UPDATE: Sources say Quarterlife will move from NBC to NBC Universal-owned Bravo.
The announcement that Ed Zwick and Marshall Herskovitz had sold their 36-episode Internet show Quarterlife to NBC for a network series caused a lot of talk during the writers strike. (See my previous, Zwick/Herskovitz: WGA Friends Or Foes?) The show was seen as the first wave of an independent production future on the Internet for writers. But when NBC bought Quarterlife during the strike (after ABC passed years earlier on it as a TV series), striking writers questioned whether it was morally right for Herskovitz and Zwick, both WGA members, to help a network. But bad news: Quarterlife debuted last night and it bombed big-time. The team behind thirtysomething and My So-Called Life recorded NBC's worst time-period performance in at least 17 years despite The Biggest Loser as a lead-in. Agents are telling me that as a result the show may only get one or two airings on NBC.
But. But. No that can’t be. That’s impossible. The internet was supposed to be the incubator of the next wave of programming. Surely NBC must have dropped the ball. They didn’t promote it right. It was a big hit on My Space. What? Maybe that’s where it belongs? On the web only and not on network TV? Nonsense. Anything that’s a hit online will also be a hit on the airwaves. That’s what all the striking writers said so they must be right.
Comment by Anonymous — February 27, 2008 @ 7:39 pm
This is kind of… confusing. I mean, was the show popular on the internet (or has it aired on the internet yet?)?
And will the internet simply be a place where shows are ‘tested out’? A place where networks simply buy the most viewed shows?
Comment by Carlo — February 27, 2008 @ 7:44 pm
Hmmmmm…let’s see, trying to sell something during the writer’s strike? I seem to remember something about that being a violation of the WGA rules…
I guess scabbing doesn’t pay off after all.
My heart bleeds for NBC, Zwick, and Herskovitz. No, really it does. Seriously, it does. I mean, I don’t wish those two scabs ill will. Much.
Comment by Jake Hollywood — February 27, 2008 @ 7:47 pm
The networks are to blame half the time for poor ratings, though. They don’t give shows a fair go to find an audience, nor do they leave shows in regular timeslots, which really gets viewers peeved. It’s almost blind luck when a show is a hit these days, and the mistake the networks make is they overthink the formula of creating hit shows. It’s simple, but they make it complex.
Comment by Michael Dobrofsky — February 27, 2008 @ 7:57 pm
I’m not surprised it bombed. Unlikable characters, cliche complications that don’t go anywhere, the production values and look of a show shot for an iPod … the bigger surprise is NBC picked it up in the first place, hadn’t anyone watched it? Or did they just look at the MySpace viewers and think that meant something?
Comment by Ernest — February 27, 2008 @ 8:13 pm
most shows fail
saying that new media is not viable because a show failed when most do, is the same insane logic that warner bros. misogynists use saying female actresses are not viable because a movie failed when most do
Comment by Mark — February 27, 2008 @ 9:00 pm
It made bad TV look good.
Comment by pb — February 27, 2008 @ 9:05 pm
I’m not surprised. It was a bad online show.
Comment by Derus — February 27, 2008 @ 9:09 pm
It seemed really insipid. Come one, the thing was created for the INTERNET. How good could it be?
Comment by mla28 — February 27, 2008 @ 9:43 pm
I think it’s good old fashioned hubris. The show was touted as something amazing. No network interference equals great television. Hmmm. I might have to rethink my opinion of network notes. Did anyone see the show? It was just the same old same old. It was all spin. Good for them!
Comment by Michael — February 27, 2008 @ 9:45 pm
internet programming, with its ragged, spontaneous, amateur quality will only spur more deliberate, careful scripting and expert storytelling in tv programming, dramas especially. bringing internet style content to tv will never work.
the only way tv can survive is by amping up the quality and originality of its execution to stand out.
never mind the fact these guys have no business creating television programming about high school age issues without considerable research. my so called life was mawkish and humorless when it originally aired; it is now moving into guilty pleasure premenstrual zones.
and don’t forget ‘relativity’ the zwick/herskovitz bomb that had episodes whose dramatic thrust sprang from which air hangar sized loft apartment the leads were going to move into. obscene wealth is not a good idea for writers. try alcoholism.
consider watching more british tv, with its bracing storylines and real world, lived in faces.
Comment by dr. ian ziering, phd — February 27, 2008 @ 10:14 pm
Nice post. What’s the problem, “Dr. Ziering,” is the labor of actually using CAPS at the beginning of a sentence asking too much effort from poor lil’ you?
I love it when 13-year-olds chime in.
Comment by benseattle — February 27, 2008 @ 10:27 pm
I seem to be alone here, but I really liked this show. A lot! Good writing is good writing.
I didn’t watch it on-line, just on network and was surprised at how well it flowed . As a business experiment, there is much to be learned here. On the plus side, it’s a ground breaking deal for full ownership of the author’s content. On the other side, if you just give a show away for free, don’t really expect anyone to watch it on network tv. Except, of course, for me.
Peggy Lane O’Rourke
Comment by Peggy Lane O'Rourke — February 27, 2008 @ 11:15 pm
Why in the hell would you put Quarterlife on after Biggest Loser? Their target audiences aren’t even in the same realm. Of course it tanked.
Comment by KD — February 27, 2008 @ 11:26 pm
I’m not saying the show was groundbreaking or even that good, but really NBC didn’t promote the show at all so I think that’s a big part of the story here that no one seems to note.
Comment by Anonymous — February 27, 2008 @ 11:47 pm
I’m taking a class at UCLA Extension where we dissect shows like this and figure out how to monetize them for the web. The professor, a successful web video entrepreneur, touted this show as the quintessence of everything good and right in web programming. I thought it was crap. It had almost no appeal, and I’m supposed to be their target audience.
This has nothing to do with whether a series made for the web could be commercially viable on TV. All those who think that way are just struggling writers looking to throw the future under a bus (and massage their crippled egos). This is plain and simple crap work. And apparently, crap Internet programming doesn’t become more entertaining when transferred to the tube.
Comment by Obi — February 28, 2008 @ 12:16 am
Hello? The show sucked. On the net. On the network.
Sucked.
Comment by tf — February 28, 2008 @ 12:34 am
this show sucked on the web and had ZERO promotion. I wonder why it bombed.
Bottom line is the internet show simply don’t make enough money to make a good show at the moment.
It is still plenty far away from being a contender. Even then it will be an animated series that does it. (I am positive South Park could have been that kind of series had it debuted 10 years later than it had)
Comment by manny — February 28, 2008 @ 1:37 am
Is there anything to the idea that NBC would want to kill this show? After all the show is writer-owned. A huge writer-owned hit may not set a good precedent for the networks. Picking it up was not a bad insurance idea during the strike, when who knew when we would see original programming. Strike over, why heavily promote and push a show that the network doesn’t own? So you eat the distribution fee paid to the creator/owners and kill the f’n thing off before any other independent-minded creatives get any ideas of launching shows on the net and then making deals where they own the shows and the networks just distribute. Don’t think that’s a business model that networks want to see succeed.
Comment by hmmm — February 28, 2008 @ 5:51 am
I watched the first two episodes - as shown on their website - and found that although it was a strong premise the show was dated out of the box.
There was nothing that hadn’t been seen before in many other so-called teen-dramas and the fact that someone was blogging their life - & their friends too - well it isn’t unusual.
As for the unrequited love interest in the opening episode, there was a ‘vibe’ that made me think it might be between the two male leads, Jed secretly longing for Danny (they had chemistry and that would have been a more interesting train-wreck of a thing) but…
It was all the same familiar territory - or seemed to be. Hence my bowing out after episode two.
Comment by Anonymous — February 28, 2008 @ 6:52 am
Wasn’t this show a bomb on the Internet already?
Comment by Anonymous — February 28, 2008 @ 8:20 am
Nothings new they test those shows on the internet and even it is that bad they still show them on TV! That ridiculous!
Comment by Prison Break — February 28, 2008 @ 8:22 am
There’s no reason to say that any content on the internet is not suitable for TV. It all depends on the content itself. It’s not impossible to make quality, budgeted content for the internet, but no one is doing it because there’s no money in it. Good content is good content regardless of what medium it’s on.
Comment by Tamox — February 28, 2008 @ 8:26 am
The “They didn’t promote it enough!” line is nonsense. I saw promos for that thing everywhere…even in the golf telecast this weekend.
Comment by t editor — February 28, 2008 @ 9:38 am
This doesn’t have anything to do with the internet… It has to do with quarterlife being so unwatchably bad that i literally could not force myself to watch it despite my best efforts.
Comment by Chris — February 28, 2008 @ 10:14 am
Check this out. Google “quarterlife” and click on the cached version of the page. It takes a little while to load, but you’ll see the NBC logo with an announcement of the premiere episode on Tuesday night. Then check out the current page and the NBC logo is strangely missing with no update on when the next episode will air. Supposedly the regular time slot is on Sundays at 9 pm. We’ll see.
Comment by screenanalyst — February 28, 2008 @ 10:30 am
Obi, you are right on. This show is anachronistic, it’s the style of thirtysomething 20 years too late.
If you hated quarterlife, I encourage you to check out 2/8 Life, a series we just released. (www.icn.tv/series/28life) It pokes fun at quarterlife, but we also think it can stand on its own as a better example of what a web series can be.
Comment by Daniel — February 28, 2008 @ 11:28 am
I think this is actually an example of little more than Quarterlife being an amazingly crappy show. The type of screen was of little consequence. Way to go NBC! Keep that quality coming!
Comment by Pete — February 28, 2008 @ 12:10 pm
Hmmm, makes a good point. A damn good point. Post-strike, destroy the business model BEFORE it catches on. Writers OWNING their own shows! That’s just crazy! We CLEARLY need networks, and studios. Right?
Peggy Lane O’Rourke
Comment by Peggy Lane O'Rourke — February 28, 2008 @ 12:51 pm
Don’t worry, it is Biggest Loser’s fault. The only reason why that show is still on the air is because of Jeff Zucker.
Comment by Jessy S. — February 28, 2008 @ 1:00 pm
The golf telecast?? Is that really where you should be promoting a show geared toward 20-something year-olds?
I’m in that age group and frankly, I didn’t know it was on until I flipped to NBC by accident at that time…and, yes, I KNEW that NBC was planning on premiering it at some point this month, but that’s because I read it in the trades, not because I saw any real ads geared towards a 24-year old.
Terrible promoting, even worse show.
Comment by DH — February 28, 2008 @ 2:00 pm
Why is everyone so bitter? What’s exciting is the fact that a major network took the shot on programming from the meidum. The question we all should be answering has nothing to do with marketing, scheduling or ratings, it has to do with audience feedback on websites and the practical reality of where it fell short technically in migrating from the web to the net. Although Herskovitz seems to be absorbing the blow for the network, having an understanding as to what needs to be done for the second tier platform while your shooting for the first tier, is the bigger piece of information. People, the seamless migration and cross platforming of internet and television is all our futures. In failure there is much to be gained. Ironically, until the show aired, I have to believe you all had only wished you were the firs to have achieved what they did… easy to pile on in failure, shortsighted not to learn from it.
Comment by Albert Clementine — February 28, 2008 @ 2:28 pm
Just heard NBC has already guillotined this sappy piece of dreck.
I really hope the ghost of David Sarnoff pays Mr. Zucker a visit and slimes him for greenlighting this brain-liquefying abomination (I turned it off after 15 minutes).
Comment by P.J. — February 28, 2008 @ 3:10 pm
Fortunately, there’s other web-first projects in the works. Sancutary, which benefits from Stargate stars, also started as a web project and it’s expected to do well.
Comment by Patrick McNamara — February 28, 2008 @ 4:40 pm
That show bombed on the internet and it bombed on TV. Why the surprise that nobody wants to watch a bunch of spoiled twentysomethings bitch and moan about nothing interesting?
And the producers ought to be kicked out of the WGA for selling product to a network (struck company) during a strike.
Comment by Francine Fishpaw — February 28, 2008 @ 5:32 pm
No suprise. Sucky = Sucky no matter which medium it’s produced in.
Comment by MNL — February 28, 2008 @ 7:28 pm
I don’t care why it failed to find an audience, but I’m disappointed, because I really liked it. I hope the producers truly are rich enough to afford continuing it as a vanity project because I’ll miss it when it runs out of episodes.
Maybe the real target demographic is people who liked My So Called Life, rather than people in the age group of the show’s characters.
Comment by Steve S — February 29, 2008 @ 5:06 am
I have to agree that Quaterlife is dated and self absorbed misery for a target demo that should be anything but. Hope and adventure win out, not a mirror of their boring sad little lives. Although, I’m sure the makers of Prozac might have signed on.
Comment by GF — February 29, 2008 @ 10:51 am
I think I’ll bake some cookies.
Comment by M Steeart — March 2, 2008 @ 5:03 am
it was awesome
Comment by sean from china — March 3, 2008 @ 6:35 am
How many people on the picket line at the WGA Strike were working before the strike..The internet provides hope for the future, let’s not write off the possibilities as a great incubator for future series. So one series didn’t work outside of the online world, let’s not kill the future golden goose, or what was the strike really all about..
Comment by jfJ — March 8, 2008 @ 11:21 am