People in charge (supposedly)

[Hana Chan]

A lot of what we're talking about is supposition because there have been no official statements from anyone at this point. We don't know how many episodes of Glee will be aired for this season, when those episodes may start airing, or when Glee will actually start production. The actors themselves seem to be in the dark as much as anyone else (going by their tweets and interviews as of late). The only thing that we know for certain is the statement from FOX that Glee would not be in the fall line up and would be airing as a mid-season replacement.

[camussie]

I think it is telling the actors have no idea yet when they are returning for production.  Last year by this time they had already done the season 5 publicity shoot (I doubt there is one this year) and knew that Sunday July 14 was some behind the scenes video shoots knew that full production began on July 29 (which was then delayed to August 5 due to Cory's passing).  That the production calendar still seems to be unknown to the actors tells me that there is a delay in the start date.  Not a huge deal since the show is not coming back until sometime in 2015 but still telling.

Edited July 3, 2014 by camussie

[heyerchick]

And now, after Chris's tweet, Glee is losing one of its most popular cast members and characters. 

[indeed]

CC's account was supposedly hacked. So, denials going around about that to quell the "panic".

Someone else tweeted that Kevin said they might not be starting until late July/early August.

I only wish that any delay was because they were actually giving more time and consideration to breaking down and writing the scripts. Ha.

[bravelittletoaster]

Kind of bummed it was fake.  That's the most interesting this clusterfuck known as Glee has been to me since Brittany and Santana briefly made up and made out.

[tom87]

The behind the scenes drama and screw ups are way more entertaining than this show sometimes. 

Has been since seasons 2.

[heyerchick]

And now Lea is either preggers or had her twitter hacked too ;) It's not the Glee cast's week.

[tab19]

Yes, she was hacked. As we knew.

http://www.mtv.com/news/1861314/is-lea-michele-pregnant/

 

But more entertaining to me are the final lines of the article:

"This makes two “Glee” cast hacks in just two days! Who is hacking them, and more importantly, why?"

 

Which I read as, "Why would anyone bother to hack the Glee cast?"  Oh, Glee...

Edited July 4, 2014 by tab19

[tom87]

Yeah so if a 3rd cast member gets hacked tomorrow are we going to call it a stunt to get more viewers for the last season? Or is someone behind the scenes really angry at them?

Sorry but why 7 months before it is to airs again and why in the world would Lea ok this when she is currently getting hate just for dating again?

[bravelittletoaster]

Nah, I think they were just hacked.  Dianna was once too. People are just dumb with their passwords.

 

I'm sure the prevailing reaction to anyone who saw the Colfer tweet was, "That show is still on?"  I don't think anyone's trying to drum up interest in a DOA show that's not going to air until 2015 anyhow.  

[coolbeans3131]

Ha. I was just being sarcastic and making a joke. Hence, why I added the someone behind the scenes must be really angry. I was just trying to be funny, I guess it doesn't always translate on computer screens. But yeah.. according to Lea's tweet unless it was a joke,their passwords were their cats name which is kind of stupid if thats true. 

I'm sure Lea was joking as well. She and Chris have talked about their cats by name many, many times. There is no way they are that stupid.

[tom87]

Ha. I was just being sarcastic and making a joke. Hence, why I added the someone behind the scenes must be really angry. I was just trying to be funny, I guess it doesn't always translate on computer screens. But yeah.. according to Lea's tweet unless it was a joke,their passwords were their cats name which is kind of stupid if thats true. 

She was  joking without a doubt.

[tom87]

Glee actually got one Emmy nomination for Paris Barcaly for 100.   Not sure what was special about the directing in that.

[bravelittletoaster]

Not sure either but I was happy for a candidate with 0 chance to win because it ups Orange's odds in that category.  Ha.

[jjjmoss]

Modern Family is probably the main competition. 3x reigning winner in that category, and less debated as to whether it's actually a comedy.

[tom87]

Modern Family has already won 3 too many.

Edited July 12, 2014 by tom87

[Demian]

"Barclay."  Also, it's definitely going to Jodie Foster for Orange Is The New Black because she's Jodie Foster, so don't even start with this "Modern Family" bullshit.

Edited July 12, 2014 by Demian

[cycworker]

"Barclay."  Also, it's definitely going to Jodie Foster for Orange Is The New Black because she's Jodie Foster, so don't even start with this "Modern Family" bullshit.

 

This.

 

As current sitcoms go, I don't mind Modern Family, but it isn't this incredibly brilliant show that people make it out to be. Jodie Foster is a shoo in.

[caracas1914]

As current sitcoms go, I don't mind Modern Family, but it isn't this incredibly brilliant show that people make it out to be.

 

True, however it and Glee came out at the same time, both were awards fodder shows, (ie both had double digit Emmy nominations, Glee beat out MF for the Golden Globes, etc, ).  After five years even with a  natural decline in ratings from its peak,  MF remains strong with nominations/awards cred, has relatively healthy  ratings, and it's core audience has remained faithful because IMO  the show runners deliver what the GA expects  from the show.  The show should generate decent enough ratings and good $$$ for 2 to 3 more years at the least.

 

They are a template how to keep a show running after the initial buzz has died down, whereas Glee is the opposite, an ailing show limping to the finish line with no buzz, zero critical acclaim, burned off all goodwill,  an audience who abandoned it in droves, and something it's network renewed only because contractually forced to.

Edited July 13, 2014 by caracas1914

[Anna Yolei]

As far as renewal goes, FOX could've still canceled had the show bled out move viewers and/or ad revenue fell? I'm sure there had to be some drop off point where paying Murphy out of his concract would've cost less than producing another season.

[bravelittletoaster]

I think the bigger problem was FOX had zero prospects to fill its space. They are on life support right now. You know they got, like 19 Emmy nods? Netflix got 31 in its second year of eligibility. Meanwhile all the good properties of 20th century are on FX. But I guess the two networks are run completely independently even though they're owned by the same entity? Otherwise I don't know why they don't put the better product on the network with more potential viewers... (Tho I imagine FOX not broadcasting at 10 pm EST is an issue. That's where most of their TV MA dramas would have to go due to "safe harbor."

Long story short, the fact that Glee is on the most floundery of networks has definitely given it life support it didn't deserve.

Edited July 13, 2014 by bravelittletoaster

[Camera One]

True, however it and Glee came out at the same time, both were awards fodder shows, (ie both had double digit Emmy nominations, Glee beat out MF for the Golden Globes, etc,

 

I think Glee got those awards because it was fresh and it "brought back" the musical and it had a lot of buzz.  I didn't find the first season all that well written (the core story is just a bunch of tired tropes), though it was well produced with all the musical numbers and dance sequences.  All the characters were basically stock, and have stayed that way, which could be one of the reasons why the series couldn't sustain itself, no matter who the show focused on.  I don't even feel I have a favorite character on this show.

 

Though I also don't find "Modern Family" that funny.  There hasn't been a non-laugh-track comedy in the last few years which has given me actual consistent laughs.  

Edited July 13, 2014 by Camera One

[bravelittletoaster]

I feel like when I watch a show with a laugh track I can actually feel my brain cells dying. So I basically just avoid CBS.

[caracas1914]

I think Glee got those awards because it was fresh and it "brought back" the musical and it had a lot of buzz.  I didn't find the first season all that well written (the core story is just a bunch of tired tropes), though it was well produced with all the musical numbers and dance sequences.  All the characters were basically stock, and have stayed that way, which could be one of the reasons why the series couldn't sustain itself, no matter who the show focused on

 

Well obviously the problems with some of  the writing that were there from the getgo never went away.  However, where I disagree is the assumption that Glee was bound to fail once the "novelty" of the musical genre wore off or that the stock characters were doomed to repeat the same story lines

 

Kurt as the outcast gay kid, Rachel as the overachieving wannabee star, Finn as the ambivalent QB, Santana as the bitchy cheerleader,  there were interesting spins the actor brought to those characters.

 

I think the bigger problem is the one that Brad inadvertently brought out in one of his interviews, that these are showrunners who have difficulty maintaining focus and freshness past the initial start of a series.  "Popular" suffered from this, as did "Nip/Tuck", "Near Normal" and even "American Horror Story" which has the format advantage of being an anthology series with a finite SL end  seems to run out of gas by the end  of each season, leaving a narrative mess in it's wake.  None of those were in the musical genre so one can't lay the blame on the novelty of characters/trope for the diminishing returns of those shows.

Edited July 14, 2014 by caracas1914

[Camera One]

owever, where I disagree is the assumption that Glee was bound to fail once the "novelty" of the musical genre wore off or that the stock characters were doomed to repeat the same story lines.

Kurt as the outcast gay kid, Rachel as the overachieving wannabee star, Finn as the ambivalent QB, Santana as the bitchy cheerleader,  there were interesting spins the actor brought to those characters.

 

I don't think it was "doomed" to fail either, and I definitely agree that there were many other avenues they could have (and should have) taken the storylines instead of repeating the same plotlines even by Season 2.  

 

Unfortunately, I personally didn't feel that invested in the characters or found them interesting enough.  Of course, I kept watching but I couldn't say I felt strongly either way when these characters were sidelined.

Edited July 14, 2014 by Camera One

[jaytee1812]

Well obviously the problems with some of  the writing that were there from the getgo never went away.  However, where I disagree is the assumption that Glee was bound to fail once the "novelty" of the musical genre wore off or that the stock characters were doomed to repeat the same story lines

 

Kurt as the outcast gay kid, Rachel as the overachieving wannabee star, Finn as the ambivalent QB, Santana as the bitchy cheerleader,  there were interesting spins the actor brought to those characters.

 

I think the bigger problem is the one that Brad inadvertently brought out in one of his interviews, that these are showrunners who have difficulty maintaining focus and freshness past the initial start of a series.  "Popular" suffered from this, as did "Nip/Tuck", "Near Normal" and even "American Horror Story" which has the format advantage of being an anthology series with a finite SL end  seems to run out of gas by the end  of each season, leaving a narrative mess in it's wake.  None of those were in the musical genre so one can't lay the blame on the novelty of characters/trope for the diminishing returns of those shows.

I don't think Glee was bound to fail. With a team of decent writers I think it could've gone on for far longer, and been of a far higher quality. 

 

At the start Glee seemed to say 'here are a bunch of stereotypes but we're gonna show that they not just that'. But after season 1 that seemed to fall away and the characters were nothing more than a bunch of stereotypes. No-one became anything that you wouldn't expect from those initial stereotypes, or even had any storyline that broke the mould of their character even a little bit. 

[caracas1914]

Unfortunately, I personally didn't feel that invested in the characters or found them interesting enough.

 

Fair enough, and that goes back to the writing that  failed to continue to develop these characters and build upon what they started in Season One.  I mean, for God's sake we had a " virginity" SL for one  original character, Mercedes, in frigging Season Five.  While that might have been interesting about a young adult who doesn't want to have sexual relations, but it came in the context of so many "virginity" SL's on Glee for  the last five years for all the other characters over and over and over.  Wash, rinse and repeat is these showrunners motto.

Edited July 14, 2014 by caracas1914

[Camera One]

And they even repeated the same storylines with their newbie characters, sometimes multiple times.  Plus, as you said, every time the old characters guest starred.  It practically requires a gift to do the same thing over and over again with realizing? they had done this a million times already and people were sick of it.

Edited July 14, 2014 by Camera One

[jaytee1812]

Fair enough, and that goes back to the writing that  failed to continue to develop these characters and build upon what they started in Season One.  I mean, for God's sake we had a " virginity" SL for one  original character, Mercedes, in frigging Season Five.  While that might have been interesting about a young adult who doesn't want to have sexual relations, but it came in the context of so many "virginity" SL's on Glee for  the last five years for all the other characters over and over and over.  Wash, rinse and repeat is these showrunners motto.

It wasn't just they had so many 'virginity' storylines, they were all the same. Boy wants sex, girl isn't sure, girl is also not sure if boy will stay if she doesn't have sex. It was a tired trope with Rachel in season 1, it was freakin exhausted by season 5. 

[camussie]

Really the only virginity storyline I felt was a fresh take on it all was Mercedes/Sam's in season 5.  That was actually some decent writing in that Mercedes' decision to wait wasn't accompanied by heavy handed preachiness.  Unfortunately it came after several seasons of botched virginity stories.  

[Camera One]

Glee writers definitely have no pride nor any skills. The cast is so talented and unfortunately are stuck with these hacks until the end. I mean its to the point that I wish some fellow (good writers) would have staged an intervention or kidnapped them (sure FOX wouldn't pay a ransom for them) until the series end.

Nothing they are projecting in the spoilers indicate that they have a clue of how to thoughtfully and or smartly bring this full circle.

For that I lay the blame on Ryan Murphy for being so insistent that the final season would take place primarily back in Lima. I'm sure many of those writers are pondering if they will list "Glee Writer" on their resume when its all wrapped and fades to black!

 

This got me curious about who wrote for Season 5 of "Glee".

 

There were a lot of different writers, which probably contributed to the inconsistent tone.

 

Ryan Murphy

Brad Falchuk

Ian Brennan

 

Russel Friend & Garrett Lerner

Michael Hitchcock

Roberto Aguirre-Sacasa

Matthew Hodgson

 

Ross Maxwell

Ned Martel

Rivka Sophia Rossi

Jessica Meyer

Chris Colfer

 

The first group of writers wrote the more "important" episodes.  The second group only wrote two episodes each... one in the first half of the season and one in the second half of the season.  The third group each penned one episode each.

 

Of the first group, Ian Brennan hardly has any writing credits apart from "Glee".  Brad Falchuk has won writing awards for "American Horror Story", though that could mean he knows how to write suspenseful who-will-die-next horror, but not necessary how to write everyday life, which is what "Glee" would require if it was actually a character-based story.

[ExplainItAgain]

A few months back I looked up who wrote some of my favorite episodes. Ryan wrote a lot of them, so I tend to prefer his writing. To me, it's no coincidence that when he stopped writing every third or fourth episode (about mid-season 3), things started to decline a bit. In my opinion, Ryan wrote the two best episodes of season 4 ("The New Rachel" and "The Break Up") and one of the only great episodes in season 5 ("New New York" - "The Quarterback" notwithstanding).

 

So my own conclusion is that, crazy as Ryan is, him stepping away from glee started it on a downward spiral. He obviously has great ideas for shows but can't maintain the interest or enthusiasm. 

[camussie]

There is a difference between being able to write a good episode here and there and between able to run a show over the long term.  RM is a good concept guy, which means some good to great writing one-offs and some really good show ideas, but it simply isn't in his skill set to run a show over the long term.  He barely can do it for the 13 episode seasons of American Horror Story.  

 

I think Glee really started its downward spiral in the second half of season 1 and continue to slide throughout the years with it gaining a lot of downward momentum with the clumsiness of the split narrative.    I say the second half of season 1 because that is when the inability to follow through on longer arcs became obvious.  Neither Finn nor Will got decent writing from the fall out of the pregnancy lies.  For that matter neither did Puck, Quinn, or Terri.  This was just a harbinger or things to come for all stories

Edited August 28, 2014 by camussie

[caracas1914]

Don't forget Shelby. They made her one of the worst mothers in the history of TV episodic series. Still shaking my head how she lost interest in Rachel and wanted a shiny new baby.

[penpen]

Don't forget Shelby. They made her one of the worst mothers in the history of TV episodic series. Still shaking my head how she lost interest in Rachel and wanted a shiny new baby.

Well, Rachel did hate every dream she ever had coming to fruition, so I'd want a new one too.

[camussie]

Congratulations Lea you get to continue to get the blame for all the woes of glee.

 

 

Honestly I haven't seen this.  Some people blame the writing for Rachel but that isn't the same as blaming Lea herself  and even those blaming Rachel alone is a small subset.  I just don't get why some are trying to martyr her by saying she got a crappy deal out of this show.  I wholeheartedly agree she and the rest of the cast got shafted on song royalties and concert proceeds.  Other than that it has turned her into a known entity who has a foothold in Hollywood that she might not have had otherwise.  Same with the rest of the cast, so while it hasn't been all good, what this show brought to the cast is hardly something to martyr any of them over.

 

Meanwhile here who seems to get the actual blame by different people/groups of people

• If you go by what RM says it is all on Cory's passing.  It only took him about 3-4 months to start doing this and he hasn't stopped.  It is completely distasteful yet some fans buy into it.  
• It is pretty apparent the bigwigs at Fox blamed Kevin Reilly in that giving Glee that two year renewal has been cited one of the factors in his leaving the network
• Then there are those who swear it was all on the newbies
• Then there are those who blame it on trying to keep the original in the first place
• Meanwhile the logical among us realize the real culprit is on RM and team's inability to produce a coherent show over multiple seasons.  That issue started popping up after the first 13, became more obvious as the seasons wore on, and blew wide open after they tried to write two narratives.

 

I fully believe if they hadn't attempted dual narratives seasons, while 4-6 wouldn't have been quite as badly written, the show would not have been good by any means.  Even if they had followed the originals to New York, like I think they should have, I believe Glee would have ended after the 6th season no matter what.  Probably not at quite the rock bottom ratings it will end on but still not in a great place ratings wise.

 

Also, I believe no matter what the characters would have been dang near destroyed by the end of the show's run.  Nip/Tuck ran for exactly 6 seasons and the leads in that show were unrecognizable at the end of it.  And RM didn't need a split narrative or the death of a lead to do that.  It happened simply because of his inability to write and produce a multi-season show.  

Edited September 8, 2014 by camussie

[caracas1914]

God I forgot what a fucking train wreck Nip/Tuck was at the last few years of its run. The characters were all shits and not in an entertaining good way, like " Breaking Bad". It was euthanasia when that show ended.

[SevenStars]

God I forgot what a fucking train wreck Nip/Tuck was at the last few years of its run. The characters were all shits and not in an entertaining good way, like " Breaking Bad". It was euthanasia when that show ended.

I totally agree. I stopped watching two seasons before it was done and I don't regret that decision base on what I heard happened afterward. 

[tom87]

Honestly I haven't seen this.  Some people blame the writing for Rachel but that isn't the same as blaming Lea herself  and even those blaming Rachel alone is a small subset.  I just don't get why some are trying to martyr her by saying she got a crappy deal out of this show.  I wholeheartedly degree she and the rest of the cast got shafted on song royalties and concert proceeds.  Other than that it has turned her into a known entity who has a foothold in Hollywood that she might not have had otherwise.  Same with the rest of the cast, so while it hasn't been all good, what this show brought to the cast is hardly something to martyr any of them over.

 

Meanwhile here who seems to get the actual blame by different people/groups of people

• If you go by what RM says it is all on Cory's passing.  It only took him about 3-4 months to start doing this and he hasn't stopped.  It is completely distasteful yet some fans buy into it.  
• It is pretty apparent the bigwigs at Fox blamed Kevin Reilly in that giving Glee that two year renewal has been cited one of the factors in his leaving the network
• Then there are those who swear it was all on the newbies
• Then there are those who blame it on trying to keep the original in the first place
• Meanwhile the logical among us realize the real culprit is on RM and team's inability to produce a coherent show over multiple seasons.  That issue started popping up after the first 13, became more obvious as the seasons wore on, and blew wide open after they tried to write two narratives.

 

I fully believe if they hadn't attempted dual narratives seasons, while 4-6 wouldn't have been quite as badly written, the show would not have been good by any means.  Even if they had followed the originals to New York, like I think they should have, I believe Glee would have ended after the 6th season no matter what.  Probably not at quite the rock bottom ratings it will end on but still not in a great place ratings wise.

 

Also, I believe no matter what the characters would have been dang near destroyed by the end of the show's run.  Nip/Tuck ran for exactly 6 seasons and the leads in that show were unrecognizable at the end of it.  RM didn't need a split narrative or the death of a lead to do that either.  It happened simply because of his inability to write and produce a multi-season show.  

 

Never said everyone was blaming her but you may not see much but I have seen my fair share to the insane blaming her to Cory's death to sleeping with people to get her part, trying to get people fired, to favoritism for Lea, to contracted to get more songs, to ratings dropping, blamed for even still doing PR for the show.  etc...

 

The point wasn't  to say she should have more to be upset about the point was she gets  a lot of blame mainly cause some people perceive her getting more time is taking away from  others and that is misplaced but I see it often. 

 

I am not trying to make her martyr. I just think at times she doesn't get enough credit and more of the blame then she deserves.  I know that can come with the territory at times.   I never said she got a raw deal overall. I did mention the royalties for them but that was an over all question not just about Lea.   

 

Once the song spoilers came out so did the claws.

 

It was a bit of an exaggerate and hyperbole but I see that here a lot so i thought it would be ok.

Edited September 6, 2014 by tom87

[camussie]

Never said everyone you may not see much but I have seen my fair share to the insane blaming her to Cory's death to sleeping with people to get her part, trying to get people fired, to favoritism for Lea, to contracted to get more songs, to ratings dropping, blame for even still doing PR for the show.  etc...

 

 

Who on this site has blamed Lea for Cory's death or accused her of sleeping with people to get the part or trying to get people fired?  Or said she was contracted to get more songs?   

 

On this site people have reacted to the imbalance of song distribution in the first episode and have kept it to their issues with the writing for Rachel and the character of Rachel.  As far as  who is to blame for the antipathy some have toward the character of Rachel?  Again that gets back to RM and his team.  If people have issues with Rachel the vast majority of that is on RM's hack writing.  

 

Now there have been some criticisms of Lea's voice (as there has been of others) but even that has been tempered with most people acknowledging that the way she is produced on the show has sometimes been detrimental.  That since they view her as the "voice of a generation" Adam Anders and Ryan Murphy have encouraged her to belt songs even when it isn't appropriate for the tone of the scene.  

 

As far as Lea being the favorite why is this even controversial?  I think she is but I don't think it is unwarranted in that she carries a big workload on the show and almost always delivers.  What I thought was unwarranted was RM not giving his other leads (namely Cory and Chris) similar professional consideration throughout the years especially the media fiasco that was the summer after season 2.  

 

I am responding to the rest of your post in the Lea thread.

Edited September 6, 2014 by camussie

[tom87]

Who on this site has blamed Lea for Cory's death or accused her of sleeping with people to get the part or trying to get people fired?  Or said she was contracted to get more songs?

 

I never said or implied anyone here said those things.  

 

I mentioned it was exaggeration like some do here like saying Rachel  has had a million solos or even saying it is the Rachel Berry Show.

Edited September 6, 2014 by tom87

[camussie]

I mentioned it was exaggeration like some do here like saying Rachel  has had a million solos or even saying it is the Rachel Berry Show.

 

 

One is an exaggeration about a character.  The other is about the actress.  The first has happened on here.  The second not so much.  Lea and Rachel are simply not one in the same.  Equating the two, especially in a way that says that people who are hyperbolic about the number of songs Rachel gets are like those on who troll and harass Lea is wrong.  

 

In other words antipathy towards Rachel is not the same as not giving Lea enough credit for what she does on Glee or throwing shade on Lea. Lea plays Rachel but Lea is not Rachel.  If anything antipathy towards Rachel and spoilers for her season 6 story is on the people in charge, which is why I am discussing it in this thread.  

Edited September 6, 2014 by camussie

[tom87]

An exaggeration is an exaggeration.    I was just saying people exaggerate which is true.

 

In the end I think she gets a lot of heat and that comes off as not appreciative to me.  We see and read different things so that is all there really is to say I guess. 

Edited September 6, 2014 by tom87

[Hana Chan]

I'm taking my answer to the Lea thread since it's more appropriate there.

[Myrna123]

n the end I think she gets a lot of heat and that comes off as not appreciative to me.

This is essentially the opinion of every single viewer of every single television show who has ever been moved by their preference of a particular character to post a comment on any and every online forum ever in existence. Duly noted and all, though, that Lea Michele is the one you feel that way about.

[caracas1914]

I realize Ryan and company will do fine after Glee since they still have "American Horror Story" running but I do think their reputations as showrunners par excellence took a huge hit with how they let Glee self destruct on their watch. They had a huge cash cow that dried up due to their ineptitude and hubris.

[SevenStars]

I realize Ryan and company will do fine after Glee since they still have "American Horror Story" running but I do think their reputations as showrunners par excellence took a huge hit with how they let Glee self destruct on their watch. They had a huge cash cow that dried up due to their ineptitude and hubris.

 

I don't think it did because Fox gave them a two year contract on a dying show. That tells me that despite how badly they destroyed Glee, it didn't impact them much career wise. It didn't have an impact because those in the industry sees that they are still able to attract fans to a show they created, no matter how badly they have destroy previous shows. They just know not to expect RM to have good long running shows. If they were smart, they would have him create the shows and after one season, fire him or have a deal with him that would allow them to get another showrunner who would be able to sustain the success of his creation. 

[caracas1914]

The two year contract occurred because of perfect timing; the numbers for season 4 had slipped but not completely and no way in hell did anyone anticipate that season 5 ending numbers would make Glee the lowest rated show to not be axed, with even the CW besting it.

Most industry pundits in the media opined that the 2 year renewal was a major blunder by FOX's Reilly and could have been one of the factors that led to his being let go.

If this years numbers are just as bad a 13 episode commitment for a throwaway rating disaster will be a heavy write off by FOX. I doubt even FOX won't blink if they lose millions on this.

I'm not saying that if Ryan gets another great idea for a series he won't get backing but I think the perception that his team isn't great in sustaining an episodic series is there. Doubt he will get carte Blanche like he did with Glee spending money hand over foot on a whim.

Edited September 6, 2014 by caracas1914

[SevenStars]

I'm not saying that if Ryan gets another great idea for a series he won't get backing but I think the perception that his team isn't great in sustaining an episodic series is there. Doubt he will get carte Blanche like he did with Glee spending money hand over foot on a whim.

I think this perception had been there before S5 fall because I remember reading an interview with RM at the end of S3, where the interviewer questioned him about the industries perception of him being a great series creator but being unable to sustain the success of his shows. And RM answered saying that everyone have their own opinion and he disagree with that perception. So to me, that means that this is something the industry assume/knew about long before Glee fall like it did.

[ThatThingYouDo]

Yeah, it was a perception before Glee. Nip/Tuck survivors know how bad this could get before they're done. That's why it was such a clear error when they gave a two season pickup. They knew there was a decent shot it'd take a nosedive off a cliff while Ryan kept screaming to the bitter end about his misunderstood genius. There has to be a story behind that other than just timing.