http://www.avclub.com/articles/end-it-already-when-cancellation-is-the-best-thing,73402/

Just because a TV show could go on forever doesn’t mean it should.

A terrible thing about long-running scripted shows is that: A good show concludes, A bad show gets to drag on indefinitely. An example of this is animated programs with a sliding timescale such as "The Simpsons" or "South Park" get to keep producing new episodes indefinitely while live-action programs have to end their runs after 8 to 10 seasons. This is injustice, and I have no idea why this happens.

I agree with that quote, TMC. A very important rule in scripted shows is that you have to know when to say when. Unfortunately, however, it seems that money and ratings often outweigh the desire to produce high-quality episodes, causing many programs to go on far past their sell-by date - and actually alienate viewers in the process! Just because a TV series is successful doesn't mean that an endless number of seasons have to be shoved down our throats. When it comes to television longevity, nothing is worse than seeing your favorite characters returning for another season just so that someone can get rich or that a network could be #1 in the ratings.

I agree with that quote, TMC. A very important rule in scripted shows is that you have to know when to say when. Unfortunately, however, it seems that money and ratings often outweigh the desire to produce high-quality episodes, causing many programs to go on far past their sell-by date - and actually alienate viewers in the process! Just because a TV series is successful doesn't mean that an endless number of seasons have to be shoved down our throats. When it comes to television longevity, nothing is worse than seeing your favorite characters returning for another season just so that someone can get rich or that a network could be #1 in the ratings.

Tell that to FOX. They're just milking The Simpsons for all its worth.

A long-running series can hold a TV network back from creating and building all-new series. A network can order all-new series instead of renewing the same old and tired long-running drivel over and over again.

FOX will never drop it, but I think American Idol is way past done.

Tell that to FOX. They're just milking The Simpsons for all its worth.


Simpsons is worth more dead than alive, they can't sell reruns to any cable networks while it's still in production

A terrible thing about long-running scripted shows is that: A good show concludes, A bad show gets to drag on indefinitely. An example of this is animated programs with a sliding timescale such as "The Simpsons" or "South Park" get to keep producing new episodes indefinitely while live-action programs have to end their runs after 8 to 10 seasons. This is injustice, and I have no idea why this happens.
Animated shows are a lot easier to keep going...the characters don't have to age. But The Simpsons definitely should've ended a good 10 years ago.

that and Ncis im sorry that show is way past its expiration date along with the simpsons

Animated shows are a lot easier to keep going...the characters don't have to age. But The Simpsons definitely should've ended a good 10 years ago.

It's funny you mention that because almost exactly 10 years ago, I remember mentioning to someone how I thought they were running out of good story ideas. I never expected it to still be going in 2013!

The popularity of King of the Hill, Family Guy, American Dad, Futurama, etc. probably did a lot to help keep interest going in primetime animation, which obviously is beneficial for Simpsons.

Remember King of the Hill? That ran for 13 seasons (debuting in the 1996-97 midseason) and used a "sliding timescale". Declining ratings and popularity caused its cancellation/ending after the 2008-09 season.

It's funny you mention that because almost exactly 10 years ago, I remember mentioning to someone how I thought they were running out of good story ideas. I never expected it to still be going in 2013!

The popularity of King of the Hill, Family Guy, American Dad, Futurama, etc. probably did a lot to help keep interest going in primetime animation, which obviously is beneficial for Simpsons.

I stopped watching "The Simpsons" 11 years ago, and they STILL have to have that damn show on...it just isn't funny and seems they can't get the show on cable or Hulu or Netflix. Cancel already, you're like the damn Energizer Bunny which made its debut the same time "The Simpsons" did....

fILdYrxnrf8
AqrnZnMhyvA
zEsYscjOvI0

And it got spoofed in a Cleveland sketch show called "Big Chuck and Lil' John"!...

X9_T0DVJoLU
xValDAvOYHw

You want to know what else needs to end? Scripted TV series with really long hiatuses between seasons (like over a year). Curb Your Enthusiasm is an example of this. The show's most recent season, its 8th, aired in the fall of 2011. It always has to be up to Larry David himself to decide if he wants to film a new season.

Whenever they add a baby or young child, it's time to go!

I don't understand the anger at the Simpsons for staying on so long. It's a half hour a week; if you don't like it anymore, don't watch it.

Personally, I don't think it's as good as it was, but it is still vastly better than most of the junk (yes, junk) masquerading as comedy today.

I don't understand the anger at the Simpsons for staying on so long. It's a half hour a week; if you don't like it anymore, don't watch it.

Personally, I don't think it's as good as it was, but it is still vastly better than most of the junk (yes, junk) masquerading as comedy today.

I don't care. It doesn't matter. I am not going to pretend that it doesn't exist. There are a lot of other primetime scripted shows that are a half-hour a week, such as TBBT and Modern Family, and those examples are live action. It would be best for the Simpsons to disappear as a first-run series for good; for that to happen, it would only take a business decision. I want entirely new animated shows on FOX to be pushed in the near future.

Animated shows do not have to be better than live-action shows all of the time, if they actually were, it would be an unfair injustice. As long as animated shows have the longer runs, there will never be any equality between the two scripted genres. If I wanted to make "The Big Bang Theory" run for 15+ seasons, then I'll do it, just to show the animated shows who's boss.

I don't understand the anger at the Simpsons for staying on so long. It's a half hour a week; if you don't like it anymore, don't watch it.

Personally, I don't think it's as good as it was, but it is still vastly better than most of the junk (yes, junk) masquerading as comedy today.
If you really think that's true, then you don't watch a lot of comedy.

I'm a huge Simpsons fan, it's probably my pick for the greatest comedy of all-time. But every mediocre season the show keeps churning out buries the shows golden years one season deeper. There is probably a large generation of people out there who only know of The Simpsons as post-2000 Simpsons, which is just sad. (Although I'd really pinpoint the start of the decline back to 1997/1998).

I don't care. It doesn't matter. I am not going to pretend that it doesn't exist. There are a lot of other primetime scripted shows that are a half-hour a week, such as TBBT and Modern Family, and those examples are live action. It would be best for the Simpsons to disappear as a first-run series for good; for that to happen, it would only take a business decision. I want entirely new animated shows on FOX to be pushed in the near future.

Animated shows do not have to be better than live-action shows all of the time, if they actually were, it would be an unfair injustice. As long as animated shows have the longer runs, there will never be any equality between the two scripted genres. If I wanted to make "The Big Bang Theory" run for 15+ seasons, then I'll do it, just to show the animated shows who's boss.
But see, the problem is that The Big Bang Theory simply can't exist as a show in its 15th season. By that point, the characters will be pushing 50, and a show about a bunch of 50 year old nerds hanging out in an apartment is a much different (and to most people, less appealing) show than one about a bunch of 20/30 something year old nerds hanging out in an apartment. With an animated show, you don't have that problem because the characters don't have to age, so the show can maintain its status quo for years and years.

If you really think that's true, then you don't watch a lot of comedy.


Please don't presume to know what I do or don't watch.

But see, the problem is that The Big Bang Theory simply can't exist as a show in its 15th season. By that point, the characters will be pushing 50, and a show about a bunch of 50 year old nerds hanging out in an apartment is a much different (and to most people, less appealing) show than one about a bunch of 20/30 something year old nerds hanging out in an apartment. With an animated show, you don't have that problem because the characters don't have to age, so the show can maintain its status quo for years and years.

So? Jim Parsons turned 40 this year, and his appearance makes him look like he's perpetually stuck in his early 20s. Also, it became the #3 most-watched show and highest rated scripted show in the 20-50 demographic. I should have meant keep TBBT going until all those animated sliding timescale shows (even Family Guy) end their runs first.

If you don't want the characters aging in an animated series, then maybe the setting of the animated series would be stuck in the year of its introduction and you really can't have events, people, technology, and everything else from after the series's introduction popping up within the series itself.

I want an aminated series to be created where the characters do age physically so they can properly correspond to the real world.

Please don't presume to know what I do or don't watch.
So then what do you watch? Sorry, I just hate the "it's still better than EVERYTHING ELSE ON TV!" excuse for a series that's gone downhill, because 95% of the time, it's not true.


So? Jim Parsons turned 40 this year, and his appearance makes him look like he's perpetually stuck in his early 20s. Also, it became the #3 most-watched show and highest rated scripted show in the 20-50 demographic. I should have meant keep TBBT going until all those animated sliding timescale shows (even Family Guy) end their runs first.

If you don't want the characters aging in an animated series, then maybe the setting of the animated series would be stuck in the year of its introduction and you really can't have events, people, technology, and everything else from after the series's introduction popping up within the series itself.

I want an aminated series to be created where the characters do age physically so they can properly correspond to the real world.
40 is one thing. 50 is another. And that's just one aspect. You also have the issue of cast contracts. Actors and televison shows in general become more expensive as the show gets older. Why do you think a live-action sitcom has never made it past 12 seasons? Even if you take away the aging aspect, it's because it just doesn't really make financial sense for even the biggest shows to go on that long. Eventually, the show gets to a point where it'd be more profitable to re-run it syndication over and over than to produce new episodes of it. That issue is less prevelant with an animated sitcom, because voice actors aren't paid nearly as much as on-screen actors and the overall cost is typically lower. Even The Simpsons is getting close to a point where it's not all that profitable anymore despite consistent ratings, though. (Hence the big contract dispute that took place around 2 years ago).

A real-time animated sitcom could be interesting. A lot of people have suggested that The Simpsons do a time jump to keep things fresh. Not a bad idea, but I doubt it ever happens.

that and Ncis im sorry that show is way past its expiration date along with the simpsons
NCIS is still as good as it ever was. I've dropped plenty of shows that I thought JTS but I still am entertained by NCIS. The spin-off is another matter since I never liked it.

I haven't watched the Simpsons since the mid 90's. lol

So? Jim Parsons turned 40 this year, and his appearance makes him look like he's perpetually stuck in his early 20s. Also, it became the #3 most-watched show and highest rated scripted show in the 20-50 demographic. I should have meant keep TBBT going until all those animated sliding timescale shows (even Family Guy) end their runs first.

If you don't want the characters aging in an animated series, then maybe the setting of the animated series would be stuck in the year of its introduction and you really can't have events, people, technology, and everything else from after the series's introduction popping up within the series itself.

I want an aminated series to be created where the characters do age physically so they can properly correspond to the real world.

For Better or For Worse had a few holiday specials, characters aged in that strip

King Of The Hill ended at the exact right moment in my opinion. 13 seasons and it was ending just as it felt like they should. I think it was a good thing it ended when it did, because it would have completely run out of gas.

Now if only they would add it to Canadian Netflix...

http://whatculture.com/tv/10-tv-shows-whose-cancellation-was-way-overdue.php

It seems almost criminal, when we see good, quality entertainment unfairly get the axe after only a season or two. With network television as dependent on numbers as they are, it’s difficult for them to give a show time to develop and attract viewers. If it’s not an instant hit, most networks will cancel it without a second thought.

But for every Firefly or Pushing Daisies, there are shows that don’t seem to be physically able to get themselves cancelled. They have a natural immunity, and year after year you have to stare at the screen in amazement and wonder how the hell these shows haven’t been cancelled yet. In some cases, it’s genuinely bad material that appeals to the lowest common denominator. But it’s almost worse when it’s a formerly great show that has run out of momentum, but for whatever reason the network wants to squeeze the last bit of juice to try and get a better syndication deal.

Whatever the reason, here are some shows that overstayed their welcome on our TV sets.


Read more at http://whatculture.com/tv/10-tv-shows-whose-cancellation-was-way-overdue.php#5RW8FWKovglW3HFB.99

Does anyone know how shows that had runs similar to "The Simpsons" were treated by the public? Were shows like "Ed Sullivan" or "Gunsmoke" widely considered by the public as worn out and on fumes in their final years?

Does anyone know how shows that had runs similar to "The Simpsons" were treated by the public? Were shows like "Ed Sullivan" or "Gunsmoke" widely considered by the public as worn out and on fumes in their final years?
Can't speak about Ed Sullivan but Gunsmoke was still highly rated in the early 1970's. I remember my family and I watching it every Monday night.

I haven't watched the Simpsons since the mid 90's. lol

I don't think the Simpsons is as bad as everyone makes it out to be, honestly. With animated shows you don't have the problem of characters aging out of their roles or needing to bring on new characters to replace them, etc.

I think the Simpsons' real issue is that after 25 years of episodes, you just plain run out of new ideas. I can watch the show now, but it's definitely not appointment viewing as it once was. I can pretty much take it or leave it; and often, I just leave it.

NCIS is still as good as it ever was. I've dropped plenty of shows that I thought JTS but I still am entertained by NCIS. The spin-off is another matter since I never liked it.

guess ti just me it been on so long do same stuff get kind tiring wish A team could of been on this long.

omg NCIS La bores me I can not get in to it I try to season final was shocker though

guess ti just me it been on so long do same stuff get kind tiring wish A team could of been on this long.

omg NCIS La bores me I can not get in to it I try to season final was shocker though
NCIS has a great cast and it's funny as well as entertaining. NCIS: LA is just generic imo. I was the same way with CSI. I loved the original (although I haven't watched it in 7 or 8 years) but I hated the spinoffs.

NCIS has a great cast and it's funny as well as entertaining. NCIS: LA is just generic imo. I was the same way with CSI. I loved the original (although I haven't watched it in 7 or 8 years) but I hated the spinoffs.

good thing Ncis red didn't go I wasn't entertained by that at all,im ncis all the way kind reminds me of a new A team without weapon making n more people.

I got me Ncis ps3 game abbie standee bubblehead even had abby favorite drink one time cafpow

I follow the older programming. I am fed up with the crap that is on TV now or the fact that most of the programming is so long on the tooth, they should be ashamed of themselves.

good thing Ncis red didn't go I wasn't entertained by that at all,im ncis all the way kind reminds me of a new A team without weapon making n more people.

I got me Ncis ps3 game abbie standee bubblehead even had abby favorite drink one time cafpow

I am retired Military. Guess what most of us think of NCIS Red?

If animated series are easier to keep going, then there's a downside: Production of animated shows' episodes take longer than live action shows' episodes.

And another problem with the current animated shows such as The Simpsons? They consist of stand-alone episodes without continuing story arcs.

Remember King of the Hill? That ran for 13 seasons (debuting in the 1996-97 midseason) and used a "sliding timescale". Declining ratings and popularity caused its cancellation/ending after the 2008-09 season.

It was the untimely death of Brittany Murphy (Luanne Platter), that convinced the producers to end the show. :(

It was the untimely death of Brittany Murphy (Luanne Platter), that convinced the producers to end the show. :(

Final episode of KotH aired in September of '09, Brittany Murphy died in December of '09.

If animated series are easier to keep going, then there's a downside: Production of animated shows' episodes take longer than live action shows' episodes.

And another problem with the current animated shows such as The Simpsons? They consist of stand-alone episodes without continuing story arcs.

that's what makes them popular in syndication, they don't need to be watched every day and can be run out of order

Why can't long-running shows with continuing story arcs be popular in syndication?

Because most people who watch syndicated re-runs want something relatively simple that they can leave on in the background or veg out in front of. Syndication isn't really designed for watching TV closely or intently. That's why sitcoms have always fared better in syndication than dramas. I know the majority of this forum is very involved in syndicated re-runs and knows exactly when their favorite shows are airing, but the truth is that the majority of the viewing public is just looking for something comforting to put on the TV before dinner or before bed or whatever. Non or less serialized comedies fullfill that purpose better than a more complicated, concept-y show.

Because most people who watch syndicated re-runs want something relatively simple that they can leave on in the background or veg out in front of. Syndication isn't really designed for watching TV closely or intently. That's why sitcoms have always fared better in syndication than dramas. I know the majority of this forum is very involved in syndicated re-runs and knows exactly when their favorite shows are airing, but the truth is that the majority of the viewing public is just looking for something comforting to put on the TV before dinner or before bed or whatever. Non or less serialized comedies fullfill that purpose better than a more complicated, concept-y show.
Plus when you have a continuing drama in syndication, you have to commit to being there everyday.

Exactly.

If you're flipping through the channels and you find an episode of...I don't know, Lost, you need to know the entire backstory of the show in order to know what's going on. Whereas if you flip to an episode of Friends, you can probably get some enjoyment out of the show and the characters, even if you've never seen it before, because it more or less tells a self-contained story.

Why do production of animated series' episodes even take longer than production of live action series' episodes?

Plus. The Simpsons has had about 20 long-running live action shows on its network come and go during its tenure. Animated sliding timescale shows such as The Simpsons and South Park are evil.:mad:

Why do production of animated series' episodes even take longer than production of live action series' episodes?

Plus. The Simpsons has had about 20 long-running live action shows on its network come and go during its tenure. Animated sliding timescale shows such as The Simpsons and South Park are evil.:mad:
Lol why do you have so much anger against animated shows? I don't get it.

Most animation takes a very long time to complete - much longer than it takes to film actors in a studio. I mean, the entire episodes has to be drawn (whether hand-drawn or digitally), and then the drawings have to be animated. It's time-consuming. The same is true of animated movies, which usually take 5+ years from start to finish. South Park is actually an exception - they only produce their episodes the week before they air, but that show's animation is far less sophisticated than other animated shows (of course, that kind of adds to its charm).

Fact is, though, animated shows are simply easier to keep going than live-action shows. If an animated show is still profitable for a network, why end it? So the live-action shows won't feel bad? That's silly.

How are the animated series more profitable than live-action shows? That doesn't mean that the animated shows can stay a first-run series forever.

Television is a business, and if people insist on saving old and tired animated shows and want them to run forever, then maybe they don't belong in business.

In a broadcast network, long-running scripted shows (no matter how successful and profitable they are) are only seen as an obstacle in building brand-new or newer scripted TV shows.

If I have a choice between an adult animated series and a Reality show, bring on the cartoon characters.

If I have a choice between an adult animated series and a Reality show, bring on the cartoon characters.
I agree. Anything but reality shows.

I agree with you about NCIS Los Angeles. I don't think LL Cool J or Chris O'Donnell have good chemistry, and the acting is a bit dry by everyone.

How are the animated series more profitable than live-action shows? That doesn't mean that the animated shows can stay a first-run series forever.

Television is a business, and if people insist on saving old and tired animated shows and want them to run forever, then maybe they don't belong in business.

In a broadcast network, long-running scripted shows (no matter how successful and profitable they are) are only seen as an obstacle in building brand-new or newer scripted TV shows.
That's not true at all. The business of broadcast television has one goal: to sell ad dollars. They don't care whether it's a brand new reality show or a 20-year-old animated show - as long as it's bringing in a profit, it's welcome to stay around. As TV consumers, we may not like old animated stalwarts long past their expiration dates taking the spots of newer, fresher shows...but sadly, the TV business is not based on quality.

Animated shows have an advantage because, unlike live-action shows, they don't have large actors' salaries that the network/studio has to fork out. All live-action shows, even the biggest ones, become less profitable as they age because the actors have to be paid bigger and bigger salaries the longer the show stays on the air, and eventually it causes the production cost to outweigh the money the network actually makes on the show. With an animated show, you don't have big actors' salaries to pay because voice actors aren't paid nearly as much as live-action actors...plus add things like sets and studios that don't need to be paid for. They're just, generally, more sustainable.

I am retired Military. Guess what most of us think of NCIS Red?

not much to tell only was on one episode part one part two it was dull as rocks least the blonde chick was good to look at

That's not true at all. The business of broadcast television has one goal: to sell ad dollars. They don't care whether it's a brand new reality show or a 20-year-old animated show - as long as it's bringing in a profit, it's welcome to stay around. As TV consumers, we may not like old animated stalwarts long past their expiration dates taking the spots of newer, fresher shows...but sadly, the TV business is not based on quality.

Animated shows have an advantage because, unlike live-action shows, they don't have large actors' salaries that the network/studio has to fork out. All live-action shows, even the biggest ones, become less profitable as they age because the actors have to be paid bigger and bigger salaries the longer the show stays on the air, and eventually it causes the production cost to outweigh the money the network actually makes on the show. With an animated show, you don't have big actors' salaries to pay because voice actors aren't paid nearly as much as live-action actors...plus add things like sets and studios that don't need to be paid for. They're just, generally, more sustainable.

I mean, long-running scripted series have to be cancelled to make room for new series. Spinoffs of existing animated series aren't going to cut it, and a move to another network/channel is right out. The number of timeslots in broadcast television can get limited with so many popular and profitable shows. Plus, you also have to take declining ratings/viewership and popularity into account, especially after shows have hit their peak in popularity.

If FOX have announced that they have cancelled The Simpsons, would they have allowed time to craft a series finale/wrap-up episode, especially considering its lack of story arcs and episodes' long production time? I suspect they'll end up giving those ASTCs a "farewell season" when their time comes and that'll be it, though it is possible they could end their runs without a series finale. Plus, voice actors can get burnt out from doing a popular character for a long time just like live-action actors, aside from their rising salaries.

Another factor: An agreement was signed to limit syndication of The Simpsons to broadcast affiliates. As long as new episodes of that show are being produced, the program can;t go into cable syndication.

Why can't long-running shows with continuing story arcs be popular in syndication?

because they have to watched every day to keep up like daytime soap opera, and since they're reruns people already know what happens

not much to tell only was on one episode part one part two it was dull as rocks least the blonde chick was good to look at
I didn't even watch it because it was on NCIS: LA. lol

Simpsons is worth more dead than alive, they can't sell reruns to any cable networks while it's still in production
American Idol is a good way for un known singers to make it, but I don't like watching it.

That's not true at all. The business of broadcast television has one goal: to sell ad dollars. They don't care whether it's a brand new reality show or a 20-year-old animated show - as long as it's bringing in a profit, it's welcome to stay around. As TV consumers, we may not like old animated stalwarts long past their expiration dates taking the spots of newer, fresher shows...but sadly, the TV business is not based on quality.

Animated shows have an advantage because, unlike live-action shows, they don't have large actors' salaries that the network/studio has to fork out. All live-action shows, even the biggest ones, become less profitable as they age because the actors have to be paid bigger and bigger salaries the longer the show stays on the air, and eventually it causes the production cost to outweigh the money the network actually makes on the show. With an animated show, you don't have big actors' salaries to pay because voice actors aren't paid nearly as much as live-action actors...plus add things like sets and studios that don't need to be paid for. They're just, generally, more sustainable.If animated shows were so profitable FOX wouldn't be the only network airing them. Other networks have tried and failed (ABC with The Goode Family, NBC with Father of the Pride). Replacing the most honored show in Emmy history (Frasier) with an animated show was a big insult, and it backfired of course.

Bring back the 1960s cartoons and put them on prime time.
Peter Potamus has been unemployed so long he has wasted away to a mere ton.

Coming up with a good series finale for an animated sliding timescale show is a very tricky situation. The apparent inability and unwillingness to conclude the show with even a suitable wrap-up episode for "The Simpsons" (one (obvious) example of an animated sliding timescale show) is one of the reasons why people insist on keeping it (and other animated sliding timescale shows) going indefinitely, even if the crew can easily run out of new ideas. Personally, I admit that I want "The Simpsons" to end its original run badly. The problems are that there are no long-running storylines/story arcs within the series that need to be closed. Flat-out parodies of other shows' series finales aren't gonna work. "The Simpsons" consists entirely of stand-alone episodes, and shows that consists entirely of stand-alone episodes usually do not get proper wrap-up episodes when they end their long and successful run.

If animated shows were so profitable FOX wouldn't be the only network airing them. Other networks have tried and failed (ABC with The Goode Family, NBC with Father of the Pride). Replacing the most honored show in Emmy history (Frasier) with an animated show was a big insult, and it backfired of course.
The problem is the animated comedies you mentioned were beyond horrible. FOX has a targeted audience for their animated comedies (Male 18-34 and Male 18-49) and they still command a huge advertising rate. This past season, both The Simpsons and Family Guy were in the top ten, bringing in over $275,000 for a thirty second ad. The only shows to top them were Sunday Night Football, American Idol (Wednesday), Modern Family, New Girl, and American Idol (Thursday).

The animated shows are crazy profitable for Fox. They repeat well, they attract lucrative young male demographics, they sell well internationally, and a hit can run effectively indefinitely.

I can only speculate why other broadcast networks aren't developing animated shows. My guess is that it's off-brand for the older-skewing CBS and female-skewing ABC, and NBC got their fingers burned with Father of the Pride. I also imagine they see it as a risky, with high upfront costs, long development cycles and an atypical development process. It's much easier for Fox because they already had The Simpsons to build around.

Both The Simpsons and American Dad have had episodes developed as potential series finales (the episodes Holidays of Future Passed and Hot Water respectively).

Why does having stand-alone episodes mean a show can't have a proper series finale? The Simpsons may not do story arcs, but they've still developed characters with unique personalities, stories, goals, ect that could be well-served by a finale. Same goes for pretty much all of the other animated shows, except for maybe Family Guy which, let's be honest, most of the time is just an animated sketch show.

And of course the animated shows on FOX are profitable - if they weren't, why would they have spent 20+ years airing them? I don't know why the other networks haven't succeeded in replicating their success, but there have been plenty of successful animated programs on cable networks. The fact that ABC and NBC's attempts to get a successful animated series failed is on them, not the animation genre. My guess is that, as stated, FOX's demographics just fit the format better.

Why does having stand-alone episodes mean a show can't have a proper series finale?

Some dramas like Cold Case, CSI: Miami, CSI: NY, Law & Order, and Without a Trace (as well as most scripted television series that originally ran prior to the 1980s) are entirely standalone episodes and when they were cancelled, they never got proper wrap-up episodes.

Well, a few of those were cancelled after production on their final season already wrapped (CSI: Miami, CSI: NY, Law & Order).

Just because those shows didn't doesn't mean none can. Plenty of stand-alone sitcoms like Mary Tyler Moore Show, Seinfeld, ect, were mostly stand-alone episodes and they got proper finales.

Bring back the 1960s cartoons and put them on prime time.
Peter Potamus has been unemployed so long he has wasted away to a mere ton.

Well...he did have a part on "Harvey Birdman".

I always ask this and never get an answer: Does an animated (sliding timescale) series exist only for satirical purposes?

I always ask this and never get an answer: Does an animated (sliding timescale) series exist only for satirical purposes?
Have you ever actually watched an animated series?

I understand what you are saying, with shows like "Family Guy" and "American Dad". I'm in a very small minority here I know: I watched one episode of "Family Guy" and thought to myself, "If I were 12 years old with a potty mouth and mind, I would think this was a marvelous show." However, I am not, so I have no use for it. "American Dad" ... too weird..."The Cleveland Show" (now cancelled) Uh...did people ever figure out a white actor was voicing a Black character? I guess not enough people watched to care because they had "Amos 'n- Andy" taken off the air 50 years ago for crap like that.

I enjoyed Looney Tunes and "The Flintstones" so needless to say, the animation of today, I just don't care for. And if anyone can explain to me how in hell "The Simpsons" has survived 25 years, I really, really, really would like to know. I understand it has made billions in merchandising which is the main reason it is still on, but that is a show that has been on too long.

Have you ever actually watched an animated series?

(In a stern manner) YES.

Especially when I was younger. I used to watch animated series a lot, but in recent years, I have been watching more and more live action TV.

I understand what you are saying, with shows like "Family Guy" and "American Dad". I'm in a very small minority here I know: I watched one episode of "Family Guy" and thought to myself, "If I were 12 years old with a potty mouth and mind, I would think this was a marvelous show." However, I am not, so I have no use for it. "American Dad" ... too weird..."The Cleveland Show" (now cancelled) Uh...did people ever figure out a white actor was voicing a Black character? I guess not enough people watched to care because they had "Amos 'n- Andy" taken off the air 50 years ago for crap like that.

I enjoyed Looney Tunes and "The Flintstones" so needless to say, the animation of today, I just don't care for. And if anyone can explain to me how in hell "The Simpsons" has survived 25 years, I really, really, really would like to know. I understand it has made billions in merchandising which is the main reason it is still on, but that is a show that has been on too long.
The McFarlane shows aren't really a good example of animation at its best. Granted, I like American Dad a lot, but it has a very off-beat sense of humor that's definitely not for everybody. Family Guy has its moments, especially in its older episodes, but overall it's a pretty lazy, juvenile show...and The Cleveland Show is generally pretty terrible.

I think the best animated show on TV right now is Bob's Burgers. It's a hilarious and incredibly well-written show with great characters and a lot of heart. Archer's a great show too - very smart, a little darker, but with equally as good characters. Both shows are better than the large majority of live-action sitcoms on TV right now, if you ask me.

As for The Simpsons - the first 8 or 9 seasons of that show are brilliant, and a strong candidate for the all-time greatest television comedy. It's gone downhill a lot, but it still does well enough in the ratings and in merchandising to stick around I guess. I wish they'd end it though...it's just sad to see it in its current state.

I have not watched a full Simpsons episode for many years, because the show is ired and not funny anymore. I have said this before, but the show would have been fresh if they would have allowed the children to grow up, as well as allowed the parents to grow older as well. This could have been gradual, maybe one year older for two seasons of time.

MASH to me is a famous example of a show going on way, way too long. The show should have stopped the season Gary Burghoff left. The post Burghoff seasons were rehashes of older episodes, and just not good, not to mention that the long time characters physically looked older. There was one 10th or 11th season show where Klinger asked the gang "Do you remember the "good old days" with Trapper?" Of course, this was the Bizarro Korean War which took 12 years and no one rotated home (with a 50 year old Lebanese corporal, who was more or less too old to be drafted in the first place).

If some situation comedies, such as The Big Bang Theory, are serialized, then how are some of the serialized comedies successful in syndication while the serialized dramas have to crash and burn in syndication? Are serialised scripted TV shows trouble? Serialized TV shows are more likely to get a proper wrap-up episode than a series with almost entirely standalone episodes. What about serialized dramas' potential in cable syndication? Can they fail there?

(I am not trying to bash TBBT since I am a fan of that show.)

Also, to User: Yong Fang: Despite being a live action show, M*A*S*H used a "floating timeline"; it is a eleven-year-long series covering a three-year-long war. It's pretty hard to make a very-long-running series cover a really short period of time (like four years or less). Another example is That '70s Show, an eight-season-long series covering a 3 1/2 year long period. The Simpsons, however, has its characters stuck in their 1990-1992 ages indefinitely despite its setting having to just "float" into the present year (2013).

Most modern sitcoms are serialised to some degree, but The Big Bang Theory not a great example as it is barely serialised. Studios try to discourage heavy serialisation in comedies so it sells better in syndication.

Serialised dramas do badly in syndication but I believe they do well in international sales and increasingly have Internet outlets like Netflix as a revenue stream. It's telling that nobody is airing ER reruns while Law & Order and Friends reruns are everywhere. Friday Night Lights was also a notorious ratings bust for ABC Family.

The McFarlane shows aren't really a good example of animation at its best. Granted, I like American Dad a lot, but it has a very off-beat sense of humor that's definitely not for everybody. Family Guy has its moments, especially in its older episodes, but overall it's a pretty lazy, juvenile show...and The Cleveland Show is generally pretty terrible.

I think the best animated show on TV right now is Bob's Burgers. It's a hilarious and incredibly well-written show with great characters and a lot of heart. Archer's a great show too - very smart, a little darker, but with equally as good characters. Both shows are better than the large majority of live-action sitcoms on TV right now, if you ask me.

As for The Simpsons - the first 8 or 9 seasons of that show are brilliant, and a strong candidate for the all-time greatest television comedy. It's gone downhill a lot, but it still does well enough in the ratings and in merchandising to stick around I guess. I wish they'd end it though...it's just sad to see it in its current state.
I agree with you on Bob's Burgers. It is another family show but it's also a working class show so there is at least some originality. I've yet to see Archer.

If the still-active original CSI series were to ever end its original run, would it get a special series finale episode? Or will it just be cancelled without even having a series finale/closure? It's rare for a procedural series to have a series finale epsiode.

Also, can procedural series have story arcs, also?

If the still-active original CSI series were to ever end its original run, would it get a special series finale episode? Or will it just be cancelled without even having a series finale/closure? It's rare for a procedural series to have a series finale epsiode.
CSI was a landmark show. Its spin-offs were big hits in their prime, but they didn't have the same impact as CSI original recipe. So I would think CBS would want to commemorate its achievements and impact with a proper finale, yes.
Also, can procedural series have story arcs, also?
Sure. There's lots of shows today that sort of blur the lines between procedural and arc-structured, in that they have a "case-of-the-week" structure but also have more complex storylines occurring in the background...such as Fringe, Person of Interest, The Good Wife, ect.

Another series that I think need to cease as a first-run series is South Park. I was attracted to this series through its reruns in syndication (it's not on broadcast syndication anymore as of 2012), but with the combination of current events and a sliding timescale, my interest in the series waned, and I stopped watching/following it after season 14. South Park may be cheap to produce. The series has went through three voice actresses; it doesn't have any (special) guest stars; and I thought that only poor people watched the series. So far, the program has been on for 17 seasons, and I suggest that its Season 20 be the last season.

How many more seasons does anyone see Law & Order: Special Victims Unit run for? The show is currently in its 15th season (currently the longest-running live-action scripted series on network TV), is produced in-house by Universal TV, and currently averages as the third-highest-rated scripted series on NBC (behind Chicago Fire and The Blacklist). It's stuck around because the rest of NBC's schedule has done so poorly ever since Friends retired, then the original Law & Order was cancelled. Personally, I do not want to dislike SVU as badly as The Simpsons.

How many more seasons does anyone see Law & Order: Special Victims Unit run for? The show is currently in its 15th season (currently the longest-running live-action scripted series on network TV), is produced in-house by Universal TV, and currently averages as the third-highest-rated scripted series on NBC (behind Chicago Fire and The Blacklist). It's stuck around because the rest of NBC's schedule has done so poorly ever since Friends retired, then the original Law & Order was cancelled. Personally, I do not want to dislike SVU as badly as The Simpsons.

Not much longer. I think the heart of the show is gone. I noticed last week's episode, it seemed they were getting graphic just for shock factor rather than necessary to the storyline. The show has had a good run, and it should bow out at the end of this season.

Not much longer. I think the heart of the show is gone. I noticed last week's episode, it seemed they were getting graphic just for shock factor rather than necessary to the storyline. The show has had a good run, and it should bow out at the end of this season.

Personally, I don't see shows such as SVU, NCIS, Big Bang Theory, or Modern Family bowing out as first-run series as long as The Simpsons remains on the air, so... Simpsons probably needs to bow out before any of those shows do.

http://www.manic-expression.com/apps/blog/show/20133965-a-look-at-tv-shows-that-went-on-far-to-long

3rd Rock From The Sun-This is a unique example because usually six years is not too long. In fact most shows are still going strong then, but this is an exception. When it first premiered this show was just plain hilarious. John Lithgow played the alien commander and his over the top acting was perfect for the show. Since the entire town was kind of nuts, the four aliens just seemed to blend right in. The question is, why was this show on for six years? I mean let's be honest; they had really run out of things to do by the end. Yes the final episode was very well done, but it would have been even better a year earlier.

Happy Days-I have talked about this a million times so will keep it short. This is the poster child for "why is this show still on the air?" Eleven season? Half the cast wasn't even in it anymore! The stories were silly and it was truly all about The Fonz. I have said before that I missed the show when it was first on, and maybe if I had been a diehardf an I would have understood. But I had no problem with Seinfeld and Cosby Show ending their runs before they ran their shows into the ground, so maybe not. Yes the final episode was sweet, but man was this show on far to long.

ER-It's amazing that this drama lasted for fourteen years. Even more amazing because they ran out of ideas after season 10 or 11. As someone once said, when you start replacing your replacement cast that's a sure sign that it may be time to pack it up. I stopped watching altogether by the time the last season rolled around, though I did watch the final episode which admittedly was very well done. ER in its prime was a groundbraking medicaldrama. Too bad that it went on few years longer than it should have. I mean, John Stamos? Really?

Dallas-This was a cutting-edge drama when it premiered in 1978. It went off the air in 1991! You know, I was a huge TV watcher back then (duh) and I have no memory of this show being on so long. It was opposite TGIF that may have something to do with it. In its early days the show was brilliant. The stunt “Who Shot J.R.?” was one of the biggest stunts ever, it had so much attention with the whole country wanting to know just who it was that shot J.R.! But as the years went on the show got silly, and of course it had the legendary jump the shark moment when the killed Bobby Ewing suddenly popped up in Pam’s shower, alive and well. The whole season before just a dream. I never watched the show, but even I call that laaammee!!! Despite that Dallas changed the course of TV drama and gave us the memorable spin-off Knott’s Landing and, yes, a new series today.

Murphy Brown-Talk about beating a dead horse! This show premiered in 1988 and was a huge hit. It was topical, clever, and very well written. It should have been cancelled around it’s eight season, but instead it plugged away for another two years. Man was it bad, and I mean really bad. By the end the show was barely recognizable, and so was the character.

Two and a Half Men-Will anything kill this show? I will be honest;I have never been a fan so maybe it's still as fresh as it was when it firstcame on the air. But somehow I doubt it. This show is currently in season 10and yes some may argue that it doesn't count as 10 seasons because season 8 was cut so short. I thought for sure Charlie Sheen leaving the series would be the end, but instead it just keeps plugging along. I admit I have seen some episodes and even laughed at some of the jokes, but I still can't bring myself to be a regular viewer.

The Simpsons-Oh, you knew we were going to be talking aboutthis one. When The Simpsons first aired it was a groundbreaking program. It wasc ontroversial, topical, and damn funny. The problem is that was in 1989. Thisis 2012....and it's still on!!! Would someone please explain to me why? I havegrown so bored with this show I didn't even check out the Halloween episode this year (someone will have to tell me if it was good or not). This show has lots of awards, accolades and records, including being the longest running prime time animated program, but good lord end already! Since I don't watch itI can't tell you for sure how stale the gags are, I know that the show itself has poked fun of the fact that many fans which it would end already. The show is like a stubborn person, refusing to accept that they’re day is past. I thinktwo decades and a feature film are enough! I feel bad because every year theyplow on, it’s tarnish on the history of the show. It should be remembered for its groundbreaking humor, not for the fact that it stayed on the air way to long!

Scrubs-This show was really good for many years. It was a screwball comedy with lots of heart, and could even be darn depressing. Howeverthe last few years got really silly. It just wasn’t the same show. Then camethe 8th season, and what appeared to be the final episode. It was a beautiful episode, very well done! That was that, right? No someone decided torevamp the show for a 9th season! The show was taken out of the hospital and put into a classroom? What? Well, needless to say I never watched it for methe series was done and that was that. That final episode from season 8 should have been IT, instead we get this humiliating last season.

Everybody Loves Raymond-There was a point around the seventh season I think where I realized the show had just lost its charm. It had gone from a little show about family situations, albeit a dysfunctional family, into the cast just yelling and arguing week after week. This show managed nine seasons, but I would have preferred it ended around 7.

Survivor-Why is this show still on? I realize that it’sdifferent every year but really, what hasn’t been done on that show by now? Iwill admit, this is all my opinion and it may well be that the show is exciting to watch year after year. But really…..isn’t it enough yet? By the way, who else would love to Celebrity Apprentice disappear already?

Survivor-Why is this show still on? I realize that it’sdifferent every year but really, what hasn’t been done on that show by now? Iwill admit, this is all my opinion and it may well be that the show is exciting to watch year after year. But really…..isn’t it enough yet? By the way, who else would love to Celebrity Apprentice disappear already?

My fix for Survivor is to do an episode called Survivor: The Donner Party. This is where you gather up all the winners, the Directors, Producers and Writers and put them on a snowed in mountain pass. You don't even have to feed them. You don't get voted off this one. The next one to freeze to death gets eaten by all the others.

The survivor will win 1 million dollars. That is, at the end, just leave him on the pass and he gets the money if he can come claim it 3000 miles away.

That should be some pretty good Pay for View and be the very last episode.

This should be SVU's last season IMO.

I loved the show in it's heyday. But, with Munch and Stabler already gone and Cragen leaving. The only character left from the original cast will be Benson. And, with occasional appearances from Cassidy. It's time for NBC to pull the plug.

This should be SVU's last season IMO.

I loved the show in it's heyday. But, with Munch and Stabler already gone and Cragen leaving. The only character left from the original cast will be Benson. And, with occasional appearances from Cassidy. It's time for NBC to pull the plug.
Ditto! Btw, I love your new Miles & Murphy avatar.

Ooooh. Thanks. It's the best one I could find. Tumblr barely shows any Miles love. :( *shakes fist at Tumblr*

I know animation and live-action are supposed to be in different leagues, but there is a 10-year gap between The Simpsons and Law & Order Special Victims Unit. If SVU retires now and The Simpsons didn't, the gap between TS and the next-longest-running scripted series in American broadcast television will get bigger.

The Simpsons should depart as a first-run series with Season 26, and after that, FOX should concentrate on creating brand-new animated shows. Don't even bother moving The Simpsons to a cable channel for new episodes, either.

Yeah. The Simpsons is totally worn out. That show premiered when I was 2. It shouldn't still be on TV. Way too long for a series to run. Especially an animated one.

This should be SVU's last season IMO.

I loved the show in it's heyday. But, with Munch and Stabler already gone and Cragen leaving. The only character left from the original cast will be Benson. And, with occasional appearances from Cassidy. It's time for NBC to pull the plug.

NBC's prime-time lineup is terrible. SVU may be slipping in quality, but it is still one of the best shows that network has. If they can renew Michael J. Fox's new series for a full season, SVU should get renewed for three more seasons!!

They renewed MJF's worst career move. Whoa.

I know I am in a minority here when I say that I am NOT a Michael J. Fox fan. Never understood the hoopla around him. And Family Ties was only popular in the 1980s because it came on either right before or right after The Cosby Show. The Alex P. Keaton character would get the "The TV Character That Most Grated on My Nerves Of All-Time" Award from me. Or "The Tv Character I Would Most Like To Slap The S--- Out Of" Award

Did the original Law & Order even need a special last episode? Probably not.

During the middle of its 20th season, NBC was considering the possibility of renewing the original L&O for a record-breaking 21st season. The show has remained on the air because it was produced in-house and the ratings for the rest of the NBC schedule were poor. There was an issue over license fees from TNT, however, and NBC terminated the original Law & Order after the 20th season. The possible reasons for L&O's cancellation were the low ratings and the financial disagreements between NBC and Dick Wolf. A wrap-up movie was being considered, but Wolf closed the door on that possibility and stated that L&O has "moved into the history books". L&O was a police/legal procedural, with almost entirely standalone episodes, and the nature of procedurals don't allow for special final episodes.

If a long-running scripted TV show is considered a "cash cow", then the terrible thing about these so-called "cash cows" is that you can't be responsible with them. They won't allow you to give other scripted shows a chance, and you just keep on producing new episodes of them until they just get cancelled without allowing them the chance to do a farewell episode.

If a long-running scripted TV show is considered a "cash cow", then the terrible thing about these so-called "cash cows" is that you can't be responsible with them. They won't allow you to give other scripted shows a chance, and you just keep on producing new episodes of them until they just get cancelled without allowing them the chance to do a farewell episode.

On our main street we had a two block area that no cars were allowed. They did away with that. The problem I can see is that we have lost much of our heritage and it gets worse every day. I grew up in in solid Western State that had customs and heritage once upon a time. Since then, we have had a heavy influx of people coming from areas that have long since lost their heritage. We lost ours as well. The older shows oozed heritage and were very successful. Today, with no heritage, the new shows are just bland with only a few exceptions. I don't watch too much of the recent shows and I watch ZERO "Reality" shows. I am still a firm believer that the Copyright for TV Shows should be either 25 years (like some countries) or the original 48 years of the 1908 law. From what I can see, the Networks are blaming everyone except themselves for the failed programming today. I see some brilliance once in awhile but, mostly, I see complacency. They used to give young writers chances that they won't today. It's no longer an art but a business.

^^Oh, so we purposely avoid watching new shows in order to protect existing established shows?

^^Oh, so we purposely avoid watching new shows in order to protect existing established shows?

What do YOU think? I recognize that form of debate. It usually gets you thrown out of 7th grade debate class.

I watch GOOD programming no matter when it was presented. I purposely don't watch those that are done to death or are still born and only for the 25-35 demographics. If it isn't written by adults for adults then why would I waste my time?

^^I forgot to mention, what I just said (about avoiding new shows and protecting existing shows) usually happens with American broadcast television (ABC, CBS, NBC, FOX and CW). Network TV is such a cutthroat business.

Another thought of mine:

We are always skeptical of animated TV shows ending their original runs. It is because of the possibility of them being revived at some point in the future (Especially as a regular first-run series). Also, there is the possibility that some of the voice actors will be too old to continue doing their roles. And there can be the stress associated with a 9-month-long production schedule for just one episode compared to 2 or 3 or so months for an episode of a live-action TV show, and probably the cost of production. Sometimes animated TV shows keep their original runs going despite its ratings already being low, and sometimes they jump to another network and start airing original episodes there.

http://whatculture.com/tv/10-tv-shows-that-ran-way-too-long.php

Shows they should've taken around the back of wood shed, Old Yeller-style.

X-Files should have stopped at season 7.

I have this question: Should all long-running US broadcast scripted TV series be restricted to six seasons, regardless of success/viewership/populatrity?

King Of The Hill ended at the exact right moment in my opinion. 13 seasons and it was ending just as it felt like they should. I think it was a good thing it ended when it did, because it would have completely run out of gas.

Now if only they would add it to Canadian Netflix...

For the record, the King of the Hill was cancelled.

Mike Judge and Greg Daniels were willing to continue producing the show.

If you need confirmation of this, see how they dug up Beavis-and-Butthead from its grave.

It was the untimely death of Brittany Murphy (Luanne Platter), that convinced the producers to end the show. :(

Actually, King of the Hill was cancelled to make room for The Cleveland Show.

http://www.shakefire.com/news/2008/11/01/reign-ends-for-king-of-the-hill

Lol why do you have so much anger against animated shows? I don't get it.

Most animation takes a very long time to complete - much longer than it takes to film actors in a studio. I mean, the entire episodes has to be drawn (whether hand-drawn or digitally), and then the drawings have to be animated. It's time-consuming. The same is true of animated movies, which usually take 5+ years from start to finish. South Park is actually an exception - they only produce their episodes the week before they air, but that show's animation is far less sophisticated than other animated shows (of course, that kind of adds to its charm).

Fact is, though, animated shows are simply easier to keep going than live-action shows. If an animated show is still profitable for a network, why end it? So the live-action shows won't feel bad? That's silly.

Then after the animation is drawn, you have to get all of the voice actors together to play their parts, which depending on their schedules (especially if they have other commitments) can take forever.

(in the case of South Park, Trey Parker and Matt Stone do majority of the voice acting)

Then of course there's the syncing of the voice recordings with the actual animation.

How are the animated series more profitable than live-action shows?

Define "live-action shows."

If you're referring to sitcoms, with animated series, the cost to produce them is much cheaper. You don't have to pay for an elaborate studio setting or a camera crew, for one.

If I have a choice between an adult animated series and a Reality show, bring on the cartoon characters.

Agreed.

Define "live-action shows."

If you're referring to sitcoms, with animated series, the cost to produce them is much cheaper. You don't have to pay for an elaborate studio setting or a camera crew, for one.

"Live action shows" is where you have on-camera actors (aka "body actors") playing that show's characters. Try to estimate the per-episode budget of a live-action comedy series, a live-action drama series, and an animated comedy series.

Nine months...:crazy: uggh. If you're gonna spend that much time to produce just one episode of an animated show, then maybe they (the animated shows) shouldn't be considered "easier" to keep its original run going that live-action shows at all.

I know I am in a minority here when I say that I am NOT a Michael J. Fox fan. Never understood the hoopla around him. And Family Ties was only popular in the 1980s because it came on either right before or right after The Cosby Show. The Alex P. Keaton character would get the "The TV Character That Most Grated on My Nerves Of All-Time" Award from me. Or "The Tv Character I Would Most Like To Slap The S--- Out Of" Award

For 3 seasons, it was smashed between The Cosby Show, Cheers and Night Court (all of which were some of the top shows of their time). By the 1987-1988 season, it was bumped in favor of A Different World.

So you're arguably correct. Family Ties doesn't do very well in syndication, because of how dated and topical it was.

I can't agree about Family Ties only being popular because of TCS. Of Course it was a contributing factor but FT was a top 10 hit at the same time that TCS took off. Cheers and Night Court weren't even top 10 hits that first year. And then when it moved to Sunday., it was the first program that NBC had that gave Murder She Wrote any Competition. Not only that but the final episode which aired on a Sunday night was the #1 ranked show of the week. A show that only was popular because of it's lead in wouldn't draw that many people. ADW was more of a timeslot hit because after TCS went off the air, it flopped. Of course it isn't popular in syndication but a lot of hit shows aren't.

I think all 4 shows helped feed off each other because after NBC started tinkering with their Thursday night lineup ( Putting Dear John, Grand or even Wings on that lineup) , none were as popular as the original four.

I have this question: Should all long-running US broadcast scripted TV series be restricted to six seasons, regardless of success/viewership/populatrity?

No, not all scripted programs should be restricted to six seasons. From my point of view, how many seasons a series should be restricted to varies from series to series. Although six years is a great run for a scripted TV series, some did fine lasting seven seasons and others did well or okay (if not great) lasting eight seasons.

However, it's getting to the point where I'm having an issue with a scripted series lasting 10+ years. I get suspicious of the motive for keeping a series going longer than it needs to, because it gives me the impression that the cast and crew members are continuing the show more for themselves than for the audience. (It's like a politician caring more about keeping his job than serving his constituents.)

Fortunately, there is a history of cast/crew members exhibiting restraint when it comes to television longevity. For example, Tim Allen was offered a salary raise if he did a ninth season of Home Improvement, but he declined, saying in no uncertain terms that the show's eight season (1998-99) would be its last.

Another example: Before The Dick Van Dyke Show went on the air, the producers decided that the series would not last more than five years. CBS wanted to do a sixth season, but the producers were adament in their pledge not run the series for more than five years. Therefore, despite maintaining strong ratings, TDVD ended its five-year run in 1966. The series produced a total of 158 episodes - more than enough for the series to air in daily syndicated reruns! :)

Just to reminder, anyone interested in getting The Dick Van Dyke Show Box Set can get the Blu-Ray Set from The Big River's Marketing place for $53.98 (Includes Shipping) ;)

How about this: Some of these new "anthology" shows with each season featuring a different cast of characters and story, such as American Horror Story on FX and True Detective on HBO. How many years/seasons do you see their original runs last?

A Blossom episode titled "The Joey Chronicles" (Season 3, Episode 5) had this quote from Joey (the title character's brother):

"Life is like a big motel, and there's only so many rooms. So in order to make room for the new guests, somebody's gotta check out."

Another lesson of the broadcast TV business and the nature of it. As I'm suggesting, long-runners have to make room for the new, fresh and young(er) shows because of the limited number of spots on a network's schedule.

(Blossom is a sitcom that ran for five seasons on NBC during the early 1990s.)

Irritations causing cancellations is inexcusable, you never leave it unresolved alone, you fix them right away in order to continue before time runs out.

For the record, the King of the Hill was cancelled.

Mike Judge and Greg Daniels were willing to continue producing the show.

If you need confirmation of this, see how they dug up Beavis-and-Butthead from its grave.
But even when B&B was brought back what did MTV unceremoniously do, just take it off the air after 3-4 episodes because MTV execs were getting antsy at B&B making fun of the networks top rated shows like Jersey Shore and Teen Mom.

http://whatculture.com/film/14-washed-tv-shows-desperate-need-cancellation.php

Whereas a troubling movie that outstays its welcome might only steal an extra 30 minutes or so of your precious time, with TV shows it’s a whole different story. If you’re a fan of a hit series, it’s likely that, if it stays on the air long enough, the quality is going to begin to decline as creative stagnation sets in, even if ratings continue to be high enough that it’s financially viable to keep the show on the air, and everyone is keen to ride the gravy train along the way.

If you’ve been watching a show for close to or even upwards of a decade, it’s not exactly easy to detach yourself: you feel like you owe it to yourself to see it through to the end, hopeful that each upcoming season just might be the last. But dammit, then it gets renewed for another season (or three), and you resign yourself to the fact that, while you could just abandon the sinking ship, you’re almost certainly going to keep contributing to the problem by helping boost those precious ratings.

Though some shows have proven they can return from the brink of awfulness (Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. delivered a mostly terrible first season before recovering), while others that deserve cancellation have recently been given their merciful marching orders (Two and a Half Men, Glee), here are 14 shows all in their sure decline (some in worse states than others) and in desperate need of cancellation.

This is a great list. Family Guy should have ranked higher and I agree on L&O SVU. Dick Wolf should concentrate on his 2 younger shows which are Chicago Fire and Chicago PD. Put the Law and Order franchise to sleep Dick and move on.

I commented on the article that all of the other shows on that list can end their original runs before The Big Bang Theory does. Matter of fact, some of the shows on this list ought to be "the new The Simpsons".

The Big Bang Theory is the new The Simpsons
Grey's Anatomy is the new The Simpsons
Bones is the new The Simpsons
Supernatural is the new The Simpsons
Law & Order: Special Victims Unit is definitely the new The Simpsons
CSI: Crime Scene Investigation is the new The Simpsons
NCIS is the new The Simpsons

All of these shows have ended up (or, in the case of The Big Bang Theory, will end up) being total "Simpsons", And I actually like some of the shows I listed (most of all, NCIS) better than The Simpsons itself.

8 seasons is enough, I hate it when a show goes on for much longer as if the producers don't know when to call it quits, I mean who cares if your actors are asking for a pay raise or if your show is the #1 rated TV program, the audience that stood by the show from the beginning will eventually burn out and look elsewhere.

It's like everything else, you get tired of wearing the same clothes go out and buy new clothes, you get tired of eating the same food every night go out and eat something else, you get tired of the same girlfriend go out and look for a new one.

Another question: A scripted TV series is renewed for another season, and sometime later, it is announced that the season will be the show's last. Sometimes, the announcement of the show's ending would be made midway during production of the season, or while the season is currently airing. Will this kind of timing affect viewership for the show's series finale/final episode in any way?

Shows that lasted a lot longer than they should have? (http://officialfan.proboards.com/thread/519920/shows-lasted-lot-longer)

One question: Is there a limit to how many shows on a single network that can be in "final season" during one television season?

Another question: A scripted TV series is renewed for another season, and sometime later, it is announced that the season will be the show's last. Sometimes, the announcement of the show's ending would be made midway during production of the season, or while the season is currently airing. Will this kind of timing affect viewership for the show's series finale/final episode in any way?
nope - everyone already gave up on that lame duck already.

nope - everyone already gave up on that lame duck already.

Actually, some shows like M*A*S*H, Cheers, Seinfeld, Friends, and Breaking Bad have seen major upticks in viewership for their series finales.