Does The WB Think DS Has "Vast Potential"?

Well, according to E! Online's Kristin Veitch (of Watch With Kristin) they do. Check out her column from April 16th (which I finally got around to checking out today) about the cancellation of Angel and efforts to save it.

I can't say I'm thrilled to read yet again how DS is responsible for Angel's demise (who knows, maybe it really IS true?), but the supposed feeling at the WB that DS has "vast potential" is certainly encouraging! 

I can't say I'm thrilled to read yet again how DS is responsible for Angel's demise (who knows, maybe it really IS true?)

Actually, Kristin clarifies her point (somewhat  ) in this week's chat transcript:

From rocketboy: What is Dark Shadows?
It's a remake of old vampire TV show that's coming to the WB, which is helmed by John Wells and is a big ol' slap in the face of Angel.

From hostrov1: So you think Angel was canceled because of Dark Shadows?
As I said in my last column, I think Angel might have stayed another season had John Wells created a non-vampire show. It wasn't the only reason Angel was canceled, but it sure didn't help. Make sure you read the column to get the lowdown on where Angel stands.

All I can say is that I was not a "Buffy" fan (even though I know the woman who did Buffy's stunt doubling), nor an "Angel" fan.  I think I may have watched about 15 minutes total of either series.

Will I watch the new DS?  Do you even have to ask?

Okay, so I'll answer:  YES! I'll watch it (if we're lucky enough to have a new series.)

Well, according to E! Online's Kristin Veitch (of Watch With Kristin) they do. Check out her (URL) from April 16th (which I finally got around to checking out today) about the cancellation of Angel and efforts to save it.

I can't say I'm thrilled to read yet again how DS is responsible for Angel's demise (who knows, maybe it really IS true?), but the supposed feeling at the WB that DS has "vast potential" is certainly encouraging! 

I totally agree MB. I have seen enough bickering from Angel and DS fans on the internet to last me a lifetime. I do think Kristin could use a refresher course in Journalism 101. That being said,  I feel that there is a great deal of positive buzz surrounding the proposed DS series that outweigh the negativity being sprouted by Angel fanatics.

She certainly manages to damn with faint praise, that's for sure.

She quotes unnamed WB "bigwigs" saying the new DS has vast potential....but she certainly doesn't seem to think the show has anything going for it except the involvement of John Wells.

She makes it very clear that she believes that if John Wells was involved with a show that resembled "Seventh Heaven" or "Charmed" then that would be the new darling of the WB....and the fact that it's specifically "Dark Shadows" is purely incidental.   

I still think the reality is that 20th Century is going to charge more $$$ for the show.  They were planning to do that when Buffy came up for the sixth year renewal.  That's when it jumped ship to UPN.  And, then there is that cheaper, reality programing.  Anyway, Joss Whedon, the man himself doesn't blame Dark Shadows.  His interview with LA's KROQ's Kevin & Bean is found here.

I have to shamefully admit, vampire-lover that I am, that I have never seen a single episode, or even a part of one, of Angel.  As for Buffy, I've only seen one episode from the entire series and it looked absolutely enjoyable, yet I never watched another episode again.  Why?  Eh, who knows.

Gerard

Why?  Eh, who knows.

I think I can tell you why.....because Buffy (and I'll assume "Angel" also) is a VERY self-referential show....and the longer it was on, the more you needed to have seen it from the begining to make any sense out of it...especially the humor.

I only managed to get into it because where I live it was (and I believe still is) on twice a day, every day.  And more importantly, I had my kid, who'd seen every episode, to "translate" for me and fill in the blanks.  Otherwise, I'd have given up in utter confusion after a couple of episodes. 

I couldn't help but feel compelled to write Kristin at E! an email last night, seeing that the last thing needed at this point is her helping along the Angel/DS war already brewing. Since I watch far too much TV  I've always enjoyed reading her column and chats and usually she's pretty fair, so it was a bit disappointing to see her blaming DS.

Basically, all I asked of her (and very nicely, I might add) is that she hold off passing judgment on DS until she has actually seen the pilot. I doubt I'll hear back from her, but at least I sent her a levelheaded email in support of DS 

As far as Angel goes, I've been watching it since the beginning, and while I hate to see it cancelled, I haven't really been all that fond of this season. I don't know why Angel fans find it so surprising that it's been cancelled, considering the fact that the WB has never treated the show very well. It has aired in 4 different time slots in 5 years, not to mention the WB came very close to canceling it last year.

grayson67 (Melissa)

I've always enjoyed reading her column and chats and usually she's pretty fair

I agree. I like Kristin. And back when I had more free time I used to attend all of her weekly chats, waiting for any tidbits she might drop about what was coming up on Buffy/Angel. (The nice thing about Kristin (who was still known as "Wanda" then) is that, unlike other people, she doesn't completely ruin something by telling you everything that's going to happen - she just provides enough spoiler info to get you really psyched over what's coming.) Her Buffy/Angel info was always dead on. So, if she says that someone at the WB thinks DS has "vast potential" I really believe that someone at the WB actually told her that in as many words.

so it was a bit disappointing to see her blaming DS.

As for her partially blaming DS for Angel's cancellation, what she says could be true. Unlike some of the Angel fans who've said that DS was planned as a replacement for Angel from the outset, what Kristin said is that if another vampire series from a prestigious producer like John Wells hadn't come along, the WB might have keep Angel around longer...

Until the last year or so, I'd never watched Buffy, and I've only seen the few I have because my daughter (who came back home for a while after being on her own for a year or so -- gad, but that's a whole 'nuther story!), was a big Buffy fan; I couldn't help but look over her shoulder at a few. Not bad stuff, but I can't say I've felt any compulsion to sit down and watch the show now that she's gone again, much less check out episodes of Angel. Nor do I ever so much as take a gander at any of the rows about Dark Shadows vs. Angel, and so am blissfully ignorant of the particulars. Kind of a shame that some fans get their shorts in such a wad they might deny themselves an honest to God treat, assuming we've got one in store for us.

I'm sure glad I'm not a rabid fan of anything.









GODZILLA RULES!!!!!!!
--Mark
http://home.triad.rr.com/smrainey

You know after seeing the article's picture of James Marsters (Spike). . .I'd seriously suggest (if they went with Next Generation idea --which it doesn't seem they are). . that he SHOULD play a child of Julia's. .  look at those Cheekbones!   Hey he was born in '62. . before Grayson's Julia got entangled at Collinwood. . suppose she went to some medical conference, got a wee bit intoxicated. . hey it could work.. . (wait J99 is on overdrive ain't she?)

 :-   I must say that I, being around longer that most of you (possibly), have never heard of a show being canceled because a PROPOSED show is projected to be vastly more popular. (The proposed show being in the same genre, of course.) Has TV programming changed so much? Seems silly to me to rate or over-rate something that hasn't even hit the public yet. Guess I'm behind-the-times, as the saying goes.
                                            Misty, who has still to find a so-called
                                                "reality" show that's interesting

:-   I must say that I, being around longer that most of you (possibly), have never heard of a show being canceled because a PROPOSED show is projected to be vastly more popular. (The proposed show being in the same genre, of course.) Has TV programming changed so much?

Well, haven't we seen soaps dropped in order to make room for new ones?  I know that some of my daughter's favorite cartoons have suffered the same fate on Nickolodeon in order to make way for a new lineup.  And I recently read a bio of Margaret Cho that mentioned that her sitcom was cancelled to make room for The Drew Carey Show.  So, unfortunately, I don't think it's a new concept.

I ... have never heard of a show being canceled because a PROPOSED show is projected to be vastly more popular.

Well, at least in this case DS isn't just the average, run-of-the-mill proposed show. It has a built-in audience and a name value that a proposed series with an entirely new concept doesn't have (though audience recognition in and of itself isn't necessarily a guarantee of success - just look at what happened with the WB's Tarzan  :- ).

The interesting thing here is that the WB has slipped behind UPN as the leading Weblet (for Patti, that means mini-network  ) and they're scrambling to regain their top position because lower ratings equal smaller ad revenues from commercials, which mean less profits. By all accounts, they're looking to shows with a name value to help them regain their former status - that's why they've greenlit both the DS and Lost in Space pilots. The audience already has some idea of what to expect from those titles, so the WB's thinking is that they're (supposedly) an easier sell and the audience (again, supposedly) is more likely to sample them than they are a show with an entirely new name/idea.

Now, is the mere name recognition factor of a new, untried version of a series enough of a reason to cancel an established show. One wouldn't think so. But much to many Angel fans' surprise, the WB seriously considered cancelling Angel last season (something the what I refer to as the "overly caffeinated Angel fans" seem to want to overlook). Factor in the fact that Angel's 5 year WB contract ends with this season and would be up for renewal should the series get a pickup for a 6th season - and most probably at a heftier price than the WB had been paying - and you've got a situation where a new, even untried, series with name recognition value might look like a better and perhaps even more financially sound deal than renewing an established series in which (much to its fans' dismay) the network appears to be losing interest...