How Angel Got Cancelled
Jun. 18th, 2018 09:24 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
shadowkat Why Angel the Series Got Cancelled -- halfway through the Marsters Q&A, James reveals how Angel got cancelled. Whedon pissed off his boss one too many times. The previous year, after S4, word came down in the summer that they were cancelled -- which put all the crew and cast out of work, and they didn't have any time to get another show or work for the next year -- so would be out of work for the full next year. Whedon felt really bad about it. So in S5, some of the Buffy cast came over full time (Marsters and Harmony), and the ratings improved by 80%. So Whedon went up to the network sort of cocky after the 100th episode and said..."I need to know if we're renewed for S6."
Network: Eh, John Wells from ER is giving us a Dracula show, once we see how that tests, we'll let you know.
Whedon: No. I need to know now!
Network: If we tell you now, you're cancelled.
Whedon: Fine.
Network: Cancelled.
Whedon: sorry guys, I screwed up.
Note -- the John Wells Dracula Show tested really badly. If Whedon hadn't pushed they might have remained on the air.
Also it should be noted that it is NOT ratings that gets shows cancelled, it's other factors, such as advertisers. You want to get a show cancelled or renewed, figure out the advertisers. Ad dollars pay broadcast channel network exec's salaries. Subscriber dollars pay premium channel and streaming channel network exec salaries.
Roseanne got cancelled not because of ratings, but because her tweet pissed off the "advertisers" who most likely called the network and said -- we're pulling out. Bye now. Doesn't matter how great your ratings or how many people watch -- what matters is whether advertisers want to place ads on your show. Ads pay for the show's air time. It's always been like that...used to be worse. That's why they are careful about certain things -- do not piss off the advertising sponsor who pays our rent.
Network: Eh, John Wells from ER is giving us a Dracula show, once we see how that tests, we'll let you know.
Whedon: No. I need to know now!
Network: If we tell you now, you're cancelled.
Whedon: Fine.
Network: Cancelled.
Whedon: sorry guys, I screwed up.
Note -- the John Wells Dracula Show tested really badly. If Whedon hadn't pushed they might have remained on the air.
Also it should be noted that it is NOT ratings that gets shows cancelled, it's other factors, such as advertisers. You want to get a show cancelled or renewed, figure out the advertisers. Ad dollars pay broadcast channel network exec's salaries. Subscriber dollars pay premium channel and streaming channel network exec salaries.
Roseanne got cancelled not because of ratings, but because her tweet pissed off the "advertisers" who most likely called the network and said -- we're pulling out. Bye now. Doesn't matter how great your ratings or how many people watch -- what matters is whether advertisers want to place ads on your show. Ads pay for the show's air time. It's always been like that...used to be worse. That's why they are careful about certain things -- do not piss off the advertising sponsor who pays our rent.
no subject
Date: 2018-06-19 03:25 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-06-19 01:02 pm (UTC)I agree. Also, David Boreanze and Marsters were burned out by the end. We'd have gotten a different show if they hadn't been cancelled. More episodic in nature I think. You can see the tonal shift in the writing, etc, after the announcement came. It's as if the writers decided -- okay, screw the network, I'm going to do what I want.
no subject
Date: 2018-06-19 07:21 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-06-19 12:59 pm (UTC)Well, it's hard to tell if the actors loved him or not. Mainly because at a Q&A they are performing. And they have to know that they are being recorded and posted to the internet. Particularly after they've been doing it for 20 years. If you watch the ones in which he's still in the show, he says one thing, the one's post show another, and now, another.
Also, when you spend a great deal of time in the public eye -- you sort of put on a persona of sorts. A performance. But it's hard for us to wrap our heads around because we don't work in the Glamour biz. Where everyone is putting on a glamour constantly.
Marsters loved Whedon because he fought for his people and for his art against the network. Also he gave him great material to work with and made him a millionaire. Marsters went from starving/ broke actor to being worth 5 Million in part because of Joss Whedon.
Again, it's hard for us to understand because we don't work in the industry - aka Hollywood/Television/Film and don't get that culture. It's a nasty culture to work in. Rampant bullying, sexism, harassment. We're just beginning to see the extent with the MeToo movement.
Also, it's grueling work. I've walked through quite a few film and television sets on my commutes, and it's akin to watching grass grow. Lots of standing around, lots of waiting for the lighting to be right, jumping to get on your mark, and retakes.
So, we really don't know what's going on behind the scenes. I wouldn't want to do it. I don't know how they do. There's not enough money in the world that you could pay me to do that for a living. (I've watched the dailies for Smashed, Gone, and others.) Ugh. ("Through him against a wall, kiss him. Take 1. Okay do it again. Take 2, Okay do it again. Take 3. Okay do it again. Take 5....) They did up to 10-20 takes. And that's actually not that bad. Stanely Kubrick used to do 75 takes. Actors love Clint Eastwood because he only does one-three takes.
no subject
Date: 2018-06-19 08:59 pm (UTC)5 million? How did you find the figure? (Not disputing - just interested.) I suspect it's a love-hate relationship; Joss made him do a few things he wasn't happy about, and now Joss has lost a bit of his mojo, maybe it's not so important to keep the love part to the forefront of his mind.
no subject
Date: 2018-06-20 12:21 am (UTC)I love listening to him, but ...let's just say Joss isn't the only one who has lost his mojo and he'd be a hypocrite to be too judgemental of Joss Whedon, considering he most likely did some of the same things. (He hooked up with Mercedes McNabe who was MUCH younger and had a crush on Michellet Trachenberg. There's a hilarious Q&A, where Nicholas Brendan talks about the Buffy comics and how he doesn't like the Dawn/Xander pairing. It's far too young for him and James is basically trying to hide under the table.)
[ETA: All of that said? He's human and he's in Hollywood. I like him but..I see his flaws. And I'm happy we aren't in each other's lives. ;-) Anyhow, I do agree with what you said above.
I suspect it's a love-hate relationship; Joss made him do a few things he wasn't happy about, and now Joss has lost a bit of his mojo, maybe it's not so important to keep the love part to the forefront of his mind
Very true. I've seen him diss Joss out of the side of his mouth. And I'm willing to bet Charisma Carpenter and James Marsters bonded a bit over a mutual irritation with Whedon and SMG, and an admiration of David Boreanze.
The attempted rape almost killed him. And it wasn't necessary. Also Whedon and the writers liked to play mind-games with Marsters -- because Marsters was the most talented actor in the cast next to ASH. And very versatile. They got off on throwing things at him. Espenson admits it sort of in a Q&A, in which she says it's very interesting to see it from his perspective, but no, they had a plan and decided to see what they could come up with to stump him -- what crazy thing can we do to him next and can he do it? Marsters didn't realize how incredibly sadistic television writers, particularly frustrated television writers truly are until Buffy and Angel. I honestly think Whedon went to his trailer -- told him he had no idea what he was going to do with his character, went back to the writer's room and giggled about it. Fury: "Did you do it?" Whedon:"Oh yeah, and he buys it every time. He has no idea what we have planned." Laughs fiendishly. "I'm going to give him a soul and drive him insane and he's a method actor. Oh this is going to be soo much fun!" LOL!
no subject
Date: 2018-06-20 07:34 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-06-20 12:18 pm (UTC)No, he's too smart to say anything nasty about Whedon or anyone he's worked for. He did say some things post Angel, but he's gotten smarter with age and he really knows how to play a crowd. Best Q&A that I've seen. Claire Krammer and Marsters have figured out how to play the crowd really well. They make quite a bit at those cons.
no subject
Date: 2018-06-20 02:41 am (UTC)Also, when you spend a great deal of time in the public eye -- you sort of put on a persona of sorts.
I think there is a diplomatic element, as you indicate. While people have reputations and it's likely agents know what you really think - I'd imagine many actors worry that saying anything too out of line might make it harder to get more work. (Whether from Joss, or someone else) So there's an incentive to be positive, promote your show, and promote the people you work with and for...