MovieChat Forums > Defying Gravity (2009) Discussion > Very angry at ABC

Very angry at ABC

posted 15 years ago by sleepyeyes
46 replies | jump to latest

Hey folks,

I know I'm not alone here in being angry at ABC for canceling yet another great show. What also saddens me is the fact that the sets had to be destroyed. Can anyone enlighten me why they had to do that? Is there no chance that they will continue this series?

Anyways, I'm fed up with television in general. What's the point in watching anything new when you know it could get cancelled in a heartbeat? Why invest the time? I invested time in watching DG (mostly on Hulu, where I discovered it existed in the first place). I thought the cast was perfect, and ALL the actors had believable and real chemistry with each other, something that is hard to achieve in an ensemble cast. Plus I felt the touches of backstory incorporated with future politics was compelling and interesting to watch.

As for the haters of the show, that's fine, you didn't have to keep watching it. For the fans of the show, it feels completely unfair. I'm really curious as to how ABC decides what stays and what goes. I hope it's not due to ratings (completely outdated...they should be looking at Hulu and torrent downloads). Quality programming is not as easy to come by anymore on network TV, and that makes me really sad, especially when good programming gets cancelled so easily.

If you're still reading this, thanks for your time.

[–] mrtraska 15 years ago

This is precisely why it's getting to be stupid to put anything really good on network TV, and why the best new dramas seem to be on cable instead. Cable gives you time to build that audience whereas they're all cowards up in broadcast network programming. Spit at ABC all you like: they deserve it. For this, and for many other travesties.

[–] mightaswell 15 years ago

I have not seem any statement from ABC saying it was canceled, but it wouldn't surprise me with the ratings it got, although it was an excellent show. The final run that ABC did not run was especially excellent.

[–] MarthaJonesSmith 15 years ago

I am SO angry at ABC and at the ratings system. I know 3 families who are 'Nielsen' families and all of them are a pack of hee haws! They watch reality trash shows and wrestling more than anything...and these are some of the people that are choosing our programming! ...I'm fed up....which is why I watch more upper channel cable shows and british television!

Henchmean 24: "We're going to get our asses kicked!...We didn't have a breakfast!"

[–] xheilig777 10 years ago

I just found DG on WATCHEVER and thoroughly enjoyed it and was so disappointed to find out that there is no Series 2 as it was cancelled. I am not a great fan of SF usually but I have enjoyed a few shows Dyfying Gravity, Firefly, Lost and X Files I though FIREFIRE was brilliant and could not understand when such an unusual show was cancelled. I just hate reality TV and that seems to be all that is on television today. Don't we have enough singers for goodness sake!!!

[–] smsoylemez90 15 years ago

They could just move the show to another day and time like early in the afternoon of friday(cosidered as the day of the doomed shows) BUT still keep it alive OR try and sell the show to another channel OR at least leave the set as it is without destroying it untill the show has a buyer BUT NO ABC ain't got no time they have to axe the show due to low ratings demolish the set so it can be replaced by a set of DONT-CARE-WHICH show

BUT GUESS WHAT I am not going to watch any ABC production what-so-ever. Don't care if they are big productions and even if I love them I will simply forget about them. That's what ABC deserves, we have to protest them for what they are doing to not just DG but any show that gets low than expected ratings.

RATINGS ARE FOR THE ADVERTISEMENT COMPANIES TO DECIDE ON THEIR ADVERTISING POLICY CONSIDERING US(THE VIEWERS), NOT FOR BROADCASTING CHANNELS TO DECIDE ON WHAT TO KEEP, WHAT TO AXE (FOR) US.

They are not doing it for us. If they had been, they wouldn't ignore US, little bit of us watching the show as a part of the lower-than-expected amount of people but still passionate and affected enough to post on a forum like me.

SO no more I will watch their channel, and do nothing like visiting offical web sites of the shows or buying t-shirts or ANYTHING because they don't do anything for us other than making money on us. Some channels at least deserves the money it makes on us, so in return we have RESPECT for them.

ABC can go to hounds of hell

[–] madn_109 15 years ago

"RATINGS ARE FOR THE ADVERTISEMENT COMPANIES TO DECIDE ON THEIR ADVERTISING POLICY CONSIDERING US(THE VIEWERS), NOT FOR BROADCASTING CHANNELS TO DECIDE ON WHAT TO KEEP, WHAT TO AXE (FOR) US."

That's capitalism for you.

Cure: The Venus Project

want to know more? http://www.thezeitgeistmovement.com/

[–] levent-taskan 15 years ago

Yes, and besides, networks make money on advertising and advertisers don't like their commercials attached to shows with low ratings, obviously because nobody would see them. This makes the network very unfriendly towards the shows in question.

[–] Ghosthunter123424 10 years ago

I know a cure that is actually guaranteed to work and is something that can be realised today.

jump off a cliff

[–] b-nott-1 15 years ago

I certainly cant disagree with you. Like you say, the viewer puts in an investment of time. If a network is going to start showing a series with such a long story arc, they should at least respect the viewers that invest that time and give the series a chance. Otherwise, why waste everyone's time.

--
Yes it's the apocalypse alright. I always thought I'd have a hand in it.

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] cigar95 15 years ago

One might say that 'X-Files' and 'Lost' are science fiction shows that have done well. Neither of them were traditional science fiction, but I believe they both qualify for the title.

The thing about them was that they came up with a premise which was both different and interesting. And with 'Lost', they jumped right into the story full speed and got people hooked, regardless of what we might think about where they've taken the story in the later years.

I wonder how DG might have done that. There's no denying that it took a while to get going, even with the interesting ending of the pilot. It may have been a fatal error, as too many people who saw it may have been willing to walk away early on.

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] thomasar2002 15 years ago

I agree with most of the points made in this very intelligent discussion. One thing that I wanted to point out in the barrier-to-entry for Science Fiction shows are the operational costs.

A show such as Defying Gravity is going to have huge upkeep and maintenance, storage, post-production, and other costs I'm not even aware of. LOST got away with very little CGI and lots of on-location jungle filming. X-Files also had little CGI, especially in the beginning, and very generic scenes that could take place on any of a number of stock sets.

Bare minimum for DG you had the Command Center, the ship, and Major Tom's showing up time and again. Then there's whatever planet needs to be "created", whatever Earth-side location shots (i.e. airport/tatoo parlor), and the immense CGI.

Couple all that with a relatively small niche market and you have a near insurmountable barrier-to-entry.

Conversely, this is why there are so many sitcoms on network television. Infinitely reusable sets, no CGI (or if there is, it can look crappy and no one cares), and a much broader appeal to general audiences. It pains me greatly to say it, as I LOVE SCIENCE FICTION however from a network programming perspective, there's almost no choice. Sci-Fi is a sink hole, comedies and straight drama are where the money's at, which is why this show was marketed as "Grey's Anatomy in space". *shudder*

[–] hakangungorlu 15 years ago

this show was the most boring thing ever televised on national tv!! I'm so happy its over!! :)))

[–] lillithme 15 years ago

Yes, but XFiles was a much better show when it wasn't focused on Scully and Mulder, but on the Monster of the Week. Look at Dr. Who... Monster of the Week did great for many years.

Raymond Shaw is the kindest,bravest, warmest, most wonderful human being ...

[–] b-nott-1 15 years ago

Other than three of the Star Trek incarnations, what science fiction show has ever lasted more than three seasons on network TV to begin with?

The ST:NG, DS9, and Voyager were syndicated shows, at that, so not directly tied to 'broadcast' network tv. So the Sci-Fi track record on broadcast TV is even worse than you state!

The original Battlestar Gallactica did very well in the ratings, because it hit right at the height of the star wars craze, and probably would have gone on for a few years, but was cancelled after one season because of the show's cost. (there was a second season, sort of, but it wasnt really the same show)

--
Yes it's the apocalypse alright. I always thought I'd have a hand in it.

[–] dorline1283 15 years ago

Poorly promoted to focus on the "Grey's Anatomy" aspects. ABC did this to engage a wider audience because they knew the male sci-fi crowd would come check it out but the promos failed to allure the women. It would have made it like "Lost" did when the ground-swell of word-of-mouth took hold. Beautifully shot, great writing, well cast, good acting...wish they wouldn't have destroyed the sets so quickly so someone else could have picked up ABC's third of the pie. Guess Beta and Gamma tested ABC...and mankind failed ;)

BTW, this show was so much better than that hack job, "Battlestar Galactica"...what a ruse that was. Those guys had no clue and left plot holes so large a base ship could fly thru them. I won't give "Caprica" a watch as I'm not putting my eyeballs in the count toward Nielsen for such watery sci-fi.

Collective sigh kids!

[–] cigar95 15 years ago

Poorly promoted to focus on the "Grey's Anatomy" aspects.

Maybe they could have turned that strategy on its head and gone with "Babylon 5 with babes and hunks".

The whole handling of this show was really baffling - I saw a good deal of promotion on sports broadcasts before the show began, but nothing once it began running. Makes one wonder if ABC never really meant it for anything beyond filling a slot during the dead summer season.

[–] sleepyeyes 15 years ago

"Makes one wonder if ABC never really meant it for anything beyond filling a slot during the dead summer season."

You hit the nail on the head. Other posters have commented that ABC never intended for DG to be a major show (based on the sheer lack of promotion) and in fact were surprised that anyone watched it to begin with. So here's the thing: Why even bother airing a show you don't care about? How is that good for a network's reputation and its audience? I get that yes, ABC is bound to its shareholders but without an audience, the shares are worthless, no?

I completely understand why people will boycott ABC, but even though I am still angry with them, I am also a devoted LOST fan, and will watch whenever it comes back on. I may end up watching it on Hulu anyway. Also, I do not have cable, and still look to network TV (and Hulu!) for my entertainment needs. Not to mention that V is about to start and actually looks good, better than Flash Forward (which I wanted to like but the cast isn't grabbing me). Both shows are also Sci-Fi and I suppose are also doomed :(

Also, it was a BIG mistake to market DG as "Grey's In Space". Not only is that not true, it doesn't give the show enough credibility for how original it was (I'm speaking to the flashes of the future that we got to see, not just the overall "Beta" plot).

Many good comments have been raised on this board—thanks for keeping the discourse insightful!

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] sleepyeyes 15 years ago

I watched the V trailer on Hulu and thought it looked good. Elizabeth Mitchell is in it, and she's one of my favorite actresses. But who knows, 10 minutes is easier than an hour a week.

[–] cigar95 15 years ago

The two original "V"s were four and six-hour miniseries, respectively. The first was genuinely interesting and thought-provoking, but they lost their executive producer over creative differences, and the second miniseries ditched the thematic things that made the first one so good - all they were left with were the action scenes. And the weekly series that followed was basically just a mess.

I am not optimistic about the new one - network TV rarely seems to be interested in thematic allegories and symbolism that make for interesting stories.

I'm giving FlashForward a chance, but I'm not at all sold on it. On the other hand, DG didn't grab me, other than Eve, until the end of episode 8.

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] sleepyeyes 15 years ago

This is a great article that mentions ABC's bad history of marketing sci-Fi shows:

http://www.tvovermind.com/tv-news/has-abc-finally-figured-out-how-to-market-sci-fi-with-v/12068

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] ckanelevy 15 years ago

When you read articles about the dismantling of the DG sets, it's pretty discouraging. I'll tell you one thing though: If ABC wanted to save the show it could have. It was put in a horrible time slot and given almost zero promotion after the first few episodes.

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]