Is TV better than it used to be?

[pryor15]

well, the big thing to consider was that for the longest time TV was considered the clear second class citizen compared to movies. if a movie star did a TV series, it was a sign their star was fading. but, over the last couple years TV has finally figured out that there are things they can do better than film. they can have bigger, more complicated storylines and casts and do them justice, simply because they have more time to work with. Just think how a show like LOST or Deadwood would be as a film. they'd be 2 hours long and missing a lot of the character development and whatnot that really makes them so great.

In order to compete, the standard style shows have had to up the ante quality-wise, so that overall we have TV that's better across the board ([censored], cheap reality TV aside).

it also doesn't hurt that there's a lot more channels

[Blarg]

William Goldman made great comments on how movies have become star-centric, and supporting characters have dwindled down to nothing, making films flatter and less believable. He said that back in the 80's. That has just gotten worse since then. People don't do a lot of shooting in wide angle anymore because everything is centered around a star, and woe to the costar whose role is too strong -- his best lines and aspects will simply be transferred over to the star, while the costar becomes a shell.

Good, well-developed supporting characters who do more than just set up a spike for the star are not as common anymore, and that's a shame.

But I agree that long plotlines are more common these days, and sometimes well thought out ones. There seems to be more willingness to experiment with narrative and produce a long, somewhat cohesive story out of connected episodes. Old t.v. often began anew with each episode yet ended up, no matter how well done, in the same place. As much as I love Colombo and Spock, there was little danger that either would change much or discover much once a series found its rhythm. They basically punched the clock. Now you're at least a little more likely to be surprised.

Just like you're more likely to not be surprised that shows may seem to have only one character, the superstar, surrounded more or less by shadows.

[youtalkfunny]

[ QUOTE ]
If you get the chance to see an old show from the '70s or even '80s that you thought was really good, do so. They were generally pretty horrid. There are classics from that era as well, but there's some really, really bad shows out there, especially dramas.

[/ QUOTE ]

Somebody around here once posted, "I saw an episode of Bonanza for the first time. It sucked! How could that show have been #1 for 20 years in a row?"

People old enough to fondly recall Bonanza thought he was crazy.

Then those same people came back and said, "You know what? I just caught a Bonanza re-run, and you're right, it DID suck."

[Wynton]

Eh, I think all of you lack a real historical perspective, or memories have just faded. As far as I'm concerned, since the beginning of time, 95% of what has been broadcast has been pretty junky, including what is on now. And every year, there is a handful of quality shows.

It is true that tv has matured, shows have become grittier and more realistic. But many of us don't consider the overabundance of reality shows to be a positive development.

And I don't think that it is fair to view a show a few decades old and apply it to today's sensibilities. Just because a show is dated does not mean it was not well executed. Consider "The Twilight Zone" for a second. That show is dated in countless ways and probably looks silly to a lot of people. But it still had some excellent writing and acting.

[Acein8ter]

With some of the cool reality shows, yes. I don't watch/follow sitcoms or any of the other weekly primetime shows.

[Mr. Orange]

[ QUOTE ]

For something not too old and available on Netflix I'd recommend "Homicide: Life on the Street". Like "The Wire" it's also based in Baltimore. You should also be able to find at least one old thread discussing this show on TLDR or even OOT.

[/ QUOTE ]

Great show. Probably one of the best shows ever made. It wasn't as much as a procedural as some of the cop shows but dealt more with the emotional states of officers and how they handled the job while trying to maintain family lifes. They also showed how the stress of the job wore them down over time and changed them- absolutely fascinating character study. And Andre Braugher is probably the most underated actor of our lifetime.

[stjohnychan]

[ QUOTE ]
I doubt there's one hospital show pre-St. Elsewhere that stands up anymore.

[/ QUOTE ]

MASH is pre-St. Elsewhere, no? Stands up.

[katyseagull]

[ QUOTE ]
Just because a show is dated does not mean it was not well executed. Consider "The Twilight Zone" for a second. That show is dated in countless ways and probably looks silly to a lot of people. But it still had some excellent writing and acting.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this is a very good point. I was trying to think of some old shows and a lot of them do seem a little lame to me. I guess it's like you say...maybe they don't apply to our sensibilities?

For instance, Stjohnychan mentioned MASH. This was one of my dad's favorite shows. I've seen it before but not for a few years. I caught a couple episodes of it last year and was surprised. I thought it was forced and kind of sappy.

On the other hand, some of the old comedies stand up really well. Frasier makes me laugh my head off. So does Family Ties. Also, last year I started watching All in the Family. That show was kind of funny!


As far as hospital shows go, I don't think Grey's Anatomy is any better then any old hospital show. It is really stupid. However, I do think House and Scrubs are far better than the oldies. Basically, I think TV is all over the place right now.

I'm with the guy above who said the reality shows can be cool. I love watching The Amazing Race and So You Think You Can Dance. Now that's good TV right there.

[Colt McCoy]

[ QUOTE ]
As far as I'm concerned, since the beginning of time, 95% of what has been broadcast has been pretty junky, including what is on now. And every year, there is a handful of quality shows.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this is right. There are tons of great old shows over the years. Granted some of the older shows that were popular for a little while aren't as good in hindsight, but that doesn't mean there weren't some good ones. I'm sure in a few years we'll be looking back at today's shows and thinking the same thing. A lot of them we liked were really awful, but a few were really good. FWIW I watch Andy Griffith a couple of times a week.

[katyseagull]

Andy Griffith is an excellent show.