Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Entertainment and Arts > TV
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 04-02-2013, 12:29 PM
 
Location: Lakewood OH
21,695 posts, read 28,458,443 times
Reputation: 35863

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by SabresFanInSA View Post
Actually that is not at all why Moonlighting died. People really need to let that myth die. I think it causes shows to go in unnatural directions because people are afraid of something that never happened.

That said, this was one of the better episodes. To me Castle has lost something recently and it has nothing to do with Castle and Beckett getting together. They seem to have forgotten the things that made Castle (the man) Castle. They have been pushing the "Castle bumbling fool" angle a little too much.

My $.02 anyway.
Then what was the reason "Moonlighting" died? Because for me, that definetly was the reason. It killed the tension and bantering back and forth between the two main characters which I liked so much. That's when I lost interest in the show and that's what I remember the critics saying as well. So why do you say it was a myth?

I believe other shows shared the same fate but at the moment I cannot think of any. Maybe others can.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-02-2013, 02:19 PM
 
Location: Not where I want to be
24,509 posts, read 24,204,357 times
Reputation: 24282
Babies kill shows too....Murphy Brown, Mad About you are two I can think of top of my head.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-02-2013, 03:41 PM
 
Location: Lakewood OH
21,695 posts, read 28,458,443 times
Reputation: 35863
Quote:
Originally Posted by tamiznluv View Post
Babies kill shows too....Murphy Brown, Mad About you are two I can think of top of my head.
Also when they try to replace old kids with new ones. Like all of a sudden the moms have babies when the littlest kids get too old to be cute. Somehow those babies never get to be old enough to get cute because the show gets cancelled.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-02-2013, 03:45 PM
 
Location: in here, out there
3,062 posts, read 7,036,493 times
Reputation: 5109
Quote:
Originally Posted by Minervah View Post
I usually don't fall for surprise endings but this one knocked me off the couch.
I didn't expect that twist. I was annoyed at the whole rear-window thing, but it was a nice practical joke for April fools'.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-02-2013, 05:35 PM
 
Location: San Antonio, Tx
8,238 posts, read 10,729,447 times
Reputation: 10224
Quote:
Originally Posted by Minervah View Post
Then what was the reason "Moonlighting" died? Because for me, that definetly was the reason. It killed the tension and bantering back and forth between the two main characters which I liked so much. That's when I lost interest in the show and that's what I remember the critics saying as well. So why do you say it was a myth?

I believe other shows shared the same fate but at the moment I cannot think of any. Maybe others can.
The "Curse" was actually debunked some time ago and I cant find the article. Basically Moonlighting's demise was a perfect storm of Cybill Sheperd's pregnancy and her demand for a lighter work schedule along with Bruce Willis' desire to do movies along with the fact that they had trouble getting along. Add to that the writers didnt know how to get them together. They finally decided to hook them up and then made an 11th hour decision to not (remember Maddie marrying someone she just met). Finally I believe (and this part I am cloudy on) the show was renewed after Cybil and Bruce decided they didnt want to do the show anymore.

EDIT:

Here is an article that alludes to it.

Quote:
Indeed, none other than Moonlighting creator Glenn Gordon Caron has often admitted that timeliness became an issue as the show went on. “The show was really difficult to do,” he told the Chicago Tribune back in 2005. “A lot of discord centered around that — working 14-15 hours a day, and the way I worked, pages came very late.” So late, in fact, that yes, episodes regularly missed deadlines, and it wasn’t uncommon for episodes of Moonlighting to be replaced by re-runs at the last minute. With audiences never quite sure whether or not they’d be getting a new episode or a re-run until they tuned in, it’s hardly surprising that fans started drifting away. Factor in Shepherd and Willis both reportedly losing interest in the series for various reasons (her newborn children, born during the show’s fourth season, and his increasingly successful movie career, respectively), and the show’s cancellation seems more the fault of multiple events and less of viewer backlash against David and Maddie ending up in bed together.
http://entertainment.time.com/2012/0...=ent-main-lede
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-02-2013, 05:40 PM
 
Location: San Antonio, Tx
8,238 posts, read 10,729,447 times
Reputation: 10224
Quote:
Originally Posted by tamiznluv View Post
Babies kill shows too....Murphy Brown, Mad About you are two I can think of top of my head.
Babies are USUALLY a sign the show has finally jumped the shark. The exception has been Modern Family.

Suddenly aging them (Growing Pains, Fresh Prince, Last Man Standing to name a few) never makes sense either, but I can sort of see WHY they do it. I just dont like THAT they do it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-02-2013, 05:52 PM
 
Location: Lakewood OH
21,695 posts, read 28,458,443 times
Reputation: 35863
Quote:
Originally Posted by SabresFanInSA View Post
The "Curse" was actually debunked some time ago and I cant find the article. Basically Moonlighting's demise was a perfect storm of Cybill Sheperd's pregnancy and her demand for a lighter work schedule along with Bruce Willis' desire to do movies along with the fact that they had trouble getting along. Add to that the writers didnt know how to get them together. They finally decided to hook them up and then made an 11th hour decision to not (remember Maddie marrying someone she just met). Finally I believe (and this part I am cloudy on) the show was renewed after Cybil and Bruce decided they didnt want to do the show anymore.

EDIT:

Here is an article that alludes to it.



Will Fall TV Finally Make the ‘Partners With Benefits’ Formula Work? | TIME.com
The part that the writers didn't know how to get them together then did play a role in it even though it may not have been the main reason. So it was several different factors. I know there were a lot of behind the scene problems and egos came into play. The show was doomed because of those problems but from the storyline point of view, I still think that getting them together in a romantic way killed it from that perpsective for the viewers.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-02-2013, 07:38 PM
 
Location: San Antonio, Tx
8,238 posts, read 10,729,447 times
Reputation: 10224
That's fair I suppose. I think the issue people have is that the show was gone regardless of what happened between "Maddie and David".

The fact that Castle and Bones are still succeeding even after "hooking up" the leads is a sign that it isnt the nail in the coffin most people think it is.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-03-2013, 03:43 PM
 
Location: Cushing OK
14,539 posts, read 21,265,870 times
Reputation: 16939
Quote:
Originally Posted by SabresFanInSA View Post
That's fair I suppose. I think the issue people have is that the show was gone regardless of what happened between "Maddie and David".

The fact that Castle and Bones are still succeeding even after "hooking up" the leads is a sign that it isnt the nail in the coffin most people think it is.
I don't know what it was, but when they 'officially' hooked up on Moonlighting, it just lost its spark. It was like all the fun stuff was done and now what? I think that both actors were looking past the show and making plans definately effected things, and if the actors lose that touch then nothing will fix it, no matter how good the script is.

They had to move on into a new segment, discovering each other. Castle is doing fine on that. But the cast are happy with their jobs so that makes a difference. What I can't figure out is how they are keeping this a 'secret' when they are taking vacations together and their partners know.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-04-2013, 12:53 AM
 
977 posts, read 1,109,927 times
Reputation: 1927
I loved this last episode and thought it was a wonderful homage to
"Rear Window" with a delightful twist!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Entertainment and Arts > TV
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:41 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top