What Makes a Hit a Hit?

Joe Strike tries to uncover the special something that turns an animated idea into a long-running, hit television series.
Posted In | Magazines: AnimationWorld

Sometimes getting a show on the air is only half the battle. Beyond having writing that makes a show and its characters come alive, Clifton sees network support as critical. “You have to have a network that has a vision and some balls. You can come up with a lot of great stories that are interesting, but at the end of the day, if the networks don’t buy into your vision, or if you have people there saying, ‘this is a little different from the stuff we know and we’re just not sure about it,’ rather than taking that gamble it’s just not going to work. You have to give it a chance, your show needs to be given shot.”

Even The Simpsons might have a harder time getting and staying on the air today than it did in the late 1980s. “The networks just aren’t giving shows the time they used to,” said Clifton. “Their attitude nowadays is it has to be an instant hit, period. There’s so many things in their pipeline that if it’s not a slam-dunk, then let’s just move on.”

Futurama may be a case in point of how everything can come together – almost. One would think that a Matt Groening-created series featuring some of the best writing and animation on TV and a loyal following would have a lock on becoming the next Simpsons. Yet Futurama just barely made it through five truncated seasons and 72 episodes – a not insignificant number, but a fraction of The Simpsons total and still growing output.

Grogin offers FOX’S perspective on Futurama and its animated brethren: “Primetime animation is a niche market, and we have to make sure any show we put on appeals to a substantial audience. You couldn’t do Kid Notorious (Comedy Central’s latest raunchy offering) or South Park on a broadcast network – not necessarily because of their language or theme, but because they have a narrow point of view. Personally, I enjoy Kid Notorious; it’s perfect for a niche network, but not for us.

Futurama had a loyal, but a relatively small core audience,” Grogin said. “It connected very strongly with 18-34 year old men, but it didn’t do so well with 12-17 year olds and it didn’t appeal to women at all – very similar to The Family Guy, by the way. By comparison, The Simpsons has high demographics across the board.”

Those higher Simpsons demographics translated not only into higher ratings, but also into sizeable licensing and merchandising revenues as well, according to CN’s Lazzo. “A lot of the original production money was recovered very rapidly. There was a good revenue story with the Simpsons that I don’t think was replayed with Futurama or The Family Guy from the ratings standpoint.”

Both cancelled series have become ratings winners for Cartoon Network’s late-night Adult Swim block, where they reach a far greater concentration of their prime demographic. In recent months, rumors have surfaced of a possible revival for either or both series via a co-venture between the two networks. “Based on the cost per episode and the number of viewers they actually brought in for FOX, they probably weren’t the kind of properties that made sense for them to continue,” says Lazzo. “Family Guy has sold a large number of DVDs for FOX, so there has been interest to a degree in that property. We’ve been talking for months about that type of thing [a joint effort] with FOX. Whether something will come out of it is too early to say. [Editor’s note: Sources confidentially report that FOX will resume production of Family Guy with 35 new episodes in that could return in January 2005. This would make it the first time a canceled series has been revived due to DVD demand and ratings success in syndication.]

“There hasn’t been an equivalent situation with Futurama to date,” Lazzo offers. “It did quite well on DVD but didn’t sell the numbers that Family Guy sold. In fact, King of the Hill didn’t sell the numbers that Family Guy sold. Family Guy seems to be one of those shows that worked in cable much better than it did in broadcast.”

Lazzo goes on to describe the fate of any number of network shows, animated and live-action alike. “I think a large part of that was that you couldn’t find the show. When it first premiered I thought it was a pretty good show, but not the kick in the teeth The Simpsons had been, and I lost track of it because they moved it on the schedule. Then I tuned in the second season and went, wow, this show feels really fresh and funny now.

“It happens all the time: great little shows just tend to get lost,” explains Lazzo. “Audiences are fickle and you have to have a critical mass there or it just doesn’t make sense for the programmer to stick with it. Very often shows are stopped before they can find that audience. It’s a sad state of affairs, but I understand why it happens.”

Unless viewers make an effort or have the luck to revisit a series after it’s worked out its early kinks or moved around the schedule, the networks will take it as a rejection on the audience’s part. It’s a self-fulfilling prophecy that usually ends with (in the eyes of the show’s partisans) a premature cancellation. Anyone (like this author) who watched Futurama get pre-empted week after week by lengthy football telecasts or double runs of The Simpsons can tell when a network has given up on a series long before it actually leaves the air.







Comments


I find it quite insulting that someone as intelligent as Ms. Clifton could claim that the cartoon could "draw itself" as long as there are good writers. That is the main problem with animation today! Too much dialog, no one taking advantage of the visual capabilities of the medium. Story is the key thing for a series, but story is not only about writing. So often, it is the board artists and directors who save the story from being a long string of boring dialog. I find this very disheartening, as I admire so many of these people, and their comments are more than a little distressing. Story, design, marketing, all of these things are important. However, I think that doing something different might just appeal to people. Something that has not been done before. I know no network would support that, at least not in primetime, but everyone has to have their dreams.
Danielle Heitmuller (not verified) | Mon, 12/01/2003 - 01:00 | Permalink
One other thing… The look of South Park does not prove a show’s character look like isn’t important. The overly graphic character design style of South Park is critical to the show’s success. Because of the extreme crudeness and mean spiritedness of certain characters, you have to have a less realistic character look in order to distance the audience. If that show’s characters looked like those from “Peanuts,” you would not perceive them the same way. You would find them more offensive and less humorous. You might not even like them at all. You have to hand it to Matt and Trey. Whether it was intended or not, they got it right. Ms. Clifton of Film Roman is also right. You need to find a visual style that properly supports the writing. It will make or break the property.
Doug Whaley (not verified) | Wed, 11/26/2003 - 01:00 | Permalink
One other thing… The look of South Park does not prove a show’s character look like isn’t important. The overly graphic character design style of South Park is critical to the show’s success. Because of the extreme crudeness and mean spiritedness of certain characters, you have to have a less realistic character look in order to distance the audience. If that show’s characters looked like those from “Peanuts,” you would not perceive them the same way. You would find them more offensive and less humorous. You might not even like them at all. You have to hand it to Matt and Trey. Whether it was intended or not, they got it right. Ms. Clifton of Film Roman is also right. You need to find a visual style that properly supports the writing. It will make or break the property.
Doug Whaley (not verified) | Wed, 11/26/2003 - 01:00 | Permalink
What makes a hit show? It isn’t one specific thing. To say that it is the “writing” is wrong. That’s only one facet. The real answer is that it’s a balance of everything. You can have a wonderfully written show, but if you’re aiming for primetime, and you have a property that looks like Saturday morning kid animation, it isn’t going to fly with adults. A too narrow of niche is just as big of problem as thinking that you can create a show that will appeal to everyone,. This was one of the fatal flaws of “God, the Devil, and Bob.” Another mistake is defining a show’s niche strictly by age and sex. To increase your odds, you need to understand the viewer. If you don’t know why a show like Power Rangers is such a success, and how it works psychologically on so many different levels, than your chance of creating a hit property is going to be a lot more dependent on luck. The more you understand the human psyche, empowerment, fear, and other psychological motivations that makes a viewer choose one show over another, the more you’ll increase your odds of success. One of the things that is problematic with shows like “Kid Notorious”is the property lacks viewer identification. How many people watching can identify with being a movie producer and the problems that creates? If you don’t know what the five types of audience identification are, again, your success is going to be based more on luck. To understand what makes a show a hit, look at the people who’ve created the most successful. When it comes to primetime animation, you’re talking about creators who had talents in both writing and art. The more diverse your knowledge, experience, and talents are, the stronger your core vision will be. And it doesn’t stop with just writing and animation. An understanding of acting, human motivation, marketing, entertainment production, again, do nothing but increase your odds of success. Another important element is to bring to the property that special something that is unique about you. How did Steve Hillenberg come up with an underwater cartoon character named Sponge Bob? It came from his love for and background in oceanography, something that was special and unique to him. One other thing I can’t emphasis enough. It takes an enormous amount of work. A great series can take years to develop because there are so many elements that you have to get right. You have to be an extremely driven, persistent, self-motivated individual who understands there is no quick and easy road to success.
Doug Whaley (not verified) | Tue, 11/25/2003 - 01:00 | Permalink

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Use <!--pagebreak--> to create page breaks.

More information about formatting options

CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.