Very good post. I don't understand the claims of the spin-off having nothing to do with CM, because the salaries are generally paid by the production company, not the network directly, but if they cut their budget, then the production company has to decide what to do with the allotted money. I have no idea how CM's contract with ABC/CBS goes so i can't say this is the absolute truth. Regardless CBS would certainly survive just fine if CM were to tank
( ... )
yeah, i definitely can't claim to know exactly how the budgeting stuff goes, but i can't help feeling like they're at least a little bit connected by the fact that it's cbs who's deciding who gets what money. and like i said, financial concerns aside, cbs is meddling creatively. and i know a few fans deciding to tune out isn't going to hurt cbs, but if people don't feel like wasting their time on a network that disregards a significant portion of their viewership, that's definitely their right. and even though i don't want the other cm actors to be jobless, they're all so talented that i have no doubt they'll find other good projects once cm's run is over
( ... )
ah, thanks for the explanation. since i admittedly don't know that much about how the industry works, that does clear up a lot. it also makes me feel like it must have been creative (and therefore on cbs) since i can't imagine ed bernero and company being on board with a decision that goes against the core of the show so much.
i was already a bit let down by most of season 5 post-"a slave to duty," so i think that's another reason i'm feeling pessimistic about cm's future. i agree, it's really getting hard to care anymore.
i may need to check out white collar, though. i've heard others say good things about it!
Then this whole thing is just getting even more bizarre, since what would CBS gain from firing the ladies from the show? As long as ratings are up and they're getting advertising revenue, isn't that all they care about? Fucking with an aspect that was a huge draw for the show--its cast--seems counterproductive to me.
It actually makes much more sense as a financial decision, b/c it's become clear that the spinoff is tptb's pet project rn, and you know Forrest Whitaker ain't cheap. Perhaps I'm just cynical, but I have absolutely no doubt tptb would sacrifice Paget and AJ if it meant keeping him, because he is a huge star--far more so than the headliners of most other CBS crime shows--and they're probably counting on him to draw viewers to this spinoff. One thing for sure, it ain't the writing.
This is all such bullshit and the more I hear about it, the angrier I get.
It shouldn't involve CBS at all, unless they've reduced their overall budget for the show. The initial investment for any show is the producers, but once a show gets picked up by a network, they get a "budget" from that network. (I think the way it works is that the producers float the cost of production, and then after the fact they get money back from CBS from the advertisers, and the advertisers pay CBS based on the viewership for that show. The better the ratings, the more they pay for an ad to air during the show.) The producers get to decide how to allot that budget. So if they reduced the show's budget, then it would make sense. If they didn't, then this is the work of the producers of the show, trying to save some money for themselves
( ... )
I agree with all of this, and that's as someone who doesn't watch a lot of TV for the exact opposite reason (which is to say, I'm constantly multitasking so a show has to be really good to actually hold any of my attention in the competing circus.)
I especially feel your frustration on the "But it's not sexist!" point. In what universe is obliterating 2/3 of the regular female cast for "financial" or "creative" reasons and replacing them with one ~new lady~ not a sexist move? And no matter how far one breaks it down to try and excuse it, it always boils down to, "And why is that? SEXISM IS WHY." I think some people just get defensive at the idea of other people thinking they're doing or thinking something even tangentially sexist, and rather than trying to examine what they're doing to see if they're okay with the implications, they jump to explain why the thing they're doing CAN'T POSSIBLY be sexist.
Comments 14
(The comment has been removed)
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
and thanks! i was worried it was too rambly, so it's nice to know i didn't get too off track!
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
i was already a bit let down by most of season 5 post-"a slave to duty," so i think that's another reason i'm feeling pessimistic about cm's future. i agree, it's really getting hard to care anymore.
i may need to check out white collar, though. i've heard others say good things about it!
Reply
It actually makes much more sense as a financial decision, b/c it's become clear that the spinoff is tptb's pet project rn, and you know Forrest Whitaker ain't cheap. Perhaps I'm just cynical, but I have absolutely no doubt tptb would sacrifice Paget and AJ if it meant keeping him, because he is a huge star--far more so than the headliners of most other CBS crime shows--and they're probably counting on him to draw viewers to this spinoff. One thing for sure, it ain't the writing.
This is all such bullshit and the more I hear about it, the angrier I get.
Reply
Reply
I especially feel your frustration on the "But it's not sexist!" point. In what universe is obliterating 2/3 of the regular female cast for "financial" or "creative" reasons and replacing them with one ~new lady~ not a sexist move? And no matter how far one breaks it down to try and excuse it, it always boils down to, "And why is that? SEXISM IS WHY." I think some people just get defensive at the idea of other people thinking they're doing or thinking something even tangentially sexist, and rather than trying to examine what they're doing to see if they're okay with the implications, they jump to explain why the thing they're doing CAN'T POSSIBLY be sexist.
Reply
Leave a comment