TV Tuesday: A Good Thing?

[yourlibrarian]

Given it’s the most watched (original) series ever on Netflix, Stranger Things was a must-view for many. It was also a show whose story was dragged out for so long that its characters aged into adulthood. Is it great when a favorite gets extended into many seasons? Or is the lure of a potential franchise something that ruins what was once enjoyable? Does the type of story being told matter?

Comments

[jo]

I don't think the issue is a series lasting a long time, it's more the time it takes now between series/seasons of a show. If you look at network TV series that ran a long time, they produced new seasons annually. So you take, for example, The Waltons, which ran 9 seasons and starred a boatload of kids -- the kids aged and got married/started their own families as the series went on. I never watched Stranger Things beyond season 2, so I don't know if the timeline from one season to the next is supposed to be rather continuous or if it incorporated the massive gaps between series to explain why the kids aren't kids anymore? But if each series of it is supposed to take place immediately following the events of the previous one, then yeah, that becomes a bit of an issue if you're dealing with kid actors and taking an eternity to produce new series of it.

Shows like M*A*S*H*, which ran 11 years but was supposedly about the Korean War which lasted 2 years -- obviously the big issue is the stars looking much older after 11 years than they would have if the show had lasted only as long as the actual war. But the quality of the show actually got better and better as the show went on, so as long as it remained excellent, no one was going to complain about how long it had been on the air.

If a show maintains its excellence, I don't think it matters how many seasons it lasts. But if it's a show that involves kids, and is set within a specific, narrow time-frame, then you either make it a one or 2 season thing, or produce your seasons annually, or else you rethink the approach so your characters can age realistically along with the actors playing them.

[naushika]

I really miss when TV shows aired a season per year. I completely understand that pumping out a 22+ episode season every year is hard on everyone (cast and crew alike), expensive, and being phased out. But I think 10 episodes every 2-3 years is too harsh of a rebound. It's that loooong period between seasons that's so detrimental. It doesn't really matter what kind of show it is, it's just those periods of nothing that are damaging.

I feel like a healthy compromise is a season of 15 episodes, and one season a year. I'm hoping TV creators come around because IDK how much longer I can do this. I lost interest in Stranger Things a long time ago, and I also forgot about it so when I heard the final season was happening my only response was, "oh, that's still on?"

[rogueslayer452]

It's less that a show goes on for so long, but more that there's an extended wait period between seasons that. With Stranger Things it basically ten years for five seasons, and that's....not good, honestly. This is an issue with the streaming model in general, though. Not only that, seasons aren't even that long anyway. Having six episodes per season and a prolonged wait time in between seasons isn't ideal, it doesn't give a lasting impression for the most part, and in fact many either lose interest entirely or don't bother starting a new show because they know that it'll take years before the next season to arrive. While traditional network television had its own fair share of issues, at least it had a set schedule.

Now, if we're going by shows from before, that also was kind of a mixed bag. We often bemoan prematurely cancelled shows, but there are also shows that go far beyond its desired expiration date. The general consensus seems to be five or six seasons (with 22+ episodes per season) is ideal in most cases, although it truly depends on the show and the story being told. Some require more seasons, some less, it's about the story the creator is trying to tell.

[yourlibrarian]

I could do with 10 episodes, but I agree that an annual season seems long enough for planning purposes. And more shows could be a limited series so that it's just one and done.

[yourlibrarian]

That last issue is the key one, I think. In the past there often was no particular story that showrunners wanted to tell. It was just a matter of coming up with something to fill airtime for 6 months. And if enough people watched it would go on until ratings didn't justify production costs anymore (or else cast left and ratings dropped).

I've been listening to a con appearance by the Buffy/Angel writers, and they talked about how different the show was than any other they'd worked on. Part of that is that each episode had specific character arcs, and there was always a plan where the season would end up. They said a lot of other shows focused on an idea for an episode, not a plan for what it meant for a character or the season's development.

[yourlibrarian]

It wasn't starting immediately after the events, but the story had to be stretched out some to account for the rapid change in the kids. The final season they're supposed to be in their senior year of high school though they're now playing younger.

I agree that it depends what your show is supposed to be. For example, a family sitcom where all the kids become adults is a different thing than when there was a variety of ages (or your central character is a nanny...)