I thought it was hilarious, if not a little sickening.
I disagree. The prisoner characters in Oz were always portrayed as criminals. There was never a time when you were supposed to feel they were just regular people like you or me. The only exception was Beecher, whose function in the show was to be the relatable character; the non-criminal living among all these criminals.
That may have been a new thing for an American series. But anyone who was watching imported British series was used to limited seasons like that.
I’m not sure I understand this comment.
The characters in Sopranos are also always portrayed as criminals, I never felt they were just regular people; “just regular people” don’t run someone down with a car and beat them half to death like they did on the Sopranos early in the very first episode of the series.
To me, the difference between them and most of the residents of Oz was a conviction, and I felt similarly like (or similarly distant) from both groups of characters.
Like a lot of things that become cultural icons or watersheds, there’s quite a bit of “right place at the right time” with The Sopranos. It could not have happened 5 years earlier (HBO’s first original series was Oz in 1997), and 5 years later we might be having this discussion about The Wire or Deadwood, though those might not have been made without The Sopranos success.
As others have said, The Sopranos changed TV with it’s focus on morally questionable main characters, long (even multi-season) storylines and character arcs, ambiguous resolutions or no resolutions as made famous in “The Pine Barrens” episode.
Technically, the slow production pace allowed a focus on quality and the production was more film-like than most shows at the time, including the budget which was much higher per show than most contemporary shows. On top of that was the writing, directing, and acting, which was superior to most contemporaries despite a few notable clunkers in some areas. As other have also said, they didn’t necessarily invent all of these separate ideas and techniques, but they did bring them all together.
I don’t remember where, but I saw it, some article claiming that the show was the TV version of The Beatles. In that they weren’t necessarily the first to do something, but they took a lot of emerging ideas and techniques, combined them with nearly peerless artistry and creativity and packaged it all in a crowd pleasing format (that’s more important than you think) that pushed the whole field forward permanently and clearly divided the history of the art form into “before” and “after”.
Of course, that leads to what is the Chuck Berry of TV?
Or the Buddy Holly?
Or the Jimi Hendrix?
As I said in my earlier post, I disagree. The prisoner characters in Oz were always either in the middle of committing a crime, or planning a crime, or dealing with the aftermath of a crime. Their entire existence in the show centered on being a criminal. (Which, incidentally, is unrealistic. Actual prisoners very rarely talk about their criminal activities much less carry out any crimes. They probably spend less time talking about their “jobs” than the average working person does.)
That wasn’t the case in The Sopranos. There were many scenes that had nothing to do with one of the characters being a criminal; they were shown dealing with family problems or domestic situations or talking about their feelings. We saw that they had lives outside of crime, which we barely ever saw with the characters in Oz.
Yeah, I would go as far as to say that I would feel sort of comfortable being around the majority of the characters on The Sopranos, provided that I didn’t owe any of them money or was otherwise on their shit list. I would take great pains to not get any of them angry at me, but other than that, I would be able to cope with them.
There isn’t a single character on Oz other than the dude in the wheelchair, who I would turn my back on for two seconds. They are all terrifying.
People forget that the staff have signficant coverage in Oz, the warden, McManus, Sister Peter marie, Mike Healy, Father Ray, Dr Gloria, Carmelo Soprano…
It’s groundwork was 10 episode highly violent adult subject matter and a view into the life. People think that the significant thing about the Sopranos was that it was mafia family life. I never saw it as that way, to me it was more a prism into connecting to the rules of the mafia. Their laws. Junior being horrified that his girlfriend is boasting of oral sex, as if it makes him gay. Highly dramatic confrontations which don’t end in violence, but some poor sap gets murdered in the car park instead. The whole Omerta falling apart due to drugs. The fact they also framed it with domestic duties was unavoidable and not the significant greatness of the series.
So I still think Oz did lay the groundwork. But wasn’t exactly the same series.
Philip Marlowe?
First and Ten?
Dream On?
Arliss?
True, but at the same time, there was always, at least for me, a distinct feeling that these guys just followed in the family business- it’s not like they got out of college and found a bunch of job ads, one of which was for “Organized Crime Soldier” and thought “Yeah, I could be an accountant, or I could be an organized criminal… which to choose?”
There was something kind of tragic about the whole thing I felt; like maybe these guys didn’t seek it out and weren’t the sorts of sociopaths who would, but rather were raised in that environment, and as a result, their concepts of normal behavior and normal attitudes were grotesquely twisted. Bobby and Eugene in particular were ones who I feel were examples of this.
…no… not even…arguably true… There were A LOT of original series on HBO before that.
Not unless you’re counting animated series, comedies and documentaries, which doesn’t really make sense when you’re talking about whether The Sopranos changed TV or whether Oz could have . I find three “original HBO drama series” before Oz- one seems to have been an anthology of afterschool special type programs ( which is not what I would consider a series) , one was a joint production with ITV and the last was a six-part series.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Here’s a clip of what that looked like.
Sorry I meant first drama series. There were of course original comedies, documentaries, and children’s shows before Oz.
The Philip Marlowe mentioned upthread could maybe be considered the first but it was produced for HBO, not by HBO, which might be hairsplitting.
Eh, Phillip Marlowe only had 11 episodes anyway. If you say that Oz was the first HBO drama to have character arcs and run themes over several episodes … I can get behind that.
While First & Ten was always billed a comedy, it wasn’t done in a slapsticky sitcom style – there were character arcs and some (light) drama mixed in.
If anyone is interested I highly recommend the following book:
The Revolution was Televised - Alan Sepinwell
Great read how the following TV shows forever changed the face of television:
- The Sopranos
- Oz
- The Wire
- Deadwood
- The Shield
- Lost
- Buffy the Vampire Slayer
- 24
- Battlestar Galactica
- Friday Night Lights
- Mad Men
- Breaking Bad
I highly recommend it.
MtM
Another vote for didn’t change TV.
Even though it didn’t get nearly as much attention as The Sopranos, I feel The Wire had a far bigger influence on TV. Oz was the show that opened the door a wee bit for shows like this, but it was a more restricted fictional world and limited story arcs. It was The Wire that really made things happen.
I didn’t watch it when it came out, or really any TV at all. I started watching it recently because it came with Amazon Prime and I thought I’d be getting a much less episodic show that had a smooth story arc. For whatever reason I was under the impression that this show had started a trend that I enjoy in newer shows. While not “monster of the week”, it’s not what I thought.
Or has my viewpoint been skewed by watching this in 2019?
Really? I love The Wire, but it seemed less groundbreaking than Homicide and felt like a continuation of that show in a lot of respects.
That book came out in May 2013. I’d be interested to see Sepinwell’s take on the dawn of streaming television.