CN Ratings Thread

[RomanMack]

BAH. Whatever.

Anyways, I do wonder what this will cause. I mean, if not even Naruto can do it...

 

[Space Cadet]

On a more positive note, CN had a pretty good July:

Cartoon Network July Ratings News

Cartoon Network has been pulling together a quality summer ratings period for its evening programming this year, banking on the primetime success of its Thursday evening animation as well as its weekend programming. The kids entertainment channel has earned moderate growth overall for the month of July 2008, while securing an even more substantial increase over specific time-periods as per the network's "Har Har THarsdays" programming block (Thurs. 7:30-10:00pm, ET). The following is a supplied breakdown of Cartoon Network's success in July (second week; full month) as indicated.

Performances by key comedy titles Chowder and The Marvelous Misadventures of Flapjack, as many readers are aware, continue to keep viewers coming back. As compared to last year's numbers, the monthly ratings percentages and delivery numbers for Kids 2-11, Kids 6-11 and Tweens 9-14 have improved favorably during Primetime. Regarding the success of "Har Har Tharsdays," the block's July audience delivery in July registered a growth of 31% to 69%, scoring its best monthly results since the franchise launched in March this year. Cartoon Network ratings highlights for July 2008 are as follows:

Cartoon Network July Primetime (M-Sa., 8-11pm; Su, 8-10pm) vs. July 2007

• Kids 2-11 delivery (767,000) increased by 5%, and ratings (1.9) by 6%
• Kids 6-11 delivery (536,000) grew by 4%, and ratings (2.2) by 5%
• Tweens 9-14 delivery (400,000) improved by 6%, and ratings (1.6) by 7%

Har Har Tharsdays (Th., 7:30-10pm) vs. same time July 2007

• Kids 2-11 delivery (1,112,000) jumped by 31%, and ratings (2.8) by 33%
• Kids 6-11 delivery (801,000) expanded by 35%, and ratings (3.3) by 38%
• Tweens 9-14 delivery (605,000) catapulted by 69%, and ratings (2.5) by 67%

Recounting Cartoon Network's performance earlier in the month of July (week two), the cable channel found The Marvelous Misadventures of Flapjack as the #1 program for its time-period, with all key demographics. Nested in multiple-digit growth with the Boys 6-11, Boys 2-11 and Boys 9-14 audiences, among others, the tale of a boy adventurer and his sly captain continue to charm viewers. Highlights of Cartoon Network's overall prime time, "Har Har Thursdays" and "Fried Dynamite" programming include the following:

Cartoon Network Primetime (M.-Sa., 8-11pm; Su, 8-10pm) vs. same time 2007

• Kids 2-11 delivery (829,000) rose by 15%, and ratings (2.1) by 17%
• Kids 6-11 delivery (576,000) grew by 13%, and ratings (2.4) by 14%
• Tweens 9-14 delivery (409,000) improved by 12%, and ratings (1.7) by 13%

Har Har Tharsdays (Thurs., 7:30-10 p.m.) vs. same time 2007

• Kids 2-11 delivery (1,215,000) expanded by 41%, and ratings (3.0) by 43%
• Kids 6-11 delivery (863,000) and ratings (3.6) both increased by 44%
• Tweens 9-14 delivery (595,000) catapulted by 91%, and ratings (2.4) by 85%

"Fried Dynamite" (Fri. 7-11pm) vs. same time 2007

• Kids 2-11 delivery (908,000) and ratings (2.3) both grew by 35%
• Kids 6-11 delivery (671,000) and ratings (2.8) both jumped by 47%
• Tweens 9-14 delivery (496,000) advanced by 52%, and ratings (2.0) by 54%

Source: http://www.animationinsider.net/article.php?articleID=1802



So, Flapjack is doing pretty well for itself. Fried Dynamite seems to be doing fine, even though it only airs reruns of Sunday movies and reruns of Chowder and Flapjack.

 

[D Dubbs]

ROFL. No mention of Toonami whatsoever despite all the movie stunts, yet Fried Dynamite continues to get great ratings.

Toonami is so dead.

 

[Mickialla]

On a more positive note, CN had a pretty good July:



Source: http://www.animationinsider.net/article.php?articleID=1802



So, Flapjack is doing pretty well for itself. Fried Dynamite seems to be doing fine, even though it only airs reruns of Sunday movies and reruns of Chowder and Flapjack.

Good news, good news. But I can't help but be hesitant when I read this. I'm glad Chowder and Flapjack are doing well. I'm not happy that Fried Dynamite is doing well, because it's success means there's a greater chance that the action block will be on Saturday, which leaves a better chance that Toonami will be saying bye-bye. I'm also afraid that the execs will end up thinking "We're doing good the way we are, let's not change anything to screw that up". Yes, CN is doing better than it has in a while, but we forget that there are still a lot of things that need tweaking in the current CN. The current CN contains traces of live action, the current CN is dominated by Johnny Test and gang. I don't want the execs to let this get to their head so they decide to keep everything the way it is.

There's still a lot more room for improvement people, we need not forget that.

 

[RomanMack]

ROFL. No mention of Toonami whatsoever despite all the movie stunts, yet Fried Dynamite continues to get great ratings.

Toonami is so dead.

Most likely. Ugh...

 

[Antiyonder]

CN doesn't target teens or adults. Adult Swim targets adults. CN targets kids, that's where they get their money from.

So why not a couple of all ages programming? They'd still get the money, plus a bonus. Besides, when having two portions of the network that cater to a different age group (CN/AS) having show that are for both child would give the schedule a much more smooth flow to it (TDI is somewhat of a step in the right direction).

Yeah, Total Drama Island actually is meant for older kids. And KND barely airs anymore. Cartoon Network, though I hate to say it, is a kids network. Their demographic is the 2-12 (or something like that) demo. Back in the day CN did appeal to a wider demo, but those days are sadly done.

The decision to focus on one demo is merely part of the problem. I maintain the idea that CN would have better results if they were to:

A. Put more enthusiam into their work. I mean how can you expect the viewers to enjoy Cartoon Network when the majority of execs (who would likely rather work on SpikeTV, MTV, CW, CBS, ABC, etc) hate the network (Compared to the previous execs who considered their job to be fun).

B. The old bumpers (from CN's glory days) gave off the impression that watching cartoons were cool, where as today the network gives off the vibe that you should feeling embarassed for watching a channel for cartoons unless you're under 13. They need to inject the idea that cartoons are a legitamate form of entertainment (especially since the general public sees the medium as kid stuff).

C. For the time being it seems like their upcoming material is headed in the right direction. But the main problem with their line up in the past few years (minus their reruns) is that they were mostly animated sitcoms. To my knowledge the networks at least greenlighting more shows that take advantage of the visual medium.

 

[Sketch]

ROFL. No mention of Toonami whatsoever despite all the movie stunts, yet Fried Dynamite continues to get great ratings.

Toonami is so dead.

Well that would explain why the new action programing is being considered for Saturday rather than Friday. Then they could keep Friday for movies and probably the Fried Dynamite packaging.

It doesn't seem like it'll be so bad though. Toonami wouldn't be promoted at all at this point if they planned on axing it for another block. (and they promote the movies) So chances are Toonami will remain on Saturday while gaining Secret Saturdays, The Clone Wars and Batman (in November).

But we'll just have to wait and see.

And I imagine Toonami did respectably compared to the rest of the years ratings for the block but it wasn't "worth" reporting to CN PR. Sheesh Toonami hasn't had a PR for years guys.

 

[Mickialla]

So why not a couple of all ages programming? They'd still get the money, plus a bonus. Besides, when having two portions of the network that cater to a different age group (CN/AS) having show that are for both child would give the schedule a much more smooth flow to it (TDI is somewhat of a step in the right direction).



The decision to focus on one demo is merely part of the problem. I maintain the idea that CN would have better results if they were to:

A. Put more enthusiam into their work. I mean how can you expect the viewers to enjoy Cartoon Network when the majority of execs (who would likely rather work on SpikeTV, MTV, CW, CBS, ABC, etc) hate the network (Compared to the previous execs who considered their job to be fun).

B. The old bumpers (from CN's glory days) gave off the impression that watching cartoons were cool, where as today the network gives off the vibe that you should feeling embarassed for watching a channel for cartoons unless you're under 13. They need to inject the idea that cartoons are a legitamate form of entertainment (especially since the general public sees the medium as kid stuff).

C. For the time being it seems like their upcoming material is headed in the right direction. But the main problem with their line up in the past few years (minus their reruns) is that they were mostly animated sitcoms. To my knowledge the networks at least greenlighting more shows that take advantage of the visual medium.

Well, though TDI is more mature, it's far from being a bridge from CN to [as]. The problem is that most of the current [as] material is so....so lewd and gory and such that it would be pretty hard to make a link between the two. I'm referring mainly to Metalocalypse, Robot Chicken, Assy McGhee, and sometimes Venture Brothers. Nothing that CN currently airs is "mature" enough to be a bridge between the two. Maybe if they miraculously brought back C2C or Cartoon Planet, or Tex Avery/Chuck Jones/Bob Clampett shorts, we'd be getting somewhere. Even Flapjack, the weirdest CN original ever, can't be a bridge. Wait, I think I just agreed with you while trying to put up an argument. All I know is that TDI can't connect CN to [as].

On the other hand, I agree with everything else you said.

 

[lemonhead75]

So why not a couple of all ages programming? They'd still get the money, plus a bonus. Besides, when having two portions of the network that cater to a different age group (CN/AS) having show that are for both child would give the schedule a much more smooth flow to it (TDI is somewhat of a step in the right direction).



The decision to focus on one demo is merely part of the problem. I maintain the idea that CN would have better results if they were to:

A. Put more enthusiam into their work. I mean how can you expect the viewers to enjoy Cartoon Network when the majority of execs (who would likely rather work on SpikeTV, MTV, CW, CBS, ABC, etc) hate the network (Compared to the previous execs who considered their job to be fun).

B. The old bumpers (from CN's glory days) gave off the impression that watching cartoons were cool, where as today the network gives off the vibe that you should feeling embarassed for watching a channel for cartoons unless you're under 13. They need to inject the idea that cartoons are a legitamate form of entertainment (especially since the general public sees the medium as kid stuff).

C. For the time being it seems like their upcoming material is headed in the right direction. But the main problem with their line up in the past few years (minus their reruns) is that they were mostly animated sitcoms. To my knowledge the networks at least greenlighting more shows that take advantage of the visual medium.

I agree with almost everything you just said there.

 

[Antiyonder]

Well, though TDI is more mature, it's far from being a bridge from CN to [as]. The problem is that most of the current [as] material is so....so lewd and gory and such that it would be pretty hard to make a link between the two. I'm referring mainly to Metalocalypse, Robot Chicken, Assy McGhee, and sometimes Venture Brothers. Nothing that CN currently airs is "mature" enough to be a bridge between the two. Maybe if they miraculously brought back C2C or Cartoon Planet, or Tex Avery/Chuck Jones/Bob Clampett shorts, we'd be getting somewhere. Even Flapjack, the weirdest CN original ever, can't be a bridge. Wait, I think I just agreed with you while trying to put up an argument. All I know is that TDI can't connect CN to [as].

On the other hand, I agree with everything else you said.

Sure they don't have any all ages show in development, but they could still use a couple older programs until then:

- Looney Tunes: What ever episodes they have available will do. It's often been enjoy by both kids and adults correct?
- Justice League and Justice League Unlimited: As I recall, the problem with keeping the show on the lineup was for it being too intense to be a kid show, but to superheroish to be a full fledged adult show. To put it simply, it's not a squeeky clean kid friendly show, but it's not a gory blood bath show for adults, thus it fits the parameters of being middle ground.
- Flintstones: Was originally intended as an adult program. One of the most successful primetime shows and while it was more for the Honeymooners loving adults, it drew in a substancial kid crowd. Besides, the characters appear on cereals and vitamins, so you cannot tell me that kids would have no interest in the cartoon.
- Naruto: Airs with a PG rating and isn't counted as Adult Swim programming.

Left the 4th improvement method out, btw:

D. Line ups need to be more diverse (Though this pertains to any network that airs animation). Yes, all networks fall in the lazy method of airing certain shows constantly, but even then, there are plenty of live action programs to choose from (thus you still get many viewing options). Animation on the other hand is restricted to a limited number of networks (whether it's a 24 hour cartoon channel, a morning or primetime block and/or just one animated show on the entire channel). Thus in order to compensate for the lack of animated filled slots, the networks willing to air animated programs need to air as many titles as possible. That's another reason I believe the youngsters are lacking an interest in cartoons, because there's a lack of title options (Especially since a heavy portion of cartoon based channels are restricted to digital TV).

 

[Mickialla]

Sure they don't have any all ages show in development, but they could still use a couple older programs until then:

- Looney Tunes: What ever episodes they have available will do. It's often been enjoy by both kids and adults correct?
- Justice League and Justice League Unlimited: As I recall, the problem with keeping the show on the lineup was for it being too intense to be a kid show, but to superheroish to be a full fledged adult show. To put it simply, it's not a squeeky clean kid friendly show, but it's not a gory blood bath show for adults, thus it fits the parameters of being middle ground.
- Flintstones: Was originally intended as an adult program. One of the most successful primetime shows and while it was more for the Honeymooners loving adults, it drew in a substancial kid crowd. Besides, the characters appear on cereals and vitamins, so you cannot tell me that kids would have no interest in the cartoon.
- Naruto: Airs with a PG rating and isn't counted as Adult Swim programming.

Left the 4th improvement method out, btw:

D. Line ups need to be more diverse (Though this pertains to any network that airs animation). Yes, all networks fall in the lazy method of airing certain shows constantly, but even then, there are plenty of live action programs to choose from (thus you still get many viewing options). Animation on the other hand is restricted to a limited number of networks (whether it's a 24 hour cartoon channel, a morning or primetime block and/or just one animated show on the entire channel). Thus in order to compensate for the lack of animated filled slots, the networks willing to air animated programs need to air as many titles as possible. That's another reason I believe the youngsters are lacking an interest in cartoons, because there's a lack of title options (Especially since a heavy portion of cartoon based channels are restricted to digital TV).

Right again, but there's no point in arguing, because everything that you said I agree with.

The 4th point is also a good one. You just listed all the key components that make CN lousy.

I've said this before, but the Chuck Jones/Tex Avery/Bob Clampett Shows were definitely the most adult thing (besides C2C or Cartoon Planet) that ever aired on CN. Now compair a Looney Tunes or a Droopy short to the nonsensical gore that is Metalocalypse. It doesn't mesh properly. There's too much division.

 

[Space Cadet]

- Naruto: Airs with a PG rating and isn't counted as Adult Swim programming.

Because its better off on Toonami than on AS. It attracts more kids and teens than adults.

 

[Space Cadet]

Week of 7/28-8/3:

Household Rating:

Primetime: 1,096,000(#8 for cable last week)
Total Day: 1,017,000(#5 for cable last week)

Viewers 2+:

Primetime: 1,422,000(#9 for cable)
Total Day: 1,251,000(#5 for cable)

And the ratings went up for another week. Except with Total Day Viewers for the 2+ category. That slightly went down.



Here are the charts:


Weekly Top Ten Basic Cable Ad Supported networks, Total Day and Primetime Rankings among K2-11 (000) 7/28-8/3/08:
Total Day (000) Primetime (000)
NICK~: 1275 DSNY*: 1386
DSNY*: 996 CARTOON: 821
CARTOON: 696 NAN**: 482
NAN**: 348 NOGGIN: 276
NOGGIN: 248 DISCOVERY: 194
ADSM**: 228 TOON DIS: 158
TOON DIS.: 138 BET: 132
DISCOVERY: 96 NICKTOONS: 112
NICKTOONS: 94 TLC: 77
BET: 64 ESPN: 64
Source: Disney Research from Nielsen Media Research Data Live + SD Data
*Disney Channel is not an ad supported cable network, unlike the others in this listing.
**Denotes a network that broadcasts less than 51% of minutes in a 24hr day.
~Nickelodeon Total Day 6a-11p

Weekly Top Ten Basic Cable Ad Supported networks, Total Day and Primetime Rankings among K6-11 (000) 7/28-8/3/08:
Total Day (000) Primetime (000)
NICK~: 780 DSNY*: 1112
DSNY*: 726 CARTOON: 568
CARTOON: 468 NAN**: 351
NAN**: 269 DISCOVERY: 145
ADSM**: 165 BET: 97
TOON DIS.: 80 TOON DIS: 83
NICKTOONS: 62 NICKTOONS: 70
DISCOVERY: 76 TLC: 59
NOGGIN: 52 NOGGIN: 47
BET: 46 ANIMAL PLANET: 45
ESPN: 45
Source: Disney Research from Nielsen Media Research Data Live + SD Data
*Disney Channel is not an ad supported cable network, unlike the others in this listing.
**Denotes a network that broadcasts less than 51% of minutes in a 24hr day.
~Nickelodeon Total Day 6a-11p

Weekly Top Ten Basic Cable Ad Supported Networks, Total Day and Primetime Rankings among Tweens 9-14 (000) 7/28-8/3/08:
Total Day (000) Primetime (000)
DSNY*: 621 DSNY*: 946
NICK~: 587 NAN**: 480
NAN**: 406 CARTOON: 424
CARTOON: 339 DISCOVERY: 164
ADSM**: 248 BET: 131
DISCOVERY: 102 MTV: 86
MTV: 89 COMEDY: 77
BET: 69 ESPN: 70
TOON DIS.: 52 TLC: 65
COMEDY: 50 THE N: 55
Source: Disney Research from Nielsen Media Research Data Live + SD Data
*Disney Channel is not an ad supported cable network, unlike the others in this listing.
**Denotes a network that broadcasts less than 51% of minutes in a 24hr day.
~Nickelodeon Total Day 6a-11p


So, the Primetime charts were up, but the Total Day was down a bit.

 

[Linkpre]

While it's nice ratings have increased abit for Cartoon Network, I really hope this doesn't mean the mini marathon schedule lasts into fall. Hope they can bring in a little more variety in September.

 

[Antiyonder]

Because its better off on Toonami than on AS. It attracts more kids and teens than adults.

That's the point I was trying to make. I count it as a show that marketable to kids while being able to attract an adult crowd. Heck, the entire Toonami line up could be a decent bridge for CN/AS.

And while I'm at it:

E. This is a brief paragraph from the thread "Toon Disney to become Disney XD":

Animation, traditionally a draw for boys, has been a struggle for Disney Channel, although its newest series, "Phineas and Ferb," appears to be building a strong male following. But so far, the network has failed to produce a blockbuster to compete with Nickelodeon's "SpongeBob SquarePants;" or match the guy-centric focus of Cartoon Network, which one ad-buyer described as the "ESPN" of animation.

Again, all children based networks suffer the same problem. Cartoon Network is no exception. You have hit cartoons such as Spongebob Squarepants, The Fairly Oddparents and Ed Edd N Eddy (And for a while even Rugrats). Understandably networks want to have more programs such as them as they bring in a good share of ratings and money. But apparently the execs have a short attention span.

All of the programs I'm listing started out as modest successes.

Rugrats- Didn't become the blockbuster hit until Season 3 went into reruns.
Spongebob Squarepants- Played second banana to Pokemon (More on that in a bit).
The Fairly Oddparents- Took a couple of seasons before it joined Spongebob in the ratings.
Ed Edd and Eddy- Powerpuff Girls and Dexter's Lab were higher in the ratings than the Eds, and yet this show outlasted them.

Another problem is high expectations. The higher the expectations, the more you're likely to face disappointment:
1. While it was a hit from the beginning, Power Rangers was intended as nothing more than a shortlived 40 episode series. The success took Saban and Fox by surprise.

2. (This is a comic book example, though it will prove my point) When Spider-Man and Wolverine were conceived, iconic value wasn't the priority. Spider-Man was merely an attempt at having a teen hero who was a solo act (no titans or sidekicks here), and Wolverine was conceived as a one shot opponent for The Hulk and nothing more. Thus you'd think that a couple of characters would rot in obscurity oblivion, yet these characters are known even outside to the non-comic readers and appear/star in a good number of comics. Spidey even became an icon to his company for crying outloud.

3. Going with the internet videos, James Rolfe/The Angry Video Game Nerd is one of the most popular online series. Unlike some other online celebrities, James didn't even consider the idea that satrical game reviews would be popular. He made and submitted two videos (Castlevania 2 Simon's Quest and Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde) as a joke and uploaded them at the request of his friends. Not only did he become popular, but made online game reviews a popular thing. Again, we get another case of a series being made as a result of modest reasons, only to evolve into a hit.

Now yes you may get an instant success here and there (Pokemon). Still, expecting all shows to be an instant hit and canceling them when they fail to reach expectations is quite frankly, childish (under some circumstances hypocritical). It's the equivilent of a child planting a seed to grow a tree only to throw a hissy fit when the seed doesn't produce instant results. Using Power Rangers for example. When the show was at the top, many shows (VR Troopers, Beetleborgs, Masked Rider) were made to cash in on it's success.

The two ironies are:
1. Cartoons are cancel because they don't score a huge Spongebob rating, while the show they are trying to surpass got its success because the network was patient.
2. That the show that was made with modest intentions is still on today while the shows that were made for the sake of popularity are over and obscure.

Heck, when and if my paragraph is realized, Cartoon Network and other channels would in my opinion be better off than they are now.

 

[Mickialla]

That's the point I was trying to make. I count it as a show that marketable to kids while being able to attract an adult crowd. Heck, the entire Toonami line up could be a decent bridge for CN/AS.

And while I'm at it:

E. This is a brief paragraph from the thread "Toon Disney to become Disney XD":


Again, all children based networks suffer the same problem. Cartoon Network is no exception. You have hit cartoons such as Spongebob Squarepants, The Fairly Oddparents and Ed Edd N Eddy (And for a while even Rugrats). Understandably networks want to have more programs such as them as they bring in a good share of ratings and money. But apparently the execs have a short attention span.

All of the programs I'm listing started out as modest successes.

Rugrats- Didn't become the blockbuster hit until Season 3 went into reruns.
Spongebob Squarepants- Played second banana to Pokemon (More on that in a bit).
The Fairly Oddparents- Took a couple of seasons before it joined Spongebob in the ratings.
Ed Edd and Eddy- Powerpuff Girls and Dexter's Lab were higher in the ratings than the Eds, and yet this show outlasted them.

Another problem is high expectations. The higher the expectations, the more you're likely to face disappointment:
1. While it was a hit from the beginning, Power Rangers was intended as nothing more than a shortlived 40 episode series. The success took Saban and Fox by surprise.

2. (This is a comic book example, though it will prove my point) When Spider-Man and Wolverine were conceived, iconic value wasn't the priority. Spider-Man was merely an attempt at having a teen hero who was a solo act (no titans or sidekicks here), and Wolverine was conceived as a one shot opponent for The Hulk and nothing more. Thus you'd think that a couple of characters would rot in obscurity oblivion, yet these characters are known even outside to the non-comic readers and appear/star in a good number of comics. Spidey even became an icon to his company for crying outloud.

3. Going with the internet videos, James Rolfe/The Angry Video Game Nerd is one of the most popular online series. Unlike some other online celebrities, James didn't even consider the idea that satrical game reviews would be popular. He made and submitted two videos (Castlevania 2 Simon's Quest and Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde) as a joke and uploaded them at the request of his friends. Not only did he become popular, but made online game reviews a popular thing. Again, we get another case of a series being made as a result of modest reasons, only to evolve into a hit.

Now yes you may get an instant success here and there (Pokemon). Still, expecting all shows to be an instant hit and canceling them when they fail to reach expectations is quite frankly, childish (under some circumstances hypocritical). It's the equivilent of a child planting a seed to grow a tree only to throw a hissy fit when the seed doesn't produce instant results. Using Power Rangers for example. When the show was at the top, many shows (VR Troopers, Beetleborgs, Masked Rider) were made to cash in on it's success.

The two ironies are:
1. Cartoons are cancel because they don't score a huge Spongebob rating, while the show they are trying to surpass got its success because the network was patient.
2. That the show that was made with modest intentions is still on today while the shows that were made for the sake of popularity are over and obscure.

Heck, when and if my paragraph is realized, Cartoon Network and other channels would in my opinion be better off than they are now.

That's true, but there are faults to that. Chowder became an instant success, and Flapjack is just one step behind. And personally, I think some of CN's shows got a long enough incubation period for their shows (Lazlo and Gym Partner in particular, you could count Juniper Lee in on that too). That statement can be true when applied to certain cartoons, but not all. The problem is that between the years of 2005-2007, Cartoon Network just produced a long string of mediocre toons. And I don't believe that any of those toons were attempting to cash out on a past series' success.

 

[Antiyonder]

That's true, but there are faults to that. Chowder became an instant success, and Flapjack is just one step behind.

And I did cover that. Yes you may have the occasional instant success' (I mentioned Pokemon as the big example), but to expect that all shows follow in that regard is just rediculous. The expectations should be kept at a modest level just the same. Though I've heard that part of Chowder's success is attributed to the fac that the execs weren't expecting it to do as well, so again there is something to being patient and modest.

 

[Mickialla]

And I did cover that. Yes you may have the occasional instant success' (I mentioned Pokemon as the big example), but to expect that all shows follow in that regard is just rediculous. The expectations should be kept at a modest level just the same. Though I've heard that part of Chowder's success is attributed to the fac that the execs weren't expecting it to do as well, so again there is something to being patient and modest.

I didn't say there wasn't. The main part of my post was that not all of CN's recent toons weren't good because they weren't given a good shot, some weren't good because they were just plain mediocre. Lazlo had 3 years to get better, and Gym Partner and Juniper Lee had 2 years.

But I understand what you're saying. If I could rephrase it, I'd say that a toon shouldn't be made in order to make money. A toon should be made if is a good idea that the creator wants to see on TV. Cartoons that are made because the creator is fond of the idea are the toons that truly do well, because the creator puts their passion into it. If the creator is a professional animator that just wants to create another toon to keep getting money, chances are the toon isn't going to be as good. I'm not saying a lot of the animator's in the world are like that, especially since I don't think the job of an animator is a million-bucks-an-hour kind of job. But for example, most of the Hanna-Barbera toons made during the late 60's-the 80's were made with little passion in them. The first idea that popped into their head, they produced it. A lot of the comedy toons were just copies of the original H-B toons that were the most successful (Huckleberry Hound, Quick Draw McGraw, Top Cat, Flintstones, Jetsons). And most of the action/mystery toons were copies of shows like Scooby Doo or Superfriends. Maybe the H-B example isn't the best one, since some of those "clones" weren't too bad to begin with. But the toons that were made were only made to make money. They weren't really made because the creators spent a lot of time coming up with the concept and "constructing" the characters. You get what I mean??

 

[Antiyonder]

But I understand what you're saying. If I could rephrase it, I'd say that a toon shouldn't be made in order to make money. A toon should be made if is a good idea that the creator wants to see on TV. Cartoons that are made because the creator is fond of the idea are the toons that truly do well, because the creator puts their passion into it. If the creator is a professional animator that just wants to create another toon to keep getting money, chances are the toon isn't going to be as good. I'm not saying a lot of the animator's in the world are like that, especially since I don't think the job of an animator is a million-bucks-an-hour kind of job. But for example, most of the Hanna-Barbera toons made during the late 60's-the 80's were made with little passion in them. The first idea that popped into their head, they produced it. A lot of the comedy toons were just copies of the original H-B toons that were the most successful (Huckleberry Hound, Quick Draw McGraw, Top Cat, Flintstones, Jetsons). And most of the action/mystery toons were copies of shows like Scooby Doo or Superfriends. Maybe the H-B example isn't the best one, since some of those "clones" weren't too bad to begin with. But the toons that were made were only made to make money. They weren't really made because the creators spent a lot of time coming up with the concept and "constructing" the characters. You get what I mean??

I get what you're saying, but I have to disagree on another matter that you brought up. All shows (even the top quality ones are produced for money). It's for that reason infact why Greg Weisman for instance won't tell the rest of his Gargoyle tales in fanfic format (Because any chance of making money off them would be gone). Even the execs/writers with high integrity aren't in the business for charity.

And the problem isn't that they want money. I respect that they're looking for ratings and profit. The problem is that they want huge success with little effort. They lack the willingness to work hard for their money and ratings. And by hard work I mean:
- Giving a show a couple of years before deciding if it's crap (cause again, Rugrats didn't even catch on until Season 3 finished).
- Don't produce a show with high expectations. As long as it produces stable ratings it's at least worth renewing.

 

[Mickialla]

And the problem isn't that they want money. I respect that they're looking for ratings and profit. The problem is that they want huge success with little effort. They lack the willingness to work hard for their money and ratings. And by hard work I mean:
- Giving a show a couple of years before deciding if it's crap (cause again, Rugrats didn't even catch on until Season 3 finished).
- Don't produce a show with high expectations. As long as it produces stable ratings it's at least worth renewing.

Yes, but the little effort that they put into it comes from them not having passion in their idea. They think of the idea to make money, they don't make money because they thought of the idea.