Wednesday, August 04, 2004
The theme... it is hypnotic!
For the curious, I speak of the Doctor Who theme, specifically. Orbital did a cover of it on their album The Altogether, and I've been listening to it off and on ever since I started watching the show. I think it's the oscilloscopic sounds of the melody that really does it, but the bassy backbone could be just as responsible. Perhaps it is the minor key, or the fact that I don't think the "happy" melody in the Orbital cover is part of the theme... Whatever it is, it will not leave my brain, and I have to keep listening and humming the song over and over again! If it weren't so kickass, I would probably mind more.
I watched The Pirate Planet last night, (or is it The Planet Pirates?) and I must say that if anything, the series is ambitious. With nothing more than a handful of interior sets, barely enough cast members to form a crowd and props that look like they were made from scrap, the show manages to pull off a story that makes the recent offal Star Trek has done look like... well, crap. I mean, to get the audience to believe that the episode takes place on a hollow planet that maintains a time dam from the gravity of planets that have been compressed to the side of soccer balls... And toss in a cyborg and some telepaths to boot! Rather impressive stuff for the 70s - I can see why the cult following on this show is the way it is.
Anyhow, I was thinking about the show last night in-between episodes, whilst I was making some pizza, and I have decided that they just don't make shows like Doctor Who anymore. Now, often when ideas like this strike me, I don't remember them, but I managed to hang on to this one for posterity. Anyways, Doctor Who was done in the style of pulp serials - you have a large storyline broken into separate bits, and each bit ends with a cliffhanger to get the viewer/reader to tune in next time. If you watch all the bits back to back, it makes the whole story like a movie, and so you have the same freedom with extended length that comes with cinema, but in a television form. That doesn't happen anymore, not really.
Yes, there are TV series* on the air that have a major plotline overarching the episodes, but it isn't quite the same. Those plotlines would run for an entire season, and the majority of each episode would go towards the plotline of the specific episode, with a small amount of the uber-plot (for lack of a better term) dispensed throughout. The difference is in the scale. A story arc for Alias, for example, lasts for 13 hour-long** episodes. A Doctor Who story arc lasts 4 half-hour-long episodes. A Doctor Who story can be enjoyed over the course of 4 weeks, or just as easily in a sitting. Not so for Alias - unless if you consider watching TV for most of a day to be "in a sitting".
* What is the plural of series? Serieses? One series, two series? Doesn't seem right. Maybe I'm just being weird though.
** I'm aware that the episodes are really only 44 minutes. Doesn't have the same ring to it. Now quit arguing semantics.
Formats aside, this little cogitation on my part ended up sparking a bigger question: when did "leave the audience wanting more" turn into "leave the audience satisfied'? To get to this question involves the following process:*
Start!
> Doctor Who ends each ending with a cliffhanger.
> The cliffhanger is there to get people to tune in next time.
> This only works if the program is good however, since the cliffhanger only gets you if you're into the program and like it.
> This reminds me of an episode of Captain Star where the crew go off to entertain the aliens in the Great Dark.
> After the crew sneak off more and more and are in danger of being permanently held in the Dark, Capt. Star goes to settle the matter himself, and gives the greatest show ever.
> He then leaves and never does a repeat performance, since the secret to giving a good show is to always leave the audience wanting more.
> Jump back to me - all my favorite movies have left me wanting more.
> Or rather, they have always left me wanting the movie to go on and on, but still realizing that it can't.
> Some of the movies I have seen recently, on the other hand, such as I, Robot, have left me saying "Well, it wasn't a "good movie", but I was entertained. I am satisfied." In fact, I can think of several times where my companions at such a movie have uttered the same thing.
> Is this what we, the audience, has become?
> When did we stop demanding quality in our cinema?
> Is it because we asked for stories that wrapped up nicely and got squared away?
> Did we ask for these movies that provided us with our 2 hours of distracted entertainment and then kindly buggered off so we could go back to our lives?
> If that's the case, it's reasonable to assume that that is what they think we want.
> When did "leave the audience wanting more" become "give the audience what they want"?
* This is a glimpse into how my mind works sometimes. Viewer discretion is advised.**
** I am also aware of the irony of putting the disclaimer in the footnote. It is intentional.
That thread there could devolve further into more mutterings and ramblings, but I'll stop. You shall be spared more of the inner workings of my brain - all clockwork and humming, whirring along until someone throws a monkey wrench into it. That happens to me sometimes, as anyone who's been around me for any length of time knows.
Anyhow, it's home time so I'm sending this and posting it. Hyah.
¶ 2:57 p.m.
For the curious, I speak of the Doctor Who theme, specifically. Orbital did a cover of it on their album The Altogether, and I've been listening to it off and on ever since I started watching the show. I think it's the oscilloscopic sounds of the melody that really does it, but the bassy backbone could be just as responsible. Perhaps it is the minor key, or the fact that I don't think the "happy" melody in the Orbital cover is part of the theme... Whatever it is, it will not leave my brain, and I have to keep listening and humming the song over and over again! If it weren't so kickass, I would probably mind more.
I watched The Pirate Planet last night, (or is it The Planet Pirates?) and I must say that if anything, the series is ambitious. With nothing more than a handful of interior sets, barely enough cast members to form a crowd and props that look like they were made from scrap, the show manages to pull off a story that makes the recent offal Star Trek has done look like... well, crap. I mean, to get the audience to believe that the episode takes place on a hollow planet that maintains a time dam from the gravity of planets that have been compressed to the side of soccer balls... And toss in a cyborg and some telepaths to boot! Rather impressive stuff for the 70s - I can see why the cult following on this show is the way it is.
Anyhow, I was thinking about the show last night in-between episodes, whilst I was making some pizza, and I have decided that they just don't make shows like Doctor Who anymore. Now, often when ideas like this strike me, I don't remember them, but I managed to hang on to this one for posterity. Anyways, Doctor Who was done in the style of pulp serials - you have a large storyline broken into separate bits, and each bit ends with a cliffhanger to get the viewer/reader to tune in next time. If you watch all the bits back to back, it makes the whole story like a movie, and so you have the same freedom with extended length that comes with cinema, but in a television form. That doesn't happen anymore, not really.
Yes, there are TV series* on the air that have a major plotline overarching the episodes, but it isn't quite the same. Those plotlines would run for an entire season, and the majority of each episode would go towards the plotline of the specific episode, with a small amount of the uber-plot (for lack of a better term) dispensed throughout. The difference is in the scale. A story arc for Alias, for example, lasts for 13 hour-long** episodes. A Doctor Who story arc lasts 4 half-hour-long episodes. A Doctor Who story can be enjoyed over the course of 4 weeks, or just as easily in a sitting. Not so for Alias - unless if you consider watching TV for most of a day to be "in a sitting".
* What is the plural of series? Serieses? One series, two series? Doesn't seem right. Maybe I'm just being weird though.
** I'm aware that the episodes are really only 44 minutes. Doesn't have the same ring to it. Now quit arguing semantics.
Formats aside, this little cogitation on my part ended up sparking a bigger question: when did "leave the audience wanting more" turn into "leave the audience satisfied'? To get to this question involves the following process:*
Start!
> Doctor Who ends each ending with a cliffhanger.
> The cliffhanger is there to get people to tune in next time.
> This only works if the program is good however, since the cliffhanger only gets you if you're into the program and like it.
> This reminds me of an episode of Captain Star where the crew go off to entertain the aliens in the Great Dark.
> After the crew sneak off more and more and are in danger of being permanently held in the Dark, Capt. Star goes to settle the matter himself, and gives the greatest show ever.
> He then leaves and never does a repeat performance, since the secret to giving a good show is to always leave the audience wanting more.
> Jump back to me - all my favorite movies have left me wanting more.
> Or rather, they have always left me wanting the movie to go on and on, but still realizing that it can't.
> Some of the movies I have seen recently, on the other hand, such as I, Robot, have left me saying "Well, it wasn't a "good movie", but I was entertained. I am satisfied." In fact, I can think of several times where my companions at such a movie have uttered the same thing.
> Is this what we, the audience, has become?
> When did we stop demanding quality in our cinema?
> Is it because we asked for stories that wrapped up nicely and got squared away?
> Did we ask for these movies that provided us with our 2 hours of distracted entertainment and then kindly buggered off so we could go back to our lives?
> If that's the case, it's reasonable to assume that that is what they think we want.
> When did "leave the audience wanting more" become "give the audience what they want"?
* This is a glimpse into how my mind works sometimes. Viewer discretion is advised.**
** I am also aware of the irony of putting the disclaimer in the footnote. It is intentional.
That thread there could devolve further into more mutterings and ramblings, but I'll stop. You shall be spared more of the inner workings of my brain - all clockwork and humming, whirring along until someone throws a monkey wrench into it. That happens to me sometimes, as anyone who's been around me for any length of time knows.
Anyhow, it's home time so I'm sending this and posting it. Hyah.
¶ 2:57 p.m.
