enough to justify the cost of the episodes to CBS.

Your are not listening to what I said, higher production cost and low viewers is your catalyst. If it was on WB it would still have been cancelled. In fact it would probably have never been picked up. See bigger studios have more money they can loose on a show. The studio had nothing to do with that. See 3 million viewers is enough to carry Buffy on both stations. But not Firefly. If so, SCI FI (SY FY) would of continued the show but didn't. Now don't get me wrong all stations want the most bang for their buck, so yes, Supergirl may go to CW and do better. But I wouldn't be surprised if their budget doesn't decrease also to increase profits.

Buckyrig
05-12-2016, 12:26 PM
Your argument is morphing.

Jason Powell
05-12-2016, 01:21 PM
Your argument is morphing.

No it it is not, I said from the beginning the studio had nothing to do with it's failure, high production cost and low viewership is the cause. It doesn't matter if it is on Fox or WB. Infact Fox had a larger built in audience than WB at that time. However Buffy maintained a 4.5 ~6 million viewership where Firefly tapped out at 4.5 million.