FX’s John Landgraf is not sure the media ecosystem supports television shows that run beyond just a few seasons.
Well, Nah. The problem is that lack of plot, and just milking viewers with fillers, and get cancelled without ever actually completing the character’s arch or wrapping up the story.
Mini Series like Black Bird, Chernobyl, True Detective… They’re amazing!
It ain’t attention spans its the fractured landscape of streaming and the high costs of productions on more non-reality TV shows. Plenty of dog shit reality TV shows can still get endless seasons because they are cheap to produce.
As I’ve gotten older, I’ve come to appreciate shows that do a tight story in six to eight episodes. Many shows with 16-24 episodes per seasons always add in filler episodes that only need to exist to sell more ads over the course of the season. And shows that drag on season after season eventually lose the plot.
Remember Lost? One hundred and twenty-one episodes only to drop entire plot lines, mysteries, etc.
I absolutely love LOST but the idea of sitting through a 24 episode season just feels so wrong at this point.
That and writing goes to shit once an idea has been dredged far enough.
Even the good stuff sucks after seven + years, and there’s usually a drop off before that.
I would say it is number of episodes more than just years, as a show with 20+ episodes per year will run out of the same number of ideas twice as fast as 10 per year, and the latter has more time available to think up and refine ideas.
I would say long running shows should be the exception to the rule, and all those shows that drug themselves out for whatever the syndication minimum was are the best examples moat things having a limited lifespan. Plus the number of years tends to lead to staff turnover and the people writing season 7 are most likely not the same as the ones who made the show successful in the first place.
