TV Tuesday: TV for Sloths or Rabbits

[yourlibrarian]

Vince Gilligan was recently quoted as saying “[Slow storytelling] is a plus in a world of very fast-paced editing and TikTok videos that are only a minute long. If the whole world were to move at that pace...that would be very sad to me. I think there is a certain percentage of the viewership… is ready for a slower pace. It’s fast food versus home cooking.”

Have you found that the pace of TV storytelling has increased? Have you seen patterns in different time periods? And how slow is slow enough for your viewing taste?

Comments

[squidgiepdx]

While I haven't read the reports myself, there was talk about a new Netflix series that they thought "was too complicated for people who are multitasking watching TV and playing on their phones at the same time" so they nixxed the more complicated storylines.

SO. DUMB. But also quite telling as a species. ::sigh::

[yourlibrarian]

Yes, Netflix had to issue a denial that they were telling writers to recap what had happened in the show via dialogue because people were too distracted while watching.

[jo]

Hopefully this isn't region blocked as it's a recent skit from Canadian comedy show This Hour has 22 Minutes: https://youtu.be/UFQ4sumQ9-0?si=nIV6Ixjg_cOcb4hn

[rocky41_7]

I do feel like there's less patience, among both execs and the audience, to let a story unfold. If it's not doing numbers on the pilot, it's unlikely to get a second season. In the past, maybe because we had less to choose from, it feels like people were more willing to let a show ramp up.

There are pros and cons--I think we all can remember shows of the past that had episodes or whole arcs of filler that felt like they were there just to eat up airtime. But I do think something is lost when a story moves too fast. I don't generally enjoy breakneck plot pacing. If the show is good, I want to dwell in it a while, I want to get to know the world and the characters and have time to wonder what's coming next.

[yourlibrarian]

Or perhaps mix it up from episode to episode -- some which move at a steady clip, some which allow for character development. But when you've got 8 hours for the story to start with, this is hard to balance.

But you're right that the most alarming speed is the way that so few shows are given a chance to catch on.

[jo]

Like everything else, it depends. Some shows are slow, but well done, and each episode well-plotted and instrumental to advancing the story. Other shows are slow, but some episodes have definite "filler" vibes. A recent-ish example of the latter for me was "The Residence". That show was too repetitive and would have been better if it had been 2-3 episodes shorter.

What I really like with some shows is they'll have episodes of varying lengths -- maybe the pilot will be close to a full hour, but then the next ep is 45 minutes long, some even shorter than that, others back to 50-55 minutes, etc. The episodes are only as long as they need to be to tell that part of the story. Obviously, that's only possible on a streaming service. As Gilligan points out in the article, network TV has very strict timing for episodes in order to accommodate advertising.

A show is like a book -- and with books, they say the first sentence is the most important one -- got to get the reader hooked right from the start. Same with shows, except replace first sentence with first episode.

(totally unrelated to this question, but at the end of the article you linked to there were links to other articles, including one about other Scandi noir series coming up on various networks/streamers. I clicked on that cuz I like Scandi noir, and found out that there is an adaptation of Philip Kerr's Berlin Noir series coming to Apple!!! Starring Jack Lowden (Slow Horses) as Bernie Gunther!!! Best news ever!)

[yourlibrarian]

I agree with you about Residence. I would say 1-2 episodes shorter, but there was too much repetition as well as stuff that could have done more character development. Had there been more of the latter I think the murderer reveal would have landed better.

I also agree that with streaming, why not take advantage of varying lengths! I mean I don't want one to be 90 minutes and another a half hour, that just seems like either bad pacing, or something that is a side story. But speaking of that, shows have done this! They have done "extras" that take something in a story and go into it in a side story. Both Short Treks and Mythic Quest's Side Quest are examples. These could be backstories, an idea that couldn't be fully fleshed out to an episode, or just another perspective on things in the series.

Oh interesting! Jack Lowden seems to be doing well given his Slow Horses boost.