Archive for the ‘Television Shows’ Category

A Word on Fan Fiction

Tuesday, December 1st, 2009

One of the things that I think marks great episodic television is that it inevitably engenders a slew of fan fiction. And I love that the internet has helped not only globalize “water cooler conversation,” but has also provided a place where fans encourage each other to add to the lexicon of a show with new stories, sidelines, etc. When you consider the amount of creative work created by fans that surrounds (and dare I say, supplements) the creative work contributed by a series itself, it’s really quite incredible. It reminds you that good television exists not only to entertain but also to engage.

And some fans really do engage. For example, Chance McClain. This Joss Whedon fan actually wrote, directed, and produced a 45 minute musical prequel to Whedon’s Dr. Horrible series and put it online. And you know what? It’s actually pretty good. You can watch it here.

Now, I’m sure that there’s going to be some sticky issues concerning creative control and copyright infringement when a man usurps another man’s characters and creates his own supplementary narrative. But it’s also sort of great that this fan was moved to cash in his 401k and respond to something he saw on the internet.

What watching THE PRISONER taught me

Thursday, November 19th, 2009

Yes, I did it. I watched the whole thing. There were times I didn’t think I’d make it. But yes, I did, I made it through the entire remake of The Prisoner on AMC. An unlimited supply of popcorn and chocolate chips helped, as did the knowledge that at some point this show would end and I would leave the experience with some new found knowledge. And here it is:

1. Cast Sir Ian McKellan in everything always.

Ian McKellan is like Kryptonite to channel changers. There is no way a person can change the channel on this man. In the original series, Number Two was played by a different person each week. A smart device if you want to explore issues of expendability, but thankfully not one used in the remake. Because let me tell you, if they replaced McKellan, I would have turned off my tv.

2. Don’t steal aspects of the OLD show and put them in the NEW show if the new show has an entirely different premise.

Case in point: the numbering system. If the new village is supposed to be some sort of Utopian existence, (unlike the old village which was a prison), then taking away people’s names and numbering them all makes absolutely no sense. It’s nice to have an homage and all, but stick to showing us lava lamps and referencing costumes…

3. If you make 6 episodes, air 6 episodes.

Don’t air three mega-episodes as two hour “events” instead. The thing that makes episodic television great is just that: the episodes. It let’s us follow a distinct aspect of the story, muse on it, discuss it with others. If you present two episodes back to back, without any sense of divide between the two, we begin to wonder why we watched the first hour of the show when the second goes in another direction.

4. Just because we love a mystery, doesn’t mean we like getting yanked around.

You may think that because we watch LOST and revel in the random polar bear sitings and black clouds, that we’re OK without explanations of why these things exist. Not so. We continue to watch so that eventually we will understand WHY JJ Abrams imported a polar bear to Hawaii. And JJ Abrams knows that, which is why he asked for an end date to the series so that he could start explaining things without veering too far off course. But this was a six hour show. It had an end. So tell why, by the end of these six hours, do I still not know what the hell that bouncing white ball is supposed to be?

5. Don’t call me stupid (ahem… Subaru).

Did anyone else notice that during the commercial breaks, Subaru “presented” hints to what was going on? Hints like: “the pills and the holes are connected.” Wow, really Subaru? Thanks for thinking I’m an idiot. Much appreciated.

Dollhouse Cancelled. World Mourns.

Monday, November 16th, 2009

Yeah, you heard me. We’re on the last 13 episodes.

It’s not that Dollhouse wasn’t a flawed show. It had issues – the biggest being Eliza Dukshu (sorry, Dukshu fans). And, of course, the implausibility behind there being a dollhouse that remains hidden despite the fact that whenever a doll is sent out on a mission, something inevitably backfires.

That said, Joss Whedon’s writing, dialogue, and character development are pretty much the best you’re going to see on television. (Don’t believe me? Rent Buffy Seasons 1-7. And then read all the books written about the series, because other people are more literate than I am and can tell you why Buffy might have been the most important show on television)  And when Whedon concentrated on the far superior, supporting cast’s backstories, what came out was absolutely heartwrenching television.

The worst part of Dollhouse’s cancellation, though, is that this story’s not going to have an ending. The 13 episodes have already been shot, and we’re all going to be left wondering what comes next. In an ideal world, Fox would let Joss write a response to last season’s unaired episode, Epitaph One (but released on DVD and itunes), if only to give us a sense of hope after the apocalypse (another Whedon signature).

Wouldn’t it be wonderful if TV creators (besides J J Abrams) were given a realistic sense of their show’s lifespan, so that they could plan their story accordingly. Of course, this would need to happen in a world without as much dependence on advertising dollars, ratings, and bottom lines.

Storyboard TV, anyone?

What did Sesame Street really teach us?

Monday, November 16th, 2009

So, in case your head is in a hole somewhere, you’ve probably realized that it’s the 40th anniversary of Sesame Street. There’s a lot of blogging dedicated to this fact today, so I thought I’d throw in my two cents.

I loved Sesame Street. I mean, come on, who didn’t?  My favorite character was Snuffleupagus because nobody could see him and I liked watching Big Bird get frustrated about it. Oh, and of course the grouch. Because he lived in a trash can.

But I’ve also always had a bone to pick with this show. I’m pretty sure it helped create an ADD generation of people who are unable to be interested in anything for more than three minutes. With it’s short sketches and songs, it trained generations of children to expect a lesson in a short amount of time. There was no plot arc, no character development, no slowly working towards a larger goal. I don’t know – maybe this makes me seem crotchety – but I wonder if the reason we all like you tube clips and cliffhangers before every commercial break is because we never learned patience as children.

That said, it was also groundbreaking in the way it introduced the very concept of watching television to children. Fellow blogger, James Poniewozik, puts it best:

“I like to think that, in some small way, Sesame also taught kids to be smarter media consumers, and that this was as valuable a service as teaching the alphabet. By spoofing TV, the show didn’t just captivate kids; it also taught by example that a news show or an entertainment show has its own rules and conventions—it taught kids that shows are shows, performed by people for cameras, and not reality. It deflated the pomposity of news anchors for kids, and showed them by referencing the traditions of commercial TV (“brought to you by the number 8,” etc.) that TV is in the business of selling you things.” (Read the whole article at: http://tunedin.blogs.time.com/2009/11/10/sesame-street-raising-little-media-critics-for-40-years/)

It’s a nice idea to think that watching Sesame Street helped fortify me for my future life of watching too much TV. Maybe it made me a more critical watcher. Hey – and maybe it prepared me for the shorter acts between longer commercial breaks.