[SPA]

I think that if the CW was unhappy with Aliens' numbers in the Monday spot, they would directly move the show to another spot -- not keep on two places to see which one fares better. Why stick a show that you are not happy with in two different slots on prime-time? And, they didn't seem to be above "axing" a show (Online Nation) quickly.

I think the CW is pleased with its numbers on Aliens and was not with Online Nation and wanted to put it's best 30-minute show in that slot -- possibly to give it more exposure -- possibly to solve a problem with a not-so-good show -- and that show just happens to be Aliens.

Truth is, we don't have any information on why Aliens was picked to do an encore. We'll just have to wait and find out from TPTB.

I still like CWs decision though. I'm a glass half full kinda girl.

[lancer1993]

I hope it's a sign they like the show and want it to keep going for the full 22 ep season.

[crazyboutscott]

Originally Posted by lancer1993 (View Post) I hope it's a sign they like the show and want it to keep going for the full 22 ep season.

I hope so too!

[SPA]

Maybe this is a stepping stone to do just that Michelle!! You know this show has stopped and started in various ways and means. So maybe it's going to take a little more time for things to settle doiwn. However, I really think this a good sign [keeping fingers crossed].

[WandaRose]

Don't the ratings prove that AiA isn't actually CWs best show? They seem to be having trouble holding an audience. If they can't hold the audience of their lead in, they aren't doing what they are supposed to be doing. One of the reasons Veronica Mars was never renewed was because it couldn't retain Gilmore's lead in all year. And they had better ratings that AiA ever did. I'm pretty sure, anyway.

I'm guessing CW is experimenting a little to see if AiA gets better ratings in another time slot. They probably don't want to give up on AiA too soon because it's been critically acclaimed. They know what it's like to have to deal with angry fans and critics over cutting show. So hopefully something will work out for them.

[scooterjo2004]

The Late Night TV page is updated through 11/2 and Scott is not on.=(

[crazyboutscott]

Originally Posted by scooterjo2004 (View Post) The Late Night TV page is updated through 11/2 and Scott is not on.=(

So, so sad

I really want to see him on late night TV

[scooterjo2004]

Originally Posted by crazyboutscott (View Post) So, so sad I really want to see him on late night TV

Me too! I love aliens but it's only half the Scott on our screens each week (1/2 hour AiA vs 1 hour GG). I'm going through withdrawls! Lea gave us the info right? I'm almost positive that it was just pushed back because of Aliens.

[Brilliant Disguise]

Originally Posted by lancer1993 (View Post) I hope it's a sign they like the show and want it to keep going for the full 22 ep season.

Maybe the show is doing ok for CW standards and they are giving it more exposure and see how it does in another timeslot

[genuinelorelai]

ah, Sunday night repeats....reminds me of Easy-View on the WB!

and yea, I wonder if they are thinking of trying it in a diff time-slot. But I wonder what would take its place. I know the CW has mid-season replacement shows, but I don't know of any 30 min ones.

[pinkpaisley]

I'm guessing CW is experimenting a little to see if AiA gets better ratings in another time slot. They probably don't want to give up on AiA too soon because it's been critically acclaimed. They know what it's like to have to deal with angry fans and critics over cutting show. So hopefully something will work out for them.

I agree. There has been a lot of buzz about the show and they won't just cut it, but the ratings have left something to be desired since the start.

[clmorrow]

They are probably hoping to engage some new viewers to the show by showing repeats on Sunday - maybe they think of those new viewers will then watch the original episodes on Monday nights as the season progresses. It isn't a good sign but the ratings for all those Monday night sitcoms are pretty dismal.

I'm bummed about the news of David Sutcliffe getting a role on Private Practice as a potential love interest for Addison - he gets the major network gig and a romantic role and SP winds up in a sitcom on a show with low ratings. There is no fairness fairy whatsoever. I so want to see SP in a romantic role that mixes humor and drama. Grrr.....

[dukesmom]

From today's Ask Matt at tvguide.com (I've highlighted the most relevant parts):

Question: In another blog on TVGuide.com, someone was bemoaning having Jim and Pam together on The Office, saying, "Did we learn nothing from the Moonlighting debacle?" Not being a viewer of The Office, I cannot weigh in on the specifics of this situation. But I'm tired of Moonlighting being cited as the reason no couple has been allowed to get together on a TV show for the last 20 years. In my opinion, the reason Moonlighting failed to work once they put Dave and Maddie together is because by that point, Bruce Willis and Cybill Shepherd couldn't stand to be in the same room with each other. Their chemistry was gone and their loathing was evident. After a while, manufactured excuses to maintain sexual tension take their own toll on an audience. Add that fact to everyone claiming that, post-Moonlighting, couples must be kept apart at all costs, and it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. Once the couple finally gets together, people look for what they were told was going to be there: a loss of chemistry, a loss of drama, etc., and, of course, they find it, whether it's really there or not. I can think of any number of shows — Lois & Clark and Gilmore Girls leap to mind — where the real problem wasn't what to do once the couple got together, but rather the ridiculous attempts to keep them apart, which destroyed all audience goodwill. If writers can't figure out what to do when a couple get together, maybe they shouldn't try to tell us those couples belong together in the first place. Personally, I feel cheated if I am not given time to enjoy a relationship that I have been rooting for for months or years. That's one advantage of TV over movies: getting to see what happens after the happily ever after. What do you think — is it time to retire the assumption that a show must necessarily die once a relationship is allowed to live?— Ryan P., Valley Village, Calif. Matt Roush: With all due respect to whoever wrote the comment that inspired this question, I agree that the Moonlighting yardstick should be retired. The problem with the Dave-Maddie consummation was that there was no joy in it (either on screen or behind the scenes), whereas with Jim and Pam, there is only joy and continued good humor in their now-open relationship. It is a great payoff for viewers, and I don't understand the backlash — not that I've been seeking it out (why would I?). I'm lucky that way, in that it has to come to me before I respond, and so far, I'm only hearing about it secondhand. Gilmore Girls is a terrific example of how people could misconstrue the results of bringing beloved characters together. Lorelai and Luke were doing just fine and were delightful company before the April incident and the Christopher incident spoiled things in such ridiculously contrived ways that it helped ruin the final seasons of the series. No fault of Lorelai or Luke (or the actors, for that matter). Let's just hope the Office producers aren't planning similar miseries for Jim and Pam anytime soon.

[SPA]

I totally agree with the questioner and Matt -- it wasn't a "syndrome" -- it was bad, might I say Horrible -- writing.

[Elissa5]

Originally Posted by SPA (View Post) I totally agree with the questioner and Matt -- it wasn't a "syndrome" -- it was bad, might I say Horrible -- writing.

I completely agree 100%!!! But I don't blame David Rosenthal because he only went with what was already given to him and he was locked into having David Sutcliffe for 13 episodes. He wanted to bring Luke and Lorelai back together by the January episodes of Season 7, the network and Lauren pushed for the LC relationship to continue. But it all starts back with ASP and DP losing perspective. They are genius writers but they made some huge mistakes in their joint careers and in the writing. That year, Season 6, definitely was not their greatest triumph.