On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 5:34 PM, Kevin M. <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 10:20 AM, Jason Carpio <[email protected]> wrote: >> I tried to evangelize the awesomeness of this show when it was on the air. >> i wonder if this show would of lasted longer on a cable network. > > The show would have lasted longer on a network that hadn't devoted > itself to lowbar programing like "Deal or No Deal" and "Fear Factor." > It was just too jarring for viewers to transition from a show with the > basic premise of "pick a number" to an hour-long drama about powers > and principalities (it is also why the Wheel/Jeopardy evening hour has > worked for decades while Hollywood Squares didn't -- the first > requires at least a few active brain cells while the second is just > mindnumbing tic-tac-toe). I think HBO or Showtime would have wanted > more sex and violence, whereas I liked the implied-but-not-seen sex > and violence of the series -- reminded me of the Lion-roaring MGM > Hollywood days. And basic cable would have moved the series to Canada > where -- with all due respect to my maple leaf lovin' friends -- it > would have looked Canadian. > > I agree with PGage that NBC deserves credit for putting on such an > ambitious show, but they also deserve the blame for lowering the > network's level of quality to the point that the series could not find > the audience it deserved.
I watched every episode when the series ran, usually on tape or on Hulu the week it aired. The series had a lot going for it but I don't believe the problem was that the audience was just too lowbrow for it. I liked the production values, the idea of using the biblical story as source material, and about half of the actors. Putting an ancient story into a modern situation stretched things a little too much for me. On the other hand, I liked the ability of the storytellers to integrate modern technology like cell phones, YouTube, and TMZ-type celebrity programming into their stories. The thing I think really hurt the series was the actor who played David. He just wasn't engaging enough to pull viewers to watch the show. My take is that the producers were more interested in getting a pretty boy to lead rather than a dynamic actor like Ian MacShane who played King Saul. It's possible that the story was written so that David would be overwhelmed and impassive the first season and the character would develop during the second season to become a ruler, but that failed by not having a second season. The question of whether the series would have thrived as a basic cable series is an interesting one. The budget would have been cut of course. If the integrity of the episode plots and the general level of acting would have been maintained the series might have worked. -- TV or Not TV .... The Smartest (TV) People! You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TV or Not TV" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en
