You all won't belive this!

[Hunter]

Here is a hint first: Flatline! Clear! (Thump!) We've got a
heartbeat! Prep for possible transfusion crossover episodes from
"Grey's Anatomy!"
Non-spoiler space:
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
..
This is from the hardcover issue of the new TV Guide double issue,
The January 26 to February 8, 2009 one on page 14 (with the new First
Couple on the cover) under the "Breaking News" section in the article
"Coming Soon to a TV Near You:"

"ER To Continue?

Could ER be resuscitated after its series finale on NBC? Executive
producer John Wells confirmed to TV Guide that he received a call
from ABC entertainment president Stephen McPherson about the
possibility of picking up ER right after NBC announced it was getting
out of the 10pm drama business next fall to make room for a new
nightly show for Jay Leno. Wells is skeptical a move will happen--
he's even budgeted bulldozing the show's sets--but 'you never say
never,' he says. Even if ABC picks up the show, Wells says he
wouldn't change the planned ER finale on NBC. "I've been crafting an
ending for two years."

Heck I would watch. ER maybe even successful again "JAG became a hit
after it left NBC after its first season. Of course the big
difference is that ER is in its 15th season, but hey if the original
"Law & Order" ("The Mothership" to us L&O fans) can last 19 seasons
why not "ER"? LOL!

The possibility of crossover episodes with "Grey's Anatomy" which
airs on ABC, was strictly my idea of course. I think Dr. Yang and Dr.
Rasgotra could get along. Both are highly technical surgeons with
poor bedside manner-well at least Neela used to have poor bedside
manner. She has improved a lot over the years. Christina is only now
starting to get a feel for her patients. Of course this assumes Neela
stays at county here dreams may literally take her elsewhere.

[Mason Barge]

Post by Hunter
Here is a hint first: Flatline! Clear! (Thump!) We've got a
heartbeat! Prep for possible transfusion crossover episodes from
"Grey's Anatomy!"
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..

I wondered (out loud) about why NBC would cancel "ER" when it was still
getting ratings higher than so many of its other shows. It's age -- the
sole reason given for its cancellation - seems to me to be prejudice
defeating observation.

[David]

On Wed, 21 Jan 2009 10:27:12 -0500, "Mason Barge"

Post by Mason Barge
I wondered (out loud) about why NBC would cancel "ER" when it was still
getting ratings higher than so many of its other shows. It's age -- the
sole reason given for its cancellation - seems to me to be prejudice
defeating observation.

In television "old" means "too expensive to keep it going." Everyone
starts out signed to seven-year deals. After that everything except
the most popular shows becomes too expensive. Sometimes the network
and studio strike a balance where they can both keep making money but
it's amazing that "ER"s managed to this long.

[Mason Barge]

Post by David
On Wed, 21 Jan 2009 10:27:12 -0500, "Mason Barge"

Post by Mason Barge
I wondered (out loud) about why NBC would cancel "ER" when it was still
getting ratings higher than so many of its other shows. It's age -- the
sole reason given for its cancellation - seems to me to be prejudice
defeating observation.

In television "old" means "too expensive to keep it going." Everyone
starts out signed to seven-year deals. After that everything except
the most popular shows becomes too expensive. Sometimes the network
and studio strike a balance where they can both keep making money but
it's amazing that "ER"s managed to this long.

Okay, but am I wrong that "too expensive" means primarily that the main
stars' salaries have gotten astronomical? Which is how ER and L&O keep
going -- let 'em leave and get some new ones.

Also, there has to be some economy of time, such as sets all built, everyone
knowing what they're doing, less infighting over control and direction, some
other stuff.

[David]

On Wed, 21 Jan 2009 11:08:10 -0500, "Mason Barge"

Post by Mason Barge

Post by David
On Wed, 21 Jan 2009 10:27:12 -0500, "Mason Barge"

Post by Mason Barge
I wondered (out loud) about why NBC would cancel "ER" when it was still
getting ratings higher than so many of its other shows. It's age -- the
sole reason given for its cancellation - seems to me to be prejudice
defeating observation.

In television "old" means "too expensive to keep it going." Everyone
starts out signed to seven-year deals. After that everything except
the most popular shows becomes too expensive. Sometimes the network
and studio strike a balance where they can both keep making money but
it's amazing that "ER"s managed to this long.

Okay, but am I wrong that "too expensive" means primarily that the main
stars' salaries have gotten astronomical? Which is how ER and L&O keep
going -- let 'em leave and get some new ones.

Everyone who's been there from the beginning will want a raise and
promotion to head writer or producer or get a chance to direct. It's
how these shows end up with opening credits that last until the first
commercial break.

Post by Mason Barge
Also, there has to be some economy of time, such as sets all built, everyone
knowing what they're doing, less infighting over control and direction, some
other stuff.

They could save the set since another medical show is inevitable. Or
they probably could sell off the medical equipment.

[Obveeus]

Post by David
On Wed, 21 Jan 2009 11:08:10 -0500, "Mason Barge"

Post by Mason Barge
Okay, but am I wrong that "too expensive" means primarily that the main
stars' salaries have gotten astronomical? Which is how ER and L&O keep
going -- let 'em leave and get some new ones.

Everyone who's been there from the beginning will want a raise and
promotion to head writer or producer or get a chance to direct. It's
how these shows end up with opening credits that last until the first
commercial break.

The writers, cameramen, etc... all have turnover the same as the cast on ER.
I'd bet that at least 50% of the one hour dramas on network TV today cost
the network more per episode this year than ER.

Post by David

Post by Mason Barge
Also, there has to be some economy of time, such as sets all built, everyone
knowing what they're doing, less infighting over control and direction, some
other stuff.

They could save the set since another medical show is inevitable.

Or they could run a bulldozer through the set like they did with According
to Jim.

[David]

Post by Obveeus

Post by David
On Wed, 21 Jan 2009 11:08:10 -0500, "Mason Barge"

Post by Mason Barge
Okay, but am I wrong that "too expensive" means primarily that the main
stars' salaries have gotten astronomical? Which is how ER and L&O keep
going -- let 'em leave and get some new ones.

Everyone who's been there from the beginning will want a raise and
promotion to head writer or producer or get a chance to direct. It's
how these shows end up with opening credits that last until the first
commercial break.

The writers, cameramen, etc... all have turnover the same as the cast on ER.

I don't know about that. It would have to be a really crappy union to
allow Warner Bros to turn over their staff that often.

Post by Obveeus
I'd bet that at least 50% of the one hour dramas on network TV today cost
the network more per episode this year than ER.

Post by David

Post by Mason Barge
Also, there has to be some economy of time, such as sets all built, everyone
knowing what they're doing, less infighting over control and direction, some
other stuff.

They could save the set since another medical show is inevitable.

Or they could run a bulldozer through the set like they did with According
to Jim.

If you've heard something I haven't this is a hell of a way to break
the news to me :-(

[Obveeus]

Post by David

Post by Obveeus
The writers, cameramen, etc... all have turnover the same as the cast on ER.

I don't know about that. It would have to be a really crappy union to
allow Warner Bros to turn over their staff that often.

People get board with jobs after 5-10 years and often want to move on. It
isn't like all the on-air tallent was replaced to lower costs, many of them
simply wanted to do something other than the same role on the same set
everyday.

Post by David

Post by Obveeus
Or they could run a bulldozer through the set like they did with According
to Jim.

If you've heard something I haven't this is a hell of a way to break
the news to me :-(

If it makes you feel batter, 'Til Death was renewed.

[David]

Post by Obveeus

Post by David

Post by Obveeus
The writers, cameramen, etc... all have turnover the same as the cast on ER.

I don't know about that. It would have to be a really crappy union to
allow Warner Bros to turn over their staff that often.

People get board with jobs after 5-10 years and often want to move on. It
isn't like all the on-air tallent was replaced to lower costs, many of them
simply wanted to do something other than the same role on the same set
everyday.

Cameramen and on-air talent probably don't leave for the same reasons.
Casmeramen don't think they're going to break through in movies or
leave multi-camera sitcoms to become stars in single-camera shows.

Post by Obveeus

Post by David

Post by Obveeus
Or they could run a bulldozer through the set like they did with According
to Jim.

If you've heard something I haven't this is a hell of a way to break
the news to me :-(

If it makes you feel batter, 'Til Death was renewed.

But why can't I have both!?!

[Obveeus]

Post by David

Post by Obveeus
People get board with jobs after 5-10 years and often want to move on. It
isn't like all the on-air tallent was replaced to lower costs, many of them
simply wanted to do something other than the same role on the same set
everyday.

Cameramen and on-air talent probably don't leave for the same reasons.
Casmeramen don't think they're going to break through in movies or
leave multi-camera sitcoms to become stars in single-camera shows.

They still get sick of co-workers or the city they live in or the lack of
new equipment they are working with or...
People move on to different jobs for lots of reasons. If you had to stare
at Law&Order 15 hours per day, every day for the last 19 years you would
understand.

Post by David

Post by Obveeus

Post by David

Post by Obveeus
Or they could run a bulldozer through the set like they did with According
to Jim.

If you've heard something I haven't this is a hell of a way to break
the news to me :-(

If it makes you feel batter, 'Til Death was renewed.

But why can't I have both!?!

this is only the second level of Hell. If you want both According to Jim
and 'Til Death next year, you have to dig your way down another level.

[David]

Post by Obveeus

Post by David

Post by Obveeus
People get board with jobs after 5-10 years and often want to move on. It
isn't like all the on-air tallent was replaced to lower costs, many of them
simply wanted to do something other than the same role on the same set
everyday.

Cameramen and on-air talent probably don't leave for the same reasons.
Casmeramen don't think they're going to break through in movies or
leave multi-camera sitcoms to become stars in single-camera shows.

They still get sick of co-workers or the city they live in or the lack of
new equipment they are working with or...
People move on to different jobs for lots of reasons. If you had to stare
at Law&Order 15 hours per day, every day for the last 19 years you would
understand.

I don't believe there could be as much turnover behind the scenes as
there is with the actors. No workforce could be 80-90% new every five
years. And I'd guess it's beneficial even for cameramen to stay on
successful shows. If producers on "ER" earn much more than producers
on "Chuck" it would be piggish for them to not trickle down the
prosperity.

Post by Obveeus

Post by David

Post by Obveeus

Post by David

Post by Obveeus
Or they could run a bulldozer through the set like they did with According
to Jim.

If you've heard something I haven't this is a hell of a way to break
the news to me :-(

If it makes you feel batter, 'Til Death was renewed.

But why can't I have both!?!

this is only the second level of Hell. If you want both According to Jim
and 'Til Death next year, you have to dig your way down another level.

Really, second? Feel more like level four, fiveish.

[Mason Barge]

Post by Obveeus

Post by David

Post by Obveeus
The writers, cameramen, etc... all have turnover the same as the cast on ER.

I don't know about that. It would have to be a really crappy union to
allow Warner Bros to turn over their staff that often.

People get board with jobs after 5-10 years and often want to move on. It
isn't like all the on-air tallent was replaced to lower costs, many of
them simply wanted to do something other than the same role on the same
set everyday.

I actually saw, just last week, some interviews with craft and production
employees who had been on Law and Order since the first show. They loved
their jobs.

I can't recall where it was, but it would make sense that it was on NBC. Or
it conceivably could have been on the internet. If I think of it or see it
again, I'll post more info.

One thing about union employees: Employers don't necessarily feel an
obligation to give them an annual raise outside the contract. I'm not
saying this applies so much to higher-level SAG or WGA people with ongoing
relationships, but it does to personnel in trades/crafts.

[Pete B]

In article <***@4ax.com>, dimlan17
@yahoo.com says...

Post by David
On Wed, 21 Jan 2009 11:08:10 -0500, "Mason Barge"

Post by Mason Barge

Post by David
On Wed, 21 Jan 2009 10:27:12 -0500, "Mason Barge"

Post by Mason Barge
I wondered (out loud) about why NBC would cancel "ER" when it was still
getting ratings higher than so many of its other shows. It's age -- the
sole reason given for its cancellation - seems to me to be prejudice
defeating observation.

In television "old" means "too expensive to keep it going." Everyone
starts out signed to seven-year deals. After that everything except
the most popular shows becomes too expensive. Sometimes the network
and studio strike a balance where they can both keep making money but
it's amazing that "ER"s managed to this long.

Okay, but am I wrong that "too expensive" means primarily that the main
stars' salaries have gotten astronomical? Which is how ER and L&O keep
going -- let 'em leave and get some new ones.

Everyone who's been there from the beginning will want a raise and
promotion to head writer or producer or get a chance to direct. It's
how these shows end up with opening credits that last until the first
commercial break.

Surely not everyone, some must be content with doing what they do well -
and if not sack them! (Just look at the stargate "franchise" going down
the drain because eventually the catering guy ends up producer.)

[David E. Milligan]

Post by David
On Wed, 21 Jan 2009 11:08:10 -0500, "Mason Barge"

Post by Mason Barge

Post by David
On Wed, 21 Jan 2009 10:27:12 -0500, "Mason Barge"

Post by Mason Barge
I wondered (out loud) about why NBC would cancel "ER" when it was still
getting ratings higher than so many of its other shows. It's age -- the
sole reason given for its cancellation - seems to me to be prejudice
defeating observation.

In television "old" means "too expensive to keep it going." Everyone
starts out signed to seven-year deals. After that everything except
the most popular shows becomes too expensive. Sometimes the network
and studio strike a balance where they can both keep making money but
it's amazing that "ER"s managed to this long.

Okay, but am I wrong that "too expensive" means primarily that the main
stars' salaries have gotten astronomical? Which is how ER and L&O keep
going -- let 'em leave and get some new ones.

Everyone who's been there from the beginning will want a raise and
promotion to head writer or producer or get a chance to direct. It's
how these shows end up with opening credits that last until the first
commercial break.

Post by Mason Barge
Also, there has to be some economy of time, such as sets all built, everyone
knowing what they're doing, less infighting over control and direction, some
other stuff.

They could save the set since another medical show is inevitable. Or
they probably could sell off the medical equipment.

I may be remembering wrong, but it seems to me that Shiri Appleby (Daria) said in an
interview that the set was either an unused wing of a hospital, or a hospital that had been closed
down.

[David]

On Wed, 21 Jan 2009 21:11:26 -0500, "David E. Milligan"

Post by David E. Milligan

Post by David
They could save the set since another medical show is inevitable. Or
they probably could sell off the medical equipment.

I may be remembering wrong, but it seems to me that Shiri Appleby (Daria) said in an
interview that the set was either an unused wing of a hospital, or a hospital that had been closed
down.

Wikipedia says the pilot was filmed in an abandoned hospital but the
show films on a soundstage.

Now "Scrubs" does film in a hospital.

[David E. Milligan]

Post by David
On Wed, 21 Jan 2009 21:11:26 -0500, "David E. Milligan"

Post by David E. Milligan

Post by David
They could save the set since another medical show is inevitable. Or
they probably could sell off the medical equipment.

I may be remembering wrong, but it seems to me that Shiri Appleby (Daria) said in an
interview that the set was either an unused wing of a hospital, or a hospital that had been
closed
down.

Wikipedia says the pilot was filmed in an abandoned hospital but the
show films on a soundstage.
Now "Scrubs" does film in a hospital.

Guess I was remembering both and combining them.

[Obveeus]

Post by David E. Milligan

Post by David
Wikipedia says the pilot was filmed in an abandoned hospital but the
show films on a soundstage.
Now "Scrubs" does film in a hospital.

Guess I was remembering both and combining them.

NBC just picked up a pilot called 'Mercy' about 3 nurses.
See, it didn't take long for them to find a way to get future value out of
all those ER props/sets.

[Hunter]

Post by David
On Wed, 21 Jan 2009 10:27:12 -0500, "Mason Barge"

Post by Mason Barge
I wondered (out loud) about why NBC would cancel "ER" when it was still
getting ratings higher than so many of its other shows. It's age -- the
sole reason given for its cancellation - seems to me to be prejudice
defeating observation.

In television "old" means "too expensive to keep it going." Everyone
starts out signed to seven-year deals. After that everything except
the most popular shows becomes too expensive. Sometimes the network
and studio strike a balance where they can both keep making money but
it's amazing that "ER"s managed to this long.

----
It is the same reason all very long running (I would guess 10 years
and more) shows keep going: Main cast turn over. In both "ER" and
"Law & Order" virtually none of the original cast is still there on
the two shows and NONE of the main characters of either show. On the
practical side you have a new set of characters with relatively cheap
contracts, while it also puts a touch of realism in the shows to have
such turn over.

[Mason Barge]

Post by Hunter

Post by David
On Wed, 21 Jan 2009 10:27:12 -0500, "Mason Barge"

Post by Mason Barge
I wondered (out loud) about why NBC would cancel "ER" when it was still
getting ratings higher than so many of its other shows. It's age -- the
sole reason given for its cancellation - seems to me to be prejudice
defeating observation.

In television "old" means "too expensive to keep it going." Everyone
starts out signed to seven-year deals. After that everything except
the most popular shows becomes too expensive. Sometimes the network
and studio strike a balance where they can both keep making money but
it's amazing that "ER"s managed to this long.

----
It is the same reason all very long running (I would guess 10 years
and more) shows keep going: Main cast turn over.

Yeah! Just look at Gunsmoke! ;)

[Hunter]

Post by Mason Barge

Post by Hunter

Post by David
On Wed, 21 Jan 2009 10:27:12 -0500, "Mason Barge"

Post by Mason Barge
I wondered (out loud) about why NBC would cancel "ER" when it was still
getting ratings higher than so many of its other shows. It's age -- the
sole reason given for its cancellation - seems to me to be prejudice
defeating observation.

In television "old" means "too expensive to keep it going." Everyone
starts out signed to seven-year deals. After that everything except
the most popular shows becomes too expensive. Sometimes the network
and studio strike a balance where they can both keep making money but
it's amazing that "ER"s managed to this long.

----
It is the same reason all very long running (I would guess 10 years
and more) shows keep going: Main cast turn over.

Yeah! Just look at Gunsmoke! ;)

--
Exception to the rule. Different times. :-)