# Giving up on a show after just the pilot episode



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

I am reading all the threads on the new shows and noticing how many people are just deleting a SP after the pilot - or for some, not even before it ends. 

Yes, I was guilty of this last year with Under the Dome and another one that is now a hit. I starting thinking about this and decided to revise my thinking for the fall season. Give it at least 3 episodes...or more even.

Are viewers turning into quick to delete without giving a show a chance to really blossom? 

There have also been several shows that I wish HAD gone more than one season. Shows I really enjoyed but am not sure why others didn't - at least enough to have the studios keep them around. And of course there are the shows that I wonder about why they are STILL around.

I am wondering how many shows you gave up on and then they went on to be hits or at least on for a few seasons? 

Do you give a show more than just the pilot a chance? Let them develop, grow or change at all?


----------



## Maui (Apr 22, 2000)

Well, in the past I have simply cherry picked some shows that I thought looked interesting and recorded them. I usually gave these shows multiple episodes. 

This year the my recorder is set to record ALL new shows. So far some shows have earned a season pass, some are probationary and others were eliminated after 1 episode (and in one case so far part of an episode). With returning shows that I still watch I just don't have the time to be overly generous in evaluating new ones.

For the record. Betrayal is the only one I turned off before it was finished.


----------



## Donbadabon (Mar 5, 2002)

If a pilot shows some sort of promise I will stick with it. But with all the new shows (and existing ones that I watch), it is a tough sell. I can't spend 8 hours a day watching TV so I have to weed out ones that just don't grab me.

I bailed on the pilot of The Big Bang Theory. Tuned in again during season 6 and loved it. Now I am hooked.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

Donbadabon said:


> If a pilot shows some sort of promise I will stick with it. But with all the new shows (and existing ones that I watch), it is a tough sell. I can't spend 8 hours a day watching TV so I have to weed out ones that just don't grab me.


This is how I do it these days. I'm going the opposite of the OP. There's SO much on TV and I have SO much to watch, that I feel if they can't at least get me interested after the pilot, then I'm bailing. If word of mouth or something else says some show has "gotten better" I might come back. It's usually fairly easy to find old episodes these days. For instance, I bailed on the first episode of Mad Men, which I found boring, but gave it another shot over last winter break, and I enjoyed it after that slow start. But for me to watch within the time frame the advertisers want me to, the show better hook me on the pilot.

When there were just a few channels, I'd be much more likely to stick with shows I didn't care for immediately.


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

betts4 said:


> Are viewers turning into quick to delete without giving a show a chance to really blossom?


Yes. Not here, but I was reading comments on "Agents of SHIELD" elsewhere, and there were comments like "Bored after 10 minutes. Gave up." Seriously? People have a ridiculously short attention span these days.


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

Steveknj said:


> This is how I do it these days. I'm going the opposite of the OP. There's SO much on TV and I have SO much to watch, that I feel if they can't at least get me interested after the pilot, then I'm bailing. If word of mouth or something else says some show has "gotten better" I might come back. It's usually fairly easy to find old episodes these days. For instance, I bailed on the first episode of Mad Men, which I found boring, but gave it another shot over last winter break, and I enjoyed it after that slow start. But for me to watch within the time frame the advertisers want me to, the show better hook me on the pilot.
> 
> When there were just a few channels, I'd be much more likely to stick with shows I didn't care for immediately.


There is so much to watch that I can't keep up. I do also cherry pick - I am really picky about sitcoms because there are so many. I am just trying something new - not stopping after the pilot. Maybe by episode three I will say 'no more time to waste on this'.

What else happens is that I don't even watch a pilot and then hear about it half way into the season and how good it is. Mad Men, West Wing, Once upon a Time. Then I wonder how I can catch up!


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

LoadStar said:


> Yes. Not here, but I was reading comments on "Agents of SHIELD" elsewhere, and there were comments like "Bored after 10 minutes. Gave up." Seriously? People have a ridiculously short attention span these days.


I just wonder if this is because we all have TV overload. For dramas, I'll give a show a half hour if it's something I wasn't that interested in the first place, but gave it a chance. For sitcoms, 10-15 minutes. But if it's a show I had some real initial interest, I'll watch through the pilot and maybe another episode even if the pilot didn't grab me.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

betts4 said:


> There is so much to watch that I can't keep up. I do also cherry pick - I am really picky about sitcoms because there are so many. I am just trying something new - not stopping after the pilot. Maybe by episode three I will say 'no more time to waste on this'.
> 
> What else happens is that I don't even watch a pilot and then hear about it half way into the season and how good it is. Mad Men, West Wing, Once upon a Time. Then I wonder how I can catch up!


The nice thing is, there's always a way to catch up these days. It might cost a little something, but you can catch up. You also might have to wait for the season to be over too.

I'm generally more selective for dramas than sitcoms, mostly because it takes more time to watch a drama. I can get through a sitcom in 22 minutes.


----------



## Hoffer (Jun 1, 2001)

I have so much TV I want to watch at some point in my life. Still haven't watched the last season of Battlestar Galactica. I'd like to watch The Wire. Haven't watched the last 3 seasons of Dexter. I'm behind a season on Boardwalk Empire. Goes on and on. 

I don't really need new shows in my life. I usually give shows a couple episodes, but I'm not afraid to give up on something quickly. Last year there was some new show about a groups of dads. I literally did not give the show 2 minutes. The dads were sitting in a bar with their babies having stupid dialogue. I immediately hated it.


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

I used to give shows multiple episodes. This is the first year I am much less inclined to do so. I feel capable of discerning when a pilot is mediocre because they are setting up the show and when it is because it's an unappealing idea in the first place. In the past when I've said, "I'll give it a few episodes before I decide" I have always ultimately decided that my first reaction was correct. The only exception really was half-hour comedies, which I do give a wider berth.

This year, my wife didn't want to continue watching Sleepy Hollow or SHIELD after about 15 minutes. It was painfully obvious that Sleepy Hollow was not my type of show and SHIELD was even after just 15 minutes. I'd be surprised if my reaction after 15 minutes were not generally quite accurate of a predictor. Historically, I'd be proven wrong now and again, but I bet it would work out 95% of the time. And for the other 5%, I can always try again later via the multitude of streaming options.


----------



## late for dinner (May 17, 2013)

how about the ones who delete their SP before they watch the pilot based on "reviews"


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

TAsunder said:


> I used to give shows multiple episodes. This is the first year I am much less inclined to do so. I feel capable of discerning when a pilot is mediocre because they are setting up the show and when it is because it's an unappealing idea in the first place. In the past when I've said, "I'll give it a few episodes before I decide" I have always ultimately decided that my first reaction was correct. The only exception really was half-hour comedies, which I do give a wider berth.
> 
> This year, my wife didn't want to continue watching Sleepy Hollow or SHIELD after about 15 minutes. It was painfully obvious that Sleepy Hollow was not my type of show and SHIELD was even after just 15 minutes. I'd be surprised if my reaction after 15 minutes were not generally quite accurate of a predictor. Historically, I'd be proven wrong now and again, but I bet it would work out 95% of the time. And for the other 5%, I can always try again later via the multitude of streaming options.


There's a reason why people say "There's only one time you can make a first impression". It's up to the writers to get me hooked and quickly or I'm moving on. Now it happens that I'm hooked and then, I watch a few episodes and they lose me. The Last Resort was a show like that. I thought the pilot was one of the best I ever saw. By episode 5, it had gotten REALLY bad.

So at least give me a reason I want to give your show a chance, then it's up to you to keep me.


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

LoadStar said:


> Yes. Not here, but I was reading comments on "Agents of SHIELD" elsewhere, and there were comments like "Bored after 10 minutes. Gave up." Seriously? People have a ridiculously short attention span these days.


You are totally right. People can't even..

oohhh.. Look. A new post on reddit!!


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

The only show I can remember bailing on early was Under The Dumb and I lasted five episodes with that. The really bad ones usually get canceled before I drop them.


----------



## sharkster (Jul 3, 2004)

I've been known to drop a show after the pilot, but not that often. Sometimes a pilot is kind of crappy, but I see promise and I keep going. Sometimes I really don't see that, FOR ME, a show has any promise and I feel comfortable with just letting it go. I don't see anything wrong with that.

I've never just dropped something, without watching, based on somebody's review or opinion, though. 

These days, what with all the channels (I grew up with 3 channels), there are so many choices out there. I watch a LOT of shows, but there will also be a lot of shows that don't grab me. A lot of them will be mainstream shows, but that's ok. I still have plenty to watch.


----------



## gweempose (Mar 23, 2003)

betts4 said:


> I am reading all the threads on the new shows and noticing how many people are just deleting a SP after the pilot - or for some, not even before it ends.
> 
> Yes, I was guilty of this last year with Under the Dome ...


The best decision you ever made!


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

Ah, I forgot that a couple of times I have dropped a show without watching it based on the ratings it received (so low that it had no chance of surviving a full season). Certain types of shows just are too frustrating to watch when you know you will never get answers or have a chance to see the story properly unfold.


----------



## Peter000 (Apr 15, 2002)

I have too much to watch, and a show has to REALLY intrigue me for me to even give it a chance. If I don't enjoy the pilot, it's bye-bye.


----------



## Alfer (Aug 7, 2003)

Agree...if you can't grab my attention with the pilot, odds are I won't keep watching. Not enough time in the day/week/month to "test the waters" of a show by watching it several more times.


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

Steveknj said:


> The nice thing is, there's always a way to catch up these days. It might cost a little something, but you can catch up. You also might have to wait for the season to be over too.


Yes. Thanks to Netflix and binge watching I was able to get into watching Breaking Bad, Downtown Abbey, Homeland and a few others. Thanks to Netflix I was able to watch and love West Wing, Friday Night Lights and others.


----------



## DougF (Mar 18, 2003)

I think the last show we dropped after the pilot was "Chicago Fire". Wasn't horrible, just boring. The next, for me at least, will be "Lucky 7". My wife liked it and will probably keep watching. Though the ratings indicate it likely won't be around long anyway.

Most of the time, I'll drop something after at two or three episodes if I don't really like it. I'm not a "might as well watch because it's in HD or there is nothing else on" type. If I don't really like it, I'm out. Too much else to do.


----------



## bsnelson (Oct 30, 1999)

My approach in the last few seasons has been this:

1. Make a very short list (3 - 4) of shows that seem very compelling because of topic/actors/writers/directors/producers
2. Watch a few episodes of them, even if they seem to start slow
3. Watch for groundswell on other shows that we didn't choose
4. If other shows that seem interesting are getting lots of good press (especially from the harshest critics around, the people in this forum, and I'm only half kidding), "obtain" the missing episodes from "somewhere", and if we like them, get an SP going forward. 

It's kind of a way to not have to commit to so many shows up front, but be able to get in the game later. 

As for the original topic: I'm not sure I can think of a single show that I stopped watching after seeing only the pilot. 

Brad


----------



## andyw715 (Jul 31, 2007)

Not really that big of a deal, bailing on a show. Most often it can be found streaming online somewhere. So in the chance that it does become something great, you can always catch up if you like.


----------



## scandia101 (Oct 20, 2007)

betts4 said:


> I am wondering how many shows you gave up on and then they went on to be hits or at least on for a few seasons?


A lot. X-files, ER, 24, Fraiser, Party of Five, Gilmore Girls, just to name a few. Do I feel like I missed out on anything? nope. And not once have I ever thought 'I need more TV to watch'

and I don't get not understanding how so many people can watch just a pilot (or part of the pilot) and decide that it's not for them when millions more don't even do that much before deciding to not watch a tv show and that's ok to do.


----------



## TIVO_GUY_HERE (Jul 10, 2000)

Too much to watch, if it doesn't grab me, it's gone. It's just a tv show.


----------



## mr.unnatural (Feb 2, 2006)

I usually research all of the new shows before they air and set up my recordings based on what sounds interesting to me (which totally eliminates anything in the "reality TV" realm, game shows, talent shows, and most sitcoms, most of which could not even remotely be considered as quality TV). I already have a large number of shows that I have stuck with from past seasons and there's only so many hours in the week I can devote to TV viewing.

I'll try to record and watch as many premieres as I can, but chances are there are some that just don't fit into my schedule that might be something I'd like to watch. A show has to be just plain awful for me to bail on the first episode or else bore me to tears. So far only one show has gotten the axe in my lineup (Brooklyn Ninety-Nine; I just didn't find it all that funny and making Andre Braugher gay was just annoying and completely unnecessary).

Any show that doesn't follow a tired old format and cast of characters will more likely get my attention. There are far too many shows about cops, firemen, doctors, lawyers, forensic scientists and, more recently, vampires. I dropped just about every such show from my recording schedule except for a select few. Hollywood must think that anyone that works outside of these professions is just too boring to make a show about.

Anything by Aaron Sorkin or Joss Whedon gets a season pass automatically.


----------



## Vendikarr (Feb 24, 2004)

It's really tough to know when to bail on a show. If I am really hating it, it will be after three episodes. The pilot is always just introducing the concept and characters, and I have never found it a good episode to judge what a show will be. I like to give it a couple of regular episodes to see what they are doing with it. If I am on the fence I stay a little longer.

Scripts are normally written weeks ahead of filming, and the writers won't have seen the actors in the roles, and so the parts on the page won't have as much life.

It can be five or six episodes before the writers begin to incorporate aspects of the actors in their scripts, and that is where you actually see things come together. If I am still on the fence at this point, I give up, because to me it's not going to get any better.


----------



## Beryl (Feb 22, 2009)

Sitcoms get one episode because I haven't enjoyed a sitcom since "King of Queens". 

Dramas may get a few episodes because I'm initially drawn by the actors, the premise and/or the writing. I watched a few episodes of Season 1 Breaking Bad, for example, when initially aired and dropped out. Meth has destroyed communities and I didn't like the idea of glorifying its manufacturing. Season 3 starred Giancarlo Esposito (an actor I enjoy watching), so I decided to try a couple of episodes in Season 3, got hooked, and went back to watch Season 1 & 2. I watched 3 episodes of Revolution because of the same actor and the premise before dropping it. 

There are too many shows to watch and books to read for me to invest time in something that doesn't grab me right away.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

Beryl said:


> Sitcoms get one episode because I haven't enjoyed a sitcom since "King of Queens".
> 
> Dramas may get a few episodes because I'm initially drawn by the actors, the premise and/or the writing. I watched a few episodes of Season 1 Breaking Bad, for example, when initially aired and dropped out. Meth has destroyed communities and I didn't like the idea of glorifying its manufacturing. Season 3 starred Giancarlo Esposito (an actor I enjoy watching), so I decided to try a couple of episodes in Season 3, got hooked, and went back to watch Season 1 & 2. I watched 3 episodes of Revolution because of the same actor and the premise before dropping it.
> 
> There are too many shows to watch and books to read for me to invest time in something that doesn't grab me right away.


It's interesting that you made the last statement and did the exact opposite with Breaking Bad


----------



## Beryl (Feb 22, 2009)

Steveknj said:


> It's interesting that you made the last statement and did the exact opposite with Breaking Bad


Yep. I liked an actor and the premise of Revolution but I couldn't stand the show. The writing and the direction didn't hold me.


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

Beryl said:


> Yep. I liked an actor and the premise of Revolution but I couldn't stand the show. The writing and the direction didn't hold me.


I watched 3 episodes of Revolution and dropped it. Still here it being talked about so I am not sure if I should go back to watch, but really am not that interested.


----------



## MonsterJoe (Feb 19, 2003)

It took me 5 years to get past the 1st episode of Breaking Bad.

I tend to bail quickly, but am open to trying again.


----------



## Azlen (Nov 25, 2002)

For most new shows, the pilot episode is the highest ratings it will ever get, so a good chunk of the Nielsen audience seems to bail if they don't like the pilot. It's the rare show that will actually build an audience in subsequent episodes and those shows usually have great word of mouth. One of the more recent shows that did this that comes to mind is Scandal as well as Breaking Bad whose ratings went in the exact opposite direction with it's finale the highest rated episode.


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

betts4 said:


> I watched 3 episodes of Revolution and dropped it. Still here it being talked about so I am not sure if I should go back to watch, but really am not that interested.


Don't bother.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

Revolution is entertaining.. I still haven't watched the season premiere yet, but that's not saying much. I *do* go back and watch old stuff I recorded.

I don't remember what show, but I think I may have given up on one after the pilot last year.. but if I watch, usually I watch a couple... and then if I get into a show, I watch until _THE END_ for the most part. Some of the exceptions in the past were actually *popular* shows, since I know they would show up on DVD.. and even one of my favorite shows ever, 'er', because there were too many things on between 9-11 on Thursday nights and Tivos couldn't deal with the 9:58-11 recording.. so I gave up on 'er' at some point. I have a couple of seasons to watch when I pick up the DVD set some eon (after the Bluray full series gets dirt cheap, the DVD set will be even cheaper!). Did the same with CSI. But for the most part, if I watch more than a couple of episodes, I keep watching or at least recording, the show... and as I said, there have been times when I have gone back and watched episodes I recorded from a year or two ago and caught up. Though it's not an example, I do think after trying out the first couple eps of Revolution last year, I waited months before watching a bunch fairly quickly to catch up near the end of the year.


----------



## steve614 (May 1, 2006)

Fortunately, I have enough storage on my TiVos that I can record all the new shows that pique my interests.
I don't watch them right away. I keep up with current shows while the new ones get saved up. If the show doesn't last a full season, I just delete them...there's no point in watching them if that happens.


----------



## Alfer (Aug 7, 2003)

*Blacklist* is the perfect example of how a pilot grabbed us (wife and I) and had us hooked from pretty much the opening scene. My wife is already hooked (as am I) and was fully entrenched and said she thinks this could be "great series".


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

MonsterJoe said:


> It took me 5 years to get past the 1st episode of Breaking Bad.
> 
> I tend to bail quickly, but am open to trying again.


That was me with Mad Men. And I probably wouldn't have gone back if I wasn't bored and had nothing else to watch. The first episode of Mad Men was incredibly boring.

So while I usually won't revisit something I dropped on the first episode, it's not unprecedented that I might.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

steve614 said:


> Fortunately, I have enough storage on my TiVos that I can record all the new shows that pique my interests.
> I don't watch them right away. I keep up with current shows while the new ones get saved up. If the show doesn't last a full season, I just delete them...there's no point in watching them if that happens.


See, I never got that whole "if the ratings are bad, no sense watching" thing. Why should "the ratings" dictate what you might like? If everyone sat back and waited for the ratings to come in to watch than NO show would get any ratings. For me, if I like the show, I'm going to enjoy it for however long it's on. I do kinda get it for serialized shows, because they can leave you hanging with no answers to the plot. But for sitcoms and procedurals? Why not just enjoy it until it's officially cancelled? A show like Whitney the last couple of years mostly got bad ratings, but I enjoyed it, so I was going to watch until I couldn't. If I enjoyed it for only 5 episodes? I got that much enjoyment and moved on.


----------



## markz (Oct 22, 2002)

If I am interested enough to watch the pilot, I will give a show at least two episodes, maybe three before bailing. I know that the pilot is usually filmed way ahead of the rest of the episodes and often times a lot is revamped between the pilot and the next couple of episodes.

Since I have a Hopper, it records all of prime time (on the 4 major networks) automatically. Therefore I can easily give every show a viewing or two before deciding not to continue watching. I don't have to worry about setting up the DVR to record most shows except the networks like AMC, FX, USA, etc.


----------



## Cearbhaill (Aug 1, 2004)

I used to worry about this but now we have Netflix and On Demand so it is much easier to see shows we discounted early on if they happen to get a lot of good buzz.

IMO it's good to have a list of shows you want to watch someday.
We usually have a surplus but there have been dry spells and that's when we pick up shows we missed first run.


----------



## Kablemodem (May 26, 2001)

I miss the days of only three channels with only a few new shows to watch. Watching TV is too much work these days.


----------



## markz (Oct 22, 2002)

Kablemodem said:


> I miss the days of only three channels with only a few new shows to watch. Watching TV is too much work these days.


If I won the lottery, I could hire someone to watch TV for me.


----------



## unitron (Apr 28, 2006)

Of course if you were going to give up on Firefly after the pilot episode you had to wait for them to show an episode or three out of order first.


----------



## midas (Jun 1, 2000)

I never nuke a sitcom after just watching the pilot. But after seeing the 2nd episode of Dads, I'm starting to rethink that philosophy.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

Steveknj said:


> See, I never got that whole "if the ratings are bad, no sense watching" thing. Why should "the ratings" dictate what you might like?


I think it's dumb too, but some people refuse to watch/immediately delete a show when it's cancelled. So they'll only watch the show while it's still being made.

I will continue to watch, if I like the show, even when I know it ends on a cliffhanger.


----------



## steve614 (May 1, 2006)

Steveknj said:


> See, I never got that whole "if the ratings are bad, no sense watching" thing. Why should "the ratings" dictate what you might like? If everyone sat back and waited for the ratings to come in to watch than NO show would get any ratings. For me, if I like the show, I'm going to enjoy it for however long it's on. I do kinda get it for serialized shows, because they can leave you hanging with no answers to the plot. But for sitcoms and procedurals? Why not just enjoy it until it's officially cancelled? A show like Whitney the last couple of years mostly got bad ratings, but I enjoyed it, so I was going to watch until I couldn't. If I enjoyed it for only 5 episodes? I got that much enjoyment and moved on.


I don't pay attention to the ratings. I understand what you are saying though.
I mostly stick with the 1 hour dramas/procedurals and since most of those involve ongoing plots, I don't see any point in watching what is essentially an unfinished story if the show doesn't last a full season.

Would you still take the time to read a book if you knew that the last few chapters were ripped from the end of it?


----------



## kdelande (Dec 17, 2001)

Made it through half of the 30 Rock pilot and bailed. I have never retried it, despite all the praise it gets/got.

Just moved on to other things.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

steve614 said:


> I don't pay attention to the ratings. I understand what you are saying though.
> I mostly stick with the 1 hour dramas/procedurals and since most of those involve ongoing plots, I don't see any point in watching what is essentially an unfinished story if the show doesn't last a full season.
> 
> Would you still take the time to read a book if you knew that the last few chapters were ripped from the end of it?


Depends on the book. If it was a book of short stories, sure (think sitcom). If it was a series of books and the author only wrote the first two and decided not to finish the series, I'd read the first two (procedural). If it was a self contained book, and the last three chapters were missing, I'd probably read up until the point that I knew they were missing.


----------



## Maui (Apr 22, 2000)

I did not even make it all the way through the first epsiode of Super Fun Night last night.


----------



## Kablemodem (May 26, 2001)

mattack said:


> I think it's dumb too, but some people refuse to watch/immediately delete a show when it's cancelled. So they'll only watch the show while it's still being made.
> 
> I will continue to watch, if I like the show, even when I know it ends on a cliffhanger.


I was going to start watching Breaking Bad, but it's already been cancelled, so what's the point?


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

Kablemodem said:


> I was going to start watching Breaking Bad, but it's already been cancelled, so what's the point?


While I understand your point, you picked the wrong show. It wasn't cancelled, it finished its run. It is complete. Start to finish.

Now you can watch it, since you know it won't leave you hanging.


----------



## scandia101 (Oct 20, 2007)

mattack said:


> I think it's dumb too, but some people refuse to watch/immediately delete a show when it's cancelled. So they'll only watch the show while it's still being made.
> 
> I will continue to watch, if I like the show, even when I know it ends on a cliffhanger.


Why do you say it's dumb? What difference does it make?
People stop watching tv shows all the time for lots of reasons. There is no reason to invest time in something you've decided is no longer worth your time.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

scandia101 said:


> Why do you say it's dumb? What difference does it make?
> People stop watching tv shows all the time for lots of reasons. There is no reason to invest time in something you've decided is no longer worth your time.


I'm not saying it's dumb, people do what they do. But how do you know if a show is worth your time or not, until you watch it?


----------



## MonsterJoe (Feb 19, 2003)

Maui said:


> I did not even make it all the way through the first epsiode of Super Fun Night last night.


It was so not the show that it claimed to be.


----------



## WhiskeyTango (Sep 20, 2006)

Steveknj said:


> I'm not saying it's dumb, people do what they do. But how do you know if a show is worth your time or not, until you watch it?


If it's likely to be canned before finishing the season, it's not worth my time. Pretty simple actually.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

WhiskeyTango said:


> If it's likely to be canned before finishing the season, it's not worth my time. Pretty simple actually.


I don't see it that way.

There's no shows you could have enjoyed for the one season (or less) that it was on? Nielsen or the Networks decide for you what you like?


----------



## WhiskeyTango (Sep 20, 2006)

Steveknj said:


> I don't see it that way.
> 
> There's no shows you could have enjoyed for the one season (or less) that it was on? Nielsen or the Networks decide for you what you like?


They don't decide what I like. They help me decide what I'm going to commit my limited time to. Any time spent watching a doomed show is time I'm not watching and keeping up on a keeper.

I'm sure there are some shows I could have enjoyed for a season but I dropped them in favor of shows I have enjoyed for multiple seasons.


----------



## The Spud (Aug 28, 2002)

midas said:


> I never nuke a sitcom after just watching the pilot. But after seeing the 2nd episode of Dads, I'm starting to rethink that philosophy.


Technically, I nuked this after the 2nd episode, but since I didn't watch the 2nd episode, I guess I gave up after the pilot. My thought process was that it was so bad that even if it got significantly better it would still be pretty bad.

I have pretty low standards, so giving up during or after the pilot doesn't happen very often.


----------



## scandia101 (Oct 20, 2007)

Steveknj said:


> I'm not saying it's dumb, people do what they do. But how do you know if a show is worth your time or not, until you watch it?


You can't possible be serious.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

Maui said:


> I did not even make it all the way through the first epsiode of Super Fun Night last night.


I was looking to bail then when the fat chick (hey, I'm a fat dude, so I can decide if that was dumb or not) decided to climb on the piano to look sexy during the horrible sing off battle, that is when I hit stop and deleted everything.

What a horrible show. I wish I could delete it from my recording history, too.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

MonsterJoe said:


> It was so not the show that it claimed to be.


It was on at night, so it got one out of three right.


----------



## Azlen (Nov 25, 2002)

I got a chance to watch the pilot episode of "Sean Saves the World" and it was awful. I wanted to like it because I like Megan Hilty but it was beyond bad. Annoying laugh track, wasn't funny. Couldn't make it through the pilot.


----------



## gweempose (Mar 23, 2003)

WhiskeyTango said:


> Any time spent watching a doomed show is time I'm not watching and keeping up on a keeper ... I'm sure there are some shows I could have enjoyed for a season but I dropped them in favor of shows I have enjoyed for multiple seasons.


I agree that it can be very frustrating to get really into a show only to have it yanked from the schedule without any plot resolution. Because of this, I will often record an entire season of a show and wait to watch it until I know it has been renewed for a second season. That being said, there are some truly amazing shows that got the ax way too soon. I recently started a thread on this very topic:

http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=9841540#post9841540

I can't imagine never having watched Firefly simply because it got cancelled in its first season. I'd put the 15 episodes that do exist up against the complete multi-season runs of almost any other show out there.


----------



## Maui (Apr 22, 2000)

Azlen said:


> I got a chance to watch the pilot episode of "Sean Saves the World" and it was awful. I wanted to like it because I like Megan Hilty but it was beyond bad. Annoying laugh track, wasn't funny. Couldn't make it through the pilot.


It wasn't the worst new sitcom of the night in my opinion, Welcome To The Family took that prize, but it was pretty bad.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

gweempose said:


> I agree that it can be very frustrating to get really into a show only to have it yanked from the schedule without any plot resolution. Because of this, I will often record an entire season of a show and wait to watch it until I know it has been renewed for a second season. *That being said, there are some truly amazing shows that got the ax way too soon. I recently started a thread on this very topic:*
> 
> http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=9841540#post9841540
> 
> I can't imagine never having watched Firefly simply because it got cancelled in its first season. I'd put the 15 episodes that do exist up against the complete multi-season runs of almost any other show out there.


And you never would have found those shows had you not watched them. I couldn't have imagined missing Terriers, but if I followed the credo of never watching shows that might get cancelled, I would have missed it. I'll watch stuff I like, and if it gets cancelled, cest la vie


----------



## TonyTheTiger (Dec 22, 2006)

So far, the celeb-led shows are failing in my book. Having been away in the UK for most of last week and this, we are just hitting the DVR for some of the pilots. Last night we watched *Michael J Fox* and *Crazy Ones* and the following is true for both of them. The celebs have their 'schtick' and, if the entire show is based on that, it'll get very old very quickly. Maybe they'll get a second episode viewing, but it's not a priority.

I was really looking forward to *Brooklyn-Nine-Nine*, but cancelled the SP after the first one. Even Andre couldn't save that mess.


----------



## WhiskeyTango (Sep 20, 2006)

Steveknj said:


> And you never would have found those shows had you not watched them. I couldn't have imagined missing Terriers, but if I followed the credo of never watching shows that might get cancelled, I would have missed it. I'll watch stuff I like, and if it gets cancelled, cest la vie


I suspect you and I have very different viewing habits. If you don't mind my asking, how many hours of tv do you record and watch per week?


----------



## TIVO_GUY_HERE (Jul 10, 2000)

_The Originals_ didn't make it past the 1st episode. I gave _Vampire Diaries_ a couple of seasons, but gave up on that, so I didn't have high hopes.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

WhiskeyTango said:


> I suspect you and I have very different viewing habits. If you don't mind my asking, how many hours of tv do you record and watch per week?


I haven't figured it out, but I would say, on average, at least 4-6 shows per night (except Friday-Saturday). Some nights, more. And I have a whole host of movies and documentaries that I save up for slow periods. I also watch stuff on Netflix from time to time too (just finished United States of Tara for instance). So it's not like I hardly record anything. I record a lot. I think where we differ is I'll give shows a shot, even if the ratings are low, where you might wait for the ratings and if they are bad, you let it go. IMO, I just think you might miss out on a hidden gem from time to time  If everyone watched like you, I'm afraid, all we'd get is reality shows and other cheap to make shows, because nobody would give anything other than that a chance. Unless of course the TV infrastructure changes with the times 

Oh, and I should mention, that I'm an avid hockey and baseball fan, so very often, I will watch all or part of a game and catch up on the other stuff later.


----------



## MonsterJoe (Feb 19, 2003)

Too bad about those Rangers!


----------



## WhiskeyTango (Sep 20, 2006)

Steveknj said:


> I haven't figured it out, but I would say, on average, at least 4-6 shows per night (except Friday-Saturday). Some nights, more. And I have a whole host of movies and documentaries that I save up for slow periods. I also watch stuff on Netflix from time to time too (just finished United States of Tara for instance). So it's not like I hardly record anything. I record a lot. I think where we differ is I'll give shows a shot, even if the ratings are low, where you might wait for the ratings and if they are bad, you let it go. IMO, I just think you might miss out on a hidden gem from time to time  If everyone watched like you, I'm afraid, all we'd get is reality shows and other cheap to make shows, because nobody would give anything other than that a chance. Unless of course the TV infrastructure changes with the times
> 
> Oh, and I should mention, that I'm an avid hockey and baseball fan, so very often, I will watch all or part of a game and catch up on the other stuff later.


Oh, I have no problem giving a show a shot. I've seen several of the shows in gweempose's list including Invasion, Life on Mars, Firefly, and Journeyman. Last year I stayed with Last Resort.

My issue is time and space. If I'm understanding you correctly, you are pretty much able to keep up with what you are recording for the most part? I can't. Right now I have 35 hours set to record each week but I can only realistically watch around 21 hours. With the amount of free space I have on my Tivo, I'll run out of free space in about 6 weeks. At that point something has to give.

I have about 350-375 hours of backlogged recordings dating back as far as 2006 (season 2 of Sleeper Cell). I simply can't keep up with all that I record and have to be a bit more discerning in what I choose to get involved in.

Of the dozen or so new shows I'm recording I've only watched the first episode of Sleepy Hollow. When I reach my storage tipping point, I have to decide to bail on a show I am currently watching or one I have saved up. That is when the ratings come into play. Last spring I had 666 Park Ave, Vegas, Red Widow, Zero Hour, and Do No Harm recorded but unwatched. I was down to only 12 hours (out of 157) left in free space. Those shows all got the boot which allowed me to continue recording the rest of the shows I was watching as well as later adding Orphan Black and Hannibal.


----------



## gschrock (Dec 28, 2001)

I'll generally dump a show if it's cancelled before I've started watching it. Maybe I would have liked it, but who knows, and quite frankly, I don't have the time. And for me, it's pretty simple, I just don't have the time for something that's already been deemed not worthy of continuing. The good thing is if I don't watch it, then at least I don't know whether I would have liked it, so I don't have to be pissed that it was canceled.

I've got so much stuff that I still need to watch that I'm not exactly running out of stuff to watch.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

scandia101 said:


> Why do you say it's dumb? What difference does it make?
> People stop watching tv shows all the time for lots of reasons. There is no reason to invest time in something you've decided is no longer worth your time.


I'm not saying they can't use whatever reason they want to stop watching a show, but I continue to think it's dumb to stop watching a show and immediately delete all of the episodes JUST because it's been cancelled. If they were enjoying the show before, why not keep watching them.

Heck, I'll probably still watch *at least* the first episode of Lucky 7, even though I know it's already been cancelled. (If I don't watch the second, I might arguably be falling into the same trap.. but I'll really likely just leave it on my hard drive until that hard drive dies too, if I don't watch it soon after watching the first episode!)


----------



## Azlen (Nov 25, 2002)

mattack said:


> I'm not saying they can't use whatever reason they want to stop watching a show, but I continue to think it's dumb to stop watching a show and immediately delete all of the episodes JUST because it's been cancelled. If they were enjoying the show before, why not keep watching them.
> 
> Heck, I'll probably still watch *at least* the first episode of Lucky 7, even though I know it's already been cancelled. (If I don't watch the second, I might arguably be falling into the same trap.. but I'll really likely just leave it on my hard drive until that hard drive dies too, if I don't watch it soon after watching the first episode!)


To me there is a great dependency on what type of show that it is. I'll watch a sitcom still even if it's been canceled. I even watched the unaired episodes of The B in Apt 23 and Ben and Kate. But I'm much more likely to skip a soon to be canceled show if it's more serial. I don't want to get into a story if I don't know how it's going to end.


----------



## WhiskeyTango (Sep 20, 2006)

mattack said:


> If they were enjoying the show before, why not keep watching them.


Because I, and others, have better things to do. I guess some people value their time more than others.


----------



## jr461 (Jul 9, 2004)

bsnelson said:


> My approach in the last few seasons has been this:
> 
> 1. Make a very short list (3 - 4) of shows that seem very compelling because of topic/actors/writers/directors/producers
> 2. Watch a few episodes of them, even if they seem to start slow
> ...


We approach it similarly. Those shows that seem interesting to us get set up for a SP (typically not more than a handful each season).

Typically, I like to give a new show about 3 episodes. While I would like the pilot to grab us, I realize that some shows need a couple of episodes to get their footing. That said, if the pilot really loses us we will stop. My wife bailed on the Goldbergs after the pilot (not a huge sitcom fan anyway); I can spare 22 minutes in the near future to see if it improves.

Regardless of how much we have to watch, the DVR eliminates any pressure to do so on any particular timetable. In fact, we like mini-binges for those shows we don't get to for a couple of weeks.

There are MANY shows we've caught up on after passing initially but for which received recommendations from friends/family or had seen a lot of press. Those resulted in enjoyable long term binges for shows such as Dexter, Breaking Bad, Arrested Development, Weeds, Mad Men and Downton Abbey.

We made the mistake of bailing on Ray Donovan after the pilot as we thought it was too confusing (it was late and we were tired). My sister urged us to stay with it so we did and now are hooked.

On the other hand, Sons of Anarchy was also recommended to us and we gave it 3 full episodes but still couldn't get into it.


----------



## scandia101 (Oct 20, 2007)

mattack said:


> I'm not saying they can't use whatever reason they want to stop watching a show, but I continue to think it's dumb to stop watching a show and immediately delete all of the episodes JUST because it's been cancelled. If they were enjoying the show before, why not keep watching them.


But who says they were enjoying the show to begin with? If they are just giving the show a chance by watching a few episodes why invest any more time in it?


----------



## aadam101 (Jul 15, 2002)

I give up after pilots because if the show is bad it's sure to get cancelled. The network TV model doesn't make a lot of sense. Spend $100 million on development every year just to end up with one or two hits and maybe a handful of others that don't get cancelled. That's only if you are lucky. If you are NBC, you cancel your entire lineup because nobody watches your network anymore. Rinse and repeat. 

With cable and Netflix quickly taking over, network TV needs to change fast.


----------



## Azlen (Nov 25, 2002)

aadam101 said:


> I give up after pilots because if the show is bad it's sure to get cancelled. The network TV model doesn't make a lot of sense. Spend $100 million on development every year just to end up with one or two hits and maybe a handful of others that don't get cancelled. That's only if you are lucky. If you are NBC, you cancel your entire lineup because nobody watches your network anymore. Rinse and repeat.
> 
> With cable and Netflix quickly taking over, network TV needs to change fast.


One key difference between cable/Netflix and network TV is the pure volume of scripted original programming each provides. Maybe the networks should cut back on the nights that air new programming but cuts directly into their revenue. A lot of what gets watched on Netflix and cable also came from network TV. Cut the source and it will have a downstream impact as well. The network model must still be working to some degree because they're still making money for the most part. When that money dries up things will change but it could very well mean that we don't get as much original scripted programming. There aren't any clear cut solutions out there.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

scandia101 said:


> But who says they were enjoying the show to begin with? If they are just giving the show a chance by watching a few episodes why invest any more time in it?


I think I am referring to those who record shows and never watch because they got cancelled. I think, for most of us, if we watched a show and we really enjoyed it, we'd probably watch it no matter what the status of the show is. It's why I generally don't binge view during the fall new show season (and to a lesser extent the January one). I'll watch all the new stuff I'm interested in at least once. I'll get rid of stuff that absolutely have no potential for me to enjoy (such as Dad and Moms this year), and I will go from there. I am usually not a binge viewer anyway and try to keep up, but sometimes I'll get a few episodes behind and try and catch up eventually (this time is year is generally the time I fall most behind because of baseball post season and some hockey). So I do kinda get watching a show once that you kinda like but letting it go if it's going to get cancelled or you just don't like it enough. But I usually don't let either a critic's review or cancellation status determine if I'm going to watch something or not.


----------



## scandia101 (Oct 20, 2007)

Steveknj said:


> I think I am referring to


If you don't know what you're talking about...

and what you said is an entirely different concept than what I'm questioning mattack about so I don't get why you'd quote me.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

scandia101 said:


> If you don't know what you're talking about...
> 
> and what you said is an entirely different concept than what I'm questioning mattack about so I don't get why you'd quote me.


Sorry you took it so personally. 

Lighten up Francis!

If you read the thread, you'd know that a lot of this discussion stemmed from the fact that someone mentioned they don't bother watching shows until they know if they are cancelled or not.


----------



## steve614 (May 1, 2006)

I see where you are coming from now.
I admit, I will tend to keep watching a canceled show IF I like the show and I started watching before I knew it was canceled.
I did this with Zero Hour and 666 Park Avenue.

OTOH, there are shows like Lucky 7. I've got episodes saved up but I haven't started it yet. And now that it is canceled, I most likely won't bother.


----------



## scandia101 (Oct 20, 2007)

Steveknj said:


> Sorry you took it so personally.
> 
> Lighten up Francis!
> 
> If you read the thread, you'd know that a lot of this discussion stemmed from the fact that someone mentioned they don't bother watching shows until they know if they are cancelled or not.


I'm simply trying to understand your comprehension limitations.
I know what the thread is about and your post is relevant to the thread, but quoting me as a launchpad to say it makes as much sense as saying "I like turtles" when asked about your zombie face painting.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

steve614 said:


> I see where you are coming from now.
> I admit, I will tend to keep watching a canceled show IF I like the show and I started watching before I knew it was canceled.
> I did this with Zero Hour and 666 Park Avenue.
> 
> OTOH, there are shows like Lucky 7. I've got episodes saved up but I haven't started it yet. And now that it is canceled, I most likely won't bother.


Yeah, strangely, I got into Zero Hour & 666 more during their burnoffs than when they were regularly scheduled. Probably because they were some of the only dramas with new episodes that I was watching at the time.


----------



## jr461 (Jul 9, 2004)

If a serialized show is canceled, I will stop. I don't want to invest the time to be left without a conclusion. OTOH, if it's a show with stand-alone episodes and I have been enjoying them, no reason not to continue.


----------



## TIVO_GUY_HERE (Jul 10, 2000)

I have I think 4 episodes of "Southland" yet to see. I do plan on watching them, but since I know there isn't anymore, I'm in no hurry. 

For me to cancel a show after the 1st episode, I really didn't have high hopes anyway.. most shows I will give at least 2


----------



## mr.unnatural (Feb 2, 2006)

TonyTheTiger said:


> So far, the celeb-led shows are failing in my book. Having been away in the UK for most of last week and this, we are just hitting the DVR for some of the pilots. Last night we watched *Michael J Fox* and *Crazy Ones* and the following is true for both of them. The celebs have their 'schtick' and, if the entire show is based on that, it'll get very old very quickly. Maybe they'll get a second episode viewing, but it's not a priority.
> 
> I was really looking forward to *Brooklyn-Nine-Nine*, but cancelled the SP after the first one. Even Andre couldn't save that mess.


I just dropped The Crazy Ones and The Michael J. Fox show from my lineup last night. I dropped Brooklyn Ninety-Nine after the pilot episode. The first two sitcoms weren't all that bad, but your post rings true for their respective "schticks." I mostly dropped them because there are new shows premiering this week as well as a couple that I still watch and I only have so many hours in the week to watch them. I like to keep as current as I can with my shows and not have too many backlogged. Otherwise, I'll never get caught up. I've still got a lot of shows from torrent downloads I need to finish watching, like House of Cards and Orange is the New Black and several others.

I also just dropped Criminal Minds and Revolution. Criminal Minds was a great show in it's day, but was starting to reach a point where it was basically the same old plot being rehashed with a slightly different twist each week. Revolution was OK, but when I looked at my overall list it was one of the shows I least looked forward to viewing so it got cut. I dropped Chicago Fire and Hostages for the same reason. I can't see Hostages being more than a dragged out miniseries. It is scheduled to only run for the first half of the season so maybe that's how they planned it.


----------



## TonyTheTiger (Dec 22, 2006)

According to the pundits, Hostages and Betrayal are both failing to hold an audience, so I would expect them to be dropped fairly soon.

Watched the pilot of Back in the Game last night and completely failed to even smile, although it seems to have a following.

Time will tell.


----------



## MonsterJoe (Feb 19, 2003)

We're really enjoying Brooklyn 99...it's kind of like the "Scrubs" of cop shows.

Back in the Game got maybe 5 minutes from me.


----------



## Beryl (Feb 22, 2009)

TonyTheTiger said:


> According to the pundits, Hostages and Betrayal are both failing to hold an audience, so I would expect them to be dropped fairly soon.


Totally agree with this prediction. I gave Hostages 2.5 episodes and Betrayal 1.25 (quitting at the first commercial break).


----------



## WhiskeyTango (Sep 20, 2006)

Beryl said:


> Totally agree with this prediction. I gave Hostages 2.5 episodes and Betrayal 1.25 (quitting at the first commercial break).


It's not really a bold prediction and you don't have to be a 'pundit' to see that. The ratings for both shows suck and are getting worse with each passing episode.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

WhiskeyTango said:


> It's not really a bold prediction and you don't have to be a 'pundit' to see that. The ratings for both shows suck and are getting worse with each passing episode.


For Hostages at least, I hope they at least burn it off on Saturday night. If not, I'll just move on to something else having enjoyed the few episodes I watched.


----------



## kmccbf (Mar 9, 2002)

I've bailed on very few shows after the pilot. The few I have is because I just didn't like the characters. Recently I watched a detective show that was recommended to me by a friend. It was well written, well acted, but I took such a dislike to the lead character that I turned it off. When I bail on a show it's not just because it's bad, but also because the idea doesn't interest me.


----------



## sharkster (Jul 3, 2004)

I was thinking about this last night and one show from last year (a sitcom) came to mind. I tried to watch a show that was called something like 'Men with Kids'. Obviously, it was about several men all of whom had kids. It was so bad I didn't even last the first entire episode. 

I also tried to watch that Mindy Kaling show that same year, and ditched it after the first episode. People seem to like it, though, so perhaps I got out too soon. It just didn't grab me in any way whatsoever.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

sharkster said:


> I was thinking about this last night and one show from last year (a sitcom) came to mind. I tried to watch a show that was called something like 'Men with Kids'. Obviously, it was about several men all of whom had kids. It was so bad I didn't even last the first entire episode.
> 
> I also tried to watch that Mindy Kaling show that same year, and ditched it after the first episode. People seem to like it, though, so perhaps I got out too soon. It just didn't grab me in any way whatsoever.


I've stuck with pilots that were bad in the past. Usually it's either because I liked one of the actors, or while the pilot wasn't that funny, I saw potential in the show and the characters. The Matthew Perry show a couple of years ago where he managed a sports arena is an example of the former. I stuck with it because I generally like Perry, but the pilot was bad and it only got mildly better, so I gave up. 30 Rock is an example of the latter. The pilot, to me, was really bad, but I could see that the premise could be really funny, and it was for the most part.


----------



## MonsterJoe (Feb 19, 2003)

sharkster said:


> I was thinking about this last night and one show from last year (a sitcom) came to mind. I tried to watch a show that was called something like 'Men with Kids'. Obviously, it was about several men all of whom had kids. It was so bad I didn't even last the first entire episode.
> 
> I also tried to watch that Mindy Kaling show that same year, and ditched it after the first episode. People seem to like it, though, so perhaps I got out too soon. It just didn't grab me in any way whatsoever.


I didn't like the Mindy Kaling show originally - but I've watched 1 or 2 more recently, since it's on right after New Girl, and it's better than I gave it credit for.


----------



## laria (Sep 7, 2000)

MonsterJoe said:


> It took me 5 years to get past the 1st episode of Breaking Bad.
> 
> I tend to bail quickly, but am open to trying again.


I just started watching _Breaking Bad_ this summer. I think Season 1 was for the most part really boring. The last episode or two started to get things moving, although I'm not sure when I'll have time to start watching Season 2, since now all my other tv is started.

But I only powered through the first few because everyone raves about the show.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

laria said:


> I just started watching _Breaking Bad_ this summer. I think Season 1 was for the most part really boring. The last episode or two started to get things moving, although I'm not sure when I'll have time to start watching Season 2, since now all my other tv is started.
> 
> But I only powered through the first few because everyone raves about the show.


That was me, but I kinda felt REALLY let down, and felt I wasted 10 hours of my life. Yeah, yeah, it gets better, by S2, or halfway through S2 or maybe S3 it gets better...maybe it's even S4 

OK, dead horse beaten by me. Moving on.


----------



## mr.unnatural (Feb 2, 2006)

laria said:


> I just started watching _Breaking Bad_ this summer. I think Season 1 was for the most part really boring. The last episode or two started to get things moving, although I'm not sure when I'll have time to start watching Season 2, since now all my other tv is started.
> 
> But I only powered through the first few because everyone raves about the show.


Breaking Bad takes a while to grow on you, then it won't let go. The first season was a bit slow and it picks up a bit with season 2. Season 3 is where things really start to steam roll and it only gets better from there. You really need to watch the first two seasons to understand the overall storyline.

Stick with it. You won't regret it.


----------



## Azlen (Nov 25, 2002)

TonyTheTiger said:


> According to the pundits, Hostages and Betrayal are both failing to hold an audience, so I would expect them to be dropped fairly soon.
> 
> Watched the pilot of Back in the Game last night and completely failed to even smile, although it seems to have a following.
> 
> Time will tell.


Hostages come from Jerry Bruckheimer and is a short run series so CBS is more likely going to have it swap places with Hawaii 5-0 than cancel it, but we'll see. 
CBS really seems to be struggling (for them) on Mondays now. The two new comedies aren't doing well and 2 Broke Girls has had a big ratings drop. I think they'll try to shake some things up there before too long.


----------



## sushikitten (Jan 28, 2005)

I record every pilot just so I don't miss anything I might have wanted to see. But I have so many KNOWN good shoes I want to watch (Breaking Bad, Veronica Mars, etc.) that if it doesn't REALLY grab me, it's done. I don't think I've set one SP yet this year.


----------



## laria (Sep 7, 2000)

I set season passes for everything, and then just delete them as I drop things. 

So far _The Blacklist_, _Sleepy Hollow_, and _Marvel's Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D._ are the only new shows to make it into "continue watching" territory. I guess _The Originals_ will probably be there too, even though I haven't watched it yet... but it's a spinoff of a show I enjoy, so I'll keep watching it.


----------



## bsnelson (Oct 30, 1999)

At the risk of offending some folks (and it's really not my intent): I wonder of some of the _Breaking Bad_ "slow starting" is from those that lean more towards the "instant satisfaction" and generally expect the pace of things to be more frenetic. Myself, I love the long, slow scenes in BB; it's a time to reflect upon what's happened in the episode so far, to just let things digest. I don't have to have constant action and dialogue.

It took me about 5 minutes of the first episode to get hooked, and I loved almost every episode (though I'll admit that it took me a second viewing of "Fly" to fully appreciate it). I watched the first two episodes of _Homeland_ last night and am already firmly hooked, and I've heard some say that it took them a while to get into it. Of course, for us guys (and some gals), having


Spoiler



Morena Baccarin naked from the waist up and having sex


in the first episode didn't hurt. 

Brad


----------



## Beryl (Feb 22, 2009)

mr.unnatural said:


> The first season was a bit slow and it picks up a bit with season 2. Season 3 is where things really start to steam roll and it only gets better from there. You really need to watch the first two seasons to understand the overall storyline. Stick with it. You won't regret it.


Or, you can do like I did -- watch 2 or 3 episodes in Season 3, get hooked and then go back and watch the first 2 seasons. 

I wonder how many viewers did that also.


----------



## Azlen (Nov 25, 2002)

bsnelson said:


> At the risk of offending some folks (and it's really not my intent): I wonder of some of the _Breaking Bad_ "slow starting" is from those that lean more towards the "instant satisfaction" and generally expect the pace of things to be more frenetic. Myself, I love the long, slow scenes in BB; it's a time to reflect upon what's happened in the episode so far, to just let things digest. I don't have to have constant action and dialogue.
> 
> It took me about 5 minutes of the first episode to get hooked, and I loved almost every episode (though I'll admit that it took me a second viewing of "Fly" to fully appreciate it). I watched the first two episodes of _Homeland_ last night and am already firmly hooked, and I've heard some say that it took them a while to get into it. Of course, for us guys (and some gals), having
> 
> ...


I was hooked on Breaking Bad from the start as well. Didn't find it slow at all.
Homeland for me was the exact opposite of what you heard from others. It was great early on but lost a lot going from season 1 to 2. They had one great story (is he or isn't he) and nothing nearly as good to follow it up with.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

So far, I know I've dropped the Goldbergs & Mom this year... Though somehow I ended up watching Goldbergs eps 1 then 3.. Still have 2 on my TivoHD, and will still watch it. There seem to be more good new dramas this year -- hostages, the James Spader one... and more I can't think of at the moment.


----------



## gweempose (Mar 23, 2003)

bsnelson said:


> Of course, for us guys (and some gals), having
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> ...


No it didn't.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

bsnelson said:


> At the risk of offending some folks (and it's really not my intent): I wonder of some of the _Breaking Bad_ "slow starting" is from those that lean more towards the "instant satisfaction" and generally expect the pace of things to be more frenetic. Myself, I love the long, slow scenes in BB; it's a time to reflect upon what's happened in the episode so far, to just let things digest. I don't have to have constant action and dialogue.
> 
> It took me about 5 minutes of the first episode to get hooked, and I loved almost every episode (though I'll admit that it took me a second viewing of "Fly" to fully appreciate it). I watched the first two episodes of _Homeland_ last night and am already firmly hooked, and I've heard some say that it took them a while to get into it. Of course, for us guys (and some gals), having
> 
> ...


I don't think that's it for me. I watch Mad Men, where nothing really ever happens that gratifies me, but I still enjoy it. Same with Sorkin shows like The Newsroom. And I enjoyed the Sopranos episodes where nobody got whacked 

For me, very often subject matter trumps "great writing". The show could be written so eloquently that Shakespeare himself would rise from the grave an applaud, but if the subject matter doesn't grab me, I'm out. Downton Abbey is another example. Supposedly it's very well written and done, but watching a show about an upper crust English family for hours on end would make me want to poke my eyes out.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

Azlen said:


> I was hooked on Breaking Bad from the start as well. Didn't find it slow at all.
> Homeland for me was the exact opposite of what you heard from others. It was great early on but lost a lot going from season 1 to 2. They had one great story (is he or isn't he) and nothing nearly as good to follow it up with.


Homeland is a series I'll circle back to eventually. I don't have Showtime, so I'll have to find it during my slow periods somewhere and watch. It's definitely the kind of thing I am interested in.


----------



## laria (Sep 7, 2000)

I don't think that I expect shows to have a frenetic pace. I enjoy the shows that Steveknj mentioned... _Mad Men_, _The Newsroom_, _Downton Abbey_... and obviously I enjoyed _Breaking Bad_ enough to keep watching it.

The thing is, I was expecting more to happen in _Breaking Bad_ because of all the comments about the more recent seasons. I assumed it was that kind of show all along and it really wasn't right at the start. There was a looooong build up to the last 2 eps of Season 1. I wonder if some of that had to do with the writer's strike.


----------



## gweempose (Mar 23, 2003)

I never found Breaking Bad to be slow. I suppose in retrospect the first season was slow compared to later seasons, but this never dawned on me at the time.


----------

