Of interviews and ratings and bad trackers!

[katikat]

There is a new interview with Eric Kripke over on TV Guide's web site. There's nothing really spoilery there - at least in my opinion - if you don't consider things like "lower budget for S4" spoilery, that is :)

There are some awesome things in the interview though... Quoting:

So in Season 4, (...) we'll be presenting it in our scruffy, angsty, Supernatural way, and we'll return to concentrating on the relationships and the characters. Does that basically mean the return to S1? No flashy gore, more low budget scare? *crosses fingers*

But if the fans overwhelmingly reject something, over and over and over, on every website, we tend to pay attention to that. Again, I want to stress, it never alters the core story and central mythology;... Awesome. I just hope that they did apply it to one chick by the name Bela Talbot and they will kick her butt out of the show *nods*

---

Ratings for Monday...
Gossip Girl: last week (repeat) 1.29 mil.; this week (new) 2.44 mil.
One Tree Hill: last week (new) 2.72 mil.; this week (new) 2.82 mil.
Bones: last week (new) 8.54 mil.; this week (new) 8.64 mil.
House: last week (nothing); this week (repeat) 8.04 mil.

Ouch for GoGi. I mean, all that money thrown into soft porn ads, fans miffed for them taking their show from down from streaming on their site... and for nothing. These ratings are horrible. And even after such a huge campaign, they're almost the same like the last airing's on Jan 9th - 2.34 mil. viewers...

ETA: This is ridiculous...

According to Marc Berman from The Programming Insider, the CW's spin on GoGi's ratings is: The return of Gossip Girl, paired with original episodes of One Tree Hill to create our new night of drama, gave us our best Monday EVER in adults 18-34 (2.0/6) and women 18-34 (3.0/8)... From 8-10, The CW was second in women 18-34 (3.0/8) and first in female teens (3.0/9).

Do they even realize how ludicrous they sound? "Yeah, nobody actually watched us but we had the most teenage viewers!" O.o I'm not slanting the show itself, just the spin on the ratings they give it. Come on, this is the least watched full hour show on the CW and they still present it like a hit!

ETA2: And if you want to read a hymn on GoGi take a look at this: The Genius of Gossip Girl. I wonder how much the CW paid for that article...

---

Lately, I've been having tough time downloading stuff. Some of the downloads from eztv don't work for me at all. And I can't download anything from a.scarywater, the main torrent site for anime. It tells me "10060; Operation timed out". I went looking for what that means and the web sites told me that basically, the tracker is busy and it kicked me out. Great. So, I have no way to download anime at all now because only Shinsen, aarinfantasy and some smaller subbers don't use this site *sigh*

Comments

[jamesinboots.livejournal.com]

If they get less money, one more regular could prove to be way too much.

Regular actors (and producers! and writers!) contracts aren't included in the per-episode budget, only guest stars and extras are. It's one of the (delightfully sneaky!) advantages of hiring regulars! :D Cassidy is a recurring regular - if they took away her regular status, not only would they run into the problem of not having her whenever they want her, they'd have to include her in the episode budget.

Apart from that, actors are very cheap. Numerous times, I've seen producers talk about how hiring people is always easier, 'cause they're the cheapest part of an episode (one CW producer was even quoted as saying ALL the guest stars in any given episode of his totaled a mere $25,000 - in an episode budget of nearly $2 million, that's hardly a thing ...).

[katikat.livejournal.com]

Yup, in ep-to-ep budget maybe but they cut their seasonal budget. So that means less money overall. But as long as I get lotsa Sam and Dean and schmoopy brotherly love, I will be happy :)

[jamesinboots.livejournal.com]

The budget they're speaking of is the episode budget. :) Part of the reason it goes down every year is to offset the way all the contracts rise - the expensive people are the producers, and their contracts rise exponentially every year. There's no way around this - The CW can't lessen the amount they receive until their contracts are up (typically 7 years), so there's no such thing as a budget cut there. Contracts aren't included in the budget at all - partly because that's handled through the production company, Warner Brothers Television, who also takes part (if not all) of the burden of the contracts financially. (See! Sneaky!)