What IS wrong with American TV?
POSTED BY: Ruthie
UPDATED: Monday, August 10, 2026 16:40
VIEWED: 19611
PAGE 4 of 7
For every good drama we produce, there are several awful ones, and it is a rare day that a decent UK comedy show is produced.
We only see the better ones over here, but I can think of plenty of good UK comedies over the years.
Coupling
Youngones
Blackadder
Goodies
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
CGRealms:
I guess this is a "what do you think is good?" type question. I have very discriminating tastes and none of the shows that you have stated have drawn me in.
I find Everwood pathetic, Smallvile tries but fails, Srubs is great for a lark, but in the end fails to draw me in regularly. Yes, Joan of Arcadia does force a point of view down your throat, abeit subtly, but it does. And I haven't given the last a good try yet, but I'm not impressed so far.
Hopefully those on the horizon will be worth it. Quite frankly, TV is almost becoming a waste of my time as I tend to dowload and buy what I watch at least as much as I actually turn it on.
----
"Canada being mad at you is like Mr. Rogers throwing a brick through your window." -Jon Stewart, The Daily Show
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Misguided By Voices:
Actually, I'll stand up for US TV here, as a Brit myself. We do the odd good thing, but the vast majority of our scheduling is reality TV or soap operas (a little above the class of Days of Our Lives, but not by much).
For every good drama we produce, there are several awful ones, and it is a rare day that a decent UK comedy show is produced. If we do produce a good series, such as Spooks (or MI5), its 6-8 episodes, as stated. Most of our best TV is made in the form of TV movies like Sharpe, or two-parters/mini-series like Cracker.
Compare that with, and I'm missing out a lot here:
Sopranos
The West Wing
ER
NYPD:Blue
Homicide
CSI
Six Feet Under
Law and Order
The Shield
The UK has nothing that I can think of that even gets close to the achievements of these series at their best - even take a show like Sopranos with 13 episodes; something the BBC or ITV could do, and there is nothing close.
Here's my optimists way of viewing the situation - because the schedules are flooded with reality shows, made on the cheap, they have more money to make the good drama series that get the publicity and the awards. You may have to look a little harder, but there is a heck of a lot of good stuff still out there.
As a UK Browncoat, I totally agree with this. I think British TV does one off dramas or miniseries, documentaries and (some) comedies really well. However when it comes to weekly series the best US series are far superior to anything produced over here. If you compare Firefly/The West Wing to stuff like Casualty or the Bill there is absolutely no contest. The series that turn out ok (for British tv) are usually slightly poorer imitations of American tv like Spooks (sorry Spooks fans, I did quite like it but didn't think it compared to my favourite US series).
I'm not watching any tv at the moment now that Angel has finished because there is nothing on British tv that I could be bothered to watch.
Lets hope the Dr Who remake turns out ok.
Well, my sister's a ship... we had a
complicated childhood
.................
I wear the cheese. It does not wear me.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:There's no arguing taste, but I'm curious as to just what's pathetic about the first. And if "Joan..." forces a point of view, what point of view is it, exactly?
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
I find Everwood pathetic, Smallvile tries but fails, Srubs is great for a lark, but in the end fails to draw me in regularly. Yes, Joan of Arcadia does force a point of view down your throat, abeit subtly, but it does. And I haven't given the last a good try yet, but I'm not impressed so far.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Well, I wanted to point out that the new show 'The 4400' is a six episode (well, 4 one-hour and one two-hour episode) "mini"-series, and is getting really good reviews, and is recieved the highest ratings for a basic-cable network premiere. (Sadly, it looks to have topped Firefly, although it did get quite a bit new advertising, imo).
The producers, after getting a greenlight based on the pilot to do 4 more hours, write the series as a single story arch, while leaving the series to do an 'encore'.
I bring it up because I think it could lead to seeing more of this style of production. Basic cable networks, like USA, FX, SpikeTV, etc, can take more risk than a major network, as they only expect to get "Firefly type ratings", if they get more it's a nice suprise, but not required for them to be profitable. This "mini-series" will likely make USA a good bit of money and will probably lead them to commision 6 more hours for next winter(mid-season) or summer (competign against re-runs is easy).
Also, I wanted to point out that FOX was, for awhile at least, considering doing a 24 spin-off series in an 8 hour direct to DVD format. THe concept is the same (mini-series, disctributed via a non-broadcast network system) and hopefully they will eventually do it, and perhaps open up another avenue for quality programming that has a smaller viewer base.
Lastly, I speculate that TiVo will eventually end it's fued with network television by setting up a subscription system for them. Basically I envision a system where you use your TiVo to order, record, and 'decode' scrambled TV shows that are broadcast on smaller stations in luei of Paid Advertisements. 20th Century Fox could produce the show, sell it direct to consumers via thier TiVo (for orderign and billing), and buy some broadcast time on basic cable TV in the middle of the night (Discovery, for example, is all paid advertisements from about 2am-7am, along with most other basic cable TV).
Your TiVo, if authorised, would record, and decode the show, and store it on your system, perhaps keeping it 'invisible' to you until a certain time, when the show 'airs', and then letting you watch it whenever you want.
Shows with a large user base, or lower production costs could be priced cheaper, in order to get even more subscribers, etc. Shows with small, dedicated, userbases (FF, B5, Dark Angel, etc) could be priced higher in order to remain profitable while staying on the air with relitivley small viewer numbers.
Advantages here are that networks get to try new shows, and keep old ones, that normally wouldn't make the cut; TiVo get's a shot at more users; basic cable tv networks get increased compition for their off-hours time, hence making them some free money, whoch in turn, hopefully, can be used to fund more quality TV; fans get to decide directly which shows to support, and it's VERY easy to track exactly how many people are PAYING for a show (who cares if they watch it, as long as they pay).
I figure a show like Firefly (say about 1.5million paying views) could stay profitable for something around $3-4 per episode per person. Shows that are cheaper to produce, with very large audiences, say Will and Grace, or some other successful sitcom (sans friends, which cost $7million per episode just for the main cast), could probably do well at a dollar or less per episode.
Anyways, if you made it all the way to the end of this post I congratulate you on your patience for my babble!
Rob
If you can't run, you crawl, and if you can't crawl, well, if you can't do that, you find someone to carry you.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Actually, yeah, that seems about right. Any longer and it tends to be a mini-series.
Originally posted by Channain:
The longest running series over here is 60 Minutes. That seem right to anyone?
(Yes, I know what you mean. I'm trying for the funny.)
-----
We applied the cortical electrodes but were unable to get a neural reaction from either patient.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:"Ba-dum-bum. Cybersnark, ladies and gentlemen. He'll be on stage all week!"
Originally posted by Cybersnark:
Actually, yeah, that seems about right. Any longer and it tends to be a mini-series.
(Yes, I know what you mean. I'm trying for the funny.)
nicely phrased.We have art so as not to die of truth ~ Neitzsche
http://www.mnartists.org/artistHome.do?rid=7922
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Dr Who will be basically pants. The choice of the new Doctor is dire (Christopher Ecclestone if anyone doesn't know) and the loss of the Daleks is unforgivable.
There are very few American shows that have grabbed my attention over recent years. Firefly was an exception, Frasier held me from start to finish, The Simpsons has waned in the last few years and Family Guy has kept up many a night watching the DVDs.
Over here, currently I've fallen in love with Black Books (although I'm not sure how well that'd go down in the States), still a huge fan of Jonathan Creek (The true example of how to mix drama with comedy) but that is about all.
Most of my time is taken up with older programmes, Father Ted, Quantum Leap, Red Dwarf (Series 1-6 only!!!), Blackadder, Young Ones, Bottom etc.
On bothe sides of the Atlantic there seems to be a quality drought.
Lok'Tar Ogar
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
There was a closed meeting of network execs and news-desk personalities. It was infiltrated (I forget by whom, I'd have to look it up).
The keynote speech was that TV news shows weren't there to report the news, they were there to garner an audience to deliver to the advertisers. And that's what the execs think of the NEWS!
There are all sorts of studies on demographics. They (the network execs) used to go for the 18-31 age bracket (of legal age and with money), but the greying of the US put a kink in the calculations. They thought they should expand the age margins (18-40+), and some still do that. But more recent studies indicate that while the 40+ age group has the most money by a huge margin, they're discriminating spenders - they spend less than younger folk in absolute terms. Young people on the other hand tend to spend about as fast as they think of it. And as a group, they're not too interested in quality. So 'they' (the network execs) have redefined their target audience - which as a reminder is the group they want to garner to deliver to advertisers.
Nowhere did 'quality' enter into the speech at the meeting, so I'm guessing if a quality show doesn't pull big numbers but survives ANYWAY, it's due to some freak circumstance.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
I really think that you are deluding yourself. That extra money is going into the pockets of the execs as a bonus for creating such "good" (read money making) TV and the rest will be put towards make more of it to further increase there profits.
I frequently live in said delusional state
That said, the fact remains that in recent years, despite this so called slide in TV quality, we are receiving some of the best shows ever written - yes you have to search for them more, but the cream at the top is pretty darn good.
As Norm said in Cheers, its simple Buffalo Theory.
"I threw up on your bed"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME