You'll never see them again
You'll never see them again


You'll never see them again
Also TV now: This show/movie did well 40 years ago so we rebooted it with people who never saw it, a shitload of special effects, and totally missed why it was popular in the first place.
They did this a lot in the 90’s too. Production companies love to ground an IP into the dust.
That explains why I'm so familiar with boomer shows and movies, despite being a millennial. There was a lot of old content and remakes on TV then.
NuTrek that you?
Wait… have you also been trying out the MacGyver reboot from 2015???
We don't talk about that.
Curious - do you feel a lot of reboots have missed the mark?
I'm starting to feel the opposite, where a lot of reboots are way better than the original.
In general I feel like reboots are lazy. There is a plethora of created and not-yet-created IP to choose from but producers continue to reboot the same franchises often ignoring established cannon in favor of “popcorn eating masses” appeal. Reboots frequently result in a generalization or dilution of the original plot with character traits dialed up to 11.
To answer your question more specifically; yes. Movies like ‘The Magnificent Seven’, franchises like Star Trek in the 90s, even shows like MASH or Buffy the Vampire Slayer (both based on films of the same name) showed that reboots don’t have to be in the same vein as their source content either by a change of genre, a change in timeframe, or even a change in medium. The best reboots have always brought their own new flavor to or take on the original material. But even doing that little means taking a risk and that doesn’t seem to be something producers are willing to do right now.
Nu Trek has been consistently awful.
only SNW has come close to anything that feels like the spirit of trek
The 'Lost In Space" reboot was amazing. They took everything that was dumb in the original show and made it smart. Then they took the one really good thing [Dr. Smith] and made them fantastic.
I'm reserving my judgement until I see the reboot of the Munsters.
Conversely
Producers find a new show idea that looks interesting and could be popular .....
Writers: yeah we got this idea that could be turned into an hour and a half hour long film ... it's very interesting, great plot dialogue, and there's a great twist
Producers, executives: Great idea! I love it! But it would give us more content if you could turn it into a series instead. Take the whole film and stretch it out across seven one hour episodes.
Writers: how?
Producers, executives: just cut it up into seven parts, slow everything down and make a dramatic cliff hanger at the end of every episode.
And then, Kai Patterson comes in and cuts it back down into a pretty good standard length film which I see as a win.
Opposite problem, too. Take what was supposed to be a series and shrink it down to a movie. The Section 31 movie comes to mind. It's so much better if you view it as if it were the pilot for a new series, but that's never going to happen.
It depends. I really like the ability to flesh something out into a longer format - especially book adaptations. Not that there isn't space for 2 hours and under films, but the rise of high production TV series that aren't meant to go on forever IMO has been net positive.
Also writers: We don’t give a shit about the source material the fans love. Fuck these nerds.
Also TV now:
Murder mystery.
"Comedy" that's all about murder mystery.
Depressing drama.
Drama about murder.
Murder comedy that's mostly just drama.
Documentary about murder.
Depressing documentary.
I miss the good engineering docos, how it's made etc. And shows like Mythbusters.
There's nothing quite like that now.
The Netflix show, House of Cards, in the first few minutes of the first episode, Kevin Spacey stumbles on a hit-and-run and there's a badly injured dog. He puts it out of its misery.
According to Netflix who wanted it removed, it led to a major drop off of people dropping off the show. But to the showrunner, that's the point.
Now, people drop off that show when Kevin Spacey appears so whatever.
a major drop off of people dropping off the show
Uhh.. what? So more people kept watching?
Yeah. That first season was really good! And Kate Mara!
Why the point?
My guess is that if you didn't like the dog scene, you wouldn't like the rest of the show. The tone is the same.
Its the idea that not every character should be likeable and not all media should be without friction.
I... generally think stuff like that in the first few episodes is really stupid. Mostly it just turns things into misery porn and is a great way to alienate your audience. I think a much better approach is to lure the audience in so that they don't quite realize when Walter/Saul/Kim became truly irredeemable monsters... even if that tends to lead to people never realizing it.
And I think it is extra disingenuous to pretend that House of Cards was some daring show that bucked all the norms. It wasn't HBO levels of sexposition but they definitely were playiing up the "you can't watch this on network TV" from the first episode.
Print, not TV, but one of my favorite authors is Harry Connolly and his Twenty Palaces series had a pretty infamous chapter that was all one long run on sentence (I forget how many pages but I want to say 5-10?). You don't necessarily realize it in the moment but it is a hard read that is mentally tiring and it perfectly suits the contents of the chapter. Apparently basically every single beta reader hated it and he has alluded to it being why his Agent and Publisher dropped him and... I probably would too. I loved it but it very much hurt the overall pacing of the book to a large degree.
But that was also 3 or 4 books in. Not the first chapter of the first book (which was a child burning to death horribly... Yup. Connolly definitely got a hold of some incriminating photos or something).
It's amazing Black Mirror ever got off the ground then...
I'd rather have them kill shows immediately than right before the final season. See Westworld, Expanse and (almost) Snowpiercer. I'm currently really anxious about Yellowjackets.
Firefly still hurts though.
Firefly still hurts though.
With age comes wisdom. I realized some time ago that we get to love Firefly because it never lived long enough to be bad. No one talks about famous actor James Dean becoming an ultraconservative asshole, being closeted racist, or a serial abuser of women. He died before anything like that could happen. Firefly is the same way. It lives in our hearts with all of the potential it could have been. Contrast that to Game of Thrones which had a wonderful start and a dreadful and forgettable end.
How many people today would say "Lets binge watch all of Firefly from beginning to end!" vs "Lets binge watch all of Game of Thrones from beginning to end!"?
This is how I've always felt about it too. All of Whedon's other shows had twists that made the audience hate entire seasons; there's no reason to believe Firefly would have escaped that pattern.
So instead of being sad it died early, we can be glad we can still imagine where it could have gone in the best case scenario. The vision in our minds will likely be better than what we would have got if it'd continued.
No need to worry about Jayne's inevitable face-heel turn, or whatever other terrible subplots could potentially have cropped up in later seasons like River developing explicit (rather than merely suggested) incestuous feelings for Simon, or Inara betraying the crew for a cure to her disease (before being welcomed back a season later), or Kaylee getting killed off out of nowhere because Whedon loves doing that to characters of her archetype, or YoSaffBridge becoming a core crew member after we learn her tragic backstory even though her awful personality hasn't changed at all.
And that's not even getting into what the network execs, who hated the show, would have done with their meddling. Things could have been so much worse. Fans should console themselves with the fact that the show at least died with its dignity intact, and we even got a movie that resolved a few of the major hanging threads.
No one talks about famous actor James Dean becoming an ultraconservative asshole, being closeted racist, or a serial abuser of women. He died before anything like that could happen. Firefly is the same way.
Something like this would have happened even if Joss Whedon wasn't revealed to be a scumbag. Adam Baldwin, the actor who played Jayne, went on to become a major mouthpiece for the alt-right and a mainstay of conservative Twitter. IIRC he's even the one who named GamerGate (not that the name required even a modicum of creativity).
If you want to know how the series would've been if it had stayed on, you can read the comics.
Yeah, but half a season?
The Expanse would need at least 3 seasons to catch up to the books. I'd rather they stop at the actual end of an arc (which is followed by 30 year time skip, mind you) than half ass through and botch the ending of the entire series.
I will never forget when Netflix had the "New Season" banner on Firefly. On April 1st.
the one thing i do appreciate is them dropping filler episodes
Oh no, filler is a good thing. Filler gives you time to know the characters, and adds depth and color to the world. Filler is where writers actually get to stretch and try out ideas. Filler is what makes a show feel full.
Imagine the X-Files with no filler. We'd lose the Jose Chung episodes, "Home," "the Post-Modern Prometheus," and so many other great episodes. Without the filler, it's just an endless slog through Chris Carter's poorly planned mythology. Just the smoking man and vanishing babies for eleven nine seasons.
Filler can be good, it can also be bad, and perhaps most strangely it can be "bad" but also "fuck you I want to see Goku scream 'give me your energy' for four episodes before he releases the spirit bomb. Again."
I think your opinion is by far the more popular view right now. I completely disagree though. Almost every mini-series I see I'm left dumbstruck as I feel like any decent editor could have gotten the same story across just as well with a 2 or 2.5h movie instead. I feel like they are just wasting my time.
i mean i haven't rewatched xfiles since the 90s but isn't that more of a victim of being a transition between monster of the week episodic and season long story arcs?
just an endless slog through Chris Carter’s poorly planned mythology
Exactly. Watching just those episodes on a binge is going to be... okay, at best. You really need the time in-between those plot beats to let it marinade a bit. Let the conspiracy and shadow-government machinations grow in your head. It lets you get real hungry for the next morsel of "the truth" that eventually comes your way. Then you savor it while you watch Mulder out-think a Genie or whatever.
Community has the best "big round number" episode.
And also the best bottle episode.
Except that one episode of Breaking Bad...
But then again, that show is over a decade old at this point.
Which one was filler?
Honestly there is so much back catalog to watch, who even needs a flood of new stuff? I can't possibly keep up.
That's the problem.
All new TV must compete with the rest of the gag streaming catalog.
I mean, this is entirely untrue. There's a bit in the first episode of the renewed 4th season of Family Guy joking about it. This was 20 years ago. FOX had already stumbled on the "people are more excited about the first season of a show" formula that Netflix wouldn't adopt for another decade.
And that's not even considering the graveyard of television in the 80s and 90s. Shows nobody even knew about until they'd been cancelled (American Gothic, the Original Battlestar Galactica, Freaks and Geeks) or shows that flared out from the enormous budget (Alf, Dinosaurs) too soon, but developed cult following after they were gone.
Survivorship bias is a hell of a drug.
On the plus side, it makes fishing for the TONS of shows that never got past a couple airings surprisingly entertaining.
Crap was so ruthless seasons weren't fully ordered, written or filmed by the time they were on the air because shows would get cancelled overnight, so they were fully ramped up and working without knowing if they'd end the season they were doing at the time. Between that and how much cheaper everything was it's no wonder no film actors would be caught dead in a TV show until prestige television broke out of that mold.
Between that and how much cheaper everything was
I mean, here's an article from 1992 complaining that TV costs too much to produce.
I'm sure a proper Marxist could say something about the stead decline of profit. But if TV studios are strapped for cash, you'd never know from that validations of their parent companies.
it’s no wonder no film actors would be caught dead in a TV show until prestige television broke out of that mold.
There was definitely a jump from TV to Movies that people didn't want to come back from. But there's also only so many hours in the day, and half of making a movie was the market you did after filming was completed.
But at the end of the day... People remember Cheers and Cosby Show much more vividly than The Critic or Joey.
They make a lot of shows now that would never have been greenlit back when all shows had to be hits. It's possible to have a niche now.
Briefly, but it's possible.
If it's on Netflix, don't expect them to finish the show.
Absolutely.
I maintain that Netflix is basically like The Cannon Group was back in the 1980's... only, profitable. They just throw everything at the wall and see what sticks. You get some real art that way, a few okay wins, some real duds, and some absolute freaks of nature that crawl their way to the top and/or into cult status. But none of it is what typical execs would go for. Which is to say that it's a viable economic niche in the entertainment industry, especially now that it's bigger than ever.
I know the 26 ep a season shooting schedule was hell on actors, but it really allowed for more variety in episodic shows. There could be good eps and stinkers in a season without it impacting the overall show. Plus it gave you more time to weave in on-going plots while also giving room to explore specific characters more thoroughly.
It worked for sitcoms and Law and Order, but generally I prefer the tighter writing that can come with shorter seasons.
I'll take 10 excellent episodes over 26 fair-to-good episodes any day.
It also guaranteed work for those actors. A 3 season show meant you had steady work for 3 straight years and could still do auditions when you had time. This 10 episodes every 3 years is dumb
Yes, it was a guaranteed paycheck... until the show ended. And doing a movie in the off months basically only worked for a Clooney level talent where anyone who ever interacted with him realized he was a generational talent that guys and gals would swoon for. Everyone else MAYBE could get a bit part if they knew the production crew (see: The Schwim on Band of Brothers). And then, if you were lucky, you were basically typecast by the time the show ended and stuck either playing the same character or needing to find a company that wanted to take a chance on you reinventing yourself... which lined up with the weinsteins of the world.
And all of that assumes that you aren't in a role that requires you to spend most of your off time staying in shape and having more or less the same appearance in case pick-ups are required. Otherwise you have entire VFX teams working to... remove a mustache.
That is why there is increasing pushback to Marvel Movie contracts from a lot of actors. Yes, it is a guaranteed paycheck (although those get smaller and smaller with each geneartion) but it is also the only thing you can really do for however many years in case you get called up that you just got one of your appearances added to a TV show everyone will hate.
Which is more or less where we are at. Sure you sometimes have something like a Zendaya where the Disney Channel actress you got for your lead suddenly becomes the most popular actress on the planet and you have to work around her schedule AND all the supporting actors who became high B listers. But mostly you are just dealing with talent who care more about their careers than making sure they are available for the one episode you want them to come back next year.
Its why so much of the Game of Thrones fandom (and original creator...) clearly don't have much production experience. Yes, it would have been cool to have arcs like Lady Stoneheart. But the chances of Michelle Fairley being interested in coming back four years later for two episodes is nigh zero AND would have given her way more negotiating power than studios want. Same for all the other one off characters who come back two books later.
Totally disagree. The amount of episodes per season in the old days is what made so many shows so much worse than they should've been
I was thrilled by the BBC Sherlock that I wanted more. It was like 9 episodes across three seasons.
I think CBS had a Sherlock show with Lucy Lawless, which had like a couple seasons and 20 episodes each. And yikes. The story went nowhere, with their monster-of-the-week storytelling.
I hate when they release streaming shows one episode per week. I am not going to watch it until it’s done and I catch up on other shows. Stop trying to get me to watch weekly, it’s not going to happen. That’s just not how people watch tv anymore.
So a new show to me is new for a solid year before i can get to it sometimes. So many times a show gets cancelled before I can watch it and half the time I lose interest once I know it’s cancelled
Maybe I'm weird but sometimes I actually enjoy streaming one episode per week, especially if I like the show, it just forces me to spread it out.
Dude id be fine with like 3 per week... if they do 13-14 episodes then they guaranteed two months streaming income. As it is... yes im gonna just keep rotating streaming services.
I spread it out regardless, I just don’t want to pick up a show without a conclusion.
There's so many shows that I watch one episode of something with the wife every night, and we haven’t run out of stuff to watch in years. We like to watch one show at a time till we finish the season before we move on to something else, so we just wait till the show or season is over
That's some rose colored glasses right there.
TNG, Voyager... Rough first seasons leading to excellent series
Also see Life on Mars, Journeyman, Freaks and Geeks, Pushing Daisies, and Freaking Firefly.
None of this is new.
Part of the problem is that modern shows have far smaller audience than two decades ago in absolute numbers. The most watched shows today have horrific numbers compared to previous decades.
I hadn't thought of that. When something was broadcasted then, everybody watched it. And at the same time even.
RIP KAOS
ಥ_ಥ
RIP Dennis
Back when you had TV on a specific schedule, you were forced to watch things as they were. If a show was clunky, well you didn't have much choice in the matter, it was watch that or change channel or go outside.
With on-demand stuff, you can just completely skip over stuff you might actually like because the first few episodes are clunky. Why should I watch something clunky when I have the choice to watch something I know is good from the start?
...I'm still not watching One Piece though, I don't care how good it gets later.
Every 100 episodes of one piece has 10 good episodes. Fans of the show will clip those 10 episodes and yell from the rooftops that it’s the best show.
Is there a television show that doesn't have a gun in it?
The grand tour.
Clarksons farm.
Must see if you like laughing your ass off.
I had the exact same thought. Abandoning American productions is the best way, although it sometimes means reading subtitles. For example, many of these are free to watch:
Ireland https://www.tg4.ie/en/player/online-boxsets/ South Korea https://www.viki.com/categories/country/korea/genre/all
Black Books
You just have to forget that it's Graham Linehan who wrote that because it never quite hits the same when you realise who it was. It's the same with IT Crowd and Father Ted.
Tons of 'em! Comedies, in particular, tend not to have guns. I watch a lot of UK light ent, particularly panel shows, which fit the bill.Then there's sci-fi (if you're cool with space guns), and shows set before guns were invented (other weapons may make appearances).
I'm currently re-reading Dan Simmons' Hyperion Cantos, and something struck me. If this had been made into an HBO/... show, like, 8 years ago, it could have been a genre- and generation defining TV event akin to Game of Thrones.
But if it was to be produced today? It would be a cringe, plastic-feeling knock-off akin to Netflix' Last Airbender.
Apparently I have horrible taste because every show i like gets canceled in the first or second season
Twin peaks?
Twin Peaks started out good and stayed good. I didn't get around to watching it until the late 2000s. I had heard that it started to fall apart after the killer was revealed, but it just kept getting better.
It isn't for everybody, though, and it probably just got too weird for a mainstream audience.
Have you seen the third season? Came out in 2017. I think it's some of the best TV that's ever been made.
Especially episode 8. Just pure David Lynch surreal perfection, right in my veins.
Two seasons in the early 90s, then a third season in 2017 where David Lynch basically got a blank check to completely unleash his beautiful insanity. Definitely shows the differences between what was acceptable on broadcast TV back then, vs what's acceptable on cable/streaming in a much more modern era.
There is a weird inverse relationship between how long audiences will wait to give a show a chance, and how long execs (specifically Netflix) will give the show.
I think there must be more to the Netflix example. Maybe they are monitoring other data points like web searches or show mentions on fora to quantify buzz and work out if the show has hit potential with target markets. Either that or they get some new opportunity for creative accounting with each show.
Netflix take note!
50 years ago: 6 episodes in a season and stop after 2 seasons because it's well written without a bunch of useless filler.
I wanted to dispute this, but aside from the hyperbole around the number of episodes per season, top-rated TV in 1975 was pretty damn good.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top-rated_United_States_television_programs_of_1975%E2%80%9376