Welcome to another Question of the Day. Today's one comes from Tatyana who asks
"Which TV Show is on a misplaced Network?
Cancelled or present: Do you think ""V"" should be on SyFy or Supernatural should be on anythink else rather than CW? Maybe ""Dollhouse"" would have been treated better on cable?"
Great question, and good choice about Dollhouse, that certainly would have fitted better I think on Syfy. The problem with a show like Dollhouse is that it's not cheap to make. This sort of limits it to the major networks imho.
However I would love to see a lot of my favourite shows, Fringe, V, FlashForward etc to have been on a more understanding network.
Not many Sci-Fi shows work anymore on TV and I would love to have a channel dedicated to just Sci-FI like the Syfy channel. What an awesome line up of shows you could have on an evening. Supernatural, followed by Fringe followed by V. That would be cool :)
So what about you? Which show(s) do you feel are misplaced?
Supernatural should be on an HBO or Showtime. Would allow them to do more I think.
ReplyDeleteFringe would be good on SyFy.
Besides if the show was on HBO or Showtime we'd get more shirtless scenes and more gore!
ReplyDeleteSupernatural - maybe another network would appreciate the show and fans more. It could be so great with a bit more of promotion.
ReplyDeleteMedium should have been on a different channel. It wouldn't have been cancelled because of the ratings if that was the case
ReplyDeleteAll Whedon shows should be on cable. Dollhouse probably would have lived longer and Joss could have done what he wanted to do with it from the beginning (his own Pilot, not as much introduction in the beginning, etc.).
ReplyDeleteFor misplaced shows I would vote that V definitely should have been a Syfy or even TNT series- it would draw good numbers and rule its cable night. I think Falling Skies will rule the summer on TNT.
ReplyDeleteBut HBO and Showtime only have quality shows, sorry ;)
ReplyDeleteChuck should be on ABC or Fox
ReplyDeleteWell it WAS on a different network before CBS, remember? :P
ReplyDeleteChuck would be a great fit on Fox or ABC, among other fantastic program, unlike NBC (whose only good drama is Law & Order: SVU).
ReplyDeleteaha... I know but they shouldn't have dropped it either!
ReplyDeleteSurface would have been good on Syfy, Pushing Daises also. The ghost whisperer should have been banned from TV.. or on Lifetime. Better off Ted might have had a better chance on NBC. Studio 60 to ABC. The Good Guys to USA....
ReplyDeleteI agree with "Chuck" on Fox. Paired with "Human Target", another show from WB and the same production house. A spy night with drama and comedy would make an awesome pairing for Fridays.
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure if Chuck would have made it this far had it been on Fox- the network has a history of canceling great shows.
ReplyDeleteFrom the top of my head I have to say "Kings". That's a show that should have been on cable. Really great show, interesting concept, amazing cast and NBC, this network apparently run by monkeys throwing feces at each other, cancelled it... Still pissed about that and it's a pity it wasn't saved like Southland.
ReplyDeleteYeah, because 'True Blood' is of Shakespeare quality. Lol
ReplyDeleteFOX have been good to fringe. Relatively.
ReplyDeleteThat would be so great! :D Ben Edlund could do even crazier episodes than now.
ReplyDeleteI could definitely see Californication and True Blood on CBS, that would be something. But seriously :
ReplyDeleteThe Good Wife (CBS) : NBC.
Lie to Me (FOX) : CBS.
Nikita (CW) : FOX (this show doesn't have the CW vibe).
Chuck (NBC) : FOX (a Chuck/Human Target combo, I could have seen that happening).
Late Late Show with Craig Ferguson (CBS) : FX (or HBO, but it just wouldn't be the same without CBS).
Episodes would fit on HBO, because of the subject of the show and because of Showtime only producing dramedies on the 30 minutes format (Californication, The Big C, Tara... all have comedic aspects but there's a fine balance with drama), except Episodes, which is a pure comedy from start to finish (and a good one).
Fringe is just fine on FOX, they have a lot of room for stories and a lot of money (Fringe has some of the best CGI out there). I could never conceive to see it on SyFy, because SyFy is garbage... their 18-20 episode seasons spreaded on almost 2 and a half years, that's just stupid, especially when these shows don't have any budget and any narrative value (SyFy completely lost me when they cancelled Caprica, their only smart show left, and they don't seem to be doing anything to produce new outside the box shows). But I could defintely see V on SyFy though...
Maybe they should make a new network because Fringe would be too sci-fi for Syfy. All they got left are fantasty and sci-fi light shows. I don't think Fringe would be a good fit for the current Syfy.
ReplyDeleteTrue Blood is still good. Way many leagues over Supernatural at least, even TB on it`s worst aint that bad as Supernatural.
ReplyDeleteTrue Blood and Californication cant be on a channel like CBS. That would kill the shows, sex and naked people is a main thing on these shows, they need it for the shows to work.
ReplyDeleteEven though it has many soap-like aspects, I still consider True Blood a quality show. And no offense to Supernatural, a show I don't care about one way or another, but it definitely isn't cable material.
ReplyDeleteI think that V would do much better on SyFy. Really right now I would follow it anywhere because I just don't want it to be canceled.
ReplyDeleteFinally someone agrees. Supernatural can never be on HBO, its no quality in a show like that. It`s just medicore or bad all the time. There`s to many Supernatural-fangirls on this site...
ReplyDeleteI disagree. NBC is the only channel that can afford to keep producing a show with such low ratings. I love Chuck, but it probably would have been canceled with these ratings on any other network after its first or second season.
ReplyDeleteTwas sarcasm :P.
ReplyDeleteI loved 'Surface'!
ReplyDeleteYou've got a good point here. SyFy isn't really airing a lot of classic Sci-Fi shows anymore. I remember even reading something about a cooking show on SyFy... Seriously??
ReplyDeleteyea.. seriously.. it's supposed to be some cutting edge gastro biological making tasty magic from chemical reactions or something.. i dunno... haven't watched it but it sounds more like a trumped up chef trying to please eccentric rich people
ReplyDeleteI dream of a cable geek network and my favorite night would be Friday with Fringe, Supernatural and The Walking Dead. :D
ReplyDeleteme too! i thought it had a lot of potential stories to tell and decent CGI for the time. A creature show with a heart but also government conspiracy.. oh and Lake Bell being so hot also helped.
ReplyDeleteThat's completely subjective...You like TB,I was bored of it after the first six episodes of season 1 and I still love Supernatural after 6 seasons.
ReplyDeleteYou can't really say that one is better than the other,cause it's just a matter of personal opinion...
I still think firefly would have lasted for at least 5 seasons it it had been on sci fi.... the old sci fi!
ReplyDeleteNikita is too good for the CW!
ReplyDeleteany show that's good and is on fox..
ReplyDeleteThe Good Wife should be on AMC, paired up with Mad Men or something similar.
ReplyDeleteno reason to argue with these TB lovers. Their way of looking at things is that everybody watching Supernatural are crazy fangirls drooling at Jared and Jensen and the all so "wonderful" True Blood full of vampire rape, hick languages and constant sex is such a piece of art, rather than you know..piece of ****
ReplyDeleteSo for one, I don't like TB and have nothing against the show as long as some dumbass won't start praising his/her's favorite show thru bashing somebody else's favorite show.
Keep your invalid oppinion to yourself Steffen Linus
Honestly, be glad SPN is on CW. I don't think any other channel would hav ekept it on as long as it's been on. Although a real budget would be nice.....
ReplyDeleteI think Chicago code should be on FX channel and Friday Night Lights should have been on AMC or HBO.
ReplyDeleteI wasn't really arguing..I was simply trying to explain that it's pointless to compare two shows and say that one is better than the other..
ReplyDeleteDon't get worked up!Think about the fact that we're getting closer to the end of the stupid Hellatus,it'll help! ; )
Well which one likes better is personal opinion for sure, but True Blood is definitely made better than Supernatural... has better actors, better music, scoring, sets special effects and so on. Just has to to do with a bigger budget and more cinematic oriented film crew.
ReplyDeleteI agree! I never got the hate for The CW, Supernatural has done alright from the network
ReplyDeleteAgreed on Friday Night Lights. Also Prison Break could of worked better on either AMC or HBO I think.
ReplyDeleteThey've made a few mistakes, but the support in general they've shown so far has been good.
ReplyDeleteTrue,but as you said this has to do with the bigger budget.I was talking more about the plot and things like that!
ReplyDeleteJust one thing..In my opinion,nothing on TV has better music than SPN! ; )
But I admit that the theme song for TB is very good!
Studio 60 was robbed by NBC. I wish it was on a channel that appreciated it, Showtime would have done it proud.
ReplyDeleteRaines on NBC, love Goldblum and it was killed after only 7 episodes, send it to CBS!
Kings on NBC too, that was stunning in concept, and killed once again, send it to Showtime!
To be honest, anything on NBC would be better off away from NBC, especially thrillers and sci-fi's... The Cape, Heroes, The Event. I don't really think there's anywhere atm though for sci-fi's to be safe on principle.
The Good Guys on FOX should have joined up with shows like Warehouse 13 on syfy, but FOX were kind enough to give it 20 episodes to be fair.
Kings was one of the most original and better new series of the 2000's and sorely mistreated by NBC. If it had been on a more 'artistic' network like AMC, A&E, Showtime etc it would likely still be on the air.
ReplyDeleteI think Fringe should be on AMC. Fringe, Breaking Bad, and Walking Dead sound good together.
ReplyDeleteYes but if it were on another network it wouldn't have the same ratings so technically another network would be MOre suitable for Chuck:)
ReplyDeleteAs much as I love that Supernatural is on the CW (makes that channel tolerable), I wish it was on a more popular network
ReplyDeleteTotally agree, I'm still bitter about the Kings cancellation, it was such a great show. I'd wish some cable network would have picked it up...
ReplyDeleteI valiantly fought the urge to nitpick but I've failed. So, shouldn't the title read "Which TV show is misplaced on its network?" After all, it's not the network that is misplaced.
ReplyDeleteAnyway, my pick is In Plain Sight. It is much closer to a TNT series than a USA series.
If you know there are lots of Supernatural fans here then don't bash the show. Have an opinion, sure, but respect other people's. I don't think True Blood is any good at all, and before you ask, yes I have watched it, but that doesn't mean I'm going to outright insult it. I can have an opinion, but I still accept that other people do like it, clearly. I only hope you treat Supernatural and it's fans in the same way.
ReplyDeleteKINGS should have been on hbo
ReplyDeleteI have always thought that and look for it on TNT! Too true!!
ReplyDeleteI occasionally have a hard time remembering the title of the show so I guess this program has a few branding problems. :)
ReplyDeleteWow. You do realize that you can't compare the shows at ALL, don't you? Supernatural's budget is infinitesimally SMALL compared to that of True Blood's. They HAVE NO RESOURCES to be as "quality" as True Blood. Of course it's not cable material. It's on the freaking CW for crying out loud!
ReplyDeleteIf True Blood were on the CW, it would be crap. Complete and utter crap, and it would get perhaps 2 million viewers each airing tops before it was outright canceled. I think Supernatural's doing pretty damn well with what it has.
And to be honest, the fact that a "quality" show like True Blood couldn't hold my interest for more than three episodes whereas I have stuck with Supernatural for six years speaks volumes as to how different our opinions of "quality" are.
TV HEAVEN!
ReplyDeleteFirefly... Way before its time. The right network and the right timeslot could have made such a huge difference.
ReplyDeleteI don't know how true that is. Do people ignore Chuck because it's on NBC,
ReplyDeleteor because they don't care? It has received the accolades of a huge number
of critics and yet people still aren't watching. Look at Pushing Daisies. It
aired on ABC and it reminds me a fair bit of Chuck (low ratings, critical
success, quirky humour). It was cancelled during its second season. I don't
think Chuck would do well anywhere else. Not a fan of NBC, but I'm glad that
they have kept Chuck around this long. All of that aside, we're all clearly
Chuck fans here :P.
I would not like Supernatural on HBO or Showtime. Too much time having the brothers in bed with some random hookup and not enough time on the plot if they were there. Not too mention we would have half the episodes each season. However, I would love for it to be on TNT, a network that actually shows it love even when they only have repeats.
ReplyDeleteYou're not serious, right? It's not like every HBO or Showtime show is all about sex and nothing else matters. These are networks where story matters, they are known for this fact! Sure, there usually is more sex and more nudity on a cable show than on a network show, but apart from Spartacus I can't remember any cable show where this was overused and held back the progression of the plot.
ReplyDeletefor me it makes no difference coz down in australia, those channes don't matter
ReplyDeletewe really only have 3 channels so all shows are split up over them (although now with HD channels, each channel has 3 channels to split its show over)
i only care that my shows continue to be on air
I noticed that too, Bruce, but I knew what was meant anyway. LOL :-)
ReplyDeleteI think nothing should be on SyFy. That'd teach them that we won't put up with their shitty B-movies they insist on doling out every 3 months with z-list stars. Why not try and make some REAL movies that actually have some interesting plots and quality graphics?
ReplyDeleteyou're right, I got a bit carried away and off the subject. Agree with the point that there's no reason to praise your favorite show by bashing someone else's. We all have different tastes ;)
ReplyDeletelol@ur username :) ...funny.
ReplyDeleteGod most shows on tv is cable material these days. Lets all head over to Nick jr. TB fans be hating on us? lol. Reading this SPN/TB war is as bad as the Twilight/HP crap. *sigh But come on TB, we all know most viewers were lured by a rawly, sexually driven show in season one alone, HBO,SHO and Starz 'dramas' are all made of the same thing, sex, fighting, blood, throw in some gay sex, massacres, weed...historical sex...nudity...plot, and apparently the theme song.
Sounds like TB fans have some unresolved tension with SPNfangirls. I do not how we pulled off the tv guide cover but we did. I don't know how we got to season 6 but thank god we did it.
NCIS!! :D yay
:D You my friend, might be onto something :)
ReplyDeleteTrue Blood? Which of a hundred shows talking about vampires is that again? Sorry,but yet another show jumping on the bandwagon of vampire movies after Twilight came out is hardly interesting.
ReplyDeleteSupernatural going into 6 seasons that have kept my interest (someone who has seen hundreds of shows come and go,) is it's own award.
As for more blood and gore,like someone else commented? I watched the first episode years ago and was shocked that it would be allowed on TV,but it kept my interest and even without the blood and gore any episode is great to watch!
Besides,any show that can mock themselves with a Supernatural convention episode is a show that you know is a great one!
Honestly, the cooking show is more sci-fi than most of what's on Syfy these days. And better quality. Not that it was much of either, but comparatively. Heh. Beats wrestling.
ReplyDeleteIt's more of a guilty pleasure show, sure it got the sex and the gore but the storylines are so weak.
ReplyDeleteFunny, I always thought TB looked way too cheap for a HBO show. Lol
ReplyDeleteIf Supernatural was on HBO, it would be simply gorier and have a few more sex scenes. TB would be nothing without sex.
ReplyDeleteI don't see why TB is a quality show. It's a soap opera with vampires, the opening is quality but the rest is overrated.
ReplyDeleteThe CW didn't keep Supernatural as a favor, most of their new shows simply failed. And if Supernatural had a bigger budget and be on another network, it could also have other ratings. Remember The Game?
ReplyDeleteDo you know True Blood?
ReplyDeleteI get that you don't like True Blood, but I still wouldn't say that they overuse sex. I suppose the sex scenes are likely to remembered because they often involve blood and violence, but it's not like the show is all about sex and that the plot isn't progressing because of it.
ReplyDeleteThe name is a homage to South Park.
ReplyDeleteAnd I sure as hell don't have a problem with SPN fans. Did I offend the show in any way? I don't think so. Just expressed my opinion. Also I'm not a die-hard True Blood fan, but I enjoy it.
Don't take it as an offense, because it's definitely not meant as one, but True Blood is a critically acclaimed show that was nominated for Emmies and Golden Globes in the important categories. It deals with issues like racism and discrimination and while a lot of focus is on "soapy" story lines there also are really interesting other plots.
ReplyDeleteI like True Blood, I've watched all three seasons but for me it's simply a fun show with many flaws. They sometimes seem to forget that they could move along the plot and instead we get Sookie and Bill sex scene No. 450. *sigh*
ReplyDeleteDon't get me wrong they have some really great character, I love Lafayette and Jessica but they don't give them a lot to do.
Well, in my opinion the main problem of the show is that there are too many characters and you can't simply give them all decent storylines. And the fact that they added a lot of new faces for the new season doesn't make me very optimistic, because the ending of season 3 was pretty weak to be honest and I blame all those mini plots for it.
ReplyDeleteNow it is, but if you watched Supernatural in the beginning it had an amazing storyline. The problem with Supernatural is they went beyond their original storyline. More people started watching the show so they extended the show. I LOVE Supernatural, I've watched it since the beginning, but it should have ended after Sam went to Hell. But it being worse than Trueblood, is a statement of opinion. I personally couldn't get through one episode of Trueblood.
ReplyDeleteI have to agree....
ReplyDeleteTB and SPN is not even near the same category. There is no reason to compare them.
I don't think Supernatural should be on Cable, it definitely doesn't have the same gritty aspect as some of those shows.
ReplyDeleteThat being said, True Blood isn't that much different from Supernatural with the exception of a few sex scenes here and there.
I really don't get the craze about TB -- First season was brilliant, second season was meh, third season was when I realized none of the characters had changed one little bit. Eric was exactly the same, debating whether or not he likes Sookie, or if he should brood a bit more...and Tara, oh my god, Tara. I swear, if Season 4 consists of her running around screaming 'Eggs, they shot Eggs' in that ratty little tone of hers, I might give in and watch Glee (my own private hell).
The writing is very different. Supernatural has brilliant writers, like Ben Edlund, and True Blood has a genius at the helm in Alan Ball (Six Feet Under was so so much better than TB will ever be).
I'd like to see how they'd alter Supernatural on cable. Some of the stuff can get pretty visceral -- those who think it's just fan-girls have clearly not seen some of the episodes. The valentines day one last season was some of the most disturbing shiz on TV. I mean when the couple start to each other, and the bloke who falls into the deep fat fryer. Bloody crazy.
maybe if firefly hadnt been on fox those bastards wouldn't have completely re-arranged the series (thrwoing off all character developement and over arching plots) and then axed it when - surpirse surprsie - peopel didnt get into it
ReplyDeleteSupernatural <3
ReplyDeleteSciFi is starting to hurt they canceled Stargate SG1, Atlantis, etc either get some better writers, producers or SciGi will drop in the polls.
ReplyDeleteits anyTHING not anyTHINK, tatyana, if that is your real name.
ReplyDeleteSharktopus was a instant cult classic (ROFL)
ReplyDeleteI'd love to see HBO pickup the rights to The Dresden Files. SciFi ran it for a season and dropped it. I'd like to see what someone with a budget and good writers could do with it.
ReplyDeleteSciFi is really dropping the ball. They have good shows, Eureka and Warehouse 13 are good, they really need to capitalize on their strong series or give them to someone who will.
StarGate thing is getting old, trying to be BSG in the wrong universe. :)
Are you kidding me? Why is WWE Smackdown on SyFy? I understand the fiction part, but come on!
ReplyDeleteWhy Friday? Don't you go out?
ReplyDeleteI get that you don't like True Blood, but I still wouldn't say that they overuse sex. I suppose the sex scenes are likely to remembered because they often involve blood and violence, but it's not like the show is all about sex and that the plot isn't progressing because of it.
ReplyDelete