This site will work and look better in a browser that supports web standards, but it is accessible to any browser or Internet device.

Whedonesque - a community weblog about Joss Whedon
"That's right, Big Bad's back! And lookin' for a little death!"
11944 members | you are not logged in | 22 August 2014




Tweet







March 10 2009

"Castle" debuts to strong, but mixed numbers. Nathan Fillion's new show "Castle" premiered with 11.6 million viewers.

The "mixed" numbers part comes in when you factor that "Dancing With the Stars" had a 22.5. So "Castle" only kept half of the "DWtS" viewers - or you can interpret it like I do: That most people who watch Nathan Fillion are not "DWtS" watchers.

ETA: Zap2it is posting that ABC won their target 18-49 demo and their numbers for "Castle" say 7.7/13.

11.6 million viewers is pretty good. 'Ture Beauty' had less viewers during that hour. I was surprised to see the low number for Chuck though.
If we compare a show of similar genre and theme (quirky non-detective tags along on investigations)... a rerun of "The Mentalist" drew 8.1 million last week while new episodes draw 12.5 million and more (season average is 10.2).

For a show that is also in the same genre, but has a reality TV show coming before it, "Lie to Me" is doing quite well also, drawing between 6.8 to 7.7 million on average (I don't have season numbers).

A lot of the reviews of "Castle" I've been reading point out that the second episode is much better than the pilot, which if internet browsers are to believe this, we should see a decent retention of viewers for next Monday.
DWTS appeals to people who don't even watch normal television. I caught a few minutes of DWTS (waiting for Castle to begin) and it was unbearable. If anything, DWTS probably hurts whatever comes after it.

[ edited by willbueche on 2009-03-10 21:42 ]
I think the ratings drop can also be significantly linked to the 10 o'clock hour. I know a few people who said they couldn't stay up that late on a work night. I struggled to stay awake myself for Cappy's sake.

I liked the chemistry between Fillion & Katic. And the show plays to Nathan's strengths. I'll watch again. :)
The thing to bear in mind is that the final 2 minutes of Dancing With the Stars aired in the 10-11 timeslot and so Castle's numbers will come down when the finals are released and those viewers are taken out. The biggest problem Castle has is that it had poor retention out of DWTS not only overall but also in the prized 18-49 demo. While DWTS won its time slot in the demo, Castle was second to CSI:Miami.
I was surprised to see that it was a 10 pm show. I'd gotten it into my head that it was on at 9pm. And having seen it now, it does seem a little lighter than what I'd normally expect for a 10 pm show.
The finals are in at pifeedback.com.

Castle (58 minutes)
- 10.760 million viewers
- 7.1/12 HH
- 3.0/8 A18-49


So by my calculations that means 47% retention out of DWTS overall and 49% retention in the demo which is pretty poor.

[ edited by helcat on 2009-03-10 22:57 ]
18-49 may be too broad. If you assume as I do that 99% of the DWTS audience in that demo are probably at the high end -- 48 or 49 years old -- then it's a credit to our elders that some stayed for Castle despite the women wearing pants and the course language.
Generally DWTS has skewed old but it did much better in the demo this time round, possibly because of the last minute addition of one of the women from the last round of "The Batchelor". I wait to see what spinning, if any, ABC do with the numbers as that might show if they've any strengths in some of the other demos of interest.
I have to say that these numbers for the evening make me very worried about 'Chuck'! I really love that show, it is consistently hilarious and exciting (and has Adam Baldwin!) but it is coming in 4th which cannot be good, people are talking about canceling 'Heroes' which makes me think they would dump 'Chuck' too. *sigh*
In spite of 'Castle's' drop-off, it still seems like strong numbers... I hope ABC is satisfied.
NBC have already said they'll bring back Heroes next season, though you have to think that might be it unless things turn around. The real hope for Chuck, I think, is the general poor showing for NBC in general, they can't cancel all their poorly performing shows and if they feel Chuck and Heroes make a nice block may stick with it another year while trying to address other holes in their schedule.
Actually, they can cancel all their shows. From what I understand they've already talked about dropping scripted shows altogether. It might be shortsighted & not the smartest thing, but that's never stopped anyone before.
Don't forget NBC is getting rid of their 10pm hours for Leno next season.
high end -- 48 or 49 years old -- then it's a credit to our elders that some stayed for Castle despite the women wearing pants and the course language.

Exsqueeze me? Ageism much? ;)
Heroes is somewhat understandable to be canceled. The show has really taken a downward turn, and though its ok, it is so frustrating since it can be so much better. If they killed off the majority of the characters and made the rest masked vigilantes (they are wanted by the government and they just go around using powers like they don't care!), the show could be saved, but it seems they just want to retread the same things over and over.

I was hoping with the reveal of Pres. Worf and the Superhero Registration Act... I mean illegality of powered people, that the show would fix itself. Kill off some of the chaf, have Ando die and make Hiro awesome and katana wielding, keep Nathan as an antagonist, but it seems they have no chutzpah. They really need to go to the Joss Whedon school of killing people off. Of course, at this point anyone they killed would cause happiness, not sadness for me.

[ edited by SteppeMerc on 2009-03-10 23:47 ]
Watched this last night and LOVED it.

I agree with much of what has been said. Great chemistry between Stana and Nathan. This show totally plays to Nathan's strengths, and I hope it lasts because I think this a great vehicle for him.

I thought the pilot episode was strong. I think Stana performed extremely well. She had so many fantastic and different facial expressions, she really executed well. Nathan just had a great time and you could tell from watching.

Even with all this, I'll openly admit the only reason I tuned into the show is because of Nathan and he is the only reason Ill continue to watch it. I'm not a fan of Police/Procedural shows, but his dynamic makes this worth watching and fun. Nathan is on my very short list of people whose mere presence in ANYTHING makes it better and more fun to watch. Bruce Campbell is another such person.

Looking forward to next week's episode and great job to Nathan and Stana!
I think even with the loss of the 10pm hour you'd be hard pressed to find enough actual hits on NBC to fill their schedule.
high end -- 48 or 49 years old -- then it's a credit to our elders that some stayed for Castle despite the women wearing pants and the course language.

My husband just turned 50 last week - I'll have to make sure to check in him to see how he feels about this pants and language question. That dirty old man will probably say that he prefers his women with no pants at all, especially when they talk naughty.
Since my parents are fifty and fifty one, when my brothers and I were trying in vain to figure out how age demos work, I pretty much pointed out that they don't matter (despite the fact that none of us do, what with the lack of Nielson boxes or whatever) when it comes to watching TV, at least compared to me. They were not amused.

[ edited by SteppeMerc on 2009-03-11 00:13 ]
It's so sad that 11 million viewers is disappointing.

Isn't it conceivable that DWTS fans a) aren't interested in procedurals b)switched to CSI because it's a show they already follow or c) went to bed?

I can see if they switched away from a show called Dancing With Castle that it might be a concern.
They were not amused.

I'm fifty-two. Neither am I.

Like anyone has money to buy stuff anymore anyway.
Heroes will not be canceled.

Chuck will probably not be canceled.

"From what I understand they've already talked about dropping scripted shows altogether." - Not true.
CSI: Miami is familiar ground to most viewers, and fairly serious in it's approach. Here's hoping Castle gains audience for it's lighter, funnier approach to the Police Procedural Genre. Nathan has a winner on his hands, and I think we should all support him as best we can. I admit, 10pm is late for me, since I leave the house at 5:30am to go to work.
Rikardo, I think Chuck is in extreme danger of cancellation. Probably an 85% chance that it is toast along with Life. What logic are you using to say that it probably won't be?
helcat-
I have no idea where you are getting your information. I just read at various sites that Heroes is getting canceled & NBC is still standing behind Chuck. TV critics like Chuck & this last episode was the 'hot pick of the week.' The show creators were pretty optimistic at WonderCon that Chuck would get a third season. NBC wouldn't spend the $$ to have the cast of Chuck come to WonderCon if there wasn't some hope of renewel.

What is the most important about this number/rating/demo business is what ABC is looking for. As I mention before, Castle is preforming better then what 'True Beauty' did during the 10pm hour. Furthermore, it is doing much better then 'Medium'.

You are making a lot of assumptions here & at times sounding like ABC has Castle on the chopping block. I sincerely hope Castle & Chuck continue to do well. I would enjoy nothing more then seeing our BDH reach the Hollywoood A list. It have been a lot of fun seeing Nathan working the talk shows last week.
TamaraC-
My understanding with Chuck at the moment is "if" the ratings continue to drop...then yes it will be on the chopping block. There are some great guest stars coming & hopefully it will help the ratings.
redeem 147, my point was not to be insulting, but to point out how odd the age demo thing works. And indeed, I am baffled at why car commercials are still so prevalent... who would buy a car now? Unless your old one broke down or something.

There was an episode of Boston Legal about how TV doesn't cater towards the elderly (though in this case it was 70s, not 50s, since 50s and 60s isn't elderly anymore). It was a somewhat legit point, but I much prefer shows that supposedly appeal to the 18-49 crowd... despite the fact that obviously people older than that watch them. I'm not so sure how many 80 year old folks would watch Castle or Dollhouse or BSG though.
Spacegirl3200, Heroes is a done deal.

http://www.thrfeed.com/2009/03/nbc-to-renew-heroes.html

Where did you get your information about Chuck? Hopefully not in the same place. LOL

[ edited by TamaraC on 2009-03-11 01:13 ]

There was an episode of Boston Legal about how TV doesn't cater towards the elderly (though in this case it was 70s, not 50s, since 50s and 60s isn't elderly anymore).


I loved that episode. My 78 year old mom got me watching BL. Apparently she tried Castle but it wasn't her thing, so maybe you're right.

I wasn't insulted. Sorry if I came off that way. I mean I'm not amused with the way the demographics are judged, not you.

Well, except when you're being amusing.
The Heroes renewal has been reported all over the place and I see TamaraC has pointed to one site with it. I've no inside info on Chuck but as yet it's not been picked up by NBC and it's ratings aren't great.

As for Castle, I'm not saying ABC will pull it this week or anything silly but a show that can't manage 50% in audience or demo out of it's lead in is always going to have at least a big question-mark next to it.
I liked Castle - despite being an "old broad of 43." But then, I'd watch Nathan in almost anything. (I wish he played Echo!) The story itself? Meh.
I thoroughly enjoyed CASTLE and hope it's a break-out hit for Nathan. He's certainly overdue. The show has good bones (pun intended), a great cast, and room to grow.

Also, as for the drop-off in viewership from DWTS, not only are they different show types (tho I liked Nathan trying to call Castle a reality show in one interview, lol), a lot of people turn their TV's off at 10 PM too. Let's hope the ratings don't drop significantly in subsequent episodes - that to me will be more telling as to its fate.

Spacey -- I learned the hard way that what the creators (and even the network reps) say at cons should to be taken with a grain of salt. Last year's SDCC was all about how Stargate Atlantis was going great, and they were looking forward to the next season. The network rep even stated that they had a lot of faith that Atlantis could last 10 seasons like SGA. Only a week or so later, they were cancelled. I'm not saying that what you heard at WonderCon isn't true from their perspectives (as I haven't been following Heroes at all and haven't paid attention to Chuck's ratings), I'm just saying not to assume that TPTB are telling them everything either.

I'm hopeful that Chuck's back half brings the show's magic back. Most shows hit rough patches, so I'm confident that they can find it again. I just pray that NBC still has faith in the show, because their ratings are troubling.

[ edited by MizBehavin1 on 2009-03-11 01:53 ]
Rikardo, I think Chuck is in extreme danger of cancellation. Probably an 85% chance that it is toast along with Life. What logic are you using to say that it probably won't be?

What logic are you using to come up with your 85% probability that it will be canceled? In this environment, aren't we all kind of guessing?
I watched Castle with trepidation. I was concerned I wouldn't like it. Although I begrudgingly admit to having enjoyed Remington Steele and Moonlighting back in the day, this show's premise looked like something very old and very unfun. It's like Murder She Wrote meets Cagney & Lacey, but with Nathan Fillion, and believe me the only thing that made me tune in at all was Nathan Fillion.

By the time Castle asked the lady cop for the pictures so he could show them off to his fellow writer buddies, I glanced at the clock and did some quick math: it took Fillion about eighteen minutes and thirty seconds to make me a die hard Castle fan.

"I'm not asking you to give me the bodies. Just the pictures."

I'm so there, dude. I hope he has better luck on ABC than he did on FOX. I'd like to see Castle hang around for awhile.
Oh. And I have no love for Chuck, so it can get canceled and I won't even notice. Although I'm happy for Baldwin that he's been getting a steady paycheck, I can't watch a segment of Chuck without wanting to throw my TV out the window before the commercial break.
I adore Chuck and think it is one of the finest hours of pure fun entertainment that is on TV today.

Chuck was on the bubble last year and a lot of people were shocked when the woeful NBC picked it up for another season. It consistently placed 3rd and 4th in it's time period. Both in viewers and in the demo. It has had a horrible timeslot, but I don't think it matters. NBC will need 5 less shows next year. The lowest rated and most expensive shows will be the first to go. Mostly likely to go is Life and Chuck.

And I will be very sad.
MizBehavin1-
Thanks for the word of advice regard info for Con pannels. I couldn't agree with you more about Nathan being overdue for a hit show.

BB-
You bet me to the bile of baloney regarding the magic 85% :-)

helcat-
I disagree. Sounds like you are saying that Castle is on the chopping block-- especially with your theory of "a show that can't manage 50% in audience or demo out of it's lead in is always going to have at least a big question-mark next to it". Again. we don't know what numbers ABC is expecting.
You can sign up to be notified when the Castle DVD is released http://www.amazon.com/Castle-Nathan-Fillion/dp/B001UHN8AG/
Rats, can't buy Castle on Amazon on Demand. Got Dollhouse like normal.
"If you assume as I do that 99% of the DWTS audience in that demo are probably at the high end -- 48 or 49 years old -- then it's a credit to our elders that some stayed for Castle despite the women wearing pants and the course language."

Y'all are too young to remember the Fish cheer. People who were young during the Sixties are at or near retirement now. The language and situations on Castle are Lawrence Welk compared to my faves Deadwood and the Sons of Anarchy.
No, I'm not saying that Castle will be cancelled, I'm saying its premiere did not get great ratings which don't bode well for its future. That doesn't mean things won't improve or ABC won't decide that the show is worth keeping in the hope it'll grow. However, if I were a betting woman I'd be betting it won't be back.
I thought Nathan's performance in 'Castle' was charming as expected. :) Not sure how I feel about the show itself yet (the plot seems predictable and has been so many times with shows of this genre), but I will definitely be sticking around for Nathan's sake! I do think the show has promise and the potential to be interesting if done right. You can already see that there is a definite chemistry between Nathan's character and the detective lady? (sorry, can't remember her name off hand). I hope for Nathan's sake it does work out. The guy deserves a break! ;)
Castle also airs again on Saturday 10/9c for anyone that missed it
Loved the casting, wish more comments were about the show's debut rather than about the numbers, & yes I know my comment isn't really in the form of a sentence.
Well this is a thread about the numbers. If you want to talk about the episode, you can go to this thread.
I shouldn't have come into this thread, because I hadn't realized that Chuck's numbers were dire. I was assuming that it was doing wonderfully and would be renewed (not based on reality, just because I feel it's currently the best show on TV right now).

Glad that Castle debuted strong. I'm planning on catching it online today.
Castle was ok. Kinda like a Bones II.

Not holding lead-in numbers probably isn't much of a consideration; can't imagine they think DWTS and Castle are siblings. I don't mind though 'cuz DWTS is the only reality/contest show that I like.

Is Chuck any better than its first season? It never caught my interest in the slightest.

Nathan is definitely in his element with Castle. I love the daughter being the responsible one. Hope they don't overplay it though. Rogueish is fun but he came close to being worthless as a father.

[ edited by lottalettuce on 2009-03-11 12:50 ]
Another die hard fan here already. It far surpassed my expectations. I was expecting to like it, maybe, but was ready for cringes. They never came. Well written, well cast, well acted. Several laugh out loud moments, and left with smiles and feeling great at the end. This is how Moonlighting used to make me feel, but with good acting thrown in as well. :-)
The problem with chuck and surviving is even half mentioned in the Heroes renewal Also being factored: NBC's pilot project “Day One,” about a group of survivors in the wake of a catastrophic global event. If the serialized “Day One” goes to series, having an established sci-fi drama like “Heroes” could help the new show in a few ways, including possibly airing as part of the same Monday night block.


Chuck most likely won't be moved to another night therefore its likely to be gone. I really hope thats not the case.
It was fun, I really liked it, though it wasn't mindblowingly special. Kinda like I had expected. I certainly wasn't dissapointed. It's not as funny as Psych (which I've really grown to love over the past few weeks) or as good as Firefly or Drive, but Nathan was ofcourse very good and I'll definately continue watching.
willbueche: "If you assume as I do that 99% of the DWTS audience in that demo are probably at the high end -- 48 or 49 years old -- then it's a credit to our elders that some stayed for Castle despite the women wearing pants and the course language."

That's gotta be so totally tongue-in-cheek, rather than age-ism, 'cause you're like 40-ish, no? So we're not terribly much your elders, and obviously you know that demo can be pretty pants-friendly. And since we (many of us) came of age in the 60's, our language is often quite as colorful - if not moreso, in some cases - than subsequent generations. The main factor for the pants-and-swearing crowd wouldn't be age so much as region/class/liberality/religious background, etc.

For those of you who are very young or unschooled in fashion history: although there were laws in the U.S. up until about a century ago against wearing clothes considered as being inappropriate for one's gender, pants for women have increased in occurrence and popularity since 1930-ish, and by the 60's-70's, (depending on where you lived) were usually dress code-approved for girls/women in junior and/or high schools. Many thanks to Katharine Hepburn and Marlene Dietrich, who helped popularize pants for women.

I'm 53, and I wore pants - jeans, usually of the bell-bottom persuasion - all the way through junior and high school. Actually, I haven't worn a dress since I gussied up (as we old folks say, dagnabit and consarnit) as a witch for Halloween in 1992. And I swear like a trucker, if that trucker swears a lot.

I know many like me. I say this just so the nature and style of many of us doesn't get lost in revision and mythology... ; > and not because it's remotely on-topic.
Pants were against our dress code in high school. When I was in grade nine we all wore them one day in protest. And then kept wearing them.

And I'm a tad younger than you, Quoter Gal. (and really, just a wee little puppet tad)
Right on QuoterGal. I was going to respond to those comments (I'm a tad older than you) but you've said it much better than I could. So thanks.
Never knew that QuoterGal. Thanks for the history lesson.

I think ageism (?) is one of those things that'll be around long after the cockroach. No one seems to be in a hurry to correct that either. From being considered wise and worthy of respect to knowing nothing and not having a "count"... I don't know. I don't get it.
"That's gotta be so totally tongue-in-cheek, rather than age-ism, 'cause you're like 40-ish, no?"

Caught. Yes indeed. Good detective work!
Castle is getting lots of good word of mouth. With NBC abdicating the 10 o'clock hour soon, the only competition will be CSI:Miami -- admittedly a strong competitor, but I predict a long and healthy life for Richard Castle.
Only half done with the first episode of castle, but so far I'm loving it (I know I'm behind). Actually very surprised how much I'm enjoying it. Maybe it is just my state of mind, but I'm laughing at a lot of it. I agree it is similar to Bones but still I'm liking it. Not sure if they can keep it going from week to week but hope so. Nathan was very good.
I'm even more behind .... damn, I missed it! Will definitely tune in next week.

I'm 53, and I wore pants - jeans, usually of the bell-bottom persuasion - all the way through junior and high school. Actually, I haven't worn a dress since I gussied up (as we old folks say, dagnabit and consarnit) as a witch for Halloween in 1992. And I swear like a trucker, if that trucker swears a lot.
QuoterGal | March 11, 21:29 CET


Well said ;) I'm older than you and live in jeans and t-shirts (shorts & tanks in summer, since I live in Hawaii) and haven't worn a dress in about the same amount of time (jeans and tees get swapped for silk pants and shirts, for special occasions).

And I would rather walk over hot coals than watch Dancing With The Stars. Why do really young people assume that those of us who came of age in the sixties are shocked by anything? ;)
Or that we've exchanged our radical mind-sets for knitting in a rocker .... to which, can I just say .....eeeww :_(

You need to log in to be able to post comments.
About membership.



joss speaks back home back home back home back home back home