Shonda Rhime's has created a pantheon of successful shows based on occupations with which grade schoolers often complete the phrase "When I grow up I want to be a…" (Grey's Anatomy- doctor, Scandal- president, How to Get Away with Murder- lawyer.) This article would be an study on why this model has worked so well, the narrative formula, and the fictions and truths of the occupations that these shows focus on. There should also be an argument for the character driven story and whether or not the occupation matters as more than just a frame for the dramatic storylines.
Now in its third season, the FX series The Americans is about two KGB spies posing as Americans. This suspenseful series continues to astound audiences and critics, but, like many shows, is deprived of any recognition from award shows. For example, this article could discuss the themes the show brings up and how the two main characters, Philip and Elizabeth, develop.
As a baby boomer who lived through the Cold War and entered true adulthood complete with a real job, a mortgage, and children in the early 1980’s, “The Americans” draws me like an ant to an open sugar bowl. The double lives, led by main characters, Elizabeth and Peter Jennings, as deep cover KGB agents embedded in a Washington DC suburb on one hand and as middle class suburbanites on the other, makes for deeply disturbing and yet compelling drama.
The point of view of the two Russians with deeply indoctrinated beliefs in the communist system is new and foreign to me. While Phillip is seeing the positive side of the U.S., he still doesn’t let go of his core loyalty to his Russian ideals, regardless of his new awareness of the weaknesses of those ideals. Elizabeth is more strongly dedicated to their mission and unwavering in her distrust of the American system and the threat it poses to her beloved homeland, a hatred and fear instilled in her from birth.
My strongest take-away from the first three seasons of “The Americans” is a refreshing realization that citizens from other countries, including Soviet Russia, love their own country and its culture as much as we Americans love ours. And I am quite happy to live in a country where that fact can be explored as deeply as it is in this brilliant series.
– JanJolly8 years ago
Season 2 of the show "Penny Dreadful" is quickly approaching. So what can audiences expect? This article could provide a brief synopsis on the show and its characters, taken from famous works of literature.
A brief review of the previous season would be good to add. It seems like it has been so long since the first season! – Liz Watkins10 years ago
Overall, final seasons always seem to end up having some sort of issue about them. They can feel contrived, problematic, and flat out not as interesting.
I think unless you have a story with an end in mind when you start, you are going to have trouble. Many shows exhaust all their ideas quickly and that is why some go downhill fast. Sometimes it's probably tough to just suddenly come up with a way to end it.
I feel Breaking Bad should be an example in how to end a show when it's the right time and not try to keep going because of popularity reasons or money reasons. Look what happened with Sons of Anarchy and Dexter. The two final seasons of both of them were uncomfortably bad to the point where you start questioning whether the series were that spectacular to begin with.
It can be hard to steer the plot to a satisfying conclusion without it feeling forced. The story should have a natural progression and often times the end comes based on a network's decision so the writers have to adjust and you can tell. So the writers try to satisfy the network and the fans and sometimes it just can't be done.
Then you have popular shows that are kept on way too long because they are money makers and the final season is bad just because they have long since run out of ideas and have declined in quality in a way that you just can't get back in a last season.
An example of this is HIMYM, while I personally like the finale, many people didn't. A big factor in this was the way the last season changed, with the whole season running over the course of Barney and Robins wedding, only to find out in the finale that they didn't stay together. It was also a change of format to what people were used to and so a lot of people may not have liked it because of that reason. – Tyler McPherson10 years ago
It might be interesting to reflect on the format itself, the series, in order to answer the question. Because there are so many episodes, the audience has to be 'loyal' to the series and really commit to it in order to reach the end. But most of the episodes resemble each other in the end and become repetitive which bores the audience. Maybe series have to be shorter to remain entertaining? Maybe we need to rethink how series work and their format? – Rachel Elfassy Bitoun10 years ago
In recent years, there has been a marked shift from political shows of the late 90s/early 00s like The West Wing, which acted as an idealized representation of the political world. The bad guys always got what was coming to them, our team always won in the end, the couples always got together, etc. Now with the introduction and success of shows such as Scandal and House of Cards, viewers are seeing darker, jaded, terrifying underbellies of the political world where nothing is tied up neatly and oftentimes you are expected to side with the villains. Why have audiences shifted to this kind of entertainment? What is it about our current time, perhaps, that makes this shift believable? And how does a lighter show like Veep figure into this equation?
Really good idea for a topic. There could be so many reasons for this shift... perhaps people don't trust who are running our countries anymore and that we assume all politicians are corrupt. – samcel10 years ago
A look at Peter Dinklage's career, particularly compared to other actors of short stature. He made a point of not playing leprachauns etc. in hie early career, and made a great turn in The Station Agent (2003) Where could he go from here and will his success open the door for other short actors/actresses? (season 4 of GoT should provide a role for at least one…)
This is a really interesting topic. Though he's been around for years he's probably best known for GoT. I remember an early interview that he did about avoiding typecasting and you might want to consider looking at that as part of your topic. Good luck with the article, I'm excited to read it! – Kristin Ronzi10 years ago
Great Topic! I feel that he has been underrated for years! When I first saw him in Elf, I thought he had potential, but was disappointed that he was subjected to these types of roles. He has finally found the perfect role in Game of Thrones! – writingonpurpose10 years ago
I saw him for the first time in Nip/Tuck and thought he was great. A quick look at his career would be nice, but I am sure someone else has already done this. – T. Palomino2 years ago
Classic Doctor Who, certainly. The mid-80s onwards weren't kind to them, with a dropping budget and popularity, backstage strife, an unpopular Doctor in Colin Baker and unpopular companions like Mel, etc.
It didn't get immediately better when Sylvester McCoy took the role in 1987, but boy, did the final season in 89 pick up the slack. Stories like The Curse of Fenric and Ghostlight are classics, the Doctor had a great companion dynamic again thanks to Ace, and there were hints at big revelations about the Doctor's life that would have come in season 27…if it was made, that is.
You could argue the rise in quality goes back to the penultimate season with Remembrance of the Daleks, but the general fan belief is that the final season holds together much better.
We have Smallville. The last few seasons (Justice League-lite featuring "The Blur") were pretty weak and aimless and just treading water but in the last season they knew it was finally ending and it actually had some momentum and they started lining up the characters and universe with the Superman we know. Shame about the disappointing finale though.
And Rescue Me, kind of. They were really wavering on quality on the later half of that series. Season 4 was kind of weak, 5 was better, 6 was atrocious, but 7 was better. It definitely wasn't the strongest season of the show, but it was better than Season 6.
This would be a subjective topic, unless you could prove fans of a specific show you wish to analyse felt it went downhill before the series finale. – Ryan Errington10 years ago
There have been very few successful musical television shows (Glee, Smash). The reality based music shows fair better than the fiction. Why do musical television shows seem to fail when we are such a music addicted culture? What makes the successful ones work?
This may also be complicated in a really interesting way by Empire, which has seen its ratings increase and its critical acclaim/awards buzz on a weekly basis. Both Glee and Smash started off with a relative degree of success as well, before their messages and reception took a turn for the worst. It could be interesting to consider what that may mean for Empire's future, especially given the show's "soapier" tone. – kdaley10 years ago
Their is also the musical comedy Galavant. It had relative success when it came out and so far has only had one season, but it is putting comedy in a genre that it isn't generally present in on TV. – Tyler McPherson10 years ago
