Re: Too many commercials

[Guest guest]

Good! About time someone protested! I don't understand why not the whole population gets together and starts to boycott channels that have too many commercial breaks. That would make them rethink their policy real fast, I'm sure.

Here in Sweden we usually only get one or two commercial breaks per hour in our commercial channels. One used to only have commercials between programs but then changed. I protested against this but they said that viewers will get used to it. "Not this one" said I. I never get used to these annoying interruptions.

Thus, I mainly watch our non-commercial national TV and cable channels, or else I tape the program so that I can FF past the ads. Unfortunately, such behavior among viewers has led to product placement instead which I find extremely annoying. It can and have ruined many a good film. :-(

Inger - really sick of commercials! :-(((((((

Too many commercials

TV producer may move to cable to escape ad deluge

LOS ANGELES (Hollywood Reporter) - The creator of Emmy-winning legal drama "Boston Legal" said Tuesday he's concerned about the amount of commercial time on primetime TV shows and raised the possibility of working in cable in the future. "If the commercial encroachment becomes worse, it's probably something that we'll all consider," E. Kelley told reporters during ABC's portion of the Television Critics Assn.'s summer press tour at the Beverly Hilton. He said he has no plans in cable right now. Kelley said that when he worked on "L.A. Law," there were 48 minutes of show. That has been reduced over the years to a little more than 41 minutes. Kelley said that makes it tougher to create character-driven stories and tell emotional stories, particularly within the five-act structure that sometimes gives only eight minutes between commercial breaks. "It's tough to be as effective as a storyteller with 41 minutes," Kelley said. He added that it was hard to get the audience's attention for a subtle or softer story line coming out of some commercials. He said he would be open to alternatives to add to the time available.

"I would love to explore some ideas that buy some of that time back," Kelley said, including perhaps entertaining offers with corporations that would sign on as co-producers who might allow 43 or 44 minutes for the shows.

In an interview following the presentation, Kelley said he had explored a co-production deal with a company for his shows "The Practice" and "Ally McBeal" for that reason. But it wasn't practical because, given his story lines, it was possible that it would offend at least somebody that might make it difficult for a company to sponsor the show.

"My exploration came to an end because the corporate entity wanted some script control . . . That's not viable" for creative reasons, Kelley said. He hasn't considered it since.

During the panel, Kelley said he wasn't happy about ABC's removal of "Boston Legal" for the premiere of "Grey's Anatomy" this year.

"It was very tough, but it's the reality that we're dealing with, and we're going to make a go of it in our new time period," Kelley said.

He added it was particularly difficult because he felt "Boston Legal" was coming to its best five episodes when the show was taken off the air. Four of the five episodes, including two with Locklear as a murder defendant and also guest-starring Betty White and Rupert Everett, will be the first ones shown this coming season. They are being reworked to include the new co-stars, including former "Ed" actress Bowen; the fifth will require more extensive reworking.

Reuters/Hollywood Reporter

===

It has been clear for a long time that there are too many commercials and that it was getting worse. Kids cartoons these days are the worst. Each 30 minute show has 10 minutes or more of commercials. Broadcast TV is going to put itself out of business if they keep this up.

[Guest guest]

:

> Product placement has as much to do with greed as people cutting out commercials. It started with the movies where the moguls figured they could make more money by getting the different products to bid on having their goodies in their movie. In a way I can't really blame them. The so-called talent charges kingly sums for their work and most of the movies in turn bomb. The moguls have to make up that loss somehow.

I see.

> For example: I think it was Lucy Lui who got like $300,000 for her first movie. By her thid she was demanding $7 million. Many of the biggest names don't work for less than $20 million or more. I don't see how they can get away with it though since their movies stink and cost the companies money.

I have no idea who Lucy Lui is, but I agree that it is bizarre to earn that much money for just a job.

> On TV it is not too different. Much of the "talent" demands exorbitant amounts of money. I read that some of the most popular shows had cast members walk off the set in the middle of the season because they felt like they deserved a pay raise. They would get it of course, which lead the others to complain and then get raises, which hurt the ego of the first jerk and it all started over again. The newsies also charge a fortune, as do the talk show people. Then bear in mind that most of the new show stink and fail in the first season: that too is a lot of money down the drain.

All this would change quickly if a few things were done.

> 1.) Remind the "stars" that they are not irreplacable. If they aren't earning their keep by producing money losing bombs, then they are gone and some new faces are given a shot. This could work since most actors and actress these days are pitiful compared to those of the 1940's and 1950's.

Right. With most of the young ones, I really wonder what the big deal is. Very few of them have the charisma of a "real" star (Kate Blanchett being one of the exceptions) or the acting skills of a "real" actor (like Dame Judy Dench).

> 2.) Remind them that a contract is a contract. Go on strike because you think you can extort more money, your character has a tragic death and you are replaced.

LOL! Hm, perhaps THAT is why some characters suddenly have tragic deaths..?

> Make a stink and the studio would tell how you tried to destroy the show with your outrageous demands.

Somehow that is not considered a stink, though. Many tend to only admire people who have the balls to demand outrageous amounts of money to show up.

> 3.) Bring in some real talent to write movies and TV shows. Get rid of the hacks and the losers who decide to produce the junk they are putting out.

Good idea. I'd like to see more quality films, preferrably without violence and too many computer animated special effects.

> 4.) Stop planning TV shows solely for the pilot. Most shows these days are not written or planned beyond the pilot and a few following shows. This is because so many shows fail either on the pilot (which might not sell at the studio or bombs on broadcast) or the next few shows convince the audience that the show is a flop. See how this might be a self-fulfilling prophecy?

Yep.

> 5.) Have Congress bring back the old law restricting commercials to no more than 8 minutes per hour. Sure advertizers would have to pay more, but that just means more creativity for the commercials. Also, the law would have to outlaw advertizing bugs, crawls and other junk crowding up the screen.

Very good idea! Why don't you start lobbying for it right away? You are so eloquent that I'm sure you could really make a difference if you put your mind to it. And surely, there must be others who are equally fed up who would join your campaign?

Inger

[Guest guest]

I stopped watching anything but PBS (Public Broadcasting Service)

because of the commercials, and the only shows I really watch on PBS

are Nova, Nature, Frontline, The McGloughlin Group, This Old House,

The Antiques Roadshow, and Louis Rukheiser.

But Lately I have become somewhat disatisfied with some of these shows

because the producers have been cutting them short to allow for

commercials when the programs are re-sold to commercial broadcasting

companies.

If this trend continues, I will cease watching TV altogether.

Sometimes when I travel I will watch cable. I remember when cable

first came out. On premium channels, there was just the movie,

followed by previews, and another movie. Now you have the network

embelem in the corner to remind viewers too stupid to remember what

channel it is they are watching, and you get the occassional promo

flashing across the screen for what's coming up next. Commercials are

beginning to infiltrate these premium channels also.

Now when my neighbor first got cable, he said it was all the rage and

that there would NEVER be commercials on premium channels. Now he's

switching to satelite TV because surely something that is so expensive

would not allow commercials to creep into the programing.

So ironically, it seems that it's commercials that are one of the

things driving people away from TV, and I don't know about you all,

but the more I see a particular product interupt my favorite

programming, the less I am inclined to buy it. People criticize me

for that, because if it weren't for the product ads, I wouldn't have

the program to watch. But the way I figure, the programs are

increasingly not worth watching due to commercialism making heavier

inroads on my programs.

The bottom line is, I simply watch less TV than ever, and spend more

time reading, doing chores, and generally enjoying myself. It also

seems that I feel a lot less stress now that I am watching less TV.

Tom

[Guest guest]

Tom:

> I don't know about you all, but the more I see a particular product

> interupt my favorite programming, the less I am inclined to buy it.

Same here. Any producer that has the nerve to invade my brain with their

logo enough times, makes me so annoyed that I make a mental note to avoid

that brand for all future. :-(

Inger

[Guest guest]

Mmmmmmmmm adverts.

I remember a time when adverts were almost a novelty and then they

were very well thought out and quite clever - now there is overkill

and the standards are well basically cr*p overall.

I don't tend to watch too much TV - I check the TV guide and only

watch what I want and only if I have nothing better to do - which I

usually have :-) I tend to see commercial breaks as a que to use the

bathroom - or some other small job - or pick up a book or article -

or even jump onto computer whilst they are on :-)

If something is really important I record it.

I absolutely cannot stand day time TV the majority of it being

drivel - I only have the basic package for TV as there is no way I

could justify paying for extra channels that I do not have time to

watch.

In UK on some channels they are starting to break up a film with

about half an hours worth of news - which is really annoying - as it

makes end time of film really late and if I wanted to watch - hear

30mins or more of news I would put a news channel on - go on web or

get a newspaper. Channel 5 in this country is a little better as they

have something called 60 second news inbetween programmes which is

not as intrusive and alerts me to any news worthy info' that I may

want to check out later.

> I stopped watching anything but PBS (Public Broadcasting Service)

> because of the commercials, and the only shows I really watch on

PBS

> are Nova, Nature, Frontline, The McGloughlin Group, This Old House,

> The Antiques Roadshow, and Louis Rukheiser.

>

> But Lately I have become somewhat disatisfied with some of these

shows

> because the producers have been cutting them short to allow for

> commercials when the programs are re-sold to commercial

broadcasting

> companies.

>

> If this trend continues, I will cease watching TV altogether.

>

> Sometimes when I travel I will watch cable. I remember when cable

> first came out. On premium channels, there was just the movie,

> followed by previews, and another movie. Now you have the network

> embelem in the corner to remind viewers too stupid to remember what

> channel it is they are watching, and you get the occassional promo

> flashing across the screen for what's coming up next. Commercials

are

> beginning to infiltrate these premium channels also.

>

> Now when my neighbor first got cable, he said it was all the rage

and

> that there would NEVER be commercials on premium channels. Now he's

> switching to satelite TV because surely something that is so

expensive

> would not allow commercials to creep into the programing.

>

> So ironically, it seems that it's commercials that are one of the

> things driving people away from TV, and I don't know about you all,

> but the more I see a particular product interupt my favorite

> programming, the less I am inclined to buy it. People criticize me

> for that, because if it weren't for the product ads, I wouldn't

have

> the program to watch. But the way I figure, the programs are

> increasingly not worth watching due to commercialism making heavier

> inroads on my programs.

>

> The bottom line is, I simply watch less TV than ever, and spend

more

> time reading, doing chores, and generally enjoying myself. It also

> seems that I feel a lot less stress now that I am watching less TV.

>

> Tom