There are few things more annoying to me than an art snob. That endless debate about high and low art where the snobs turn their nose up at specific artistic endeavors – meaning the commercial kind, the childish kind or even the basic kind – in favor of what they perceive to be masterworks that have not gained mainstream acceptance. This group also doubly bridles when others often criticize their masterworks for being slow-moving, esoteric, sad, depressing, overly intellectual, confusing, distancing or, at the end of the day, just plain boring.
This argument cuts equally the other way. For there are also those who are consistently determined to leave what little bits of brains they have remaining at the door and dismiss anything on film, television, the stage or even at a museum that challenges them to spend more than a second or two pondering or, heaven forbid, processing its meaning. The adjectives this group – the anti-snob snobs — apply to their hate list usually begins with pretentious and ends with high-fallutin’.’ Translation: Anything that doesn’t immediately make me laugh or cry is beyond the ability of a reasonable person (Note: ME) to understand and enjoy and therefore is not worth my time. This, too, is snobbery, but of the mainstream kind.
Ugh. Is this movie in black and white?
Of course, neither of these forms of elitisms is to be confused with the most treacherous – the financial and/or critical version. Meaning the amount of money a creative effort makes in relation to the cost or how many experts write complimentarily and eloquently about it is the real bottom line of its value???
Uh, no.
Simply put, just because your latest favorite film has grossed a billion dollars worldwide is not tangible evidence it is great. Money is not necessarily proof of artistic talent. It is evidence of a talent for moneymaking. Similarly, a handful of rave reviews from your fellow intellectuals and/or critics who always agree with you does not prove the new piece of cinema which didn’t get theatrical or even VOD distribution but you so, so enjoyed is better than anything playing at any random multiplex anywhere in the world. Nor does it give you a pass to boast voluntary ignorance or giggle derisively when someone mentions it might be worth your time to check out a really fab new limited TELEVISION series they saw with their kids and spouse at home one Saturday afternoon while lounging on the sofa.
#goaway
Full confession: I was a film and television critic for Variety many decades ago and used to fight these battles daily with fellow co-workers, studio executives and other critics – as well as with many in my family and friends. There is a reason why the saying, Everybody has two businesses – their business and show business has stood the test of time. People get very emotional and are very invested with what they find good and bad on the cultural landscape.
This is why comments by Variety’s chief film critic this week proclaiming his total ignorance about contemporary television – as well as an article in Filmmaker magazine that boldly declared TV IS NOT THE NEW FILM (Note: You could almost hear the writer shouting it off the page) really got my goat. Oh, and add to that writer/director Ethan Coen’s response to a question at this year’s Cannes Film Festival, where along with his brother Joel he served as grand jury president, about the much-acclaimed TV series version of their hit film Fargo.
It’s not that I don’t like TV. It’s alien to me. I haven’t watched a television show in decades.
I would have to bone up on years of neglected TV watching before I could hazard a guess — as it stands, it feels like an apples-and-oranges comparison, and one where I don’t have the clearest idea what oranges taste like.
As much as I love Breaking Bad, The Wire, Mad Men or Twin Peaks, as great and as groundbreaking as those shows were, they are still not Cinema.
Oh, why is it whenever anyone says or writes the word cinema I want to stick my tongue down their throats and get them to spit up a hairball?
Preach
The reason this has surfaced is that the upcoming Toronto Film Festival has decided to follow the lead of other film festivals all over the world and feature one of two programs this year devoted to television i.e. the pilot episodes of several new series viewers will be treated to later in the year.
The immediate reaction of critics like Chang is to sniff they were just too busy with CINEMA to watch contemporary television, even the superior kind. It seems like it’s even the inferred response of a prominent film artist like Mr. Coen, who treats the mere mention of the medium as some rare oddity from outer space he, as an earthling and non-scientist, has just not had the time or education to get familiar with.
Frankly, I’m amazed at these reactions.
Certainly everyone has the right to sample what they choose to or have time for. We’re lucky to live in a world where there are so many possibilities of art to sample with the click of a button. But this is the same reason for any evolving artist and/or critic to try and take a little bit more time to survey the contemporary world if they want to continue to remain interesting, or even relevant.
This past week I stood in front of three different small groups of students in the first classes in the college semester where I will guide them as they formulate and execute any number of screenplays, television pilots and spec episodes of existing series. These are all smart, aware and active young people in their early twenties and it might or might not surprise you to know that the vast majority of them only very sporadically go out to the movies or watch a television series at the precise moment its network or cable outlet decides to first air it. Nor do they particularly care whether they view what they eventually watch on a big screen, laptop, iPad or smart phone. Oh sure, there are the occasional events, or motion pictures that must be seen large or viewed as early as possible. But these are rare. Like – VERY rare.
Like this…
And studio executives take note – the two most repeated words I heard in all of our conversations about which movies and TV shows they liked and watched (Note: Yes, they all did BOTH!) were:
HULU and NETFLIX.
Unless one wants to write about or create art rooted or set solely in the past it might be nice for those at the top of their game in either of these fields to take note of some of the above. It does not mean you are betraying Renoir, Tarkovsky or Chantal Akerman. Anymore than it means you are turning your back on The Real Housewives if every now and then you decide to go to your local art house or streaming service and check in to see what Andrew Bujaski or the Dardenne brothers are up to.
As for the high vs. low art issue, I for one refuse to get into a debate over whether The Hangover is better than Breaking Bad, if the first season of True Detective had camerawork and imagery that would indeed rival the latest Terrence Malick film or if Guardians of the Galaxy was more enjoyable than any one episode of Mad Men or even The Sopranos. I mean, who really gives a shi damn???
Oh who am I kidding? The answer is ALWAYS Mad Men. #EmmyforHamm
Yes, I’d rather watch Breaking Bad on a loop for the next three years than to have to sit through another Hangover even one more time. But I have actually seen the first two (Note: Ok, not all three) Hangover films. Not to mention all of the above choices, even the last few from the brilliant Malick – a director I really have to take a rest from before I become one the very kind of lazy, non-thinkers I’ve warned my students (and all of you) not to become.
See, sometimes it’s not enough to simply be aware of your tendency toward marginalizing, judgment or limited thinking in the art world. You actually need to make an effort to get off the couch or your soapbox, or flop down onto your couch and put on the TV. You’re free not to do that. But if so, please spare us your snob stories.
Brilliant illustration by Kiersten Essenpreis (youfail.com)
What’s the last TV show you binged on?
I had 30 responses to this Facebook post within an hour or so. Which, if nothing else, tells me that gluttony in America is by no means limited to food.
But let’s start at the beginning. Most of us seem to know exactly what binge TV is, though it’s a relatively new phenomenon. Nevertheless, definition please:
Binge Viewing
n. A period of excessive indulgence spent watching previously broadcast episodes of a TV show. (binge viewern.)
Of course, one person’s excessive indulgence is another person’s appetizer course, especially given our country’s lack of portion control (Don’t believe me – try ordering a plate of pasta in Italy). Yet the inverse of this is also true, especially if you’ve ever ordered a spaghetti main course at the Olive Garden (yes, I was once dragged there and actually had a ton of leftover penne on my plate).
All of this makes me think of another great American phenomenon – the TV dinner. Originally invented as the perfect size plate (tin?) of food a person could graze on through their favorite series, it would certainly need reinvention nowadays in light of binge viewing. Maybe a — TV trough? Or at least, well let’s say, a Banquet.
Or just add a pound of butter..
This already leads to an amendment of our brand new definition in light of the recent premiere of Netflix on-demand series like Orange Is The New Black, which by far was the #l binge choice to my informal binge survey. The women’s prison drama, adapted to your screen of choice by Jenji Kohan, creator of Weeds, has ALWAYS been completely available – each one hour episode of thirteen – since its debut. Which means goodbye to excessive indulgence of a previously broadcast series and hello to gluttonous viewing of ANY TV series since shows financed by relatively new content providers like Netflix give us the CHOICE of ordering up and devouring ALL THIRTEEN HOURS of a season at one sitting if that’s what it takes to satisfy our ever-growing cravings.
Programs like Breaking Bad, House of Cards and Game of Thrones all drew multiple votes – though OITNB outweighed them all at least four times over. This could in part be due to the fact that the New Big O has only been on the market for a month and is the current IT show. After all, we are all human and live in the USA which means we exist in a place where the most current, talked about material will always be the thing that is considered the most popularbinge of the moment. This is as sure as the fact that somewhere among us there will always be prom queens and prom kings. (Note: It is also reassuring to know that, much like prom royalty, the #1 popular cultural choice will also quickly be replaced by something else more to one’s liking since beauty, like popularity and ratings, never last forever).
What is far more interesting and encouraging is that aside from those top contenders, 30 television series running the gamut of every genre one could possibly imagine ODing on each got at least one binge recommendation from those who responded to this very unscientific survey of what do you binge on, TV-wise? They include:
Existing cable series: Bates Motel, Breaking Bad, Switched at Birth
Existing pay cable: Nurse Jackie, The Newsroom, Boardwalk Empire
Defunct series:The Wire, Golden Girls, Friday Night Lights, Studio 60, Greek
Euro imports: Sherlock, Dr. Who, The Lake, Braquo, The Fall, A Touch of Frost
New Media First Runs: Attack on Titan, Arrested Development
Network Series: Scandal, Under the Dome, New Girl, Parks & Recreation
Reality Series: Kitchen Nightmares, The Biggest Loser
At the very least this tells me that audience taste in the new media age of binge is not as monolithic as market researchers (they usually work for networks and studios) want us to believe nor can it necessarily be categorized by age, ethnic origin or region (Note: I have an eclectic group of both Facebook and IRL friends who, as they used to say in the days prior to market research binging, cover the waterfront).
But what do these ever-growing gluttons really think about all of this stuff, beyond just their choice? I wanted to know more without the help of a paid market researcher and so should you, especially since my opinion markers are probably a lot closer to your taste than theirs. So take a look at a handful of five more in-depth and uncensored responses to questions posed by your Chair about the four very different TV shows these individuals recently binged on and why. (Note: Okay, full disclosure – The Chair is the fourth respondent because, well…there IS always a method to my madness – in this case diversity of choice). And further note that these respondents range in age from their late 20s to late 60s, live on various ends of the country, and include two males and two females of various sexual proclivities who, needless to say, all have very, very different tastes.
The Questions:
1. What show and why binge on this particular show?
2. How did you watch it? Did you speed through it, or take a little at a time?
3, What is your reaction to this show? Are you hooked? Would you recommend?
4. Did you know spoilers previously? If not, how did you avoid them?
5. Do you prefer binge to regular watching and why?
ORANGE IS THE NEW BLACK, Netflix
Respondent #1- Female, 20s, NYorker
1) After all the buzz, I waited about 2 weeks and finally had to get “in the know.”
2) I watched it via Netflix streaming, probably at about 2 episodes a night (sometimes 3!). It took about a week to get through.
3) The great thing about it being available on Netflix is that it lends itself to voracious viewing – meaning, it needs to be seen in a short period of time. The pacing of the show doesn’t lend to a week-to-week viewing, and I’m not sure I would have stayed as invested in the characters if I’d done it that way. I almost imagined that I was in “viewing prison” with Piper (the lead character) – it was time to hunker down and be trapped with the show for a short period of time and then be released. I would recommend this to someone who is looking for a show to fill the void until the fall season – and who has 13 hours to kill.
4) I had steered clear of all spoilers, despite working in front of a computer all day, and having a lengthy commute which allows me to read every entertainment article imaginable. It’s fascinating to me that bloggers and recappers are incredibly careful and considerate when it comes to respecting the binge-watching viewer. Headlines are kept clean of any spoilers, first paragraphs are even non-specific and filled with warnings regarding content below. Vulture (one of my go-to recap haunts) decided to space out its reviews of Orange to suit a three-episode a week average. Considering the trolls out there, and the loose lips (fingers?) of my Facebook friends, it is a miracle that I was still able to be unsullied by spoilers.
5) It fulfills the need for instant gratification – there is no need to wait to find out what happens next – which I simultaneously love and hate. I love it because I’m impatient and love being able to see full character arcs unfold in a short time. I hate it because I lose the excitement of the week leading up to the episode… the wondering, the guessing, the appointment viewing… the last vestiges of a pre-DVR world. But who am I kidding? DVRs are the greatest invention since the remote control, or Google Maps. I just prefer regular, weekly viewing because then I don’t end up a mole-person, permanently in my PJs, un-showered, unaware of the time of day. (Chair Note: Is the latter really such a bad thing?)
BREAKING BAD, AMC, Basic Cable on DVD
Respondent #2 – Female, 40s, Los Angelino
1) My friend kept telling me to watch it, and I had read about how good it was. I wanted to see for myself — and to see if I liked it as much as Mad Men. They’re both great in their own ways. Impossible to compare.
2) I watched it on Netflix – 54 episodes in just under 2 weeks. One Saturday I think I watched 6 in one day. Most days I watched between 2-4. I wanted to make sure I finished before the season premiere aired because I knew that if I didn’t I would have found out what happened. Social media and the Internet would have spilled the beans.
3) I love the show. I am completely hooked and would definitely recommend. I was reluctant at first because I wasn’t interested in the world where it was set. But once I started watching I was captivated by the storytelling choices, and the acting, and the visual style choices. I had recently heard that they were supposed to shoot the show in Riverside County, California but Albuquerque was offering a huge production discount so that’s why it was shot there. The location really suited the show and I’ve heard numerous people say that Albuquerque became a character also. It really did, I couldn’t picture it being shot anywhere else. It’s wide open and claustrophobic at the same time. Also, the editing is stellar. Two of the episodes are nominated for Emmys this year. I’m probably voting for the season finale. (Chair Note: The latter fact makes this person that very desired elite binger).
4) I knew the basic premise of the show but did not know any spoilers. I could tell from the image of Bryan Cranston on the poster that the character undergoes some type of transformation. He starts out with hair in season one and he ends up with a shaved head and a goatee, kind of the badass look. I also made sure I didn’t read any of the articles on the Internet. When I started watching people were already talking about it in anticipation of the season premiere because it was off for a year and everyone was really excited for its return. I really made an effort to stay away.
5) I love binge watching – it makes me the boss of the TV. I like being able to decide when and how many I want to watch. It’s feels similar to reading a great book, wondering what’s going to happen next. I just turn on the TV and find out. The disappointing thing is when you’re done you have to wait and watch the rest with everyone else. After this season’s premiere, for a moment I felt like I could just go to Netflix and watch the next episode, but sadly NO 😦 Also, I’ve heard that some creatives don’t like people binge-watching. They feel that people are not allowing enough time to reflect on the stories being told. I disagree. (Chair Note: This person IS a creative so that’s at least one industry vote for the binge).
DOWNTON ABBEY, PBS by way of ITV, DVD
Respondent #3 – Male, 60s, Floridian
1) My friends kept at me about it but I am resistant to the period because to me it’s feels very much like “teacup movie time.” But when my brother, who is a really straight guy who lives in Idaho and builds kitchens, started talking about it to me, and told me I’d love it, I finally said, Okay,I gotta watch it.
2) My neighbor gave me the first two seasons on DVD and I watched it in a week and a half. Then a month later someone loaned me season three and I watched it in less than a week.
3) I’m totally hooked. It’s great storytelling and great characters. You get emotionally caught up in all their stories and want to know what’ll happen next. It’s so well written, sympathetic and well developed. Plus, Dan Stevens is dreamy. (Chair Note: Uh-oh)
4) Somebody slipped and mentioned a spoiler to me when I was in the middle of season two. Then I read something about a contract with one of the actors in season three so that sadly made me aware of the possibility of losing another character. I was late to the game so the article made me aware. But it didn’t hurt the show. I suppose it might have been more of a shocker if I didn’t know but that didn’t matter.
5) I do like binge viewing. Watching Downton Abbey week to week – I would’ve been really frustrated. That’s particularly the case with Breaking Bad, which I also binge viewed a few months ago. I’m used to watching these shows sometimes till 3 in the morning, sometimes 3 or 4 episodes a night. You’re consumed with it and it becomes much more impactful. It’s not so much the show even but the process of watching it and being engulfed in that world. Now you have to wait a week and you lose momentum, the all-consuming effect. You can enjoy it for that hour but then you go on with your life.
COLD CASE, CBS via Syndication
Respondent #4 – Male, 50s, Los Angeleno
1) I accidentally stumbled on it one night when I couldn’t sleep and immediately got hooked. I don’t generally like one-hour network drama these days and refused to sample this show when it aired. Wrong! More than half of every show flashes back in time to another decade where an unsolved crime was committed and is then played out in key bits and pieces dramatically. It also uses the real songs of the period, making it one of the most expensive network shows on television because of the music rights to famous songs from artists as varied as Bruce Springsteen, Nirvana, Donna Summer, Patsy Cline, Elvis Presley and The Rolling Stones. Those songs alone takes you right back into the period. Plus, the way they match the period character with another actor who plays the same person 20 or 30 years later is impeccable. Some of the best casting I’ve ever seen on television.
2) I watched almost three of eight seasons of 22 episodes each in about three weeks. The issue is due to the music rights of such famous songs, the show is not available on DVD. The only way to get it is on reruns on the CBS cable channel ION-TV. Though I suppose there are other ways one could get fined for. Still, it’s sort of an adventure this way – you never know what you’re going to get. And there’s something about watching all these shows that are not readily available that, well, I kind of like.
3) I love it. Sometimes it’s so disturbing, depending on the crime, yet it’s also sort of soothing because most of the shows enable people to resolve a terrible issue that happened in their past and get closure. That resolution is almost always emotionally resonant and doesn’t always happen in real life – which is part of why we watch dramas anyway. After watching so many of the shows, you can see the structure. And yet, it also surprises me. I’d particularly recommend it to friends who are stubborn like me about network procedural series and who love music. There are almost no television dramas, or even films, where famous music plays such an integral part of the storytelling. It puts you in the space and informs the action in a way no amount of great dialogue ever could.
4) I knew NOTHING about this show. Absolutely nothing. Except that it didn’t interest me. Which proves that sometimes I literally do know nothing.
5) I like both but do love binge watching when I get to discover something I didn’t know about or resisted. That is not to say that I want to binge watch everything. I couldn’t imagine binge watching Mad Men because I got hooked immediately. The same with The Sopranos, Six Feet Under and Dexter. That said, there is plenty to binge on. Oh – and added bonus. Cold Case was created and written by Meredith Stiehm, one of the principal writers on the brilliant Homeland in its first two seasons. Another of its writers and eventual show runners was Veena Sud, who has gone on to create AMC’s The Killing. This allows you to understand how creative people grow into their careers and to experience the great works of their pasts.
So what have we learned here? That there is a huge gamut of public taste buds waiting to be tapped into if done in the right way. It just can’t all be done in the same way and, given our changing patterns of consumption, it won’t be anymore. Certainly producers understand this. You might think it’s cheapie programming on Netflix but you’re wrong – the low end cost estimates of shows like House of Cards and Orange Is The New Black is $3.8 – $4 million per episode. And there’s a reason why so much money is being spent. With so many options of ways to view and so many platforms to do it on, content providers see avenues opening up to make substantial overall gains on their investments.
Keep the drip flowing
Here’s the deal. They need lots and lots of content – both new and old. Not only what is the next new thing but what will be the next new “old thing.” What will last /endure beyond first run – which is more and more not much of a run – certainly not even a sprint and, in fact, something even longer than a marathon.
For a large and growing segment of today’s audience it’s not AS important to watch one episode (or even season) of a show when it debuts than it is to discover something that’s already been checked out by your friends and loved ones and given the seal of approval so you don’t have to waste time deciding. That’s the new model being established by binge viewing. This greatly differs from the network model, which wants to sell overpriced ads for first run appointment television, charging companies and audiences as much as they can for goods delivered with as little creative challenges or off-centeredness as possible to the widest possible audience. (Note: This model also causes them to complain endlessly at Emmy awards time when they’re often shut out in favor of more inventive cable programming).
What both cable and on-demand providers and have now discovered, thanks in part to technology, is that you can forever make money on superior (or even just plain quirky) creative choices that don’t necessarily take the easy way out and tell great and far more sophisticated stories. How much money? Well, this remains to be seen. But judging from Netflix’s investments coupled with initial and growing audience response – quite a lot. In particular, this change should cause creative unions to take note and readjust their financial demandsbecause certainly none of these newer companies will fully share their true profits from these alternative revenue steams unless their hands are absolutely forced. The creative guilds, especially the writers, lost a fortune by not pushing back harder on the studios for a share of DVD revenue when it was the hottest thing going and the studios cleaned up. That is until there were newer and quicker ways to watch older or just seen shows. The same thing will undoubtedly happen with the burgeoning on demand /web based viewing – binge or not – if there is soon not some strong re-accounting adhered to.
A glimpse into our future?
Meanwhile, we mere viewers can bask in the many great choices now available on a growing home, tablet, or computer-screened menu. For decades television was seen as the poor stepchild of movies but these days it seems like the roles have been reversed. Respondent #3 notes that if he were an Emmy voter he’d find it impossible to choose the winner of best drama series between such nominees as Mad Men, Homeland, Breaking Bad and Downton Abbey. Almost as difficult as he found it to choose the winner of the best picture Oscar in 1976, the first time he was a voting member of the Motion Picture Academy. Among the nominees that year were Network, All the President’s Men, Taxi Driver and Rocky. Nowadays, he struggles to even have that many films worthy of nomination. But has no trouble finding many more choices than that to binge on from the small screen.
Addendum: This blog inspired me to binge view all six episodes of a new half-hour Australian show called Please Like Me. It’s sort of a gay version of Girls and it is faaaabulous. And — it can now be seen here
Addendum 2: 2.0? A previous version of this blog ended up in many spam folders… I blame network television execs!
notes from a chair 