Skip Through The Ads My Darlin'

No wonder the majority of new shows each season tank - it turns out, in this era of DVRs and OnDemand programming, TV execs are spending more time finding ways to develop ad revenue than they are developing new series.

From a certain standpoint, I can appreciate this. Ultimately, if they can't sell ads, we won't get television for nearly as inexpensively as we do now. Unless we want a glut of a quasi-reality, American Idol type shows; cheap to produce and hand-over fist money makers.

The problem is they're focusing on the wrong problem. DVRs provide essentially the same function as VCRs, which have been around for close to 30 years. Why the sudden scare that commercial viewership is decreasing? Granted a DVR will allow you to only slightly time shift a program (say start watching it 10 minutes in), where with a VCR you have to wait until the show is done recording. However, with the limited numbers of DVRs in use I have to ask again, what is the sudden scare? It can't be any sort of pre-emptive strike, American businesses having proven time and again that they are too shortsighted to be proactive. So what is it that they are actually reacting to?

Got me. Even though I skip through the ads most times when watching recorded programs, I sometimes will stop and go back if something catches my eye. For instance I'm a big fan of the Mac ads, so if I catch a glimpse while one is going by at the speed of a freight train, I back up the program to check it out. Same goes for something that looks quirky or funny in high-speed; I'll go back to play it in real time to see if it was. When watching a show "live" however, I usually just change the channel to something else and wait out the commercial break - thank goodness for dual-tuner DVRs. In this scenario the advertisers actually fair better when I'm watching something I've recorded or time-shifted on the DVR.

Contrary to what they teach in business school, advertising can be successful without being in your face. A poorly designed ad will fail no matter how high it's volume or obnoxious it's presence. A well designed ad however, even one playing on a TV used primarily as background noise, can still catch the interest of the essentially uninterested viewer. So can a well-thought-out product placement.

You know what I remember more than the commercials that aired during an episode or season of The Office weeks or even months after it has ended? The fact that they have Staples products strewn throughout the Dunder-Mifflin complex. The irony of this juxtaposition makes this memorable enough, but the fact that I notice, and chuckle at it every week makes it even more so. Staples is getting every bit of their money's worth out of that deal.

Product placements can work, and don't necessarily have to lessen the integrity of the show. Of course, if they are done poorly and out of context - see the J&J Acuvue placement in a Smallville episode from a couple seasons ago - the results can be horrific. I'm willing to risk it however, if for no other reason than the hope that it might free up some time for the suits to work on giving us some innovative programming.

Season Finale Highlights and Lowlights

Lots of big doin's in the past week. Here are some of the highlights (and lowlights):

The Simpsons - The finale actually consisted of two unrelated episodes, the second being the series' 400th. The first episode however was my favorite of the two. I love The Simpsons, but I rarely watch the episodes in their first run anymore; I either wait for syndication or the DVDs. However, when I saw they were doing a 24 parody I couldn't pass. This ep was spot on (did I see Jack with his man bag?) and so good in fact that I want more Simpson's episodes in this style. The second episode was good too, if for no other reason than Homer's letting us know that he learned from Fox news that "Mexican gays are sneaking across the border and unplugging our brain-dead ladies". Looking forward to the movie this summer.

The Office - A classic episode, and a great way to end a great season. Michael's going nowhere, Jim's got a date with Pam, and Ryan will now be Michael's boss. His exchange with Kelly after his phone call from corporate was fantastic. As was the barely noticeable comment from CFO David Wallace that the corporate HR guy is kind of a jerk. The table has been set for what should be a hilarious fourth season. My only concern is that NBC has apparently ordered thirty episodes for next season. That's 1/3 more the funny; it may be hard to pull off.

24 - This episode was better than most of it's predecessors this season, but still indicative of the unevenness of this sixth season. It was good to see the return of Jack's man bag, but his final confrontation with his father was a bit of a let down. Plus wasn't it just super-convenient that Audrey's house was only a four minute walk from the spot where Jack jumped off the helo? Lots of stories about the producers hearing our frustration and making some significant changes for Jack's next long day. Let's hope they're true.

Lost - Thank goodness for DVRs. I don't think I would have remained mentally stable (relatively, of course) if I had to wait through each commercial break of what was an especially intense and simultaneously uplifting and browbeating two hours of television. The game has definitely changed, and I didn't really see it coming until Jack was alone in his pad with countless maps of the South Pacific. The only other clue I picked up in my initial watching was how new his cell phone looked, but I thought maybe that was just a prop dept. mistake. What a great episode: action, emotional engagement, a good number of loose ends tied up, and several more laid out. I can't wait to see how the show will reconcile its "new" format with the need to tie up all the other loose ends that still exist. Who's funeral do you think it was nobody showed up for?

Smallville - A little uneven, like the rest of the season. Lana's death was a (self-planned) setup telegraphed by the unnecessary delivery van that passed in front of her right before the explosion. I was really hoping Lois was actually dead and Chloe was going to take over her identity for some reason. I'll be sad if Chloe is really dead, cause the actress is much more likable than the chick who plays Lois. The appearance of the Martian Manhunter and Bizarro was cool, but could have been much better executed. This show never allows for more than five minutes an episode for its climactic scenes, and it usually results in a bit of a letdown, just like...

Heroes - I loved the final episode, right up until the last scene with Nathan jetting Peter off to safely explode in the atmosphere. I don't really care if Nathan's dead, but if they really killed off Peter I may stop watching; it's like killing off Superman in a Justice League scenario. The two episodes leading up to the final had a lot of build up to what was billed as a spectacular confrontation. Well, there was a confrontation, but it wasn't very spectacular, and it lasted less than three minutes. Peter used none of his powers to stop Sylar, instead absorbing Nikki's strength to knock him around until Hiro showed up to deliver the fatal blow. This begs another question. Why couldn't Peter just fly himself away? Why did he need Nathan? Hiro's eventual landing in Ancient Japan is interesting, but like a lot of other viewers I felt a little insulted by how weak a job was done of wrapping things up. This show had a good first season, but I think a lot of that was based on faith. I kept watching, even though I wasn't totally connected with any of the characters, for the promise of what the show could be. It seemed like in the last few episodes it might live up to that potential, but then at the last minute it tripped. I just hope in can pick itself up for season two.

TV (Producers) on the Radio

Lost producers Damon Lindelof and Carlton Cuse were on WBUR's OnPoint program yesterday with some interesting insight into the past and future of the show. You can listen to the entire interview here.

What I found most interesting in the conversation was the discussion of the producers' negotiations with ABC to define an end date for the series and the viability of Lost-type shows (i.e. serialized dramas based on a story with a defined end) in the future. Cuse and Lindelof seem to think the networks might be willing to move in that direction (however slowly) as they become more comfortable with alternate forms of viewing (iPods, Internet, DVR, etc.). This would be a huge shift in the television business model, which basically develops shows to go on indefinitely so the networks can squeeze out as much revenue as possible. After decades of operating in such a manner, I'm sure it seems scary to turn around and start saying a series is only going to last so many episodes or seasons. And while the network suits are always loathe to slaughter a cash cow, what's better: huge ratings for a few years, or slowly eroding ratings coupled with an exodus of viewers to other networks?

Adding a few series with specific ends to their stories, and thus limited runs, would go along way to keeping what's on a given network fresh, building some credibility with viewers, and ensuring that they keep watching what that network puts in front of them. It's a gutsy move, but the payoff in the long term seems worth it, almost like creating a brand loyalty for a network.

I've written about this before in these posts, but imagine how awesome Smallville could have been if the creators and network agreed it would only be a four year run culminating with Clark's graduation. It would have meant less filler, less unresolved story threads, less instances of the characters turning into caricatures, and probably higher ratings since it would have been a less frustrating show.

Lost is my favorite show right now, and frankly I can't wait to hear when it will end.

Mr. Buchanan, Can I Go Home Early Today?

Check out Ken Tucker's review of this week's ep of 24 and tell me if you don't kind of agree with him that this season is a little spotty. My major gripe this week concerns how we are expected to believe in these characters when they do stupid things. For example, Jack knows that everyone in the consulate is waiting outside the doors, he spoke with them for goodness sake. Regardless, after he gets his info he walks right into their waiting arms, no gun drawn, no thought of maybe going out the back. The good news is he was able to convince one of the Russians to call CTU. Inexplicably however, this guy has to change rooms to make the phone call on his cell phone, thereby leaving himself open to be killed by a co-conspirator of the ambassador. Seriously?! These techniques they are using to stretch out the plot are getting a little thin. Maybe we could make this season a half day.


Other News

Newsweek recently ran an article making the argument that TV is better than the movies. I can't necessarily disagree, though one comment by NBC President Kevin Reilly made me laugh. He made the comment that "desperation breeds inspiration" as if most of what is on TV right now is inspired. While I grant him that there are some really unique shows on now, probably more than in the past, the grim reality is that there are vastly more relying on outdated, tired formulas; and for every unique, creative show that succeeds, there is an exponential amount of copycats. He should have said desperation breeds imitation.

It's probably more coincidence than anything, but I like to think the producers of Smallville read my post that lambasted the creative direction of the show. The last two or three episodes have actually gotten me back into rooting for the series. Lana's realization that Clark has powers was a breath of fresh air, and I can't wait to see what Chloe's meteor freak ability is.

And on the Eighth Day, God Moved Onto His Next Project

Creators create shows. They write the pilot, executive produce, and if the viewer is lucky, they stay heavily involved in the story direction and development of the series. Some, like Aaron Sorkin, even write the majority of the episodes or at least do a heck of a lot of rewriting. Unfortunately however, a creator may decide to shepherd a show for only so long before she decides to move onto a new project. That's a perfectly acceptable decision, except for the fact that it often means the show is going to be left in less capable hands, or at least in the hands of people who might not have the same storytelling ability or vision as the creator.

Yet another disappointing episode of Smallville got me thinking about all this the other day. I began to wonder how much of a role the creators are still playing in that show. They are both still listed as executive producers, but how actively are they involved in the week to week running of the series? I ask because Smallville has turned from a show for which I would eagerly await each new episode to one I find myself watching purely out of obligation. They continue to recycle tired story lines and ridiculous plot gimmicks. Clark becomes less mature with each passing episode. At this point he will have finally developed the traits that make him Superman around the time he is starting to collect Social Security. The show's first three seasons were spectacular. Even if the show was written towards a younger demographic, there was reverence for the characters and the mythology, there was an appropriate amount of knowing references to future of the characters, and the show incorporated a slight darker tone at times.

Starting with season four though the show has been on a long, very long, downward spiral. Clark is less mature as a college sophomore than he was as a high school freshman. His decisions are rash, stupefying, and often end up causing more harm than good. Lex isn't nearly as cool or as three dimensional as he used to be. In fact, character development has essentially stopped and caricature development has started in its place. (For another example of this phenomenon see seasons 5+ of Friends).

How much of this has to do with the creators moving onto other projects and focusing less time on the show is debatable, but when you look at other series where a similar situation has taken place it seems the creator plays a vital role in maintaining the quality and tone of a series, especially in regard to serialized dramas.

Alias went sharply downhill when J.J. Abrams moved on to other projects. Again, he was still an EP of the show, but he was also working on Lost, plus other shows and directing Mission Impossible 3. This was another show where it felt like deja vu sometimes, with recycled story ideas or plots and characters finding themselves in exactly the same situation as in earlier episodes. The show also started to veer from its mythology, to its detriment.

After Aaron Sorkin was canned, The West Wing should have been. Season five of that show was a complete disaster. Sure it got good again in seasons six and seven, but it never equalled what it once was.

When Larry David left Seinfeld after season six it remained a ridiculously inventive, funny, and great show, but it wasn't the same one that it had been for the previous six seasons.

And though I would disagree with them, some might say the same about Lost. If you look closely it has become a slightly different show than when it started, but not that different and not really in a bad way. I think that's because most of the people originally involved in it are still on board.

These are just of few of some recent instances that came to mind, I'm sure there are dozens of others. Obviously if someone wants to move on they're going to. And it really only seems to be a problem for serialized shows, and that's why maybe TV execs need to rethink the whole series development process. Rather than try to keep a money-making show on the air for as long as possible (all the while draining it entirely of its soul and originality) why not purchase shows that have a distinct beginning and end, and a defined season length? For example in Smallville's case I would have made it a four year show, just focusing on Clark's high school years. It would have allowed for greater freedom in storytelling and a greater consistency of quality since the writers wouldn't have been saddled with creating what are essentially filler episodes.

Such a scenario would still allow a creator to move on to another project, but it would also leave a defined blueprint for his successors to follow, which would be a big benefit for the audience who has invested so much time in someone's work.