The Golden Age of TV Is Over

[The Borgified Corpse]

Agreed. I've seen many of them, but I only consider a very small handful to be great. Actually, my favourite Netflix movie may be The Red Sea Diving Resort. It's fantastic. But I think you make a good point. It's just disappointing to see most of them be so average. I've learned to keep my expectations in check when viewing Netflix movies these days.

I feel like a lot of the Netflix movies I've seen have felt unfinished in terms of the sound design & music. The whole soundscape just feels so much more bare than what I've come to expect from theatrical releases.

I think any competently written one hour screenplay is going to have a beginning, middle, and a discernible end. The end may not be the end of the overarching story, but simply the end of a single episode.

What I think happens is that because we know a show is serialized and there is an ongoing overarching story, we tend to overlook what is an actual end to the episode at hand. A lot of times an individual episode's ending in a serialized show is subtle, but if you look closely enough, it's there.

If it's so subtle that I miss it, does it even really count?

 

[Owain Taggart]

I feel like a lot of the Netflix movies I've seen have felt unfinished in terms of the sound design & music. The whole soundscape just feels so much more bare than what I've come to expect from theatrical releases.

Yes! I know exactly what you mean. And not only in terms of sound design, but I feel as an overall package. It's like producers start something, hit a wall and then call it a day. Many of them have bad endings, and I don't mean thematically or stylistically speaking, but abrupt endings without resolution. There was one movie called This is How The World Ends, and the movie feels like it's ending just as it's hitting the climax. They're talking while taking a road trip, about things they've heard, as if we're supposed to eventually see them ahead in their post-apocalyptic world. But NO, the movie just ends and they roll the credits. Just baffling.

 

[Boomstick]

The Golden Age of Television, if we are to vaguely define that as post-Sopranos (which obviously means excluding all the great shows in the 90s that preempted it), is long over I would say. Things like The Wire showed the potential for long-form drama to do something new, but then not much else actually did anything new.

So many shows now are a two hour story stretched into 10-20 hours, and they're often about the same old soapy crap that older TV was about. And loads of shows that have a lot of noise surrounding their release are forgotten about in a couple of weeks. If something is entertaining enough to binge through in a quick blur it appears exciting, but there's little to it to leave a lasting impression.

I'd also like to point out (albeit at the risk of sounding pompous) that what we and the article are talking about should be qualified as the Golden Age of American Television. Long-form serials, as in a serialised six to twelve episode narrative, has been pretty standard in lots of other countries long before HBO allowed for that form to thrive in the US.

I also don't understand all these comments about not wanting to watch The Sopranos because it's depressing. While there is a lot of violence and immorality in The Sopranos, it's one of the funniest shows I've ever seen. Every character is ridiculous and the writers ridicule them for it.

 

[gblews]

If it's so subtle that I miss it, does it even really count?

"Subtle" doesn't mean non-existent. And just because some viewers cannot discern that an ending has taken place, is also not an indication that the ending is not there. At this rate, you might miss the beginning as well.

And if by "count", you mean "matter" then I would say very much so. First of all, not everyone will miss it and many would be looking for that ending. An episode written without an ending is not competently written and quality shows simply don't do this.

I would say. Things like The Wire showed the potential for long-form drama to do something new, but then not much else actually did anything new.

Game of Thrones, Breaking Bad, Mad Men, Better Call Saul, The Americans, VEEP, Orange is the New Black, Fargo, 30 Rock, and others, all say hi.

 

[Boomstick]

Game of Thrones, Breaking Bad, Mad Men, Better Call Saul, The Americans, VEEP, Orange is the New Black, Fargo, 30 Rock, and others, all say hi.

I like some of those shows (But I will point out that you can't really say VEEP is a show that was something incredibly new since it is a semi-spin-off from The Thick of It/In The Loop and is very similar to those), but look at how few you've named. The Sopranos came out in 1999, that's not a lot of things to name in twenty years, especially considering the sheer amount of content that is created now, percentage wise it is incredibly low.

Also, none of those shows came out in the last five years, with most being closer to ten. Mad Men, 30 Rock, and Breaking Bad (of which Better Call Saul is an, admittedly more recent, spinoff) all came out over ten years years, with 30 Rock and Med Men inching closer to fifteen years ago. That sort of puts parenthesis around 1999/2000-2012/13 being a more reasonable date range to argue as being a golden age, with less coming after it, although it has more difficult to assess more recent content with the further context time brings. Are we still in the Golden Age if we are only seeing the influence of these shows?


And just to pull it back to the article in the original post - it's pretty telling that the only show produced by a streaming platform you mentioned is Orange is the New Black, the surprise success of which started the glut of terrible original content on Netflix - both of movies and tv shows - which, as the article argues, signaled the end of the Golden Age of television.

 

[ALF]

Yeah, more is less which is I guess what the article OP posted is saying. There's going to be a point where there's going to be too much "must-watch" tv to watch and we will have to choose, for lack of hours in a day. Well, I guess the argument is that with the streaming wars, that time is here now. So make your choices wisely.

Google "Golden Age of Television," and among the suggestions:
golden age of television 2000s
golden age of television 1950s

TV broadcasting around the millennium was quite bad as I recall it (excepting a few early gems from HBO).
Maybe creative burnout is to blame? You cannot have a Golden Age of anything go on for too long.
Valleys create peaks.

The Golden Age of Television, if we are to vaguely define that as post-Sopranos (which obviously means excluding all the great shows in the 90s that preempted it), is long over I would say.
...
I also don't understand all these comments about not wanting to watch The Sopranos because it's depressing. While there is a lot of violence and immorality in The Sopranos, it's one of the funniest shows I've ever seen. Every character is ridiculous and the writers ridicule them for it.

The 90s may not be considered part of the Golden Age of Television, not because they didn't have great shows, but because there were fewer of them? (taking a guess here)

I am glad you find the Sopranos funny. Not that I don't, it's rife with comedic genius (Paulie Walnuts) but the darkness and intensity, violence and depravity on display in that series overcome the amusing gangster stereotypes, for me anyway. The writing doesn't strike me as straight-up ridicule, although the pilot episode is way more comedic than the rest.

 

[Boomstick]

The 90s may not be considered part of the Golden Age of Television, not because they didn't have great shows, but because there were fewer of them? (taking a guess here)

I am glad you find the Sopranos funny. Not that I don't, it's rife with comedic genius (Paulie Walnuts) but the darkness and intensity, violence and depravity on display in that series overcome the amusing gangster stereotypes, for me anyway. The writing doesn't strike me as straight-up ridicule, although the pilot episode is way more comedic than the rest.

Yeah, I think you are right about the 90s, and I believe that percentage wise we are probably closer to the ratio of good to bad shows of the 90s then the mid-2000s.

You're right about the Sopranos, it's not always straight up ridicule, but there is undeniable ridicule. The prime example, I suppose, being Christopher's intervention devolving into squabbling and violence. The episode where Tony and Paulie have to lay low in Miami, the whole thing is basically Tony getting frustrated at Paulie's personality quirks, he's an absolute caricature in that episode. The whole sixth season has Frank Leotardo (sp?) being a preposterous manifestation of shame and pride. I'm not saying it's not dark, intense or violent, I just think the moments of brevity, for me at least, massively outweigh the heavier moments (the constant subtext of exploitation notwithstanding). Christopher is a miserable character who engages in despicable behaviour and acts of violence, and struggles with addiction and receives abuse from the people he admires - but the longest storyline he has is his desire to write a movie and break into Hollywood, a thread that travels from season one right until season 6, and nearly everything Christopher says and does in regards to that narrative is played for laughs or to illustrate his naivety.

 

[The Borgified Corpse]

"Subtle" doesn't mean non-existent. And just because some viewers cannot discern that an ending has taken place, is also not an indication that the ending is not there. At this rate, you might miss the beginning as well.

And if by "count", you mean "matter" then I would say very much so. First of all, not everyone will miss it and many would be looking for that ending. An episode written without an ending is not competently written and quality shows simply don't do this.

If you enjoy what these shows are doing, good for you. But a lot of them aren't to my taste. I realized that I don't have any grasp of what's popular when I tried watching the 1st season of Heroes back when it was trendy and found that every episode just seemed to stop randomly because the hour was over and didn't deliver anything remotely resembling a climax.

Game of Thrones, Breaking Bad, Mad Men, Better Call Saul, The Americans, VEEP, Orange is the New Black, Fargo, 30 Rock, and others, all say hi.

That's a pretty wide swath of shows. 30 Rock is the only one that I watched with much consistency. And while that was a great show, I don't think it was that heavily serialized. It's definitely at the top of the heap when you talk about fast-paced single-camera sitcoms (alongside Arrested Development and Community).

Yeah, I think you are right about the 90s, and I believe that percentage wise we are probably closer to the ratio of good to bad shows of the 90s then the mid-2000s.

Individual sub-genres wax & wane at different times. I would argue that the 1990s were a golden age for the 3-camera sitcom. This was the Must See TV era, which gave us such legends as Frasier, Friends, Seinfeld, NewsRadio, 3rd Rock from the Sun, Mad About You, etc. Meanwhile, the Brits were giving us Coupling and Red Dwarf.

 

[Marsden]

I don't get it? Is this supposed to be sarcastic or ironic?

Sorry, neither!

 

[Push The Button]

It's HBO. Bad behavior is rewarded with stunning regularity......Tom Hanks' WW2 minseries being the exception.

Paulie was my SOPRANOS favorite from the moment he ran into the poison ivy.

I like to think of The Sopranos as the deconstruction of the American gangster. At one extreme there is The Godfather, where we see an almost romantic take on the subject; honor, family and all that. In The Sopranos, other than the “civilian” characters like Dr. Melfi, Tony was the only character with even a hint of a conscience, the rest of the gangsters we encountered were nothing but ignorant, greedy sociopaths, bullies and thugs. As the series progressed, I found myself wanting Tony to somehow be redeemed, but for the rest of the bunch to simply die (which is pretty much what happened to most of them anyway.) Chase and co. did a great job of showing us just how unglamorous and brutal that life really is.

 

[fireproof78]

Agreed. Whenever I hear someone talk about the "Golden Age of Television," what they're really doing is stroking themselves for watching a bunch of super-depressing stuff that makes them feel sophisticated. I've never had even the slightest inkling to watch something like Dexter, Mad Men, or The Sopranos. I gave up on Game of Thrones & The Walking Dead after only 1 season. And while I forced myself through 3 and a half seasons of Battlestar Galactica, I've yet to drag myself across the finish line for the final 10 eps.

If that's the Golden Age then I missed out on most of it and could care so little about that it can't be measured.

Why not just enjoy what you enjoy?

 

[gblews]

I like some of those shows (But I will point out that you can't really say VEEP is a show that was something incredibly new since it is a semi-spin-off from The Thick of It/In The Loop

VEEP is not a spinoff. It is an original production regardless of whether or not you think there are similarities to other shows.

but look at how few you've named.

Okay, I thought the "and others" would have been a hint to you that there were..."others."

But in any case, The Americans, The Good Place, Westworld, Crazy Ex Girlfriend, Black Mirror, Downton Abbey, Mr. Robot, Fargo, Legion, The Crown, Homeland, Barry, Succession. Parks and Rec, AND OTHERS. This Golden Age thing is no joke.

Also, none of those shows came out in the last five

Now you're attempting to move the goal posts. This thread is about great TV shows that have aired since The Sopranos (not just in the last 5 years), and thus would be reasons why the Golden Age of TV continues.

And just to pull it back to the article in the original post - it's pretty telling that the only show produced by a streaming platform you mentioned is Orange is the New Black, the surprise success of which started the glut of terrible original content on Netflix - both of movies and tv shows - which, as the article argues, signaled the end of the Golden Age of television.

You continue to try to move the goal posts in an effort to support your position. The Golden Age of TV is about just that, TV. Great TV shows, the shows that make this the Golden Age of TV, extend to broadcast, broadcast cable, premium cable, streaming.

Trying to now change the argument to the Golden Age only applies to streaming is pretty disingenuous.

 

[gblews]

If you enjoy what these shows are doing, good for you. But a lot of them aren't to my taste. I realized that I don't have any grasp of what's popular when I tried watching the 1st season of Heroes back when it was trendy and found that every episode just seemed to stop randomly because the hour was over and didn't deliver anything remotely resembling a climax.

Of course, but what I was addressing was your comment that appeared to state that because you may not have noticed the existence of an ending in a serialized show episode, that endings in these episodes are irrelevant or non-existent.

Game of Thrones, Breaking Bad, Mad Men, Better Call Saul, The Americans, VEEP, Orange is the New Black, Fargo, 30 Rock, and others, all say hi.

That's a pretty wide swath of shows. 30 Rock is the only one that I watched with much consistency. And while that was a great show, I don't think it was that heavily serialized.

My response was to Broomstick's position that there had been only one great show since the Sopranos aired (The Wire). He didn't confine that position to just serialized shows, thus my list includes shows which were and were not, not serialized.

 

[Mr. Adventure]

I think the Golden Age of Internet Articles has passed as well.

 

[Boomstick]

VEEP is not a spinoff. It is an original production regardless of whether or not you think there are similarities to other shows.

VEEP is an adaptation of The Thick of It depicting American politics and politicians instead of British, I said "semi-spinoff" because it is not a straight spinoff. Both shows were developed by Armando Iannucci, and VEEP, at least for the first few seasons, is largely the same the writing and directing team as the entirety of The Thick of It (Iannucci, Chris Morris, Will Smith, Chris Addison, Simon Blackwell etc etc). They also made a movie called In the Loop which is again, a semi-spinoff. Starring the late James Gandolfini, just to link it back to the Sopranos conversation.
I'm not questioning the validity or quality of VEEP, I'm just saying, in the context of a conversation about originality, VEEP comes with the caveat that it's a conscious adaptation of an original work largely made by the same creative team as the original work - not a direct spinoff, no, but undeniably in a similar vein.

Now you're attempting to move the goal posts. This thread is about great TV shows that have aired since The Sopranos (not just in the last 5 years), and thus would be reasons why the Golden Age of TV continues.

You continue to try to move the goal posts in an effort to support your position. The Golden Age of TV is about just that, TV. Great TV shows, the shows that make this the Golden Age of TV, extend to broadcast, broadcast cable, premium cable, streaming.

Trying to now change the argument to the Golden Age only applies to streaming is pretty disingenuous.

I feel like I've annoyed you in some way, but I'm just musing on how you would bracket the golden age. I'm not claiming to have some definitive or singular authoritative argument/position on this. I only acknowledged there weren't many shows from the last five years in the list because I believe, like I said, the golden age is over and the lack of good shows would reflect that.

I haven't suddenly changed the goalposts and said the Golden Age suddenly applies to streaming, all I did was acknowledge that Orange is the New Black was the only streaming original in the list of shows that was given. I just thought it was interesting to point out since the article the OP posted was arguing that streaming platforms worrying about profit over artistry and experimentation is killing/has killed the golden age, and the surprise popularity of Orange is arguable a catalyst for this perceived change.

And just as a quick clarification - I don't think The Wire is the only good show since The Sopranos, I didn't write that and if that's the subtext then it was unintentional, I only dropped The Wire because it was ambitiously original and is always mentioned in conversations about The Golden Age, and often fights with The Sopranos for the top spot in 'best of' articles.

 

[gblews]

feel like I've annoyed you in some way,

Seems like these days, many times frankness, candor, is mistaken for hostility. Take my being straightforward with you as a compliment.

but I'm just musing on how you would bracket the golden age.

Um. okay. The only bracket I would apply to the golden age is the same ones most have, beginning with the Sopranos in 1999. When or whether or not it has ended (I don't think it has) is open to debate.

Perhaps if you'd offered some of the qualifiers and explanations contained in your latest post to which I now respond (to the post in question), I might not have thought you were trying to moving the goalposts. Perhaps this wasn't your intent, but the post could certainly be plausibly interpreted that way.

 

[Mudd]

Depressingly accurate as observation.

Studios have wanted hits as long as movies have existed, but as the field has grown more crowded and their audiences more instantaneously global, the studios have put all their money on the same end of the betting table: more franchises, more reboots, more anything with even the vaguest connection to preexisting IP—a TV show, a board game, a piece of used bubble gum, it doesn’t matter as long as the name rings some distant bell in a prospective viewer’s cluttered mind. The strategy is epitomized by the Marvel Cinematic Universe, whose unprecedented dominance has transformed the nature of moviemaking in the past 11 years, but now even the MCU is just a piece of a much larger puzzle, sitting next to all the Star Wars movies and all the Pixar movies and all the Disney movies and all their infinite possible spinoffs. With their homogenous feel and post-credits teasers, the MCU movies provided an experience akin to watching a sporadic, incredibly expensive TV show. And now that they’ve turned movies into TV, they’re going to help turn TV into the MCU.

 

[FPAlpha]

I don't know when this supposed golden age started or ended but natural law even applies to entertainment, in this case TV.

Technology has found a new way to provide entertainment, it has freed the user from timetables and recording devices at a time when our lives are getting ever more complicated and demanding and we can't adhere to TV programming times and Must See timeslots.

In my subjective experience groundbreaking shows are ever moving away from the decades old system of free TV stations to paid subscription channels and finally streaming services.

The old guard, TV stations with set timeslots, ads between and in shows/movies, is slowly dying and i don't see many of them survive the next 20-30 years. They will be replaced by a handful of the biggest streaming services who have the money to produce premium content at the highest quality level and people will get used to it as the internet infrastructure spreads and solidifies to allow high definition streaming to the farthest corners of the world.

Anything that can't evolve will die sooner or later.

 

[Mudd]

You do know that everything evolves and everything dies, right?

 

[KennyB]

You do know that everything evolves and everything dies, right?

Blockbuster agrees.......