Are four-year story arcs better?

[Joe Washington]

Four-year arcs like Battlestar Galactica, Babylon 5 before it was renewed with a fifth season, and the 4400.

I heard that the V remake is planning on running for four seasons and the creators of Breaking Bad are thinking of having the show run for that exact number of seasons.

What are the ups and downs of four-year arcs? Do you know of any that actually work out? Which shows do you think would better off with one?
How would you do a four-year arc?

 

[bigdaddy]

BSG didn't have a four year arc, it was just on four years, but it was NEVER planned to be on only four years. Hell they never even had a plan.

Also V will most likely only run the 13 episodes and end, I heard that it's a "special TV miniseries event" or something equally as stupid.

 

[JoeZhang]

god no - as I get older, I simply have less time and energy for shows that kick the arse out of their premise. I like the british model of 12 episodes at best and you are done!

 

[barnaclelapse]

Four? How about forty, fuckers!

Bring it on!!

 

[Bri]

Five year arcs are great when they actually get to complete them without various factors.

Babylon 5 had to skip ahead a few pages at the end of season 4, Joe would have ended it with "Intersections in Real Time". As a result the first half of Season 5 was compromised, and didn't really kick in till half way through. That Byron arc would have lasted FAR LESS TIME.

Check out HBO's the Wire, which is a 5 year arc nearly uncompromised, and easily the smartest written show I've ever watched.

Bri

 

[Warp Coil]

The longevity of a show should be entirely dependant upon the show's premise and pacing. Some shows might need 4-5 seasons to tell their story before things get old and stale. Others may have a very narrow premise and can't sustain themselves past one season. It all depends, so there is no magic number that would hold true for every series.

 

[DS9Continuing]

Well I can't really say, because your initial premise is flawed.

As already said, BSG didn't have a pre-planned four-year arc - that's just when they decided to end it.

Babylon 5 had a five year pre-planned arc - it was not artifically renewed after the fourth year, that was always the intention.

and The 4400 would have been happy to carry on longer than four years if it hadn't been forcibly cancelled. As would Farscape, for that matter.

So none of your examples actually did have four-year arcs.

 

[Lindley]

Season arcs usually work best, I think.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

This topic comes up often enough that I have already have a canned answer: the ideal length of a series is determined by its premise.

Prison Break had a one-season premise.

Star Trek and Heroes have open-ended premises (a situation to be managed rather than a problem to be solved) that could continue indefinitely, with total changeover in casts, spinoff series, etc.

Most shows fall somewhere inbetween. It does seem like 4-6 seasons are where most shows hit their ideal range. But so many of them don't even make it to 4, it's hard to prove one way or the other.

I heard that the V remake is planning on running for four seasons

That premise is a hybrid of "problem to be solved" (boot the invaders) and "situation to be managed" (survive until the invaders are booted), so I'd bet it could be stretched for 6 or 7. But first they gotta get past the miniseries stage and get picked up for the 2010-11 season. At this point, we don't even know that it deserves a pickup.

 

[Bob The Skutter]

Personally I'm for shows lasting as long as they need to for their story to be told. If they're popular and they want to continue making it then come up with another story that needs to be told with those characters rather than dragging the same story out endlessly.
I'm for variable season lengths too. If one year the writers/producers think they can make 10 great shows then do 10, if next year they think they can do 18 do 18, and if when it comes down to it they only have enough story for 4 episodes then go ahead and do 4.
I know the realities of TV scheduling, especially US TV, means that can't, or won't, happen though.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

If they got their story planned out in advance (and any show with an arc needs to at least have the outlines planned), then they should know what their story is going to be for any given year. Non-arc series are just the same thing over and over, a la CSI, so they certainly have no excuse for running out of ideas.

I have a hard time envisioning why TV writers would be so precious that they would be able to have 20 episodes worth of creativity one year and four the next. Are they opium swilling aesthetes lounging on cushions and bemoaning the cruel lives of artists struggling to maintain their artistc integrity in a mercenary world?

Or are they just lazy bastards who are easily replaced by hungry young writers who just hit town last week and will do anything to break into the biz? Hollywood has an endless supply of those. If I were a TV producer, I'd give all my Lord Byrons the boot and give the new kid a shot. Or make sure their royal highnesses damn well know how replaceable they are. Bet I get those 20 episodes pretty damn quick.

 

[Bob The Skutter]

My point was why stretch out 4 hours that you have left to complete your intended story to fit 20 episodes? If your story is complete it's complete, don't milk it.
And if you think the quality of your work would drop squeezing 20 episodes out, when all you really need to tell your story well is 10, then why compromise the quality in order to get the quantity? I know American's (networks and perhaps even the viewing audience) expect 6 months worth of show (or at least 3 months) but personally I'd rather have quality.

 

[sidious618]

Well I can't really say, because your initial premise is flawed.

As already said, BSG didn't have a pre-planned four-year arc - that's just when they decided to end it.

Babylon 5 had a five year pre-planned arc - it was not artifically renewed after the fourth year, that was always the intention.

and The 4400 would have been happy to carry on longer than four years if it hadn't been forcibly cancelled. As would Farscape, for that matter.

So none of your examples actually did have four-year arcs.

This was pretty much what I was going to post.

 

[The Evil Dead]

However long it takes to tell the story in a satisfying manner is how long story-arcs should be.

 

[Bob The Skutter]

However long it takes to tell the story in a satisfying manner is how long story-arcs should be.

As long as it's a minimum of 100 episodes...

 

[Vendikarr]

I prefer the Buffy method. Each season has an overall arc, with a meta arc encompassing the entire series.

At the end of each season you had a sense of closure, should the show not return. But there were still elements left to build on should the show return for another season.

The method used in Enterprise season 4, with mini arcs of three episodes interspersed with stand alone episodes worked well too. And like Buffy, there were continuing story lines bridging those mini arcs. I thought the structure was very satisfying.

You can only get away with planning a multiple year arc when you know you can let it play out. Most series don't get that kind of guarantee.

 

[Trubinator]

Well I can't really say, because your initial premise is flawed.

As already said, BSG didn't have a pre-planned four-year arc - that's just when they decided to end it.

Babylon 5 had a five year pre-planned arc - it was not artifically renewed after the fourth year, that was always the intention.

and The 4400 would have been happy to carry on longer than four years if it hadn't been forcibly cancelled. As would Farscape, for that matter.

So none of your examples actually did have four-year arcs.

Well said! This numbering business seems silly. To my way of thinking, you can make any number of seasons work provided that you plan a show out fully. So you could either end up with four seasons or forty-five (although the latter is highly unlikely).

 

[Gertch]

I'm tired of arcs. But I like how SG-1 had a couple of loose arcs (Goa'ulds in general and Apophis specifically in a shorter arc) mixed together with a good helping of bottle shows.

The bottle shows can also help to reinforce characters and bring a needed break. For an example of how NOT to do a bottle show look at the last season of SG-A and how they disregarded all the character improvements Rodney had made and whimped him out again.

 

[roguephoenix]

bsg wasn't planned as a 4-year. it just ended up that way because actors didn't want to come back. had they known they actually only had 4 years then maybe the story would have been structured differently with less fillers and less sprinting at the end.

it just really depends on writers if the show ends up being good. you can have only one show and have it suck or be boring or you can have more than 5 years and have every season be great.

if the show has a definite end though, having an actual finite timeframe would be better for all the parties involved in the show. the writers would be able to structure their story well.

 

[RandyS]

Five year arcs are great when they actually get to complete them without various factors.

Babylon 5 had to skip ahead a few pages at the end of season 4, Joe would have ended it with "Intersections in Real Time". As a result the first half of Season 5 was compromised, and didn't really kick in till half way through. That Byron arc would have lasted FAR LESS TIME.

Bri

Not at all would have been better. He's the ONE thing about B5 that I hated.