MovieChat Forums > Beverly Hills, 90210 (1990) Discussion > Lost 33% of audience in season five (94-...

Lost 33% of audience in season five (94-95)

posted 4 years ago by [deleted]
12 replies | jump to latest

That’s a huge drop for a show that was steadily building up to that point.

I think it’s due to the cultural change that took place in 94, with a move away from wanting to be materialistic and rich (a big part of the appeal in season 1) to wanting to be grungy.

The mid 90s were quite different to the early 90s. They couldn’t really move with the times and make the cast Seattle hipsters so they had to work with what they had.

Most shows with such a big downturn in viewers would be cancelled but I guess it was still enough to sell commercials.

[–] metsydoodle (10) 4 years ago

That doesn't surprise me in the least, because I read an interview [that took place when the series was nearing completion of the fourth season] which was conducted with Luke Perry at a diner. According to the atmosphere of that location, no one was mobbing him, and keep in mind he didn't have a bodyguard with him. Basically, his teen heartthrob status had faded away at that point. It was also mentioned that 90210 might fold when the actors’ five-year contracts run out in 1995. IMO, it was still watchable until during the sixth season when Luke Perry left. However, I can't say I was ecstatic when he returned during the ninth season. By that time, it was like "Why bother?" Sadly, I think the series was bleeding money in the last seasons and that the producers would have done anything to shore up the ratings, thus Luke's return.

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

Yeah and Luke looked very old the be a "college kid" cracking onto young girls. My brother bought a boxset for $10 (the whole series) and I was watching a college episode with him.

Besides how old they look, the storylines were pretty weak.

I can understand why he came back, I'm sure he was offered millions. Very hard to turn down good money.

[–] pioneergrrrl (2390) 4 years ago

Non-traditional college students do exist. Luke did not look that 'odd' running around a college campus actually.

I think they should have (keeping up w the times) had grunge during the 1991-pre 1994 era....when alt rock was BIG. Instead they tried to promote white boy rap. Vanilla Ice was not 'hip' so trying to make Brian Austin Green into him was the one area where they failed. Suprised the 'hip' Kelly and Donna did not insist on following the latest music.

I think the closest they came was REM. I guess they had licensing issues and the artists did not want their name tied with a teen series....but still. I hope that some of those bands do know/understand that okay yes we did watch this show we did listen to their CDs both. It was difficult to get out to their concerts when we were 12/13 and our parents/our friends parents would not take us. So apprearing on the show would have been really good.

Perry disliked being a 'teen idol' and left to work on movies. Glad he returned bc this is apparently what gave the series two more seasons.

I think though it should have been cancelled when the Walshes were gone, since the whole premise was about them moving to California from Minnesota.....and no Walshes means no series.

Trying to use the house where they had once lived as a 'backbone' seems odd. Suddenly everybody wants to live where their former friends once lived?? Weird much? It was obvious the production team was scrambling for the magic of seasons 1-4 where the ratings were through the roof

No making it into something indistinguishable from melrose wasn't a good idea.

[–] BillySlater (4108) 4 years ago

I think there were more factors than just cultural change. Shannon Doherty left at the end of S4 who was one of the most popular characters. Also their college life was less interesting than their high school life, especially when you consider their target audience were teens, young adults. I would also say that the show was never really about materialism as the Walshes were a grounded family, it was more about them being in a fish out of water scenario.

[–] metsydoodle (10) 4 years ago

I didn’t mind them in college, because in essence they were still babies, aside from the ages of the cast playing them. Therefore, they were still dealing with the same kinds of issues. The series should’ve pulled the plug after the 7th season when they entered the real world. What really irked me was the epidemic of cast members leaving midway through production. It made the series seem so sloppy, which is why Luke Perry’s departure (ten episodes into the 6th season) and return (six episodes into the 9th season) didn’t seem so monumental, but instead random. This can also be said for Jason Priestly who left just five episodes into the 9th season. It’s like the producers didn’t give their fan base a chance to let it marinate, which is why new, departing, and returning cast members are better executed during hiatus when the fans had three months of anticipating who’s going to be added or removed from the opening credits. While I don’t know exactly when Luke Perry decided to call it quits, his riding out into the sunset on his motorcycle would’ve panned out for a more exciting upcoming season if the writers inserted that plot line at the end of the 5th or 6th season instead of during the 6th season.

[–] pioneergrrrl (2390) 4 years ago

When the Walshes left though show shifted and that is when the show needed to have been cancelled. Wasn't right to have kept the show on without them.

[–] pioneergrrrl (2390) 4 years ago

Shannen leaving was the first big blow to the series. It survived scott bc he was a side character---was not integral. But Brenda being gone was irreplaceable.

Would have been soo much better had she stayed. Brenda and Dylan yes could have adopted Erica--who Erica positively adored and would have done anything in the world to please. She never would have run away

[–] TandyMan (10393) 4 years ago

Doesn't surprise me. I stopped watching the show before that back when it aired. Quality gets a lot worse as it goes on. Becomes a total soap opera. But even crappy 90210 is still pretty good, at least when viewed nostalgically from the future. But I think you're right. Aside from story difficulties of an aging cast, culture really did shift in the mid 90s. 90210 is very much an 80s show in its attitude. They basically took all those 80s movies we loved of either the spoiled rich kids having fun or the small town kid moving to paradise, and made a tv show out of it. That's what was so damn great about this show in the beginning. And that's specifically what the grunge movement rebelled against. I graduated in 95 and by then, only a certain clique of kids still watched 90210. For the rest it was a subject of ridicule.

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

Word must have gotten around, it was no longer cool to say "did you watch 90210 last night?"

[–] pioneergrrrl (2390) 10 months ago

lol Grunge was 1991....and by the time the 1994/1995 season rolled around Cobain was dead and grunge was on its way out as a 'trend'.

Spelling attempted to create something re 'the heights' to capitalize on it. But he never understood that having 'alternative' bands (even generic) would have been better on this very same show.

Even pre-social media most of them (excepting Dylan who yes probably would have stuck w Springsteen to be different) would have been aware what was the west coast originated musical trend.

[–] punkrockgirl (1155) 9 months ago

33% is a pretty large portion.

It's because Brenda left! No internet to warn them. It probably felt like they were watching a completely different show.

[–] BillySlater (4108) 3 months ago

It wasn't that bad. It was more like a 10% drop off.