standalone episodes or serialized season for next TV series?

[cultcross]

This is new territory because I'm used to the series' episodes' Act end with a fade to black, but streaming shows are designed more like premium TV shows where there's no signal to break for commercials.

As someone who grew up with commercial free BBC shows alongside American imports, I couldn't be happier to lose the cheesy, often forced 'mini cliffhangers' of the fade-to-black. Freeing the writers from that shackle allows the big moments of the story to flow more naturally.

 

[Shalashaska]

Serialized, serialized, SERIALIZED!

Episodic storytelling is restrictive and an ancient, inferior format that belongs back in the syndication era. It's time for Star Trek to move on.

 

[Tim Walker]

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TheChrisCarterEffect

Warnings about kudzu plots, and making up things as you go along.

 

[Kor]

I would like stories that stand strongly on their own, but with some overarching theme that lets you know things are progressing forward in time. The key is that each episode must be strong. Think less "Agents of Shield" and more "Mad Men," if that makes sense.

As someone who grew up with commercial free BBC shows alongside American imports, I couldn't be happier to lose the cheesy, often forced 'mini cliffhangers' of the fade-to-black. Freeing the writers from that shackle allows the big moments of the story to flow more naturally.

Yes, it is pretty odd for a show to fade to black, and then fade right back in to the exact same scene, and often the exact same shot that was faded out from.

Kor

 

[Tim Walker]

A couple good things about the X-Files.....

1. An occasional stand alone episode. Some ideas are good for only the one episode. And such an episode need not be subject to a kudzu plot or the Chris Carter effect.

2. The regular cast was small, but there were a number of recurring characters, such as the cigarette smoking man, and The Lone Gunmen.

 

[cultcross]

The regular cast was small, but there were a number of recurring characters, such as the

I think this is something Trek could learn from. Each modern ensemble has had superfluous characters who get screen time for no creative reason other than they're in the opening credits, and it's got worse with each successive series. I would select 3 or 4 main cast for the new show and keep a background of recurring characters who rise and fade in importance as plots demand.

 

[STEPhon IT]

As someone who grew up with commercial free BBC shows alongside American imports, I couldn't be happier to lose the cheesy, often forced 'mini cliffhangers' of the fade-to-black. Freeing the writers from that shackle allows the big moments of the story to flow more naturally.

Does it really shackle writers??? An editor can easily take those, as you say cheesy - mini cliffhangers, cues away but I'm not for those things either. As with you, I would like to see a continuous flow with storytelling. I'm a huge fan of BBC programming, and I don't want Star Trek to remotely emulate your style of storytelling, I do see the sense of modernism which makes stories flow. A flow I see in most premium shows on HBO, Showtime, and Netflix. It will be interesting see what is done, and how will it translate for it's only appearance on terrestrial broadcasting.

 

[STEPhon IT]

A couple good things about the X-Files.....

1. An occasional stand alone episode. Some ideas are good for only the one episode. And such an episode need not be subject to a kudzu plot or the Chris Carter effect.

2. The regular cast was small, but there were a number of recurring characters, such as the cigarette smoking man, and The Lone Gunmen.

It definitely kept the narrative tight, and on focus which I appreciated. Hey, it's something Star Trek used to do with Shatner, Nimoy, and Kelley. What a concept?

 

[Tim Walker]

Of course, Trek occasionally had a two-parter. An occasional two-parter worked well for Trek.

 

[STEPhon IT]

Serialized, serialized, SERIALIZED!

Episodic storytelling is restrictive and an ancient, inferior format that belongs back in the syndication era. It's time for Star Trek to move on.

How do you know this? Are you a writer, do this truly makes you restrictive?
I would like to know if other writers believe this? I'm a writer, and it really doesn't matter to me. I would think canonical codes would be restrictive to a writer or what the Executive Producer would limit a staff to do, but restrictive can be a negative if the material is not working and the staff hasn't made adjustments.
I guess it all depends on how you see it?

I'm there with you, I wouldn't mind seeing serialized Star Trek... with an appropriate main cast (3 or 4) and an overall objective like exploring 1 particular system for a season.

 

[Tim Walker]

cult cross has a good point. In TOS, it seemed like half the bridge crew (Sulu, Uhura, Chekov) were glorified extras, even though they were supposed to be regular characters.

BTW, with TOS and TAS we got a few recurring characters outside the starship crew. Harry Mudd appeared in a couple TOS episodes, and Cyrano Jones and Koloth reappeared in a TAS episode.

 

[Shalashaska]

How do you know this? Are you a writer, do this truly makes you restrictive?
I would like to know if other writers believe this? I'm a writer, and it really doesn't matter to me. I would think canonical codes would be restrictive to a writer or what the Executive Producer would limit a staff to do, but restrictive can be a negative if the material is not working and the staff hasn't made adjustments.
I guess it all depends on how you see it?

I'm there with you, I wouldn't mind seeing serialized Star Trek... with an appropriate main cast (3 or 4) and an overall objective like exploring 1 particular system for a season.

Depends what you're writing.

If you're trying to write a character-driven show with a decent story arch, then yes, episodic storytelling is restrictive.

Episodic television wasn't the leading format for all those years back in the 60s, 70s, 80s and 90s because people thought it was better, it was because they had no other choice. Making a serialized show (which most writers would largely prefer) was asking to be cancelled back then, it just wasn't possible for most people to stay up-to-date with the show. If they missed ONE episode, they'd be pretty lost next episode, depending on how serialized the show was. Ratings would go down, money would stop coming in, and they'd be forced to either go episodic or get cancelled. It's a miracle DS9 and Babylon 5 survived all those years.

Today, with on-demand streaming, DVR and pirating being so prevalent, serialized TV has taken the forefront. All the shows you hear getting critical acclaim and all the shows people are talking about are the ones with serialized storytelling. It allows for a much richer and rewarding experience when you see a long and well-written story unfold over a 13-episode season or a full run of a TV series.

I just think it'd be a big missed opportunity for Star Trek to go back to that old format. It's outdated. I want to see a character and story driven Trek series.

 

[Kor]

In past decades, higher-quality programs were episodic, while serialization was usually considered the domain of cheap daytime soap operas.

Kor

 

[Longinus]

I would like stories that stand strongly on their own, but with some overarching theme that lets you know things are progressing forward in time.

I'd prefer this as well. Episodes that are mostly self contained stories, but some overarching theme or plot binding them together. I think modern Doctor Who works mostly like this.

 

[Longinus]

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TheChrisCarterEffect

Warnings about kudzu plots, and making up things as you go along.

Yeah, this is what I fear 'serialised' might turn into. I really hated the 'main plot' episodes in X-files, as it was obvious that the said main plot made no sense whatsoever, and would never go anywhere.

 

[Tim Walker]

Wagon Train

www.emmytvlegends.org/interviews/shows/wagon-train.

The regular characters seemed to have been relatively restrained in numbers.

I understand that an episode would focus on a guest star, the character being either a member of the wagon train, or someone they met along the way.

 

[Shalashaska]

In past decades, higher-quality programs were episodic, while serialization was usually considered the domain of cheap daytime soap operas.

Kor

That's because 95% of shows were episodic.

I'm talking about today, not past decades, and today, serialized shows are considered much higher-quality than episodic TV.

 

[Kor]

That's because 95% of shows were episodic.

I'm talking about today, not past decades, and today, serialized shows are considered much higher-quality than episodic TV.

Today things have been reversed, so high-quality shows of every imaginable genre (even sitcoms ) are expected to be serialized. But up until fairly recently, serialization was basically a lowbrow melodramatic gimmick to get people to keep watching all the time just to see what happens next.

And even with some of today's shows, that seems to be the only real point of the serialization, with endless strings of mediocre episodes that are utterly forgettable on their own... Marvel's "Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D.," for example. Of course, there are some that are more well done.

Kor

 

[STEPhon IT]

That's because 95% of shows were episodic.

I'm talking about today, not past decades, and today, serialized shows are considered much higher-quality than episodic TV.

I agree with you, but it still depends on the show. As much as I would like to see Trek go in this direction, and hopefully it's nothing like what was done on DS9, it all depends on how it's handled and how involving the story can be?
There are many serialized shows which didn't connect with an audience and the notion of it being higher quality is subjective.

 

[Shalashaska]

Today things have been reversed, so high-quality shows of every imaginable genre (even sitcoms ) are expected to be serialized. But up until fairly recently, serialization was basically a lowbrow melodramatic gimmick to get people to keep watching all the time just to see what happens next.

And even with some of today's shows, that seems to be the only real point of the serialization, with endless strings of mediocre episodes that are utterly forgettable on their own... Marvel's "Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D.," for example. Of course, there are some that are more well done.

Kor

Oh yes, of course, it has to be well-written.

But Bryan Fuller is quite possibly the best showrunner in television and an incredibly creative writer. I think we're solid there.