Okay, I'm going to be realistic here, and weigh a few things...
Well, first, RTD has shown that he can rake in the money, so he did earn the right for that creative control in the world of the BBC. What he did with it, and how he treated viewers, is another story. I agree that Gardner seemed to have dropped the ball at some point, and I'm not sure about rumors of Tranter's iron fist really mean anything since her best shows got shittier as she moved up the ladder.
I should clarify that RTD is supposedly still with BBC Wolrdwide. Tranter and Gardner just rule from LA, and they supposedly have him on "retainer" of sorts, so not yet gunning for American TV. I'm just guessing that Tranter, Gardner and RTD took this gig in the hopes of all of them making the leap. I'm betting Tranter has shot because ruthlessness is rewarded over here...at first. This means they'll get their American TV pilots, and probably get one picked up. There is just no way they'd be able to keep it afloat if they ran things like they did DW. I don't really believe that over the course of US TV show he could maintain things. Even with shorter cable runs. He has weaknesses that are exactly the kind of things that can turn off viewers over time. Unless he's tries with a sitcom...then Tranter would still have to be able to stay in check. He would need the Gardner or Tranter buffer to make it work.
Also, it's not ratings in the US. That's a misunderstanding. It's advertising revenue. You could be middle of the road ratings wise and be raking it in with ad rates because you have a small budget. You'd be in a better position than the number one show on television if that show has a huge budget, isn't near syndication, and can't cover the ad rates. That's how top 10 shows get canceled, and middling shows last for ages. It happens more often than people realize. Ratings is second, and even then it's timeslot averages and 18-34s, and not overall ratings.
Plus, everything is run by the networks now. Almost all TV shows are funded in some way by the network itself, so they have a lot more say. He's used to a different kind of network, and I'm anxious to see if he can adapt. Good showrunners know who to cajole to keep the right people off their backs. I'm not sure RTD has that, and the question then comes down to Gardner, Tranter, or whoever chooses to get into bed with him. Will another producer put up with him? I think they'd give him a shot based on his money making record. How long could he go before he crashes and burns, or could he find a way to stay afloat with oddball projects? That's the real question.
no subject
Well, first, RTD has shown that he can rake in the money, so he did earn the right for that creative control in the world of the BBC. What he did with it, and how he treated viewers, is another story. I agree that Gardner seemed to have dropped the ball at some point, and I'm not sure about rumors of Tranter's iron fist really mean anything since her best shows got shittier as she moved up the ladder.
I should clarify that RTD is supposedly still with BBC Wolrdwide. Tranter and Gardner just rule from LA, and they supposedly have him on "retainer" of sorts, so not yet gunning for American TV. I'm just guessing that Tranter, Gardner and RTD took this gig in the hopes of all of them making the leap. I'm betting Tranter has shot because ruthlessness is rewarded over here...at first. This means they'll get their American TV pilots, and probably get one picked up. There is just no way they'd be able to keep it afloat if they ran things like they did DW. I don't really believe that over the course of US TV show he could maintain things. Even with shorter cable runs. He has weaknesses that are exactly the kind of things that can turn off viewers over time. Unless he's tries with a sitcom...then Tranter would still have to be able to stay in check. He would need the Gardner or Tranter buffer to make it work.
Also, it's not ratings in the US. That's a misunderstanding. It's advertising revenue. You could be middle of the road ratings wise and be raking it in with ad rates because you have a small budget. You'd be in a better position than the number one show on television if that show has a huge budget, isn't near syndication, and can't cover the ad rates. That's how top 10 shows get canceled, and middling shows last for ages. It happens more often than people realize. Ratings is second, and even then it's timeslot averages and 18-34s, and not overall ratings.
Plus, everything is run by the networks now. Almost all TV shows are funded in some way by the network itself, so they have a lot more say. He's used to a different kind of network, and I'm anxious to see if he can adapt. Good showrunners know who to cajole to keep the right people off their backs. I'm not sure RTD has that, and the question then comes down to Gardner, Tranter, or whoever chooses to get into bed with him. Will another producer put up with him? I think they'd give him a shot based on his money making record. How long could he go before he crashes and burns, or could he find a way to stay afloat with oddball projects? That's the real question.