People in charge (supposedly)

[ComfySweater]

That and has any actual lesbian anywhere ever uttered the phrase "sweet lady kisses"?

After being slobbered on by Trouty Mouth, I'd figure that's a natural response.

[Ceeg]

That and has any actual lesbian anywhere ever uttered the phrase "sweet lady kisses"?

 

Well, to be fair, I'm pretty sure Brittany is the only one who's ever said that, and she's not a lesbian. Or a person who exists in any kind of reality.

[SNeaker]

I think the "have another wine cooler" thing with Puck and Quinn was intended as a joke because...it's a wine cooler. Pretty hard to get drunk on those. Quinn didn't drink it when Puck offered, and she was clearly (to me) extremely lucid in that scene. Puck did stop when she said stop and only continued to try to persuade her verbally, and not with any kind of manipulation as most of her protests had nothing to do with not wanting it and seemed more like halfhearted "we shouldn'ts" based on celibacy club and Finn. She said the word "ok" and they continued. So while that entire ordeal  was not Puck's finest moment, I don't think it's that problematic as far as consent. Other than that one time Quinn claimed he "got her drunk and she felt fat that day" which seemed again like her attempt at minimizing the experience to hurt Puck so she wouldn't have to acknowledge him as the baby daddy, Quinn generally presented it as a very bad decision, but a decision nonetheless.

[ComfySweater]

I think the "have another wine cooler" thing with Puck and Quinn was intended as a joke because...it's a wine cooler. Pretty hard to get drunk on those.

It had to be a joke. If you've had enough of those to be drunk you're in the bathroom not the bedroom.

[caracas1914]

The takeaway I got from the Quinn/Puck hookup in Season 1 was that it was consensual, but Quinn had no illusions (at least for her) that it was a  big romance thing.  They were sexually attracted to each other and he had the bad boy vibe that All American boy Finn did not.

Edited March 23, 2015 by caracas1914

[ComfySweater]

I'm not convinced Quinn was sexually attracted to anybody on the show. She always screamed more interested in books than people to me. 

 

ETA: I do acknowledge Santana gave her one hell of an orgasm and probably another one after that, but can still call that a very talented woman making her feel really good in a way that probably confused her for weeks.

Edited March 23, 2015 by ComfySweater

[caracas1914]

I think Quinn thought men were necessary evil, but yes, I don't think she was ever in love on the show.

[caracas1914]

I sometimes wonder if something happened behind the scenes once they started filming or at least once they started scripting.  

 

Even with their flaws, I thought that 6.01 and 6.02 had competently framed the McKinley setup for the last year.  I would say 6.02 was more than OK in parts.  Rachel and Kurt as choir codirectors, Blaine getting a comeback with Dalton, the Blainosfky, etc it all seemed to point to some SL's there were going to be explored.

 

Maybe it was Ryan had them do the setup as if they still had 22 episodes and something behind the scenes, deadlines for the other shows Ryan and company were working on, FOX gave another condition ,etc, and they seemed to give up in the setup they had.  Spec:  they realized they had bit off more then they could chew in 13 episodes and said, Fuck this, let's just wrap it up anyway we can.  Tthey had some check of list stuff, and that was it.  They didn't care how they checked if, the more outrageous the better, it was almost like the couldn't afford to waste any time on a Glee S/L .

 

 

[dizzyizzy01]

I sometimes wonder if something happened behind the scenes once they started filming or at least once they started scripting.  

 

Even with their flaws, I thought that 6.01 and 6.02 had competently framed the McKinley setup for the last year.  I would say 6.02 was more than OK in parts.  Rachel and Kurt as choir codirectors, Blaine getting a comeback with Dalton, the Blainosfky, etc it all seemed to point to some SL's there were going to be explored.

 

Maybe it was Ryan had them do the setup as if they still had 22 episodes and something behind the scenes, deadlines for the other shows Ryan and company were working on, FOX gave another condition ,etc, and they seemed to give up in the setup they had.  Spec:  they realized they had bit off more then they could chew in 13 episodes and said, Fuck this, let's just wrap it up anyway we can.  Tthey had some check of list stuff, and that was it.  They didn't care how they checked if, the more outrageous the better, it was almost like the couldn't afford to waste any time on a Glee S/L .

 

As much flack as I think Ryan deserves for his showrunning and decision making, he's still probably one of the better writers on this show.  I think the show went from kinda bad to downright awful when he stepped back from lack of interest/lack of time.  The episodes he has more of  direct hand in are the better ones.  In this season, he's credited with 6x01, 6x02, 6x12, and 6x13.  Generally speaking those are the better episodes in this dismal season.  The writing team RIB hired is pretty damn awful.

[phoenixrising]

As much flack as I think Ryan deserves for his showrunning and decision making, he's still probably one of the better writers on this show.  I think the show went from kinda bad to downright awful when he stepped back from lack of interest/lack of time.  The episodes he has more of  direct hand in are the better ones.  In this season, he's credited with 6x01, 6x02, 6x12, and 6x13.  Generally speaking those are the better episodes in this dismal season.  The writing team RIB hired is pretty damn awful.

I feel like you could cut out at least half the episodes in the middle, and it would've made no difference.

Thinking back on it though, Ian typically wrote some of the worst episodes (and this season he definitely did). Just let him write weird crap, but not whole episodes. Aaaaargh!

I'll agree that as much as I hate Ryan as a show runner and as a human being, when he actually tries, he can write good stuff.

[dizzyizzy01]

I feel like you could cut out at least half the episodes in the middle, and it would've made no difference.

Thinking back on it though, Ian typically wrote some of the worst episodes (and this season he definitely did). Just let him write weird crap, but not whole episodes. Aaaaargh!

I'll agree that as much as I hate Ryan as a show runner and as a human being, when he actually tries, he can write good stuff.

 

Yea.  Ian is goood with the one-liners, but whole episodes, no thanks.

[camussie]

I think Glee might have muddled along for another couple of seasons a the same kind of ratings as season 4 but losing a presence like Cory's coupled with a writing team who did not know how to handle it then it was a major factor

 

 

While I agree that ratings bottomed out quicker and more severely with Cory's death I don't think they would have stayed at season 4 levels even if Cory had not passed.  I think they were heading to a free fall the second the school year was extended.  The split narrative was just not working and by the end of season 4 I think viewers were fed up.  

 

If you look at S5 ratings the first big free fall  happened between episode 1 and episode 2  (demos went from 2.0 to 1.6) and that seems to be what triggered Fox telling RM & team to shut Lima down.  I say this because they were almost done filming "The End of Twerk"  when 5.02 aired and TEoT still had a heavy focus on the sophomores.  By "Puppet Master" (2 episodes later) the sophomores were all but wallpaper while McKinley's wind down focused on Blaine & Sam.

 

As for TPTB not knowing how to handle losing Finn I actually think they did.  They came to the most logical conclusion fairly quickly - rescind their agreement with Matt Morrison that he could leave the show in season 5. By the end of season 4 Finn and Will were fairly interchangeable i.e. all RM and team needed was one of the original leads to ride the whiteboard while they tried to keep selling the choir room as the heart of the show.  The only thing Finn could offer that Will couldn't was the occasional romantic angst for Rachel.  

 

What they didn't know how to handle was the viewers saying enough was enough with the split narrative.  They didn't seem to know how to transition the show to New York without making their characters come across as self absorbed jackasses (end of season 5) and they also didn't know how to keep the show in Lima without making it seem like everyone couldn't escape high school (most of season 6).    If I am right about that the problems they had with the writing would have been there even if Finn was around.  

 

Kevin's candor will only be admired when he admits to doing the disabled equivalent of blackface. 

 

 

I don't agree that is what he was doing.  Plenty of productions have able bodied people playing disabled characters.  See Tom Cruise, Daniel Day Lewis, Patty Duke,  I also don't blame TPTB not wanting to add one more potential complication to the already complicated production of Glee.  

Edited May 2, 2015 by camussie

[jaytee1812]

I don't agree that is what he was doing.  Plenty of productions have able bodied people playing disabled characters.  See Tom Cruise, Daniel Day Lewis, Patty Duke,  I also don't blame TPTB not wanting to add one more potential complication to the already complicated production of Glee.

I completely blame them, just because other people do it doesn't make it not offensive. Both those in charge and Kevin make it worse as they seem to think it was a good thing having a disabled character, but don't understand he was pointless when being played by Kevin. It does nothing for disabled representation. Same with having trans characters played by cis people.

What is the difference between casting Kevin as Artie and having Mercedes, Matt or Jake played by white people and blacked up?

[camussie]

I also have no problem with trans people played by CIS people.  Felicity Huffman was spectacular in "Transamerica,"  Hilary Swank was fantastic in "Boys Don't Cry," and Jeffrey Tambor is awesome in "Transparent" all of which helped/are helping to further the dialog and awareness about transgendered people.  I feel like having a disabled character as part of a very popular high school show did the same, in small part.   To me it isn't pointless to raise awareness and help contribute to the dialog.    

 

Beyond that I never lose sight that Glee was a business first and foremost and whether we like it or not it was a complicated production with a rigorous schedule.  There were multiple takes for every scene we saw Artie and the rest of them in.  Their dance rehearsals, studio times, and actual filming often led to 18-20 hour days.  I just can't blame those in charge at Glee for not wanting to add more potential complications to that. 

Edited May 2, 2015 by camussie

[jaytee1812]

I I feel like having a disabled character as part of a very popular high school show did the same, in small part.   To me it isn't pointless to raise awareness and help contribute to the dialog.

To raise awareness of what? Glee did nothing but have an able-bodied guy sit in a chair for six seasons. Apart from that awful Wheels episode, which apparently demonstrated that this group of people have no basic human empathy unless it's their problem.

[camussie]

It wasn't well written (what on this show was over the long term although Artie fared better than most) but I felt they did a decent enough job that showing that Artie was more than his disability.  That he had hopes and dreams for his future like any other high school student.  That he developed crushes and feelings like any other high school student.  That he could be a self absorbed jerk at times like any other high school student.  That he too longed to fit in like any other high school student.  To me part of the point of Artie's character was to raise awareness that disabled teens are more similar, than different, to their able bodied counterparts.   

 

Frankly I think the lighter touch they used with Artie's character worked better at times than some of the anvilicious PSAs they wrote to  address/raise awareness about other issues.  

Edited May 2, 2015 by camussie

[caracas1914]

rankly I think the lighter touch they used with Artie's character worked better at times than some of the anvilicious PSAs they wrote to  address/raise awareness about other issues

 

One word:    Becky.

[AndySmith]

but I felt they did a decent enough job that showing that Artie was more than his disability.  That he had hopes and dreams for his future like any other high school student.  That he developed crushes and feelings like any other high school student.  That he could be a self absorbed jerk at times like any other high school student.  That he too longed to fit in like any other high school student.  To me part of the point of Artie's character was to raise awareness that disabled teens are more similar, than different, to their able bodied counterparts.

 

Yeah, for the most part.

[jaytee1812]

I think they did a great job showing Artie as a self absorbed prick. But apart from Wheels and Dream On they ignored his disability, and in those two handled it dreadfully. Artie can't be a dancer? There is a professional sport called Wheelchair Dancing, but they said to every person in a wheelchair who was watching that they couldn't dance, which is an out and out lie.

But the worst thing is even if they'd handled it well, they were saying to every kid watching, 'you might see some like yourself on TV, but you can't do this, you can only have people who can walk pretending to do this.'

Disabled people have long complained about able bodied actors doing disability drag, and trans activists have complained about cis actors playing trans characters. That's why it matters. And for every time that an able bodied actors plays disabled or a cis person plays trans it makes TV and film less diverse and that's never a good thing.

[AndySmith]

Personally, I don't care who plays the role as long as it's written well. Which, poor Artie. And Becky. And...just about every character on this show at some point. But...getting a bit off topic here, aren't we?

 

Does anyone think RIB would have kept the season 4 newbies around longer had Cory not passed away? As others have said, they seemed to be phasing Will out of the choir room, but at the same time, if Finn was going off to college, who would have been running the Glee club? Or would Finn be doing both?

Edited May 3, 2015 by AndySmith

[jaytee1812]

Personally, I don't care who plays the role as long as it's written well.

I do care. I want the world on screen to represent the world I live in.

And yes I think the newbies would've still been binned. Those in charge never got they weren't the problem. Look at how badly the Rachel-centric season 6 did.

I'm glad he got rid, had he not Melissa might not have been free to do Whiplash or Supergirl, and that really would've been a bad thing. I just wish he'd binned Kitty and Tina too.

[AndySmith]

Well, to each their own, I suppose.

 

I think they would have kept them longer (not sure by how much), since they were offered contracts at the start of season 5, no? Hope they got paid for the full season.

[jaytee1812]

They got credited for all episodes which I assume means they got paid.

I love that the show sunk even lower without them. I'm embarrassed for Jenna, Becca, Dianna and Harry that they were involved in season 6.

[AndySmith]

The way things were going, it would have sunk whether they were there or not.

[jaytee1812]

The way things were going, it would have sunk whether they were there or not.

Totally agree. I just think it's funny how many people said they had to get back to the originals. We got season 6 of Rachel and a bunch of white boys, mostly Will and it sunk even further.

[Higgs]

I want the world on screen to represent the world I live in.

Then I suggest you stick to documentaries, or, when desperate, reality shows. Drama isn't meant to be naturalistic; it's heightened reality. Chris was accused of playing himself as Kurt. The key word there is "playing", which is an entirely different world from "being". Reduced to its inevitable absurd conclusion, the idea of theater strictly representing the real world would result in the elimination of, amongst a million or so other things, Beijing opera, Japanese Noh, science fiction, Mozart's "Marriage of Figaro", Strauss' "Der Rosenkavalier", virtualy all baroque opera, including Handel's, DD-L's Left Foot, Jon as Melchior, and Artie's fantasy scenes in "Glee", and would surely lead to the End of Western Civilization As We Know It when a 6', 210 lb. transgendered woman in spike heels drags Darren Criss kicking and screaming from the Belasco stage. Edited May 3, 2015 by Higgs

[AndySmith]

We got season 6 of Rachel and a bunch of white boys, mostly Will and it sunk even further.

 

Not sure what the ethnicity of the characters has to do with it, other than the fact that you seem to relish the show failing for some reason because it featured mostly "white boys"? The show was sinking regardless of what the racial and sexual make-up of the cast was because the writing was just all over the place, and just bad overall. It had nothing to do with who was in the cast or not. Season 6 actually started out promising, and seemed like it would at least go out on a high not, but those in charge just really fumbled it. A small example was, they had Puck and Quinn being together, that was where their characters supposedly ended up, etc. Then they bring back Puck with no Quinn for Santana/Brittney's wedding, and while I get Dianna wasn't available, for whatever reason, in the episode there is no explanation for her absence...and Puck is trying to hook up with Blaine's mom. Even though he and Quinn are a couple now and mostly living together offscreen.

 

What. the. fcuk?!?!

 

So it really has nothing to do with who was on the show by that point. The inept and incompetent writing and show-running is what kept the show sinking more and more each season.

 

Had Corey/Finn been around, I do think the show might have lasted a few more years than it did, but it would have kept declining just as much commerically and creatively.

[jaytee1812]

Then I suggest you stick to documentaries, or, when desperate, reality shows. Drama isn't meant to be naturalistic; it's heightened reality.

So why does this heightened reality have to only show us mostly white, able bodied, young cis gendered men? Something this show was really good at.

[tom87]

Had Corey/Finn been around, I do think the show might have lasted a few more years than it did, but it would have kept declining just as much commerically and creatively.

 

 

I think in season 4 when it got renewed for 5 and 6 they knew season 6 was their last Cory, originals, boring noobs or not.

Edited May 3, 2015 by tom87

[Higgs]

So why does this heightened reality have to only show us mostly white, able bodied, young cis gendered men? Something this show was really good at.

You were lucky to get even that. Until CC auditioned, the original script had zero gays. For a series about a high school show choir. Produced by a gay. In the 21st century. And not in Iran or Putin's Russia.

[ComfySweater]

Then I suggest you stick to documentaries, or, when desperate, reality shows. Drama isn't meant to be naturalistic; it's heightened reality. 

What the ever-loving fuck is wrong with this world that people say this in public? All white people all the time is the default because this world is screwed up. It's not okay. Don't try to defend it with big words. Wrong is wrong. 

Edited May 3, 2015 by ComfySweater

[shantown]

And yes I think the newbies would've still been binned. Those in charge never got they weren't the problem. Look at how badly the Rachel-centric season 6 did.

Season 6 didn't fail because it was Rachel-centric. It failed because it was on at 9pm on Fridays, after two seasons of failing ratings. There was NOTHING they could have done to save the show at that point.

 

Maybe airing an hour of behind the scenes footage of the cast. That could have gotten higher ratings.

[camussie]

Does anyone think RIB would have kept the season 4 newbies around longer had Cory not passed away?

 

 

I think the question is would Fox have kept the split narrative if ratings reached the point they did even with Cory on the show?  Any I would place good money the answer to that is no.  The decision to go down to one narrative seemed to be an economic one more than anything.  One narrative meant less cast to pay and more importantly fewer sets to put up and strike.  

 

They got credited for all episodes which I assume means they got paid.

 

 

The newbies 1.0 were contracted for season 5 but only had a guaranteed 13 episodes.  That means they got credited for the entire season but their pay was based on the 13 episodes they were guaranteed to appear in   If they would have appeared in additional episodes they would have gotten paid some negotiated additional amount for those appearances.  If they didn't appear in all 13 episodes they still would have been paid for 13 episodes.  Those contracts were announced in June and Cory died in July.  As an FYI  soap operas have been doing this type of contract for decades but it is becoming more and more common on prime time shows.

 

That is also why I think even before Cory passed Fox were keeping the option to go down to one narrative open. After all if they were 100% sure they were going to do the split narrative for all of season 5 they newbies would have gotten more than 13 episode guarantees.  

 

My guess is that a once they told Matt he could leave in S5 Fox & RM decided the 100th would be the end of the school year as well as Mr Shue's goodbye with Finn taking over.  Fox also saw that as a natural inflection point in case they pulled the trigger to go down to one narrative which is why the newbies only got 13 episode guarantees (13 episodes would have taken them to 101 which was the last episode at McKinley in S5)

 

Then Cory died and their first instinct was to go with RM's original plan of having 2 narratives throughout season 5 which is why they told Matt their agreement for him to leave the show was rescinded (according to Matt as he said he was supposed to leave in S5 but "thing changed" and to me it was pretty obvious he was referring to Cory's death)

 

Then the ratings came for 502 and Fox decided to pull that trigger to go down to one narrative and Matt got the second half of season 5 off after all but had to come back for season 6.  

 

I think in season 4 when it got renewed for 5 and 6 they knew season 6 was their last Cory, originals, boring noobs or not.

 

I think when they signed they hoped it would have gone on longer with the newbies being the one to carry the mantle forward but they were quickly disabused of that notion once season 5 starting airing.  While I am sure Cory's passing added to ratings downfall, to say the least, I think the show was headed to that "come to Jesus" moment in season 5 one way or another.  As I said above that die was cast as soon as they split the narrative or if I am being generous as soon as they extended the school year.

 

Those in charge never got they weren't the problem. Look at how badly the Rachel-centric season 6 did.

 

The newbies themselves weren't the  problem.  Trying to be both Friday Night Lights and 90201 was.  For that matter if they tried to only be  Friday Night Lights starting in season 4 that would have been a problem too.  Whether people like it or not, by season 2 Glee had de facto decided it was 90210 (the kids, not the location, were the center of the narrative)  so the only logical way forward in season 4 was to follow some of the kids in their post high school lives.  By the time they finally decided to do that in the second half of S5 it was too late.  Ratings were a point of no return.  Originals, newbies, etc couldn't keep the show out of  free fall.  If they had done that at the beginning of S4, while I think the show would have still ended in S6, I don't think it would have ended  as low ratings wise. 

 

Added to all of that was just bad writing no matter the location or "group" being written for.  

Edited May 4, 2015 by camussie

[caracas1914]

The newbies themselves weren't the problem

 

Disagree.  

 

They were PART of the problem.   Of course shitty writers who didn't give a fuck were the main culprit, but the Noobs unfortunately for whatever reasons never clicked, other than with the ass licking tweeners of the Glee forum.

[AndySmith]

The problem with Newbies 1.0 was the way they were written. The cast themselves were talented enough, they just weren't used well because the writers were lazy.

 

We should have gotten the transitioning story with Unique. Ryder or Jake could have been the gay football player. Have Kitty be the cheerleader who is hiding the fact that her mom works at the cafeteria. Or, if keeping Marley with that scenario, have her bulimia be her subconsciously not wanting to end up like her mom. It's not the best idea, but it's better than Kitty tricking her into believing she is gaining weight. If you're going to have a love triangle, don't make it an all newbie triangle. make it one with the older kids to help the newbies integrate. Sam/Marley/Ryder. Or Sam/Marley/Jake. Or Sam/Kitty/Jake. Or Tina/Jake/Kitty. Or Tina/Ryder/Sugar. Whatever. I'm not a fan of triangles on this show, but make it a more interesting one, at least.

 

The newbies were a part of the problem in the sense that they got shafted by boring, lazy writing. The split narrative, not knowing what to do with characters like Will, Finn, etc, was all part of the problem. But if there was any one thing that should get the lion's share of the blame, I feel it should be the writers/producers/show runners.

Edited May 3, 2015 by AndySmith

[caracas1914]

The newbies were a part of the problem in the sense that they got shafted by boring, lazy writing.

 

Without the benefit of having audience goodwill and familiarity that the Originals enjoyed.

[ComfySweater]

You get credited you get paid. Try sticking Clooney or Spader in your student film credits and see how well not paying either of them goes.  You put the name in the credits you pay the bill. They paid those kids for every episode they credited them.

Edited May 3, 2015 by ComfySweater

[camussie]

Credited/contracted for the entire season is not the same thing as having pay based on appearing in all 22 episodes.  Many people in episodic TV have contracts for the entire season based on a guarantee.  What the contract basically says is we are paying you for the whole season but that pay is based on the guarantee you will only be in X many episodes.  If you are in more than X many episodes we will pay you X dollars for each additional episode you appear in.  I would guess Amber, Mark, Harry, and Naya had that type of contract in season 4.  The newbies had that type of contract in S5 and it seems that everyone but Lea may have had that type of contract this season as she was the only contracted actor to appear in all 13 episodes.  

 

Also, as I said above that type of contract is hardly new to the business.  It has been the way soaps have been run for decades. There was a big uproar when they started cutting very tenured actors guarantee due to the slashing of soap budgets.  

 

The problem with Newbies 1.0 was the way they were written. The cast themselves were talented enough, they just weren't used well because the writers were lazy.

 

 

The newbies were destined to fail before any of them were cast because Glee had moved away from the choir room being the heart of the show as far back as season 2.  Better writing might have made the newbies intro smoother but it was never going to work because Glee had spent seasons 2 and 3 on the kids being the heart of the show.  I think suddenly trying to morph at least half of the show into Degrassi along with general bad writing is the main reason they didn't click.  

Edited May 4, 2015 by camussie

[ComfySweater]

Look at the extreme mess that played out in public of Parenthood. They did fewer than the total number of episodes thing there, and the names did not appear in the credits in the episodes they did not get paid for. You get a credit you get paid. It's not hard to do that math. Those cute kids got cash money every single episode their name was in no matter if they showed up or not. It's how it works. If it was otherwise their name would not be in the credits.

[jaytee1812]

Look at the extreme mess that played out in public of Parenthood. They did fewer than the total number of episodes thing there, and the names did not appear in the credits in the episodes they did not get paid for. You get a credit you get paid. It's not hard to do that math. Those cute kids got cash money every single episode their name was in no matter if they showed up or not. It's how it works. If it was otherwise their name would not be in the credits.

That's what I thought. Not just with Glee, but with as an industry wide thing. Because if it wasn't that, why were all four newbies and Alex Newell credited on every season five episode. The only reason they would do that is if they were contractually obliged, which would suggest they were getting paid.

Edited May 3, 2015 by jaytee1812

[camussie]

Once again they were contracted for the entire season (thus their name was in the credits for the entire season) but their pay for that season was based on a guarantee of only 13 episodes.  Much like Harry, Naya, Amber, and Mark were all credited in every episode in season 4 but their pay was almost assuredly not the same as when they appeared in every episode in season 3.  The biggest difference between those amounts?  Their guarantee.  If any of the people mentioned would have worked over their guarantee they would have gotten some additional amount for each episode they appeared in which is a pretty standard TV contract

 

Generally what a contract like that does is it allows the show to have first dibs on an their actor's schedule (especially actors who don't have a lot of bargaining power) and in turn it gives the actor's guaranteed income even if the show decides to not use them for their contracted minimum episodes.  In season 4 it seems only Dianna said nope I want flexibility over a guaranteed income which is why she was a guest star and not a contracted actor.  

 

Taking it back to the newbies.  If they had not jettisoned McKinley after 513 they would have been paid above their contracted amount because they they contract was based on appearing in only 13 episodes.  On the other hand, if they had jettisoned McKinley before 513 they still would have been paid their entire contracted amount and still been credited for the entire season.

 

A crude real world analogy is some school districts having contracts that spread out teacher's pay over 12 months even though they aren't teaching for a couple of months during the summer.

Edited May 4, 2015 by camussie

[jaytee1812]

How can you know exactly what their contracts said? And why would they be credited and not paid? How do you know they all had the same contract?

[camussie]

When the announcement was made back in June 2013 I remember it was specifically mentioned in an interview ( I think by Alex) they got 13 episodes.  It stuck with me because I thought at the time well that is interesting coming on the heals of the a two year renewal after RM and team extended the school year.  I thought for sure, given those two things, the newbies would have gotten a full season guarantee or close to it.  The 13 episodes immediately made me think someone at Fox is hedging their bets.  

 

Also they were credited because they were still under contract for that season.  As myself and others have pointed out they wouldn't have been credited if they weren't under contract.  Assuming the newbies had much less negotiating power than Fox ( a safe assumption IMO) had Fox wanted to go back to McKinley at some point in those last 7 episodes of season 5 those 5 actors would probably have had to come a running.   The upside for them, had that happened, would have been additional income for each additional episode they appeared in. That is if we go by what Alex? said in an interview about 13 episodes.

Edited May 3, 2015 by camussie

[tom87]

I still believe Ryan whole they gave the  cast a choice if they wanted to stay or not was really they gave some of them they found were expendable a choice between limited regular or guest star.    Dianna and Jayma choose guest star.    Amber, Mark and Harry choose limited regular, which is why they used them even if they didn't have anything much for them to really do. 

 

Anyway it would be horrible business sense to pay them all for a guaranteed 22 episode contract if they used them or not.    You are talking millions of dollars. 

[caracas1914]

Much like Harry, Naya, Amber, and Mark were all credited in every episode in season 4 but their pay was almost assuredly not the same as when they appeared in every episode in season 3.

 

This.

 

What the fuck. 

 

Are people seriously suggesting that FOX would pay Amber and Mark for all 22 episodes of Season 4  whey appeared in only 6-8?

 

Anyway it would be horrible business sense to pay them all for a guaranteed 22 episode contract if they used them or not.    You are talking millions of dollars.

 

Exactly. 

Edited May 4, 2015 by caracas1914

[ComfySweater]

Are people seriously suggesting that FOX would pay Amber and Mark for all 22 episodes of Season 4  whey appeared in only 6-8?

Yes. That's what they had to do to have them on call every single episode. Also, millions, LOL. Look up standard rates. Amber and Mark are chump change. One Cheetos commercial and they're paid everything their contract requires. These kids got screwed multiple ways, but no way no how were they expensive to the network.

[AndySmith]

I'd go with caracas1914, it makes more sense. Plus, it depends on how well of a "pay-or-play" Amber, Mark, the Newbies, or anyone else had.

 

Research on the internet seems to suggest people get paid whether or not they appear in the episode, regardless of being credited for it.

 

Also, millions, LOL.

 

One actor, no. But, if you add up all the actors and all the episodes, yeah, it can be a bit of change, especially factoring in the standard rising cost of a TV show, coupled with declining ratings, I'm guessing FOX and the show would want to cut costs any which way they could.

[tom87]

I am  pretty sure the fact that they say how much an actor gets paid per episode instead of per season suggest just that.

 

If you are an salaried person they say how much you make per year. If you get paid per hour well a hourly sum.

 

 

One actor, no. But, if you add up all the actors and all the episodes, yeah, it can be a bit of change, especially factoring in the standard rising cost of a TV show, coupled with declining ratings, I'm guessing FOX and the show would want to cut costs any which way they could.

 

And yes thank you I was talking collectively paying 4 or 5 actors who only appeared in a few episodes for all 22 would result in millions paid for nothing.

 

But in reality if they did only use like Lea or Jane for a few episodes and promised them the whole 22 they would have paid out over a million for just one person.   Jane never did an entire 22 episodes.

Edited May 4, 2015 by tom87

[galax-arena]

Plenty of productions have able bodied people playing disabled characters.

I also have no problem with trans people played by CIS people.

I think that the comparisons to blackface are completely out of line - there is a history of minstrelsy there that can't be ignored - but IMO productions should make more of a good-faith effort to cast disabled actors in disabled roles, trans actors in trans roles, etc. No one's denying that abled and cis actors can perform competently, but the issue to me is giving more opportunities to marginalized voices. Someone like Felicity Huffman is always going to have more opportunities than someone like Laverne Cox. Obviously there's skin color to consider, but the trans issue is a significant factor as well. I'm glad that OITNB cast Laverne instead of finding a cis actress to play the part, because it's proven to be a breakout role for Laverne and she wouldn't have had as many opportunities to show her stuff otherwise. 

 

I liked that The Fosters went out of their way to look for a transgender teenager to play the part of Cole. So many people belonging to various minority groups are discouraged from the entertainment business because they figure that there's nothing out there for them. I'm Asian and I knew a lot of aspiring Asian actors who felt that way.

[ComfySweater]

The point I was making is that the people they kept around for an extra season were unlikely getting much more than minimums.  The people who cost decent cash were being kept anyway. Harry Shum and Amber Riley, amazing though they are in their ways, were chump change compared to how often that crazy show went into overtime and had to pay double to every last anybody on set including the extras.  I'm sure they enjoyed the paychecks, but it didn't break any banks compared to what they not so kindly called Fraturday.