Rethinking Prime Time

LaneSig · #1 11-02-2006, 03:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 33girl

They already have. Unless it's something that's been on for a while and solid in its time slot (i.e. making money), they are not putting any new scripted shows in the 8-9 PM hour. The only 7-8 hour is Sunday, which of course already has Dateline.

I'm not sure about other days, but Thursday night, 'My Name is Earl' and 'The Office' are on the early hour (7-8 pm).

Perhaps if they did switch and made shows that had less episodes, we would see more quality shows and work. No more "According to Jim' or 'Still Standing' shows. Also, the British actors bounce around. They might do a comedy series and then a drama series. That way they are not typecast as a specific role or performer. One I can think of is the lead actress in 'Keeping Up Appearances' - can't think of her name. She did very broad comedy in that series, and then played a lady private detective in "Hetty Wainwright Investigates". I'm sure a lot of actors would love the chance to play various roles and scenerios.

Another point about cost: Do some of the actors deserve such high salaries? I'm thinking of Helen Hunt on 'Mad About You'. Was she really worth $1 million per episode? Don't get me wrong. I have always thought she was great, but come on. Of course, if the school district offered me $1 milllion per class to teach, I would take it. lol

33girl · #2 11-02-2006, 03:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LaneSig

I'm not sure about other days, but Thursday night, 'My Name is Earl' and 'The Office' are on the early hour (7-8 pm).

7-8 in your time zone is 8-9 for people in the East, you freakazoids.

You get Dateline at 6-7 on Sunday, right?

Oh, and nothing connected with Mad About You was worth $1M per episode. God, I hate that show.

MysticCat · #3 11-02-2006, 03:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LaneSig

I'm not sure about other days, but Thursday night, 'My Name is Earl' and 'The Office' are on the early hour (7-8 pm).

Right, because they're drawing viewers, making some money (solid, as 33girl called them).

Quote:

Also, the British actors bounce around. They might do a comedy series and then a drama series. That way they are not typecast as a specific role or performer. One I can think of is the lead actress in 'Keeping Up Appearances' - can't think of her name. She did very broad comedy in that series, and then played a lady private detective in "Hetty Wainwright Investigates".

Patricia Routledge, who has a very broad resume indeed.

I can see both sides: I'm loathe these days to take on a "new" show because the ones I already watch take up enough time. (I tried taping "Lost" when it first started, but I got far enough behind in the first month that I gave up and haven't watched it since.) Between my wife and me, there are only 5 shows that we watch regularly (or tape if we're going to miss them) -- there are a few others we might watch if we have nothing else to do, but that's it. I've watched very few of the new shows this season, and I haven't really cared for the ones I have seen -- not enough to try and watch them again.

And the British-style schedules might indeed bring more interesting shows that do not require as much commitment as, say, a whole season of "Lost."

On the other hand, like many I've become conditioned to the "it's-***day-so-[blank]-will-be-on-tonight-and-watching-it-is-what-we-do-every-***day" syndrome. Might be hard to break.

Taualumna · #4 11-02-2006, 03:53 PM

Reality shows have no place on network TV. Send them to cable where they originated from!

They could try the Hong Kong method of television. Hong Kong prime time dramas usually last about 20-30 episodes, and are on daily. Once the storyline is over, the show is done. If the series was extremely popular, then a sequel season will be produced.

MysticCat · #5 11-02-2006, 04:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Taualumna

Reality shows have no place on network TV. Send them to cable where they originated from!

Disagree. Most reality shows are relatively worthless (which doesn't mean they can't be entertaining), but the good ones like The Amazing Race and Survivor were brought to us by network TV, not cable.

Quote:

They could try the Hong Kong method of television. Hong Kong prime time dramas usually last about 20-30 episodes, and are on daily. Once the storyline is over, the show is done. If the series was extremely popular, then a sequel season will be produced.

A la the telenovella -- a staple of TV in Latin America and much of the world.

So are you saying you haven't been watching Bo Derek and Morgan Fairchild brawl on My Network TV's new American telenovellas?

LeslieAGD · #6 11-02-2006, 05:11 PM

I think it depends on what shows you like. Plenty of my favorite shows have been around for a few seasons (Prison Break, House MD, Gilmore Girls, L&O:SVU, Grey's Anatomy, Medium). But notice most of my favorites are police/crime and hospital dramas which tend to do well with viewers.

33girl · #7 11-02-2006, 05:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Taualumna

Reality shows have no place on network TV. Send them to cable where they originated from!

The first ever "reality" show was on PBS, when there was no such thing as cable.

Taualumna · #8 11-02-2006, 11:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 33girl

The first ever "reality" show was on PBS, when there was no such thing as cable.

You mean nature shows and documentaries?

bluefish81 · #9 11-03-2006, 12:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 33girl

The first ever "reality" show was on PBS, when there was no such thing as cable.

Wow, I didn't know that. I always thought that reality shows got their start with MTV's Real World.

DeltAlum · #10 11-03-2006, 02:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bluefish81

I always thought that reality shows got their start with MTV's Real World.

Wow.

33girl · #11 11-03-2006, 10:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeltAlum

Wow.

For real, yo.

In addition to An American Family - we went through a lovely time in the late 1970's when we had this and this. Now THAT was stupid television.

#12 11-05-2006, 11:35 AM

I think reality shows should belong on cable or a station strickly for that venue. These shows have taken away the quality tv that was once was. I just cannot get into watching fear factor and the grotisque things they had to endure on that show. Survivor just has run its course. Yes it was cool the first two seasons but now ...i got nothing! We all have busy lives and the last thing i want to do is watch reality i rather get embroiled into a good story line vs reality. IF i wanted reality i would just turn the tv off and go out and see reality outside my front door.

There are some shred left of great shows like Greys Anatomy, ER , Studio 60, Gilmore Girls,etc... But when they take great show away and replace it with reality TV then becomes a real turn off!

Taualumna · #13 11-03-2006, 02:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bluefish81

Wow, I didn't know that. I always thought that reality shows got their start with MTV's Real World.

That's what I was thinking too...anything before that, the shows on PBS (and PBS-like channels) are documentaries or nature shows because I don't recall anything similar to Real World on PBS.

What "reality" show was on PBS?

Senusret I · #14 11-03-2006, 03:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Taualumna

What "reality" show was on PBS?

It was called An American Family and came on in 1973. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/An_American_Family