
It was hyped more than a heavyweight championship match, and the broadcast networks’ first ratings face-off last night didn’t disappoint. There was no clear winner but there was a big flop, Fox’s new drama Lone Star, and, as we know, there is nothing Hollywood relishes more than a failure. Lone Star was given the strongest possible drama lead-in on Fox with House as well as the lion share of the network’s fall marketing dollars. It also received mostly glowing reviews. So how come it drew premiere numbers that wouldn’t even pass muster at a top cable network (4.1 million viewers and a 1.3/3 in adults 18-49)? It held on to less than a third of the House lead-in and bled profusely from the first to the second half-hour. Why did the pilot directed by Marc Webb bomb so badly?
Some attribute it to confusing marketing (“they never really explained what the show really was”) and soft pre-launch tracking (“tracking never suggested that there was huge interest in the show”). Others point to Lone Star‘s rural Texas setting, not exactly Fox’s bread-and-butter as the network’s shows traditionally do best in the large cities, and to its old-fashioned Southern soap feel and pace. Some also singled out the morally ambivalent hero at the center of the show that some viewers may have had problem sympathizing with. I personally can see Fox’s rationale putting Lone Star behind House, another show with a flawed character, but I do think that Dr. House’s pill popping and verbal abrasiveness rate much higher on the forgiveness scale than Lone Star hero’s cheating on 2 wives and swindling hard-working people out of their money.
Whatever the reason was, Lone Star tanked worse than even the most pessimistic projections. “We thought a 2.5 (18-49) rating would be bad, but not as bad,” said one of the rival network gurus who are scratching their heads today. And while Fox brass are doing a lot of soul-searching today and not rushing with a cancelation decision, the writing appears to be on the wall for a serialized show like Lone Star. Rumors are already circulating that the drama may stop production, at least temporarily, and a move to pull it from the schedule can’t be that far away. The flop is certain to bring back Fox’s decision in May to pick up Lone Star and Shawn Ryan’s Ridealong over Breakout Kings, a procedural that ultimately went to A&E. In July, Fox entertainment president and big Lone Star fan Kevin Reilly told me he had absolutely no regrets over his choice.
Elsewhere on premiere night, with the final ratings in, CBS’ Mike & Molly and Hawaii Five-0 topped the rookie class with a 3.9 demo rating and widened the gap between them and No.3, NBC’s The Event (3.6). For serialized thriller The Event, weeks 2 and 3 will be key as its premiere numbers were in the range of ABC’s FlashForward and V last season, and both of those shows started fading quickly.
Overall, Mike & Molly, Hawaii Five-0 and The Event all did solid business but were overshadowed by veterans Dancing with the Stars (5.1/13) and Two and a Half Men (4.9/12), both up double-digits from last fall and ranking as the top 2 programs on Monday night by a wide margin. Both also exceeded expectations – shrewd casting like teen mom Bristol Palin brought a lot of young viewers to the traditionally older-skewing Dancing, which logged its highest-rated premiere in 3 years among adults 18-34. And Men proved to be Charlie Sheen legal woes-proof as viewers flocked back to the traditional sitcom in droves despite some trepidations about a possible backlash from Sheen’s brush with the law as well as his highly publicized salary dispute.
“It all comes back to old chestnuts Dancing with the Stars and Two and a Half Men that are hanging right in there,” one network insider said. “New shows come and new shows go, but some of the old shows continue to do well.”
TV Editor Nellie Andreeva - tip her here.


My two cents on Lone Star:
Saw the trailer. Thought to myself, “we’re supposed to feel bad for this bastard?” Didn’t tune in.
I really like Adrianne Palicki, too, from Friday Night Lights. Hope she finds something more successful soon.
Absolutely agree – despite good visuals and actors I love, I could not bring myself to give a shit about the main character. This is the worst possible climate to make anyone feel bad about a man who schemes to steal people’s savings. I almost never say this, but the network must be insanely out of touch with the economic realities of most Americans to think this guy would be at all relate-able.
Speaking as someone who slaved at a Fox station for years, I can tell you Rupert Murdoch and his henchmen ARE totally out of touch with the lives of quiet desperation most Americans lead. But they’re especially out of touch with the desperation of their own employees, who are now routinely working for the worst salaries in the business and doing the work of 4 to 8 people who have been laid off in addition to their own jobs. It was a brutal place to work and I am so glad to be gone.
I’m sure this idea about a guy who wants it both ways, to be respectable but still be able to cheat on his wife and girlfriend. and steal from his father-in-law, well, that probably appeals to the old, fat white men who run Fox who wish they could get away with doing they same. They’re all just so odious that even their huge bank accounts won’t do it for them, though, so they have to live vicariously through shows like Lone Star. I am so glad the American viewing public took a pass on this one.
“the old, fat white men who run Fox” What a blatantly racist comment! It is easy to see why you failed to thrive at Fox considering your truly negative attitude.
Totally agree. I love an anti-hero as much as the next, but had no interest in watching a con man lying to two women… and all the ads seemed to pound this plot point home. At least Vic Mackey occasionally caught a bad guy and House saves lives.
I kind of enjoyed Lonestar and may continue to watch it. But it made me nervous – how long can this go on before he gets caught.
As for Hawaii 5-0 – loved that they kept the theme song, and even some of the visuals from the original beginning.
it’s amazing that Fox thought that this show was going to be a hit. clearly the people over there need to WATCH TV. Why was this there big piece of development? What on earth made them think this was going to fit with the history of their network. Go watch “Big Love” if you want to see a man with two wives. Wake up, idiots. This was dumb from the get go.
IRONY ALERT! IRONY ALERT!
First: “Why was this there big piece of development?”
Then: “Wake up, idiots.”
But it was so critically acclaimed and very different from Big Love in tone and plot. It was a fantastic piece of TV that can’t be summed up so glibly by somebody who didn’t even watch it.
okay, #1: saw all the print ads. Had Zero interest.
#2-infinity: Even if I was interested, once again Hollywood sends in a boy to do a man’s job.
Leads in T.V. and Film are called Leading “Men.” Not Leading “Boys.”
The lead guy was obviously cast to try get someone as cute cuddly as possible to counter the fact that he’s conning poor people out of their savings.
Just what the people want to see. Bernie Maddoff Jr. played by Justin Bieber. BTW, I like the actor. How can you not? He’s just miscast and misdirected. This reeks of studio-think.
The leading man; sorry, “boy” seems to have been transported through time from the cast of “Weekend at Bernies.” All’s he needs are Ferris Bueller shades and an excellent adventure.
Hilarious bc it’s true!
Think it had more to do with going up against DWtS, the overly promoted The Event, and Two and a Half Men more so than flatout lack of interest. It could actually pick up a little next week, unless all of those that tune out of The Event (bound to drop after that inexplicably horrible pilot) tune into DWtS instead.
Yeah — except for the fact that a good portion turned it off at the half hour mark — which means it simply didn’t connect with those who did bother to tune it in. So uptick? No — cancellation.
Do these ratings reflect the people who are watching these shows on dvr as well – or only the people watching live?
I realize that a viewer who watches live, and in in theory watches the commercials, is more valuable to an advertiser, but isn’t this method providing a skewed reflection of what is really being watched and enjoyed by the public at large? Aren’t real, passionate fans as important, if not more important, than the person who is technically unsavvy? Why are those viewers being given all the programming power?
No, if you do not watch commercials they do not care how passionate you are.
Are we really already calling it “the demise?” I’ve seen actually terrible shows with equally bad ratings float longer than this.
On trigger finger FOX? I don’t like its chances.
No show pulls a 1.3 and survives unless it is on Friday
So America opts for the Hoff in a body suit and Teflon Sheen over networks highest paid creative executives. Crazy. Well, must be something wrong with America and not the quality of shows…
beef up the wives’ roles and move it to Lifetime! that’d actually work
I was too engrossed in Monday Night Football to bother with any of these lame ass shows.
And I’m on the other side of the fence; I have zero interest in watching a bunch of helmeted cows who’ve learned to walk on two hind hooves bang into each other.
“Men” was tolerable and Tons-o-Fun was funnier than I expected. Wasn’t even aware of what was on elsewhere, and I always click off and pop in a Blu-ray movie at 10pm.
But man, I miss “24″ on Monday nights.
They show have recast and more importantly… move to another network (possible even cable). Fox has had a terrible track record with dramas (aside from House).
I think you’re forgetting Bones.
And I agree with other posters, the competition has a lot to do with the bad ratings, though the premise holds no interest for me personally.
Ugh – yeah – I mean, 24 was SUCH a flop.
THE X-FILES, ALLY McBEAL, MELROSE PLACE, 90210, PARTY OF FIVE were other stink bomb dropped by FOX.
Why do they even try doing dramas at all?
Saw the show and enjoyed it. The acting was good, and the writing wasn’t bad at all. Was perhaps a little too interesting and/or sophisticated for a network show. The protagonist, while a charming actor, is clearly some type of sociopath, which means most of the show you’re wincing as you meet his various marks. Also, the trailers didn’t grab me at all; I only watched it because of comments from the critics. On a cable network with lower numbers pressure, it could have found a niche.
I totally agree. But, when the competition is so fierce these days… could Fox afford taking a chance on it versus something edgier that targets the ’24′ audience like Breakout Kings? We… shall… see…
“Why did the pilot directed by Marc Webb bomb so badly?”
Because Marc Webb directed it. The script was great and they turned it into schmaltz.
I agree that Marc Webb is hugely overrated. My Spidey Sense is also telling me that his reboot of Spiderman will similarly disappoint.
Marc Webb isn’t even really a director… is he overhyped? 500 Days of Summer was like a too-long youtube sketch… except for Joseph Gordon Levitt, every single element of that movie is unwatchable. If you liked it, it’s only because you were starving for original content in movies and were told it would be a nutritious meal. But make no mistake, you were handed a Lunchables… not a real sandwich. Go watch it again… it’s worthless.
TOTALLY AGREE!!! Thought I had gone crazy when every Loooooved 500 days and the direction was a big part of what stunk about Lonestar. Well, that and the hugely flawed premise.
Here’s something that no one is talking about: with the, at best, vague, and at worst, failed, marketing campaign for Lone Star, this marks the third major launch this year from a Fox co. where you can clearly point to the marketing campaign as a likely culprit for a flop.
First, there was the bizarre campaign for the Cruise/Diaz film Knight and Day, which inexplicably featured not the stars but some generic shadows…
Then there was the really confusing campaign for FX’s Terriers, which compounded a bad title with a campaign that did nothing to explain it, or the show…
And now we have Lone Star, where the initial on-air promos didn’t even mention the one guy/two women aspect, and the can-you-spot-the-differences-in-these-two-pictures print ads just left you confused.
While I realize that these are all separate divisions, it is kind of weird that they are also all having the same marketing problems.
Well, number one…the title sucks.
Two, wasn’t ‘Lonestar’ an old country band in the 90s?
Three…….that’s all i got.
Don’t forget “Lonestar” was the name of the hero in “Spaceballs”. Hell, every time a commercial for the show came on, I had the urge to bellow the name of “Lonestar” A La Rick Moranis’ “Dark Helmet”
Wonder why the creators of the TV show used the same name as an iconic movie? Creatively bankrupt, I guess.
Lone Star (1996) is one of my all time favorite movies, starring the fabulous Chris Cooper as Sam Deeds, a Texas sheriff doggedly trying to solve a murder, but will his investigation prove his own father was a murderer who killed the former sheriff? Co-starring the equally fabulous Elizabeth Peña as Sam’s long lost high school flame, and written and directed by John Sayles. Amazing movie. Rent it from Netflix.
The premise for this show is so offensive. I guess the old boys at Fox still think it’s a great plan to showcase a womanizer and alienate the female audience.
Booyah! And you, my dear, are the intelligent viewing audience they were hoping to avoid… LOL!
But THAT’s the story. The character’s a con artist. Tony Soprano was a womanizer. Don Draper is a womanizer. Walter White cooks meth knowing full well the harm it does to those who use it. So what’s your point? There’s no fun in watching a show about a dude grilling and smiling all the time. It’s okay to be offended, as long as through the course of the show we see the character changing. Which it looks like that’s how the show is going to go if it stays on the air. This is a character who’s father forced/most likely always guilted him into being a grifter as well. And he wants out. It’s so annoying that political correctness in our culture is castrating creativity and imagination and storytelling. Shakespeare would have loved this premise.
The three dramas you mentioned are (or, were) on cable networks. And those specific networks (AMC, HBO) skew more heavily toward a male demographic viewership.
FOX is one of the Big Four over-the-air networks. Thus, it also has one of the largest female demographics, who fall into the young-to-middle-age professional range.
Simply put, Lone Star’s premise probably turned off a significant portion of this important FOX demographic. (The same problem probably exists for The Good Guys — women probably find it too juvenile for their tastes, that’s just my guess. Incidentally, also happens to be shot in Dallas, Texas.)
Lately, there appears to be a boys mentality going on with what series premises get the greenlight to pilot at FOX.
The largest number of viewers were women. The bigger problem was male viewership. Also Fox has no female demographic this season, at all. Mad Men also skews heavily to women.
There is a wonderful scene in this show where the protagonist says no to an affair with a beautiful stranger because he is so in love with his two wives. That scene addresses the concerns. How many films have centered around a woman choosing between two men she’s in love with.
I think it depends on how we interpret the overnight data. It could be said that the viewership for the premiere was so low that all there were left were female viewers who happened to not be interested in either DWTS or GG. What men who could have watched to bring the gender ratio on par were simply more interested in football.
What will be interesting is to see how the ratings fare next week, and if the demographic still holds in a significant way.
There also appears to be a boys (club) mentality in the MARKETING of FOX shows.
FBC Promo needs a new drummer.
Pick up your sticks and leave you HACK.
Tens of millions of dollars just got flushed down the toilet. That’s JLo money.
The argument that only cable viewers deserve or can appreciate/understand intelligent Television is terribly ignorant. Network Television has recently begun a turn towards intelligent comedy, it can do the same with drama, it just needs a little more time and staying power.
amy you idiot. he’s a con man not a womanizer. you dumb girl.
I can’t root for a guy to make fools of two women. Or to cheat people. Not the least interest in cheering evil.
People loved the Sopranos. Does everything have to be so black and white as good vs evil? It’s not a morality lesson it’s supposed to be thought provoking.
Premise is too old, should have been done 4yrs ago. I don’t want to watch these characters and marketing could have intised rather than confuse.
The character loves those women. Why not go after Two and a Half Men, it adulates a man who has abused women in REAL LIFE, frequented prostitutes and is basically about two men who want to trick women into sleeping with them.
Pick your battles, don’t just look for an obvious criticism or an easy target.
As a viewer, I have to say I DVR’d it and deleted it before I watched half. I just found it creepy — and it looks like a lot of people had the same reaction.
The print media looks like an ad for Levi Jeans or something.
The script had a lot of potential. Emphasis should have been put on the eye-porn. Big land, blue sky — it should have been dreamy and escapist. It should have looked like GIANT. That should have been the billboard, not a dude being hugged by two different women.
America hates Texas because America does not want to be reminded of W.
Wait’ll they try one set in Chicago; by next year the Normal-American Community will be hunting democRats with dogs.
Hey Pistol Peete, you must be shooting blanks!! you’re comment is ridiculously lame!!!! Yeah, I watched LoneStar and you wanna know how many times i thought of W??? Yeah, exactly! People were turned off by the premise of the show especially in this climate. I enjoyed the pilot and you can definitely see how his past is going to catch up with him in some way and I think the struggle of that is fascinating.
Who can resist Charlie Sheen’s smirking animal magnetism and his show’s… “hilarious”… humor?
I can! I can! I go into a frantic panic attack anytime he pops up on my TV and I can’t find the remote.
I would have thought How I Met Your Mother would be near the top of Monday’s rating rat race. Surprised it isn’t. Even more surprised it wasn’t mentioned. Hm.
can we also talk about MIKE & MOLLY?! this was such a piece of crap. who wants to look at those two week after week?! and that laugh track. good lord. NOT FUNNY.
There is no such thing as a comedy too stupid to air on CBS.
Think it was a pretty odd fit w/ the Fox network. But applaud Fox for trying something new. Not everyone is interested in procedurals with paper-thin characters and dialogue that sounds like it was written by fifth graders. Nonetheless, it’s toast. will be gone within a week.
This pilot was flawless, have any of you cracked a newspaper or magazine this month? It’s unanimous.
Agreed. I watched this back-to-back with ‘The Event’ and was blown away. ‘The Event’ looked like it was directed by a blind kid who’d won a contest.
People always say “why don’t NBC/CBS/ABC/FOX make a show like Mad Men/Damages/The Sopranos/…, I’d watch that!”. The nets do, and the collective ‘we’ watch DWTS.
Frustrating.
Didn’t see the pilot, big fan of the script. The problem is, PBS has flawless shows, too. Doesn’t mean they’re on network TV, after a show like House.
And Jeez — the production values looked awful. Felt dated.
If you didn’t see it, how do you know production values looked awful?
From the commercials. I’m an educated person who works 80 hrs. a week. I’m going to judge a show on its spots, and it just looked so unfamiliar and dark and fake. I like dark, too, but it just looked like a CW show, aside from the obvious quality.
Not enough under 25′s and/or hot people on this show. Gossip Girl sucks, but everyone knows the actors names, namely hip-30 something’s who have never seen it even.
The pilot was “flawless” if you are a fan of montages that lead into other montages. And if you prefer your male leads to be 25 year olds with daddy issues.
It was GOOD. And that’s surprising enough on network television these days. But great? Not hardly.
It’s alarming that two back to back comments each declare the cast first far too old then far too young. And yet you all claim to be authorities on Television. Maybe you’re not wrong, but this show is far less flawed that the garbage everybody else is watching on TV and can grow from it’s pilot, save the harshness.