Supernatural article at EW.com
Mar. 1st, 2010 10:21 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
agt_spookyDid anyone post this over the weekend? I didn't see it anywhere. It's from Entertainment Weekly's website. (FYI - I removed the Smallville spoiler at the beginning of the article so I could put this outside a cut)
The CW's identity crisis: Are 'Supernatural' and 'Smallville' better than 'Gossip Girl' and '90210'?
by Ken Tucker
I kept seeing commercials for new March episodes of Melrose Place and 90210 and Gossip Girl and Life Unexpected. I have a soft spot for the lovably twee Life, but it’s not really amounting to much. As for the rest: blechh. Seeing all that promotional posing and pouting, I thought, I’ve pretty much had it with the CW’s cool-hip brigade. And that so includes One Tree Hill.
The CW has never had huge ratings, and it’s struggled to establish its brand identity. So here’s an idea. Why not rededicate itself to being the home of Supernatural, Smallville, and Vampire Diaries (its best cool-hip show primarily because its cool-hip is enlivened by its fantasy element), and develop more shows in this genre?
I know the business counter-argument to this: the network can assert that it gets more ad dollars by dangling youth and beauty. That Leighton Meester makes more of an impact in the media than Jensen Ackles.
But I don’t write a business column; I advocate for what’s interesting to watch. And at this point in their respective histories, I am certain that Supernatural is more fun to follow than Gossip Girl is, and I know that the people who are doing amusing variations on the Superman mythology in Smallville are giving us better entertainment than the talented folks who are trying heroically to breathe life into the wheezing 90210 legacy.
Am I wrong?
~~~~
You're not wrong, Ken! I agree with you wholeheartedly. I mean, can't the CW look at it's own ratings week to week and realize that VD, SPN and SV are always at the top of the pile? Why keep forcing all this teen-angst-drama-who's sleeping with who this week crap down our throats when you've got a formula that's working. And that draws in the female audience you're looking for. I just don't understand what Ostroff is thinking.
And if they DID give Jensen (and Jared) some press time, they'd see our two boys are as big a draw as Leighton Meester is.
What do you guys think? Thoughts? Opinions?
The CW's identity crisis: Are 'Supernatural' and 'Smallville' better than 'Gossip Girl' and '90210'?
by Ken Tucker
I kept seeing commercials for new March episodes of Melrose Place and 90210 and Gossip Girl and Life Unexpected. I have a soft spot for the lovably twee Life, but it’s not really amounting to much. As for the rest: blechh. Seeing all that promotional posing and pouting, I thought, I’ve pretty much had it with the CW’s cool-hip brigade. And that so includes One Tree Hill.
The CW has never had huge ratings, and it’s struggled to establish its brand identity. So here’s an idea. Why not rededicate itself to being the home of Supernatural, Smallville, and Vampire Diaries (its best cool-hip show primarily because its cool-hip is enlivened by its fantasy element), and develop more shows in this genre?
I know the business counter-argument to this: the network can assert that it gets more ad dollars by dangling youth and beauty. That Leighton Meester makes more of an impact in the media than Jensen Ackles.
But I don’t write a business column; I advocate for what’s interesting to watch. And at this point in their respective histories, I am certain that Supernatural is more fun to follow than Gossip Girl is, and I know that the people who are doing amusing variations on the Superman mythology in Smallville are giving us better entertainment than the talented folks who are trying heroically to breathe life into the wheezing 90210 legacy.
Am I wrong?
~~~~
You're not wrong, Ken! I agree with you wholeheartedly. I mean, can't the CW look at it's own ratings week to week and realize that VD, SPN and SV are always at the top of the pile? Why keep forcing all this teen-angst-drama-who's sleeping with who this week crap down our throats when you've got a formula that's working. And that draws in the female audience you're looking for. I just don't understand what Ostroff is thinking.
And if they DID give Jensen (and Jared) some press time, they'd see our two boys are as big a draw as Leighton Meester is.
What do you guys think? Thoughts? Opinions?
