10 ms·
It is worth pointing out that the title used here is nothing like the title used on the original article, which makes no claims about what anyone should have do
by caf 10y ago
It is worth pointing out that the title used here is nothing like the title used on the original article, which makes no claims about what anyone should have done.
- forgettableuser 10y agoYeah, the title is misleading. The article is trying to quantify the properties of a cancelled cult-classic and derive a ranking. It doesn't make claims about whether it was right or wrong. Such an article would also have to look at the costs to make each show, which it does not. (I expect Firefly to be more expensive than Veronica Mars due to things like special effects, and Joey expensive due to Matt LeBlanc.) And it would have to consider monetization models for each, where shows with ads have to concern themselves more about advertiser friendly demographics vs. premium pay shows have to find a demographic that is willing to pay directly for TV.
- spdustin 10y agoOh, but Joey was awful. No chemistry. Firefly had a period table's worth of chemistry.
- sctb 10y agoWe updated the submission title from “Fox really shouldn't have canceled Firefly”.