Does anyone know why this wasn't a ratings success? They must have been pretty bad for a show to drop its host and change its name half way through the season. Does anyone know what it was up against on the other networks when it first aired?
share[deleted]
Thankyou for your detailed response, robertwcole. I actually think GHOST STORY is better than NIGHT GALLERY so I was wondering if Rod Serling saw any episodes of this and what his opinion was?
share[deleted]
Come and join our FB group you guys: https://www.facebook.com/groups/42619736251/
shareCome on, have you tried watching this cheese-fest today? The shows
are so of their time - corny ESP ghost stories, with lousy scripts
and has-been actors who look embarrassed and/or uninvolved. And
who could blame them? - the harder some actors tried, the worse they
come off (James Franciscus comes to mind). I enjoyed this on Friday
nights when I was a kid, but even as a child I knew they were silly.
The problem with Circle of Fear wasn't the casting. As I recall, some great actors appeared.
shareAnthology series have mostly not succeeded on TV — especially horror anthologies. We remember Serling’s work because they’re the exceptions. It’s tough to start all over each week with a new cast, story, and setting. The audience never gets a chance to get hooked on any of the three. Think of the biggest series successes of today — Breaking Bad, Walking Dead, even The Simpsons. All benefitted from the cumulative familiarity of actors, characters, and situations, allowing viewers to get deeply invested. That’s why successful series’ ratings grow each year — new viewers join in while older ones stay.
At least both Twilight Zone and Night Gallery had Serling’s commentary bracketing each episode. Ghost Story had Cabot, but he was no Serling. NBC probably felt that his portly British upper-class style put off young viewers, and they were probably right.