The speaker, in a humorous and reflective tone, discusses the fate of two critically acclaimed but commercially unsuccessful TV shows, "Arrested Development" and "Community".
In the case of "Arrested Development", the show initially premiered in 2003 with high ratings. However, it gradually lost its audience over the next few months, leading to its cancellation by Fox. Despite winning five Emmys in 2004, the show failed to translate its critical acclaim into popularity. The show was later picked up by Showtime and ABC, but neither of these attempts led to a successful resurrection. The show was finally released on Netflix in 2013, but the reception was mixed and it failed to match the praise of its original network run.
"Community", on the other hand, premiered on NBC in 2009 with high hopes. However, the show's genre-hopping ambition led to a decline in its audience. Despite the show's quality improving over the first three seasons, its ratings consistently declined. In 2012, NBC decided to make a change and replaced the show's creator, Dan Harmon, with David Gracio and Moses Port. This decision led to a significant drop in quality in season four, which was the show's final season on NBC. The show was then picked up by Yahoo Screen for a sixth season, but it was unable to attract a large enough audience, leading to its cancellation.
The speaker concludes by discussing the lessons that can be learned from the fates of these two shows. Despite their initial success, both shows suffered from missteps that led to their downfall. The speaker suggests that it's okay to let a show end even if it's still good, and that it's important to let our most recent memory of a show be a positive one.
Here are some possible facts extracted from the text:
1. The text is a transcript of a video comparing two comedy shows: Arrested Development and Community.
2. The video argues that both shows were critically acclaimed but commercially unsuccessful, and that they failed to revive their quality after being cancelled and brought back by different platforms.
3. The video uses metrics such as ratings, awards, reviews, and viewership to analyze the performance and reception of the shows.
4. The video also discusses the factors that contributed to the decline of the shows, such as network interference, schedule changes, cast availability, creative differences, and genre experimentation.
5. The video concludes with a lesson that sometimes it is better to let something end while it is still good, rather than trying to extend it beyond its natural lifespan.