Kyle Garret's Blog, page 30

"My Name Is Kyle, I Wrote a Book..."

"...would you like to read my book?"

That quote comes from my friend Matt.  It was generally said with a bizarre accent that I would be hard pressed to place (Matt does not normally have said accent).  I'm not sure, but I believe the joke stems from the horribly long process of trying to get someone of import to read my book.

Funny enough, this isn't even a reference to "I Pray Hardest When I'm Being Shot At," being released on June 1st from Hellgate Press (plug plug plug).  The book in question was the first book I ever wrote and I am, in fact, still trying to find someone of import to read it (in my defense, I haven't tried in quite some time).

It's interesting that the joke will never be outdated.  Even now, when I have a book coming out from an actual publisher, I find myself having to work to get said book into the hands of, well, if not people of import, than people who will review it, and ideally tell the world they love it.  I have two more books (the aforementioned first book and a YA book) that I'm going to have to pitch to anyone who will listen.

And it doesn't just apply to books.  I've spent years trying to get people to give my short stories a chance.  While I don't write as many as I would like, I'm also regularly pimping out my comic book reviews at ComicsBulletin.com.  And, of course, there are these blog entries, that I would imagine are hit and miss for most people unless they are me.

It can be difficult, in the modern age, to get attention, or even just get a chance.  While the internet might be a wonderful tool for getting the word out, the sad truth is that there are millions of people doing the exact same thing, and the signal to noise ratio is not in your favor.

I'm always amazed at people who have online followings.  I understand how some of them do it: become an authority on  a very specific subject.  But there are a lot of people with large followings who write about fairly general, mostly pop culture related things.

I suppose a huge factor is the ability to update your site on a regular basis.  I have found this pretty hard, mostly because I have a) other writing to do (across many formats), b) I have a day job, and c) I have 4 separate blogs that I'm trying to maintain (well, I've been maintaining 3 of them, at least).  But from what I've read, the best way to be successful with a blog is to be conversational about it, to let the reader have a glimpse into your regular life so they can form a connection with you.  Which, I guess, is how you create a loyal following.

Ultimately, though, it all boils down to brand building.  You have to roll one project into another project and do so by bringing your audience with you, regardless of where you're going.  That's a lot to ask of people.  Heck, that's a lot to ask of the writer.  But it seems like a great relationship, once it's created.

I suppose that, then, is the trick: building your brand without becoming a brand.  Building an audience that's not just for the sake of consumption.

I think I'll start by using a crazy accent and saying "My name is Kyle. I wrote a book. Would you like to read my book?"

Chuck 4.24 (spoilers)

This was a great finale and I'm excited by the possibilities for next season.

But...the ending.  No...just...no.

I loved this episode up until the very last moment.  I'm holding out hope, though, that it's a mislead, and the first episode of season five will wipe it clean (Josh Schwartz is notorious for doing this with his shows).

What's the problem?

Season one of Chuck, we see his college professor explaining to Bryce Larkin that Chuck's test scores were off the charts.

Season three we see that Chuck actually uploaded an early version of the Intersect into his head when his dad wasn't looking.  His father was stunned by it, calling his son "special."

Season four we meet two agents that have had the Intersect put in their heads, but clearly can't handle it.  When they get it removed, one of them comments "that poor bastard Bartowski."

Chuck isn't the Intersect by happenstance; he is the only person who can hold it in his head, the only person who can use it.  In fact, the speech by Decker at the end of the episode really underscores the fact that Chuck isn't the Intersect on accident.


So giving the Intersect to Morgan is...it's awful.  It undercuts everything this show is about, not to mention belittling what Chuck is.

But Morgan did nothing that would indicate that he actually knows kung fu.  There was no noticeable flash and he certainly didn't actually USE any kung fu.  It's entirely possible that Morgan simply saw some of the images and jumped to conclusions.

And, honestly, the "guys, I know kung fu" joke is wearing thin.  It was so great when it first happened, but they need to let it go.

Update: Now that I've calmed down a bit, I'm just going to operate under the assumption that it was, in fact, a joke.  Like I said, Decker's comments just moments before emphasize the fact that Chuck is special, so undermining that would be pretty bad writing.  Besides that, picture the opening of season five with Morgan claiming he knows kung fu and Casey handing him his ass.

On the Other Hand

There was so much to love about this episode.  Honestly, there's almost too much for me to cover in any way that justifies it.  I'll just stick to talking about the culmination of the episode and the season.

Chuck saving the day was great, and the way he did it was perfect for the character.  The troops from Volkoff Industries was a bit over the top, but a nice bit of foreshadowing, which more than makes up for it.  As soon as Chuck opened that envelope, I knew what it was (flashbacks to the season four finale of Angel!) and thought it was a brilliant solution to everything that had happened.  I also didn't see it coming at all.

Loved the timely return of the Cat Squad, as well as the ever expanding Team Bartowski.  Nice to see Awesome and Ellie pitching in to save Sarah.  I also really like the dynamic between Frost and Casey.  It was nice to see that Decker knows Casey, too, which should bode well for more Casey next season.

Next Season

They dropped a big bomb at the end of the episode: the suggestion that there is a Big Bad who has been responsible for everything that's happened for the last four years.  It's a really intriguing idea, one which we get only one real comment on: Who would have that much influence over their lives?

There's an obvious answer: Beckman.  The idea that Beckman could be involved in some way is absolutely nuts, but not necessarily bad.  It would also be interesting to see them explain all the things Beckman has done over the years.

The other option would be the Bartowski parents.  After all, they're connected to almost everything that's happened to Chuck.  Does that suggest that they knew Chuck would be the Intersect some day?  That he could be the Intersect?  How messed up would it be if they made Orion and Frost bad guys after all this time?

Update: Orion doesn't really hold up to scrutiny, given his confrontations with Fulcrum.  Frost, on the other hand, could actually work.  She would know everything that Orion knew and we've never seen her interact with Fulcrum or the Ring.  She really could work as the Big Bad (more easily than Beckman, really).  The only real question would be, what is her goal?

I'm thrilled for season five, and it's going to be a long summer.  I have no doubt it will be the best season of Chuck since season 2.  I'm just hoping they take care of the ending of this episode as quickly as possible.

Update

New update on Destroying Comics about Image's sudden increase in popularity (and sales):

http://destroyingcomics.blogspot.com/

Determining Chuck's Fate

Chuck fans now have six days to neurotically worry about the fate of their favorite show.  And I'll be honest: it doesn't look good.  This begs the question: why is Chuck more likely to be canceled than renewed, and what could possibly save it?

Chuck is produced by Warner Brothers.  NBC then pays the WB to air it.  So we're looking at two different factions that need to make money in order for Chuck to stay on the air.

(Keep in mind that I am, by no means, an expert on these things, but perhaps living in Hollywood has given me some kind of knowledge through osmosis.)


Warner Brothers

The WB's formula for making money on Chuck is pretty simple: amount NBC pays them minus the cost of producing the show plus licensing income.  I'm not sure if the WB gets all the profits from DVDs, but I'm sure those things probably pull in half a million dollars per season, if not more.

The WB is also in a pretty good position with Chuck because the show is relatively cheap to make; they've cut the budget multiple times over the last four years in an effort to make it more profitable.  Up until now, the show has probably made plenty of money for Warner Brothers.

NBC

The show is not, however, as profitable for NBC.  Their formula for making money on Chuck is pretty simple as well: advertising revenue minus amount paid to the WB plus any licensing fees they might get.  Again, I don't know how the licensing is divided up, but I do know that NBC sells a lot of Chuck merchandise in their online store.

The problem, of course, is that as Chuck's ratings have plummeted, the value of commercial air time during the show has dropped.  While it has probably not affected the show this year (as such advertising is most likely determined well in advance), it's going to be a hard sell for NBC for next year.  After all, advertisers want to reach viewers, so why would they spend their ad dollars on a show that has a small audience?

The recent Twitter campaign to tell advertisers that fans watch the commercials and will buy their products if they support the show has been a good one, but it's hard to judge how effective it will be.  Advertisers have responded to it on Twitter, but will that translate to them saying to NBC, "hey, we really want to advertise on Chuck again next year, and we'll keep paying what we paid this year?"  I kind of doubt it.

So if NBC's advertising revenue decreases, the only way to keep Chuck profitable is for the amount it pays to the WB to decrease as well.

The Deal

Ultimately, this means there is only one thing that can save Chuck (aside from executive decision from someone in NBC who is just really nerdy like the rest of us): the WB has to lower its asking price to the point where NBC can make money on the show.

Why would the WB do that?  Syndication.

Basically, the WB number crunchers have to figure out how much money they can make by selling the syndication rights to Chuck.  Then they need to figure out how much they're willing to lose when they sell the show to NBC in order to make it back (and then some) when they sell the syndication rights.

The problems here are twofold: 1) There's no way of knowing for certain how much the syndication rights for Chuck will sell for, although they could probably come up with a reasonable estimate and 2) Would the discounted price to NBC be low enough for the network to pick it up?

The syndication point for a television is how is generally considered to be 88 episodes, although most networks prefer 100.  But if 88 is the minimum, then Chuck would only be 10 episodes away after the end of season 4, and it would hit 100 with a final, full season.

But, again, it all boils down to this: Is it worth it to the WB to make a lower offer?  And would it be worth it to NBC to take it?

Negatives

There's really only one negative that matters when it comes to the fate of Chuck: no one watches it.  It has been bleeding viewers all season long.  No other network (well, not entirely true, but I'll get to that in a moment) would even consider renewing it, the ratings are that bad.

Positives

I could go on and on about the idea that an official, final season of Chuck would bring back a decent number of former viewers and thus increase the ratings to at least an low average level, but that's all speculation and more of a sales pitch than anything else.  No, if there's one, glimmer of hope to look towards for Chuck's renewal it's this: Fringe.

For reasons that have never been revealed by Fox, Fringe was renewed for next season -- for a full 22 episode season.  Fringe gets ratings that are just as bad as Chuck's and airs on Friday nights, which means it's ratings could very well get worse.  It's also clearly much more expensive to make, if the effects are anything to go by.  It is, as many have said, mind boggling that Fox renewed it at all, let alone renewed it for a full season.

But here's the kicker: Fringe is produced by the WB.  It has aired 65 episodes, just 23 shy of syndication.  That's one full season plus one episode.

Did the WB make a deal with Fox this far out?  Fringe has a pretty heavy cult following and would probably do well in syndication.  So did the WB

Less helpful but still encouraging is the fact that NBC doesn't have a whole lot of new shows being prepped for next season, so there could very well be an opening for Chuck.

So there you have it: six days left to worry.  Let's hope the Fringe effect wins out.

Chuck 4.23 (spoilers)

You do have to wonder why this show can't be this good all the time.  Why is it that the show has these extended stretches of...well, mediocrity?  In some ways it's baffling that the same show can run so far to the extremes, sometimes in the course of the same season (honestly, sometimes in the course of a single episode).  But I suppose that has a lot to do with the fine line that chuck walks.  It's not a comedy.  It's not a drama.  It's not a romance.  It's not even about action or espionage.  Yet it steps in all of those worlds, and sometimes it leans too heavily in one direction and the show suffers for it.

This might seem like a bold statement, but this show should always concentrate on the spy aspects first and foremost -- or, more specifically, the spy elements need to be the essential A plot.  Yes, I know that, in theory, the spy stories are always the main plot, but they're not always essential -- they don't always matter.  And when they are insubstantial, the other aspects of the show are played up to compensate, and the balance is thrown off.

Here's the thing: the romance, the comedy, even the drama -- it can all be placed within the context of an important spy story line.  I probably laughed more tonight than I have in the majority of episodes this season and this was, for all intents and purposes, a heavy duty, super serious episode.  The romance was also really apparent, from simple moments between Chuck and Sarah to the rehearsal dinner.  And it hit home because it wasn't the sole focus, because it wasn't laid on really thick.  It worked because it was in contrast with something.

When I was in high school, my grade were always better in the fall because I played soccer.  This meant I didn't have time to slack off -- I had to keep to a rigid schedule.  Chuck is a lot like me in high school.  It needs the structure of a tightly plotted spy storyline to keep it on task and to make the other parts of the show shine.

We have one week left until we find out the fate of this show.  Like I said in my last post, I can't believe I'm back to being on the edge of my seat waiting for word about the fate of Chuck.  But tonight's episode just reiterated the fact that there's plenty of material left to be mined.

I love the move to get Morgan out of the spy game.  Honestly, I've had a hard time with the fact that he's been a part of the team for a while.  It really, really stretched the suspension of disbelief putting Morgan in the field.  It's possible to have believed him being back in Castle monitoring the missions, yes, but in the field?  That's a bit much.

We also haven't seen Casey's ex-wife since she found out the truth about him.  I was actually waiting to see her show up at the rehearsal dinner.  That's obviously not a story that's going to get dealt with this season and it would be a shame to see it fall away.

I think it's probably safe guess to say the "Chuck going rogue" story line isn't going to be completely resolved at the end of next week's finale (the title kind of gives that much away).  I also really like the idea of Chuck going rogue; it's pretty close to the finale I suggested many, many months ago.  I also wonder if he'll do so alone; will Casey go with him?  Will Sarah go on the run with him at the end of the episode after Chuck has saved her?

And then there's the twist that was suggested in the preview for next week.  I honestly have no idea what it is.  There as a point where I wondered if Vivian might actually be related to Chuck, as we've never really gotten a clear explanation as far as the relationship between Volkoff and Frost.  It would make a kind of terrifying sense, really, if Ray Wise (whatever his character's name was) was partially right, that Chuck's dad actually programmed Hartley to be Volkoff as a way of getting revenge on him for having an affair with Mary.  That seems kind of convoluted and intensely serious.  It was also require Frost to keep sleeping with Hartley after he becomes Volkoff, since he became Volkoff before Chuck was born.

Then again, maybe the multiple Star Wars jokes tonight were meant as clues that there's a brother and sister at play here.

For that matter, it's possible the reverse is true.  According to wikipedia, Chuck Bartowski was born on September 18th, 1981.  That's 10 months after Hartley was turned into Volkoff, but it's entirely possible for wikipedia to be wrong (I'm honestly not sure where that date came from).  The timing seems really close...

...could Volkoff be Chuck's father?  And is that why the Intersect worked on Chuck, because it worked on his dad originally? (Technically, it also worked for Orion)

Again, that's probably a stretch, and way too convoluted.  But the fact that I'm even considering such things is a good indication of how completely clueless I am, and how completely glued to my chair I'll be next week.

Next Monday could be a roller coaster for Chuck fans.  We could get bad news during the day, then a great and sad finale.  Or we could get good news and a finale that will energize for one, last season.

Fingers crossed.

A Little Something for (Almost) Everyone

My web site is kind of all over the place.

Calling it a web site is probably a little bit a stretch, given that it's ultimately a personal blog, not that the two things are mutually exclusive.  Still, if you look at all the tags for entries over there on the right side of the page, you'll see a pretty wide range of topics, although most of them seem to fall under the "pop culture" heading.  But you never really know what you're going to get.

Since Things Are Happening (yes, capitalized) in a number of areas of my life right now (and in the near future), I figured it was probably time to stop vomiting on the page and perhaps get my ideas organized.

With that, I present to you all the various places you can now find me online and exactly what each of the is about:

www.kylegarret.com -- For all your KG info

www.iprayhardest.com -- the official site for my book, "I Pray Hardest When I'm Being Shot At," out June 1st from Hellgate Press!

http://destroyingcomics.blogspot.com/ -- home to all my ranting and raving on comic books, both the medium and the industry. I've already copied a bunch of the comic book-centric columns from this blog over to that one.

http://raychapmansrevenge.blogspot.com/ -- while it hasn't been updated in quite some time (these days mostly because I'm scared to), this is my blog all about the Cleveland Indians baseball team

Facebook Page -- the fan page for me

www.twitter.com/kylegarret -- my twitter

http://www.facebook.com/iprayhardest -- Facebook page for my book

www.twitter.com/iprayhardest -- Twitter for my book

My Amazon.com Author Page

www.comicsbulletin.com -- I post comic book reviews at CB

www.popmatters.com -- I've had a couple of things published here and I'm going to start blogging for them

I'm sure there are other places around the 'net where you can find me, but those are the major ones.  So please, bookmark, follow, and/or like any of these pages that might tickle your fancy.

Chuck 4.22 (spoilers)

"Now we have three episodes left, and from all appearances those three episodes are going to be packed to the gills with story.  The last three episodes sound like they're going to be urgent, something Chuck has missed for some time now."

That was from my April 17th blog entry, "Why Chuck Fell Apart," my attempt at dissecting why, exactly, Chuck had diminished in both quality and number of viewers.  My number one complaint was that the show had lost its sense of urgency, that sense that you never really knew what was going to happen next.

Certainly can't say that about this episode, now can I?

There have been many times over the course of this season that I have been willing to let Chuck fade away.  The quality had dropped and it didn't seem to be getting any better.  Ideally, I would have liked a final season to wrap everything up, but I probably would have shrugged my shoulders and went about my business if we don't get that.

Now, however, I just can't imagine the season finale being the end of the show.  Chuck has suddenly struck gold again and I think it could last for some time.


Season 2 Redux

The true beauty of season 2 was that it had focus.  It seemed like there was a deliberate line planned out from the first episode to the last episode and the show was focused on telling that story.  Every new complication seemed to stem from the main story and the show maintained the perfect pace because of it.

It felt like confidence.

It felt like the show had confidence in itself, that it was telling the stories it wanted to tell.  We've only really glimpsed that same attitude a few times since season 2, and never for very long.  In a lot of ways (and no doubt by network decree), the show seems to have tried to cater to new viewers in hopes of improving its ratings, only to watch regular viewers get bored and turn away.

But when this show gets it right, it really gets it right.

It's not the mystery that made last night's episode great.  Yes, it's what drove the episode -- who wasn't eager to find out who Agent X is?  It was what came after the revelation that made the episode perhaps the best of the season.  It was the crazy implications of what they've discovered.  It was the fact that Casey was (rightfully) the first person to piece it all together.  It was brother and sister Bartowski debating whether they could just let it go.

And it gets to the core of the show: can someone like Chuck actually be a spy?  Sure, he has the abilities, but he still doesn't carry a gun.  Chuck has a very well defined moral compass and he has finally found himself at odds with the CIA in a way that there is no grey area.

What's particularly interesting is that no one associated with the team has any idea what they've just discovered; this is big time, high level, deep dark secret stuff.  If and when the team goes rogue over this, how will Beckman react?

Also interesting is how this effects Chuck's battle with Vivian.  While he might have felt guilty about her before, he most certainly feels responsible for her now.  And if the only way to stop Vivian is to help her father, then doesn't Chuck have to do that to save his family and friends?

It's brilliant, really: a dilemma that strikes at the core of the show while being wrapped in complications and mysteries.  It's what this show should always be about.

Yes, the similar named cities joke took a turn for the ridiculous at the end, although I personally feel like the "make it snow" joke saved it.  I also really liked the new dynamic of adding Big Mike to Jeffster's misadventures.  The musical montage was just long enough to be hilarious without being tedious.

What Next?

My initial instinct after seeing the "Next On" was that Morgan will get shot, and it will be up to Ellie and Awesome to save him.  It would make some kind of sense, as the focus has been on how capable Ellie is, and it would be a natural way to involve her in Chuck's world.

But I re-watched the preview and there's no gun shot, which would seem like an odd thing to leave out if you're trying to create interest.  Vivian's dialogue also seems to imply that she already did something to someone, which I think suggests poison.  I also think that they give it away.

Go watch it again (I just added it below) and you'll see that Sarah is on the screen when Vivian makes her threat.  Sara is also absent from the reaction shot.  And given that we all know they won't get married just like that...

Of course Chuck would get really good again.  Just as I was at peace with the idea that this show would end, I find myself completely invested again, and trying to things of ways in which Chuck might actually come back.

Destroying Comics: Comics For Kids

Marvel's late "kids" line, Star ComicsEvery the comics' gadfly, I thought I'd chime in on a little tidbit that bounced around the virtual talk box yesterday, bleeding into today, even.

Roger Langridge, popular writer of Thor the Mighty Avenger, got things rolling with this quote from his blog, which was later reposted by Robot 6 on CBR:

I really don't think Marvel and DC are helping things by having gritty, R-rated versions of their superheroes in their main comics – what they sell as the "real" versions – while simultaneously selling those exact same characters in kids' comics and plastering them all over lunchboxes and animated cartoons… Casual readership by kids, or by parents for their kids, is effectively impossible the way things are currently structured. And I think the waters are muddied too far now to claw that ground back. I think it's insane that DC have spent 70 years making Superman as big as Mickey Mouse, and branding him to be understood by parents as being pretty much as kid-friendly as Mickey Mouse, only to piss that brand away in a decade. Nothing wrong with doing mature content in comics – in fact, it should be encouraged as often as possible – but doing it with characters who are on your kids' lunchboxes is kind of moronic. Take a lesson from Watchmen and come up with new characters for that stuff. And then go back to Superman and Batman and put the same kind of love and effort and craft and intelligence you've been putting into all those rape scenes and body mutilations into something kids can read, and adults can also be proud to read because of all the love and effort and craft and intelligence you've put into it, and make those the "real" versions.

People who both a) read comic books and b) like to post their views online ran with this quote.  Many, of course, agreed with Langridge, and pointed towards things like death, violence, rape, vomiting blood, sleeping with Norman Osborne, what have you as examples that, hey, those aren't the people on my kids' sheets!  It's crazy that the Big Two are marketing two different versions of the same characters!

Others responded with "I like my adult superheroes doing adult things and I don't want Batman patting bad guys on the head just because some brat out there wears Batman Underoos."


The next morning, Milk and Cheese creator Evan Dorkin added this on Twitter:

No one is going to try to pussify your goddamned Batman. The pool's already been pissed in, for good or bad. You've won. You can sleep well.
There are a lot of things about this discussion that, I think, have been left unaddressed.  First and foremost, it's not strange for any company that produces anything to modify their product for a market.  Every company does it.  Coco-Cola does (you know they still make OK Soda in certain markets?).  Hollywood does it (or do you think they actually show everything in an R rated movie on a plane?).  Heck, a few years ago venerated fantasy fiction franchise Dragonlance came out with series of Young Adult books that were just re-writes of the original books for a younger audience.  This is not new or different and it's certainly not bad.

I also can't imagine most creators would embrace the idea that only certain types of stories can be told with specific characters.  It would be pretty awful to think that we would never have Frank Miller's The Dark Knight Returns because Batman's in a Saturday morning cartoon, and all versions of Batman must be the same.

But what I find most interesting is the theory that there's a demand for the character who appear on lunchboxes and backpacks or even in the cartoons.  The idea that said demand not only exists, but is greater than the demand for "R-rated" superheroes is even harder to swallow.

I made comments in that vein on Twitter, and got a response from friend of the blog, Chris, who works at Hollywood's own Meltdown Comics:

@kylegarret : Kids, unless they are really young (<6 or so), may like "kids comics", but they love @MrMarkMillar books, in my experience
The short lived Legion comic based on the cartoonAnd I think he raises a good point.  As I mentioned in my last blog about comics, the first time I was ever offered a comic book, I was given a choice between Elfquest and a Disney duck book -- I took the one with the fighting (and implied sex, although I didn't realize it at the time).  The ducks were for kids, as far as I was concerned, and I didn't want something that was for kids.

Which begs the question: Do kids even want kids comics?

I don't think so.  I know I didn't.  The movie version of Thor is rated PG-13, but if the all ages version of that character is more popular, than why would the studio go with a PG-13 version?  Answer: because the all ages version isn't more popular, it just shows up in more places.

Yes, there's a lot to debate as far as why "kids" comics aren't more popular.  Every single time Marvel or DC get a new cartoon on the air, there's a comic book version of that cartoon on the stands to match it...and yet those titles are usually canceled after only a few months because they simply don't sell (DC's foray into cartoon based anthologies seems like a good one, though, but that's an entire other discussion about format and demographics).  Is marketing to blame?  Retailers? Parents? Maybe.  It's a good discussion to have.




I think it's a desire for a happy medium, a desire for balance.  Those demanding more "kid friendly" fare point to all the gruesome moments in recent comics history that are used more for shock value than anything else, but those titles are on one end of the spectrum.  No one was raped, eaten, or stuck in a refrigerator in any of the comics I bought yesterday.

But that tone seems to be a dominant element in superhero comics these days.  And so one extreme is met by another in an effort to produce balance.  In a rather perverse way, it seems like Hollywood might actually be right about something: PG-13 is a happy medium for a product that's meant to appeal to the movie going masses.

In the end, Marvel and DC are going to market versions of their characters that sell, it just so happens that different version sell in different forms.  But the idea that one version should be sold across the board seems bad, no matter which version it is.

Idiot Box: Why Chuck Fell Apart

Last week's episode of Chuck dropped to a 1.3 in the ratings, a series low.  Since that would appear to be the last nail in the Chuck coffin (barring a miracle or the WB agreeing to sell the rights to NBC at a reduced rate for the sake of reaching the syndication point), I thought I'd take a look back at the show and figure out what exactly went wrong.


Chuck premiered on September 24th, 2007 to over 9 million viewers and what would have been around a 3.8 in the 18-49 year old demographic that networks count.  For what it's worth, a rating like that now would make Chuck NBC's highest rated show, and even a highly rated show outside of the shallow pool that is NBC.

As with most shows, Chuck's ratings dropped after the premiere, but never ventured into the danger zone.  In fact, the first season averaged 8.68 million viewers, a perfectly acceptable number, particularly given the fact that the first season was cut short by the writers' strike.

To give you an idea how of far Chuck has fallen, last week's episode reigned in 4.1 million viewers, less than half of its average from the first season.

So what happened?

Timing

For those who know anything about this show, "timing" would seem to be an obvious answer, if not an obvious excuse.  But I think there were people responsible for the timing problems.

Watch Chuck or Sarah will shoot you. Obviously, the writers' strike that derailed the first season didn't help matters.  While the show got a typical half season order of 13 episodes in, the finale didn't pack much of a punch.  It also aired in January, which isn't exactly a hot bed of television activity.

Because the season ended after only 13 episodes, the show never dealt with many stories of substance.  The episodes consisted mostly of secret identity issues and Chuck pining away for Sarah, but it was all done very well.  Each episode was funny, relatively self-contained, and at times even moving.  The chemistry between the core cast members was on display from the start.  We also got just enough information that everything made sense, yet not so much that we didn't want more.

The only problem is that the show never got to a point where it seemed like something real was at stake.  This is completely understandable after half a season, but made the show feel less substantial than it really was.  I think, to many people, it was easy to dismiss.

It's not entirely surprising, then, that the second season of Chuck (which premiered in September of 2008, 9 months after it had gone off the air) had less than 7 million viewers.  The ratings were all over the charts for season two, but it eventually clocked an average audience of 7.36 million, about 1.3 million fewer than season one.  And while that was good for something like a 2.7 average (which it would kill for now), the finale clocked in at closer to a 1.8 -- not a good sign.

What's truly frightening about the ratings trend that developed is that season two was easily the best single season Chuck ever had.  The show had been renewed for an entire season before the first episode of season two ever aired.  The creators knew they had 22 episodes to produce and planned accordingly.  The planned it out so much, in fact, that they ended it on a cliffhanger, as they assumed they would return for a third season.

Each episode of Chuck from season two (more or less) built upon the mythos of the show.  The spy world was fleshed out, but so was Chuck's family life.  Mysteries were introduced, new and old characters showed up at unexpected times, and we actually got plot twists -- all while Chuck and Sarah grew ever closer.

I was never more excited about the show than I was after season two, which made the fact that it's renewal was in doubt all the more frustrating.  This is where timing would, yet again, get the best of this show.

NBC eventually decided to renew Chuck, but they only picked it up for 13 episodes.  In many ways we were back to season one, with the show forced to try to walk that fine line between continuity heavy episodes that its core audience loved and self-contained episodes that could possibly bring in new viewers, all in just 13 episodes.

Season three of Chuck premiered on January 10th, 2010 and scored a 3.0, a huge jump from the season two finale and a rather ridiculous bump for NBC's overall ratings.  While the ratings crept slowly downward after the premiere, the show was still above a 2.5 six episodes in, so NBC -- who were desperate for ratings (and still are) -- decided to order 6 more episodes, bringing the season 3 order up to 19.

The problem, of course, is that the show had already been planned out for 13 episodes, so the additional six were going to be like a new season.  Even more unfortunate is the fact that the first 13 episodes felt like it was created by people who were forced into writing 13 episodes, but thought they might get more at some point.  It was completely unfocused.

Season three did just barely well enough for NBC to renew it, yet again for only half a season, lead it to the same difficulties in season four that were found in season three.  And when the show debuted with a 2.5, NBC did exactly what it did earlier; picked up the show for a full season even though it had been plotted out as half a season.  And, again, it was obvious that the show had not been put together in a cohesive manner.



NBC's continued hedging of episode orders has led to fans jumping ship and creative false starts.

But all of the blame can't be placed on the network.  No, some of the blame falls at the feet of the show itself, at the drop in quality that has been so evident since the end of season two.

Manufacturing

The end of season two had changed the core dynamics of the show.  First, there was the fact that Chuck and Sarah had, at the very least, made their feelings for each other known.  And then there was the Intersect 2.0.

I know that, at the time, Chuck's upgrade was a point of contention for many people.  The problem was that Chuck was no longer a fish out of water, but the ultimate weapon.  Personally, I have really enjoyed Chuck having 2.0 in his head, but I think it was a difficult adjustment for the writers to make, one that didn't always work out.

With Chuck suddenly becoming a full fledged spy, the writers had to find a new source of drama, and they decided to focus on the relationship between Chuck and Sarah, a relationship that had, up until this point, felt very natural.  And then we met Shaw.

Clearly, two people with chemistry...or not.Honestly, I liked Shaw.  We never learned much about him and he lacked any kind of chemistry with anyone in the cast, but that was fine with me, for the most part.  As a spy, and later a villain, he was great.  But they ruined him by making him a complication in the Chuck/Sarah relationship.

This was problematic on a number of level.  First of all, Shaw and Sarah had no chemistry, and we were constantly being told about how they were together as opposed to ever seeing it.  Second, and perhaps more importantly, it was unnecessary.  The fact that Chuck had decided to become a spy even against Sarah's wishes was more than enough reason to keep the two of them apart.  It was a huge issue that was going to cause problems between them and keep them from getting together; there was no need for anything else for that to happen.

And yet we got Shaw.  And the we got Hannah, who was almost as ridiculous, given that the number one rule of the show up until this point was that Chuck couldn't date a civilian, but for some reason it was now okay...because Sarah was dating Shaw, evidently.

The relationship drama was forced and heavy handed and it was particularly frustrating given that it could have been left out completely and nothing about the third season would have changed.

Timing and Manufacturing

Season four has, in many ways, been a combination of all the things that have gone wrong with this show.  Initially, Chuck got an order of only 13 episodes, 13 episodes that could end up being the series' last.  So over the course of those 13 episodes we were introduced to the proposal storyline.

"You're very nice, but totally unnecessary."Part of my issue with the proposal storyline is that we got only 6 episodes in season three of Chuck and Sarah being together, and then only three in season four before the proposal comes up.  In other words, they had been together for less than half a season and already they were talking about getting married.  It was way to quick and, even worse, became the focal point for the show.  As if to replace the "will they/won't they" question that had no been answered, they found another "will they/won't they" question one which, frankly, had significantly less impact.  And, again, it was forced.

Again, we saw the balance of the show shift.  Whereas season three had to fight to regain some semblance of the balance the show had before Chuck got his upgrade, any steps season three had finally taken to right the ship were thrown out the window.  All focus was place on Chuck and Sarah, with minor storylines going on around them.  The plot of every episode was built so that it connected to something Chuck and Sarah were going through, and often times that construction was heavy handed and flimsy.

Then Chuck got picked up for an additional 11 episodes, and it was clear that the creators weren't prepared for more episodes.  The initial episodes after the original finale seemed hastily thrown together, with ridiculous plots that pushed suspension of disbelief well beyond its breaking point.  We saw a random and, at the time, rather bad plot point from the first set of episodes brought back, and while they've managed to make it work so far, it's underscored how awful it was to begin with (yes, I'm referring to the computer).

Now we have four episodes left, and from all appearances those four episodes are going to be packed to the gills with story.  The last four episodes sound like they're going to be urgent, something Chuck has missed for some time now.

Season Five?

The final episode of season four is called "Chuck vs. the Cliffhanger," and given what we got at the end of season two, I have no doubts that the creators mean what they say.  For those of us who have spent four years following this show, one more season seems pretty essential.

The fact that Fox renewed Fringe for an entire season even though its ratings were, at the time, lower than Chuck's is a little bit encouraging, given that Fox operates with higher ratings standards than NBC.  But the real glimmer of hope has to come with the syndication threshold I mentioned way back at the beginning of this thing.

From a creative standpoint, I feel like the fewer episodes, the better.  Ten episode will get them to the syndication point, and ten episodes might be about right.  Give us ten episodes filled with suspense, adventure, humor, drama, and romance.  Give us ten episodes that I can't predict based upon the trailers.  Give us ten episodes where the stakes are high and emotions run wild.  Give us ten episodes that culminates 4+ years of television.

And then let the show rest, as I think it's probably about that time.

Destroying Comics: Important Issues

In the penultimate Meltcast (the podcast put out by the fine folks at Meltdown Comics), Caleb, Sam, Chris, and Aaron give their top 5 lists for the greatest comic books of all time.  It's an interesting discussion, and I invite you to listen to it, as well as the 73 previous Meltcasts (and the 1 later).

My wife is a film editor.  A few years ago, the post-production team on a movie she was working on decided to share their top 10 favorite films of all time.  You could probably imagine what a list like that, created by people in the industry, would look like...I don't think I'd seen most of them.  One of the movies that Nicole put on her list was Garden State.

One of the other people on the post-production team told my wife that, as she got older and saw more movies and as time passed from when she saw Garden State (it was the movie of the moment around this time), it would eventually fall off her list.  In other words, he was saying it wasn't a particularly good movie.



And that's the thing about top whatever lists: very often, people ignore the personal significance aspect and choose what they think is the "best," even though such a distinction is subjective.

(Side note: the Meltcasters do a good job of include personally significant books on their lists)

I listen to a lot of music.  So much so, that I associate nearly every song I own with a period of time in my life, down to even a specific month.  At a certain point, I decided that I need to collect the songs with the greatest meaning to me into one playlist.  That playlist then got broken down into sub-division and off-shoots, for what I broadly refer to as my "bio mixes."

With the advent of digital comics, I wondered if maybe I could do the same with comics.  What if someday I actually own an eReader and I want to put together a folder of all the comics that ever meant anything to me?

What would be on my biographical comic book list?

The first few are pretty easy.  The first comic book I ever read was a copy of a Star Trek comic that my brother had.  That was actually pretty strange, given that my brother has never read comics.  It was part of the Gold Key run, #53, featuring a really creepy cover.

The first comic book of my own was the Epic Comics edition of Elfquest #8.  It's interesting to note that had two choices when I picked that book, the other being an issue of one of the Walt Disney duck books.  So far my experiences with comics had nothing to do with superheroes.


That issue of Elfquest was bought at a book store in a different town, so I had to find some place to buy comics that was close to my house.  That meant my local Convenient store (that is not a typo -- I don't mean a convenience store, I mean this place).  At that Convenient store they had spinner racks, and on those racks they had...a whole bunch of superhero comics.

My first superhero comic books (bought at the same time) were Uncanny X-Men #207 and Web of Spider-man #17.  Like any good little kid, I knew who Spider-man was, mostly from Spider-man and his Amazing Friends, if I remember correctly.  And how could I resist that cover?  The end of the red suit?  I didn't even know what that meant, but I wanted to find out!

I had no idea who the X-Men were but, again, look at that cover.  Is there a more iconic X-Men cover or, at least, a more iconic Wolverine cover?  I wonder how many people can point to this issue as their first comic, because I would imagine it caught a lot of people's eye from the spinner rack and news stands (that's where we got our comics back in the day, you young pups).

I was generally a Marvel zombie in my younger days, although that changed when a borrowed a copy of Who's Who in the DC Universe #23 from a friend.  I was blown away by the scope of the DCU, and to this day I can remember how exciting it was to get my first glimpse of those worlds.

I would be remiss if I didn't include Strikeforce: Morituri #20, the first comic book to nearly make me cry, and Legion of Superheroes volume 3 #57, the starting point of a long love affair that I would have with the Legion.

The 90's eventually pushed me out of comic books, which is probably a pretty common refrain for readers.  I was drawn back in by creator owned, independent comics.  I was drawn back in by Stray Bullets #4.

My copy of Stray Bullets #4 was passed around my dorm like a good joint; I had people coming to my room to see if they could borrow it.  Stray Bullets led me to Strangers in Paradise and I just kept going down the rabbit hole of independent comics.

It would be hard to pick a single issue of Strangers in Paradise, so I suppose I'd have to go with the first collected edition, which I'm sure is probably out of print by now (but not really an issue for an all digital list).

Arkham Asylum (which scared the bejeesus out of a teenage me and introduced me to the guy who would eventually become my favorite writer), Watchmen, Sandman (I got the Doll's House for Christmas one year and it also scared the bejeesus out of me), the Greatest Batman Stories Ever Told (my first taste of comic book history), Marvel Masterworks Uncanny X-Men volume 1 (my introduction to Jack Kirby), and Maus.

That generally covers the first 25 years of my life.  But what about the last decade?  What have I read in the last ten years that could be added to that last?  All-Star Superman?  Phonogram? The Walking Dead?  I'm not entirely sure...and I'm willing to bet this list will continue to evolve.

So what are the most important comic books in your life?