Killing time, cos it's better than living

[andrewducker]

I was chatting to octopoid_horror the other day about TV series that outlive their welcome and pad themselves out with pointless filler, and how we'd both rather have shorter seasons of actual decent episodes, as well as series that ran for a limited length and then stopped, which would (a) make the series better and (b) make room for more different TV shows. And then I bumped into this piece from New York Magazine called "How to fix shows like 'Lost'" which put it very well, culminating with the following question:

[Poll #865524]

In other news, today's Cthulhu session answered the question of "What would be the best school motto in the world, ever?" with "Destroy All Monsters" - anyone fancy translating that into Latin for me?

Comments

[octopoid-horror.livejournal.com]

I choose option C:

A brand-new show from some new writers. Since in my experience "a brand new show from the writers who brought you show X!" can often mean "show X ended up crap so we rejigged it to try and milk the idea more..."

Also, as I think I said, Twin Peaks doesn't have filler. Heck, it was only meant to run for three seasons and by part way through the (as it was made, final) second season it's pretty clear what's going on. Who killed Laura Palmer isn't really the central plot after half-way through the first season - it's more just a way to lead in to the real plot. I think that show, and some of the other shows in the few years after it that had complex plots, would have worked better these days. I think people are more willing to let a series go places now than they were before. Tastes change.

And American Gothic, which I loved, still had filler even though it was only one season with a very tight plot (except that plot didn't cover the middle of the season...)

However, I would say that something like the X-Files would have been better than almost any other show had it managed to condense the two-part "plot" episodes down into about a season or two of action. That would have been ace.

I could translate that Latin, but can't be bothered right now ;-) And my Latin primer is just out of my reach.

[avatar.livejournal.com]

Pfffft, there's nothing wrong with Lost!

[laserboy.livejournal.com]

Didn't American Gothic have the lead 'good' character go crazy partway through it? It was a series I watched at the time but don't remember much of it other than I enjoyed it. Never did see how it ended.

They better not do another series of Rome. No need.

[garunya.livejournal.com]

I'll go with Option C. Lost itself was "a brand new show from the creator of Alias" after all. I don't care who's behind a show if its' good.

The lack of a Twin Peaks season three is one of the greatest tragedies of our age. I'm sure you already knew I felt that way, but it's one of those things you just have to say from time to time.

[octopoid-horror.livejournal.com]

They're already making the next series of Rome ;-)

American Gothic did some really neat things with the characters part way through.

[octopoid-horror.livejournal.com]

Well yeah. I am waiting for the Season Two box set to come out - of course, once I had the Season One set, season two got downloaded, but I want to buy the damn thing.

[pseudomonas.livejournal.com]

I can't find a good Latin word for monster - monstrum seems too much to be an ominous quirk of nature rather than what we'd mean by the word, and belua is just any dangerous animal. Is there some Lovecraftian Latin word from one of the his texts that would specify the sort of monster you mean?

[grapefruitzzz.livejournal.com]

Tota monstra destruite!

[grapefruitzzz.livejournal.com]

My dictionary said 'monstrum' is ok, but it's not a great dictionary, and I am v. lazy. Hm... *flip flip*... how about Necate totas beluas!? It sounds a lot more foreign.

[wychwood]

For a "mystery"-type show like Lost, I think limited-time is good. Or like the five-year arc on Babylon 5 - it got compressed and re-arranged slightly because of the last-minute renewal for the fifth season, but it was intended to run for five seasons, and then it finished. I'd much rather have that than have seen it stretched out beyond the limits of the story.

On the other hand, I tend to be character-focussed, and I don't want to lose my favourite characters! :) But I'd always rather have "really good" than "mediocre but familiar".

[shannon_a]

That's what we call a "push poll", and I disagree with the basic hypothesis. The show has gradually answered mysteries and opened up new ones, and I have yet to see any evidence that the writers don't know what they're doing. Thus far the show has been consistent, fair, and interesting. A ton got answered in season one, and another ton in season two. Season three thus far has really answered a lot about what The Others are, and they were a huge unknown to that point (and yet an issue from almost day one).

The one valid point in the article is that it's hard to come in late. The network clearly knows that, and has offered up lots of recaps, but the numbers do drop as a result. It's still a top show, but given the high cost, the writers should plan for 4 or 5 seasons top. Hopefully they can answer things in a meaningful way because they'll know the ending is coming from a ways away.

[odheirre.livejournal.com]

Wasn't Life on Mars one of those "planned for one or two seasons" type of shows?

[thadrin.livejournal.com]

-quote-
A brand-new show from some new writers. Since in my experience "a brand new show from the writers who brought you show X!" can often mean "show X ended up crap so we rejigged it to try and milk the idea more..."
-end quote-

It can also mean "Firefly".

-quote-
However, I would say that something like the X-Files would have been better than almost any other show had it managed to condense the two-part "plot" episodes down into about a season or two of action. That would have been ace.
-end quote-

X files suffered the same problem Lost has. They built up a huge mystery and never had any idea what was really going on, so instead of letting the series naturally go through its arc, as Babylon 5 could have done if not for network stupidity, the show meanders on getting more and more comlicated with more and more plot threads that can't all be tidied up without a complete cop out ending.

Any show that does not tie up its arc each season (as Buffy did) or goes with single episodes with occasional recurrance (Quantum leap) is asking for trouble.

[andrewducker]

Slaughter All Giant Creatures.

Sounds good enough to me!

Cheers.

[octopoid-horror.livejournal.com]

I'd rather it didn't mean Firefly. I loathe that show almost as much as I loathe Buffy and Angel.

While I really liked a lot of Babylon 5 (the first four seasons, essentially) I felt it lost its way at the end. The first three seasons went great for the arc episodes.... although the "non-arc" episodes were at times some of the worst sci-fi TV I've seen.... After the third season it seemed... hmmm.. can't find quite the right phrase but it was almost trying to be bigger than it should have been. I can't quite think how to describe what I mean, darn... but by the end of the fourth season it just seemed a bit overblown to me. I know that was the point, but I think the plot moves all happened too rapidly once they got going...

[octopoid-horror.livejournal.com]

They should just have had a one or two season arc for Lost that tied everything up.

Then a sequel series called "Found"

[thadrin.livejournal.com]

You know that they were basicly told there wasn't going to be a fifth season and so they crammed the remaining story into the end of season 4 don't you? The networks then changed their minds and they had to drag out the story for the fifth season...which blew goats. Except the very last episode.

That's what I meant about "Network stupidity".

[tisme.livejournal.com]

I think it's because of the 'stick with what's worked so far' culture that has paralysed the industry of late. Hence Dude, Where's My Car 4 comes out a year after the last one, whilst The Prestige waits 8 years to get made and so on. Advertisers are what pay for the shows, and they are more comfortable paying for slots in a tried and tested show than something new. Even if you could prove that you'd get more 'customer's' the latter way.

[laserboy.livejournal.com]

although the "non-arc" episodes were at times some of the worst sci-fi TV I've seen

Yes!

Although I can't watch any of it now, even the good episodes.

[missedith01.livejournal.com]

None of the above. And not Torchwood either.

[khbrown.livejournal.com]

Also fits quite well with "destroy all monsters" coming from a dai-kaiju eiga - i.e. big mysterious creature/monster film

[azalemeth.livejournal.com]

Rui ut omne monstrifera?

Incidentally, I love your journal Andrew. It's the only place I know of where I'm beaten to the post badly translating things into *latin*!