http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/news/e3i214f0355971497c85ac9a83cb7ea666f?imw=Y NBC stayed in the game at 10 p.m. with a win for "Life" (9.9 million, 4.0/11). The Damian Lewis police drama won in the demo against ABC's "Dirty" (10.4 million, 3.6/10) and the season premiere of CBS' "CSI: NY" (12.7 million, 3.7/10), which was down 26% among 18-49 from last season's premiere.
i do agree that relationships could be the reason why ratings are down on last season but why would you stop watching csi just because they take about 5 mins to develop the characters once in a while. theres loads of forensic shows out there. the difference with csi is that we actually care about the characters. i honestly believe that steadily by incorporating personal lives they will now appeal to a bigger audience and theyll get their ratings back steadily boo to those who stop watching.... their loss
Eh, personally I care more about the people themselves and less about which slot and tab are making sweet contact with each other. If all they tell me about them is who they're sleeping with, that's not increasing my knowledge of who they are very much. And when they set up such interesting possibilities with their families, jobs, interpersonal non-sexual relationships--only to drop that stuff in favor of the pokey-pokey--it seems like such a waste. We've been waiting since mid-season one to know more about Flack's relationship with his father, and we've yet to get any follow-up on that--but spoilers indicate that we'll see evidence of him tapping ass this season. We know they're going to be in relationships--they're attractive, single adults after all--but I'd rather assume that kind of thing than have to assume the rest. That being said, I don't think the gushy romantical stuff is entirely responsible for the ratings drop, but it certainly hasn't drawn in more viewers if the numbers are any indication. The original CSI got 24.8 million viewers, and there's definitely a romance subplot there. I think the difference in the plots themselves is that CSI didn't rush it and didn't do it half-ass the way NY did--NY has certainly dropped the ball on more than just that. CSI gets stronger plots and better science, I think (I don't watch it as often as I watch NY, though, so I could be wrong)--while some viewers are just loyal to the original and wouldn't want to watch another CSI show, I think NY could attract some of those same viewers if the CSI aspect of the show was stronger and everything was done better overall.
I do think there are external factors that go into the ratings drop--like DVRs and the fact that the Neilsen ratings system has yet to find a way to effectively incorporate those into their ratings (not an easy thing to do, I'd imagine!)--but I don't think those are the only reasons. Look at CSI--not only were their ratings up from last season's premiere, but they actually beat Grey's Anatomy! Yes, I'm sure that's partially due to the whole cliffhanger with Sara. But, I also bet a lot of people watched CSI reruns over the summer and saw the high quality of stories and writing that went into last season. I gotta say, CSI still manages to impress me that way--the quality of the writing is just top notch. Miami's numbers were down too--comprable to NY's I believe. Again, that could have been because it was going up against new shows, or it could have been because viewers are getting a little tired of the Endless Trials of St. Horatio Caine. Exactly. While I don't think the romance is entirely responsible for the 3 million viewer drop-off, I do think it plays a part. If I want romance, I'm going to watch Grey's Anatomy. Say what you will about the show, they do romance well. The characters' romantic lives go hand-in-hand with their work lives, and are consequently a major focus for the show. Because they're more in the spotlight, the romances are developed with depth and consequently are believable and moving. Even the best CSI romances are underdeveloped and largely unexplored. I like Grissom and Sara together, but my god, we haven't even seen them kiss! How believable is that??? At least we've seen Danny and Lindsay do that, and know they have healthy sexual appetites like, you know, the rest of us. :lol: But given the choice, which is more interesting? Danny possibly having a secret past and dealing with a conflicted relationship with his brother, or flying out to Montana support a woman who's rejected him? The former adds depth and complexity to his character; the latter just makes him look like a doormat...or in Carmine's words, "a punching bag." My point is, any show can do romance and most do it better than CSI shows. But Danny as he was--with the Tanglewood past, the brother, the insecurities and desperate need to prove himself to Mac--was a wholly unique character. Same with Stella--I was much more interested in her when she was a somewhat chilly, remote character who held everyone at arm's length than I am by the cliched tough girl who goes for the bad boys. Way to undercut a strong female character. And Flack...great that he's getting laid, but I'd much rather meet his father than his girlfriend. I also think part of NY's problem is that it's caught in the middle of CSI and Miami. Thankfully, it's not as outlandish as Miami. I enjoy the hell out of Miami, but that show only works in Miami. "Snow Day" was fun and exciting because it was a departure, and also because it stayed more or less believable. NY isn't CSI either, which is good in some ways. I think it has a lot more energy than CSI, which literally lowers my heart rate in most eps. :lol: It's a very low-energy show, which words for CSI but would crush NY. However, CSI has some damn good stories, and I'd like to see more of that on NY. Episodes like "Burn Out" (Grissom vs. the pedophile) and "Werewolves" are just haunting. Those weren't big "event" episodes--they were just damn good episodes penned by excellent writers. The NY writers are excellent too--I'm convinced they can give us stories that are equally as memorable. They just have to focus on adding depth to the characters--and not just notches on their bedposts.
I watched Life and I really, really liked it. Damian Lewis is great, the premise is good, and the characters are really interesting and complex. What's amazing is that NBC barely promoted the show, believing people wouldn't be too enthused about it, but it turned out to be the biggest surprise of the week and it's received really high praise. Go figure. I really loved NY during season 1, but after that it really lost its essence. I became a casual viewer after that, and I can tell you that during season 3 I couldn't tell the difference between episode whatever and episode blah. All the episodes look the same to me. The show is boring. It's always the same premise, rich white people getting killed for money. The political tension with Mac just isn't enthralling (Americans aren't into politics), Stella's always a victim, and the rest of the characters aren't compelling. They're just... there. The city is completely misrepresented to the point where the whole lab should really be moved to Albany. I was talking to a friend of mine who lives in NY and she told me she hates the show with a passion because it makes a mockery of the city and I feel that's true. It looks nothing and feels nothing like NY. And I'm sorry, but you don't mess with NY! It's the capital of the world. Where's the life and the passion and the ethnicity? Where's the music and the food and the diversity? It's like having a show take place in Seattle but it never rains. It makes no sense to me. Miami is Miami and Las Vegas is Las Vegas. What's wrong with New York? Also, four years and we still don't know the characters. Four years and I still have no idea where the hell Stella comes from, or if Flack has siblings, etc. Don't get me started on Hawkes. I'm surprised we actually know his last name (I also find it incredibly offensive that the ONLY minority on the show doesn't get any screen time, but of course, nobody seems to care about this as long as there's shirtless Danny). And then the writers decide to put these characters through physical harm, but why should I feel for these people? I don't know them. If I don't care about the characters then there is no show for me. Season 1 Stella = awesome. After that? Forget about it. They totally ruined her (ballet? wtf?). People tune into Miami to laugh at it, and CSI because it's such an institution, but other than Gary Sinise, NY doesn't seem to have much going for it. It did once, but they lost it. And I'm sorry, but D/L is the least of its problems. The problem is the boring ass writing and the fact that the people in charge don't really seem to care anymore. Zuiker used to speak so passionately of the show. Now you can really tell he doesn't give a crap. I was reading that interview where he talks about the promo picture and I just kept thinking, "I have to hook up with this guy, he has awesome pot." NY is what happens when a writer goes, "you know what? fuck this shit."
Excellent topic. The decline is alarming. I agree with those who have said that the other shows premiering must have had some effect and that we really should wait and see what happens weeks two and three of the season to get a real sense of what's going on. I also think the franchise may simply be showing signs of normal audience fatigue -- it is season four of the third incarnation, after all. And some of it may have to do with the storytelling, although I find it hard to believe that any particular character or dynamic (D/L, for example) could be to blame specifically. If you look at the ratings, seasons two and three were better than season one and that's when the whole D/L started. So while some people here might be tired of it, it's one of the few relationships on the show that has consistency to it, and that in and of itself bings people back, I think.
^I think the whole "season one's ratings sucked" thing is a myth. It's been ages since season one and I'm too lazy to go back and look up each ratings story, but if I remember correctly, the show premiered to some 18 million viewers and then dropped down each week to somewhere in the 14-15 million viewer rage, shooting back up in January of 2005 for "Tanglewood" with 17 million viewers. So no, season one's ratings didn't suck. The show was tinkered with because the network found it too dark and wanted to lighten it up. The best the show has ever been IMO was the second half of season one--it was still gritty, but not as visually dark. The show actually saw its best ratings in season one, with peaks here and there for episodes that spotlighted Danny (Trapped, RSRD) and, erm, Kid Rock. That being said, I don't think the romance is in and of itself a contributor to the ratings decline. The show's problem is that it's getting away from what it does best--crime stories with interesting character development--and trying to be like everything else on TV with the romance and the flashy storylines. As midnight pointed out, the show doesn't really personify New York City anymore, and that's problematic as well.
I actually loved the darkness of the early season one shows. I'm so glad I own the DVD. I was torn between watching this show and watching Life. I ended up picking this show out of loyalty. But I can defintaly feel my interest decreasing. It started decreasing during season 3 when one of my other favorite shows, Medium on NBC, got to moved to Wendsday nights so I would watch that instead and then tune in to CSI:NY on CBS.com. But after awhile I began forgetting to tune in. I think I even started a topic here about my losing interest. I can't really explain it. Part of it is D/L, but there's more to it. The fact the show no longer feels very New York, and even with some of the emotional stuff from season one returning, there is an almost slick-ness to it, if that makes any sense. Louise's fate is still unkown, and this stage I'm starting to think it's too late to bring him back. I've read some spoilers, and I don't think I like where they're going with Mac's 3:33am crank calls. Granted, Gary's got the acting chops to pull it off, but it's just-oh, I can't say anymore without giving anything away. I didn't like that in season two's All Access Frankie turned into a total psychopath out of the blue. Watching what Stella went through was no picnic either. I didn't like Danny having hallucinations of an annoymous lab tech morphing into Lindsay. I didn't like watching Danny and Lindsay have pool table sex in the finale. I also didn't like that Lindsay, who's supposed to be a main character, was turned into a plot device. I didn't mind Aiden leaving the show, but I was pissed they brought her back just to kill her off. I love Sid Hammerback. And Adam's cool too. I'm glad we got to meet Mac's stepson Reed,(Will he be coming back this season, or is he joining Louie Messer in the land of character limbo?) and seeing the two of them develop a realtionship. I love Peyton, she was able to be both a love interest and a indivdual character. It was also nice to see Mac happy. Now, if these new things had been added to the show but the program maintained the "flavor" if you will, of the show during season one, than I'd probably still like it.
There are so many ways to answer this ratings question that i dont even know where to start... You can't blame them on a specific thing, but I personally believe some of it has to do with the whole D/L relationship, and the fact that CSI:NY has become more of a soap opera than a crime drama. Every character is hooking up, having sex on a pool table, making googly eyes across the lab...I understand that they probably have relationships and such, i dont doubt that, but it shouldn't be THE focus of the show. Look at CSI with the GSR storyline--they made it work, and didnt make it the focus of the show. Neither character was compromised to fit the relationship, and it took time (nearly 7 seasons) to get it going. NY's love relationships come out of no where and seem rushed...and really are unbelievable. Whats even worse, they are being used in place of actual character building. Continuity and character building have been totally abandoned...seeing Flack totally ok after being nearly killed in a bombing, Adam's and Danny's miracullous recoveries after Snow Day, Louie's disapearance, no mention of the interaction between Flack and his father...i could go on but it is really starting to depress me, all the lost oppurtunities the show had. Not to mention theres really no New York feel to it. I miss the dark NY...it wasn't depressing, it just captured New York City, and i felt like the show was really taking place in the city, and not on soundstages or sets in other locations. Yeah, we had the statue of liberty, but what since season one has really captured CSI NEW YORK? I think the combonation of all these things is what is killing it for me.
^Yeah, that's how I feel as well--so many unique storylines have been sacrificed in favor of cliched tripe. Danny and Lindsay are one big cliche, from their "rivalry that turned romantic" to the whole "city boy/country girl" thing. There's not a single thing that's unique about them as a couple, but as individuals there's much more going for them. Danny has his brother, his gang connections, his tortured past, his insecurity, etc. Lindsay--well, okay, not a lot there, but the whole 'dark secret' thing might have played out better if it hadn't been under developed and treated as something that was simply an obstacle between her and Danny getting together rather than a real part of her past. And Stella? She was such an interesting character in season one--tough, a little unfeeling at times, and sometimes hard to like but always interesting and unique. Now she's defined by her bad taste in men. The whole third season was basically "let's have Stella relate to every woman who's a victim of a bad man!" Right, because a strong woman can't have compassion unless she's been victimized herself. And yeah, New York is Every City now. I admit, I watch more for the characters than the setting, but I remember in s. 1 how Zuiker said NY was going to be a "character" in the show. Remember that beautiful shot of Mac at Ground Zero? I liked the Statue of Liberty stuff in the premiere, but that's probably about all we'll see that's really NY until sweeps or another big event episode.
How come the network wanted to lighten the show in the first place? If the ratings didn't suck and the viewers aren't complaining, why would they fix something that isn't broken? I don't know but I think that if the show has stuck to that gritty, dark side of NY, Season 4 would be something completely different by now. Sometimes I feel like Season 2 and 3 have been completely wasted, despite some few standout moments. I remember! And I remember being blown away by 'Blink' - it felt like a CSI show, but I also felt as if I was in a parallel universe of CSI. I didn't think a CSI show could go that deep, that intense, that personal. I mean, Vegas has those moments but I was just impressed by CSI:NY and I couldn't wait to see where it headed. And now, despite the promos and the potential storylines I can't make myself get that excited again. Not anymore.
Honestly, I think it was due to a mixture of wanting to address critics' concerns (many said it was too dark) and also wanting to maintain/improve ratings. If they slipped from 18 mil with the premiere to 14 mil average, they probably wanted to get the numbers up to 16 mil. I bet they'd be happy with 14 now. The problem was that I think they hit the perfect balance around "TriBorough" and "ReCycling"--they brought people back and really hooked them with "Tanglewood." That second half of the first season was the best work the show has done IMO. The problem was (and my guess is that the network still wasn't satisfied) they kept going. The show now, while not as bright as Miami, is certainly a much different show than it was in that latter half of first season. Suddenly the clothes are brighter, flashier and the cases all take place in ritzy parts of town. And bringing Lindsay, a farm girl from Montana in to replace a New Yorker? That was a move to make the show less "New York" and therefore appeal more to viewers in the middle of the country--people who don't come from big cities. Basically, networks tinker with shows all the time, and not in a good way, even when things are working. "Blink" was a really powerful episode. I realize the show couldn't always stay that dark, but wow, that was such a moving, meaningful episode. How much the show has changed.
Twice I've typed a long reply and twice I've been told my form is no longer valid! why does this keep happening!!!!! The old shows had a beauty to them. They felt like mini-movies. First episode I saw was On the Job. Right away I cared about Danny and became hooked to the show. Caught all the earlier shows in summer repeats. Bought the DVD, loved the other characters. Other seasons lost the magic, mini-movies feel of season one. Continuity is for the weak! The slogan of the CSI:NY writers. I'm not moved by the characters the way I used to be. I'm watching the show more out of habit than anything else.
That sometimes happens to me. I think the board gives us only a short time to reply. When I have a long reply, I type it in Wordpad or Microshaft Word. Then I copy and paste it into the reply box. If you ever get that error message, just copy what you typed, hit the browser's reload button, then paste into the reply box. It will usually work that time.
I want to bitchslap whoever thought all those changes were a good idea. Change is good, but not ALL change. And making the show less New York for the sake of appealing to country people? Bloody hell, TPTB! Don't you get that people would want to see CSI:NY because they want to see NEW YORK WHICH IS DIFFERENT FROM THEIR HOME?! Ahem. Yes, I needed to get that out of my system. Well, I guess very soon we'll be finding out whether the 3 million viewer drop in the premiere will manifest itself in the second episode of this season, hm?