Why ABC Should Cancel Marvel’s ‘Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D.’

Though it was one of the most promising shows of the 2013 television season, Marvel's Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. has been a ratings disappointment. Add in the high cost of production for the series and Walt Disney's (NYSE: DIS  ) ABC Network should cancel the superhero-less superhero series at the end of the season.

How bad are the ratings for Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D.?

After 24 weeks of the 2013-2014 broadcast television season (through Sunday, March 9), NBC is in first place among adults 18-49 with a 3.0 rating average.  Fox was second with a 2.7, and CBS was third with a 2.4 rating average, according to Zap2It, which tracks Nielsen ratings. ABC sits at the bottom of the major networks with a 2.1 in the key demographic.

S.H.I.E.L.D. started strongly -- as should any film tied to The Avengers universe -- with a 4.7 rating in the 18-49 demo and more than 12 million viewers, according to TVseriesfinale.com. Numbers quickly dropped however as the second episode fell to a 3.3 rating and 8.6 million viewers; by week 7 the rating fell to a 2.2 with 6.6 million viewers.

Over the last two weeks the bottom has truly fallen out with the show scoring a truly disastrous 1.85 with 5.4 million viewers March 4 and only a 2.14 with 5.9 million viewers on March 11, despite a heavily hyped episode featuring a character from the Thor movies.

What rating gets a show canceled?

There is no specific formula as to what rating numbers gets a show canceled. Some networks will renew low-rated shows they think have the possibility of finding more of an audience in seasons to come. This is true of Fox, which has renewed the low-rated but critically well-liked Mindy Project despite it only averaging 3.8 million viewers, and Brooklyn Nine-Nine, which pulls in 5.2 million, but also snagged a Golden Globe. 

Both of those shows are helped by being half-hour comedies (which are much cheaper to produce than an hour-long action series). Comedies also offer the possibility of finding a new audience once they hit syndication. That was part of how The Big Bang Theory went from minor success to megahit and what propelled Family Guy from canceled to perennial hit.

Still, most shows that average under 6 million viewers (and many that average more) get the boot.

CBS is likely not renewing The Crazy Ones (nearly 7 million viewers on March 6). Fox -- which is the most generous with its renewals -- even cancelled The X-Factor despite it drawing more than 6 million viewers for its finale.

(Editor's note: This article originally reported ABC had canceled Nashville. An ABC representative wrote to tell us, "The show is still very much alive and well on our network." The Fool regrets the error.) 

Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. costs too much

It's one thing to keep a low-rated comedy or reality show on the air as the costs are relatively low and the potential for ratings growth at least exists. Comedies can also get longer lives with lower ratings if the network stands to profit off them in syndication. The market for syndicating dramas where the story builds (compared to stand-alone shows like the various procedurals where each episode stands alone) is limited.  

By most standards S.H.I.E.L.D. would be a bubble show. Its ratings are bad but not disastrous though the trend has been steadily downward despite stunt casting and other gimmicks designed to spike viewership. The reason the show tips off the bubble toward cancelation is its cost.

Disney has not revealed exactly what each episode costs, but The New York Times believes it to be an expensive show to produce.

"Marvel and ABC also appear to be spending lavishly, at least initially, on visual effects to bridge the gap between the cinematic splendor of The Avengers and the small screen," the Times reported. "The first episode cost roughly $12 million to make, a princely sum for a pilot. But shooting in Paris doesn't come cheap and neither does a flying convertible, Coulson's preferred method of travel."

ABC won't cancel Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D.

While the ratings are poor and moving in an ominous direction for the costly series, ABC is unlikely to pull the plug on a show it has invested so much into. The prudent move would be to call S.H.I.E.L.D. an expesnsive failed experiment and wrap up the series -- perhaps with a two-hour finale -- at season's end.

That's not likely to happen as Disney has too much invested in the Marvel universe to give up just because the ratings versus expense would lead to pretty much any other show being canceled. Instead of canceling S.H.I.E.L.D.  ABC will likely renew the series and retool it -- something that rarely works. Expect more stunt-casting (Hey it's a guy that knows Iron Man! Is that She-Hulk?), but ultimately a show that's expensive and averages fewer than 6 million viewers won't last. 

S.H.I.E.L.D. will survive the ax this year, but its long-term prospects are bleak.

My colleague Jake Mann disagrees with me. To read his take, click here.

The $2.2 trillion war for your living room

Regardless of how long S.H.I.E.L.D., the television landscape is changing rapidly. You know cable's going away. But do you know how to profit? There's $2.2 trillion out there to be had. Currently, cable grabs a big piece of it. That won't last. And when cable falters, three companies are poised to benefit. Click here for their names. Hint: They're not Netflix, Google, and Apple.


Read/Post Comments (47) | Recommend This Article (5)

Comments from our Foolish Readers

Help us keep this a respectfully Foolish area! This is a place for our readers to discuss, debate, and learn more about the Foolish investing topic you read about above. Help us keep it clean and safe. If you believe a comment is abusive or otherwise violates our Fool's Rules, please report it via the Report this Comment Report this Comment icon found on every comment.

  • Report this Comment On March 18, 2014, at 9:55 AM, faceman wrote:

    I think it's a little too soon to be saying it should be cancelled. I can understand why some viewers gave up, and admittedly I was close to the end of my rope with it too, but the show seems to be hitting its stride. The past two or three episodes finally felt like they actually had something to do with the Marvel Universe, which made it much more engaging and entertaining to us fanboys. The good news is that because of the show's high exposure, as the buzz improves, the viewers will come back.

  • Report this Comment On March 18, 2014, at 9:55 AM, eatatjoes70 wrote:

    it will not be cancelled until Avengers 2 AoU comes out....why ? Because it is an hour long commerical for the Marvel universe movies.....it ABC/Disney are looking at the show in that way, it does not have to have monster ratings, it does not have to make money, it just has to not be a huge money loser....on top of the show itself, it has folks like you writing articles about it just about every other day....it keeps Marvel in the forefront between movie releases. Historically, a show that costs this much that is preforming so poorly would probably be cancelled, but this is kind of a new breed of marketing.

  • Report this Comment On March 18, 2014, at 10:32 AM, ickabodx wrote:

    Why cancel a show that keeps generating so much buzz. Motley Fool is writing articles about it on a weekly basis and it shows up left and right all over the internet.

    Marvel: Agents of SHIELD blaa blaa blaa

    There is no such thing as bad publicity, while not wildly successful, it's not hurting the Marvel brand and if anything it keeps pushing the Marvel name. A small loss on TV could translate to millions more gained in the movies. ABC, Marvel, Disney just need to use the vehicle better than they currently are.

  • Report this Comment On March 18, 2014, at 10:37 AM, okbob wrote:

    Daniel Kline should be cancelled first and foremost, he is missing the boat on this story and has proved his irrelevance.

  • Report this Comment On March 18, 2014, at 10:39 AM, UNCLEFRANKIE1 wrote:

    This is a great show that my whole family watches and we tape and watch it all the time. Now I don't know about how much it costs, but by entertainment value, it's worth the risk for ABC to hold onto. Besides it works well with the promotion of Marvel episodes to follow

  • Report this Comment On March 18, 2014, at 10:41 AM, RobbyT15 wrote:

    Next week you guys are going to write another article about how Agents of Shield is the greatest show on tv, just like y'all did last week. And guess what y'alls article about the show was the week before that......That's right, it was about how the show needs to be canceled. I'm not sure what kind of 'writing' y'all think you're doing, but it's extremely annoying to get online on a weekly basis and seeing completely contradicting articles about something, and they're usually written by the same person. I hope this isn't a paying job for y'all, because if it is, your boss needs to do some serious rethinking of his business model.

  • Report this Comment On March 18, 2014, at 10:44 AM, BigFED wrote:

    There may not be that huge number of watchers that the "ratings" are based on, but those ratings don't consider the dedication or loyalty to the show that these type shows attract!!! Look at some of the other SiFi shows that were cancelled and then returned or have become "cult" favorites and continue to draw fans!!!

  • Report this Comment On March 18, 2014, at 10:49 AM, BEELZOBAMA wrote:

    IF THEY WOULD SHOW SOME SUPER HEROS THE RATINGS WOULD BE HIGHER. ITS KIND OF LAME.

  • Report this Comment On March 18, 2014, at 10:49 AM, TMFAimeeD wrote:

    What is your source for ABC canceling Nashville? Haven't seen that officially yet, but maybe I'm not looking hard enough.

    Aimee

  • Report this Comment On March 18, 2014, at 10:58 AM, KJK wrote:

    Good premise for a show... I watch it along with the family.. (rare I know). Seems to plod along a bit though.

  • Report this Comment On March 18, 2014, at 10:59 AM, cubsblue23 wrote:

    Using overnights as numbers for ratings is just wrong. Trying to make your case on false numbers is something any money man should know is wrong. This show is consistently #1 in it's time slot. it dethroned NCIS on several occasions. I know now not to listen to a thing this author puts out. He has no credibility.

  • Report this Comment On March 18, 2014, at 11:00 AM, alleyman82 wrote:

    Everyone seems to forget on demand. There are several shows I will watch that way, in groups of two or 3 episodes at a time. The season finale I'll record Which might register with the ratings industry but the OD will not at least not until the end of the year. So these ratings #'s are only guidelines at best.

  • Report this Comment On March 18, 2014, at 11:12 AM, GStrange wrote:

    I don't think anyone wants to see this show cancelled other than a few rabid DC fanboys at the Fool.

  • Report this Comment On March 18, 2014, at 11:24 AM, Notime wrote:

    Motley Fool has been negative on Agents of Shield since day 1. I am not sure why? The show has drug some but recently has gotten better. I like the show. I feel that if it was on a different night or time slot it would draw much bigger ratings. It has done the best of any show in the current time spot against NCIS. I don't think the ratings cover the DVR and HULU plus viewers. I know that when my wife is home we watch NCIS and I watch Agents of Shield the next morning. I just feel you need to give the show a break.

  • Report this Comment On March 18, 2014, at 11:50 AM, jtoots2 wrote:

    not everyone has the option to be in front of the tube on any given night my work changes like baby diapers so i dvr-it does that still count as one of the viewers for the ratings, if not then take that into consideration for why ratings on that night might not be high.

  • Report this Comment On March 18, 2014, at 12:15 PM, Shauna12 wrote:

    My biggest beef with TV networks is that they don't seem to keep their own schedule regular anymore. I went to watch "SHIELD" a few weeks ago and found that it was not airing that night in favor of some other show. Then, it came back last week and it was great. I've found the same with "Almost Human" and "Sleepy Hollow" on FOX. They've got an interesting story line, but it seems like they get skipped in favor of some other shows that have long since jumped the shark, like "American Idol" or "Bones". I realize this is my personal taste, but you can't cancel a show after one season because "only" 6 million viewers are watching it. With streaming, people's habits have changed. It doesn't mean that they don't want to see the show cancelled.

  • Report this Comment On March 18, 2014, at 12:20 PM, smhikida wrote:

    Two things to consider: (1) Tuesday @ 8pm EST Agents of Shield faces #1 drama NCIS. Why not move the time slot to a much weaker Thurs @ 8pm? (2) There is no good tracking mechanism for how many people watch it later on DVR or Hulu+, but I'd guess there's a sizable following.

    As a point of fact to the reader responders, there are several analysts who comment on Agents, and their reviews are mixed. Some like it (Tim Beyers & Jake Mann) and some don't (Daniel Kline and someone who I can't remember).

  • Report this Comment On March 18, 2014, at 12:24 PM, CindyGale wrote:

    There is very few shows on ABC I watch. It doesn't help because ABC has very quick trigger finger on canceling shows.

    I just went to abc.com to see a list of their shows and I'm only watching a few: Castle, Modern Family, The Neighbors and Shield.

    I like SHIELD, and am curious what happens next...

  • Report this Comment On March 18, 2014, at 12:29 PM, HerbieJPilato wrote:

    And nobody cares about it because it doesn't have any SUPERHEROES!!!!!!

  • Report this Comment On March 18, 2014, at 12:31 PM, mranney wrote:

    ABC is the worst at counter programming. Why would you put your new, big action/drama up against a proven action/drama like NCIS. Counter program with something like Once Upon a Time or Shark Tank to give viewers a choice. SHIELD would have killed Undercover Boss and NBCs American Dream Builder on Friday nights and been a huge success.

    Counter programming should be just that. Not a battle of two giants. Offer something else for viewers to watch that might not want to watch NCIS. Too many shows have died because the networks are too busy boxing instead of playing chess.

  • Report this Comment On March 18, 2014, at 12:57 PM, Facer5 wrote:

    The problem with this show is the slot. They should move it.

  • Report this Comment On March 18, 2014, at 1:02 PM, davidg25 wrote:

    I really hope they do not cancel this show. To be honest the show over the last couple of weeks has gotten much better. They have incorporated more of the Marvel Universe and have began to develop some intriguing plots.

    The one fault I had given the show at the start was the acting of most of the initial core S.H.I.E.L.D. team. Now that they have brought in some actors who can actually act and the actors who I shall not call out specifically seem to be more compartmentalized into their roles in the show, which in turn does not call attention to their lack of acting skills.

    I think they have a real chance to take advantage of continuing the stories and filling in some of the back stories of all of the new movies planned. It is one of the shows which I look forward to each week and I am interested on where the show is heading for the future.

  • Report this Comment On March 18, 2014, at 1:25 PM, shamx wrote:

    For those of you suggesting another timeslot might not be he best thing. Thursday has TBBT at 8, Wednesday has the growing Revolution, people aren't home on Fridays, they might be able to takeover Mondays once HIMYM goes off air.

  • Report this Comment On March 18, 2014, at 1:40 PM, xbimpyx wrote:

    1: ABC's president already said AOS is coming back.

    How about you should stop writing snarkfest and stop watching AOS if you don't like it. I don't like 99% of sitcoms except Goldbergs but you don't see me saying they should be canceled and suck. I don't like Scandal Grimm Once Upon a Time Arrow and Revenge but do I still make hate articles? Nope. Want to know why? Because it's pointless.

    Just because you are unable to see where AOS is headed and you don't like the WH13-esquie style doesn't mean you have to spam us your feelings. We get it. you dont like it. No stop watching it. God. Sick of these hate articles

  • Report this Comment On March 18, 2014, at 2:20 PM, Aldirick wrote:

    Here are the reasons why ABC will not cancel Agents of Shield:

    1, they own the property, Marvel is theirs and Coulson is a name known to everyone through the Marvel movies.

    2, the person in charge of the show, Joss Whedon, is working on a second Avengers movie and seeing what all else is happening in the rest of the Marvel Universe. He will likely put crumbs in for what will happen in the movies and put details in the show that did not appear in the movies.

    3, they have introduced several villains in the show that will appear later, Graviton, Blizzard, Deathlok. The last being a person that was saved by them and then allowed to fall into the enemies hands. The story of how they save him and allow him to become a hero again is a long term storyline that I am looking to follow.

    4, if and when Disney/Marvel gain back the rights to the X-Men, Fantastic Four and Spider-man, where do you think they will show that off to the public first? The show gives them the platform of greatest ease and allows them to announce it to a greater audience than a movie screen.

    5, and lastly, Coulson was dead, Sif even had a reaction to seeing him up and about. Imagine the reaction of any of the other members of the Avenger's when they learn this. The ramifications would be best seen in the show, not the big screen.

  • Report this Comment On March 18, 2014, at 2:25 PM, Snarf wrote:

    It's a loss-leader for Disney--they'll recoup the money invested in the series with each new Avengers movie, and then some. Essentially it's the same formula Walt used back in the day with the weekly Disney series that drew people into the theme parks. Create the buzz over a long period of time. It will work even better now, because the movies will in turn drive DVD sales of the series. No way this series is going anywhere.

  • Report this Comment On March 18, 2014, at 2:32 PM, mando0198 wrote:

    I think what you are forgetting at Motley Fool is that Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. was never supposed to be about superheroes. I read these articles each week, and every time someone mentions that the superhero show has no superheroes on it. Yet, Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. was not about the superheroes, and it was billed that way since it was conceptualized. This show was about ordinary people dealing with extraordinary threats (things like EXTREMIS tech and 084s, all which have been mentioned numerous times and have been the focus of several episodes). This show was not about having the Avengers pop in every other episode, but about normal people trying to keep law and order in a world filled with superheroes and villains. In that aspect, the show has succeeded tremendously, and at a steady 6 million viewers a week (not counting those who rely on DVR, Hulu, or other ways of watching the show each week), I highly doubt Disney will give it up.

  • Report this Comment On March 18, 2014, at 4:41 PM, Richardragan wrote:

    this Kline guy is a dummy. AoS is one of the best shows on TV and its getting better and better every week. Kline loves idol and dancing with the stars two of the dumbest shows on TV .If He gets his way he would replace it with some real life show like gay honeymooners or something dumber .

  • Report this Comment On March 18, 2014, at 5:18 PM, macanoodough wrote:

    Reading these comments, some very good points. Of course I have my own humble....

    But I agree that the choppy schedule does not help the cause. Airing reruns in like week 6 was a bad idea, like, "who's gonna lose their job" bad idea. You simply do not delay a new show like that. Then, 2 weeks after new episodes aired, "See you Feb.....For the a new episode" Ouch!

    For a show that drags its feet and repeats the same dialogue among the major cast members over and over, repeats are driving the nails into the coffin. Notice the slight spike in ratings? Maybe not all to do with tricks and cameos, maybe, just maybe that's what happens when you run new episodes of a new show advancing it's story line. I disagree that this show is not a superhero show, maybe not Marvels most powerful, but SHEILD was a comic, with more grounded, less "super" heros with a compelling story line that I would imagine makes for awesome TV. And yes, there was only the occasional, "Thanks for showing up at the perfect time to save our butts Iron Man/Thor/etc..", that begs for a 2 times a season 30 seconds of our favorite CGI superhero (movie coming out in a week or 2).

    Problem is, with this production... or I should write "The problem is with this production". First few weeks we were introduced to characters and never followed up and some cool "one off's". The new characters should have re-appeared right away, but didn't. By the time they did, the show was off air a few weeks, other non-connected episodes aired and I barely remembered who anyone was anymore. There are still some or at least one I imagine will also re-appear in this self indulgent manner, but should not have been introduced until the originals resurfaced and we continue pursuing the Clairvoyant a little bit. This is not Marvelesque or any comicesque. Marvel did not get big keeping its villains a mystery, comics sold and the movie sells when you show them ( just ask the Eric Bana Hulk what happens to sales when you never show main characters) Studios learned to not sell their international rights so cheaply with these moves just to keep from losing money.

    Keep the mystery a week or 4, not 16. And what about Skye, what's her connection to SHEILD, all good questions and I dont expect all the answers, but I expect something,. Surprise me or whatever but don't give me nothing at all. And again, if they're waiting till seasons end to dump a load on us.....Ugh! How drone, uncreative and serial! I say un, because it would actually negate some other creativity in the universe. Wrap ups require set ups.

    A major network a series has 17-24 episodes a season. WOW! How confusing to start multiple conflicts and sub conflicts without resolving a single one. How many hangers do you want at seasons end if you don't unload??? To me, this is spitting in the face of the viewers either way. This is why the ratings suffer too. You certainly do not go from 12 to 5 for a single reason or because of one guy.

    As for re-tooling? I think it would work for this show because they are not going to make it on its current course. So if they cry interference and pick up their toys and go home, throw the plan away and get with the CGI'ed weekly superhero showdown for season 2. But they will just do that with the other new shows in the works and can this one upon the aforementioned's Premier season. In any event, it's way too far down the line to fix season 1. With Avengers 2 in the pipe, I'd bet all shooting for season 1 is done or finishing up now, so only a time warp from Superman 1 can save them now, but he is DC so.........

  • Report this Comment On March 18, 2014, at 6:00 PM, NinjinSteve wrote:

    How does a show that is so expensive to produce, look so bad and cheap? Are they spending all the money on those cheesy 3 second CGI shots of the plane?

    The X-files, a show that first aired 20 years ago looks better than Shield. Even LOST, from only 10 years ago and on the same network looked fantastic.

    So why does a show on a major network, with tons of money behind it, look like a cheap Sci-fi channel series from the 90s?

    I'm not even mentioning the writing/story, which fluctuates from awful to actually pretty decent.

  • Report this Comment On March 18, 2014, at 6:06 PM, Robarino wrote:

    So now Motley Fool is passing out their worthless advice on television programming???!

  • Report this Comment On March 18, 2014, at 6:33 PM, vicman wrote:

    Is Walt Disney really loosing money woth MAoS? What about the potential DVD sales? The Motley Fool should stick with trying to get people to believe that they (and by extension athe rest of this post-manufacturing economy) isn't just a house of cards that can be destroyed by a few well placed words.

  • Report this Comment On March 18, 2014, at 6:41 PM, msorrentino wrote:

    1) Ratings don't mean a thing if they account for the 1% of viewers who watch the show on TV; I watch it on hulu.com and I suspect that many of the fans of the show are like me and watch the show through other means (preferably legal ones)

    2) The show isn't a superhero show like Arrow, it's a show about the ordinary guy aka Coulson living in & dealing with the world of superheroes.

    3) I prefer quality over quantity, I would rather have Disney pump in $12 million an episode for Agents of SHIELD than have them waste $5 million across an entire season of a show that serves as filler between episodes of popular shows.

    4) I watch only four shows from ABC: Agents of SHIELD, Last Man Standing, Once Upon a Time and Once Upon a Time in Wonderland. If ABC announced tomorrow that they were canceling every show on their network besides those four I wouldn't care.

    5) We live in the on demand age, eventually the networks will catch up and allow those of us who want to watch a particular show do so at anytime, on any service (Netflix/Hulu) and pay for the show in whatever way we choose (subscription service, pay per episode, pay per series, etc.). Case in point, there are services such as Kickstarter and Patreon that allow fans to donate however much they choose towards a product/project they wish to see continue or come into existence. An example is cordkillers.com , they fund their entire show off of fan donations.

  • Report this Comment On March 18, 2014, at 6:44 PM, msorrentino wrote:

    ^ to add to my above comment, the one bad part of Agents of SHIELD is the pacing. The writers act as if they are interweaving multiple plot lines together when in actuality they are jumping back and forth between plot lines. They should instead push each plot line forward a certain amount per episode.

  • Report this Comment On March 18, 2014, at 10:44 PM, iwillnottrade wrote:

    I would agree with the other commentators that The Fool continues to deliver news after news of SHIELD, but the key thing is that SHIELD suffers from not being able to introduce and involve enough Marvel characters unlike the CW's Arrow, which is at an all-time high in both viewership and rating. I understand that it is impossible for them to bring the major Marvel characters, but why not bring others into the mix? The roster in Marvel is HUGE! Moon Knight, Cloak & Dagger, Spider-Woman, Thunderbolts, Alpha Flight, Black Panther, Deadpool, the list goes on.

  • Report this Comment On March 19, 2014, at 12:56 AM, hectoruno wrote:

    Why are the numbers always being compared to NCIS. Compare the numbers to Arrow and you will see that a lot more people watch Agents of Shield than Arrow. Arrow is being called a hit and bringing in a spin off but it rarely if ever had 5 million viewers. Yes 12 million to 5 million is a huge drop but 5 million is a good number.

  • Report this Comment On March 19, 2014, at 2:15 AM, FinAlyn wrote:

    So because the pilot, which has been nothing like any of the other shows in terms of CGI usage or other special effects, cost $12 million, the series must cost a lot? Have you even watched the show?? One of the problems with it is how incredibly cheap it looks. It comes across as "Bargain Basement SHIELD, Get Your Gear and Vehicles Cheap!" The location shoots look like they drove out to Valencia when I'm supposed to believe it's Peru, or Russia, or Malta. That's one of the main problems with the show.

  • Report this Comment On March 19, 2014, at 10:10 AM, SeamusMcTodd wrote:

    Way to completely ignore the big picture. On its own this show may look like a failure, may be losing money, etc. But you have to view it as Disney/Marvel view it, as part of a larger Marvel Universe (or as an hour-long weekly commercial for that Universe). The hundreds of millions of dollars of profit made on Avengers alone would cover the cost of this show for a long time to come. I guarantee you that the powers that be are in no hurry to cancel Agents of SHIELD and shrink their media profile.

  • Report this Comment On March 19, 2014, at 1:06 PM, kwijino wrote:

    Long time read, first time poster. Why has the Fool gotten so negative?

    Seems every article is about the death of this, you shouldn't do that, and now, cancel this. What's going on? Someone need a hug over there?

  • Report this Comment On March 19, 2014, at 7:35 PM, girlwithaheart wrote:

    My hubby and I love this show...why are all these critics so negative with this show...same with Alphas. ..I loved that show and it got canceled ....I was soooo pissed off...but anyways I love how the show is really starting to connect it to the Marvel Universe more....anyways this show needs to stay on and keep it going for the real marvel fangirls and fanboys.

  • Report this Comment On March 19, 2014, at 8:02 PM, delfra wrote:

    Dude you sound like you from a rival studio or something. You're also complaining like a woman where I can't tell if you're Daniel or Danielle haha. If Disney we're impatient and inconsiderate like you sound, the MCU probably would have never got off the ground and hit the big screen. Has AOS been a flawless show, not by any means but it's a pretty good show with upside that you fail to see.

  • Report this Comment On March 20, 2014, at 1:31 AM, JKR wrote:

    I think someone else said that ratings don't matter unless the movies themselves start failing. Everything that happens in shield also happens in these movies. For example, the cure that brought Coulsen back to life in the tv show could very well be the plotline in bringing back the winter soldier or possibly Fury (rumored to die in Cap 2). Deathlok could also be cameoing in a film or two as well. I don't know if they'll cancel AoS (i'm not a mindreader) but the tv show does appear to help hype the movies.

  • Report this Comment On March 20, 2014, at 1:43 AM, shack wrote:

    Every week I read of why the show is bad but I enjoy the show and it builds as it goes. Writing why its not a home run every week seems like a attention grab by this motley fool. Do you ever read a whole book or just look at the pictures. By your logic there should not be a back story and just a flash in the pan episode. Stories need to build. BSG or breaking bad would of been cancelled first season with your logic.

  • Report this Comment On March 20, 2014, at 1:58 AM, macanoodough wrote:

    More people are posting about the posts than the article. Its great the show sparks the passion, but it doesnt make it a good show. Numbers do and the numbers support those here that are negative about the show. The internet buzz is overwhelming negative, but with validity. I havent seen too many jerks, if any. Everyone watches, then complains cause they feel let down, big time. But maybe the producers will respond by sprucing up the show a little. Overall I like the show, but I love Marvel, anything Marvel. So if a person like me merely "likes" it, it's bad. It seems to me the show is run by ego. Last night Assmebling a Universe aired and I dont know if it was a last minute decision, but AoS was heavily downplayed, as if they don't desperately need some hype right now. That may be an indicator of little hope left by the network because only a couple of weeks ago it was reported that AoS would feature heavily in that special because it was the thread that would tie the movies together. It got less time than the shorts no even knew existed.

    Simply put, a show that starts with 1 million viewers and ends its first season with 12 is what is known as a "Hit" and a show that starts with 12 million viewers and ends with 1 goes off the air. Period, end of story, the fat lady sings!

    ABC Just slated May 13th as the end of the season. That give Joss 8 more episodes to pull this thing from the jaws of certain death and only the negativity from the viewers can motivate him to do that.

  • Report this Comment On March 20, 2014, at 9:05 AM, jerseyclark wrote:

    First of how about not put it on a night when it's up against NCIS. Dummies over at ABC /Disney. Make it on a night when even cable has nothing but junk on. You have a show up against America's number one show. Thursday thru Saturday absolute garbage. Second Where do they get this crap I know they never asked myself or my friend if we watch. There for their count is completely not valid. Third most of the greatest shows only have one season. All the good stuff goes by the way side while garbage is spewed to the sheep's of the world.

  • Report this Comment On March 20, 2014, at 2:09 PM, msorrentino wrote:

    Another thing with the logic of this article's writer, the revived Doctor Who series would have been canceled under Steven Moffat. Some of the episodes that have been made by Steven Moffat were not what they could have been, those episodes were quite literally saved solely by the acting of Matt Smith (11th Doctor) and the various actors who portrayed his various companions. I mean they were given some real bombs, yet managed to still make the episode enjoyable for what it was. Case in point, the final episodes of both season 5 & 6 (The Pandorica Opens/The Big Bang & The Wedding of River Song) effectively relied on the same plot element, use time travel mechanics to make the events never happen. That is lazy writing and Doctor Who deserves better, in fact Steven Moffat has been the only writer to emphasize the fact that the Doctor travels through time. Most of the writers merely use the time travel as a plot element to explain how the Doctor gets from point A to B, Steven Moffat on the other hand used it as a method for through which the Doctor saves the day, something that previous writers straight up attempted to avoid.

    My point is that some episodes will have good writers and some will have bad writers, but that isn't a reason to condemn the entire show. Besides when it comes to shows like Doctor Who and Agents of SHIELD (along with most TV shows), the whole is always greater than the sum of its parts.

  • Report this Comment On April 30, 2014, at 4:50 PM, jd2134 wrote:

    But how accurate is neilson ratings. There are people watching these shows over their computers which Neilson i dont think records.

Add your comment.

Sponsored Links

Leaked: Apple's Next Smart Device
(Warning, it may shock you)
The secret is out... experts are predicting 458 million of these types of devices will be sold per year. 1 hyper-growth company stands to rake in maximum profit - and it's NOT Apple. Show me Apple's new smart gizmo!

DocumentId: 2878351, ~/Articles/ArticleHandler.aspx, 8/28/2014 3:14:05 AM

Report This Comment

Use this area to report a comment that you believe is in violation of the community guidelines. Our team will review the entry and take any appropriate action.

Sending report...


Advertisement