"So did NBC. Smash has been given the royal treatment if it fails it's because it's a terrible show."
There's zero doubt that this is NOT a case where one can fault the marketing--which often is the case when a quality show disappears (the first time I experienced that was as a young teen with My So-Called Life, and yes, I joined SOS--Save Our Show and wrote letters, etc. I hate to say, but now when shows I enjoy go, I'm disillusioned enough that I don't bother doing any of that.) However, thoughts on Smash aside, I think it's ben proven time and time again that when tv shows get canceled too soon it often has very little to do with the quality of the show--although what do I know. I have no real interest in any of the dramas in the top ten Nielson ratings.
As that article posted above says, and many on here have, a huge problem is simply that the current network tv model simply cannot support shows that don't have the broadest possible audience. And yet, more and more they want to have it both ways--they want to get the "cool" loyal crowd that cable attracts, while getting much larger numbers. It'll be a slow death, but within 20 years I frankly don't see network tv lasting for most scripted tv, at least in this model, anymore.
Maybe that's always been true. Many classic cult shows that did run a long time on network tv, Buffy being an obvious example, stuck around out of good luck--Buffy was on the WB and UPN two networks, which, like the CW rely on audience loyalty and a very young youth demo and don't expect or need the ratings the other networks need (Fox initially was the same, but is now up there with the Big Three, despite still not having programming during the 10-11 time slot.)
But Networks don't seem to learn. According to Ent Weekly the pilots ordered for next season are extremely concept heavy (let's do a procedural but every cop will be partnered with a ROBOT! etc.) The author of the Smash piece in the Atlantic (which I admit I found too negative) had a piece about why fantasy/sci fi shows really aren't working on network tv--and it's the same issue as with Smash. It wants to appeal to a niche but also to a wide audience, and so doesn't really fit in either (they say one reason Once Upon a Time, which I don't watch, is a minor success is because it's unabashedly campy and doesn't seem unsure of its tone the way shows like 666 Park Ave did.)
http://www.theatlanticwire.com/entertainment/2013/02/fantasy-we-have-problem/62209/ Anyway. Whizzer, I believe Shaiman/Whitman are writing the songs for Liaisons--I expect stuff similar to what we heard from Heaven on Earth or whatever it's called.
I actually, personally, agree with everything Namo wrote. I admit though, if the next episode (which was so highly praised by most critics) doesn't feel like a big step in the right direction, I'll be disappointed.
While I haven't been bowled over by the Hit List songs so far, I love that they are highlighting young songwriters (Benj Pasek was insanely excited on Facebook when his song was featured--as he should be, I can't think of any other way he could imagine several million people hearing a song by him)--and it's far preferable to the pop covers. (Dancing On My Own was fine, even though I now have that song associated with Girls, but like I said subject wise it should have happened last year--but the Eurythmics dream sequence was IMHO worse than the much hated Bollywood number, which I kinda found hysterically, bizarrely great.)
(( .jpg?format=auto&width=300)
