3 ms·

> I'm fascinated by the idea networks would play series out of order, which on the face of it seems incredibly dumb. Part of the issue was that show production

by kd5bjo 7y ago

> I'm fascinated by the idea networks would play series out of order, which on the face of it seems incredibly dumb. Part of the issue was that show production was pipelined and unreliable. It sometimes happened that the “next” episode wasn’t ready in time for air but a later one was, and the network would rather show something new than a repeat. The show producers and writers knew this, too, so a style developed that didn’t include any long-term character development- each episode was a self-contained short story instead of a chapter in a novel. This meant that, in the off season, local stations felt free to pick and choose individual episodes based on ratings without regard for anything else which further reinforced the style of having at least one self-contained story in each episode, which persisted long after the original constraints were lifted. I only ever saw the US edits of the old Dr. Who shows, so the recaps may have been added to help it fit into the local TV mindshare.

NeedMoreTea 7y ago
Interesting. It starts to make sense of why so much US tv was entirely stand alone episodes, which did exist in the UK, but fairly uncommon except in sit-coms. The UK had the broadcasters, even the commercial ones, making the programmes, so they were wedded to scheduling in the programme making. External production companies and studios came much later, 80s or 90s I think. Presumably they stuck to fairly rigid contracts about order, or broadcast after all x episodes of the series were made, after those changes came in, they certainly had a long history of managing in order. The UK experience was more how you describe Babylon 5 etc - a show plot that concluded with the episode, but theme and character development across the series. Even the classics from the 70s and 80s. Some were so smooth a transition it actually did seem like getting a glimpse a week later, rather than an artificially exciting episode. To modern eyes that looks pretty dull, though that's partly camera and production techniques too, yet did seem to allow smoother development.
- kd5bjo 7y ago
  I also get the impression that US shows were commissioned in longer runs— a typical season was 22 shows a year, delivered weekly, so it was impractical to plot out everything in advance. On any given day, the actors might be doing scenes for several different episodes based on location availability while contract writers were pitching unwritten episode ideas for later in that same season.
  - NeedMoreTea 7y ago
    Ah yeah, that's also true. Typical UK season now is 6, 8 or 10. A few decades ago 13 was probably the commonest. I know many are made out of order, even shorter ones, to tie with locations, sets etc. Dr Who was actually quite the exception there with 26 and even more in the earliest years! US seems to be 15 or unbelievable. They start to feel too long, even shows I enjoy, or perhaps ideas or budget get spread too thin, especially in 2nd and subsequent seasons.

by kd5bjo 7y ago

NeedMoreTea 7y ago

Interesting. It starts to make sense of why so much US tv was entirely stand alone episodes, which did exist in the UK, but fairly uncommon except in sit-coms. The UK had the broadcasters, even the commercial ones, making the programmes, so they were wedded to scheduling in the programme making. External production companies and studios came much later, 80s or 90s I think. Presumably they stuck to fairly rigid contracts about order, or broadcast after all x episodes of the series were made, after those changes came in, they certainly had a long history of managing in order. The UK experience was more how you describe Babylon 5 etc - a show plot that concluded with the episode, but theme and character development across the series. Even the classics from the 70s and 80s. Some were so smooth a transition it actually did seem like getting a glimpse a week later, rather than an artificially exciting episode. To modern eyes that looks pretty dull, though that's partly camera and production techniques too, yet did seem to allow smoother development.

kd5bjo 7y ago
I also get the impression that US shows were commissioned in longer runs— a typical season was 22 shows a year, delivered weekly, so it was impractical to plot out everything in advance. On any given day, the actors might be doing scenes for several different episodes based on location availability while contract writers were pitching unwritten episode ideas for later in that same season.
- NeedMoreTea 7y ago
  Ah yeah, that's also true. Typical UK season now is 6, 8 or 10. A few decades ago 13 was probably the commonest. I know many are made out of order, even shorter ones, to tie with locations, sets etc. Dr Who was actually quite the exception there with 26 and even more in the earliest years! US seems to be 15 or unbelievable. They start to feel too long, even shows I enjoy, or perhaps ideas or budget get spread too thin, especially in 2nd and subsequent seasons.