MovieChat Forums > 100 Questions (2010) Discussion > Hot in cleveland vs 100 questions

Hot in cleveland vs 100 questions


2 new sitcoms to hit our screens recently. Hot in Cleveland was absoulutely terrible, a real cringefest & it premiered to 5 million viwers on cable.

100 questions is'nt great by any means but i think its better than Hot in cleveland averages 2.5 mil on a major network.

this looks like an increasing trend with cable shows performing well & many many major net shows getting cancelled after a few ep's,perhaps the net's should copy the cable channels & promo their shows better & that axe might not swing as much.

reply

Generally, it's not so much the promo problem (though I'll admit - still to this day, aside from turning on the television when this show is on, I wouldn't even know this show existed (so maybe it does have something to do with the promo for THIS show))...

Basically, where we are now, there are very few households that don't have some form of cable - seeing this, cable networks have gotten more savvy, and have begun to produce their own programming, instead of leaning on reruns of broadcast network shows or super-cheap programming. Typically, a cable show will still probably cost a little bit less to make (though that may be changing with the HBO, FX, and AMC successes lately), and now that nearly everyone has access to cable and/or iTunes, they have the potential to compete with channels like ABC, CBS, NBC, FOX, and CW (and even have started beating them in varied circumstances).

The other advantage that cable holds, is that they are both a niche market (you know what channel to go to for the type of show you want to watch - though that's getting blurrier by the moment), and they tend to be able to push the content of their shows a bit more, which provides more unique storylines, more creative programming, and in general, better shows. Comedies can be less bland, action shows can be a little more edgy, hour long dramas can be more complicated, and it's just a more free environment to breathe and develop series (still not great, but better). Free broadcast tv panics quickly, and often kill shows before they have a chance to do anything (although "100 Questions" is so clearly badly crafted and lame that it never should have made it to air in the first place, I'm very curious about how that worked out)...

It is funny that the free broadcast channels are quickly dying, yet they can't figure out what they're doing wrong. And NBC is a prime example - between airing stuff like this, and their late-night debacle, I'd think monkeys could run the network better.

reply