The Future of Television?
May. 8th, 2007 01:02 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
trinityvixenLOST has an end-date.
Forget that giving them a guaranteed three more seasons is extremely generous given the way the show's been not performing for most of its second and third seasons. This is actually a brilliant idea.
Because this is exactly what I like about the way serials are done in other genres, mediums, and (thank you BBC!) countries. There's more you can do when you have the end in sight to set it up and get yourself there without wasting time. For a show like 24, obviously you can do that season-by-season because the plot specifically binds characters in a set time. The action and the seasonal closure of it offset and obscure the fact that this is an endless drama (although not lately, from what I've heard). Having the end game planned means no convoluted who's-really-spying-on-whom shit like Alias devolved into. Means no impossible it's-aliens-except-where-it's-the-government-but-everyone's-really-crazy-anyway X-Files muck.
I think every pitch session to networks should include the span of the show as part of it. Sitcoms obviously bend this rule, but for serialized dramas? Having a distinct, discreet package should be more attractive to studios, not less. Yes, you lose the sure thing if it's a hit and you want to keep it going forever, but on the other hand, if it's a hit and you know you've got three-four seasons max to it, think of how much you can blackmail advertisers for. Imagine if the LOST guys had stated their optimal seasons-long deadline as six years two-three years ago when they pitched it. By the time it was the hot thing of the season, advertisers would probably have paid Super Bowl-worthy prices for ad time. When they were then told (on the down low, of course; deniability is key) that such ad space would be a limited thing, maaaaaaan, the monies! The monies!
But really, I like this for the necessary improvements to pacing that it would require of television shows. Fewer wasted episodes or filler with the way that specific plot developments could be then fixed into the schedule and then the rest built around them. This would make flexibility difficult, but that's what these stupid-ass, useless hiatuses are good for, right?
Forget that giving them a guaranteed three more seasons is extremely generous given the way the show's been not performing for most of its second and third seasons. This is actually a brilliant idea.
Because this is exactly what I like about the way serials are done in other genres, mediums, and (thank you BBC!) countries. There's more you can do when you have the end in sight to set it up and get yourself there without wasting time. For a show like 24, obviously you can do that season-by-season because the plot specifically binds characters in a set time. The action and the seasonal closure of it offset and obscure the fact that this is an endless drama (although not lately, from what I've heard). Having the end game planned means no convoluted who's-really-spying-on-whom shit like Alias devolved into. Means no impossible it's-aliens-except-where-it's-the-government-but-everyone's-really-crazy-anyway X-Files muck.
I think every pitch session to networks should include the span of the show as part of it. Sitcoms obviously bend this rule, but for serialized dramas? Having a distinct, discreet package should be more attractive to studios, not less. Yes, you lose the sure thing if it's a hit and you want to keep it going forever, but on the other hand, if it's a hit and you know you've got three-four seasons max to it, think of how much you can blackmail advertisers for. Imagine if the LOST guys had stated their optimal seasons-long deadline as six years two-three years ago when they pitched it. By the time it was the hot thing of the season, advertisers would probably have paid Super Bowl-worthy prices for ad time. When they were then told (on the down low, of course; deniability is key) that such ad space would be a limited thing, maaaaaaan, the monies! The monies!
But really, I like this for the necessary improvements to pacing that it would require of television shows. Fewer wasted episodes or filler with the way that specific plot developments could be then fixed into the schedule and then the rest built around them. This would make flexibility difficult, but that's what these stupid-ass, useless hiatuses are good for, right?
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
Re: Love it...
Date: 2007-05-08 07:37 pm (UTC)That's why I relied on cable for the summer, but you're right--soon as a show gets ratings, they bump it back into a more competitive (in all sense of the word) time/season slot for the increased exposure, deliberately thumbing their noses at the people who gratefully made it popular because there was NOTHING ELSE ON.
This is all a conspiracy to make me go out and play in the sun. I know it.
Re: Love it...
Date: 2007-05-08 08:45 pm (UTC)Agreed, most of the summer, I like to watch pretty much ONLY cable TV. It just hurts when all of a sudden the stuff I LOVE is gone and on hiatus for EIGHT months at a time. It makes me want to *gasp* read a book!!
Don't get me started on hating sports broadcasts. I STILL haven't forgiven the Yankees for pre-empting the A-Team and Simon & Simon reruns when I was little. Fucking 5 HOUR rain delay.
Re: Love it...
Date: 2007-05-08 08:49 pm (UTC)I suppose I could read more. Nah, I'll probably just up my Netflix allowance...