Hacker News new | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit login

My parents have a rule about new TV shows: They won't watch anything in the first season. Instead, they record the entire season, and once it is picked up for a second, they'll watch the first season and then become regular viewers.

I have the same rule with social networks. I'll sign up right at the beginning, but I won't participate until I see a good chunk of my friends are on it. I don't want to invest the time if it is going to flop.




I don't like that rule. Sure, it sucks when a show you love gets cancelled, but I'd rather have a little bit of something awesome than nothing.

Great example, Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip, a 2005 comedy show written by Aaron Sorkin. It's ratings weren't great and it was canned, but I think it's amazing, and I rewatch that one season at least once a year.


I agree, Studio 60 was awesome (I don't follow their rule). But at the same time, I feel very unsatisfied that I got so little of the story arc with the cancellation.


S60 really got worse as the season went along, not helped by Amanda Peet getting pregnant and needing that storyline to be written into the show. I'm not actually sure how much of that was based on "shit we're not getting a second season, how do we tie up as many loose ends as possible" and how much was just... bad (relatively) TV.

Either way, while I agree with you on not liking the ending (and would have loved it to become as popular and long-running as The West Wing), still extremely glad that it became one of my "re-watch whenever I have nothing else to watch" shows, and still love it each and every time I see it.


Great series wasn't it, much like those first 4 seasons of West Wing he wrote


Also Sports Night from the turn of the century, two seasons of fantastic writing and amazing characters. Check it out if you haven't seen it - although I do have a friend who's also a big Sorkin fan, and loves WW and S60, but didn't particularly like Sports Night, so perhaps it's not as good... but it was the first TV I saw from Sorkin, and I still absolutely love it.


I wish I could stick to that rule your parents have adopted!. Case in point for Firefly, Flashforward, Surface and The Event most recently for me.


Good list, I think these belong there too: Invasion(2005) and Threshold


Shows are cancelled because the people are not watching it. What is the logic to dont watch it because it can be cancelled? If everybody do this every show will be cancelled.


The logic is - not everybody do this.


I know, but I dont like approachs that does not scale. I think the best thing to do is to watch and support new series that you like and hope for a second season. If you had a good time watching it that is already ok, it is not an investment.

Thats why I dont watch series that promise a distant final revelation after 4234 seasons like Lost.


i like your parents approach, but there are sometimes good shows that get cancelled after the 1st season. if you let the masses make decisions for you (as your parents are doing in this situation) things tend to slip through the cracks.


Right, you end up missing out on some great shows. But those great shows leave you with a bad taste, because you only get 1/2 the story, since they are cancelled before their time.

TV shows, at least in the way they are currently produced, are only valuable if at least some subset of the masses likes them.

Just like social networks. they are only valuable if at least some subset of the masses likes them enough.


The big difference is that social networks are often the most interesting in the beginning. Novelty makes them a lot more fun.

And you can't relive that new social network experience on DVD.


Your parents sound like the "early majority" on the tv show adoption life cycle.




Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | DMCA | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: