Cancelled shows of Tomorrow: The War on Chuck Lorre - Part 8

Status
Not open for further replies.
The thing about Idol ending is that FOX will inevitably replace it with a new reality show that's equally/more repugnant.

And starring Gordon Ramsey, since after all, Fox needs at least 200 more reality shows starring Gordon Ramsey.
 
The less "reality" television on the air, the better IMO.
 
Brian Dunkleman tweeted "I knew American Idol would never last without me"

lol
 
Better mean The Voice will get better talent, now that it will be the sole remaining mainstream singing competition on television.
 
I think we have too many channels. It's let 'reality' tv slip in to fill all the otherwise dead air.
There is that too. It's one thing to have a variety of networks to watch but something else entirely when there are so many you don't watch 90% of them. Though these days with so many channels it might be closer to 95% and yet even less to see than before.
 
There is that too. It's one thing to have a variety of networks to watch but something else entirely when there are so many you don't watch 90% of them. Though these days with so many channels it might be closer to 95% and yet even less to see than before.

It's something that won't get fixed as long as we have to keep buying channels in bulk packages.

If it was ala cart, the unwatched networks would die off (or go antenna only), and all those shows scattered among those networks would be consolidated into other networks. (Like Discovery getting back all the shows they sent to the Science Channel and other places.)

And we know it will happen because one of the arguments given when New York City wanted to force ala cart was that it would cause all the smaller channels to do out because no one wants them.

Well, if no one wants them, then why are we paying for them?!
 
OIL seems like a less interesting version of DALLAS.

Of Kings and Prophets, not sure how I feel about it. Production value looks good though.
 
It's something that won't get fixed as long as we have to keep buying channels in bulk packages.

If it was ala cart, the unwatched networks would die off (or go antenna only), and all those shows scattered among those networks would be consolidated into other networks. (Like Discovery getting back all the shows they sent to the Science Channel and other places.)

And we know it will happen because one of the arguments given when New York City wanted to force ala cart was that it would cause all the smaller channels to do out because no one wants them.

Well, if no one wants them, then why are we paying for them?!
There have been several recent attempts at this in the news with the latest being Dish Network (I believe it was) giving it a go and immediately being sued by Viacom for doing so because it violated some contract.
 
Kings and Prophets makes me miss Kings...
 
It's something that won't get fixed as long as we have to keep buying channels in bulk packages.

If it was ala cart, the unwatched networks would die off (or go antenna only), and all those shows scattered among those networks would be consolidated into other networks. (Like Discovery getting back all the shows they sent to the Science Channel and other places.)

And we know it will happen because one of the arguments given when New York City wanted to force ala cart was that it would cause all the smaller channels to do out because no one wants them.

Well, if no one wants them, then why are we paying for them?!
This has been a growing battle for the last 10-15 years as media companies created all these channels and then forced cable/satellite providers to raise their fees to cover them when there's really no reason for creating the channels. People are mainly pissed at the cable/satellite companies but should really direct their anger at the 7 main media companies that keep forcing the providers to buy more junk that really has no inherent value if it was by itself. This is a big reason I don't see the need for a cable or satellite subscription.
 
Can't say I'm impressed by any of their offerings, like usual. The premises for all their dramas are laughable or incredibly shallow and the new comedies are really meh. All their shows skew too heavily towards women, which is why I was actually more impressed by FOX's offerings. As a whole, I don't watch anything on ABC except for the Marvel shows and their Wednesday night comedy block.
 
If I could convince my family to give up cable, I'd be a streaming and antenna only house.

But, since more and more people are also going that way, the media companies are in a losing fight. The distributors (cable/satellite) will have no choice but to start dropping channels to cut costs and prices, or keep losing viewers.
 
the only new thing that seems interesting to me is Quantico... the rest of the new stuff is "meh, I'll pass"...
 
If I could convince my family to give up cable, I'd be a streaming and antenna only house.

But, since more and more people are also going that way, the media companies are in a losing fight. The distributors (cable/satellite) will have no choice but to start dropping channels to cut costs and prices, or keep losing viewers.

You can't really do that if you are a sports fan. Don't know if that will save cable/satellite forever, but it is now
 
Yeah, live sports are the only thing keeping cable TV in my house.

The Rockies, Nuggets, Avalanche, Mammoth, Outlaws, Rapids, and CU/CSU/DU sports are all cable-only here in Denver. The only games you can watch on broadcast TV are the Broncos.

Streaming works okay for individual events, but it'd be a major pain to stream 162 baseball games, 82 hockey games, 82 basketball games, 32 lacrosse games, and a ton of college games.
 
You can't really do that if you are a sports fan. Don't know if that will save cable/satellite forever, but it is now
I've found streaming sporting events works fine most of the time, even if it is a tad illegal. I just don't feel I could justify paying all that money per month for only a few channels I'd possibly watch. I've had people suggest getting it for shows like The Walking Dead and Game of Thrones and I honestly didn't see any appeal in them from the limited viewing I had of them. I find enough stuff on regular network TV to get by without cable, even if I do miss the more critically rated shows.
 
Yeah, live sports are the only thing keeping cable TV in my house.

The Rockies, Nuggets, Avalanche, Mammoth, Outlaws, Rapids, and CU/CSU/DU sports are all cable-only here in Denver. The only games you can watch on broadcast TV are the Broncos.

Streaming works okay for individual events, but it'd be a major pain to stream 162 baseball games, 82 hockey games, 82 basketball games, 32 lacrosse games, and a ton of college games.

Denver? I'm in Albuquerque, and I bet you have to deal with the mess that is trying to get Mountain West college games too. I, have to chase my Lobos to whatever channel or site they are on every week during the season. Large pain.
 
Denver? I'm in Albuquerque, and I bet you have to deal with the mess that is trying to get Mountain West college games too. I, have to chase my Lobos to whatever channel or site they are on every week during the season. Large pain.

Yeah, it seems the CSU games (the team I follow) are split equally between Root Sports, CBSSN, or streaming from the MWC website.
 
Professional sports may be dragged kicking and screaming into streaming and other packages, but that's where they'll end up. Because that's where the audience is going (which means it's where the advertisers are going).

Once they realize it opens up a whole new world for them (because they'll be able to charge fans no matter where they are, rather than being pinned down to local networks), they'll jump on board.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Staff online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
202,376
Messages
22,093,926
Members
45,888
Latest member
amyfan32
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"