SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the diamonds-in-the-coal-pile dept.
John Koblin writes in the NYT that there's a malaise in TV these days that's felt among executives, viewers and critics, and it's the result of one thing: There is simply too much on television. John Landgraf, chief executive of FX Networks, reported at the Television Critics Association Summer Press Tour that the total number of original scripted series on TV in 2014 was 371 and will surpass 400 in 2015. The glut, according to Landgraf, has presented "a huge challenge in finding compelling original stories and the level of talent needed to sustain those stories." Michael Lombardo, president of programming at HBO. says it is harder than ever to build an audience for a show when viewers are confronted with so many choices and might click away at any moment. "I hear it all the time," says Lombardo. "People going, 'I can't commit to another show, and I don't have the time to emotionally commit to another show.' I hear that, and I'm aware of it, and I get it." Another complication is that shows not only compete against one another, but also against old series that live on in the archives of Amazon, Hulu or Netflix. So a new season of "Scandal," for example, is also competing against old series like "The Wire." "The amount of competition is just literally insane," says Landgraf.
Others point out that the explosion in programming has created more opportunity for shows with diverse casts and topics, such as "Jane the Virgin," "Transparent" and "Orange Is the New Black." Marti Noxon, the showrunner for Lifetime's "UnREAL" and Bravo's "Girlfriends' Guide to Divorce," says there has been a "sea change" in the last five years. "I couldn't have gotten those two shows on TV five years ago," says Noxon. "There was not enough opportunity for voices that speak to a smaller audience. Now many of these places are looking to reach some people — not all the people. That's opened up a tremendous opportunity for women and other people that have been left out of the conversation."
(Score: 2) by frojack on Wednesday September 02 2015, @01:02AM
Meh!
I'd rather watch a series that had a beginning and a pre Planned end, a pre-determined number of episodes. Then it Ends.
Go out and find something new. Writers run dry after a while. They need to move on. So do you!
Battle Star Galactica, (say what you will) at least came to an end, but that end should have been at the end of the second season.
Wrap it up people, nobody wants to make a lifetime of any show. Shows should be canceled. You were not meant to have it accompany you on your life's journey.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 1) by Ethanol-fueled on Wednesday September 02 2015, @01:21AM
Meh, I can kinda understand. Captain Kirk narrated the beginning of every episode of Star Trek: ToS with the assertion that it was a "five-year mission," but it lasted only 3 years.
Star Trek: TNG, DS9, and Voyager all lasted 7 seasons. That's a good number to grow and explore as a series before going out with a bang, as all three series finales did.
Enterprise sucked ass, but we all knew it would. Was that Sammy Hagar singing the title song? Seemed it was also a make-work program for some former franchise cast members:
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 02 2015, @01:40AM
Enterprise sucked ass, but we all knew it would. Was that Sammy Hagar singing the title song?
from Memory Alpha:
http://en.memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/Where_My_Heart_Will_Take_Me [wikia.com]
I wish they had kept as the title theme "Wherever You Will Go" by The Calling, which was used in promotional material.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wherever_You_Will_Go [wikipedia.org]
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 02 2015, @01:45AM
Three of those are widely acclaimed and decorated directors. LeVar Burton is a board member of the DGA, Robert Duncan McNeill has directed on the order of 100 projects and Dawson has a reasonable resume as well. If you count in Jonathan Frakes and others, Star Trek, as a series, created an astonishing number of highly regarded directors. However, I'll never count William Shatner on that list, regardless of anything else he does, I can never forgive him for the terrible job he did on The Final Frontier.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 02 2015, @01:54AM
"Star Trek Enterprise" was a holodeck program by Will Riker. It sucked ass because it was fiction-within-fiction like "Dixon Hill" or "Captain Proton"
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 02 2015, @04:52PM
The other two years were only boring space travel and therefore were not made into shows. After all, you cannot expect something exciting to happen every week.
Note also that episodes cover a larger time than the length of the episode.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 02 2015, @02:53AM
1) The newer BSG had a really crappy ending that made little sense and was quite stupid in many ways. That end didn't look very well planned. Heck much of BSG didn't seem planned either so it's a pretty bad example.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 02 2015, @11:16AM
Oh bullshit.
I had it pegged at the escape from New Caprica: "They'll find Earth and we're all Cylons, they'll find Earth and it's prehistory, or they'll find Earth and we've destroyed ourselves." I was right, and I built that up from watching the story progress.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by theluggage on Wednesday September 02 2015, @11:13AM
I'd rather watch a series that had a beginning and a pre Planned end, a pre-determined number of episodes. Then it Ends.
I don't thing the G.P. had a problem with that - its when you just get the beginning, then it gets cancelled.
A major problem is the US model of 20+ episodes per season and a "success" threshold of at least 100 episodes is broken for stories with ongoing plots: its just too long to string out a single story. If a show wants to go hundreds of episodes, the "soap opera" format with multiple storylines that start and conclude independently is the way to go (if Game of Thrones wants to go that way they need to find some way of concluding subplots other than arbitrarily killing off protagonists). There's also the art of the end-of-season cliffhanger. It should really take into account that the show might not be back, and resolve the main plot-lines of the season: the "cliffhanger" should be the consequences of resolving those plots, not padding them out.
Babylon 5 (whatever other faults it had) did the cliffhanger bit quite well with "nothing's the same any more" being the typical end-of-season state. It did nicely illustrate the problem of stretching a planned story over 100+ episodes (it was really limping at the end), though, and was at its best when two seasons got collapsed into one. I've actually just finished watching Breaking Bad and (while not evangelising it too much) that got several things right, too: shorter seasons, cliffhangers that resolved the season's plot while still leaving you desperate to know what happened next, and an ending (love it or hate it). There's always the option of a spinoff or prequel...
(Score: 3, Informative) by quacking duck on Wednesday September 02 2015, @01:43PM
To be fair, the plot was limping in much of season 5 precisely because the threat of cancellation forced them to compress and wrap up the major storylines in season 4, then when TNT picked them up they suddenly had to fill in the first half of the season with less exciting plotlines and filler episodes. It didn't help that they couldn't secure Claudia Christian (Ivanova) for the last season and had to cast a new character and spend time filling that backstory.
B5's network(s) also had a terrible habit of holding the last 4 or 5 episodes of the season until the fall (in the US anyway; the UK usually got them early), so any suspense at the end of season finales (of which only season 1 and 3 had legit cliffhangers IMHO) were effectively wasted.