News:

Thanks to everyone for the feedback on what errors you encountered from the forum database changes made in Fall 2023. Let us know if you discover anymore.

Main Menu

TV Shows from Good to Bad because of dumb excecutive moves

Started by roadman65, November 26, 2019, 12:51:21 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

roadman65

In 1975 CBS once aired a situation comedy called Doc starring Bernard Hughes as Doctor Joe Bogart, an elderly practicing doctor who treated dysfunctional patients as well as his more dysfunctional family at home.  The show did well in the ratings due to it being on Saturday nights between All In The Family and The Jeffersons, but CBS thought it could do better.

The next season the producers fired the entire supporting cast and only kept Hughes, but instead of being a family man he worked in a clinic with new supporting cast members as they wrote out his family.  They had Joe become a widower and his daughter and son in law move away to another location to explain their absence.  Thus creating upset with the loyal viewers and as CBS was hoping for better ratings the show flopped instead.

Buck Rogers is another one where the first season had Buck Rogers on Earth fighting evil in space and did well, but in the second season they attempted to improve the show thus changing format to Buck Rogers out in the galaxy instead of earth fighting against evil, thus turning away what loyal viewers they had and gaining none from the revamp.


Dallas was another but was lucky enough to stay on despite if fell after that Dream Season nonsense as many viewers did not like wiping away an entire season as if it never happened so they stopped watching.  Though some will argue it fell when Patrick Duffy left in Season 9 and Phillip Capice the show's producer was changing storylines thus driving away viewers and almost causing Larry Hagman, the lead star. to almost quit.  This is one of the few exceptions to the rule of being not being cancelled because Dallas was on for 9 previous years and had popularity with fans whether watching or not.   Rogers and Doc were newbees so to speak and did not.

What shows out there started out good in the first season, where the networks or producers were not happy, changed the format in the next season, and then brought down the show to cancellation despite nothing being wrong in the first place?
Every day is a winding road, you just got to get used to it.

Sheryl Crowe


US71

Quote from: roadman65 on November 26, 2019, 12:51:21 PM
In 1975 CBS once aired a situation comedy called Doc starring Bernard Hughes as Doctor Joe Bogart, an elderly practicing doctor who treated dysfunctional patients as well as his more dysfunctional family at home.  The show did well in the ratings due to it being on Saturday nights between All In The Family and The Jeffersons, but CBS thought it could do better.

The next season the producers fired the entire supporting cast and only kept Hughes, but instead of being a family man he worked in a clinic with new supporting cast members as they wrote out his family.  They had Joe become a widower and his daughter and son in law move away to another location to explain their absence.  Thus creating upset with the loyal viewers and as CBS was hoping for better ratings the show flopped instead.

Buck Rogers is another one where the first season had Buck Rogers on Earth fighting evil in space and did well, but in the second season they attempted to improve the show thus changing format to Buck Rogers out in the galaxy instead of earth fighting against evil, thus turning away what loyal viewers they had and gaining none from the revamp.


Dallas was another but was lucky enough to stay on despite if fell after that Dream Season nonsense as many viewers did not like wiping away an entire season as if it never happened so they stopped watching.  Though some will argue it fell when Patrick Duffy left in Season 9 and Phillip Capice the show's producer was changing storylines thus driving away viewers and almost causing Larry Hagman, the lead star. to almost quit.  This is one of the few exceptions to the rule of being not being cancelled because Dallas was on for 9 previous years and had popularity with fans whether watching or not.   Rogers and Doc were newbees so to speak and did not.

What shows out there started out good in the first season, where the networks or producers were not happy, changed the format in the next season, and then brought down the show to cancellation despite nothing being wrong in the first place?

Isn't this widely known as "jumping the shark" ?  ;)

I agree on Buck Rogers.

Lost in Space had a lot of potential before Johnathan Harris started chewing the scenery.
Like Alice I Try To Believe Three Impossible Things Before Breakfast

1995hoo

The Coy and Vance Duke period comes to mind. They never did explain how Bo and Luke were able to leave to go racin' when their probation prohibited them from leaving Hazzard County.
"You know, you never have a guaranteed spot until you have a spot guaranteed."
—Olaf Kolzig, as quoted in the Washington Times on March 28, 2003,
commenting on the Capitals clinching a playoff spot.

"That sounded stupid, didn't it?"
—Kolzig, to the same reporter a few seconds later.

Brandon

The classic example, Firefly.  Show is very good, but Fox, in their infinite wisdom, showed it out of order and placed the real first episode third.  Executive meddling at its worst, before a show could even get off the ground properly.
"If you think this has a happy ending, you haven't been paying attention." - Ramsay Bolton

"Symbolic of his struggle against reality." - Reg

kphoger

Any show that fires an actor or actress for quasi-political/philosophical reasons.  (ABC, multiple shows)
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.
Visit scenic Orleans County, NY!
Male pronouns, please.

Quote from: Philip K. DickIf you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use them.

Rothman

Quote from: 1995hoo on November 26, 2019, 02:57:13 PM
The Coy and Vance Duke period comes to mind. They never did explain how Bo and Luke were able to leave to go racin' when their probation prohibited them from leaving Hazzard County.
I didn't mind the Coy and Vance switch...

...but of course I think I was still in a single-digit age at the time. :D
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position(s) of NYSDOT.

CNGL-Leudimin

Top Gear. After Clarkson was dismissed and Hammond and May departed with him, it has never been again what used to be. In fact I consider it a different show from 2016 onwards, even if the format has been essentially the same.
Supporter of the construction of several running gags, including I-366 with a speed limit of 85 mph (137 km/h) and the Hypotenuse.

Please note that I may mention "invalid" FM channels, i.e. ending in an even number or down to 87.5. These are valid in Europe.

Max Rockatansky

The Real Ghostbusters was an awesome cartoon until someone decided to make it kid friendly and focus on Slimer.  I suspect parents complaining about how dark the show was kids probably played a hand.

KeithE4Phx

Quote from: US71 on November 26, 2019, 12:59:55 PM
Lost in Space had a lot of potential before Johnathan Harris started chewing the scenery.

Lost In Space was on the verge of cancellation before Jonathan Harris started chewing the scenery.  It aired opposite Batman beginning in 1966, and the producers felt that it had to bring in campy humor, as well as more color and more Dr. Smith and the robot, in order to compete.  It worked, to a point.
"Oh, so you hate your job? Well, why didn't you say so? There's a support group for that. It's called "EVERYBODY!" They meet at the bar." -- Drew Carey

vdeane

Quote from: Brandon on November 26, 2019, 03:18:31 PM
The classic example, Firefly.  Show is very good, but Fox, in their infinite wisdom, showed it out of order and placed the real first episode third.  Executive meddling at its worst, before a show could even get off the ground properly.
According to Wikipedia, "Serenity" (the episode, not the movie) was one of the last episodes to air, not the third.  Or was "Our Mrs. Reynolds" supposed to be first?

In any case, I'm pretty sure this thread is supposed to be about series that started good and then became bad due to executive meddling, not just cases where executive meddling was an issue in general.  Otherwise I could go into detail about how Star Trek: Voyager and Star Trek: Enterprise were hurt by the executives forcing the shows to be clones of Star Trek: The Next Generation rather than allowing them to properly embrace their premises (this resulted in things that made little sense, such as Voyager staying in nearly pristine condition throughout the series despite being stranded in the Delta Quadrant, as well as wasted plot potential).
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.

US71

Quote from: vdeane on November 26, 2019, 09:26:40 PM
Quote from: Brandon on November 26, 2019, 03:18:31 PM
The classic example, Firefly.  Show is very good, but Fox, in their infinite wisdom, showed it out of order and placed the real first episode third.  Executive meddling at its worst, before a show could even get off the ground properly.
According to Wikipedia, "Serenity" (the episode, not the movie) was one of the last episodes to air, not the third.  Or was "Our Mrs. Reynolds" supposed to be first?

In any case, I'm pretty sure this thread is supposed to be about series that started good and then became bad due to executive meddling, not just cases where executive meddling was an issue in general.  Otherwise I could go into detail about how Star Trek: Voyager and Star Trek: Enterprise were hurt by the executives forcing the shows to be clones of Star Trek: The Next Generation rather than allowing them to properly embrace their premises (this resulted in things that made little sense, such as Voyager staying in nearly pristine condition throughout the series despite being stranded in the Delta Quadrant, as well as wasted plot potential).

Unstable molecules ? ;)
Like Alice I Try To Believe Three Impossible Things Before Breakfast

J3ebrules

For me, it would be House. I'm not even sure what the hell happened that last season.
Counting the cars on the New Jersey Turnpike - they’ve all come to look for America! (Simon & Garfunkel)

ozarkman417

SpongeBob simply went down the drain after Hillenburg retired. The show has regressed immensely since at least season 4 and has turned from a show that all audiences can get a laugh from to a show that is pure cringe.

MNHighwayMan

Quote from: vdeane on November 26, 2019, 09:26:40 PM
Otherwise I could go into detail about how Star Trek: Voyager and Star Trek: Enterprise were hurt by the executives forcing the shows to be clones of Star Trek: The Next Generation rather than allowing them to properly embrace their premises (this resulted in things that made little sense, such as Voyager staying in nearly pristine condition throughout the series despite being stranded in the Delta Quadrant, as well as wasted plot potential).

Neither of those series reached their full potential because of the belief that season-long story arcs would not be well-understood by the audience, because of the unwillingness to move on from episodic television. Remember, you had to actually tune in each week to see the show, and that re-runs weren't available on demand. So, there was a bit of 'dumbing-down' so that any person who just tuned in randomly would get the gist of what was happening.

Re-do a series like Voyager today and it would be a hell of a lot better. For what it's worth, though, both series were pretty good IMO.

cwf1701

You could add Doctor Who during the Colin Baker era. While there was some good stories (The Two Doctors for example), The decision by the BBC to expand Doctor Who to 45 Minutes for one season (season 22), as well as scrap the original season 23 stories for the season 23 "The Trial of a Timelord" story arc all but doomed the first series (1963-89). This was at the time "Doctor Who" was still doing multi-part serials. When the series was brought back in 2005, the BBC did more single 45 Minute episodes rather than serials.

US71

Quote from: cwf1701 on November 26, 2019, 11:35:57 PM
You could add Doctor Who during the Colin Baker era. While there was some good stories (The Two Doctors for example), The decision by the BBC to expand Doctor Who to 45 Minutes for one season (season 22), as well as scrap the original season 23 stories for the season 23 "The Trial of a Timelord" story arc all but doomed the first series (1963-89). This was at the time "Doctor Who" was still doing multi-part serials. When the series was brought back in 2005, the BBC did more single 45 Minute episodes rather than serials.

The budget (what there was) was cut to near nothing. Plus the guy in charge of the BBC at the time had a long-standing grudge with Colin and basically tried to do everything he could to destroy Baker and the show. So it was part budget, part writing and a lot of politics.
Like Alice I Try To Believe Three Impossible Things Before Breakfast

dlsterner

"Ren and Stimpy" went downhill fast after the show's creative force, John Kricfalusi, was canned by Nickelodeon.  He was also the voice of Ren; after he left, Billy West (Stimpy) took over Ren's voice as well.  The post John K shows were painful to watch.

Verlanka

Quote from: vdeane on November 26, 2019, 09:26:40 PM
Quote from: Brandon on November 26, 2019, 03:18:31 PM
The classic example, Firefly.  Show is very good, but Fox, in their infinite wisdom, showed it out of order and placed the real first episode third.  Executive meddling at its worst, before a show could even get off the ground properly.
According to Wikipedia, "Serenity" (the episode, not the movie) was one of the last episodes to air, not the third.  Or was "Our Mrs. Reynolds" supposed to be first?
Wikipedia says that "Serenity" was the last to air on FOX (three more episodes were shown on the Sci-Fi Channel), which is odd since it was supposed to be the pilot episode.

Life in Paradise

You are both right and more.  The two hour episode (the last aired by FOX) was to have been the pilot, but the executives at FOX determined they wanted a different beginning, so that is how the other episode was crafted.  They still showed them out of order.

Concerning Buck Rogers, the strike at the start of the second season didn't help, as well as the fact that star Gil Gerard was putting some white powder up his nose from his salary and asked for some things in the series.  They torpedoed some liked actors for season two with no reason given, changed Twiki's voice (then changed it back), and had God-awful costumes for some of the crew (ie Wilma Deering). 

If you want to check some other meddling by network executives, check out "Crusade" on TNT.  They also had two pilots that were made due to network demands, and a change in uniforms demanded by the network (actually that was a good request) and the original uniforms were made into an on-screen joke.

Rothman

Quote from: US71 on November 26, 2019, 11:56:33 PM
Quote from: cwf1701 on November 26, 2019, 11:35:57 PM
You could add Doctor Who during the Colin Baker era. While there was some good stories (The Two Doctors for example), The decision by the BBC to expand Doctor Who to 45 Minutes for one season (season 22), as well as scrap the original season 23 stories for the season 23 "The Trial of a Timelord" story arc all but doomed the first series (1963-89). This was at the time "Doctor Who" was still doing multi-part serials. When the series was brought back in 2005, the BBC did more single 45 Minute episodes rather than serials.

The budget (what there was) was cut to near nothing. Plus the guy in charge of the BBC at the time had a long-standing grudge with Colin and basically tried to do everything he could to destroy Baker and the show. So it was part budget, part writing and a lot of politics.
Also remember how Doctor Who was axed for a year during the Colin Baker era.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position(s) of NYSDOT.

US71

Quote from: Rothman on November 27, 2019, 01:24:18 PM
Quote from: US71 on November 26, 2019, 11:56:33 PM
Quote from: cwf1701 on November 26, 2019, 11:35:57 PM
You could add Doctor Who during the Colin Baker era. While there was some good stories (The Two Doctors for example), The decision by the BBC to expand Doctor Who to 45 Minutes for one season (season 22), as well as scrap the original season 23 stories for the season 23 "The Trial of a Timelord" story arc all but doomed the first series (1963-89). This was at the time "Doctor Who" was still doing multi-part serials. When the series was brought back in 2005, the BBC did more single 45 Minute episodes rather than serials.

The budget (what there was) was cut to near nothing. Plus the guy in charge of the BBC at the time had a long-standing grudge with Colin and basically tried to do everything he could to destroy Baker and the show. So it was part budget, part writing and a lot of politics.
Also remember how Doctor Who was axed for a year during the Colin Baker era.

18 months. Michael Grade didn't like the show, plus he didn't like Colin Baker, either.
Like Alice I Try To Believe Three Impossible Things Before Breakfast

vdeane

Quote from: MNHighwayMan on November 26, 2019, 10:29:48 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 26, 2019, 09:26:40 PM
Otherwise I could go into detail about how Star Trek: Voyager and Star Trek: Enterprise were hurt by the executives forcing the shows to be clones of Star Trek: The Next Generation rather than allowing them to properly embrace their premises (this resulted in things that made little sense, such as Voyager staying in nearly pristine condition throughout the series despite being stranded in the Delta Quadrant, as well as wasted plot potential).

Neither of those series reached their full potential because of the belief that season-long story arcs would not be well-understood by the audience, because of the unwillingness to move on from episodic television. Remember, you had to actually tune in each week to see the show, and that re-runs weren't available on demand. So, there was a bit of 'dumbing-down' so that any person who just tuned in randomly would get the gist of what was happening.

Re-do a series like Voyager today and it would be a hell of a lot better. For what it's worth, though, both series were pretty good IMO.
Deep Space Nine was serialized back then, but it also wasn't a flagship show for a brand new TV network, either.  IMO a lot of modern television is a bit TOO serialized.  I think DS9 struck a good balance - long plot arcs that progress over the series, but most episodes could still be enjoyed standalone.

Enterprise's problem is that the executives tried to make a TNG clone and shove in the Temporal Cold War plot rather than embrace its prequel status.  While I do enjoy season 3, what makes season 4 better than what came before isn't that it made most episodes part of multi-part stories - it was that it decided to embrace being a prequel and tell the story of how we got from First Contact to TOS.

Similarly, one of Voyager's problems is setting up this whole situation with the Maquis crew merging into Voyager's crew and the potential for conflict that had - and then never did anything with it (aside from the second episode, which is probably a remnant of the original plans for the series before the executives got involved) because the executives wanted a TNG clone, so anything relating to conflict within the crew and exploring what being stranded in the Delta Quadrant meant for ship provisions and repairs was either given lip service or dropped.  While the latter can be blamed on being too episodic, the former probably could have still been done even in an episodic format.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.

US71

Quote from: vdeane on November 27, 2019, 10:24:46 PM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on November 26, 2019, 10:29:48 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 26, 2019, 09:26:40 PM
Otherwise I could go into detail about how Star Trek: Voyager and Star Trek: Enterprise were hurt by the executives forcing the shows to be clones of Star Trek: The Next Generation rather than allowing them to properly embrace their premises (this resulted in things that made little sense, such as Voyager staying in nearly pristine condition throughout the series despite being stranded in the Delta Quadrant, as well as wasted plot potential).

Neither of those series reached their full potential because of the belief that season-long story arcs would not be well-understood by the audience, because of the unwillingness to move on from episodic television. Remember, you had to actually tune in each week to see the show, and that re-runs weren't available on demand. So, there was a bit of 'dumbing-down' so that any person who just tuned in randomly would get the gist of what was happening.

Re-do a series like Voyager today and it would be a hell of a lot better. For what it's worth, though, both series were pretty good IMO.
Deep Space Nine was serialized back then, but it also wasn't a flagship show for a brand new TV network, either.  IMO a lot of modern television is a bit TOO serialized.  I think DS9 struck a good balance - long plot arcs that progress over the series, but most episodes could still be enjoyed standalone.

Enterprise's problem is that the executives tried to make a TNG clone and shove in the Temporal Cold War plot rather than embrace its prequel status.  While I do enjoy season 3, what makes season 4 better than what came before isn't that it made most episodes part of multi-part stories - it was that it decided to embrace being a prequel and tell the story of how we got from First Contact to TOS.

Similarly, one of Voyager's problems is setting up this whole situation with the Maquis crew merging into Voyager's crew and the potential for conflict that had - and then never did anything with it (aside from the second episode, which is probably a remnant of the original plans for the series before the executives got involved) because the executives wanted a TNG clone, so anything relating to conflict within the crew and exploring what being stranded in the Delta Quadrant meant for ship provisions and repairs was either given lip service or dropped.  While the latter can be blamed on being too episodic, the former probably could have still been done even in an episodic format.

Closest Voyager ever came to "conflict" was Seska.
Like Alice I Try To Believe Three Impossible Things Before Breakfast

vdeane

I wouldn't be surprised if that's why they made her a Cardassian spy... to create a loophole to Gene Roddenberry's rule on no crew conflict.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.

Life in Paradise

Quote from: vdeane on November 27, 2019, 10:43:03 PM
I wouldn't be surprised if that's why they made her a Cardassian spy... to create a loophole to Gene Roddenberry's rule on no crew conflict.
Roddenberry never could realize that good realistic conflict between people is basically a constant throughout history and makes good literature and subsequently television.  That always bothered me as well as the big red reset button that was pushed so often.



Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.