Why PHYLLIS Ended

[LittleRickyII]

Recently, I posted about my recollection that Phyllis ended because Cloris Leachman had had enough and made the decision herself. Apparently, my memory is playing tricks on me. As these articles indicate, it was CBS that pulled the plug; Cloris Leachman was apparently lobbying to get CBS to renew it. Phyllis, which immediately followed Rhoda on Monday nights, wound up in 40th place for the season. Rhoda didn't do a whole lot better; it was in 32nd place. But a rule of thumb in television is that the audience is supposed to build through the night. If a show loses a significant enough audience share compared to the show that precedes it, it risks being cancelled. (The competition for Rhoda and Phyllis over on NBC was Little House on the Prairie, which was in 16th place; on ABC it was The Captain and Tenille, which did not do well in the ratings and was also cancelled).

Interestingly, The Mary Tyler Moore Show was in 39th place that season, just ahead of Phyllis. So you have to wonder, would MTM have been cancelled that season as well had Mary wanted to continue the show? My guess is it would not have been given that 1) being able to land in 39th place on low-rated Saturday night is a pretty good feat; 2) MTM was up against Starsky and Hutch and the NBC Night at the Movies; neither of those shows placed in the top 30, either, and I'm guessing MTM did better than both, or at least as well; and 3) MTM followed the low-rated Doc, so it had the misfortune that year of following a weak lead-in show. But I digress. Back to Phyllis, these articles tell the story of what happened to that show. Blame CBS. If they had moved the show to a different time slot, as Cloris Leachman wanted, perhaps it would have bounced back in the ratings. Who knows?

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id...leachman&hl=en

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id...leachman&hl=en

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id...leachman&hl=en

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id...leachman&hl=en

[OOliver]

Thanks for taking the time to clear all that up for us! Interesting articles.

[scotsguy]

Very interesting,I love Rhoda but I feel from season4,when Rhoda worked in the custome hire store,the storylines went downill although all the cast were giving it a 100 per cent.
As for Phyllis the office setting was a bad idea and there were too many new characters.

[LittleRickyII]

Originally Posted by scotsguy

Very interesting,I love Rhoda but I feel from season4,when Rhoda worked in the custome hire store,the storylines went downill although all the cast were giving it a 100 per cent.
As for Phyllis the office setting was a bad idea and there were too many new characters.

I agree with you about Rhoda. Actually, I think it started to lose it's charm in the third season. With all the hits Phyllis suffered, it likely would have deteriorated as well had it continued. So perhaps it's a good thing it ended after just two seasons.

[LittleRickyII]

Originally Posted by OOliver

Thanks for taking the time to clear all that up for us! Interesting articles.

Sure. I had fun doing it. It was a slow day at work. Don't tell my boss.

[McGillicuddy]

Yes, Little Ricky, you sure have pulled up some interesting stuff on Phyllis! The articles about Barbara Colby and Judith Lowery were fascinating also.

[catlover79]

Originally Posted by LittleRickyII

Sure. I had fun doing it. It was a slow day at work. Don't tell my boss.

My lips are sealed.

[OOliver]

I think the problem with both RHODA and PHYLLIS was that when the shows ran into trouble, they tried to ape 'THE MARY TYLER MOORE SHOW'. They threw both leading ladies into a work situation where the boss was gruff (Lou Grant), but the co-workers were charming and likeable. (It was the mid-70s, weren't there any female bosses in NYC or SF?).

Audiences just weren't buying into it.

[catlover79]

Originally Posted by OOliver

I think the problem with both RHODA and PHYLLIS was that when the shows ran into trouble, they tried to ape 'THE MARY TYLER MOORE SHOW'. They threw both leading ladies into a work situation where the boss was gruff (Lou Grant), but the co-workers were charming and likeable. (It was the mid-70s, weren't there any female bosses in NYC or SF?).

Audiences just weren't buying into it.

I have to agree. I think Phyllis was doomed from the start, from the murder of Barbara Colby to the deaths of Burt Mustin and Judith Mowry. Not to mention the other cast changes, changes of workplace, etc. The show just never came together. Phyllis Lindstrom was much stronger as a supporting character than a lead, anyway.

[LittleRickyII]

Originally Posted by OOliver

I think the problem with both RHODA and PHYLLIS was that when the shows ran into trouble, they tried to ape 'THE MARY TYLER MOORE SHOW'. They threw both leading ladies into a work situation where the boss was gruff (Lou Grant), but the co-workers were charming and likeable. (It was the mid-70s, weren't there any female bosses in NYC or SF?).

Audiences just weren't buying into it.

I totally agree with that. A big difference between Ed Asner and those other bosses: Ed Asner's Lou Grant was gruff and funny.

[LittleRickyII]

Originally Posted by catlover79

I have to agree. I think Phyllis was doomed from the start, from the murder of Barbara Colby to the deaths of Burt Mustin and Judith Mowry. Not to mention the other cast changes, changes of workplace, etc. The show just never came together. Phyllis Lindstrom was much stronger as a supporting character than a lead, anyway.

Probably so, but I do think the domestic side of this show worked pretty well. It was just when she was in the workplace that it often fell flat. Interestingly, The Mary Tyler Moore Show was pretty evenly split between domestic and workplace in the beginning, but by the end after Rhoda and Phyllis had been spun off, it was almost entirely about her life in the office. Somehow that worked for her show, but not for Rhoda and Phyllis.

[OOliver]

The major difference between Rhoda/Phyllis and MTM was that MTM had no family - her office workers were her surrogate family (as she said in the last episode) which is why the 'workplace' worked so well for the show.

Rhoda had family: her sister, mother, and father (and husband) - she didn't need a 'father figure' in Jack Doyle like MTM needed one in 'Lou Grant'. She didn't need Myrna as a sister role when she had Brenda.

Phyllis had family also: her inlaws, as well as her daughter. She didn't need the office workers to be her surrogate family. She didn't need the others.

[scotsguy]

I think also in Phyllis they tried to copy the Ted Baxter character,first with Leo and then Leonard,both were nowhere near as funny.
I found just too many characters in the office in the 2nd season of Phyllis,I'd liked to have seen more interaction with Phyllis and Harriett,just wanted that Leonard,to go away....
Would have been nice to have seen Phyllis with a new regular boyfriend in season2,she was still going on about Lars,too much.

[TVFactFan]

Originally Posted by LittleRickyII

Recently, I posted about my recollection that Phyllis ended because Cloris Leachman had had enough and made the decision herself. Apparently, my memory is playing tricks on me. As these articles indicate, it was CBS that pulled the plug; Cloris Leachman was apparently lobbying to get CBS to renew it. Phyllis, which immediately followed Rhoda on Monday nights, wound up in 40th place for the season. Rhoda didn't do a whole lot better; it was in 32nd place. But a rule of thumb in television is that the audience is supposed to build through the night. If a show loses a significant enough audience share compared to the show that precedes it, it risks being cancelled. (The competition for Rhoda and Phyllis over on NBC was Little House on the Prairie, which was in 16th place; on ABC it was The Captain and Tenille, which did not do well in the ratings and was also cancelled).

Interestingly, The Mary Tyler Moore Show was in 39th place that season, just ahead of Phyllis. So you have to wonder, would MTM have been cancelled that season as well had Mary wanted to continue the show? My guess is it would not have been given that 1) being able to land in 39th place on low-rated Saturday night is a pretty good feat; 2) MTM was up against Starsky and Hutch and the NBC Night at the Movies; neither of those shows placed in the top 30, either, and I'm guessing MTM did better than both, or at least as well; and 3) MTM followed the low-rated Doc, so it had the misfortune that year of following a weak lead-in show. But I digress. Back to Phyllis, these articles tell the story of what happened to that show. Blame CBS. If they had moved the show to a different time slot, as Cloris Leachman wanted, perhaps it would have bounced back in the ratings. Who knows?

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id...leachman&hl=en

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id...leachman&hl=en

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id...leachman&hl=en

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id...leachman&hl=en

You can't compare the ratings of MTM to Phyllis because at that the time MTM was already an established show with a 5 run. Phyllis on the Other hand was only in it's second season which is why it was easy to eliminate.

[LittleRickyII]

Originally Posted by PhilaEaglesHater

You can't compare the ratings of MTM to Phyllis because at that the time MTM was already an established show with a 5 run. Phyllis on the Other hand was only in it's second season which is why it was easy to eliminate.

Actually, it's quite common for networks to cancel an established show when ratings start to decline because there is a feeling that viewers have moved on and have removed it from their routine, so ratings will only get lower; whereas low ratings for a newer show can be interpreted as viewers simply haven't discovered it yet. So if they believe in it, they may hold onto it is little longer until it finds its audience.