"You kill the best. Go, you."
September 26
2009
Dollhouse S2 premiere ratings.
"Dollhouse averaged 2.57 million and a 1.0/4 adults 18-49 rating."
JMaloney
| Dollhouse
| 07:46 CET
|
130 comments total
| tags: dollhouse, ratings
This thread has been closed for new comments.
You need to
log in to be able to post comments.
About
membership.
« Older
5 Awesome Cases of the Internet Ow...
|
Nick Brendon's got a secret in his...
Newer »
© 2002 - 2017 - WHEDONesque.com
(
e-mail)
Individual posts are copyright their respective authors
This is a non-profit, unofficial website, not affiliated with Mutant Enemy, Inc., 20th Century Fox, Warner Brothers or UPN.
JMaloney | September 26, 07:49 CET
Saje | September 26, 07:51 CET
2.70 million (#4), A18-49: 1.0/ 3 (#4)
JMaloney | September 26, 07:52 CET
jcs | September 26, 07:53 CET
*sigh*
embers | September 26, 07:54 CET
SteppeMerc | September 26, 07:56 CET
maz | September 26, 07:58 CET
Beth | September 26, 07:59 CET
That said, I'm not bothered. If DOLLHOUSE can hold the audience next week, according to the execs it will be in with a chance of getting the back 9 episodes ordered. The need it to average around what it got last year, so a bit of growth with good episodes would be a good sign.
Don't panic. For serious.
[ edited by gossi on 2009-09-26 17:01 ]
gossi | September 26, 08:00 CET
crazygolfa | September 26, 08:04 CET
embers | September 26, 08:05 CET
...
Actually, I just admit I have no clue what to make of anything here, given all the hubbub last Spring about DVRs and cheaper production and trends in the industry. And when I try and imagine future scenarios -- is it good or bad if Brothers gets cancelled early? Southland Tales? If zombies invade the CBS soundstages? No freakin' clue.
doubtful guest | September 26, 08:06 CET
zee | September 26, 08:07 CET
Simon | September 26, 08:19 CET
Not panicking.
zz9 | September 26, 08:19 CET
Donnie | September 26, 08:24 CET
I'm not gonna say that it's bad news yet, but it's certainly not good news.
Having said that... the episode was great
[ edited by mortimer on 2009-09-26 17:29 ]
mortimer | September 26, 08:29 CET
chazman | September 26, 08:35 CET
Dollhouse, and other dramas, do so can be subsidised making the cost to the network lower than actual production costs.
Chat shows the network has to pay the full cost.
I'd be surprised if that made DH cheaper than Leno, but I doubt it's as much more as it's actual costs would suggest.
zz9 | September 26, 08:41 CET
bobw1o | September 26, 08:44 CET
FOX need to shuffle some budget across for promotional purposes for DOLLHOUSE. They need to get the message out there that's it's back, and critically that it's better now. Otherwise it was absolutely pointless bringing it back from a business point of view - they just wasted the investment. Don't make a gamble on Joss and then not actually tell people about it at all.
[ edited by gossi on 2009-09-26 17:46 ]
gossi | September 26, 08:46 CET
edcsLover9 | September 26, 08:48 CET
MindPieces | September 26, 08:50 CET
Udo Schmitz | September 26, 09:10 CET
beckyboo | September 26, 09:11 CET
wouldestous | September 26, 09:12 CET
Reilly and Rice, for better or for worse, are playing the long game. The budget is down. The studio is picking up more of the tab. The issues surrounding last season hurt them. It wasn't a show that was going to get a big advertising spend.
FOX knows all of this, and they know what it does to the notion of expectations and the premise of patience.
Put your potato salad away.
@theonetruebix | September 26, 09:14 CET
@theonetruebix | September 26, 09:19 CET
Hunted | September 26, 09:34 CET
It baffles me, ratings stories using words like "disappointing" when all things considered the proper and accurate word would be "expected", even, perhaps, "entirely expected".
There's simply nothing to see in these ratings. They tell us only what everyone should have already known going in: This is going to take time.
@theonetruebix | September 26, 09:36 CET
The premiere ratings were important in the sense of getting that initial audience. Audience almost always declines second week.
gossi | September 26, 09:39 CET
@theonetruebix | September 26, 09:41 CET
Hunted | September 26, 09:44 CET
But I don't understand about the potato salad.
BuffyGroupie | September 26, 10:05 CET
That's okay, because I'm trying to get Saje to put it away anyway. ;)
@theonetruebix | September 26, 10:27 CET
Does anyone know whether Hulu numbers mean anything to the Fox execs? When folks were trying to save Terminator: TSCC, there was some noise made about needing to watch on Fox.com rather than on Hulu, but I can't install Fox's video player as I run Linux.
starlady | September 26, 10:27 CET
gossi | September 26, 10:31 CET
@theonetruebix | September 26, 10:31 CET
If I believed Reilly/Rice were sitting around expecting even Omega-sized overnights, maybe "these aren't good ratings to relaunch to" would make sense to me. But since I happen to believe this likely is entirely expected, I refuse to pass on these numbers using the normal comparative yardstick.
[ edited by The One True b!X on 2009-09-26 19:36 ]
@theonetruebix | September 26, 10:36 CET
Isn't there a great debate on right now about how much Neilson numbers really mean? I mean my watching wasn't at all counted last night but it's assumed that the percentage that does count somehow extrapolates to represent me.
Since we're not privy to the executive meetings at Fox we don't know which numbers the advertisers on Friday at 9 are looking at, there were several iPhone adds for example, perhaps 10% of the market Apple is looking for a more specific audience, say college graduates aged 25-45. Just a thought.
As long as money in is more than money out, Fox doesn't have to do away with the show.
rocknjosie | September 26, 10:44 CET
The only thing that concerns me is that this premiere was not exactly one that will draw in new viewers, or even old viewers who quit watching after the first few episodes. It was an outstanding episode, but someone who didn't watch most of Season 1 would be completely lost. I wish they had done a "previously on Dollhouse" intro.
RaisedByMongrels | September 26, 10:55 CET
Sparticus | September 26, 10:59 CET
But... as RaisedByMongreals just said, I think a "previously on Dollhouse" intro would have been nice.
maxsummers | September 26, 11:02 CET
will.bueche | September 26, 11:29 CET
ETA that season one is #11 on Amazon Video, suggesting that people are either catching up or just finally deciding to own it.
[ edited by The One True b!X on 2009-09-26 20:35 ]
@theonetruebix | September 26, 11:32 CET
Nielsen, the company that makes the ratings, is quite interesting though. The other day they paid me $30 to hear I don't own a TV (and got the unsolicited information that I do watch Dollhouse on Hulu ;-)). I guess if they were trying to sign up new peope for ratings boxes, I did disqualify myself though.
Celebithil | September 26, 11:37 CET
Simon | September 26, 11:42 CET
holypotatoes | September 26, 11:45 CET
Cool!
Rhodey | September 26, 11:48 CET
Krusher | September 26, 11:48 CET
PS. Any discussion of replacing Nielson has to start with the understanding that the networks absolutely hate the hegemony Nielson has with regard to influencing advertising rates. Their goal will be to gain control of the rating system so they can set the rates. Not because they do not trust the numbers; Nielson uses sophisticated sampling technology in their estimations. Now, I understand that Nielson has not merged in all existing viewing technologies, but I would estimate that is something they are certainly working on.
Dana5140 | September 26, 11:52 CET
jkalderash | September 26, 11:56 CET
bubblecat | September 26, 12:03 CET
@theonetruebix | September 26, 12:08 CET
The ratings are to be expected. I'm just concerned that it seems to be regularly dropping at the half hour.
hacksaway | September 26, 12:12 CET
[ edited by gossi on 2009-09-28 11:05 ]
gossi | September 26, 12:15 CET
Dana - I would disagree. Yes, I'm sure the networks aren't happy that someone else is making that money. But at the same time, I don't see the upside of creating something that A) wouldn't be entirely considered objective (like banks rating their own bonds) and B) would have to directly compete with Neilson who has an unassailable market position unless you're willing to lose money for an extended length of time in competition just for a decent revenue stream.
I don't see the return on investment being there unless you also think there are significant cash loss issues involved in relying on the traditional Nielson ratings for renew or cancel decisions.
[ edited by azzers on 2009-09-26 21:26 ]
azzers | September 26, 12:24 CET
OTOH, I don't think this means automatic cancellation. There are still 12 more episodes to go, right? I agree with gossi that I hope the Fox execs don't give up on the show. I hope they're willing to throw a bit more money on advertising DH and give the show some time to improve. I think the best we can hope for right now is that they'll air the rest of the episodes and the ratings will improve enough to get a better average. But even if they don't, then I'm happy to have gotten a S2 and I wouldn't blame Fox for not picking up the back nine.
spiralout9 | September 26, 12:32 CET
Oh i'm only salad adjacent. I can see the salad but this season i'm trying not to partake.
(my handy method for making the ratings seem better BTW ? Mentally multiply them by a million, they're way higher when you do that, i'm surprised Fox hasn't thought of it to be honest)
Saje | September 26, 12:45 CET
Whose analysis of course proved correct last year, too. Oh, wait, it didn't. ;)
@theonetruebix | September 26, 12:46 CET
hacksaway | September 26, 12:48 CET
palehorse | September 26, 12:51 CET
We might be in Opposite World. Someone flush a toilet and see which way it drains*.
* if it's not an urban myth in this world then we may have left Kansas. Figuratively speaking. Unless you live in Kansas.
[ edited by Saje on 2009-09-26 21:51 ]
Saje | September 26, 12:51 CET
Since Fox obviously isn't going to do it, we just really need to work on getting the word out!
It was a great episode and this season looks really promising. Maybe if people get word of that they will start tuning in. It's easy to get caught up with Hulu, afterall.
ShanshuBugaboo | September 26, 13:00 CET
Whose analysis of course proved correct last year, too. Oh, wait, it didn't. ;)
Hey I didn't say I believed their analysis ;p~ I'm just saying, if you compared the 18-49 demo numbers only of every network show to DH, DH really has just about the lowest of them all. I know it's shocking but it's not unusual for the lowest rated show to be canceled. If Fox is happy with these numbers, then wonderful, I'll be happy to eat crow and watch more DH episodes at the same time. But in the meanwhile, I'll appreciate whatever episodes of DH we can get and try not to raise my hopes too much for a back nine.
[ edited by spiralout9 on 2009-09-26 22:15 ]
spiralout9 | September 26, 13:13 CET
KariAri | September 26, 13:14 CET
-if we can hold with that, with abysmal lead-ins, confusing promotion and even stiffer competition (next week we're getting double Ugly Betty from ABC and more Medium from CBS, which might hold out with the 18-49 female demo), we'll be fine for a while.
- if the numbers can grow a bit and stick, we'll get the back nine.
I'm kinda glad that we're not facing Flashpoint this year (BTW, their premiere was great), less competition for the 18-49 male demo.
Numfar PTB | September 26, 14:04 CET
| September 26, 14:35 CET
FaithFan | September 26, 14:53 CET
Simon | September 26, 14:58 CET
Bottom line:
Just about every show premiered low this year. (Dropping from end of last season.) Heroes seemed to take a cue from Petty and free fall.
Next week is going to be the first real big test. If it can hold onto, and gain, via word of mouth, then we're off to a great start. If it can't even hold onto tonight's numbers, then we'd be blessed to see all 13 hit air.
crhobbs42 | September 26, 15:02 CET
Jaymii | September 26, 15:04 CET
Simon | September 26, 15:05 CET
hacksaway | September 26, 15:05 CET
But I'm hopeful. Wasn't until HIMYM 3rd season that the show was out of the bubble worry.
Numfar PTB | September 26, 15:26 CET
Topic? Still not panicking.
zz9 | September 26, 15:33 CET
It seems like network executives want genre programming, they just can't make their core audience like it. Look at Mad Men: great TV that would probably have been canceled after one season on a major network. It hit a ratings record of 2.8 million viewers in it's 3rd year.
azzers | September 26, 15:46 CET
Suzie | September 26, 16:11 CET
That's about all we can do to help. Is spread the word.
Ivalaine | September 26, 16:33 CET
@theonetruebix | September 26, 16:37 CET
How many people follow Dollhouse on Whedonesque, IMDB and other online forums? A few hundred? A thousand or so?
How many of those are in the US? Half?
The people who can make a difference are the millions of people who have never visited an online Dollhouse forum. And that needs advertising and press. We've had some very positive press for Vows, we need more adverts.
zz9 | September 26, 16:43 CET
Twitter: Watch Dollhouse, season 2, Fri nights, Fox at 9pm. Nielsen families please watch/DVR, others please watch via hulu or iTunes. Retweet please
Facebook: Like Buffy, Angel, Firefly, or Dr. Horrible? Then tune into Joss Whedon's new show, Dollhouse, 9pm Fri nights (Fox). Those who are Nielsen viewers please watch or DVR the show. For others, watch it on Hulu free, or buy the eps or season on iTune...s. For those who watched last year and gave up on it, please give it another go, it's really improved since mid last season! Repost this to your status if you like Dollhouse!
[ edited by Ivalaine on 2009-09-27 01:45 ]
Ivalaine | September 26, 16:44 CET
Ivalaine | September 26, 16:47 CET
Which is why I also find that particular statistic the most telling we have to date, and obviously not in a good way.
On a related note, this statistic would also seem to back up my perception - as of watching last night's episode - of what I am fast concluding is actually at the heart of the show's consistent ratings woes (hint: it's got nothing to do with Fox.)
brinderwalt | September 26, 16:58 CET
Fans can tweet and Facebook status until the Fringe cow comes home, but if the network isn't also involved by being part of the conversation, answering questions, and solving problems (not show problems but informational problems, for example), any fan campaign would be trying to start a flood by spitting with dry mouth.
[ edited by The One True b!X on 2009-09-27 02:25 ]
@theonetruebix | September 26, 17:23 CET
Much of this sturm and drang is to be expected, about DH. When I first saw the post about the first episode, my initial thought was, well, how long till we have actual ratings to consider? I did not even realize that Friday was the first episode, so I never saw it. What might actually save DH is that other shows do so poorly that it allows them to actually pump more money into DH. House might have begun its first season with a 2-hr ep, but it was banal and fairly predictable, had Wilson for one moment and no other regulars. And now Jennifer Morrison has announced she is leaving, all but assuring Olivia Wilde stays as 13 (fan unfave), and they bring back the idiot private detective fellow. House may hurt, Fringe will hurt, and these are big guns at Fox. On the other hand, losing DH might allow them to pump more money into Fringe- shift it to Friday and out of that Thursday death match. Hard to call this. But no matter what the DVR ratings are, this was not a good start at all.
Dana5140 | September 26, 17:39 CET
hacksaway | September 26, 17:56 CET
John Darc | September 26, 18:03 CET
they haven't even managed to match their lowest number from last year in the first episode.
This is clearly not good news, and I doubt, fox really "expected" the season premier to have such low ratings after months of time for people to catch on to dollhouse online.
[ edited by mortimer on 2009-09-27 03:11 ]
mortimer | September 26, 18:10 CET
@theonetruebix | September 26, 18:27 CET
I loved Smallville last night, btw. It's much more Superman/Lois and Clark now.
And that was a great Flashpoint, Numfar.
For the moment, Friday is my TV night. Well, one of them, me being a TV addict and all.
redeem147 | September 26, 18:32 CET
Vespa | September 26, 21:39 CET
You're forgetting one thing - Nielson ratings only speak to the trends among the sector of the population that are habitual television watchers; humanity at large isn't even technically in the picture.
brinderwalt | September 26, 22:22 CET
usthem I mean, I totally meant them the ... big deficient bastards !The problem with the new header photos is that since I'm on 1024x768 I can't see Echo or Boyd unless I move the window to the left and then stretch the right hand edge of the window to the right.
OK zz9, there may come a point where you have to accept that your resolution is insane and happenstance. Not saying we're there yet ...
Saje | September 26, 23:37 CET
If it dies, so be it. I'm not stressing out over it anymore, just going to enjoy it while it lasts.
Aidan W. | September 27, 00:22 CET
zz9 | September 27, 01:09 CET
Racoon Boy | September 27, 01:50 CET
Seems perfectly reasonable to me. Which might be a problem considering we're in the same world. Tradition seems to require us to have a duel or possibly some kind of bet revolving around the moral worthiness of a mortal being.
Saje | September 27, 01:57 CET
zz9 | September 27, 02:15 CET
On topic, I agree with Aidan W. I don't know why everyone is complaining about lack of advertising. I barely watch TV, but when I do, it's often Fox and I've been seeing lots of commercials for Dollhouse. All during the breaks for House, Bones and Fringe, it seemed as though an ad for Dollhouse would hit at least once during each commercial break. Also, I would get those distracting motion ads at the bottom of the screen during the aforementioned programming.
If Dollhouse doesn't get strong numbers, it's because people just aren't watching for whatever reason, be it the Friday night time slot, commitment to other shows, or it's just plain not their cup of tea. That's also something that most folks don't think about. Dollhouse could be the greatest show ever, but it means nothing for the time being if you're just not into that story or brand of programming.
I do hope that if Dollhouse can't get a better night and time, it at least gets a better, more fitting lead in. I mean, Brothers had its moments (Carl Weathers is never not awesome), but it's just so generic and tonally wrong for Dollhouse. Most of all, I was offended by some of the small bits of racist humor toward Whites. Very off-putting and distracting.
How about pairing Dollhouse with Fox's big hit, Bones, or maybe Fringe? Though I think moving Fringe to Thursdays was a bad idea. It was fine where it was. Tru Calling was on Thursdays. We all know how well that turned out. Or, perhaps if Human Target does eventually arrive in the new year, the two shows can be a nice double feature of the same, basic ideas.
Then again, maybe Friday nights is exactly where Dollhouse needs to be in order to stay on the air. Think of it as if it were on The CW. These ratings would mean certain death anywhere else, but in this spot, the expectations to perform at a certain level are considerably lower. Either way, I'm just happy for a season 2 and I'll watch for as long as I'm able and not worry so much about numbers.
kungfubear | September 27, 02:18 CET
jiggyfly | September 27, 02:25 CET
In which case I've got some bad news for you....
You're gonna turn into a swan ? They can break a man's arm with their wing you know. I don't have a daughter or a wife but I do have arms.
These ratings would mean certain death anywhere else, but in this spot, the expectations to perform at a certain level are considerably lower.
Yep, built into the moving nights suggestion is the idea that that would necessarily mean enough more viewers to meet the higher expectations/requirements. Which I have doubts about.
Saje | September 27, 02:33 CET
gossi | September 27, 03:22 CET
vampmogs | September 27, 03:31 CET
Ivalaine | September 27, 03:52 CET
Hulu numbers are not public, nor are Amazon or iTunes.
I got a bunch of emails from people (and I've seen similar comments online) saying they only knew Dollhouse was returning because it was a trending topic on Twitter on Friday night before and during airing. That was kind of a planned thing, a bunch of people made it happen so thanks to those you did (they know who they are).
gossi | September 27, 07:12 CET
@theonetruebix | September 27, 10:09 CET
Seeing most of these people come out to watch mindless, god awful movies, I worry about the general population and if they can enjoy a show as intelligent as Dollhouse.
| September 27, 10:20 CET
One thing people are going to have to get used to is that Dollhouse is a Friday night show. This is the only night of the week where it would be allowed to go through growing pains.
@theonetruebix | September 27, 10:26 CET
baxter | September 27, 10:41 CET
Of course, a more sensible option would be to find another lead in ASAP for DOLLHOUSE. HUMAN TARGET could be useful. Then double back them, and promote the shit out of them using HUMAN TARGET's budget and pair them as identity shows.
gossi | September 27, 11:16 CET
And as sensible as that probably is from a business standpoint, gossi, I certainly hope that doesn't turn into the case. Unaired episodes always make me a little sad for the cast and crew that worked so hard on the episodes that never really see the light of day except for on DVD. I know my heart definitely broke a little when Felicia Day tweeted about "Epitaph One" not getting to air. :(
jiggyfly | September 27, 11:30 CET
Have the admitting staff question them on admission. If they can't name at least three people Echo has been, throw them out!
zz9 | September 27, 11:32 CET
An amusing aside - if BROTHERS, TIL DEATH and DOLLHOUSE tank more next week, I expect FOX to be knocked off it's 18-49 status for the entire week. Which is epic fail.
[ edited by gossi on 2009-09-28 11:03 ]
gossi | September 27, 11:41 CET
While problematic I don't think the advertising or time slot is entirely to blame. The show itself is high concept and unfortunately when it comes to tv it seems the majority of people like simple premises that are easy to miss for weeks and pick up a month later without missing anything, less plot twists and more voting to kick someone off and so on. Or maybe I am bitter cause I cant contribute to the ratings when I don't reside within the states.
silent knight | September 27, 14:15 CET
gossi | September 27, 14:21 CET
DarenG | September 27, 15:25 CET
So don't just say that it won't help without FOX backing it. Every 10 people we each reach who Hulu or iTunes, is 10 people they didn't have before. If we can add even 20,000 to the numbers of Hulu or iTunes views, it'll be noticed.
Ivalaine | September 27, 15:36 CET
Dana5140 | September 27, 17:57 CET
[ edited by phlebotinin on 2009-09-28 04:18 ]
phlebotinin | September 27, 19:17 CET
holypotatoes | September 27, 19:23 CET
phlebotinin | September 27, 20:42 CET
gossi | September 27, 21:56 CET
Not sure how else to take that but as a comment on the inability of most TV watchers to get what DH is all about, or rather, to invest the time and energy to do so. My take is different: the show is not written in a way that gets more people to watch. Fact is, I really don't know what the majority of people like or why. The polls are only part of the story, but programs such as Lost, Grey's, CSI all have long-term themes and arcs, and in some cases require far more attention (ie, Lost) than DH ever will. But hey, that's just my take.
Dana5140 | September 28, 03:27 CET
gossi | September 28, 04:07 CET
baxter | September 28, 04:30 CET
Which is why I find the apparent half-hour dropoff in viewership much more significant in terms of the show's overal health than just the opening number of viewers.
ETA:But yeah - I agree that this coming week's numbers are probably much more significant in the long run (After all, it's entirely possible that there were a significant number of negative flush events in restrooms of Neilson households around the half-hour mark.)
[ edited by brinderwalt on 2009-09-28 13:55 ]
brinderwalt | September 28, 04:32 CET
Michael | September 28, 07:24 CET
hacksaway | September 28, 08:33 CET
But above and beyond everything else, it's that Fox is the wrong place for this show. 1) on a cable network, these numbers wouldn't just not be bad, but would glow in the dark; 2) it's a heady science fiction premise, like Battlestar, and if the world were right, it would be taking it's place on the Sci-Fi Channel instead of a BSG redressing of the milquetoast Stargate universe on the SyFy Channel; 3) a cable network would allow more freedom under less ratings-centric scrutiny, and more Emmy grabs and attention grabbing moves. This show should be the new Battlestar, the new Mad Men, the new Nip/Tuck, all at once. It should have started with the pilot Joss made, and gotten us to where this season's premiere was by the middle of the first season. Instead, we've got network expectations (both of ratings and content) being pushed onto a cable idea. Network television is stuff like Lie to Me or NCIS, they're for people who work and have children and miss episodes because they were tailgating a football game or had to work late and don't bother to catch up. Cable is for people who take in TV the way people used to take in books.
HBO, Showtime, SyFy, or FX would have been a nice place for Joss to go, Amy Acker would have been the ideal choice for the lead, but this didn't go idea>pitch>channel>actor, this went channel>actor>idea>pitch>channel. Eliza had a production deal with Fox, and she wisely asked her friend Joss to make it for her. He's in a space right now where he made this show, and it had to be with ED and Fox, because that's how it was. I also think some of the problems with Eliza seem to have been more of a Harrison Ford-Blade Runner Voice Over thing. She didn't like the show changes, and it came through in her performances. The better written episodes (including the original pilot), the ones closer to the original concept, have had her best performances. The ones that seemed more like a rehash of an A-Team plot had cringey, phoned-in performances from her. Certainly, the others seem better for not dropping the ball like that no matter how bad an ep was, but Eliza had more crap to shovel in all of those, and was the producer, and had a more frustrating view on the show's problems.
PuppetDoug | September 28, 21:52 CET