It's a sorry spectacle -- only the latest sign that television no longer makes sense and we're nearing the end of TV shows as we know them.
The idea of a serialized TV show doesn't make sense any more when you consider the way we consume media, especially compared with music or movies. If you want to listen to a new album, you can download it onto your iPod and computer and listen to it whenever you want. That makes sense. If you want to watch a movie, you can experience it first in a huge high-tech theater filled with excited patrons (my preferred way) and later you can buy or rent it to watch alone. That also makes sense.Seasons of TV shows like 24 and Lost are a lot like movies or albums because they're unified pieces of story telling. So why should you have to watch one episode (between extended commercial time) and wait exactly 167 hours to watch the next one? It makes more sense to watch them back to back, on Hulu or DVDs, and experience the story as you like, without the interruption of a thousand Viagra commercials or a five-day workweek. But instead we're stuck with Wednesday lineups and we watch Lost like 19th century lit geeks read Herman Melville, waiting with bated breath for the next installment of Moby Dick in next season's issue of Putnam's Quarterly.
Hulu watchers and Netflixers understand that you shouldn't have to "catch" a show in an hour block, like a bear fishing for quick salmon. You should be able to shop for it like, you know, a human being in a fish market. You pay for the rights a show and when an episode is made it's automatically delivered to your computer or DVR and you watch them all when you want. The unfortunate thing about serialized weekly TV shows like 24 and Lost is that it's better when you don't have to watch them like serialized weekly TV shows.Michael Hirschorn jump-started this point and he gets an excellent assist today from Gawker arguing that the online migration of television should eventually give birth to an indie movement for TV shows.
More and more Americans are watching more and more video online for longer and longer periods of time, so it stands to reason that sooner or later, someone is going to raise their own money, shoot their own full length show (half hour to an hour long) withoutnetwork interference, put it on the internet, and it will become a cultural phenomenon.That's exactly right. From the consumers' and artists' perspective, TV makes much more sense as an online product that doesn't have to fit into weekday line-ups. Now how do you make money off that model? I don't know. Ask Nick Denton.
Serialized tv shows are frustrating and seemingly outdated because they air at a specific time each week. It goes against our intensifying desire (need) for anything and everything at our fingertips.
Even when tv shows become net-only, you'll still have to survive the delay between episodes and seasons. The difference is that you can watch them whenever you please. Sorry, Derek. Put that ADD on a hold just a little bit longer.
Apocalipster
You're absolutely right that television shows take time to make -- just like, for example, a Rilo Kiley album or a movie you've Netflixed. But the difference is that television shows are designed to be ghettoized by day and time, and this just can't be the best way for viewers to experience them, especially when -- as with shows like Lost and 24 -- they're designed to be narrative, rather than episodic.
Put another way, let's say you live in the 19th century and you like Charles Dickens. He publishes some of his books episodically in quarterly magazines. Would you prefer to read Oliver Twist one chapter-per-quarter or would you rather just have the book? The latter, for sure. I mean, it's weird to think that Michael Chabon books SHOULD be published month by month in Harpers, even if that's the pace he's writing.
My point is that, with Netflix and the Internet, viewers are beginning to realize that it's actually much better to watch some TV shows....not on TV. But, of course, if my argument seems Haze-y to you, you are free to disagree.
-D
Now listen, D. Clearly you don't watch LOST. Not only is it indeed episodic in nature, but also much of the fun/joy/glory is the delayed gratification that comes from cliffhangers and weeks of anticipation. Take your Ridalin with a glass of Riesling, watch the first season, and then we'll talk.
I think online television is great in concept. I don't mind the studios making less money. Perhaps they could start paying actors, directors, and producers what they are worth rather than the exorbitant salaries they currently receive. However, until online TV streams, NetFlix streams, etc., start incorporating a good closed captioning system, I'm afraid I'm stuck to my TV.
Derek,
You really don't grasp the concept of "appointment" TV, do you? Sure, we have a PVR, and use it for times when we have conflicts, but there's something warm and predictable, in this cold and chaotic world, about gathering together as a family to watch "House" on Monday night. As a child, I remember Sunday nights when the whole family watched Disney and the Ed Sullivan show. It's a communal experience, and completely unlike the theatre or cinema, where conversation is deplored. Our own conversations, as they weaved in and out with the show, provide extra richness and texture to the experience.
And I agree to some extent with Apocalipster - part of the enjoyment is the anticipation, especially with "Lost". (I used to feel that way for the first few seasons of "24" but it's lost its hold on me.) I was never a huge fan of "Prison Break", but some of my co-workers were, and I remember Tuesday mornings when they would gather excitedly before work to discuss the previous evening's show, and speculate on what's going to happen next week.
However, what does annoy me is the way the networks frustrate this experience by putting shows on hiatus, moving their timeslots, etc. I enjoy "Fringe", but between the weeks when it isn't on, and the way it jumps from time to time and day to day, it's been difficult to follow. I'll definitely rent the DVD, but I wonder if that will be enough to keep the show alive.
I think its true that anticipation is a big part of the experience of serialized shows. Another aspect, especially strong in a show like Lost, is speculation. Internet and ipods have allowed the viewing community to connect and share observations and theories over websites and podcasts. As much fun as talking about the last episode of Cheers at the water-cooler was, I doubt those conversations could ever match the immersive detail of the online fan community. While it may be antiquated to tune in at 9pm on Wednesdays specifically, there is still value in the serialized form. In shows like Lost, it uniquely takes advantage of the new mediums to enhance the experience of a serialized mystery.