Given the schlock that doesn't get cancelled......... this show was well written, very well casted, and offered shows, that operated on many levels. Rich, complex, beautiful stories.
Its cancellation is our loss.
Yeah I was asking myself that when over the Christmas holidays I watched episodes that I missed. It really got better as it went along.
share[deleted]
Because GOD forbid Nina Tassler admit she made a mistake during the writers' strike and bring back this incredible show (a la "Jerico").
According to her, we all need 15 different versions of "CSI: <insert city name here>" AND a 30-year old re-make of a non-sensical fictional Hawaiian police force. Yea.
At least we have the solace of watching the Sy-Fy (thank you to the Sy-Fy execs who are the only ones in H-wood that have a CLUE about good shows) and the DVDs to see the greatness that this show was on the cusp of...That last episode when Mick and Beth are trying so hard not to say goodbye...I still get tears at their so-painfully-real-it-hurts acting chops.
GO SEE "The BACK-UP PLAN" (even though J-Lo is in it..it still has our Vamp!)
[deleted]
[deleted]
Probably because the majority of the people who have watched it found the writing and acting to be. . off.
Hell I'm a fan of the show and I have no problem with admitting that the writing was very clunky and amateurish.
Most of the acting was the same way, which could have been in fault because of the writing, but still it was kind of like a day time soap opera when it came to the acting.
That doesnt make the show "bad" but its off putting for most.
The ratings were still good.
shareThe show started at around 8.5 million viewers and even though it dropped a little it never once went below 7 million. It also always bounced back to around 8 million so it definitely had potential for a second season. More expensive shows to produce don't bring in that kind of numbers, let alone on Friday nights.
However, the problem was basically that (I said it on an other thread):
A)CBS wanted Warner Brothers to step up and pay more.
B) Creative differences between CBS and the shows creators and writers. Season 2 would have moved away from the crime-solving Mick to more 'supernatural' drama. They wanted to introduce the Legion, a secret human-run organization controlling the vampire population. Whenever there are too many vampires, they start killing off some (The French Revolution was such an example). The relationship between the Legion and the vampires was explained like the relationship between the police and the mafia. Both know of each other and respect/ fear each other, but whenever the mafia gets too strong or meddles too much the police has to take them down a notch. They released this list with all of the vampires in L.A. in season 1 and in season 2 Mick would have had to decide between his brothers/ sisters and the humans. Also Coraline and Lance would have made a comeback. Basically more drama, more action, more vampire stuff and less day-to-day crime solving.
CBS, however, wanted CSI: Vampires. They wanted way less personal drama, less vampires and less Beth in favour of more cases for Mick (like CSI) that he solves weekly.
The two creators of the show didn't comply and were fired. Weerksman - writer and producer - sought a compromise but insisted on keeping the focus on the love story between Mick and Beth. He was fired shortly after.
3) Even though Moonlight wasn't bad in the ratings department it had less viewers than its lead-in and its lead-out. Also, everything else on CBS was fairly successful at that time and they were confident about their new pilots so they decided to give their 'average' show Moonlight the boot (not forseeing the vampire-boom and thinking it wouldn't attract more viewers). Also, even though fans campaigned for the show, they didn't really listen because their renewal of Jericho (based on fan campaigns) didn't work out at all. Jericho had even less viewers upon its return so they decided to not give Moonlight a chance.