The Ratings Thread (Part 61)

1473474476478479536

Comments

  • Zac QuinnZac Quinn Posts: 5,172
    Forum Member
    lewiep93 wrote: »

    Most Watched Programmes of 2014 [Top 20 - Officials]
    03 - 12.72m - Sherlock (01/01/14) - BBC 1/HD

    :D

    Now Bake Off has stopped climbing, If I'm A Celeb suffers from the ITV reach crisis it's difficult to see anything topping Sherl now :D
  • lewiep93lewiep93 Posts: 5,880
    Forum Member
    Zac Quinn wrote: »
    :D

    Now Bake Off has stopped climbing, If I'm A Celeb suffers from the ITV reach crisis it's difficult to see anything topping Sherl now :D

    I agree! That figure is outstanding and either Mrs Brown, Miranda, New Year Fireworks or I'm a Celebrity could potentially top it.
  • Zac QuinnZac Quinn Posts: 5,172
    Forum Member
    James J wrote: »
    Corrie some 1.95m ahead of EastEnders.

    Considering some were suggesting that that death episode earlier in the year might challenge Sherlock's place in the list I'm not sure being only 2m ahead of EastEnders, which is only just recovering after being in the dogs for years, is much to shout about.
  • XIVXIV Posts: 21,495
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    cylon6 wrote: »
    The irony is that when a desperate ABC in the sixties pushed how well they did in youth demos other channels followed suit. And CBS axed a number of high rating shows because they skewed old. Now they leave them alone.

    CBS is doing fine but some of their shows are ageing and if there are not careful, could end up in a situation to what NBC did just a few years ago although they have enough shows where I don't think they'll sink to fourth but third place isn't out of the question.

    Thursday Night Football is doing well and I would not be surprised if they renew not only for a few more years but also more games. There's change coming in late night with Colbert and Corden next year and Colbert will likely bring in an younger audience compared to Letterman which will help against the two Jimmys, Corden while untested is against Seth Myers and simply improving on Craig Ferguson's numbers would be a winner.

    Fridays are always going to be a difficult one to improve so that'll remain the same with maybe something Elementary or Person of Interest taking over from Hawaii Five-0 or Blue Bloods. Sundays are difficult because it's such a competitive night not only from NBC with SNF and FOX with its comedy block but also cable with the likes of The Walking Dead or Game of Thrones. I'm surprised CBS hasn't tried out comedy on Sundays, would draw in a younger audience and would solve the issue of football overruns.

    They have a straight to series Supergirl show but I don't know if that is going to be a regular season show or summer but it's a way of broadening their demographic beyond procedurals. Perhaps they should consider bringing back Dynasty or creating a new primetime soap although given Dallas and Revenge aren't doing so hot, it might not be the best idea.
  • Steve WilliamsSteve Williams Posts: 11,816
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Dancc wrote: »
    Bruce got a lot of stick on here, most of it unwarranted. I think now he's gone people are beginning to appreciate the value he added because something is most definitely missing from Strictly this year, and it shows in the viewing figures. A quality feel good production like SCD should be beating X Factor with ease, and I'm simply unable to hide my bitter disappointment that it wasn't able to do so last night and looks unlikely to be the case going forwards.

    I am so pleased my grandparents decided to give birth to my dad on this weekend all those years ago so I could go home to celebrate his birthday and miss a load of rubbish on this thread. Anyway, I wouldn't be writing off Strictly or X Factor yet in September, when we get into November and it's getting similar figures we can argue about it then.

    Anyway, as a big Brucie fan, obviously I was very sad to see him go. Gertting tess and Claudia was a no-brainer really because obviously they've done the show together on a number of occasions in the past few years and there's been no obvious backlash nor was it a complete disaster. But I always thought, while it was fine like that a couple of times a series, there wasn't the spark that would last a whole series. I think Claudia is brilliant, but I just don't think Tess can deliver the jokes, she comes across as smug and irritating, and I don't think she works as the main host. It was mentioned that the link they did together was good and I would agree with that, it probably would be better if they did more of that.

    It's certainly not enough to sink the entire series because the rest of it absolutely runs like clockwork. But there does seem like something's missing.
    cylon6 wrote: »
    It took the BBC five years to find a Saturday hit in Strictly after Noel's House Party ended in 1999. If Strictly failed BBC1 would have NOTHING left in light entertainment that could match it for ratings. ITV would struggle too but they still have BGT and I'm A Celebrity.

    But it wasn't like there was a massive chasm on BBC1 during the five years between House Party and Strictly, they didn't have any big massive shows but they had plenty of middle-ranking shows that they could get a decent Saturday night out of - Dog Eat Dog, Friends Like These, the Generation Game for a bit, the lottery quizzes - and so they didn't totally collapse and were pretty competitive alongside ITV. Often they would beat it. They wouldn't beat Pop Idol but that was an exceptional series. The same would be the case here, they have enough things like the lottery quizzes, Doctor Who, Pointless and so on, plus one of two big things. I'm A Celebrity is hardly something ITV can rely on, it only last three weeks a year.

    It's impossible to say there'd be nothing there if Strictly went because nobody knew when House Party ended that the next big thing would be Strictly, it was one of umpteen things they tired. By the time Strictly ends, which clearly won't be for a while, something else may have turned up.
    johnnymc wrote: »
    A poor autumn Sunday on BBC one in comparison. They don't intend to change their competition at all then. Such an old schedule that they have had in place for season after season.
    johnnymc wrote: »
    I hope the BBC trust ask more questions on the creativity and innovation in the BBC one schedule. I realise these are really important to many BBC one viewers but it needs refreshed.

    There's plenty of creativity and innovation in the BBC1 schedule but you're looking in the wrong place if you're expecting it on a Sunday night. Sunday nights on BBC1 have always appealed to a specific audience and that's why BBC2 generally skews young and male that night. I don't think two hours of Countryfile and Antiques Roadshow (the latter of which is not on every week by a long chalk) is too much to ask. I mean Countryfile is innovative in its own way, it clearly has massive PSB value and does loads to inform and educate viewers, and it's holding its own on primetime Sunday night.

    Also, one of the arguments about The X Factor this weekend is that the Friday episode got more than anything else would in that slot. The same is clearly true of Antiques Roadshow, it's up against a massive juggernaut. Antiques Roadshow is a popular programme with a loyal appreciative audience that deserves to continue, so where else do you put it?

    I can't remember who said it but they pointed out that BBC1 have tried virtually every single genre of programme they can possibly find opposite Downton Abbey - contemporary drama, period drama, new drama, returning drama, popular factual, specialist factual, history, nature. What else can they do? Downton Abbey is a massively popular programme.

    Incidentally, on a general point, I was reminded of the suggestion BBC1 is "increasingly" acting like a commercial broadcaster on Saturday where the question in the final of Pointless was about poetry and required the contestants to recite famous poems. At ten to seven on Saturday night BBC1! You never got that on Every Second Counts.
    Digital
    Rank Channel Time Programme OOOs Share
    1 ITV2 04:55 PM Despicable Me 1163 8.2%
    2 Sky Sports 4 10:00 AM The Ryder Cup - Live 923 9.2%
    3 BBC Three 10:00 PM Family Guy 839 4.7%
    4 BBC Three 10:25 PM Family Guy 637 4.5%
    5 ITV2 09:00 PM The Xtra Factor 591 2.5%
    6 E4 07:30 PM The Big Bang Theory 573 2.7%
    7 BBC News 08:00 AM Breakfast 534 9.7%
    8 ITV2 06:50 PM The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor 534 2.5%
    9 ITV2 12:25 PM The X Factor 515 6.2%
    10 ITV2 02:45 PM Nanny McPhee and the Big Bang 514 5%

    Note a rare Sunday where Sky's Super Sunday football didn't make it into the chart, because West Brom vs Burnley must be one of the lowest profile fixtures ever to fill the Sunday 4pm slot. This weekend is always going to have a weak Sunday game as they picked the fixtures before the Champions League draw and therefore couldn't pick Champions League teams to play on Sunday in case they were playing on Tuesday, and with the Ryder Cup at the same time they clearly took the opportunity to meet the requirement to show all twenty teams in that slot.
    By the way, unless Ian Wright had been to an all night fancy dress party surely there WAS a woman pundit on the Sunday lunch time Match of the Day thing yesterday, wasn't there?

    I was not watching but heard her talking as it was left on channel after the news and before we put on something from catch up. Did not hear her introduced but I took her to be an England women's team player or some such.

    Yes! Eni Aluko was indeed on Match of the Day Extra this weekend, while The Observer's Amy Lawrence was on last weekend. That is one of the three Match of the Day programmes over the weekend, and this kind of thing it clearly what the intention was when they suggested it. So let's put another half-heard "fact" to bed, please.
    jlp95bwfc wrote: »
    It's still a guaranteed 5m+ usually. I'm not sure how that match will rate though as it's not a usual slot for an England match. The problem is people switch off due to the unnecessarily long post match discussion. This could take viewers over to BBC One at 7pm, harming Palladium.

    It may not be the usual slot for an England match but it's certainly a usual slot for football, with Sky getting over a million for the Premier League there (when it's not West Brom vs Burnely) and ITV doing well when they've shown FA Cup matches there. And with minimal competition I expect that to be one of the better rated England matches of recent years.
    Followed on 4 August by 'ITV are on strike again - all day!' Samuel would have been happy as BBC ratings will have been 100% of the audience that day I assume as there were no other channels. :)

    Would that be the last time ever this was true?

    On Saturday 15 November 1969 the diary notes 'Colour TV starts today on BBC 1 and ITV'. There had been some colour programming for a bit and BBC 2 was all in colour by then but this was the big marketing project that obviously sold us on getting that 23 inch TV. I think it only launched in some parts of the UK, though - obviously Manchester (where we lived then) being one.

    Yes, and the best thing about is that they were officially allowed to start colour on BBC1 and ITV on Saturday 15th, so BBC1 actually started it with a Petuia Clark concert at midnight on the Friday night.

    The ITV strike in 1968 was a bit chaotic but they only missed a few days and while it was sorted there was a national ITV service for a bit made up of whatever programmes they had on the shelves. But of course it wasn't the last time because in 1979 ITV were off air for ten weeks and indeed the BBC4 repeats of Top of the Pops are at the ITV strike and in three weeks we'll see the highest rated episode ever which got 18.9 million viewers. It's amazing to think bands could often be making their first ever TV appearance in front of audiences like that. These days you'd have to go on an Olympics opening ceremony to match it.
  • AlexiRAlexiR Posts: 22,403
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    On the subject of Christmas scheduling again for a moment I've just noticed that Mad Men's Jon Hamm has signed up for Channel 4's Christmas special of Black Mirror. That's a fairly impressive get for them.
    Jonwo wrote: »
    They have a straight to series Supergirl show but I don't know if that is going to be a regular season show or summer but it's a way of broadening their demographic beyond procedurals. Perhaps they should consider bringing back Dynasty or creating a new primetime soap although given Dallas and Revenge aren't doing so hot, it might not be the best idea.
    Supergirl isn't quite straight to series. It has a series commitment which basically just means that if CBS don't take it to series after seeing the pilot they'll owe Warner Bros. a lot of money. Its unusual but networks occasionally pass on these. The pilot would have to be awful though and I suspect CBS also have a cast contingent option as well. It'll almost certainly be a regular season show though given the amount its going to cost.

    Its worth mentioning of course that CBS have tried to expand their drama slate beyond procedurals a few times in recent years and its always ended badly for them. Hostages being the most recent example. Personally I don't know that they need to expand beyond that so much as they need to make sure their schedule isn't so dominated by police procedurals. And there's stuff like The Good Wife which is essentially a procedural but manages to mix in enough serialised story elements to help disguise that fact.
  • A.D.PA.D.P Posts: 10,329
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    EastEnders gets an extra five minutes on Tuesday starting at 7.25.

    It's taken off the One Show and Shirley has a gun.
  • C14EC14E Posts: 32,165
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Wow that's a big drop for Downton YOY. Quite surprising really. Looks like last year was its peak and now the only way is down.

    A really terrible autumn for drama so far. Downton towers above the rest but it's down quite a bit. Cilla has been a surprise success, the only positive for drama this season, but it's a short run one off series.

    Despite what we were all assured was a bumper autumn of hit drama on BBC1, none of them can hit 5m with a massive drop for New Tricks, a weak showing from Our Zoo and mediocre overnights for Doctor Who. And ITV have posted some dismal figures from Chasing Shadows and Mr Whicher.
    Score wrote: »
    4.28m/21.7% for Sunday Night At The Palladium.

    That's up on last week and looks solid enough. Especially as it was hosted by Jack Whitehall, who is good but not someone you'd expect to see at 7pm on ITV Sunday nights.

    Someone assured me this was doing terribly? :confused::p The series seems to have held well, despite starting lower than Surprise last year. At least it goes into Strictly on solid footing although there's no telling how much damage might be done.
    SamuelW wrote: »
    Also XF once again down year on year. Not good news for Cowell and co.

    And once again the #1 show on TV this week... so things could be worse.

    All in all the 6 chair challenge seems to have gone very well in the end, despite Fridays awful start. Solid number on Saturday with that extended SCD clash and an improvement on Sunday as well. All against a backdrop of declines for big returning shows like Downton, Strictly and New Tricks. It's also interesting to see how the Saturdays are slipping a bit but the Sundays are creeping up. XF numbers have definitely defied traditional patterns this year.
  • AlexiRAlexiR Posts: 22,403
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Yes! Eni Aluko was indeed on Match of the Day Extra this weekend, while The Observer's Amy Lawrence was on last weekend. That is one of the three Match of the Day programmes over the weekend, and this kind of thing it clearly what the intention was when they suggested it. So let's put another half-heard "fact" to bed, please.
    On this note I'd point out that surely this is the kind of strategy that the BBC should be implementing with any new or perspective football pundit regardless of their gender? Rather than throwing them in at the deep end on Match of the Day itself testing them on some of the more low profile football shows they have to see how they do in that setting and on camera. The test here is really a long term one. As in do any of the women they try on these shows actually progress through the system as it were and eventually make it onto Match of the Day or Match of the Day 2.

    Also while I understand that the BBC's football coverage is incredibly male dominated I'm not sure the same can said of BBC Sport in general. Without looking into it a bit more BBC Sport actually appears to be one of the few areas where there does seem to be quite a strong selection of female presenters and contributors. It is perhaps OK that football coverage remains male dominated because football itself is pretty male dominated.
  • SamuelWSamuelW Posts: 8,447
    Forum Member
    D.M.N. wrote: »
    Downton Abbey's opening episode, inc +1, 2013 vs 2014...

    - Total = 11.95m/42.1% vs 10.71m/41.0%
    - C4-15 = 0.31m/27.6% vs 0.26m/27.6%
    - A16-24 = 0.59m/29.1% vs 0.42m/24.1%
    - A25-34 = 0.80m/25.0% vs 0.76m/26.6%
    - A35-44 = 1.18m/29.1% vs 0.98m/27.9%
    - A45-54 = 2.19m/41.7% vs 1.86m/37.4%
    - A55-64 = 2.33m/47.6% vs 1.97m/44.9%
    - A65+ = 4.56m/58.1% vs 4.46m/58.1%
    58pct of OAPs watching all tv watched Downton Abbey. No wonder it's nigh on impossible for BBC1 to compete with 4.5m+ against it.
  • AlexiRAlexiR Posts: 22,403
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    SamuelW wrote: »
    58pct of OAPs watching all tv watched Downton Abbey. No wonder it's nigh on impossible for BBC1 to compete with 4.5m+ against it.
    Yes because as we all know the under 65 population of the UK is basically non-existent...
  • cylon6cylon6 Posts: 25,483
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Jonwo wrote: »
    CBS is doing fine but some of their shows are ageing and if there are not careful, could end up in a situation to what NBC did just a few years ago although they have enough shows where I don't think they'll sink to fourth but third place isn't out of the question.

    Thursday Night Football is doing well and I would not be surprised if they renew not only for a few more years but also more games. There's change coming in late night with Colbert and Corden next year and Colbert will likely bring in an younger audience compared to Letterman which will help against the two Jimmys, Corden while untested is against Seth Myers and simply improving on Craig Ferguson's numbers would be a winner.

    Fridays are always going to be a difficult one to improve so that'll remain the same with maybe something Elementary or Person of Interest taking over from Hawaii Five-0 or Blue Bloods. Sundays are difficult because it's such a competitive night not only from NBC with SNF and FOX with its comedy block but also cable with the likes of The Walking Dead or Game of Thrones. I'm surprised CBS hasn't tried out comedy on Sundays, would draw in a younger audience and would solve the issue of football overruns.

    They have a straight to series Supergirl show but I don't know if that is going to be a regular season show or summer but it's a way of broadening their demographic beyond procedurals. Perhaps they should consider bringing back Dynasty or creating a new primetime soap although given Dallas and Revenge aren't doing so hot, it might not be the best idea.
    It's odd to see football on Thursday nights on US TV where scripted used to dominate. CBS must be looking at the demos for Arrow/Gotham etc and want a superhero show of their own but they seem to work better on The CW than on the big networks.

    Revenge used to be so hot. What happened? I also think CBS should try sitcoms on Sundays sandwiched between a couple of dramas.
  • XIVXIV Posts: 21,495
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    AlexiR wrote: »

    Supergirl isn't quite straight to series. It has a series commitment which basically just means that if CBS don't take it to series after seeing the pilot they'll owe Warner Bros. a lot of money. Its unusual but networks occasionally pass on these. The pilot would have to be awful though and I suspect CBS also have a cast contingent option as well. It'll almost certainly be a regular season show though given the amount its going to cost.

    Its worth mentioning of course that CBS have tried to expand their drama slate beyond procedurals a few times in recent years and its always ended badly for them. Hostages being the most recent example. Personally I don't know that they need to expand beyond that so much as they need to make sure their schedule isn't so dominated by police procedurals. And there's stuff like The Good Wife which is essentially a procedural but manages to mix in enough serialised story elements to help disguise that fact.

    CBS should use the summer to experiment, Under the Dome and Extant didn't exactly do great this summer but CBS haven't given up since they've ordered Zoo for next summer.

    The procedurals and multicamera comedies are their bread and butter but there's a risk audience will tire of them but NCIS while down on last year is still pulling in a huge audience and NCIS New Orleans is likely to be a keeper. It'll be interesting how NCIS Los Angeles does in its new timeslot and night, it'll be down no doubt but if it can do respectable numbers, it's staying there.

    I think the procedural can still be a ratings draw but they need to mix it up. Supergirl is a start but perhaps something like an English adaptation of Borgen or a more edgy crime drama similar to The Following or Hannibal plus something like a medical drama or legal drama.
    cylon6 wrote: »
    It's odd to see football on Thursday nights on US TV where scripted used to dominate. CBS must be looking at the demos for Arrow/Gotham etc and want a superhero show of their own but they seem to work better on The CW than on the big networks.

    Revenge used to be so hot. What happened? I also think CBS should try sitcoms on Sundays sandwiched between a couple of dramas.

    Superheroes or comic book adaptations in general are doing well with Marvel dominating in films and The Walking Dead being a huge hit. Even TNT has a pilot for a Teen Titans series. I think it's better if slightly less known superheroes get adapted for TV rather than the big guns since they're unlikely to get films. I'm surprised CBS did go for Supergirl, would have thought something like The Question would be more for them since the character is a vigilante.
  • cylon6cylon6 Posts: 25,483
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    A.D.P wrote: »
    EastEnders gets an extra five minutes on Tuesday starting at 7.25.

    It's taken off the One Show and Shirley has a gun.

    I bet that early start for EastEnders tomorrow will catch people out.
  • SamuelWSamuelW Posts: 8,447
    Forum Member
    AlexiR wrote: »
    Yes because as we all know the under 65 population of the UK is basically non-existent...
    OAPs are the largest group of people who watch television. They are also the most habitual age group of audience to BBC1 and Itv. Therefore, if you attract a significant portion of OAPs, you will always do well. Michael Grade once said if you attract the OAPs, you will win the ratings. And he is right, the majority of the time, shows which rate well are the ones with a big or significant OAP audience - of course there are a few exceptions like XF and Apprentice but generally the OAPs determine which show wins the ratings.

    Also if you have a young skewing show like XF, it is not too difficult to attract a counter audience against it if you have a program which appeals to the channel's habitual OAP audience. However if there is an old skewing show like Downright Shabby, it is much more difficult to attract a counter audience because it is statistically tougher for BBC1/Itv/terrestrial channels to attract a younger audience compared to an older one. Therefore it is tougher to hold up 4m+ against a very popular old skewing show like Downright shabby.

    'Attract the OAPs, and you will win the ratings' - Lord Michael Grade
  • ftvftv Posts: 31,668
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    AlexiR wrote: »
    On this note I'd point out that surely this is the kind of strategy that the BBC should be implementing with any new or perspective football pundit regardless of their gender? Rather than throwing them in at the deep end on Match of the Day itself testing them on some of the more low profile football shows they have to see how they do in that setting and on camera. The test here is really a long term one. As in do any of the women they try on these shows actually progress through the system as it were and eventually make it onto Match of the Day or Match of the Day 2.

    Also while I understand that the BBC's football coverage is incredibly male dominated I'm not sure the same can said of BBC Sport in general. Without looking into it a bit more BBC Sport actually appears to be one of the few areas where there does seem to be quite a strong selection of female presenters and contributors. It is perhaps OK that football coverage remains male dominated because football itself is pretty male dominated.

    Credit should be given to BBC Sport for promoting women's football but it's a fact of life that football is very male-dominated and it would be naïve to pretend otherwise.
  • Steve WilliamsSteve Williams Posts: 11,816
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    AlexiR wrote: »
    Also while I understand that the BBC's football coverage is incredibly male dominated I'm not sure the same can said of BBC Sport in general. Without looking into it a bit more BBC Sport actually appears to be one of the few areas where there does seem to be quite a strong selection of female presenters and contributors. It is perhaps OK that football coverage remains male dominated because football itself is pretty male dominated.

    Yes, and you only have to look at Sky Sports who are miles behind when it comes to putting women in screen in main anchor roles, more or less all the women on Sky are in co-presenter roles and it's only in the last twelve months that they've had Natalie Sawyer and Hayley McQueen anchoring some very low profile football matches. In terms of women on screen Sky are miles behind the BBC, and indeed miles behind ITV (who had Gabby Logan as their main football host for two years) and BT and ESPN before them.
  • AlexiRAlexiR Posts: 22,403
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    cylon6 wrote: »
    IRevenge used to be so hot. What happened?
    Season two happened.
    Jonwo wrote: »
    I think the procedural can still be a ratings draw but they need to mix it up. Supergirl is a start but perhaps something like an English adaptation of Borgen or a more edgy crime drama similar to The Following or Hannibal plus something like a medical drama or legal drama.
    The West Wing has left all of the networks incredibly shy on pursuing political drama. It still creates an air of expectation unlike any other show which is undoubtedly impressive presumably because there was so little to compare it to both before and since. Commander in Chief on ABC 9 years ago (which very quickly flamed out) is the only other one I can think of before this seasons Madam Secretary (which hasn't really gotten off the ground). CBS is hoping the truly awful Stalker will be their answer to The Following and Hannibal. I cannot express how much I hate Stalker. And to they've been searching for a medical drama for years now and not been able to find out they like or that audiences like.
  • Andy23Andy23 Posts: 15,921
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    cylon6 wrote: »
    I bet that early start for EastEnders tomorrow will catch people out.

    To their benefit, as ITV are showing champions league, Emmerdale will finish early, so there shouldn't any any overlap.


    Meanwhile Samuel is calling the highest rating drama on TV an immature nickname. No wonder the ITV bashing seems relentless here 52 weeks a year. Whether it is a sub 2m summer doc, or Downton Abbey, it doesn't matter to him.
  • bingbongbingbong Posts: 2,439
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Yes, and you only have to look at Sky Sports who are miles behind when it comes to putting women in screen in main anchor roles, more or less all the women on Sky are in co-presenter roles and it's only in the last twelve months that they've had Natalie Sawyer and Hayley McQueen anchoring some very low profile football matches. In terms of women on screen Sky are miles behind the BBC, and indeed miles behind ITV (who had Gabby Logan as their main football host for two years) and BT and ESPN before them.

    As an ex-proffesional footballer struggling for work having retired at 30 due to injury nothing gives me more pleasure than seeing a female commentator on my sport, am thinking of having a sex change/going tranny so i can get a job on the BBC as they are "miles ahead of Sky" in this.
  • XIVXIV Posts: 21,495
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    cylon6 wrote: »

    The West Wing has left all of the networks incredibly shy on pursuing political drama. It still creates an air of expectation unlike any other show which is undoubtedly impressive presumably because there was so little to compare it to both before and since. Commander in Chief on ABC 9 years ago (which very quickly flamed out) is the only other one I can think of before this seasons Madam Secretary (which hasn't really gotten off the ground). CBS is hoping the truly awful Stalker will be their answer to The Following and Hannibal. I cannot express how much I hate Stalker. And to they've been searching for a medical drama for years now and not been able to find out they like or that audiences like.

    Stalker doesn't look great even though it is from Kevin Williamson, I'm quite looking forward to Battle Creek which was created by Vince Gilligan but David Shore is the showrunner, surprised they didn't debut that in September.
  • AlexiRAlexiR Posts: 22,403
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    SamuelW wrote: »
    OAPs are the largest group of people who watch television...
    Difficult but not impossible is what I'll say here.

    I'll also add that it might be easier to attract a younger audience on Sunday at 9 if you didn't have the oldest line-up known to man scheduled before it. On that note surely the failure to keep hold off that older audience is a massive failure by BBC1? Maybe they should try putting a compelling drama there that locks in the audience they cultivate earlier in the night. You should be all for that strategy since you seem convinced Downton is on the way out. Which just makes it even weirder that BBC1 can't get an audience opposite it really.
  • SamuelWSamuelW Posts: 8,447
    Forum Member
    Andy23 wrote: »
    Meanwhile Samuel is calling the highest rating drama on TV an immature nickname.
    The highest rated drama on tv is Sherlock, followed by Call the midwife.
  • ftvftv Posts: 31,668
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    C4's Deal or No Deal will continue to the end of 2015 in a new contract signed with BBC Studios who provide the HD facilities in Bristol.
  • AlexiRAlexiR Posts: 22,403
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Jonwo wrote: »
    Stalker doesn't look great even though it is from Kevin Williamson, I'm quite looking forward to Battle Creek which was created by Vince Gilligan but David Shore is the showrunner, surprised they didn't debut that in September.
    I could rant for hours on how much I dislike Stalker. I'll spare you all though.

    Battle Creek looks promising. My general assumption is that it was pushed to midseason so they could get it right. There's going to be a lot of pressure on that show to be good and to be good instantly. Letting them have time to get everything in place isn't a bad call.
This discussion has been closed.