Ratings: ‘The Dovekeepers,’ ‘Weird Loners’ take a nosedive; ‘NCIS’ wins odd night
You knew most likely that Tuesday night was going to be somewhat of a ratings bloodbath. There was no new episode of “The Voice” on the air, and some other shows such as “Chicago Fire” opted to air repeats.
Ultimately, the failure of “The Dovekeepers” in live+same day ratings is probably the most surprising, given that there was no substantial competition, it had a new “NCIS” (2.1 in the 18-49 demographic) as a lead-in, and it was at least reasonably promoted by CBS. So why did it only draw a 1.0? We feel like the biggest reason is simply that few in America are that familiar with the Siege of Masada, and that is a hard subject matter to educate in the promos. Sure, there are many out there who love Cote de Pablo, but she can only do so much to promote a miniseries. This was just a product that was always going to have a hard time getting big ratings, but we did anticipate it faring better than this.
“The Dovekeepers” can at least still attest to being better than “Weird Loners,” the Becki Newton comedy that aired on Fox after the return of “New Girl.” This is a terrible title for the show, and the premiere rating of 0.7 in the demo proved that viewers are leaving this to be a weird loner all its own. Maybe Fox gives it another week on the air since you’re not going to get ratings that are much better in repeats, but this show should be off the schedule before April ends.
“The Dovekeepers” continues on CBS tonight, and next week most of the networks will be back to their normal schedule. The only one noticeably airing repeats will be The CW, who is giving “The Flash” and “iZombie” a one-week break.
What is your take on these ratings? Share right now in the attached comments, and head over here to get some other TV news sent over to you via our CarterMatt Newsletter. (Photo: CBS.)
annsan
April 2, 2015 @ 7:09 pm
snort – DK did poorly because it was marketed as a historical harlequin novel. Had they gone with the story as an actual historical event then it should have gone on the history channel like the Bible series.
The mini-series had more than just a decent lead in from the ratings winner of the night (NCIS). It’s issue was that it could not *hold* those ratings. They lost numbers in every single time block so even those that tuned on didn’t bother to stay with the show. Nor did they tune in to see the conclusion if last night’s ratings were anything to go by.
& I agree with the comment that the ratings really do reflect on the popularity of the promoted cast member. Downey put all her eggs in de Pablo’s basket of popularity as ziva from NCIS. Looks like most of them broke.
liz laughlin
April 1, 2015 @ 7:11 pm
This was one of the worst adaptations of a book to screen that I’ve ever seen. I read the book, The Dovekeepers, and I would say this is loosely based on the book. I can’t believe how they took a riveting story and slashed it so badly into something so bland. Flavius Josephus, the historian, figured prominently in the mini. In the book, he wasn’t even there. The story was told through the eyes of the women This rendering turned it into a court room. .When I read the book, I wondered how they would condense it into less than four hours. Now, sadly, I know..
The screen writing was abysmal. In many places the dialogue was preachy or sounded downright silly. Almost every conversation between Flavius and the two survivors was that way.. There were some good moments. One of them was the scene between Yael and Shirah after Yael has been visited by the ghost of her dead lover’s wife. Shirah tells Yael what she must do to be free of Sia’s ghost. That 3 or 4 minutes worked for me. Also, although the scene has not been aired yet, the scene where Shirah prays to “Yahweh” for rain is a gaff. The Jews did not use God’s name, YHWH. They addressed God as Adonai, “LORD.” The part where Shirah is caught as an adulteress was also a gaff. The penalty for adultery was stoning to death not banishing to the desert. If you are dealing with historical fiction, do the research. I would say that to all those involved.
Some people I’m sure did not like all of the sex in this work. That is actually the way that Hoffman’s book was written. So, in that way, it takes the tone of a trashy romance novel, a genre usually appreciated more by women. I think it would have been better to tone that down a bit for an “all audiences” rating. I suspect that male reviewers will be the most critical of that aspect.
As usual, I don’t blame the actors. Its hard to turn a sow’s ear into a silk purse. I will watch the second part because I am a fan of Cote de Pablo. I am however saddened that she took this role because it just gave the people who dislike her more ammunition. The actors did their jobs: the script was miserable.
CarolaPUk
April 1, 2015 @ 4:55 pm
Just another proof that CdP is majorly overrated and doesn’t draw that many people to the tv. I only fear now that she will crawl back to NCIS and act like nothing happened. It wouldn’t surprise me since she continues to stir her fans up when she’s asked about NCIS. Sad part is that I used to really like her.
Ben
April 2, 2015 @ 1:24 am
I think the interest from her to return is genuine, given she still talks to a couple of the cast members like Michael Weatherly but certainly with this result for the Dovekeepers, it really shows that outside of NCIS, there isn’t much appeal for her. It’s either go back to being Ziva or gamble on something coming up in the future, because with this result, I’m not sure the networks would be hounding her with offers.
CarolaPUk
April 2, 2015 @ 5:13 am
Of course she is interesting in coming back to NCIS. What she did before NCIS – The Jury for example – was a flop. Then she had huge success with NCIS. The movie The Last Rite of Ransom Pride in which she had a mini role was a flop. Now, The Dovekeepers is a flop too. The only successful thing she has done in her entire career is NCIS. And she is pretty much aware of that. At least she is now. She thought she could do without the show. Also, don’t forget that she wasn’t even casted for her talent on NCIS. She was only casted and signed because she had good chemistry with Michael. Her fans love to say that. Every actor/actress wants to be recognized for talent and not for flirting with a co-star. Her entire career and fanbase depended on NCIS. But in my opinion she screwed up. And just because she says she has contact with some of them, it doesn’t mean that she’s welcome back on set tho. Because from the professional aspect, she did a lot of things wrong and the cast and crew need that professionality. I think some of the cast have major issues with her since the departure (if not since before that). It was hinted a couple of times. She was lucky to have had the chance to work on NCIS. After all, she doesn’t deserve to be back on that special set in my opinion.
Ben
April 4, 2015 @ 7:35 am
Yeah I do think that Pauley Perrette and David McCallum may have a few problems with CdP, given they criticized her for leaving at the time. The remaining cast are also probably sick of having to deal with some of CdP’s fans who constantly pester them about her leaving, especially on twitter. I know Perrette had to put out a tweet to support Emily Wickersham who was apparently copping some criticism from some of the more annoying ones and even Weatherly got pulled into a little bit of a tiff over the Tiva thing recently. If she ever does come back, a lot of bridges are going to have to be rebuilt.
Beverly
April 1, 2015 @ 4:37 pm
Watched it (Dovekeepers) and it was slow. It was a little confusing to follow how each were connected as I haven’t read the book. My only other complaint is it seemed like “50 Shades of Dovekeepers”. Kissing and “everything” is good but when you are watching a show of this type they could have used it for further character development or even a little more action. Carrying on every five minutes was way too much. I think of one of my favorite movies “The Ten Commandments” and even though it was made in the 50’s it tells a concise and compelling story. No matter. Was good to see Cote de Pablo again and will watch Part 2 tonight. I think it would have fared a lot worse without the Cote fans. I think it will be a bit better as the whole plot of the movie comes together. As for NCIS I thought it was a pretty decent episode.
liz laughlin
April 1, 2015 @ 7:41 pm
They really butchered the book to write this screen play. The book had the sex in it because in some ways it is a historical trashy novel. They did tone it down a bit but if they wanted to appeal to a broad audience, they could have done more. The part where Shirah explains about her protector and lover from Moab is important. Woman through out history have sought out a man who can protect them. This wasn’t about love but survival.. I think that this is a big part of the message of these women–survive however you can. I don’t think that they developed the characters enough for us to identify with them and why they did what they did. One of the reviews that I read, written by a man, focused on the women as adulterers. He missed the whole point. But since the screen play was written so badly, I don’t blame him. With the right writer(s) this could have been a great mini.
Beverly
April 2, 2015 @ 6:43 pm
I have enjoyed several movies in this genre but this movie will not be one of them. The story itself was extremely difficult for me to follow. I have no problem with sex in a movie but every 5 minutes one or more of the couples were making out. I agree with other complaints that although I enjoy Sam O’Neil as an actor and thought the other actors were good as well as Cote de Pablo the way the story was put together and the relatively slowness of the action made for a disjointed mess. I’m surprised this is a Roma Downey production but can only wonder if it was simply the screenplay that is at fault as well as the direction. This is a story that I could have enjoyed. I would have liked to see more of the happy times and interaction instead of the constant kissing scenes. Although it was focused on the women, they could have shown the men as more than fighters and good kissers. Didn’t care for the music either as there never seemed to be any change with regards to the scenes. Disappointed that this movie didn’t deliver.
liz laughlin
April 2, 2015 @ 7:36 pm
I liked the second part better than the first. But still so much of what was important in the book was changed or left out. This was a story of four women but it became a story of three. The survivors were not the ones who survived in the book. The book made sense but the story they created for the mini did not. It was as if they cut the book into pieces and then tossed the pieces in the blender. Took out a couple of scoops and voila, the script for the mini. One example was the relationship between Yael and the slave, Wyn. In the book, this is more of a friendship They portrayed it as a hot and heavy romance.
So many great films have been made from books. The Lord of the Rings Trilogy, Gone With the Wind, and To Kill a Mockingbird to name just a few. This, simply, was not one of them. If Cote agreed to do this mini based on the book, I can understand. If she read the script first, I don’t think she exercised good judgement. Still, I don’t blame the actors, they did the best they could given the script they had and the direction they received. I suggest that you read the book and visualize what it could have been.
Also, for the haters, most famous actors have been in shows that flopped. If you look at Mark Harmon’s filmography, you will see a long list of lackluster endeavors.
It comes with the business.
Lisa Liscoumb
April 2, 2015 @ 8:46 pm
According to an interview she did with CBS News, she took the part based on the script, but was also a fan of the book. So she knew the difference between the script and the book and, in fact, commented on it.
“It’s a big story,” she said. “We’ve had to condense and take elements of the book out. I wish we would’ve had like 12 (hours), but I think we’ve accomplished the objective and are successful in telling the story.”
It is telling that the fourth woman they cut out was the older, less sexy (and sexed up) one.
And, in terms, of your final comment, Mark Harmon wasn’t being touted as the best thing since sliced bread by media and fans, and the one key person that was going to bring huge numbers in for the movie, when he made those lackluster endeavours. A lot of people who who have been going on (and on and on and on) about how great this was going to do because – and in some cases, solely because – of Cote de Pablo’s presence now have great amounts of egg on their face and are in frantic “justify and deny” mode, including the author of this article.
Lee
April 2, 2015 @ 10:16 pm
It’s interesting, Lisa, I was thinking earlier today that when Harmon was de Pablo’s age he was just a capable young actor with a pretty face. I don’t believe he had any of the expectation on him that de Pablo has had over this mini series.
The big difference is that he hadn’t gone from total unknown to a hit series like NCIS, almost overnight, and gained an unrealistic impression of himself. He was learning his craft and working his way through a whole series of parts of different types: some good, some not so good and moderate stints on reasonably successful shows that weren’t major hits. He might have gained a following by then, but even if some of them worshipped the ground that he walked on, they did it in isolation because there wasn’t anything like the internet and twitter around for them to band together and try to make it look as if he had a massive following – as is the case with de Pablo.
The evidence is that there are only a limited number of fans who really like de Pablo as an actress – and some of them seem scarily over-invested in her – but they have worked really hard to make their numbers seem greater than they are. They have been aided and abetted by the media, although how much of it is the media loving the actress, compared to believing the hype, by the few, that she is widely liked, is another matter.
Then there is a slightly larger group, though still tiny in comparison to the numbers of NCIS viewers, who especially liked Ziva in the show. There is very little evidence that these viewers are in the slightest bit interested in de Pablo herself, just in her playing Ziva. The post on the NCIS page promoting the Dovekeepers provoked mainly responses asking for Ziva to return to NCIS, very few said they were looking forward to actually watching the Dovekeepers and of those that did, many seemed to be anticipating Ziva in that show as well.
It just seems to me that Miss de Pablo has been led to believe that 8 years on NCIS has made her a star, when it is only a stepping stone toward that. Roma Downey, too, bought into the hype and believed that she would bring millions of fans to the Dovekeepers, yet the viewing figures tell a very different story.
To be fair, it seemed to me that the hype for the show wasn’t very accurate either: promoting it as a biblical epic when the chances were that most who want to watch such things would be put off by the sex scenes and many that probably would have enjoyed it were put off by the biblical association.
I wouldn’t have thought the viewing figures were disastrous but, compared to the unreasonable expectations of some, are not good.
Lisa Liscoumb
April 2, 2015 @ 10:56 pm
Agreed, Lee. And I think you’ve hit it on the head – when MH was an up-and-coming star, there was no such thing as “social media”. Who knows what would have happened with him if there had been.
liz laughlin
April 3, 2015 @ 8:46 pm
Thank you for the diatribe. I knew we could count on you. Total viewrship still beat out every show but NCIS. Was everyone who watched a Cote fan or a Rachel Brosnahan or maybe their family? Wow, they have a lot of loved ones, millions of them. And here is the big question wait for it……..Did the folks at CBS read the script before they bought the Dovekeepers? Did they buy it sight unseen? Shame on them.
liz laughlin
April 6, 2015 @ 6:59 pm
Part 2 “millions of fans” The first night of Dovekeepers had around 9 million viewers, if I’m remembering correctly. How many of those were Cote de Pablos’s fans? Do you know? I’m just guessing that a significant portion of those watchers were CdP’s fans. Those numbers were still higher than what most TV shows running have. Granted that many of the other networks ran previously viewed episodes in anticipation of higher viewership for the Dovekeepers, look at the viewership for that night. TDK still had the highest viewership after NCIS.
Over 6 million returned for the second night. What brought those people back to such a poorly written show? TV viewers vote with the remote control. Something or someone(s) brought them back.
Most of the other networks would love to have a show that got them 6 to 9 million viewers I guess that I’m a glass half full person and you are a glass half empty person. It is all in the eye of the beholder.
liz laughlin
April 3, 2015 @ 8:21 pm
As I said, if that is true, Cote de Pablo is guilty of bad judgement. The script was not good. It was a bad adaptation of the novel. I read the book and based on the book, The Dovekeepers, I thought that the character Shirah would be a good fit for Cote. I never saw the script. I was anticipating a good miniseries based on the book. Did you read the book? If you did then you would understand what I’m saying.
As for my comments about Mark Harmon, I chose him as an example of someone who did a lot of films and TV. that ranged from not very good to acceptable. Television finally was a big boon to Harmon. That is where he finally found his niche and NCIS was his greatest success. It took him thirty years to finally reach the top in television. I have to admire him for hanging in there. He’s a real trooper. (And he owes Donald Paul Bellisario a big thanks for giving him the opportunity to be the star of the most watched TV drama in the world.)
Actors make films even when they know they’re not that good. They have to work to pay the rent and put food on the table. It would be foolish for any actor to complete a film and say, “You can skip this one. It’s likely the worst piece of junk that you’ve ever seen.” And yet that is what you want Cote de Pablo to do. What planet do you live on? Yes, she hyped it, just like all actors do.
Lisa Liscoumb
April 4, 2015 @ 1:50 am
I never said that, Liz. I can fully understand and support Cote de Pablo hyping it, especially since she apparently thought it was great and had a great time doing it. Frankly, I would have liked to see her talk more about TDK and less about NCIS and Tiva in the promotional interviews, but I can’t totally fault her for that as often it was the interviewers that steered the conversation there.
I can understand Roma Downey hyping it, as it’s her production. I do have a problem with Roma Downey shamelessly trading on and attempting to pander to Cote de Pablo’s former alliance with NCIS to try and drum up an audience rather than actually promoting TDK until nearly the 11th hour, but that’s another matter all together.
My comment was about everyone else – media somewhat, but fans especially – hyping TDK, and Cote de Pablo, as close on the second coming and now frantically trying to justify and/or deny the fact that, quite frankly, it tanked.
And Lee has a very good point – we are in a much different age now than when Mark Harmon was making his B-movies (okay, some were C- or D-, or Z- movies…). If social media had existed the way it does now back then, who knows what would have occured.