Aeryn13

Neat. 😁

Apparently, they are not putting any show in front of it but will keep doing an encore of the Winchesters in the 8 pm slot and the new one later. I mean, they could switch that around but their overall problem is still that they don`t have enough shows left at this point to fill all the slots. And the ratings, while they have slipped - which, with a new show, having three breaks within the first 7 episodes is not helping - are not that bad. Independence is a lot worse so that wouldn`t help anything as a lead-in. And Gotham Knights is bound to be even worse than that. The strongest show the CW has in terms of demo which advertisers care for above viewership is All American. That is their only "hit". Walker has the viewers but not really the demo. And recently they aired some reality-TV-ish specials that got more viewership than any scripted project. I don`t see the network going on as a real network.

Seems like the Flash Info was faulty. That's gonna be paired with Kung Fu. So still no idea what the Winchesters scheduling will entail next year.

Flash has been confirmed for a final Season of 13 episodes so it would still have to go about 8 weeks after the Winchesters concluded. Maybe it will be paired with Gotham Knights? Or Superman and Lois? I`m seeing conflicting infos about the scheduling again. That is one thing Nexstar seems to keep. The CW has been bonkers about scheduling for years now. The Winchesters already had 2 or 3 breaks in the first 7 episodes? Not a great way to build momentum for a brand-new show.

Almost right. :) Apparently, it will pair with Season 9 of the Flash which is supposed to return on January 31th. That makes sense insofar as the Flash is so goofy, it is an 8 p.m. show and Winchesters with at least a little bit of gore fits with the 9 p.m. slot.

The Professionals is a limited run show anyway. When was it shot? Two or three years ago for one Season? I really have no idea what CW thought they would accomplish with it, other than it was a cheap aquisition. As for moving the Winchesters and putting it on after an encore episode, now the cancellation spree from last spring bites them because they really don`t have much to fill the timeslots. Not even cheap international stuff or reality. So pairing a show with encores of itself is pretty much one of their only avenues left. While I`m not optimistic for any show on the CW - which production company can or will take the lousy 1 million licence fee? - I don`t think this particular scheduling movie means anything one way or another. And the Winchesters has been doing relatively well for CW standards in its night. It has not underperformed as per the current network average. A show that has been doing also really well after its move to fall? Stargirl. It has gotten good demos which is what advertisers look for, above total viewers. And yet, it has been cancelled. What does it mean? Nexstar wants super cheap garbage only.

I mean the rates they can get advertisers to pay. Which go by viewership and specifically demo.

The only numbers that will be considered by Nexstar are "how much money can we make with x show?" With their only possibly revenue being ad rates. Currently I'd say with that in mind they can't make a profit on any show. And the producing studios who can technically make a profit via other possible revenues have to deduce if the budget vs. the miniscule licencing fee can still work out in their favour.

If SPN was still on, it also would have declined in the ratings by now. All networks are down comparatively to what they once were. Shows that were on the same time as SPN like NCIS or Grey`s that used to be juggernauts, also percentage-wise have been down compared to their heydays. The same is true for all CW shows, the same would be true for SPN. If people actually expected Winchesters to draw the numbers even SPN drew in its 15th Season, they were very wrong. That was never going to happen, regardless of its reception. I also don`t think anything on the CW is ever going to draw even a million again. If shows on bigger networks that used to draw 15 million are getting around 5-6 million now (and new shows even lower) and CW in its best days and for the most well-liked shows got roughly 3 million, they are and will remain under 1 million. Period. Nexstar is whacked if they expect more. Walker is vievers-wise the highest-rated show at around 700-800k. Independence on the other hand has been doing badly in both viewership and demo, it`s currently the lowest of the CW scripted shows so I doubt it will continue. Granted, I highly doubt The Winchesters will as well or anything on the CW but the Walker spin-off is hardly an example of success potential at this point. And everything on the CW would get slaughtered on a bigger network, including both Walkers or the Winchesters or anything. They wouldn`t be mid-tier there even in dreams.

If they outright said right now that they're cancelling everything, their current vierwership, even if not big, might completely implode. Then they could be liable for some compensation for previously negotiated ad rates that were determined on at least x amount of audience/demo expectations.

Walker has the highest viewer numbers but comparatively the worst demo, meaning not the worst demo of CW shows, far from it, but compared to its higher viewer count, meaning its viewership skews really old. And the above 49+ age group is the one advertisers pay the least money for. So if Nexstar wants to keep it due to the viewership and keep it for a measly 1 million licence fee, the budget would have to most certainly take cuts. The spin-off is different because of the period setting, the budget is higher anyway, every period show always is because of set decorations, including the Winchesters, but its viewership and demo are meh. In live+3 and +7, both haven`t done terribly well this Season so far. Other CW shows have done better. The Winchesters on the other hand is most certainly expensive because of both the period setting and the effects shots. For CW standards, it would have been renewed already but the Nexstar 1 million licence fee is not gonna cover it. Depends on how well it does for the production studio in other distribution, like it`s already out on amazon etc to make money from it. But those kinds of numbers are never published. Neither do streaming services really share their numbers. Oh, but I just checked, the Winchesters made it into the current Top 10 shows on HBO Max. It`s number 10. But quite good regardless for only 4 episodes out and not a super-big prestige production like HOD. It`s a big old mess right now. Shows I can see Nexstar keeping is stuff like Penn&Teller.

They might just string people along by saying that. Their expectations of cost vs. benefit numbers seem way out of whack, especially if in the upcoming Season and future they expect a heretofore unknown audience to suddenly show up for the same kind of cheap trash programming that one can already get on several outlets.

Good luck with that. When Big Bang Theory was at the height of its popularity, the main cast made top dollar. Even half hour comedies that happen to get big aren't made for scale.

Cost-cutting has been the strategy since the deal closed. Problem is, it's basically all Zaslav has been doing so we know he can cancel but can he develop anything? It's still a studio so they do need to produce some content. And if they plan to have a viable streamer in the future, they need some content for it too. I think their strategy might reach them their goal short-term but if they don't invest in anything significant, they'll fail longterm.

Never in my life have I heard (or read) someone use the word "scrappy" so many times in one sitting. And he clearly didn`t look at the humbers yet. "Why do some of these shows not get more than a million viewers?" Dude, NONE of these shows have remotely touched that in this and probably last Season. In the past, sure, but in the past bigger network shows also had way bigger demos and viewership. I think everything is down rather same percentage-wise. As for shopping the show, if Warner could make more money via licencing it to another distributor, I don`t think in theory they`d object. It`s just a question of deal-making.

As far as I know production for the Season might have just wrapped? So now would be too late to re-tool. But I do think they were smart about it either way. No back order also technically doesn`t mean no renewal. If they were very firm about it, they could have announced it right now like they did for Stargirl and Nancy Drew. Why wait? My guess is they want to see how the Season or at least the majority of it does and then decide overall what kind of network they wanna be aka if they want to have scripted original programming or not .

No studios could or probably would match the price they are asking in terms of covering costs for scripted shows or lets say what they are offering which is a licence fee of 1 million per episode. That`s not gonna cut it these days. Nexstar had a commitment for the 2022/23 Season that CW put together but beyond that they might go full cheap reality, news and old international shows bought for scale. Bad timing if it was still the old CW, they could probably be happy that the Winchesters picked up viewers again in ep 3 and 4 and the demo is pretty steady. By CW standards, it`s a little winner.

I like that more scenes seem to be in darkness or semi-darkness compared to last ep. I know nightshoots (especially night outdoor shoots) are expensive (unless you do some camera magic filter) but to me it`s always more scary in the darkness.

Finally watched it. I'm always glad to get a new monster. Something SPN got away from in later years. Nightgown!Mary was kind of distracting, maybe because the look is kinda iconic for Supernatural. Other than that count me as someone who likes this Mary and the portrayal of the actress. She might be tough (and less kind than Amy's Mary) but miles nicer than soulless brought back Mary (who I had issues with the acting because playing the terrible writing up to 11 made it worse). This version is young and somewhat brash but not unkind. I know they were trying to parallel Mary as a headstrong leader with Dean (and are going in general for a John/Sam and Mary/Dean parallel) but ironically in this episode specifically I didn’t see her much as Dean. Why? What was one of Dean's core elements when they went "undercover" somewhere? He really took to it and had fun with the environment. He was a prime LARPer and enjoyed it. Mary doesn't have that. She is very no-nomsense. Maybe it comes from John (though he didn't much show it either) or maybe from another family member. The 4 characters still have a good vibe together. And John, for a noob, already shows great potential as a hunter. .

While they are not really similar character archetypes, the depiction of the sexuality reminds me of how they did Constantine, both in his own show and on Legends. Noone hid that he had former boyfriends and girlfriends but even when that was referenced or shown, it had just about all to do with his magic use, his crochety personality and his hell problems. I think it's the same with Carlos. He is a hunter and it is so inconsequential who he snogged when. And obviously his character type in a 70s set show is "hippie". Latika is the shy bookworm, John is the skilled war vet yet new to hunting and Mary is the relatively experienced hunter who wants out.

I think Carlos is actually a character done right. Yes, he has a flamboyant personality. But Bobby had a grumpy personality. Garth had a dorky personality. And so on. All hunters seem to have something or other going on shtick-wise. In the context of the show he just a hunter with requisite tragic backstory. But knowledgable and competent. And his vibe fits with the free sex, drugs and rock`n roll thing. I actually think in a contemperary setting, it would stick out more (in the speak in twitter hashtags way) but the hippie look and mentality fits with the time period.

He has always been a gullible, easily manipulated idiot so the Akrida could sell him a back of goods and he would let them in.

You know something else that made me giggle in the episode? A very small bit but over the course of every supernatural-themed-show ever, what do characters do when they need to draw blood for something? Mainly a ritual but could be other things? Drag a big-ass knife right across their open palm. And this did the same thing. Twice. And I`m like, is this an unbreakable tradition at this point or do TV writers across the board not know how much that hurt, how long that takes to heal and generally how impractical it is if you need to use than hand for fighting and holding a aweapon soon after? If you have a supernatural character with instant-healing, fine, but humans? Why, why does noone ever just cut their finger?

It did. In the final ratings, it became the nr.1 show of the week in both viewers and demo. However, I don`t think it will determine things one way or another. Currently, there is a big upheaval with the CW network, with Warner, with Netflix, basically with any option. So the only way I would have thought the show was a failure was if I personally found it bad. So far the Pilot very pleasantly surprised me.