5 ms·

Soul-Searching in TV Land Over the Challenges of a New Golden Age

34 points by pmcpinto 11y ago

NoMoreNicksLeft 11y ago
Boo hoo. Why do I feel like they're gas station owners crying about how they can't charge $50/gallon for gasoline now that the hurricane won't make landfall?
soylentcola 11y ago
“I hear it all the time,” said Michael Lombardo, the president of programming at HBO. “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.” That doesn't really happen to me at least. I've come to love serial television (mostly drama/scifi/adventure/etc) and I'm often hunting for something to watch because I've watched everything of interest. I think this is mainly because a) There are a lot of shows that hold no interest for me and b) the stuff I do like will be binge-watched over the course of a week or a month. I treat these serial, scripted programs like novels almost. When I find a novel that looks interesting, I read several chapters most nights before bed until I finish it and then look for a new novel. With TV, I can skim HBO Go, Netflix, etc. for something that looks good and then spend the next week or more just watching an episode or three every night when I'm at home and not working on something. There really does come a point where you exhaust just about everything you might want to watch and it sucks because I've gotten spoiled. It's as if I finished all the entertaining novels out there have to wait a year for one or two more to trickle out one chapter at a time.
- chimeracoder 11y ago
  > ‘I can’t commit to another show, and I don’t have the time to emotionally commit to another show.' I don't have this problem at all. There are shows that are too intense of a commitment for me (e.g., there are only so many Breaking Bad or Game of Thrones that you can watch at a time), but I always find myself at a loss for the lower-key shows. I end up watching reruns of shows that I know I like, but there are only so many of those on Netflix, so either I end up watching the same ones over and over, or I turn to my non-Netflix collection. > It's as if I finished all the entertaining novels out there have to wait a year for one or two more to trickle out one chapter at a time. This is why I love Netflix originals. Aside from being consistently high-quality and high production value (comparable to HBO/Showtime), they're perfect for binge-watching. I actually don't binge-watch so much, but I do appreciate being able to choose my own pace, which Netflix is perfectly optimized for.
- fluidcruft 11y ago
  My anecdote: I've never been a cable subscriber and have been OTA only. There was a season 2008 or 2009-ish, I can't remember exactly, where literally every single scripted show that seemed promising was canceled by the networks after one or at most three episodes. Since then I stopped caring about live TV at all.
  - DanBC 11y ago
    Wasn't 2007/2008 the year of the writer's strike? That's obviously going to cause a bit of disruption. I agree that US tv doesn't seem to give shows a chance to get established. There are some potentially great shows that got cancelled too soon. (Space above and beyond; jericho; firefly; etc etc).
    - fluidcruft 11y ago
      I don't remember any shows being canceled while on air due to the writers strike. IIRC the programmers seemed to understand the challenge and were more lenient that year anyway. A huge draw for me with Netflix's "dump the whole season" approach is that the entire work unit has proof of life before I commit any time to watching it.
- saturdaysaint 11y ago
  Really? I feel like everyone I talk to has some show that they "have to get around to watching". The front page at http://www.avclub.com/tv/ http://www.avclub.com/tv/ probably shows around 20 shows I've either not watched or barely scratched the surface of and likely never will, barring early retirement.
cryoshon 11y ago
Uh... I don't know how else to say this: There is no real problem here; having "too many" "good" TV shows to watch is not a problem by any stretch of anyone's imagination. This article, and lamentably, this comment pertaining to that article, are a complete and utter waste of time and human attention. If you have read the comments section first, please close the comments as well as the article immediately and do not read any further.
- PaulHoule 11y ago
  I disagree. I have often railed against television, but if you look at a good TV series people have made a huge amount of effort in terms of writing, acting, directing, sets, etc. There is a lot of art to appreciate. The "too many" problem is not so much a problem of the consumer as it is of the producer, it's just what a bubble looks like on the ground.
  - VLM 11y ago
    > it's just what a bubble looks like on the ground This is why a "TV" story holds incredible value for the HN community; somewhere out there some TV fans are having a story about the tech bubble with the same observations and comments. This is extremely instructive for self reflection, observation from inside THIS bubble. This is how outsiders observe it, talk about it, rationalize about it, report on it. This individual story is about TV; copy and paste some words, and its about the SV tech scene. Even if my analogy isn't perfect, which it probably isn't, this DOES demonstrate the processes, perhaps for later analysis in the future where the analogy may fit better.
- saturdaysaint 11y ago
  I "only" watch about 3 or 4 seasons of TV a year, but the notion that we're approaching a limit on the selection of financially viable shows is interesting to me as someone who's interested in the shape/direction of popular culture (and a McLuhan student). The focus this has put on more niche/underserved demographics strikes me as world-changing - I don't believe it's an accident that gay/transgender rights have made huge leaps forward as the splintering of mass media have allowed more voices out there.
brazzy 11y ago
Personally, I'm wary of new shows, however highly lauded they are, because I've seen great potential squandered too often between the conflicting demands of having season finales be both a proper ending (because the show might not have another season) and leave room for the next season to meaningfully continue.
- PaulHoule 11y ago
  This is particularly obvious in anime, where certain quality standards that are enforced in the west are often broken in the name of telling stories that push the boundary of there system. For instance, "Futari Wa Precure" was the begining of something almost as big as Sailor Moon and around episode 24 of the first season they put extra resources to make an incredible finale; they were not sure if they were going to make more episodes for the season. All of a sudden they need to produce a new story arc and for a few episodes they out of control in terms of writing and direction and the story frankly doesn't make much sense for a few episodes until they are able to get on top.
  - gizmo686 11y ago
    Another difference I have noticed with anime is that it is much more common for second seasons to be branded as a new show, instead of as a second season to the old show. I have not seen this blead into the actual content itself (except perhaps that the storylines are potentially more independent than they could be); and this could be an artifact of the western distribution network more than the production itself.
- fractallyte 11y ago
  Case in point: Babylon 5. The show's creator, J. Michael Straczynski, originally planned for a full 5 season run. But he was forced to cram the ending into season 4 because of uncertainty over the future of the show. Then season 5 was approved at the last moment - with most storylines already wrapped up. He had to create something for the next season, but it wasn't what he'd envisioned from the start.
jobu 11y ago
First world problems... Seriously though, how much of this is a result of new players in the content industry (Netflix, YouTube, Amazon, Hulu), and how much is simply a pendulum swing back from all the unscripted "reality tv" crap that the major networks pumped out in the 2000's?
- rhino369 11y ago
  It's sort of all of the above. Netflix et al increases the availability of backlog TV shows. Networks abandoned quality tv because lowest common denominator won the highest ratings. Then cable saw the benefits of high quality niche programming. HBO started it. But FX and AMC showed you could make real money on regular cable with prestige shows like mad men, breaking bad and the shield.

34 points by pmcpinto 11y ago

Boo hoo. Why do I feel like they're gas station owners crying about how they can't charge $50/gallon for gasoline now that the hurricane won't make landfall?

soylentcola 11y ago

“I hear it all the time,” said Michael Lombardo, the president of programming at HBO. “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.” That doesn't really happen to me at least. I've come to love serial television (mostly drama/scifi/adventure/etc) and I'm often hunting for something to watch because I've watched everything of interest. I think this is mainly because a) There are a lot of shows that hold no interest for me and b) the stuff I do like will be binge-watched over the course of a week or a month. I treat these serial, scripted programs like novels almost. When I find a novel that looks interesting, I read several chapters most nights before bed until I finish it and then look for a new novel. With TV, I can skim HBO Go, Netflix, etc. for something that looks good and then spend the next week or more just watching an episode or three every night when I'm at home and not working on something. There really does come a point where you exhaust just about everything you might want to watch and it sucks because I've gotten spoiled. It's as if I finished all the entertaining novels out there have to wait a year for one or two more to trickle out one chapter at a time.

chimeracoder 11y ago
> ‘I can’t commit to another show, and I don’t have the time to emotionally commit to another show.' I don't have this problem at all. There are shows that are too intense of a commitment for me (e.g., there are only so many Breaking Bad or Game of Thrones that you can watch at a time), but I always find myself at a loss for the lower-key shows. I end up watching reruns of shows that I know I like, but there are only so many of those on Netflix, so either I end up watching the same ones over and over, or I turn to my non-Netflix collection. > It's as if I finished all the entertaining novels out there have to wait a year for one or two more to trickle out one chapter at a time. This is why I love Netflix originals. Aside from being consistently high-quality and high production value (comparable to HBO/Showtime), they're perfect for binge-watching. I actually don't binge-watch so much, but I do appreciate being able to choose my own pace, which Netflix is perfectly optimized for.
fluidcruft 11y ago
My anecdote: I've never been a cable subscriber and have been OTA only. There was a season 2008 or 2009-ish, I can't remember exactly, where literally every single scripted show that seemed promising was canceled by the networks after one or at most three episodes. Since then I stopped caring about live TV at all.
- DanBC 11y ago
  Wasn't 2007/2008 the year of the writer's strike? That's obviously going to cause a bit of disruption. I agree that US tv doesn't seem to give shows a chance to get established. There are some potentially great shows that got cancelled too soon. (Space above and beyond; jericho; firefly; etc etc).
  - fluidcruft 11y ago
    I don't remember any shows being canceled while on air due to the writers strike. IIRC the programmers seemed to understand the challenge and were more lenient that year anyway. A huge draw for me with Netflix's "dump the whole season" approach is that the entire work unit has proof of life before I commit any time to watching it.
saturdaysaint 11y ago
Really? I feel like everyone I talk to has some show that they "have to get around to watching". The front page at http://www.avclub.com/tv/ http://www.avclub.com/tv/ probably shows around 20 shows I've either not watched or barely scratched the surface of and likely never will, barring early retirement.

cryoshon 11y ago

Uh... I don't know how else to say this: There is no real problem here; having "too many" "good" TV shows to watch is not a problem by any stretch of anyone's imagination. This article, and lamentably, this comment pertaining to that article, are a complete and utter waste of time and human attention. If you have read the comments section first, please close the comments as well as the article immediately and do not read any further.

PaulHoule 11y ago
I disagree. I have often railed against television, but if you look at a good TV series people have made a huge amount of effort in terms of writing, acting, directing, sets, etc. There is a lot of art to appreciate. The "too many" problem is not so much a problem of the consumer as it is of the producer, it's just what a bubble looks like on the ground.
- VLM 11y ago
  > it's just what a bubble looks like on the ground This is why a "TV" story holds incredible value for the HN community; somewhere out there some TV fans are having a story about the tech bubble with the same observations and comments. This is extremely instructive for self reflection, observation from inside THIS bubble. This is how outsiders observe it, talk about it, rationalize about it, report on it. This individual story is about TV; copy and paste some words, and its about the SV tech scene. Even if my analogy isn't perfect, which it probably isn't, this DOES demonstrate the processes, perhaps for later analysis in the future where the analogy may fit better.
saturdaysaint 11y ago
I "only" watch about 3 or 4 seasons of TV a year, but the notion that we're approaching a limit on the selection of financially viable shows is interesting to me as someone who's interested in the shape/direction of popular culture (and a McLuhan student). The focus this has put on more niche/underserved demographics strikes me as world-changing - I don't believe it's an accident that gay/transgender rights have made huge leaps forward as the splintering of mass media have allowed more voices out there.

brazzy 11y ago

Personally, I'm wary of new shows, however highly lauded they are, because I've seen great potential squandered too often between the conflicting demands of having season finales be both a proper ending (because the show might not have another season) and leave room for the next season to meaningfully continue.

PaulHoule 11y ago
This is particularly obvious in anime, where certain quality standards that are enforced in the west are often broken in the name of telling stories that push the boundary of there system. For instance, "Futari Wa Precure" was the begining of something almost as big as Sailor Moon and around episode 24 of the first season they put extra resources to make an incredible finale; they were not sure if they were going to make more episodes for the season. All of a sudden they need to produce a new story arc and for a few episodes they out of control in terms of writing and direction and the story frankly doesn't make much sense for a few episodes until they are able to get on top.
- gizmo686 11y ago
  Another difference I have noticed with anime is that it is much more common for second seasons to be branded as a new show, instead of as a second season to the old show. I have not seen this blead into the actual content itself (except perhaps that the storylines are potentially more independent than they could be); and this could be an artifact of the western distribution network more than the production itself.
fractallyte 11y ago
Case in point: Babylon 5. The show's creator, J. Michael Straczynski, originally planned for a full 5 season run. But he was forced to cram the ending into season 4 because of uncertainty over the future of the show. Then season 5 was approved at the last moment - with most storylines already wrapped up. He had to create something for the next season, but it wasn't what he'd envisioned from the start.

jobu 11y ago

First world problems... Seriously though, how much of this is a result of new players in the content industry (Netflix, YouTube, Amazon, Hulu), and how much is simply a pendulum swing back from all the unscripted "reality tv" crap that the major networks pumped out in the 2000's?

rhino369 11y ago
It's sort of all of the above. Netflix et al increases the availability of backlog TV shows. Networks abandoned quality tv because lowest common denominator won the highest ratings. Then cable saw the benefits of high quality niche programming. HBO started it. But FX and AMC showed you could make real money on regular cable with prestige shows like mad men, breaking bad and the shield.