![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
Entry tags:
The beauty (?) of pre-streaming TV
Apologies for the post title -- I am very bad at coming up with titles for entries.
This topic arose out of a discussion on Bluesky and I thought it would be interesting to post it here. The premise is that before streaming, scripted television had to react to its own reality. What I mean is, shows that had to pump out 20+ episode seasons *every year* had to deal with actual real life things and work them into the script. For example, a character becomes pregnant because the actor gets pregnant, or a lead role had to "go missing" for part of a season because the actor was off doing a movie or dealing with a real life issue, or a character had to end up in a cast or otherwise accommodated because the actor injured themselves in real life, or the "filler episodes" that exist because of budget concerns, or the finales that were written because they didn't know if they'd be renewed for another season, etc.
This topic arose out of a discussion on Bluesky and I thought it would be interesting to post it here. The premise is that before streaming, scripted television had to react to its own reality. What I mean is, shows that had to pump out 20+ episode seasons *every year* had to deal with actual real life things and work them into the script. For example, a character becomes pregnant because the actor gets pregnant, or a lead role had to "go missing" for part of a season because the actor was off doing a movie or dealing with a real life issue, or a character had to end up in a cast or otherwise accommodated because the actor injured themselves in real life, or the "filler episodes" that exist because of budget concerns, or the finales that were written because they didn't know if they'd be renewed for another season, etc.
With streaming, because the wait between seasons is so long, we no longer get these (admittedly sometimes rather demented) workarounds anymore. Or as one person on Bluesky put it: "If you can just tell the story you want to tell with the actors you have with whatever running time you want, it's not TV, it's a movie."
Thoughts? Do you miss the imposed responsiveness of pre-streaming TV? Do you have any favourite (or not so favourite) examples of plot lines that came about because of real life events involving the actors or other aspects of the show (e.g. budget issues)?
no subject
"the finales that were written because they didn't know if they'd be renewed for another season"
Which surely still happens? Netflix in particular has a horrific cancellation rate, apparently based on streaming in the first week or so of release.
"If you can just tell the story you want to tell with the actors you have with whatever running time you want, it's not TV, it's a movie."
Which streaming service or which creative team has that level of security? Perhaps someone like the Russo brothers after their hugely sucessful Marvel movies - I believe they are currently producing their 'Citadel' spy shows for Amazon Prime in between working on the next Avengers movies. They also made one of the most successful movies of all time in 'Avengers: Endgame'.
no subject
I miss the 20+ episodes, I miss fillers, and I miss the real life stuff that had to be worked in, either globally or just personally for the actors.
no subject
Filler episodes sucked, but that was also how new writers got their foot in the door and experience. The larger writing rooms, filler eps, etc let the industry train up writers and created an experienced pool we aren't replenishing.
The only good example I can think of in terms on responsiveness is on Leverage when Gina Bellman got pregnant, that's where Tara came from and she's amazing. They handled it well, though, and most shows just don't. Tara was back and remained part of the world building.
no subject
For one, this way of producing for TV shows was far from universal. British shows (in)famously take longer to film while having significantly shorter seasons than USA produced shows. Why is the American pre-streaming way treated as just the nature of things, while a slower production mode is talked about as if it's bizarre and i precedent even though it really isn't?
Second, why is it that every time this gets brought up all anyone wants to talk about is whether or not this was good/bad for the viewers, but seldom mentions how it affected the cast and crew? I don't know much about this issue, but my intuition says this sort of work schedules contributes to toxic work environments. I'm not actually interested in passing judgements on specific productions, though, I'm more concerned with the fact that it's like 99% good ol' days nostalgia kvetching and generously 1% serious discussion around the real life circumstances
of TV productions.
As for particular examples of real life writing the plot, I'd say my favorite is Spencer Reid spending a good chunk of Season 5 with a serious leg injury because Matthew Gray Gubler broke his leg from dancing too hard (this is only a slight exaggeration). Least favorite is Kutner committing suicide in House MD because Kal Penn was working for the Obama administration. Altho, I do actually find that one kinda funny, just because it's such an unexpected reason.
Having said that, though, I don't harbor any particular nostalgia for that time. It wasn't bad or anything, but filler episodes didn't matter to me then (as in, I didn't see what was so bad about them) and they don't matter to me now (I don't see what's so good either.) Probably why I'm kind of unsympathetic to this sentiment lol.
no subject
The issue of writer training is a concerning one. I know that it used to be part of the union rules that at least 1 episode per season had to go to a new (non-writer's room) writer in the U.S.. I've noticed that in the UK it's not unusual for a single showrunner to write an entire season. But with so much moving to streaming, shorter seasons, and piecemeal work, I wonder how much of this even happens anymore.
no subject
no subject
I found the statement surprising because, while I can believe SW took longer to shoot than some UK shows (essentially being 10+ hours a year), the 9 month shooting schedule was (and still is for a number of U.S. shows) standard for 22 hours of TV. So I would have assumed SW would take no more than 6 months to do. Why is there such a difference in production times?
I agree that what was the default for U.S. TV has been grueling for a lot of performers and crew. I know some actors stated they hoped for half hour sitcoms because the schedule was so light (and, of course, there was hardly ever location/night shooting which takes up a lot more time). And dramas and procedurals often had a lot less work than, say, shows like Buffy or Supernatural which involved night shoots, locations, special effects, stunts and unpredictable hours, so even one hour dramas were not all the same.
There's definitely been many who have argued that "prestige TV" would not have been possible on the usual breakneck schedule, both because of prep and shooting time, as well as locking actors into more months of each year, and thus limiting their opportunities for other roles. I would certainly agree that it's also easier to create more, different shows if you're doing less of each and trying many things instead of shows that have to hook half the potential audience.
no subject
I think this still exists? A lot of network television is still produced for regular tv. Streaming is still a secondary market for many shows and networks. And plenty of shows still have weekly 18-22 episode runs. NCIS last season was 20 episodes. SVU was 22 eps. 911 was 18 eps.
but for baby cover ups, there was a season in Star Trek Voyager where the actress who played B'Elanna was pregnant, and for the most part they hid this (poorly lol you could still tell). But there were two episodes, where the crew was kidnapped and put into a holodeck program set during WWII and given new identities. B'Elanna's new persona was pregnant, so they showed her pregnancy for two episodes.
As someone else mentioned though, The Nanny was the best one, when CCs actor was pregnant. They made the hiding of it part of the comedy. They even had scene where CC was holding a poster for the musical "baby" in front of her belly lol
no subject
Good point -- I sort of forgot about real world events being addressed, e.g. COVID, the 9-11 attacks on New York, etc.
no subject
I think the best Star Trek pregnancy plot was on Deep Space Nine, when, to deal with Nana Visitor's pregnancy, they had Major Kira become the surrogate mother for the O'Briens. Keiko was critically injured in an accident aboard a runabout and in order to save the baby, Dr. Bashir transferred it to the only available undamaged womb — Kira's.
no subject
no subject
Part of that might be the absence of commercial pressure for BBC productions -- they can take more time to produce the shows. Also, I would think for shows that have a lot of outdoor scenes, they have to allow for weather give that it does tend to rain a lot in the UK. They might also make more use of location shooting all over the country (rather than just in LA or NYC, for example), rather than film everything on sound stages, so that would require more time for location scouting and such.
no subject
Interestingly, it was the latest season of Unforgotten which actually made, not Covid itself, but lockdowns a factor in the storyline. Given the show deals with cold cases I found it a bit eyebrow raising that something so recent would be the subject of the story. Yet here was a show which could easily have dodged the events and didn't.
I do think there's something missed when a show is unable to get audience response to storylines or characters or to current events while it's in production. At the same time, very few shows are on a schedule where there can be true immediacy, and short seasons with short breaks could also do just as well.
Thoughts
I also miss the size of the seasons. They had more content on average.
And I miss the predictability. TV had seasons. I knew when to look for new things, compare options, and decide what I wanted to watch.
Finally, I didn't have to pay for television. Once the machine was bought, the content was free, and it didn't have pop-ups or logos plastered across the screen while I was trying to watch a show. There just commercials, and we got up to hit the kitchen or bathroom during them. When cable came out, I warned people that once they started paying for shows to avoid ads, they'd wind up paying AND still suffering through ads. Nobody believed me.
Aaaaand now I'm homesick. *sigh*
no subject
Examples of pre-streaming?
John Ritter died in the middle of the comedy series - 10 Things...and James Garner took over as the grandfather.
Buffy the Vampire Slayer?
* OZ had to be written out in S4 because Seth Green wanted out of his contract. So they brought in Tara full time.
* Angel and Cordelia were being spun off into Angel's television series, so had to be written out of Buffy.
* S4 Buffy - was a bit of a mess, because the main villain portrayed by Lindsey Crouse wasn't available all the way through.
* the actress playing Buffy wanted to host SNL when one episode was filming, and they film on weekends and she's usually in every scene or most of them - so in Bewitched, Bothered, and Bewildered they turned the character into a rat for about half of the episode. Another episode - she needed to go off and do something or other - and her character was turned invisible.
Angel the Series
* Cordelia was supposed to be the main villain in S4, but the actress got pregnant, so they had to change the plot and story, and make her pregnant and possessed by the baby, then in a coma after giving birth to the big bad. Ironically it saved the character from being the villain. (Despite what fans and the actress may think - they were writing out the character one way or the other - mainly as the main villain of the season. Her getting pregnant actually kept the character from becoming a villain, but they still killed her off.)
no subject
I think 9/11 got a similar treatment where it was not incorporated into the storylines in the running shows but only in later ones. Even The West Wing made that call, because they couldn't incorporate it. The episode that they filmed during 9/11 was incredible, it was political, it even talked about Islamic extremism...but the Towers didn't come down there. And I still think that was the right decision.
no subject
no subject
I remember New Amsterdam did try to acknowledge Covid as a thing for more than one episode -- it was the only medical-type show I watched at the time, so not sure what other shows did. And FBI had people wearing masks for a bit. But now the only masks involved in that show are always on the bad guys. I'm really fed up with the police looking at CCTV and saying "There he is -- he's wearing one of those covid masks!" Really doesn't help those of us who still mask regularly in public spaces. The Connors remains the only show that I know of that made Covid a major thing during one season -- from people losing their jobs, "lock downs", wearing masks, testing, etc. I never watched the show at the time, but I've seen it in syndication since, and appreciate the fact that it acknowledges a serious, global thing that impacted pretty much everyone.
no subject
So this is why, honestly, I would prefer they ignore it. Or heck, use a fictional disease or a flu pandemic or something.
no subject