
Ranking TV Shows That Got Canceled - RaSoJo
https://priceonomics.com/ranking-the-most-beloved-tv-shows-that-got/
======
minimaxir
You can't use future events (# ratings on IMDb _10 years later_ ) to determine
what someone "should" have done.

IMDb ratings in general follow a four point scale
([http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/FourPointScale](http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/FourPointScale))
and are also skewed toward the internet-savvy demographic. It's a good example
of a homogeneous population and the problems that can cause for data analysis.

~~~
Delameko
Not to mention that Firefly's cancellation has posthumously added to its
notoriety. Nearly every Firefly mention is in relation to its cancellation.
Would it be as popular if it hadn't been cancelled?

I really like Firefly, but the cancellation meant they didn't have the
opportunity to fuck it up. Every other Whedon series has had poor seasons.

~~~
kazagistar
Actually, I think this is consistent. 13-26 or so episodes is a pretty good
length. Beyond that, ideas get stale, characters get repetitive, plots get
either formulaic, or too convoluted to ever resolve, and a show generally
starts to tilt downward.

I wish there were more shows that just were OK with planning an ending. I like
stories with endings. Just know your limits, don't try to make a show that can
go on for a million seasons, end it when its still good, and then use the
goodwill garnered from making a masterpiece to build the next creative thing.

I'm not sure why this model seems to be more successful in, say, Anime as
opposed to western TV. Budget, maybe?

~~~
jandrese
I think they're starting to get it. Breaking Bad fully executed its ending.
Game of Thrones announced their end years in advance. TV producers are finally
starting to come on board with the idea of stopping a show even though it's
popular.

~~~
sverige
The alternative is to mint an evergreen series like Law & Order. Someone finds
a dead body in NYC; investigation, trial, and silly social commentary ensue.
Then vary the parameters a bit and you get SVU, Criminal Intent, et al.
Characters are interchangeable, guest spots abound, social commentary changes
with the politics of the day.

Walking Dead -- eh, it's getting a little old. I thought they were going to
explore some primitive economics, and maybe they will, but the cliffhanger gag
last season reminded me too much of "Who Shot JR?" Not sure I care. And the
spinoff went too heavy on the social commentary, couldn't even finish Season
Two.

Mr. Robot is more promising, but I haven't seen one yet that comes close to
the satisfaction I got from the clear arc of the story in Breaking Bad. Sons
of Anarchy tried, but fell short somehow.

~~~
hannele
Walking Dead, I just wish they could find another model for a season.

"Oh, we're walking or driving through the woods" "Cool, we found a place that
looks cool and has cool people" "Oh, the cool people were actually horrible
for some reason" "Time to blow it up I guess."

------
dogma1138
Internet ranking for cult shows/movies is problematic, these shows have an
extremely loyal fan base which ties the origins of the word fan to it's root
fanatic quite often.

While these are great shows, the ranking don't necessarily mean much, it just
means that there were more fans willing to give the show a good rating, and
more likely than not on probably more than a few accounts.

It's hard to compare IMDB ratings properly when shows like America's Got
Talent or the Voice only have 5000-7000 votes with a pretty shitty score while
clearly being considerably more popular with the mass audience. Shows like GoT
are an outlier with over 1M votes cast, while even highly acclaimed TV sci fi
shows like Star Trek TNG have only about 60K votes.

Firefly is the "best tv show that got canceled ever" just like Kim Jong Un is
Time's internet person of the year, mostly anonymous internet voting and
highly loyal and fanatic fan base can easily skew statistics.

I love Firefly I would loved to have seen it live to be 5-6 seasons old, but
every time I see people talk about it like it was the "greatest mistake" in
modern television programming I can't really take them seriously.

~~~
kijin
It might not have been the greatest mistake in modern television programming,
but the size and enthusiasm of the fan base at least says something about how
profitable it might be (or not) if it returned on, say, Netflix.

Potential producers might also want to consider factors such as the average
age and income of a Firefly fan (since it was aired 13 years ago and remain
popular among Silicon Valley geeks) and whether it would be feasible to bring
some of the original cast back together and still have an interesting story
(Star Wars VII did).

~~~
fsloth
" it might be if it returned on, say, Netflix."

My Netflix has Firefly. In Finland. Our selection in Netflix in generally very
limited, though. Or do you mean Netflix would make new seasons?

~~~
kijin
New seasons. Which might or might not be a good idea, depending on some of the
factors I mentioned.

------
pmiller2
I'm a little surprised _Dollhouse_ didn't rank higher. It's really a
wonderful, extended meditation on the nature of identity, wrapped up in a sci-
fi, transhumanist, pre-apocalyptic shell, with a liberal dash of feminism.
Fran Kranz, Olivia Williams, and (last, but not least) Enver Gjokaj are
standouts among the excellent cast.

I do, however, recommend watching the first pilot from the DVD set rather than
the actual pilot episode that aired. It takes a couple episodes to get going,
but once it does, it's truly amazing.

~~~
thom
Dollhouse was premised on the idea that Eliza Dushku could convincingly play a
different character every week. I do not think it worked very well.

~~~
morganvachon
I can imagine if they rebooted the show, Tatiana Maslany could pull it off
without a hitch. It's basically what she's doing in Orphan Black, but she's
playing those multiple characters two or three at a time in one episode.

------
jfoutz
Fox tried so many crazy things. Brisco County Jr., Dark Angel, Alien Nation.
They'd stand by shows that did ok, like x files or fringe, and constantly try
random new stuff.

Yeah, i'm bummed with the rest of the internet that Firefly got canceled. Some
browncoats still have some hate for Fox. But really without fox churning
through random ideas, it never would have been made.

~~~
cgriswald
The browncoat hate for Fox isn't just that the show was cancelled but that it
was aired somewhat out of order in inconsistent timeslots and then cancelled
it.

Fox has set up numerous shows for failure, including Arrested Development,
which was aired against Monday Night Football and wasn't aired during sweeps
week. How does a show succeed, no matter how good, when it's never given a
chance to develop an audience?

You're being overly generous to Fox. It's not enough to "try" crazy shows.
They're dead in the water if they're set up for failure this way by extremely
short term thinking.

~~~
sho_hn
> Fox has set up numerous shows for failure

Seems like a dubious claim to me, since it's not in their interest. My guess
is that since the most coveted timeslots are a finite resource, they need to
make hard calls about placing stable earners in them vs. new shows, for
example, or bank on audiences finding those new shows anyway, via directed
marketing effots. "Giving a show a chance to develop an audience" is
technically achieved by airing it at all, and it's not the only thing they
need to get done in a day.

You can criticize individual decisions they make, but only if you take that
full picture of everything they need to accomodate into account. There can be
good reasons why a network doesn't place your favorite show in your preferred
timeslot.

~~~
ghaff
Without commenting on Firefly specifically, one hears a lot of comments in the
vein of: "They needed to just give this show another season so that it could
find its voice/find an audience/develop its storyline/etc." Personally as a
viewer, especially these days, you have very little time to grab me given how
many options there are--and how relatively little time I spend watching TV.
I'm not going to give your show 3 seasons, even if the network is willing, to
hope it turns into something interesting.

~~~
wruza
Consumer's life is fast and boring, so he cannot wait to entertain himself. I
think it is called positive feedback.

------
spike021
I think a similar situation happened with 'Chuck'. The last couple seasons of
it were produced in such a way that the finales could have worked as series
finales since they were never sure it would be extended further.

As a result, it had weird sponsorships like from Subway, which meant scenes of
the show were pretty much Subway ads.

But anyway, my point is that nowadays on Netflix and IMDB the show has lots of
ratings and they're generally positive.

IMDB has Chuck as 8.2/10 based on 109,543 ratings, which I would think is
decent. I think the last time I noticed it, Netflix had it at 4.5 or so out of
5 stars (not sure on overall numbers, however).

That show had a great blend of a bunch of genres:
cheesy/action/suspense/romance/sci-fi to name just a few.

But I think in general this kind of situation is mostly a result of our times.
5+ years ago shows were just really beginning to be widely available (at least
to people who didn't torrent online and things like that). Back then you
really had to intentionally be around when something aired on TV or you needed
to care enough to set it to record to DVR (or heck, even VHS further back).

Nowadays it's easy enough to just open up Netflix and continue watching a show
sequentially on demand.

~~~
JshWright
We've rewatched Chuck a couple times, but always end on the episode where
Ellie has her baby and Chuck proposes to Sarah. After that, it's just too much
of a roller coaster (for all the reasons you mentioned).

~~~
spike021
The last couple seasons are still decent, but because of the on again, off
again nature of the series that rollercoaster is quite uncomfortable to ride.

------
petra
The logic behind the rise of niche programs is simple : they didn't fit the
advertising based model , which seeks mass appeal, but they are the thing that
makes a loyal fan stay subscribed to netflix(or Amazon) even if the rest of
netflix isn't great for him - but still nice to watch.

As for the economics - let's say each niche grabs 5% of viewers - you need
just 20 shows, which is reasonable.

~~~
lucozade
This is related to an opportunity cost problem that Netflix doesn't have (so
much).

The networks have a limited set of time slots so if one show is deemed
relatively better than another for a particular slot then it makes sense to
consider a swap.

Netflix only really needs the show to make money to keep it going. If a
competing show makes more money then that's great. Show both.

~~~
dogma1138
Netflix to some extent actually prefers "niche programming". Their mass appeal
library and show would sell subscriptions but they'll peak rather quickly as a
replacement for cable. Their niche programming is very good at attracting new
customers since these customers tend to be more hardcore and they don't have
(m)any alternatives.

How much of this will remain as Netflix moves towards original programming I
don't know, I think that they are likely to move most of their mass appeal
programming to originals and just pick up the odd cult classics/fanclub shows
and movies and maybe revive a franchise once in awhile.

~~~
douche
I've been pretty disappointed with Netflix offerings lately. I've been finding
that Amazon Prime Video has a better selection of shows and movies.

Although I'm still waiting for something that just streams everything in TCM's
or the Criterion Collection's back catalog. A lot of old movies, even very
notable ones, are hard to find anywhere, legally or otherwise.

~~~
walterbell
FilmStruck (TCM + Criterion) is scheduled for Dec 2016 launch,
[https://www.criterion.com/current/posts/4032-introducing-
fil...](https://www.criterion.com/current/posts/4032-introducing-filmstruck)

Netflix has a few Criterion films,
[http://streamingcriterions.com/](http://streamingcriterions.com/)

~~~
sotojuan
Hulu has (had? Don't remember) a ton of CC films such that a film's Hulu
availability is featured in the actual CC website.

~~~
walterbell
From the link above, CC@Hulu is ending in Nov to make way for the new service.

~~~
sotojuan
Thanks. I'd prefer that actually!

------
grawlinson
One season was enough. I don't know about the rest of you, but I quite like
small one-off or short-lived TV runs because they often set out to tell a
story and once their story is told, that is it. No tacked on extra seasons.

~~~
ht_th
Agreed. Just tell a good story, take the time it needs, and be done. In my
opinion, long-lived series tend to become repetitive and formulaic, escalate
beyond measure because somehow there always has to be a new bigger bad (I am
looking at you Stargate SG1) or more trumped up storyline. I understand the
appeal to keep on going as long as it makes (a lot of) money. But as an
appreciator of a good story I just move on to a fresh idea.

~~~
TeMPOraL
I disagree with you on SG-1, though I'd like to bring up Supernatural 'spoiler
mentioned as a perfect example of what you're talking about.

SG-1, compared to many other overdone shows, had one redeeming quality - the
protagonists (in this case, all humans) actually _progressed_ through the
course of the show. In SG-1 humans went from 1980s level of technology in
Season 1 to spaceships, teleporters and off-world colonies in Season 10. So
new 'bigger bad' always made some kind of sense, and I feel there was a space
for a few seasons worth of additional interesting ideas.

That, or they could have simply continued Stargate: Universe.

There is one series I'm really up in arms about it being recently cancelled -
Person of Interest. That one was nowhere close to repetitive, it had tons and
tons of space for good, intelligent story developments, and it got cancelled
behind the crew's back anyway, because whatever. Fuck you, CBS, for cutting
out what was probably the only thing in history of television that approached
the topic of AI in a smart, realistic way (and also basically broke Snowden's
revelations a year before Snowden).

~~~
ht_th
I do not disagree with you on humanities' progression in SG1, but I'd think
that all these mayor shifts in technological advancement would have been
better explored in separate series rather than in one big swooping race to the
max.

For example how Star Trek explored early space exploration in Enterprise (sans
time traveling shenanigans), another era in the original series, and another
one in The new generation and DS9 and Voyager.

I do like the stargate universe, the Atlantis spin-off in particular, and I
would like to see more of it. Maybe they can set a new series in, say, 100
years from the ending of SG1. Or maybe it is time to move on to fresh ideas. I
liked the universe of The Expanse, for example, and am looking forward how
they can move it forward.

(I was less happy about the Dark Matter universe, or rather the story told in
it, for example: one small ship with a small crew holding the balance and
future of the entire (known) universe in their hands is a bit too much for
me.)

~~~
TeMPOraL
Yeah, I agree. Splitting SG-1 off would work for me too. I just grow very fond
of the universe (and the style, tbh. SG-1 was actually one of the things that
held me together during my biggest periods of depression - I loved the
sarcastic style of O'Neill).

I like The Expanse too, I'm waiting for the second season, and seriously
considering picking up the books it's based on.

------
kchoudhu
The list all of the high points for me: Veronica Mars, Jericho and Freaks and
Geeks.

I also appreciate the presence of Stargate: Universe on the list. Everyone
hated it, but I really, really, really enjoyed the different take on the
Stargate, er, universe.

~~~
TeMPOraL
I liked it too. It was a very _different_ Stargate. More dark, more
psychological. Some camera takes stolen from BattleStar: Galactica. But it was
interesting, and it get much more interesting (the whole cosmic microwave
background thing) just before they cut it down :/.

~~~
vidarh
I loved it too.

And it was just hilarious how much it looked like the "younger, edgier"
version from SG1 "200".

One of the best parts of the entire Stargate franchise is the amount of self-
referential and self-deprecating humour in it.

------
lutusp
Who knows? Maybe if Firefly hadn't been cancelled, its audience might have
evaporated, or Joss Whedon might have run out of ideas for new episodes (as
unlikely as that sounds). We just can't know.

I think Firefly was absolutely terrific and the people at Fox were perfect
morons not to see what they were destroying, but none of this is science and
we can't possibly know what might have happened in an alternate future. For
contrast, there's the "Matrix" sequels to show what can happen when projects
aren't terminated when their sell-by date arrives.

~~~
masklinn
> Joss Whedon might have run out of ideas for new episodes

Joss Whedon had planned 7 seasons.

------
ravenstine
Oh wow, I can't believe that Rome is #2! That's one of my all-time favorite
shows and I've only ever known 1 other person who has even heard of it. I
really do recommend it to anyone who likes historical drama with spare-no-
expense sets, costumes and visual effects.

------
sovande
The closest successor to Firefly, Dark Matter (minus the cowboy thing) only
just made it to season 2 but is now renewed for season 3 by reducing
production costs and selling older seasons to Netflix.

The new way people are watching TV is on-demand rather than on-air which is
dramatically cutting ad-based income for traditional networks. If networks can
partner or sell to streaming companies like Netflix it might help long tail
shows like Firefly to survive in the future. Another great Syfy show, The
Expanse, will hopefully survive that way whereas back in 2003 it would have
been axed by now.

------
derekp7
Looking over this list (at least for the ones I'm familiar with), most of
these shows really require that you see the premier episode (or first several
episodes) in order to "get into" it. It is hard for viewers that come in the
middle of the season, or the following season.

So unless it was really popular from the beginning, they stand a good chance
of not picking up ratings later on. Which also explains why they do so good in
streaming format -- you can binge watch them from the very beginning.

~~~
sotojuan
Arrested Development especially rewarded loyal, in-order viewing and hurt
"random" (seeing any episode out of order while switching channels) because
the show focused a lot on jokes or plot devices made episodes before.

------
CurtMonash
The Buffy vs. Angel vs. Firefly discussion is a good one. Babylon 5, Veronica
Mars, and the recent Battlestar Galactica also fit in. Ditto Dollhouse,
Heroes, Alias and Lost.

I'd say:

\-- It's just a detail, but recall that the first season of Buffy was actually
just a half-season in length.

\-- The first three seasons of Buffy had a very clear meta-metaphor. :) It
posited monsters as being a good representation for what happens in actual
high school life.

\-- That aspect of the show hit its stride in the Buffy/Angel romance: Girl
sleeps with guy and he turns into a monster.

\-- Firefly was good, but nothing in it was as brilliant as, say, the best of
Buffy.

\-- A lot of shows started with a lot of monster-of-the-week/crisis-of-the-
week and emphasized the ongoing story more later into the run. But most of the
shows cited did at least some standalone stories all the way to the end.
(Babylon 5 is one exception).

\-- Firefly never got past that part of the show's evolution. This may be one
reason it never matched Buffy's brilliance.

\-- Not knowing whether or not a show will be renewed is a huge problem. If
you're a fan of Buffy or Angel or Babylon 5, you're familiar with the
consequences.

\-- The writers' strike messed up multiple shows, or at least their audiences.
I never went back to watching Battlestar Galactica post-strike.

\-- Joss Whedon tried to oversee three shows at once. That didn't go well.
Each of Buffy, Angel and Firefly deserved more of his attention.

\-- Dollhouse didn't have real characters, the people running the place
excepted. It was never going to work.

\-- Some shows have a brilliant idea for an overarching story, in which the
big story and the individual characters' experiences and arcs mesh
beautifully. Then that story comes to a natural end, and the show is never
quite as good again. Veronica Mars Season 1 is a great example. Ditto the
first 1 1/2 or 2 seasons of Alias. Ditto Babylon 5 after things were wrapped
up in Season 4.

\-- I'd put Battlestar Galactica into the same group. The best part was the
first season, as everybody builds a society on the fly )as it were) that can
survive against terrible odds. The plots with the election and the defeat and
the aftermath weren't as good. And the pseudo-mystical stuff toward the end
was just weird.

~~~
ghaff
I agree with a lot of what you wrote.

Babylon 5 was a pretty unfortunate case. There was a lot to love about it but
also so much that you have to overlook that it's really hard to recommend,
especially a couple decades later (ack! seriously).

The effects were pretty low budget at the time--even if somewhat revolutionary
for low budget graphics (Amiga).

The acting was _very_ uneven.

And, generally, as you suggest the uncertainties around renewals through the
series run drove too many decisions with respect to the story arc and made the
whole ending arc somewhat anticlimactic. I'm also not sure that shows driven
so heavily by central mysteries--as B5 was--work very well outside of their
original context. (And perhaps in today's on-demand viewing environment more
broadly.)

I think I liked Battlestar Galactica more than you did overall but agree that
the final somewhat mystical arc wasn't a strong finish. Lost didn't close well
either after a strong start.

~~~
CurtMonash
I actually think Babylon 5, Seasons 2-4, was outstanding. I'm not sure of what
you mean by being very negative about some of the acting -- I see the range as
being from competent to brilliant, with almost nothing that was outright bad,
a few specific lines perhaps excepted.

There was quite a bit of good stuff in the fifth season as well, actually,
mainly the Centauri and telepath arcs.

I also can't think of any effects that are distracting on a rewatch.

I stopped watching Lost early on, perhaps in Season 2. I stopped watching
Heroes a few episodes into Season 2; when Kristen Bell of all people seemed to
be giving a bad performance, I concluded that the show was probably doomed.

------
modernerd
They used total ratings as a proxy for fan popularity.

I sorted by average rating count per day to give a different outlook, as some
shows have been available to rate for longer.

Firefly (37 ratings a day) is still up there in second place below Terra Nova
(38 a day): [http://d.pr/i/1119j](http://d.pr/i/1119j)

That doesn't take into consideration the rating values, though; just their
quantity. It would be interesting to see ratings per day weighted by user
rating, but I couldn't find a way to retrieve that raw data.

------
mverwijs
I am reminded of an interview with Joe Satriani. The interviewer asked if he
was worried about recording contracts given that he is not hugely popular. His
answer was something along the lines of: I may not be as popular as some, but
studios also do not have to spend buckets of money on advertising and
marketing when I release an album. My smallish fanbase will buy my albums when
they come out regardless.

I suspect Netflix is in a better position (now) to cater to those type of fans
than Fox was then.

Too late for firefly, unfortunately.

------
spydum
I think it will be very interesting how the major broadcasters/content
producers do with Nielsen Total Audience Measurement going live. Remember all
these media execs make the live or die calls off those media ratings and ad
sales. For over a decade Nielsen has been discounting online viewership. Yes
they were covering DVR, but it felt half assed. A lot of people blamed Jericho
getting cut because they questioned nielsens numbers.

------
wozniacki
Luck is another HBO show that started to show great promise but was cancelled
due to the death of some horses, at least according to the show's producers.
[1]

How to make it in America too was bright but was cancelled due to more
conventional reasons. [2]

[1] HBO Luck

[http://www.hbo.com/luck](http://www.hbo.com/luck)

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luck_(TV_series)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luck_\(TV_series\))

[2] HBO How to Make It in America

[http://www.hbo.com/how-to-make-it-in-america](http://www.hbo.com/how-to-make-
it-in-america)

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_to_Make_It_in_America](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_to_Make_It_in_America)

------
fauria
It surprises me that there are no mentions to Carnivàle...

~~~
Lio
Totally agree, it was a great show. You can really see in the second season
how the they dithered over killing it.

I believe it was originally set to be only 2 seasons, which is fine.

Then they decided to extended it, so they added the Sophie plot.

Then the execs changed their minds and cancelled it anyway without wrapping up
the new plot. Doh!

Whilst I was sad Rome only had 2 seasons at least it's fairly self contained
and ends well.

Deadwood though has to be my top pick for a bad incomplete ending.

~~~
sizzzzlerz
The first two seasons of Deadwood were exceptional with Ian McShane being the
primary reason. Season 3 started to lose something by dwelling too long on the
evil George Hearst character. I'm not sure the show could have stood up a
compelling complete fourth season but I really would have liked some closure
instead of yanking the cord like HBO did.

------
forgettableuser
Trivia: Bryan Fuller made the list 3 times with Pushing Daisies, Wonderfalls,
and Dead Like Me.

~~~
stevekemp
Dead Like Me was a great show, which was really getting into its stride (plot-
wise) when it was cancelled.

Thus far I've resisted the temptation to view the movie they made - largely
due to Mandy Patinkin's absence.

------
jccalhoun
I thought Firefly was incredibly average. If I were to list the best SciFi
shows of all time I don't think it would even occur to me to put it on the
list. I honestly can't even think of the plots of any of the episodes. There
was one with a guy in a spacesuit, I think it was red? and there was one with
cattle or sheep?

I don't have anything against it. I just don't really find it remarkable at
all.

Fans of Firefly, on the other hand, are the absolute worst. I used to have a
game and see how many days I could go without reading someone online randomly
bringing up how terrible it was that Firefly was cancelled. I rarely made it
past Tuesdays.

------
okket
Amazing how popular this "Western meets Zombies in Space" trope still is.

~~~
qznc
Zombies?

~~~
kabdib
Reavers, I think he means.

[I'm tired of the trope. Probably my least favorite thing about Firefly]

~~~
usrusr
Oh, Reavers... the best (only?) way to enjoy Firefly is to pretend that this
part of the universe simply does not exist. I guess every show has its low
points.

The main quality of Firefly was just plain old, maybe somewhat simplistic,
character likability. Just like in SG-1.

In my case, as I only discovered much later, that was also assisted by the
heavy Traveller influence in Firefly. Never played it much, but Traveller (in
some of it's incarnations) had always been my personal favorite amongst
pen&paper RPGs.

~~~
ghaff
>The main quality of Firefly was just plain old, maybe somewhat simplistic,
character likability.

Agreed. In fact, I'd argue that if you take away the appealing and interesting
cast and characters from Firefly, you're not left with an awful lot. Of
course, characters form the backbone of a lot of shows but science fiction can
also be driven by plot, the setting, ideas, etc. in a way that can make the
characters less central. But in Firefly if you take away the characters you're
mostly stuck with an overdone Western in space motif and generally unmemorable
plots.

------
Jabbles
Surely you would have to compare these with shows that were not cancelled?
Firefly received a lot, but was it enough/more than others? Presumably
something else should have been cancelled in its place?

------
heisenbit
There is a lot value and money to be made in the long tail. Simply taking a
black box approach and measuring what is easy to measure in the short run is
not really useful to predict how many people and how deeply people will
engage.

Distribution channels for narrow audiences (amazon for books/dvds,
netflix/torrents for video) combined with social network dynamics have changed
the game. Of course there is also the case that a world event changes the
game. One of the most famous failed shows - not in the list - is Startrek.
Moonlanding ignited that boom.

------
lolive
Wow. "Pushing daisies" is listed too:) Really fun WTF show.

------
brightball
Any list that doesn't include Airwolf, tragically cancelled after 3 seasons
(the 4th with a totally different cast doesn't count), is missing the mark.

~~~
Noos
The list doesn't include The Adventures of Brisco County Jr either, which is
far more of a true cult series than most of what is listed there.

------
projektir
I wonder how much Firefly has benefited from being cancelled so early. I
imagine if Heroes got cancelled after about 10-13 episodes, it'd be very well
perceived right now. The subsequent writers' strike mess and not being able to
handle an evolving story messed that show up quite a bit. So many shows, even
really well done ones, taper off at a point due to various production issues
(Babylon 5 comes to mind).

------
transfire
The worst cancellation I have ever seen was of Caprica. The last show aired
made a veiled criticism of Israel policies toward Palestine. It was pulled the
next day! The rest of the season be damned. They stuck reruns of ST:NG into
the slot. A year later they allowed the final few episodes to be shown and
that was the end of that. Since then I am reluctant to watch anything on SyFy.

------
douche
One of my favorite bits on Family Guy

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0oMTmtN7lHI](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0oMTmtN7lHI)

edit TLDW: Rapid-fire listing of 29 shows started and cancelled by Fox in the
two years between Family Guy's initial cancellation and revival.

------
Razengan
I just want this page to have a mention of _The Pirates of Dark Water_ on it
somewhere, so here it is.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pirates_of_Dark_Water](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pirates_of_Dark_Water)

~~~
forgettableuser
You reminded me of _Gargoyles_ which is worth mentioning. Creator Greg Weisman
quit over Disney planning to ruin it in Season 3. It was probably a good call
because they did ruin Season 3.

Weisman had created a detailed story arc that had a couple more centuries to
go. He has continued to answer never ending fan questions and reveal details
of the story arc for the following 20 years at "Ask Greg" at Station 8
Gargoyles

[http://www.s8.org/gargoyles/askgreg/](http://www.s8.org/gargoyles/askgreg/)

------
mioelnir
Wasn't the reason that Rome was canceled after two seasons the fact that their
entire wood-built set burnt down?

How many more are on this list where it is not differentiated between canceled
for ratings vs canceled due to an external event?

~~~
fsloth
I don't know what _actually_ happened but the public reason stated in the
wikipedia page cites budget and the termination of the collaboration contract
with BBC as the main reasons.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rome_(TV_series)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rome_\(TV_series\))

------
IgorPartola
If you don't mind getting attached to a brilliant story and characters for a
single season, I can't recommend Battleground from Hulu enough. Do yourself a
favor and watch it.

------
mandelbulb
Well, Lie to Me had unfortunately been deteriorating so unless they would've
employed new writers it isn't that bad it got cancelled. Now we hold only good
memories of it.

~~~
scrollaway
I agree. I was glad Lie to Me got cancelled.

------
lolive
The performance of christina hendricks in Firefly is jaw-dropping !!!

------
mSparks
I really wish they'd finished V and Flashforward too. Both could have been
signed off in a few episodes and would of added tons of value to the
franchises.

------
Vanit
I loved Firely, but the analysis is flawed because it didn't account for the
older shows having more time to accumulate more ratings.

~~~
modernerd
I thought the same at first, but it's still in second place if you account for
that: [http://d.pr/i/1119j](http://d.pr/i/1119j)

------
waldrews
Anybody remember what happened to Lone Star? 3 episodes, not 3 seasons, for a
critical and cult favorite.

------
dieg0
Don't care what the stats say, Brickleberry should be first on that ranking.

------
pervycreeper
How does the number of ratings on IMDB relate to profitability exactly?

------
Kiro
Should I watch the pilot or not before watching the official episodes?

~~~
throwanem
Watch the series in the order it's presented in the DVD set. The episodes were
aired out of order in a way that makes the plot arcs incomprehensible; the DVD
set has them in the intended order.

------
stevesun21
Can I vote just cancel Fox keep cancel tv shows?

------
solidr53
John Doe :(

------
gradstudent
I was sad Firefly was cancelled back in the day. Now though? I'd rather Adam
Baldwin not receive any support.

~~~
fsloth
If you censor your entertainment based on the perceived morals of the
performers you are going to miss on lots of good stuff. For instance I have no
problem enjoying the performance Tom Cruise in Mission Impossibles despite his
bat-shit crazy position on Scientology. Roman Polanski is a convicted child
rapist and that does not stop me from enjoying his films. Etc etc.

------
LulzSect
Here's an unpopular opinion. Firefly was a terrible show and was rightfully
cancelled. Not sure why it is so revered amongst neckbeards. It's a poor rip
off of Cowboy Bebop.

~~~
fnj
Popular or unpopular, you know why you've taken a hit? Because you offer no
rationale whatsoever for your opinion.

~~~
LulzSect
Bad acting Over used tropes Unimaginative plots

The entire show was a poorly executed "train job".

