10 big questions facing Hollywood right now
There's more than Charlie Sheen and fixing the Oscars on everyone's minds
There's more than Charlie Sheen and Oscars to consider
Some may find it hard to believe, but there are many in Hollywood with bigger questions on their mind as to whether Charlie Sheen will return to "Two and A Half Men" or whether next year's Academy Awards can restore America's faith that you can actually produce a good Oscar show. With that in mind, HitFix asks you to consider the 10 biggest questions facing the collective industry at the moment. Do you have the answers the movie, TV and music industries are looking for? If so, share your thoughts below. In the meantime, click on the tabs to find out what else the entertainment industry is talking about.
[And of course, feel free to solve CBS' issues with Sheen and the Academy's litany of other problems as well.]
Comments
Option 1
Comment instantly as a guest GuestOption 2
Option 3
Login or create a HitFix account Login Signupcrack3d
March 3, 2011 at 9:58AM EST Reply to CommentI definitely think a revision of the ratings system would help "less popular" shows. For example, Community, Fringe, and Chuck appear to get terrible Nielsen ratings but whenever I'm on Hulu they seem to top the "most watched" list over on the bottom right hand side of my computer screen, especially the day after the new episode airs. I can only assume that these episodes are also made available on the Network's websites too but perhaps they need to make it more obvious? Because website advertisement space can be huge now and spending a little more money plugging that option can bring in a lot more viewers and website traffic.
The other problem is figuring out how to utilize the people using DVR, On Demand, and Hulu (and its knowckoffs). On Demand doesn't have ads (I don't think...), you can fast forward through the ads on DVR, and Hulu's ads are pretty short and half of them are for charity organizations. So maybe a reason why they're not adding those numbers is because they're currently useless anyway since the people using those sources can largely bypass commercials. And maybe they're too lazy to figure out how to change that.
Dave I
March 3, 2011 at 11:49AM EST Reply to CommentI don't know if Nielsen ratings kill shows that are borderline less-popular or fringe type of shows. Given that it is antiquated and very much ignores DVR, Internet-hosted, not to mention anybody who does not have a Nielsen box (or whatever records the viewing habits) seems to indicate it is horrid and likely contributes to shows unfairly getting the boot.
That said, at the end of the day I really just want to see season two of Terriers. While that was largely a direct result of marketing torpedoing the show, the fact that people got wind of it late and had to catch it online, and those numbers really did nothing to help the published rates (thus giving FX incentive to not bring it back, and making it look less appealing to possible watchers) makes me sour to the whole system.
-Cheers
Dave I
March 3, 2011 at 11:54AM EST Reply to Comment"Will both actors keep their box office crowns?"
Not to be snarky, but who cares? So much of these titles and hype over who's best seem so fabricated. What I do care about? Whether they make good movies. Aside from exasperation, the only thing talk of "the biggest _____________ in the world" (actor, musician, athlete, cook, etc.) does for me is dull my interest. I care a lot less about who's got some make-believe "crown" as the best and more in their product. Make a good movie and I will care. The timeframe or some title that goes along with it really means nothing to me.
-Cheers
Mulderism
March 3, 2011 at 2:33PM EST Reply to CommentI would argue that Marvel Studios really only has 1 hit on their hands - "Iron Man 1". (I'm just referring to the movies they have produced). "Iron Man 2" was not a huge success nor was "The Incredible Hulk". "Thor" and "Captain America" are unknowns at this point and if either of them bomb it does not bode well for the "Avengers" movie.
I appreciate Marvel taking risks and trying to merge franchises together. If it was up to me though I would not have gone that route.
I much prefer the DC strategy to date of keeping their superhero franchises separate. (I guess it's not really a strategy so much as just doing things the way they always have been done.)
For DC is really comes down to the groundwork that Nolan laid. His Batman would not really work in an ensemble movie because his villains are just ordinary people with no powers. It grounds his movies in a reality that was not present in the Burton films. I really don't think Nolan's Batman universe would mesh well with the new Superman film but there isn't much information out there about it yet.
I'll watch the Marvel experiment unfold and I'll support their films. But I want DC to keep their franchises separate.
blue_flames I don't know why you don't want to count IM2 as a success, while I think the film was a *huge* wasted opportunity it's (worldwide) box office take was up over 35 million on the first film (tho the US take was actually down a little, 6 million).
March 4, 2011 at 12:18AM EST