ABC officially cancels "The Muppets"

[jvcarroll]

Just to extend my response to this on Twitter:

Again, I completely agree with you. As much say as the executives and the shareholders have, any future Muppet projects should stay creatively in the hands of those who are constantly there and usually have to deal with the backlash. It's perfectly okay to bring new people in to keep the material fresh, but when you have a franchise with such a dense history, newcomers should be placed in the backseat until they have enough experience with the characters and the people who perform them.

We're never going to get Frank Oz back, but Dave Goelz and Steve Whitmire aren't going anywhere anytime soon. I'm not sure about Dave, but I know Steve said on ToughPigs that he really doesn't consider himself a writer. Even if that's not an option, why not give him and Dave a lot more creative influence other than the usual collaboration on set or in the writers room. They both have over 30 years experience and from listening to Integral Naked, Steve has done so much of his own research into the Muppets and what makes them sentient characters even though in reality they are not real. Along with Bill Barretta's wonderful directing, Dave's experience and Steve's extended knowledge into the characters, surely something great could come out of it.

If you include Jim Lewis and Kirk Thatcher, I think something like a TV show could actually work. Yes, bring in the new blood, but gradually and slowly. I could be dead wrong, but this is just my opinion.

I'm mainly talking about Kirk Thatcher and Bill Barretta. I'm not sure if Dave Goelz or Steve Whitmire have any desire to produce, write or direct, but Kirk and Bill are always waiting in the wings for when they're wanted. No matter how each episode has fared, the content created for online services over the years is always a hit. Shifting to streaming under both of those fellas is a no-brainer. That's what I was trying to say.

 

[Colbynfriends]

Viewers must be a picky bunch!

Some are. That's why it's hard to please anyone. As you pointed out also, there's not much difference to me either with the different projects. It's the Muppets being themselves in different environments and stories. The show was aimed more for teens and adults and that's fine. I'm sure some kids were allowed to watch it as well. However some people were put off thinking that Kermit and co. shouldn't behave like that. They're entitled to that opinion.
Viewers are picky and hard to please one way or another. But everyone's entitled to like / dislike what they wish. Just seems for this certain projects the odds were not in the Muppet's favor.

 

[D'Snowth]

Um, no. Most of ABC's popular comedies don't even have much to do with sex. Sure the subject of sex is occasionally hinted at, but it's rarely a major plot point. Modern Family, Blackish, Fresh Off the Boat, The Middle, The Goldbergs, none of these shows are about sex. If you even watched one single episode of any of these shows you would know that.

Nevertheless, my point was that you guys could have saved yourselves a lot of time, effort, energy, and heartache. I know what I'm talking about: I've been following Ken Levine's blog for years, he's been a writer for television since the 70s, he's seen how the industry has changed over the years, he knows all of the ins and outs of television, and he knows firsthand how fickle networks are, especially when it comes to viewer feedback . . . or, in this case, not giving Rizzo's butt about viewer feedback. #RenewTheMuppets was doomed from the start. Even if any of the higher ups at ABC even saw any of this, they probably just took it with a grain of salt: viewer feedback doesn't persuade network executives; moolah and numbers do. And apparently THE MUPPETS wasn't bringing in either, so that's that.

It'd be nice if, just once, people would realize I'm just trying to get some points across without people always having to whine about me being some kind of a negative pessimist bent on trying to ruin everything for everybody else.

 

[JimAndFrank]

I'm mainly talking about Kirk Thatcher and Bill Barretta. I'm not sure if Dave Goelz or Steve Whitmire have any desire to produce, write or direct, but Kirk and Bill are always waiting in the wings for when they're wanted. No matter how each episode has fared, the content created for online services over the years is always a hit. Shifting to streaming under both of those fellas is a no-brainer. That's what I was trying to say.

Well, you definitely said it well For Dave and Steve, I was just thinking something like Creative Consultants.

 

[jvcarroll]

Corrected a typo...

 

[jvcarroll]

Nevertheless, my point was that you guys could have saved yourselves a lot of time, effort, energy, and heartache. I know what I'm talking about: I've been following Ken Levine's blog for years, he's been a writer for television since the 70s, he's seen how the industry has changed over the years, he knows all of the ins and outs of television, and he knows firsthand how fickle networks are, especially when it comes to viewer feedback . . . or, in this case, not giving Rizzo's butt about viewer feedback. #RenewTheMuppets was doomed from the start. Even if any of the higher ups at ABC even saw any of this, they probably just took it with a grain of salt: viewer feedback doesn't persuade network executives; moolah and numbers do. And apparently THE MUPPETS wasn't bringing in either, so that's that.

It'd be nice if, just once, people would realize I'm just trying to get some points across without people always having to whine about me being some kind of a negative pessimist bent on trying to ruin everything for everybody else.

I can't really go there because it's not a very Muppety response to the situation. Saying something is "doomed" because it didn't have the desired response is unhelpful pessimism. Such things unite fans and demonstrate interest to the very people who make decisions. They saw it. Letting the Muppets fade away without any reaction would be terrible. It's clear this was not the right venue, but clearly another one is in order sooner or later. That's what the # was about.

That said, the Muppets most certainly received healthy ad dollars and viewership numbers as much as the other shows around it. Combine that with the fact that Disney owns the characters and the show and that results in a money maker. However, it's not the stellar impression ABC wants for their network so the new President throws down the ax. That's what happened.

 

[D'Snowth]

I just still don't understand why despite all of the evidence of how television works today, and all of the information and resource available from insiders from the industry (not to mention just plain ol' observation from TV viewers themselves), I'm somehow still the bad guy simply for trying to point all of that out. I still don't understand why this forum has a hard time differentiating realism and pessimism. How do those two always get blurred and mixed up? I couldn't partake in #RenewTheMuppets because I've done that before in the past, and they never worked. If didn't work before, how was it supposed to work this time around? That's not being pessimistic, that's being realistic. I never said I wanted the Muppets to fade away and disappear, that's the last thing I want to happen . . . but these are different times now. Jim got lucky with the people he crossed paths with, like Lord Grade, who was willing to take a chance with him when no one else would. That's not to say Jim didn't face struggles, because he did, and he had uphill battles, but he eventually managed to turn some of his dreams into realities . . . but that was back in the days when creativity was admired and respected a lot more than it is now: everything is met with a corporate approach now, and creativity suffers as a result, because everything has to meet the corporate agenda; creators have no control over their own shows or characters anymore, because networks insist on calling all the shots for everything (and owning it as well). How many years now have people been complaining about how FOX is driving FAMILY GUY into the ground? Even Seth MacFarlane has been wanting to end the show for years, but since it's bringing in the big money for FOX, they won't let him. Jim wouldn't stand a chance trying to get any projects off the ground for mainstream today - his only chances of achieving any kind of recognition would be if he took the route of people like Doug Walker, and made content exclusively for the internet. Would he achieve a level of creative and artistis success? Yes. Would he reach out to the masses? Probably not, because it's still a small percentage. It may be growing, yes, but it's still small.

Again, those are just the realities of the entertainment industry. As the saying goes, "that's show biz." And I still don't understand why any time I try to enlighten people with all of this, it's always dismisses as pessimism and negativity.

 

[jvcarroll]

I just still don't understand why despite all of the evidence of how television works today, and all of the information and resource available from insiders from the industry (not to mention just plain ol' observation from TV viewers themselves), I'm somehow still the bad guy simply for trying to point all of that out. I still don't understand why this forum has a hard time differentiating realism and pessimism. How do those two always get blurred and mixed up? I couldn't partake in #RenewTheMuppets because I've done that before in the past, and they never worked. If didn't work before, how was it supposed to work this time around? That's not being pessimistic, that's being realistic. I never said I wanted the Muppets to fade away and disappear, that's the last thing I want to happen . . . but these are different times now. Jim got lucky with the people he crossed paths with, like Lord Grade, who was willing to take a chance with him when no one else would. That's not to say Jim didn't face struggles, because he did, and he had uphill battles, but he eventually managed to turn some of his dreams into realities . . . but that was back in the days when creativity was admired and respected a lot more than it is now: everything is met with a corporate approach now, and creativity suffers as a result, because everything has to meet the corporate agenda; creators have no control over their own shows or characters anymore, because networks insist on calling all the shots for everything (and owning it as well). How many years now have people been complaining about how FOX is driving FAMILY GUY into the ground? Even Seth MacFarlane has been wanting to end the show for years, but since it's bringing in the big money for FOX, they won't let him. Jim wouldn't stand a chance trying to get any projects off the ground for mainstream today - his only chances of achieving any kind of recognition would be if he took the route of people like Doug Walker, and made content exclusively for the internet. Would he achieve a level of creative and artistis success? Yes. Would he reach out to the masses? Probably not, because it's still a small percentage. It may be growing, yes, but it's still small.

Again, those are just the realities of the entertainment industry. As the saying goes, "that's show biz." And I still don't understand why any time I try to enlighten people with all of this, it's always dismisses as pessimism and negativity.

There are many parts of the spectrum between absolute optimism and absolute pessimism. I favor somewhere in the middle with the needle pointed more toward optimism. I don't understand why things need to be reduced to blame either. In the immortal words of Mr. Jim Henson, "I believe that we form our own lives, that we create our own reality, and that everything works out for the best. I know I drive some people crazy with what seems to be ridiculous optimism, but it has always worked out for me." That's all I'm saying. Syndication offered a similar kind of autonomy as Netflix does. Maybe the Muppets will get a slot with them. Sure, Disney can tinker in Daredevil and Jessica Jones, but once the scripts are locked for the season, that scrutiny ends and there's opportunity for the same sort of creativity enjoyed by Jim and the gang under Lord Grade in the UK. And I certainly wouldn't reduce Jim's efforts to luck. Every person I've heard talk about him has reported how tireless his efforts were and how much time things took. I like ya and I've never seen you as a bad guy. I've been aware of many points you've made and agree with them to some extent, but I don't take them as far as you do. I choose to walk toward the open doors than fret about the closed ones. That's the difference.

 

[Drtooth]

Again, I completely agree with you. As much say as the executives and the shareholders have, any future Muppet projects should stay creatively in the hands of those who are constantly there and usually have to deal with the backlash. It's perfectly okay to bring new people in to keep the material fresh, but when you have a franchise with such a dense history, newcomers should be placed in the backseat until they have enough experience with the characters and the people who perform them.

I think any future Muppet projects need a healthy balance of fresh blood and experienced veterans of the franchise. Someone who has a fresh, outside perspective who can see the potential for new concepts, while the vets keep them in line and make sure we have consistency of characters. That's why we got "The Muppets" and why it worked well for the film the franchise needed to gain footing on. The vets would have made something similar to VMX and MWOO, a gimmick with the characters in it as to reintroduce the characters from an insider's view, but left unchecked, TM's original treatment and script was wildly out of character and treated the characters if they were all too aware they were puppets. So right down the middle, we got a film about what it's like to be a fan of the characters, but with the care and nuance of what the Muppets actually are. Some leap of faith character adjustments for the sake of plot were made, but all and all it worked.

I think that they should have kept Thatcher and Lewis around for this series, if nothing else to be the creative consultants. There were clearly rough edges the first 3 episodes that could have been sanded down. But frankly, there was also a lot of leap of faith character adjustments that actually made the show a bit more exciting than seeing MFS style Stepford Kermit and Flanderized Diva Piggy, actually giving them depths of character. I liked the shake up of Kermit dating another Pig, and both Kermit and Piggy trying to work together with their history, and the fact that they know they need each other and didn't want to admit it. That's so much more interesting to watch than Piggy's unwelcome advances and Kermit responding with a fat joke, leading to Karate chop. I think we've seen enough of Hi-YAAAAH Piggy and protest too much Kermit especially in those talk show appearances. Again, what I loved about the movie The Muppets was that there was depth to their relationship. That one line about how Kermit says that her aggressiveness makes him have to push her away spoke volumes and put it into a less cartoony, more adult light. I think they tinkered with it nicely in this show too.

 

[D'Snowth]

I think any future Muppet projects need a healthy balance of fresh blood and experienced veterans of the franchise. I think that they should have kept Thatcher and Lewis around for this series, if nothing else to be the creative consultants.

I can't believe I've been saying this for years, and only now does somebody finally agree with me on this.