Print
Email
ShareIt’s been a peculiar TV season. More than usual. This one so far has been a little of everything: good, bad, innovative, disappointing, surprising, and, ultimately, one giant learning experience for the people who make TV.
And that’s one of the surprises right there. Turns out, these people do learn sometimes.
At least they did this season, which was a rolling experiment, or if you’re a poker fan, an all-in bet on the notion of serialized dramas.
Last fall, the networks launched eight flat-out serialized dramas and a handful more shows with strong continuing storylines. Most crashed and burned. A few others are barely hanging on. We call that, in another poker term, busted.
One show, NBC’s “Heroes,” did break out and is a bona fide hit.
Another, CBS’ “Jericho,” is not in hit territory but has to be considered a solid success. “Jericho” returned this week with a recap episode after more than two months off. That long break was also a risky bet, and it’s something CBS, and everyone in TV, will be watching.
So what does this all mean for future TV shows? And what exactly did the programmers and producers learn? Lots, it turns out. At least that’s what they’re saying.
Last month, network execs met with the Television Critics Association in Pasadena through a couple of weeks of press conferences, and every exec said pretty much the same thing: Oops.
“We’re all in kind of hindsight right now,” said ABC entertainment president Stephen McPherson. “And we’re saying, how much stuff with that kind of a (serial) commitment can an audience take? There’s so much good drama on right now that you’re asking a lot of the audience. There were some good shows across the board that didn’t get sampled.”
That was the first problem. Serials require a commitment, and viewers tend to be slow to start serious relationships, particularly when there are so many serials - like “Lost” and “24” - already demanding attention.
But it was the success of those two shows that suckered the networks and producers into the serial game. In this era of entertainment abundance and of competition from every kind of electronic device, TV programmers are looking for shows that viewers have to watch every week to stay involved, and that they have to watch live to stay up with the next day’s chats.
“It’s one of the biggest hooks we have into an audience,” NBC entertainment president Kevin Reilly told critics. “It’s potential rocket fuel when you hit it.”
That’s the next problem. It’s hard to hit it right.
There are lots of reasons for that, beyond the commitment needed. Some are even technical. It’s harder to fix a show, to fine-tune tone or characters or plot, when a serial has been set in motion.
CBS entertainment president Nina Tassler told critics that often new series have some episodes that need more work. With non-serialized shows, they can get held until they’re ready. With serials, there’s no messing with the episode order.
“You have to make your adjustments and tweaks while that train is moving,” Tassler said.
And it starts with tone. Most serials - those that aren’t simply soaps - need continuing unsolved issues: a mystery, a crisis, even just a long-term goal.
Generally, that means there’s a problem that doesn’t get solved right off. But unsolved problems often turn shows pretty dark. Most people can only take so much darkness in their lives or in their television.
“I think that there is a kind of escapism going on out there (in public tastes),” McPherson said. “If you look at all three of the hit new shows - `Heroes,’ `Ugly Betty’ and `Brothers & Sisters’ - I think in their own way, they have an escapism. And I think `The Nine’ - great show, well-cast, well-written, well-produced - there is a dour nature to it.”
Clarity matters, too. A show doesn’t need to be simple, but its direction should be clear.
Many producers misread the success of “Lost” and created instantly complicated mysteries. They forgot that “Lost” started as a straightforward - if extraordinarily well-done - show: People were stranded on an island and wanted off. It evolved into that Rubik’s Cube of a series after viewers were hooked.
“I do think the shows that have a more singular focus and a singular goal may have a leg up,” Fox entertainment president Peter Liguori told critics. “‘Prison Break’: Get out of prison, get away from the cops. `24’: Save the country.”
But the key may be to create characters that viewers want to be around, want to become friends with, because that is the core of TV’s appeal. If you don’t like the people on a show, you don’t hang out with them.
“People come in, week in and week out, for the characters,” CW entertainment president Dawn Ostroff said. “Movies tend to be about the big story, the big theme. But for television, it always has to be about the characters.”
But don’t get too caught up in a formula. Those are guidelines, hard-earned lessons about what kinds of things connect. Hit shows don’t follow any rules - otherwise, everybody would make them.
“All of that is too much programming-ese,” Liguori said. “If you have a great creator who is inspired and really compels an audience, that’s the magic fairy dust.”
OK, time for the scorecard. Here’s a look at how some of the fall hour-long shows rate against all that new wisdom. First the successes:
“Heroes” (NBC): The top new show this fall, drawing 14.4 million viewers, and the only series that really has that magic dust: hopeful, romantic and filled with great characters. As complicated as the long-run plot seems to be, there are shorter stories and scenes every week with big, satisfying payoffs.
“Ugly Betty” (ABC): Drawing 12.3 million viewers and a valuable Thursday-night fixture, it’s funny, cheerful, optimistic and inspiring. Its feel-good message is, among other things, that pluck overcomes looks.
“Brothers & Sisters” (ABC): It’s fundamentally a soap, though a good one, so the rules don’t apply as much, but it’s still built around a group of interesting people. The ratings story is mixed. It averages 12 million viewers but loses 8 million from its Sunday lead-in, “Desperate Housewives.”
“Jericho”: A bit of a surprise since it’s basically the story of a nuclear holocaust. But the tone remains optimistic and the core characters are solid, and it has averaged 10.7 million viewers.
Now, the failures:
“Smith” (CBS): Bad, bad people. Plus, they were crooks. And their long-range heist was vague. It averaged 10 million viewers but was dropping quickly.
“Six Degrees” (ABC): Two big problems. Who were these people, and what was the deal with them? It was a large, dull question mark. It averaged 9.6 million viewers, but lost more than half its lead-in audience from “Grey’s Anatomy.”
“The Nine” (ABC): Well-done series, but it seemed stuck on bank-robbery flashbacks. It wasn’t clear if the show was about the robbery, the people, or what? And, as McPherson said, it was dour. The 8 million viewers were fewer than half the number watching lead-in “Lost.”
“Day Break” (ABC): This version of “Groundhog Day” meets “The Fugitive” was grim and confusing. It averaged about 6.6 million viewers before getting yanked.
“Vanished” (Fox): Somebody’s wife got kidnapped, or left, or something, and there were all those tangled secrets. It was mystery overload mixed with a depressing setup. It drew 6.5 million viewers before Fox canceled it.
“Kidnapped” (NBC): Great cast and well-done show. But a child was kidnapped and it would’ve taken the whole season to get him back. Despite the payoffs each episode, that was a lot of gloom. It drew fewer than 6 million viewers.
“Runaway” (CW): A family was on the run because Dad got framed, everyone was mad at everyone, and doesn’t this sound like fun. It averaged 2 million viewers.
Still, just finding serials that will work is only part of the huge load on a network. Next dilemma: scheduling them.
Each show makes 22 to 24 new episodes a year; the season is almost 40 weeks long. If you repeat a show too much to stretch it out - as ABC did with “Lost” last year - you drive fans nuts.
One option is what Fox does with “24.” It waits until January, then runs it straight to May without reruns.
“First and foremost,” Liguori said, “it is really critical to line up consecutive episodes, give the audience what they deserve, what they’ve earned, which is the respect of (having) the storylines continue week in, week out, and not have them guessing.”
On the downside, Fox drew miserable ratings across the board from September through December and is mostly getting turned around by “American Idol.” It could have used “24” in the fall.
McPherson said that was ABC’s problem with “Lost.” It ran six episodes in the fall, tried to insert “Day Break” as a placeholder for three months (which might have worked if the show had drawn any kind of ratings), then brought “Lost” back last week. The jury is still out on the results.
“Ideally, the way you would do `Lost’ would be 22 straight, 23 straight,” McPherson said. “But given where we were in our development as a network, we really needed to have that installment in the fall.
“I think coming into next fall, there’s a good chance we would run it 22 straight either in the fall or in the spring.”
CBS more or less took the “Lost” approach with “Jericho,” but that’s partly because no one there was sure the show would even work.
“We don’t know that this is the right way to do `Jericho,’” Kelly Kahl, CBS head of scheduling, told critics. “We’re hoping this is the right way. All the information we had kind led us to this decision.”
And that’s the TV game these days. The new competition from all angles of media demands new tactics. A lot won’t work. Everyone is feeling their way.
And next season? Expect the pendulum to swing big time.
“There’s going to be a few more closed-ended dramas,” Reilly said.
Or as McPherson understated it, “I think you may see a little bit of an adjustment.”
Which means, come fall, expect complaints that there are too many procedurals and too few complex stories. That’s the thing about TV: You can always complain about something.
