Serial vs. Episodic Television

Twice a year, the Television Critics Association holds their press tour at the Ritz Carlton Huntington Hotel in Pasadena. These press tours provide opportunities for television networks to market their products to the people who will be reviewing them in the upcoming season. You can think of the event as a kind of "upfronts for critics." Ray Richmond, of the Hollywood Reporter's Past Deadline blog, has been covering many of the presentations at the 2 1/2 week event. Much of the discussion has focused on what one would expect to read from a television critic's blog, with topics ranging from the upcoming CW lineup to Dan Rather's future with Mark Cuban's HDTV network. But Ray Richmond is more than just a Television Critic, he is also a media critic which means he reports on more than just TV and its business. Ray also writes articles critiquing the critics and revealing the behind the scenes discussions at the TCAs.

This year Richmond's articles have quickly shifted from discussions of what viewers can expect to a major behind the scenes discussion which is resulting in some heated debates among the critics. It appears that CBS Entertainment president Nina Tassler started the frenzy when she was asked about viewer decision making processes and whether viewers choose a show by whether it is serial or episodic in nature.

According to Richmond's article, "[Tassler] tried to sell the idea that audience members really don't differentiate between serialized (i.e. open-ended) dramas and ones that serve up self-contained weekly storylines when making their longterm viewing decisions."

Tassler asserted that she thought, "it's purely about the quality of the programming."

Needless to say, given recent discussions at prior TCA events, this stirred up quite a question frenzy. According to Richmond, one critic asked, "but it wasn't so long ago that you guys were saying the reason why all of these 'CSIs' were so successful was the fact that people knew they were going to get a payoff at the end of the hour."

The subject of serial vs. episodic and audience choices is one dear to my heart and not without real merit outside my own aesthetic. When one considers that shows like "Threshold," "Invasion," "Heist," and "Surface" were all episodic shows cancelled before any major narrative was completed, one can see that there are stakes for both the audience and television writers. When shows like these are left hanging the loyal fans, few as they may be, are left wondering what has happened to their characters. And on a show like "Threshold," where the creators had three seasons outlined (Threshold, Foothold, and Stranglehold were the themes of those seasons), the writers can only morn the fact that their story will never be told.

Before I continue, it should be noted that "CSI: Miami" this year had a serial element which led to the season finale.

CBS even has two new serial scheduled for this fall, "Jericho" and "Smith." Both of which I am very interested in watching.

I love serial shows, but they have two potentially huge problems, both of which contribute to the debate.

The first problem arises if the show takes too long to resolve the "A" storyline and making the show feel stagnant. An example of this is summed up by one critic in the Tassler presentation, "You're saying that people at the end of the first season of 'Twin Peaks' didn't care that there was no revelation of who killed Laura Palmer?" I call this problem the "but we don't want the story to end" writer's block. This problem can manifest itself in other ways too. Shows can take to long to reveal what the underlying narrative really is, and who the protagonists/antagonists are. This is the "Invasion" problem. Shows can also stagnate in an endless cycle of almost identical episodes which fear moving the underlying narrative along too swiftly. I call this the "Threshold" problem. The storyline resolution, and stagnation, problem could be solved with networks (and creators) not being afraid to implement a "telenovela" approach and just write a 16 episode show, which might be followed by another "novel" with the same characters or it might not. Either way the story would be finished and writers wouldn't have to "prolong the inevitable."

The second problem is the network decisionmaking process itself. Networks, who are motivated by profit, have to decide whether to keep a show or drop it in a relatively short amount of time. This can cause shows, even good but "cult" shows, to end before the story is over which leaves fans hanging ("Firefly" anyone?). This is where the expanding marketplace and the interwebonetosphere can come in handy. Or at least, that has been a part of the discussion. One suggestion proposed, according to Richmond, is "posting all unaired episodes on a digital platform of some sort for those who need to discover what's gonna happen." [sic] This is a great idea, as far as it goes, but even given Richmond's pleasant mocking of the obsessed fan, that isn't very far.

That is often exactly what happens when DVDs are released. "Firefly" included extra episodes in its DVD collection,as did "American Gothic," but neither resolved the storylines. Audiences are left hanging. Narratively this is a bad thing, morally it isn't a thing at all, and financially it may be a necessary thing. If there aren't enough fans for a show, and trust me I have been one of those disappointed fans too many times to count, a show can't survive.

What I hope is that television executives are brave enough to continue offering serial television programs with interesting narratives. Those are actually the shows I find most interesting and in that way I disagree with Tassler. Given the choice between an excellent episodic show and an excellent serial show, I am going to choose the serial every time. And yes, that includes my gripes about Pirates 2 not having an ending. I just want Pirates 3 out tomorrow.

I guess it stems from my love of the old "Flash Gordon" serials and the desire to see real narratives worked out on the medium of television. It is hard to successfully convey the epic cycle in one hour. Could you imagine Wagner's Ring condensed to an hour?

Don't Hassle the Hoff!

Fritz and I were talking about the Hoff the other day, and about how he is one of the most "googled" figures on the interweb. I was astonished, but Fritz said, "Hey...don't hassle the Hoff!" Truth be told, I hadn't heard that before. Apparently, it's a real saying because David "The Hoff" Hasslehoff wears a T-Shirt with that very slogan in this music video.

The video freaked me out. First, Hasslehoff is driving from the wrong seat. I don't care where the steering wheel in Australia is, Kitt is an American car. Second, the women responding to the Hoff sound like a bad version of ABBA. Third, it's just too weird. This video, hat tip to Monitor Duty, just went on my must see list next to Shatner's version of Se7en.

Step Over Cody Banks, Here Comes Alex Rider

Hoping to capitalize on the very successful youth movie market, Samuelson Productions and the Weinstein company are releasing the $40 million teen-spy thriller Stormbreaker in England this Friday. The film is based on the successful Alex Rider novel series by Anthony Horowitz and the production companies hope that the film will be successful enough to start a new teen movie franchise.

When analyzing the financial expectations of the film, the Reuters article linked above makes comparisons to the blockbuster youth fantasy movies that have come out in recent years. Reuters discusses everything from Harry Potter to C.S. Lewis in setting the stage for the production companies' hopes, but I think this is the wrong comparison to use. Though these successful youth oriented, if I even accept that proposition, films are based on successful book franchises (as is Stormbreaker), the comparison really ends there. The Alex Rider novels, and the movie, are spy tales and ought to be compared to previous entries in the "youth spy" genre. In my view a proper comparison would be to the Agent Cody Banks and Spy Kids franchises. While these franchises haven't been as lucrative as Harry Potter, and the others, they match genre type and set a proper stage for audience expectations. This is particularly true with audiences in the United States who will be less familiar than British audiences with the novel series and will merely have genre to fall back on when deciding whether to attend the film or not.

So...in comparison to Agent Cody Banks and Spy Kids how does Stormbreaker look? You can view the preview at the official Stormbreaker website, as I have. From what I have seen, in the preview which isn't really much to base a conclusion on really, Stormbreaker looks both just as silly and yet more serious than the two films I mentioned. The young actor (Alex Pettyfer) selected to play Alex Rider doesn't look as silly as Cody Bank's Frankie Muniz. The special effects look impressive, and at first glance the cast is filled with excellent British actors like Ewan McGregor, Bill Nighy, and Robbie Coltrane which brings hopeful imaginings of a fairly serious story. But as I watched more of the preview, I saw that the film also includes Mickey Rourke and Alicia Silverstone which makes one imagine a more silly tale.



I am at a loss. I don't know whether the film will be silly or serious, a mixture of the two, engaging or campy. I just don't know. What I do know is that the camera work looks, from the preview, to be very good in comparison to the other teen spy films I mentioned. I also know that the film includes Ewan McGregor and I'll watch him in anything. BTW, if the Stormbreaker preview is any kind of indicator, Ewan would have made a very good Bond (even though I think Daniel Craig will be great).

It should be noted that comparisons to the Spy Kids series, rather than the very successful Harry Potter series, were not meant to be dismissive of the film's potential to be profitable. According to pro.imdb.com, the first Spy Kids film made $190 million in Worldwide boxoffice and only cost $35 million to make, figures that would make the producers of Stormbreaker very happy.

For my final assessment we will all have to wait for August 18th (or October depending on whether IMDB or Fandango are correct), when Stormbreaker hits the American market.

Kim Masters is Undercover on Miami Vice

It appears that Michael Mann's film version of Miami Vice has hit a snag in production and Universal is having to fight pre-release negative press. Jamie Foxx left the set and refused to shoot any scenes outside the United States forcing Mann to film his ending differently.

I know on the face that sounds scandalous, but when you read Masters's story at Slate you'll get the full picture. I'm just trying to get you interested.

Take note that there are almost no pastel's in any of the images.

It is a very good article, with which I have only one quibble. Did Masters forget, in the opening paragraph, that Michael Mann's production company made Miami Vice? Dick Wolf, John Milius, Robert Crais? Those guys suck as writers right?

To be fair, I really only like the first couple seasons of Vice and most of the "homage" films of late have been spoofs, but that is no reason to think that a Starsky and Hutch movie done straight couldn't have been good. Oh, and Michael Mann worked on that series too. "Texas Longhorn" and "Jo-Jo" were First Season Michael Mann episodes.

Forget to Ask the Hot Cop for Her Number?

If you did, don't call 911 and try to find a way to contact her. Lorna Dudash, having found the young police officer who responded to a 911 call she had made regarding noise in her apartment, tried this very thing. What was she thinking?

"Hmmm...That cop was cute. Do I call the local police station and ask how to get in touch with him? Nah. How about writing a letter to the local station? Nah. Wait! I've got it, I'll use the emergency only number to see if they can send him back to my house! Excellent. After all, I'm 45 and my dating life needs emergency assistance."

It turns out the police officer did respond to her call, only this time to arrest her. She faces up to a year in jail and a $6000 fine. Maybe he'll wait for her, and if so the relationships is certainly worth 6G. Of course, after a year in jail all her relationship troubles may be over.

Bill Buckner? What About Bob Stanley?

After watching his wild pitch allowing the tying run, you'll know what I mean. Here is a re-enactment of the dreadful inning in beatiful 8 bit style.

Iconic Girl Next Door Passes Away

Last weekend, I renewed one of my teenage crushes. Ever since I saw her as Constance Bonacieux in the Gene Kelley version of The Three Musketeers, I have had a crush on June Allyson. That crush was renewed over the 4th of July weekend when I saw her perform as Ethel Stratton in the classic Jimmy Stewart baseball film "The Stratton Story."

She was perfect as the wife who supported her husband after the loss of his leg. I can still see her standing, holding the catcher's mitt and pounding the pocket, helping Jimmy Stewart learn to pitch on a wooden leg. The scene I just wrote reads like it might have looked ridiculous, but June Allyson was so charming that it became easy to ignore Jimmy Stewart's awful pitches. All that mattered was Allyson's reactions and they were charming and sincere. In The Stratton Story, June Allyson played the girl next door and brought back my boyhood crush.

I was saddened today by the news that she had died this weekend. I was first informed of the news by our friend J.C. Loophole over at The Shelf, but the news story on my morning news show followed almost immediately.

She was 88 when she died of pulmonary respiratory failure and acute bronchitis, but she will always be 20 something to me.