Why there will be no Dark Shadows

[rkmaster27]

The WB is coming around to the fact that thousands of people, including myself, will be boycotting the WB for cancelling Angel. There is no way on Earth the WB can hope to just cancel Angel and replace it with another vampire show. That is why WB has kissed Dark Shadows goodbye most likely. I'm 99% sure you won't be seeing Dark Shadows on the WB's fall lineup.

For the record, I am boycotting the WB completely except for smallville.

[M.D.]

then thats not boycotting. I only watch smallville on WB. Am I boycotting it too?

[jimiphil]

Re: Why there will be no Dark Shadows

Originally posted by rkmaster27
The WB is coming around to the fact that thousands of people, including myself, will be boycotting the WB for cancelling Angel. There is no way on Earth the WB can hope to just cancel Angel and replace it with another vampire show. That is why WB has kissed Dark Shadows goodbye most likely. I'm 99% sure you won't be seeing Dark Shadows on the WB's fall lineup.

For the record, I am boycotting the WB completely except for smallville.

oh dont be so silly Angel was being cancled long before there were plans for a new Dark Shadows which is being planned as a midseason replacement when one of the new shows doesnt work out

[Tigress35]

For all we know, the show sucks. Maybe the actors suck, maybe the writing sucked, maybe a good story couldn't come together. Just because there was a show previously doesn't mean that this one will still be good.

Or it could be totally network/company politics as to why it isn't airing. We might never know.

But really, I find it difficult to get worked up over a show we've never seen, unless anyone has been able to see a cut of the pilot. I don't think the WB owes us any explanation as to why it chooses which shows to air. There are so many pilots that get made, and so many that don't make ever make it to the air.

[jimiphil]

Originally posted by Tigress35
For all we know, the show sucks. Maybe the actors suck, maybe the writing sucked, maybe a good story couldn't come together. Just because there was a show previously doesn't mean that this one will still be good.

Or it could be totally network/company politics as to why it isn't airing. We might never know.

But really, I find it difficult to get worked up over a show we've never seen, unless anyone has been able to see a cut of the pilot. I don't think the WB owes us any explanation as to why it chooses which shows to air. There are so many pilots that get made, and so many that don't make ever make it to the air.

It doesnt have anything to do with any of that,they said they only had 2 slots to fill
they choose two other dramas to fill the spots
they have not said that either Dark Shadows Or Lost in Space wont air,but rather they will most likely use them as mid season replacements
which to me sounds like both shows have been green lighted and are in production

[Tigress35]

It doesnt have anything to do with any of that,they said they only had 2 slots to fill
they choose two other dramas to fill the spots

If that is even true, sounds like network politics to me, which is what I said.

And you might want to check your facts before assuming something has been greenlit.

[jimiphil]

Originally posted by Tigress35
If that is even true, sounds like network politics to me, which is what I said.

And you might want to check your facts before assuming something has been greenlit.

they had been saying that for close to a month

why wouldnt it be true

[jimiphil]

Damn that wb and damn the lil birdie that told me it would be a mid season replacement
now it seems as if even the pilot will never see the light of day unless some other network picks it up and THAT isnt likely

[Dannyblue1]

Re: Re: Why there will be no Dark Shadows

Originally posted by jimiphil
oh dont be so silly Angel was being cancled long before there were plans for a new Dark Shadows which is being planned as a midseason replacement when one of the new shows doesnt work out

I think the prospect of getting a DARK SHADOWS series had to be at least one of the factors in ANGEL's cancellation. Don't get me wrong, if ANGEL had been getting better ratings, it would have stayed on the air, possible DS series or not. But if ANGEL was on the fence, and the network was weighing the pros and cons of keeping it vs. cancelling it, the whole "Well, we've got another vampire show in the works," might have helped them lean more towards cancelling. Fact is, vampire shows aren't like legal/cop dramas, where a network can have several on their schedule at one time without people thinking much of it. If the WB had two vampire shows on at the same time (especially if they weren't related) they risk becoming known as "That network with all the vampires."

I mean, they are already trying to get away from being known as the network with all the genre shows (SMALLVILLE, ANGEL, CHARMED, TARZAN, BIRDS OF PREY, etc.) and become known more for its dramas. They've said so in press releases. And I hardly think having two vampire shows on at the same time would have seemed like a good idea to them.

[jimiphil]

Re: Re: Re: Why there will be no Dark Shadows

Originally posted by Dannyblue1
I think the prospect of getting a DARK SHADOWS series had to be at least one of the factors in ANGEL's cancellation. Don't get me wrong, if ANGEL had been getting better ratings, it would have stayed on the air, possible DS series or not. But if ANGEL was on the fence, and the network was weighing the pros and cons of keeping it vs. cancelling it, the whole "Well, we've got another vampire show in the works," might have helped them lean more towards cancelling. Fact is, vampire shows aren't like legal/cop dramas, where a network can have several on their schedule at one time without people thinking much of it. If the WB had two vampire shows on at the same time (especially if they weren't related) they risk becoming known as "That network with all the vampires."

I mean, they are already trying to get away from being known as the network with all the genre shows (SMALLVILLE, ANGEL, CHARMED, TARZAN, BIRDS OF PREY, etc.) and become known more for its dramas. They've said so in press releases. And I hardly think having two vampire shows on at the same time would have seemed like a good idea to them.

also had it stayed on another season they would have had to increase the actors salary

something they didnt want to do!

[victoriawinters]

Fact is, vampire shows aren't like legal/cop dramas, where a network can have several on their schedule at one time without people thinking much of it. If the WB had two vampire shows on at the same time (especially if they weren't related) they risk becoming known as "That network with all the vampires."

The argument of their were one to many vampire shows also does not ring true since Buffy was on the same day as Angel was for three of Angel's five years. I believe a majority of it's run. I think that Angel and Dark Shadows would have complimented each other quite nicely.

It doesn't have anything to do with any of that,they said they only had 2 slots to fill they choose two other dramas to fill the spots they have not said that either Dark Shadows Or Lost in Space wont air, but rather they will most likely use them as mid season replacements....

Well before the full schedule was announced on May 18, WB already had approved The Mountain and Jack & Bobby for the fall and ordered episodes. There is a possibility that either LIS or DS could fill the void if either of these tanks but it is not a gospel given. They also have other pilots to pick from.

So, one is to ask why weren't these new shows to blame? They were the two new dramas picked by the WB. Do they not share any culpability?

Everyone also forgets the little fiasco we Angel fans went though at the end of season four when we almost did not have a season five.

Perhaps, some passionate Angel fan some day will realize that their little protests have nothing to do with WB's decisions. Joss Whedon seems to believe in article after article after article that Angel did not fit into the WBs economic plans. Based on their fall line-up, I think that is very true statement. They are the lowest rated network of the five and they took the safest path they could.

If Dark Shadows really had something to do with Angel's cancellation, surely Joss would have let us know. By now, even the most tight lipped at ME would have cracked and leaked under the intense pressure of recent months.

What has replaced Angel's time slot? Two cheap to produce comedies that need no special effects. Oh yes, lest we forget the new reality TV show, and a repeat of The Mountain. This is exactly what Jordan Levin said WB wanted from quotes circulating since February 13, 2003.

So, if you really prefer some cheap version of Hee Haw over Dark Shadows, you've gotten your wish.

If you protesters really wanted to hit WB where they lived, you'd boycott their highest rated show, Smallville.

By the way, the dictionary defines the term boycott as, "To abstain from or act together in abstaining from using, buying, or dealing with as an expression of protest or disfavor or as a means of coercion."

[Dannyblue1]

Originally posted by victoriawinters
The argument of their were one to many vampire shows also does not ring true since Buffy was on the same day as Angel was for three of Angel's five years. I believe a majority of it's run. I think that Angel and Dark Shadows would have complimented each other quite nicely.

The difference here is that ANGEL and BTVS were connected. They formed a nice little block, which took place in the same universe, and left the door open for crossovers. That's different from having two different vampire shows, and two different universes, competing against each other. And there would have been competition. It's the nature of fans--me, included--that we sometimes feel we have to choose sides. It happened with DEEP SPACE NINE and BABYLON 5. Then, between DS9 and VOYAGER. It happened between ANGEL and BtVS, for goodness sakes. Competing against a similar show on a different network is bad enough. Why would the WB want to set up a situation where they were competing against themselves?

Also, when it comes to keeping or cancelling a show, everything is a factor. Networks and studios consider details the fans would never even think of. If the subject of having two vampire dramas on the network at the same time didn't come up during the discussion of ANGEL's fate, I'd be seriously surprised. I'm not saying DS was the reason ANGEL got cancelled, but I'd bet it was a factor.

[victoriawinters]

Originally posted by Dannyblue1
And there would have been competition. It's the nature of fans--me, included--that we sometimes feel we have to choose sides. It happened with DEEP SPACE NINE and BABYLON 5. Then, between DS9 and VOYAGER. It happened between ANGEL and BtVS, for goodness sakes. Competing against a similar show on a different network is bad enough. Why would the WB want to set up a situation where they were competing against themselves?

If you compete with your fandom and choose your sides, that is your issue. I either like a show or not. So like how does the WB put a show on at the same time, so I have choose one over the other again?

It's like saying a network can't have more then one soap opera on because they are both soap operas. Certainly, networks have more then one cop show on at the same time. A few years ago in the stone ages of TV, it was Westerns or lawyer shows. Why the hell not vampires?

I need more vampires in my life damnit, not none.

It's speculation as well that WB factored DS into it's cancellation of Angel. There is no factual support for it or at least no one has devulged their source of information. It's their "bet" or belief.

The old Descartes argument, "I think, therefore, it must be" doesn't grab me.

[Tigress35]

Unfortunately most people don't feel the same need for more vampires shows like you do. Genre shows still pull in a minor audience.