American TV shows tend to stay on the air for as long as they can get renewed. Could the stories be better if the shows were written with the intention of only being on the air for X number of seasons? Broadchurch, for example, is filming it's third and final season currently. If it went on to a fourth season just because it had the audience for one, there isn't much the story could go on to do in order to follow the characters it's introduced along the same tone as the show has set thus far (and I already don't know how they're going to manage a third season. The second season seemed a good place to wrap it.)
How would TV change if we signed shows up for a story arc instead of by season? Would we get fewer sudden cancellations of shows (say, how Firefly ended abruptly?) How would we deal with the departure of beloved characters at the end of well-wrapped stories that end before the viewers are necessarily ready for them to (instead of having a show go on for too long and have viewers drop off as the storyline gets convoluted or watered down)?
Or take a beat and return after an extended absence like Arrested Development and Prison Break – Munjeera8 years ago
Arrested Development was abruptly cancelled after Season 3 and was rescued by Netflix (and I'm finding Season 4 really bizarre). A planned extended break could work, but I don't think Arrested Development is an example of that. Season 4 of AD seems closer to the Firefly movie, Serenity. A last chance to give fans closure after an abrupt cancellation. I haven't watched Prison Break, so I don't know about that one. – Amanda8 years ago
This is entirely dependant on the show – Darcy Griffin8 years ago
Grey's Anatomy would be a good example to use for this article. They're now heading into the show's 13th season, and the fans are dropping off day by day. Don't get me wrong, I LOVE Grey's, but I'm not oblivious to why fans are suddenly turning their backs on it. It's been on for a long time, so much has happened, so many new characters joining and old characters leaving. Not to mention the show is very different from the way it was when it first premiered. I'd like to see your topic fully explored. – Karyn Little8 years ago
This is definitely a subjective case, not a "one size series," fits all. Look at how successful Breaking Bad was; yet, the creator Vince Gilligan decided to end it after 5 seasons! I think sometimes this has to do with the creative overall vision, and writers truly knowing the "end game," before they begin. Some series go on forever because they are successful, have a solid fan base, and produce quality television. While others meet the first 2 criteria, but differ in producing poor quality television that they get away with. – danielle5778 years ago
Amanda, I agree: nothing topped AD in comedy for seasons 1-3, and S4 was poor. Watching a series after its expiration date is like watching Holmes destroy Ali or Willie Mays' creaky attempt to top Ruth's HR record: sad. – Tigey8 years ago
TV shows, for audiences, are entertainment and distraction that produce emotional attachment and addiction. For creators and producers, however, TV shows are revenues above all. How many seasons is too many seasons? How much money is too much money? – T. Palomino2 years ago
Look into the psychological effects of modern television and see if there is any scientific evidence to suggest if TV can influence human behavior, and if so then to what degree and in what ways.
Sounds fascinating and terrifying in equal measure. – J.P. Shiel8 years ago
There are two ways it can go. The first is to experience the trauma from the safety of your armchair, similar to reading. An example of a positive outcome would be the classic Disney cartoon in which separation from parental units are regularly depicted like Bambi, Jungle Book and Cinderella. The second direction is that regularly watching horrific scenes causes desensitization. So I agree with J. P. Shield that it is fascinating and terrifying simultaneously. – Munjeera8 years ago
I've always answered this in the same way as when someone begs the same question of video games. I find that it can be an enhancer for people who are already on unfortunate paths but it cannot be what initiates the affect. I'd love to know if there are any studies with findings on the subject. – TGoutos8 years ago
Interesting... Well if an individual is unstable to start with, even if unknown, it may trigger something on the inside. I wonder if children could be sensitive too this... It would be interesting to find out. – FandomCrasher8 years ago
I believe there has not been a scientific study that proves this one way or another but that being said, we all have to watch and limit the exposure of violence on TV on our children. While I do not believe a child would become a murderer by watching TV, it will certainly give those ideas or motivation that are more susceptible to manipulation or those that already have some sort of a chemical imbalance that might push them towards that path. It is the whole theory of nurture versus nature I guess. In so many cases, theorist have gone one way or another and it is still a much debated theory. – ferozan8 years ago
There have already been studies about this. The subject would have to be narrowed down more in order to be tackled in anything that wasn't a huge book. Maybe focus in generically (dramas, crime dramas, what have you) – darcvader8 years ago
Being someone who is totally empathetic, there's a lot of truth to this. I'm moved by just about anything that I watch on TV. Once Upon a Time makes me lovey dovey, Sons of Anarchy made me pray for violence against other characters. It's the strangest thing. – Karyn Little8 years ago
I would kill to read this article. – Tigey8 years ago
There have been several movies that depict a murder/crime that resembles a story from a book. One example that comes to mind is "The Raven". Whoever chooses this article could talk about the influences of both TV and books. – JennyCardinal8 years ago
There are no definitive experimental studies that uphold this notion; all that exists are correlations between television viewing and individuals who become murderers. Nature versus Nurture needs to be factored into this equation. Television alone cannot make someone a sociopath, but it can definitely give an unbalanced individual ideas as to how to extract their image of terror on the public. – danielle5778 years ago
With the internet becoming a popular choice for watching shows, but how often are people under the age of 30 watching a TV show at a scheduled time from a cable provider? Discussions could include the problem of pirating TV shows, the rise of streaming services and the future of millennials buying cable service.
Though the television series Breaking Bad has been discussed numerous times on this platform, a conversation that has yet to be broached is the amount of symbolism, allusions, and "clues," the creator, Vince Gilligan provides throughout the series. For example…In season 3 episode 7, "One Minute," the time on the dashboard is 3:07. At the same time, Hank gets a call that he has one minute, as two men are on the way to kill him. 3 7=10, or let's look at it as one minute. Also, the episode is from season 3, episode 7–same time displayed on the dashboard. Lastly, the room number of Skylar's room when giving birth to Holly is 307. All of these connections are intricately woven by the creator.
Other examples for discussion: the constant mentions of Icarus, The Godfather and Scarface references, the similarities between Hank (ASAC) and Ahab from Moby Dick, The meaning behind the title of the series finale, "Felina," (hint, think periodic table of elements and cooking meth; also a few other possibilities), etc. There are numerous connections and allusions, from episode titles that allude to popular movies, to songs, providing the missing puzzle pieces.
What does it all mean? It must be important or else why would the creator take great time to intricately weave every single element of the series together. Questions to consider: Why does Walt begin cutting off the crust on his sandwiches?, Look at the wardrobe evolution of characters, consider the episode title, "Grey Matter," etc. The possibilities are endless….let the explorations begin!!!
It sounds like some of these ideas are similar to LOST. Maybe some of these similarities could be written about, such as the significance of the numbers. – Munjeera8 years ago
I love shows like LOST, Mr. Robot, and Breaking Bad that reward multiple viewings. It's great to see that Better Call Saul isn't shying away from hiding its own Easter eggs like its predecessor. For this topic, I would suggest that the author of the article try to narrow it down. Even confining the topic to Breaking Bad leaves room for a never-ending article thanks to vast amount of clues and symbolism that Vince Gilligan worked into the show. Try to focus on explaining what the motive of a show creator could be in including all of these hidden secrets rather than trying to point out every example. – KennethC8 years ago
BB is loaded with fatalism. Gilligan is a moralist, raised Catholic. God's number is seven, three is the trinity. The bread crust trimmings, ala Crazy-8, recall the fatalism of Bob Dylan's "Ballad of Hollis Brown": There's seven people dead on a South Dakota farm,
There's seven people dead on a South Dakota farm,
Somewhere in the distance there's seven new people born. I think amoral Walt points out Hank's white whale - the futility of law enforcement and the hypocrisy of smoking illegal cigars - over Cuban cigars and booze, while contemplating what Walt states is the arbitrary nature of laws. It's an interesting mix, fatalism and Hank's faith in imperfect but necessary laws. – Tigey8 years ago
There also seems to be connections between Walt's ages (50, 51, and 52 years), and the corresponding elements of the periodic table. – Tigey8 years ago
Talk about the different ways that high school has been portrayed in TV, in particular the two subsets of Idealistic (ie. Saved By the Bell, That's So Raven) and Realistic (Daria, Freaks and Geeks). Compare these two portrayals to each other as well as the real life experience of high school.
Freaks and Geeks is a cult classic and the perfect example of a realistic TV show. Every individual can relate to a character on the show as each of them come from different backgrounds and face various adversities. Other TV shows like That's So Raven also tackle some real life issues like racism and portrayal of women in mainstream media (when Raven isn't allowed to be on a magazine cover) so it is not necessarily idealistic. There are different forms of TV shows, there are the recent Disney or Nickelodeon shows which completely set up false expectations for the kids.
Then there are other TV shows like Gossip Girl or Parenthood, with predominantly white casts and where the families are completely supportive and everyone tackles everything together. A really great portrayal of high school is also showed in Gilmore girls. then again this is all TV... nothing can be explicitly like real life. – Aish8 years ago
First, one would have to agree that these two "subsets" are the only possibilities for high school representation. And second, one would need to clarify that the subject is American/Western/Hollywood portrayals of youth life. – T. Palomino2 years ago
Game of Thrones, Outlander, Netflix's Jessica Jones, and Netflix's Daredevil: these are some examples of books and comic books that are now being put into a television series rather than a film. It seems to be a new trend. What are the merits of having a book series represented through television rather than a single film (such as Harry Potter or Lord of the Rings)? Is one better? Is this a natural progression of the new trend of splitting a book into two or three movies (think Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows or The Hobbit)? Is the age of one-book-to-one-film over? If so, is that a good thing?
Is television or film adaption better? it depends on the book or comic itself and how detailed and complex it is. The only difference between film and television is that the story in a television show can take its time while a movie has to fit everything into at least a 2 hour adaption for the audience to be satisfied. Another reason is if the book or comics film rights were bought by a major conglomerate, the writers and producers would have to convince the studio to do either one. For Game of Thrones, G.R.R. Martin created an intricate world that would not have been able to translate well into a film adaption, while Lord of the Rings is similar but is compiled into three books, so it made the trilogy easier for a film adaption, with the prequel, the Hobbit, which made them a lot of money and was stretch out. Is it a good thing? I believe so, because many television adaptions can stay true to the books and comics or take a completely different direction which creates an alternate universes that many fans enjoy, one example is The Walking Dead, they follow the storyline but they have changed a couple of things due how well they can translate the story visually and budget. and is the one book to film over? No, because there are stand alone novels that the film studios have acquired and will capitalize on, one example is Jojo Moyes, Me Before You, featuring the khaleesi herself, Emilia Clarke. – Angelina918 years ago
In order to justify its presence on the so-called "History" Channel, Pawn Stars makes a point of highlighting the historical significance of various antiques that come into the store. This is typically framed by Rick sharing his minimal knowledge of the item and its historical context, at which point he calls in an expert (one of his many "buddies") to tell the full story under the guise of an appraisal. In the recent seasons, they get through fewer and fewer items per episode, interspersed with cringe-worthy family subplots that appear to have been rejected from real sitcoms, including arbitrary wagers, surprise birthday parties, and (my personal favourite) aimlessly searching for Bob Dylan through the crowded streets of Las Vegas (S03E20).
Considering how the History Channel's radical re-branding of circa 2008 no longer requires it to feign being intellectually stimulating in any way, what may be the purpose of the brief historical interludes in an otherwise mind-numbing show? Given the channel's shift from educational documentaries to trashy reality shows, are these segments only there to justify that there is still some attempt at engaging with history, or is there some deeper function to it? What might this say about contemporary historical education? Could the cheese-ball sitcom element perhaps be a sort of lure to trick laymen into engaging with the narratives of the past? Furthermore, how has this kind of television content become a contemporary cultural icon in itself? (For examples, see this scene from Gravity Falls ((link) and this 2011 CollegeHumor sketch ((link) 1:17).
Whatever the verdicts may be, how might it be illustrated in other examples of post-2008 programming, such as American Pickers, Ice Road Truckers, Ancient Aliens, and Vikings?
I've noticed this trend with the Discovery Channel as well. The content seems to be catered to boosting ratings and not anything intellectually stimulating. All those fake documentaries make me cringe; there was one on mermaids, though that might have been on Animal Planet, and another was about megladons. Maybe this shift has to do with ratings or the rise of the internet or an attempt to keep tv relevant. – S.A. Takacs8 years ago
This topic sounds like an SNL dream. One could combine the Dylan-in-Vegas episode with Ghosthunters: (Out of breath from running) "My mysterious poet-o-meter says an internal rhyme was created in the area... Did you see that? It looked like the ghost of 'lectricity." – Tigey8 years ago
Great topic! At this point, Rick from Pawn Stars is as much an Internet meme as he is a television personality. I would suggest looking into the demographics of shows like Pawn Starts to see what the average age of the viewer is. That could provide some insight into why Pawn Stars and shows like it have shifted away from a historical focus. – KennethC8 years ago
The television show, The 100, had come under controversy and intense scrutiny over social issues during its third season. Issues such as the treatment over LGBTQ characters and rape culture. However, the 100 has tackled social issues in earlier seasons and those issues were not scrutinized nearly as harshly.
Some of the earlier social issues tackled by the show were mental illness (Jasper has had two accounts of PTSD) and the roles of women. Some of these portrayals are well done and generate positive discussions. Other times the show delves into tropes and goes against its self-proclaimed progressive stance.
The show would not be under such critical eyes if the show runners had not promoted it as a progressive show.Therefore, the show must be looked at through a progressive lens. It would be interesting to see an article tackle how The 100 portrays various social issues and how these portrayals are perceived by viewers. It should also note the importance of these portrayals and the discussions they generate. The show is targeted at teenagers and young adults and it is interesting to see how this show has generated discussions online. Explain why these discussions matter. The response to certain aspects of the show have been negative, but the discussions afterwards have led to positive insights. The show has only aired 3 seasons but it has tackled various social issues that can be explored in further detail.
I hope that in future seasons they don't box Clark into strictly female relationships just because it's an easy way to show lesbian relationships without introducing a new character. They did a fine job with the common-place reactions of everyone in the show to the gay guard's relationship so they should be equally fluid representing Clark as bisexual. – Slaidey8 years ago
