The next time you bemoan the state of TV today...

[RJDiogenes]

Oh, sure it was. Those are just two examples of creative shows that had short lifetimes. If you look over culture in general, as I said, including TV, movies, comics, music, everything was in an extremely creative phase. That's just the way it goes. Culture goes through ups and downs; it was in an up phase then and, as far as I can see, it's in a down phase now.

Well, what other examples do you have, then? I already explained how the Hollywood film industry was in a period of relative decline until the late 1960s. I haven't seen a lot of television examples, either. I can't claim to be an expert about music or art of the period -- I barely know much about those arenas at all -- but in terms of film and television I just don't see it. "Oh, sure it was" isn't going far towards convincing me.

Well, a number of examples from TV have already been given. Aside from sitcoms, there was Star Trek, of course, and Man From U.N.C.L.E. and Wild Wild West and Mission: Impossible, among others. In music, there was the Beatles, the Stones, The Who, Bob Dylan, and so on, ad infinitum. In comics, both Marvel and DC were in periods of maximum creativity, as were other publishers, including alternatives like Warren and various underground comix. I mean it was the 60s; just look at just about anything from the period. Culture and counterculture were feeding off each other with an incredible synergy.

Being "dark & gritty" doesn't necessarily mean a show is bad-- Lost and Firefly are two great shows which used those elements (one of which, like The Monkees, was canceled prematurely)-- but it doesn't make a show creative; that sort of thing has been going on since the 80s, so it's a pretty tired trope at this point. Nevertheless, all you need is to use scumbags and psychos for your main characters and the show will be labeled as "edgy."

You'll have to show me where I claimed that being dark and gritty make a show creative.

You said, "But that doesn't mean it's not creative." I counterpointed.

It can be quite creative if it's used as a new and interesting twist on an existing property that wasn't originally dark and gritty.

Bloody Hell, no. That's the most horrendous (and laziest) cliche of contemporary culture.

 

[Random_Spock]

Any sort of laugh track, live or not, is distracting. It breaks the fourth wall. I can't tolerate it.

Me neither. It takes me away from the show itself. Thank god MASH dvds have the option to turn it off . Too bad I haven't found other series dvds like those. That's one good option to have.

 

[ToddPence]

American television has improved enormously since the 1960s in just about every respect.

Except, of course, for storytelling, writing, direction, production values and music. Ya' know, the things that really matter.

 

[Greg Cox]

It can be quite creative if it's used as a new and interesting twist on an existing property that wasn't originally dark and gritty.

Bloody Hell, no. That's the most horrendous (and laziest) cliche of contemporary culture.

Depends. It's not a magic bullet. It isn't going to work for every franchise. (Nobody wants a grim and gritty version of Captain Marvel.) But sometimes it can revitalize an old property and make it fresh and interesting again.

Look at THE COMPANY OF WOLVES. That's a dark, creepy, erotic version of "Little Red Riding Hood" and it works wonderfully.

And just think what you could do with Disney's The Scarecrow of Romney Marsh. I'll bet that would really lend itself to a darker, more adult version.

 

[Christopher]

It can be quite creative if it's used as a new and interesting twist on an existing property that wasn't originally dark and gritty.

Bloody Hell, no. That's the most horrendous (and laziest) cliche of contemporary culture.

Depends. It's not a magic bullet. It isn't going to work for every franchise. (Nobody wants a grim and gritty version of Captain Marvel.) But sometimes it can revitalize an old property and make it fresh and interesting again.

See, this is what happens when people make the mistake of equating quality with category rather than individual achievement. Per Sturgeon's Law, 90% of the output in any category of storytelling is going to be garbage, so when people make blanket evaluations by category, they'll always end up claiming the category is a failure, ignoring the 10% of instances that are worthwhile.

What we should do is stop pretending that quality has anything to do with the genre or style or format or decade of origin or whatever of a creative work, and just admit that whether an individual work is good or bad depends quite simply on the talent and creativity of the individuals making it, along with a variety of other random factors that are impossible to predict or codify.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

Any sort of laugh track, live or not, is distracting. It breaks the fourth wall. I can't tolerate it.

Me neither. It takes me away from the show itself. Thank god MASH dvds have the option to turn it off .

What a wonderful feature! All comedy DVDs should have that.

 

[Harvey]

That would be kind of impossible for shows recorded in front of a live audience. But if it's just a laugh track that's been recorded separately or just totally manufactured, I'd certainly like the option.

 

[RJDiogenes]

It can be quite creative if it's used as a new and interesting twist on an existing property that wasn't originally dark and gritty.

Bloody Hell, no. That's the most horrendous (and laziest) cliche of contemporary culture.

Depends. It's not a magic bullet. It isn't going to work for every franchise. (Nobody wants a grim and gritty version of Captain Marvel.) But sometimes it can revitalize an old property and make it fresh and interesting again.

Look at THE COMPANY OF WOLVES. That's a dark, creepy, erotic version of "Little Red Riding Hood" and it works wonderfully.

That's a work derived from a folk tale, which was dark and creepy to begin with. It's not Lassie Comes Home And Eats The Family.

And just think what you could do with Disney's The Scarecrow of Romney Marsh. I'll bet that would really lend itself to a darker, more adult version.

I'm not familiar with that, but what I'm saying is this: 1) I think a derivative creation is better than a re-imagining, 2) This sort of thing has been way overdone for a long time now, and 3) Darker and more adult are not necessarily the same thing-- and in practice are usually quite the opposite.

See, this is what happens when people make the mistake of equating quality with category rather than individual achievement. Per Sturgeon's Law, 90% of the output in any category of storytelling is going to be garbage, so when people make blanket evaluations by category, they'll always end up claiming the category is a failure, ignoring the 10% of instances that are worthwhile.

So, in other words, you don't actually read any of my posts before responding.

 

[Agent Richard07]

Darker and more adult are not necessarily the same thing-- and in practice are usually quite the opposite.

I've always thought of "dark and gritty" as simply being the opposite of simple, light hearted wacky fun. I'm definately not suggesting anything like Lassie Comes Home and Eats The Family. My suggestion above about taking an existing property and making it darker and grittier was just a suggestion for a more adult and sophisticated take. In other words, how would a whimsical work look if it were redone with a "real world" quality with all its complexity? That's basically all I'm thinking. Some works are up for that sort of thing and even demand it. Lassie and Mr. Roger's Neighborhood? Probably not. But stuff like Batman? Definately.

 

[Christopher]

That would be kind of impossible for shows recorded in front of a live audience. But if it's just a laugh track that's been recorded separately or just totally manufactured, I'd certainly like the option.

It might be possible to mike the audience separately from the actors and keep the tracks isolated from each other. It might require a greater distance between the audience and the stage, or some kind of sound baffles, or at least highly directional mikes. But it's not impossible.

However, if a performance is filmed before a live audience, then the audience's reactions are part of the performance. They feed back to the actors and affect their performances. Leaving out that part of the whole would give you less than the full experience.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

However, if a performance is filmed before a live audience, then the audience's reactions are part of the performance. They feed back to the actors and affect their performances. Leaving out that part of the whole would give you less than the full experience.

Especially in the case of Red Green, where the audience is literally incorporated into the program and the characters talk to it. Although in that case they're "really" talking to the viewers at home, since it's a show about a show.

 

[RJDiogenes]

Darker and more adult are not necessarily the same thing-- and in practice are usually quite the opposite.

I've always thought of "dark and gritty" as simply being the opposite of simple, light hearted wacky fun. I'm definately not suggesting anything like Lassie Comes Home and Eats The Family. My suggestion above about taking an existing property and making it darker and grittier was just a suggestion for a more adult and sophisticated take. In other words, how would a whimsical work look if it were redone with a "real world" quality with all its complexity? That's basically all I'm thinking. Some works are up for that sort of thing and even demand it. Lassie and Mr. Roger's Neighborhood? Probably not. But stuff like Batman? Definately.

Sure, you're essentially right about that. In practice, though, the D&G approach is usually pandering to insecure adolescents-- it would be nice to see an adult drama where the characters actually act like adults. Plus, as you say, it's only appropriate to certain stories or characters; when it's used inappropriately it just becomes ridiculous.

 

[Harvey]

I do have to say, thinking about it for a bit, that although Hollywood cinema was in a major decline for most of the decade, French cinema was going through the New Wave in the early 1960s. That was certainly a very creative period that would be highly influential on American movies during the Hollywood Renaissance in the 1970s.

I'm still not convinced that television was unusually exceptional, though. I've seen a few episodes of Mission: Impossible and other spy series from the era, and they've never struck me as particular innovative or even that interesting. They're episodic adventure tales far short of having enough money to achieve more than a few cheap thrills. They were the source of a number of cool theme songs, though.

Now, The Prisoner was an interesting and creative spy series made in the 1960s, but it was also a bit of a flop at the time and short-lived.

 

[Nerys Myk]

I do have to say, thinking about it for a bit, that although Hollywood cinema was in a major decline for most of the decade, French cinema was going through the New Wave in the early 1960s. That was certainly a very creative period that would be highly influential on American movies during the Hollywood Renaissance in the 1970s.

I'm still not convinced that television was unusually exceptional, though. I've seen a few episodes of Mission: Impossible and other spy series from the era, and they've never struck me as particular innovative or even that interesting. They're episodic adventure tales far short of having enough money to achieve more than a few cheap thrills. They were the source of a number of cool theme songs, though.

Now, The Prisoner was an interesting and creative spy series made in the 1960s, but it was also a bit of a flop at the time and short-lived.

I think I Spy might be the most interesting of American TVs Spy Genre in the 60s.

 

[Harvey]

That's a series of which, unfortunately, I have only seen the crappy remake of. Is it on Netflix Streaming right now? That's how I've been catching episodes of these old series lately.

 

[Nerys Myk]

I know I watched several episodes on line years back. I don't recall where though.

 

[RJDiogenes]

I do have to say, thinking about it for a bit, that although Hollywood cinema was in a major decline for most of the decade, French cinema was going through the New Wave in the early 1960s. That was certainly a very creative period that would be highly influential on American movies during the Hollywood Renaissance in the 1970s.

I'm still not convinced that television was unusually exceptional, though. I've seen a few episodes of Mission: Impossible and other spy series from the era, and they've never struck me as particular innovative or even that interesting. They're episodic adventure tales far short of having enough money to achieve more than a few cheap thrills. They were the source of a number of cool theme songs, though.

Now, The Prisoner was an interesting and creative spy series made in the 1960s, but it was also a bit of a flop at the time and short-lived.

It's not a question of liking a particular show-- I can certainly name plenty from the 60s that I didn't like-- or the success of a particular show. It's about the overall creativity in the concepts and storytelling.

Good call on the theme songs, too. That's something you don't see much anymore. But that's more a function of time constraints on modern shows; one-hour shows were about ten minutes longer then than they are now.

 

[Christopher]

Good call on the theme songs, too. That's something you don't see much anymore. But that's more a function of time constraints on modern shows; one-hour shows were about ten minutes longer then than they are now.

Also, with remote controls, it's easier to change channels, so shows have to grab viewers with content right off the bat and keep them watching -- and those viewers have much shorter attention spans and are less likely to sit through a minute-long opening that's the same every week.

And musical tastes have changed. For a while, the preference in TV music was "atmospheric" sounds that weren't very melodic and didn't stand out much. Not to mention that most TV producers were too cheap to shell out for orchestras and the majority of shows ended up with synth scores. Fortunately, though, in recent years the trend seems to have shifted back toward more melodic and orchestral music, thanks to composers like Michael Giacchino and Bear McCreary and the producers who support them.

 

[Agent Richard07]

Darker and more adult are not necessarily the same thing-- and in practice are usually quite the opposite.

I've always thought of "dark and gritty" as simply being the opposite of simple, light hearted wacky fun. I'm definately not suggesting anything like Lassie Comes Home and Eats The Family. My suggestion above about taking an existing property and making it darker and grittier was just a suggestion for a more adult and sophisticated take. In other words, how would a whimsical work look if it were redone with a "real world" quality with all its complexity? That's basically all I'm thinking. Some works are up for that sort of thing and even demand it. Lassie and Mr. Roger's Neighborhood? Probably not. But stuff like Batman? Definately.

Sure, you're essentially right about that. In practice, though, the D&G approach is usually pandering to insecure adolescents-- it would be nice to see an adult drama where the characters actually act like adults. Plus, as you say, it's only appropriate to certain stories or characters; when it's used inappropriately it just becomes ridiculous.

I have to admit though, I'm curious about what a dark and brooding Mr. Rogers would look like.

Also, with remote controls, it's easier to change channels, so shows have to grab viewers with content right off the bat and keep them watching -- and those viewers have much shorter attention spans and are less likely to sit through a minute-long opening that's the same every week.

Some themes are essential for setting the mood, and the show can't do without them. Stargate SG-1 and House come to mind. I think when they tried to remove the themes from both shows, there was some backlash and the themes were put back. Actually, I'm not sure if the first House episode without a theme was intended to be permanent at the time, but I do remember the backlash.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

Intros are like commercials - I'll zap them unless they're good. But I do appreciate the good ones. I'll watch Dexter's intro more often than I zap.

What I really can't stand is the previously-last-week segments. If a show has an ongoing plotline, I'll watch each episode and I don't have Alzheimers! I can remember what they did last week!

The only show the previously's were useful for was Farscape, because that show was just so damn confusing anyway. Most shows are far more coherent.