Tuesday, July 04, 2017
Blind Item #1
This almost television show cost SO MUCH MONEY but go so little return that the numbers equate to about $100 per viewer. Yeah, that is not going to work. The company gave this B+ list dual threat director who was probably A list back in the day, a huge amount of financial leeway. Very few people watched it, but those who did were very very vocal. So the company said they would have to cancel it if a) they didn't reign in their spending and b) if their spending wasn't reigned in, it was up to them to wrap it up because they would have to cancel it if not. Instead of reigning in their cost, they spent extra, forcing the cancellation of their show, making it look like the company didn't support their endeavor and ticking off their small but very vocal audience.
The Get Down
ReplyDeleteThe Get Down with Baz Lurhman being the Director in question. Yet I still ask what did they spend the money on because the get down had no expensive special effects or costly superstars in it.
ReplyDeleteSense 8 makes more sense
ReplyDeleteReined in, not reigned in.
ReplyDeleteWas going to say Reign (expensive to produce compared to low ratings, almost television show, small but vocal audience, cancelled at end of third season, showrunners didn't prepare for a proper ending because they thought they'd turn it around, BI kept repeating the word "reign"), but did they ever have a well known director? I dont think so. So I guess not
ReplyDeleteYou mean getting an Australian director to do a history of early hip-hop might not work!?!
ReplyDeleteIt does make more sense, but it is one of the best shows out there. It is really really good. Thank goodness they're making a two hour finale.
ReplyDeleteGoliath/Amazon series.
ReplyDeleteBillyBob Thornton for the actor
This almost television show [THE GET DOWN] cost SO MUCH MONEY [$120,000,000] but go so little return that the numbers equate to about $100 per viewer. Yeah, that is not going to work. The company [NETFLIX] gave this B+ list dual threat director [BAZ LUHRMAN] who was probably A list back in the day [90s] a huge amount of financial leeway. Very few people watched it, but those who did were very very vocal. So the company said they would have to cancel it if a) they didn’t reign in their spending and b) if their spending wasn’t reigned in, it was up to them to wrap it up because they would have to cancel it if not. Instead of reigning in their cost, they spent extra, forcing the cancellation of their show, making it look like the company didn’t support their endeavor and ticking off their small but very vocal audience.
ReplyDeleteSense8 was already canned by Netflix.
ReplyDeleteMusic rights are hugely expensive. It's what did them in.
ReplyDeleteI think the natural conclusion of this BI was that the producers didn't reign in costs, and the cancelation was handed down. Netflix will do a two hour wrap up, but if you read between the lines on public statements it is pretty clear that the final movie will be much cheaper than the shows.
ReplyDeleteI would say Amazon and Woody Allen, and that series he did for them, but it was always only going to be a set, limited amount of episodes.
ReplyDeleteMaybe David Lynch/Showtime/Twin Peaks season 3? There are some outrageous special effects this season. It is brilliantly done. But, pay cable, not almost network.
Tim Allen
ReplyDeleteBecause Enty is known for his/their flawless spelling. Or were you correcting their spelling and not mine? Read the BI again. Because, I quote "they didn’t reign in their spending and b) if their spending wasn’t reigned in, it was up to them to wrap it up because they would have to cancel it if not. Instead of reigning in their cost"
ReplyDeleteThe word is used three times in this BI and look how he spelled it.
Although the show still never had a famous director, so it's still probably not the right guess. Thanks for the condescension though.
[…] July 5, 2017 […]
ReplyDelete