[ SECRET POST #2383 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2383 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.









01. http://i.imgur.com/xFMajFq.gif
[Hannibal; moving gif]


__________________________________________________













[ ----- SPOILERY SECRETS AHEAD ----- ]













02. [SPOILERS for Hawaii Five-O]



__________________________________________________



03. [SPOILERS for Ashes to Ashes/Life on Mars]



__________________________________________________




04. [SPOILERS for A Song of Ice and Fire/Game of Thrones]



__________________________________________________














[ ----- TRIGGERY SECRETS AHEAD ----- ]
















05. [WARNING for rape]

[Russell Brand]


__________________________________________________



06. [WARNING for sexual assault]



__________________________________________________



07. [WARNING for chan/shota]



__________________________________________________



08. [WARNING for emotional abuse]



__________________________________________________




09. [WARNING for rape/dub-con]



__________________________________________________



10. [WARNING for incest]

[Fosters]


















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 00 pages, 000 secrets from Secret Submission Post #340.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 1 - broken links ], [ 1 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

What is it with popular fandoms and ugly secrets?

[skeletal_history]

Hey, I kind of like it for its nightmarish(ly bad) quality. It seems fitting. :)

[(Anonymous)]

Is this really all that popular of a fandom? The show's ratings are really bad and I've never met anyone outside of F!S that watched more than a couple of episodes.

[(Anonymous)]

They wouldn't have renewed it if the ratings were bad.

SA

[(Anonymous)]

I'm wrong. The ratings really are bad. So why DID they renew it?

Re: SA

[(Anonymous)]

They supposedly added in the viewers from hulu to justify renewing it. NBC makes all the good decisions.

Re: SA

[deadtree]

because it's one of VERY few critically acclaimed shows on NBC and lbr they don't have much else going on. Also it's incredibly cheap for them to get, the fans are rabid, and if they didn't pick it up someone else would have (guaranteed) so why not?

Re: SA

[skeletal_history]

Because it's awesome? Really, it's because for one thing, the network made a killing selling it to foreign networks, so they don't lose money regardless of how poor the ratings are -- the other is that the head of NBC said she wants to keep attracting big name stars (like Mads Mikkelsen and Laurence Fishburne) to their network and knew that cancelling the show so quickly would hurt the network's rep. There was an article about her on ONTD a week or so ago...

Re: SA

[deadtree]

sounds like a smart lady

Re: SA

[skeletal_history]

Surprisingly so! (Argh, I'm trying to find the ONTD post, but the site is down for me right now...I'll try later.)

Re: SA

[deadtree]

yeah LJ is doing maintenance D:

Re: SA

[skeletal_history]

Here it is!

"NBC renewed Bryan Fuller's critically acclaimed Hannibal for a second season despite its lackluster ratings on Thursdays thanks largely to its rabid fan base and pedigree. "Would it be a smart move to take a show that represents quality and chop it off at the knees? I didn't feel like that would be a great decision and it would also affect the kind of talent we attract to the network," Salke said of the series, which stars Hugh Dancy and Mads Mikkelsen."

Re: SA

[tabaqui]

Wow, i wish other networks would keep good/interesting shows going despite 'ratings', and *because* of quality!

Re: SA

[sebastos]

I didn't know that, but I'm so glad that the show will have a second season. They can do great things if they decide to follow the books and don't fuck with Clarice.

Re: SA

[(Anonymous)]

The network isn't making any money, they don't own it. They are buying it probably at a deep discount at this point. Good critical reviews even if no one is actually watching the damn thing.

Re: SA

[(Anonymous)]

Because the less than 2 million people who liked it REALLY liked it.

[deadtree]

well shows like Supernatural and Sherlock don't have that many (live, counted) viewers either but their fandoms are massive. It's not about the total number of people who watch when it comes to fandom size, it's about the *kind* of people who watch.

[(Anonymous)]

Both of those have more than 5 times as many viewers in their organic markets than Hannibal.

[meredith44]

Uh, no. Here are the ratings for the May 17th Supernatural and the May 17th Hannibal. Supernatural got a 1.1 rating and 2.31 million viewers. Hannibal got a 1.1 rating and 2.46 million viewers. Granted, those are the 18-49 year-old viewers, because that is all that counts for US ratings, but given the demographics of Hannibal vs. Supernatural (and NBC vs. the CW), I would highly doubt that there is that big a disparity that Supernatural ends up with five times as many viewers as Hannibal.

[(Anonymous)]

I don't think any of the big three networks are happy to be pulling in CW numbers.

[meredith44]

Do I think NBC is happy about it? Not in the slightest. But as I said here, except for football, the Voice, and Revolution (which only ever had a Voice lead-in and still dropped a lot), NBC as a whole is doing horribly, and a 1.4 is pretty much renewal at this point. I hope more. Viewers watch later and tune in next year. (It's what I did, after hearing the acclaim of critics and my friends.)

Oh, and to be slightly more fair to NBC, Supernatural, Arrow, and The Vampire Diaries were the only shows that ever hit over a 1 in the ratings. The CW renewed shows with .4-.6 ratings. And, granted, Nikita was on a Friday, but they renewed it even though it hit .2, I believe.

[(Anonymous)]

That Hannibal is struggling to compete with a genre show aimed at teens that is years past its peak is frankly pathetic.

[meredith44]

I won't argue that it's ratings ar3e anything but pitiful. However, have you seen the ratings for NBC as a whole? Except for football, The Voice, Revolution (which only had a Voice lead in and still dropped), and perhaps The Office, NBC's ratings overall were pathetic. In April, Hannibal's ratings relative to the rest of the network easily had it being renewed. Unfortunately for comparison purposes, Hannibal premiered at the end of the year, so the R/C list was pretty much over, but even toward the end, when Hannibal was getting a 1.4, the inex had it as likely renewal because NBC is in such dire straits.

I think that the network is hoping that there are people like me who discovered the show late and will watch next year. (That is my hope as well, as I am enjoying it.) But, honestly? There really isn't much difference between NBC and the CW at this point.

[deadtree]

based on this http://supernaturalwiki.com/index.php?title=Ratings it looks like Supernatural averages out around 4 million viewers per ep, and frequently has far less. As for Sherlock, you can't deny that the fandom is much bigger than you'd expect for a show with the viewers it does have (looking at tumblr, every human on earth watches Sherlock; in reality, what? 10 million people tops? Big Bang Theory has that for *syndicated* episodes).

My point isn't that Hannibal's ratings are as good as those two, just that the size of the viewership doesn't equate to the size of the fandom.