Quote:
Originally Posted by mojopinuk
I think where i dont understand your argument though is where you seem to be suggesting that the "average" viewer couldn't stomach more than half a season of the show before they got sick or bored. That really cannot be true, not given how hugely successful it was.
|
i think i was getting stoned and rambling. i still think the majority of the initial success Friends enjoyed was directly related to its proximity to much stronger shows. had it been aired on a Tuesday night instead of Thursdays between Fraiser and Seinfeld it would have ended up like Boston Common. remember that one?
if it hadn't enjoyed being the meat in the sandwich between the two biggest sitcoms on tv at the time i really don't think Friends would have survived past its second season. you're right that it's how network's operate, it's only sensible to test out a similar product in association with similar established products.
i'm just remembering being a teenager here (and puffing hahah) but still... i recall people paying attention for a bit and then, that was it, it was 'that' show that you had on, while you waited for Seinfeld to start. whether or not people at home were paying attention or just leaving the tv on doesn't actually change the program's ratings. every now and then there was a funny bit that was worth noticing. though for the most part it seemed to be about wannabe yuppies.