The Good Old Days: The Things We Miss In the Modern TV Era - And The Ones We Don't

[tearknee]

5 hours ago, Shannon L. said:

But they managed so well.  I don't watch as many sitcoms as I used to, so I don't know when they stopped doing fun theme songs, but I checked The Big Bang Theory, which is the most recent one I can think of, and it was only 20 seconds long.  The Golden Girls and Friends were 40 and M*A*S*H was 45.  I kind of miss them, but it's not a big deal for me that they don't have them anymore.  I don't see how they ate up too much time, though. 

time an old theme song to the amount of plot time a modern comparable show has.

[tearknee]

Adult Ally Barone -- well she could have been a vamp on Buffy ;)

 

 

[Raja]

From 70s TV the only "interracial" meaning Black and White, couple that I could remember were the Jeffersons' in-laws. But now I am seeing them sprinkled in as one-off storylines on cop shows like Kojak and Police Story recently.

And on that Police Story episode a Juvenile Division detective, in those days before women were on patrol duties was going in to take down a teen armed robber carrying her purse. And the theme I do remember of folks fearing that males with female partners would eventually have an affair.

[Raja]

A line of dialog from a 1976 episode of Emergency! As with all later Jack Webb programs you get the anti drug message but it caught me on how the messaging of a sober or an addict in recovery has changed. A heroin addict who was clean for a year refuses pain medication for multiple broken bones and his friend questions how one could needed shot hurt even an addict. To which Paramedic De Soto immediately corrects "ex drug addict"

[tennisgurl]

I'm sick of shows with such short seasons, I miss the days of long seasons full of random filler or comedy episodes. I feel like everyone got really hung up on how "filler" is bad and how they just want to get to the point, but I think we went too far the other way and now every show ends so quickly it feels like the season just started and we didn't have time for character development, comedy, everything feels like a mad rush to get to the end. 

Some shows do benefit from a shorter season, but I miss the days of wacky side quests and episodes where it was the 1930s for no reason or when every character could get a flashback explaining their backstory, there is just no time for that kind of fun anymore when every show is just trying to get to the next shocking season finale.

[Zella]

10 hours ago, tennisgurl said:

episodes where it was the 1930s for no reason 

I've been watching a lot of the original Magnum PI lately, and I love when they do this. LOL You're right--I can't imagine a show with a 10-13 episode season doing that. 

Actually just in general, I've been enjoying Magnum PI way more than I expected to. I say this as someone born after it went off the air so only now encountering it for the first time in my thirties. 

[Annber03]

Yeah, I much prefer the old school style of TV, too. I like shows that are a mix of episodic and serialized storytelling - there's just enough overarching storylines or continuing threads that help keep everything connected and give things a nice continuity, but you'll also get more time to spend getting to know the characters individually.

Plus, even with older series that did have season/series long arcs, the old school method still allowed those stories time to actually breathe and develop, there wasn't a rush-rush-rush to move the story along. They could expand on stuff more, they could get more detailed with the plot points, and when there were shocking twists, they were earned instead of just thrown in and piled on top of each other to the point where things got all convoluted. 

But yeah, mainly I just really like the older style because I"m a character-focused person when it comes to getting into a TV show, and it's much easier for me to get invested in characters when I have more time to actually spend with them and get to properly know them. 

[Irlandesa]

I've said it here before, I think, but I hate when people criticize longer seasons for having "filler" episodes as if shorter seasons don't have filler.  They do.  In fact, I find the filler in those shorter season shows more annoying because it's even more obvious that a show is spinning its wheels to avoid getting to the end too soon.

In longer seasons, the filler is more likely to be something experimental, fun or character-building. 

[tearknee]

OTOH if you look at old shows, the discontinuities from ep to ep stick out like a sore thumb.

Elyse Keaton: "Mom! I'm your only daugh- Hi, Michelle!"

[Anduin]

15 hours ago, tennisgurl said:

I'm sick of shows with such short seasons, I miss the days of long seasons full of random filler or comedy episodes.

Absolutely! Also, the pace of modern shows, like they have too much plot for the running time. Slow down and let the story breathe a little! Especially Rings of Power. Tolkien wasn't big on brevity. For all the Tolkien trappings, it just doesn't feel like the story he would write.

[paulvdb]

15 hours ago, tennisgurl said:

I'm sick of shows with such short seasons, I miss the days of long seasons full of random filler or comedy episodes. I feel like everyone got really hung up on how "filler" is bad and how they just want to get to the point, but I think we went too far the other way and now every show ends so quickly it feels like the season just started and we didn't have time for character development, comedy, everything feels like a mad rush to get to the end. 

Some shows do benefit from a shorter season, but I miss the days of wacky side quests and episodes where it was the 1930s for no reason or when every character could get a flashback explaining their backstory, there is just no time for that kind of fun anymore when every show is just trying to get to the next shocking season finale.

I think I have mentioned it before, but I do miss the longer seasons with weekly episodes and occasional breaks. I used to hate the long wait between episodes, but stretching out the season meant that at least I'd remember what happened in the previous season's finale when the new season started. There used to be a few months between the end of one season and the beginning of the next, but now you're lucky if you only have to wait a year between seasons with many shows having two years or more between seasons.

[Haleth]

The only thing I appreciate about short seasons is that with so much content available I can watch a lot of different shows. There aren’t enough hours in the day to watch everything if shows had 20+ episodes each season as in ye good olde days. 

[tearknee]

Yeah. It would feel like reaching the end of King's the Strand.

[Annber03]

4 hours ago, Anduin said:

Absolutely! Also, the pace of modern shows, like they have too much plot for the running time. Slow down and let the story breathe a little! Especially Rings of Power. Tolkien wasn't big on brevity. For all the Tolkien trappings, it just doesn't feel like the story he would write.

Yeah, that's the funny thing, streaming shows especially will expand the running time of their episodes, to where there's no real consistency from episode to episdoe in terms of how long each one is....

...and yet it still often feels more bloated than not. A lot of TV shows are trying to be like mini movies nowadays, and...if I wanted to watch a movie, I'd, y'know, watch a movie. I'm watching a TV show because I want to watch a TV show. Let it actually look and feel and play out like a TV show. 

[Ohiopirate02]

8 hours ago, Irlandesa said:

I've said it here before, I think, but I hate when people criticize longer seasons for having "filler" episodes as if shorter seasons don't have filler.  They do.  In fact, I find the filler in those shorter season shows more annoying because it's even more obvious that a show is spinning its wheels to avoid getting to the end too soon.

In longer seasons, the filler is more likely to be something experimental, fun or character-building. 

I find that those who tend to complain about filler are people who are plot-first viewers. Character building is further down on their list of priorities, so when a show slows down to plot to explore the characters they complain. In the book world, these are the people who prefer thrillers and the works of James Patterson or Lee Child. I am a character-first type of viewer who will turn off the TV if I cannot stand the characters. I love it when a show slows it down and we get to peel back the layers on the different characters.

[Dimity]

1 hour ago, Ohiopirate02 said:

I am a character-first type of viewer who will turn off the TV if I cannot stand the characters. I love it when a show slows it down and we get to peel back the layers on the different characters.

This works well for dramas, not so much in sitcoms.  I agree with you if I can't stand the characters, or at least one of them anyway, I won't watch the show.  So good-bye Seinfeld and King of Queens!. 

But anyway the filler episodes on sitcoms are so blatant now, not because older series didn't do it, but because with so few episodes we viewers really look forward to a new episode in a way I don't think we did before.  And then when the new episode is just...blah...it gets noticed.  Are we unrealistically expecting them to knock it out of the ballpark every time?  Maybe.  But given the shorter season, and the often months long gap before a new episode drops maybe not.

[DearEvette]

2 hours ago, Dimity said:

But anyway the filler episodes on sitcoms are so blatant now, not because older series didn't do it, but because with so few episodes we viewers really look forward to a new episode in a way I don't think we did before. 

I have truly never thought about sitcoms having filler episodes.  I have always looked at sitcoms as truly episodic in nature where that episode's plot started at the beginning and got resolved by the end.  They are presented with a situation which they comedically worked through until resolved all in 21 minutes.   I do know some sitcoms carry plots over multiple episodes, but each episode has always felt self contained for the most part. 

I am curious what you'd consider a filler for sitcoms? The Very Special Episodes maybe?

Edited Friday at 06:28 PM by DearEvette

[Raja]

43 minutes ago, DearEvette said:

I am curious what you'd consider a filler for sitcoms? The Very Special Episodes maybe?

Back door pilots would be my cut.

[tearknee]

Just now, Raja said:

Back door pilots would be my cut.

Kelly's Kids and that last episode of the Facts of Life ("Do you think I over-boobed?") etc.

[Dimity]

1 hour ago, DearEvette said:

I am curious what you'd consider a filler for sitcoms? The Very Special Episodes maybe?

No not really.  Those aren't featured much anymore, at least not on the sitcoms I follow.  I guess I mean ones where an important plot point has been set up in previous episodes and that gets ignored for something pointless, and for a sitcom most importantly, laughless.

[DearEvette]

1 hour ago, Raja said:

Back door pilots would be my cut.

Ugh. Yeah.  That makes sense.

[chitowngirl]

5 hours ago, DearEvette said:

I am curious what you'd consider a filler for sitcoms? The Very Special Episodes maybe?

Clip shows. Friends seemed to have a lot of those

[tearknee]

53 minutes ago, chitowngirl said:

Clip shows. Friends seemed to have a lot of those

No, Family Ties is the trope maker (SNL when Justine B hosted)

[Ceindreadh]

I sort of half miss the clip show episodes that nearly every show used to have.

It was usually the only chance I had to get a second look at many episodes, as my local channels rarely re-ran shows.  Okay, so there were pretty much only two storylines used* (character has amnesia or is in a coma), but I still liked it for the most part. 

*The main exception being Xena Warrior Princess which had a heck of lot more variety in its clip shows. 

 

[Annber03]

And then of course there was "Community", which did its own very novel take on the "clip show" concept :D. 

9 hours ago, Ohiopirate02 said:

I am a character-first type of viewer who will turn off the TV if I cannot stand the characters. I love it when a show slows it down and we get to peel back the layers on the different characters.

Yep. I don't necessarily have to like all the characters on a TV show (although in my case, I usually do :p), but even the ones that I'm meant to hate 'cause they're the villain or whatever, I still have to be invested in them on some level. I sitll want to give a damn about why they're doing what they're doing. Better to have a strong emotion towards a character, be it positive or negative, than to just not care at all. 

[Irlandesa]

11 hours ago, Ohiopirate02 said:

I find that those who tend to complain about filler are people who are plot-first viewers. Character building is further down on their list of priorities, so when a show slows down to plot to explore the characters they complain.

Maybe but writers who have to create longer seasons also do better episode plots.  

[Affogato]

The last episode of DS9, all of them moving on to other jobs, was moving in a way that a shorter show could never capture. Ont of the good things about television is that the characters were developed over time. They became whole people and you could have things happen to them that eere wholly earned. Not just Henry’s death in MASH, not just big things, but smaller things as well. 

[tearknee]

1 minute ago, Affogato said:

The last episode of DS9, all of them moving on to other jobs, was moving in a way that a shorter show could never capture. Ont of the good things about television is that the characters were developed over time. They became whole people and you could have things happen to them that eere wholly earned. Not just Henry’s death in MASH, not just big things, but smaller things as well. 

Indeed..