Nah. She said she liked South Park, Family Guy, Seinfeld, and Married With Children ferchissakes! Not a lot of wholesome innocence there. Again, I think some people are reading too much into certain things she’s mentioned.
(screwed up my edit and missed the window)
But those four examples I gave above are chock full of cynicism and nihilism, and she likes those. So I think you’re a bit off in your assessment.
BSG? What’s BSG?
I like my nihilism with a smile I guess. Cynicism with sugar on it. Fair enough.
And they all wrap up their plots in 30 minutes and hit the reset button halfway. Pace was one of TMC’s complaints about Breaking Bad. Depending on how you look at it, nothing happens in The Wire for the first 4.5 hours*. And none of the shows she’s into are known for their cinematography. I’m guessing she doesn’t place a high value on that.
The only thing that Deadwood kind of shares with any of the shows she likes is setting. And that’s only if you squint.
*of course things happen. Very important things with set, plot, and character development. But there’s a good 4+ hours of set up. Deadwood crawls, because, arguably, the most important character in the show is the town itself, and it takes a season to get there. For all of the shows she mentioned, the plot is moving 12 minutes in, if not sooner.
I love both of these shows. They are great shows. But they’re not for everyone, and I will be shocked if they’re for Two Many Cats
Battlestar Galactica.
Maybe Two Many Cats should try watching MASH instead?
I had to laugh when she said shows like “The Simpsons” are about to jump the shark. Really? About too? “The Simpsons” jumped the shark 10 years ago! It’s been on Fox for 22 years, nobody has aged. How can they not be recycling story lines?
And I feel sorry for you Two Many Cats. I respect your opinion, but there is no way I could give up the style of modern dramas for shows of old.
Even a show like “24”, totally not realistic but highy entertaining to watch (kind of like a Dan Brown novel). I was laid-up after an operation a couple of years ago and in 3 days I power watched season 1 and 2! I did the same with “Boardwalk”.
I liken the traditional shows you like with “Two and Half Men”. That show is total shite. I have been forced to watch it twice in my life, and you could see every joke coming a mile away, and could predict the entire plot of the epiosde within the first 2 minutes!
I know you won’t like them, but these are some of my favorite shows in the last 10 years (in no particular order, because that’s too hard!):
- Six Feet Under
- The Wire
- The Soprano’s
- Deadwood
- Rescue Me
- Lost
- Rome
- Breaking Bad
- Mad Men
- The Sheild
- Justified
Cheers!
MtM
Cheers, another great sitcom. 
[quote=“McDeath_the_Mad, post:106, topic:595362”]
I had to laugh when she said shows like “The Simpsons” are about to jump the shark. Really? About too? “The Simpsons” jumped the shark 10 years ago! It’s been on Fox for 22 years, nobody has aged. How can they not be recycling story lines?
[QUOTE]
Actually I said that the prime time cartoonery was “about to jump the shark if they hadn’t already.” I think The Simpsons jumped the shark a long time ago, but still, I prefer it to most of what’s available today.
I don’t care for Two and a Half Men either. Or any of the current sitcoms that I’ve caught sight of. I watched about half of a Modern Family, the one about Mother’s Day. Annoying kids. Barbie women. They did have an interesting bit about one gay guy of a couple getting upset because everyone thought of him as the “Mom” of his family. But while it was a thoughtful bit, I didn’t laugh at all.
Comedies without laughter are the bane of my existence.
There does seem to be a lot of rage against Two Many Cats for saying that TV now is not better than it was. It became such conventional wisdom around the '00s that TV was getting better. Did it? I don’t know.
I’m not saying TMC is being fair to Breaking Bad, but the whole idea that a show with a continuing storyline is inherently more sophisticated than one without is probably unfair too. Soap operas have them, and so did prime time soaps like Dallas (which is a better show than, say, Boardwalk Empire or True Blood, though not as good as the best HBO shows). The reset-button type of show was considered a much higher art form in the '60s while soap operas were looked down on, because an individual episode that wraps things up was like a little movie or play, while a soap opera or serial just tossed out a bunch of scenes.
Serials have gotten better since then, but someone who doesn’t like the soap format might not say “oh, well, I’ll see where this is going.” They might say “this episode made no point.” Of course the good serials, like* Breaking Bad *and Mad Men, do try to give some sort of point or at least a theme to every episode, so they’re not just soap operas. But they’re still pretty soapy. That’s part of what makes them enjoyable.
I think I’d suggest to TMC if she hadn’t already done so checking out some of the current procedurals, particularly the early years of *CSI *(not the spinoffs), and currently NCIS, though that has a surprising amount of audience overlap with HBO stuff. And someone already mentioned the USA shows like Psych, though they may be too light for her taste – it seems like she’s into dramas with very strong individual episode storytelling that are still serious. *Justified *could have been a show like that, but it’s gotten heavy into arcs (and maybe is a somewhat lesser show than it could have been if it hadn’t gotten so soapy so fast).
But just because there was a mantra that TV in the '00s was in a golden age doesn’t necessarily mean it objectively was. There are certain kinds of storytelling that you could never have done in the past eras, like The Wire. But if a viewer prefers the anthology approach of *The Twilight Zone *or *Gunsmoke *where every episode is a separate short story with a point all its own (*Gunsmoke *had continuing characters but the guest characters were the real stars of episodes) then that’s hard to find now outside of sitcoms, and who says everyone has to prefer novels to short stories?
I’d argue that as the technology gets cheaper and more advanced (e.g. cinematography, digital cameras, non-linear editing, CG vfx, sound design and sets, etc.) it allows the writers and producers to craft shows that are far more cinematic and richer than money would have typically allowed in the past.
It’s not by technology alone, but by being smart in using these advances to tell and explore new, more in-depth stories that were before either impossible with TV budgets, impractical, or just came off campy because Men-In-Suit aliens, and such turned off the masses.
That, and as with any art, storytelling evolves and adapts to audiences as well. But, in my almost 40 years as a TV watcher, I can’t say there were any huge gaps in viewing where I lamented the current programming. I grew up watching 70s and 80s television, and yet, I feel primetime TV really is better, or at least on par, than what used to be.
What’s airing today that might be considered classics like All in the Family 30 years from now?