I'm with you, which is why I used the term "lightly serialized."
I like arcs, but not when the only events of significance require weeks, months or years to follow.
Interesting article about serialized programming
- Thread starter startrekwatcher
- Start date
I'm with you, which is why I used the term "lightly serialized."
I like arcs, but not when the only events of significance require weeks, months or years to follow.
So, do a recap halfway through. Or just stick those "last time on X" recaps in front of each episode.
I rarely encounter serialized shows so complicated that I even need to watch those things. Usually just zap em.
A truly serialized show is an arc. So the ending of the arc is also the ending of the series - and why go back to the status quo if the show is ending.
I doubt Dexter's going to end with a return to the status quo. They've gone too far for that - it's not even possible anymore.
I enjoy both. After all, an episodic show is just a serialized show with lots of small arcs.
The problem is that episodic shows get repetitive. When writers are forced to come up with 22 completely stand-alone plots that last exactly 44 minutes each and every year you simply run out of ideas. It's inevitable, even TNG succumbed to it eventually.
Now, on the other hand, if writers only need to tell one story a year and have up to 968 minutes to do this (less if they throw in a few standalones) they can make that one story damn special. The extra time devoted to the story (and characters) also lets the audience get more emotionally involved.
The problem is that episodic shows get repetitive. When writers are forced to come up with 22 completely stand-alone plots that last exactly 44 minutes each and every year you simply run out of ideas. It's inevitable, even TNG succumbed to it eventually.
Now, on the other hand, if writers only need to tell one story a year and have up to 968 minutes to do this (less if they throw in a few standalones) they can make that one story damn special. The extra time devoted to the story (and characters) also lets the audience get more emotionally involved.
So what's Battlerstar Galactica? I mean it's pretty heavily serialized, but it's not truly serialized?
I haven't seen the fourth season, but in earlier seasons aside from some cast shuffling the characters all remained in basically the same roles year in year out. The status quo of Dexter as the unknown but charming serial killer with a girlfriend looking for a normal life and a sister on the force, plus these other jokers working there, has been largely maintained.
I haven't seen season four either, but I have to agree that Dexter has been pretty dependable in returning to the status quo at the end of each season. The antagonist of the year is always killed (The Ice Truck Killer, Lila, Prado) and so is the serial killer of the year (The Ice Truck Killer, The Bay Harbor Butcher*, The Guy Whose Name I Can't Remember). Dexter and Rita may be making baby steps in their relationship (becoming intimate in the first season, being married in the third), but the fundamental dynamic of their relationship hasn't changed. And now that Doakes is gone, replaced by the rather uninteresting Quinn, Dexter can now slip comfortably into his role as undetected serial killero n the police force. Even Papa Morgan is still around, even though the flashbacks with him ended after two seasons.
*Or, at least, Doakes, but everyone but Dexter believes the lie that Doakes was the Bay Harbor Butcher.
Of course, from what I've read, season four will finally up-set this dynamic in a big way, but I'll believe it when I see it. I just wish the DVDs would be released more quickly.
*Or, at least, Doakes, but everyone but Dexter believes the lie that Doakes was the Bay Harbor Butcher.
Of course, from what I've read, season four will finally up-set this dynamic in a big way, but I'll believe it when I see it. I just wish the DVDs would be released more quickly.
The series that are able to arc best and most satisfactorily... tend to be miniseries. They can have lasting changes to the environment on an episode by episode basis; consider the wide ranging of territory (and rapidly changing cast) of Roots. At the beginning it's the story of a man born in Africa, captured and sold into slavery; at the end it's a show about freed blacks in the American South. Somewhere in the middle there were generational and social shifts, as the descendents of Kunta Kinte went from living on a large establishment to a poorer one and so on.
So if shorter series are best for arcs, arcs of consequence are easiest for miniseries, though I wonder if anyone would count them.
So if shorter series are best for arcs, arcs of consequence are easiest for miniseries, though I wonder if anyone would count them.
Agreed, but rather I wish that they hurried up and aired it here on FX UK.
Well, I'd prefer they put out the DVDs first, but I'm a selfish bastard at times. 
Miniseries are definitely serials/arc-shows/whatever you'd like to call them. Some, like the (superior) British version of State of Play, are even sold as serials. Shows like Generation Kill or From the Earth to the Moon are obviously entirely written from the outset, and thus, much more satisfying.
Miniseries are definitely serials/arc-shows/whatever you'd like to call them. Some, like the (superior) British version of State of Play, are even sold as serials. Shows like Generation Kill or From the Earth to the Moon are obviously entirely written from the outset, and thus, much more satisfying.
Miniseries are closed ended serials. Having a resolution, they don't suffer like open ended serials. The first season of Dexter was one story serialized, but it had a resolution. Opening the show up for further seasons merely ended in repeating for seasons two and three, necessarily more weakly, season one's basic story. Repeating the same resolution does not emphasize its finality but the opposite, highlights its triviality.
On a character level, a closed ended serial can end with a character changed. If the serial is open ended, the character has to keep changing, which is utterly unlike real life. And the characters usually keep repeating the same favorite stories, adding repetitive dullness to the list. How many times did Aeryn and John get driven apart or Bill and Lee engage in father/son reconciliation?
Closed ended serialization to tell a story too big for one episode may or may not be successful, but is a reasonable choice. Open ended serialization is almost impossible to make work, as bitter experience shows.
On a character level, a closed ended serial can end with a character changed. If the serial is open ended, the character has to keep changing, which is utterly unlike real life. And the characters usually keep repeating the same favorite stories, adding repetitive dullness to the list. How many times did Aeryn and John get driven apart or Bill and Lee engage in father/son reconciliation?
Closed ended serialization to tell a story too big for one episode may or may not be successful, but is a reasonable choice. Open ended serialization is almost impossible to make work, as bitter experience shows.
Well, let's just say Dexter has had a couple of SUGNIFICANT monkey renches tossed at him at the end of season 4, and things can't be the same again, in fact -- as a writer myself, I'd say things will start to go downhill for the character until the series comes to a natural conclusion.
That's assuming the writers and Michael C. Hall let the series run down to its natural conclusion. I'm sure Showtime would continue it indefinitely as long as it continues to do as well as it has in the ratings. But, fingers crossed that they have some class and let it end with season five or six.
Absolutely. I think any series with a metastory should preferably know exactly what that story is and where it's going - and generally, it'd be interesting to see more full series which try to arc as miniseries.
I'm hoping for five, and I say that as someone who based on the first three seasons alone considers Dexter one of my favourite TV shows ever. I just think that five is a nice clean number; and the show has moved very quickly in exploring the niceties and possibilities of the Dexter scenario; best to wrap it up before they run out of ideas
That said, I'm curious as to what it is people say changed in season four - though not curious enough to get spoiled, of course. Who knows, when I've watched it maybe I'll want ten seasons and a dozen spinoffs about Debra's various ex-boyfriends.
I prefer serialised to episodic as well. It gives you more involvement in the drama, more to care about. It also has greater rewatchability. I watch my Firefly, DS9, Buffy and Angel DVDs more often than I do my TNG, VOY, or TOS ones.
^ I always thought of episodic shows as being easier to rewatch. The problem with serialized shows is that you have to watch the whole thing all the way through, whereas with episodic shows, you can just watch your favorite episodes.
But with serialized shows you can also go back and watch your faves, since you know the story anyway.
stj, I think you have a very static life if you're not continually changing...life is continuous change, so saying that a continually changing character is unlike real life shows a complete lack of knowledge of real life. A continuously changing character is the epitome of real life...perhaps you should go and have some.
You still don't need serialization for constant character evolution though.
I think the best serialized stories are the ones where you can still have stand-alone stories that have some reference to the greater story you're telling, but it's not a case of every single episode having some huge importance to the meta-arc.
Like how the 2003 Ninja Turtles cartoon had an episode about a renegade nano-robot, the story had little to do with the major plots like the Shredder story but it did have April getting the reward money from a criminals' capture that let her get a new home after her old one was destroyed. That's what I mean, it's mostly a standalone episode that has one or two plot points that tie into the bigger story.
I think the best serialized stories are the ones where you can still have stand-alone stories that have some reference to the greater story you're telling, but it's not a case of every single episode having some huge importance to the meta-arc.
Like how the 2003 Ninja Turtles cartoon had an episode about a renegade nano-robot, the story had little to do with the major plots like the Shredder story but it did have April getting the reward money from a criminals' capture that let her get a new home after her old one was destroyed. That's what I mean, it's mostly a standalone episode that has one or two plot points that tie into the bigger story.
The trend has actually been toward more and more serialized shows on tv. Yes, syndication is better with stand-alone shows, but DVDs are better with serialized dramas. It's part of the reason why even the so-called "stand-alone" shows have begun inserted serialized plotlines (character arcs, etc.).
The best approach would be the shows where there can be standalone episodes with maybe one or two minor elements that tie into the greater plot, or can later be called back upon for the greater plot. That way it's all being used for greater effect, but you don't get lost if you missed one episode or so. It also lessens the need for recap episodes.
And try to keep the greater plot tied to one season at a time, with maybe some early set-up for the next seasons' plot.
And try to keep the greater plot tied to one season at a time, with maybe some early set-up for the next seasons' plot.
Pop-psych bullshit, and needlessly insulting too.I agree with stj: people don't change, not unless compelled to. Their circumstances might change--they fall in and out of love, in and out of employment, lose or gain family--but the personality is consistent. Personalities cement during the teens and early adulthood, and tend to remain in place unless there is a crisis that prompts a change. You bump into people from high school, and though a few might have undergone a radical shift in personality, most of the time they're the same people you knew then in different clothes. There are certainly minor things that will spice things up--acquire a new skill, learn a new language--but that's a process of accretion around the unchanging core of one's being, not true change. What is unrealistic about some serial storytelling (dramas are particularly guilty of this) is the way the character's lives become a string of constant crises to keep the characters in flux, mutable, with no periods of stability. (And because growth requires a lacuna to fill in the first place, shows that go overboard with this kind of 'progress' often just wind up making their characters scattered asswipes to have more 'faults' to fix.)
Fictitiously yours, Trent Roman
I think serialized programming is a bit overrated, even though admittedly, it's the way to go in this era. On this board, it's like if the show isn't serialized, than it's inferior and that's not true. It's just different. Just because a show like CSI, or TNG, or Star Trek, or any other procedural, it doesn't mean it's bad because it's not arc driven. Also, my major problem with Arcs is really the pacing. You can have so much build up, and a good beginning and middle, but the ending is typically pretty weak. Hell, a show I like, Babylon 5, did this with the Shadow War. It builds and builds, and then when it comes to a conclusion, you're like "That's it." Of course they ended the season awesomely with the retaking of Earth arc, but my point is if you build and build, and then you get a less than steller ending, I start wondering if it's all worth it.
I like shows that can have middle ground. Babylon 5 somewhat did this, even though it was purely arc driven, but the best examples were Farscape and DS9. Also, I really hate the concept of "Filler" episodes. An episode is either good or not. 24 is the first show to come to mind with this problem. This season has been disappointing, the one of the more common comments is just be patient, the good stuff is coming. Well that's all well and good, but you've just wasted 2 or 3 valuable episodes. If you're not going to advance the arc, fine, but make the episode interesting by having an internal story or great character work. Like I said, an episode is either good or bad, never filler.
I like shows that can have middle ground. Babylon 5 somewhat did this, even though it was purely arc driven, but the best examples were Farscape and DS9. Also, I really hate the concept of "Filler" episodes. An episode is either good or not. 24 is the first show to come to mind with this problem. This season has been disappointing, the one of the more common comments is just be patient, the good stuff is coming. Well that's all well and good, but you've just wasted 2 or 3 valuable episodes. If you're not going to advance the arc, fine, but make the episode interesting by having an internal story or great character work. Like I said, an episode is either good or bad, never filler.
Similar threads
