John August says: TV dramas better than films

[sc111]

Interesting article on John August's blog. Here are two exerpts:

Why are TV dramas so good these days? Because they’ve borrowed the look, style and ambition of features. They’re mini-movies that are better than movies. It’s time to steal back. ....

(Exerpt from John's second posting in same topic.)

...So, when I say that we need to steal from TV, here’s my looting list:

Narrative complexity
Aggressive questioning of movie conventions
Creative one-upsmanship
Surprise over spectacle
Directors who give a **** about dialogue
Corners that haven’t been rounded off

The obvious counter-argument is that audiences don’t want to be “challenged” when they go to the movies. So why are they willing to be challenged sitting on their couch, after a long day of work? Because they recognize that sometimes the mental work is worth it.

(Worth reading it all)

http://johnaugust.com/archives/2007/time-to-steal-back


So -- agree? Disagree? Currently, TV is offering better drama fare than film?

[qualitycontrol]

Re: John August says: TV dramas better than films

Agreed.

[P.G. Bauhaus]

Re: John August says: TV dramas better than films

I think he's insane. I might agree if he said that British TV comedies surpass Hollywood feature comedies. But his dramatic examples, 24, Lost, Heroes , Desperate Housewives? I haven't seen 30 Rock but there are at least 2 or 3 movies released every year that blow those shows out of the water in their writing, acting, visual sense and overall sophistication. Of the shows he listed, two began in 2001, two began in 2004, and two began in 2006. Does anyone here seriously believe that there haven't been 6 movies released in the past seven years that are as good as the best episodes of these TV shows? Ridiculous. Not to mention an apples and oranges comparison.

On his list of things to steal, I don't even know what he means by half of them but calling for "Aggressive questioning of movie conventions" doesn't seem to jive with saying that you think "television is helped by the act breaks." So television conventions such as the act breaks (which exist only for crass commercial reasons) are helpful to the storytelling. Movie conventions on the other hand are the result of spineless cowardly writers and directors who are afraid to take chances. Could all of this have anything to do with a certain failed TV show turned movie and the critical reaction to it?

[magicman35]

Re: John August says: TV dramas better than films

I think given budgets and the time available, both in terms of writing and then to shoot, that TV is punching well about its weight these days. It also strikes me that this is at least in part a result of writers having more control in TV than they do in features. Maybe having less time to 'develop' scripts actually results in better work on screen?

On a slightly different note it always amuses me that people in the States hold up British TV as a shining example. In the UK it's the opposite. Perhaps a result of the fact we're never exposed to each other's complete dross which makes up the vast majority of programming on either side of the Atlantic.

[Hardy]

Re: John August says: TV dramas better than films

In the U.K. we cannot hold a candle to the U.S. in terms of TV drama at the moment. We don't have a Sopranos, 24, House, Heroes or West Wing. It's embarrassing. We only have anaemic cops and docs. We used to have a fantastic TV writer called Dennis Potter who wrote The Singing Detective (watch the TV series, not the movie). But since his death nobody has come to the fore - no David Chase, no Aaron Sorkin. It's so boring.

[magicman35]

Re: John August says: TV dramas better than films

In the U.K. we cannot hold a candle to the U.S. in terms of TV drama at the moment. We don't have a Sopranos, 24, House, Heroes or West Wing. It's embarrassing. We only have anaemic cops and docs. We used to have a fantastic TV writer called Dennis Potter who wrote The Singing Detective (watch the TV series, not the movie). But since his death nobody has come to the fore - no David Chase, no Aaron Sorkin. It's so boring.

What about Paul Abbott, Jimmy McGovern, Tony Marchant, Andrew Davies and Russell T. Davies? And Tony Jordan at a pinch.

The UK has some terrific dramatists who have created some great shows which hold up against the best that the US has to offer. And on a fraction of the budget available to US networks.

[iDV8]

Re: John August says: TV dramas better than films

The low budget serials are back in a generation that never had them. Something is up with movies these days. It seems you have massive spectacles that cost astronomical amounts of money that had better make a hefty return and the lower budget TV shows that are primarily dependant upon the story. So many stories get lost in spectacle. To be fair, TV has an opportunity to tell the story in serial fashion, giving us a little each episode while movies can't really do that. But I think there is a newfound greatness to TV shows. It might have something to do with the newfound profits from DVDs that was strictly associated with movies for so long.

On a slightly different note it always amuses me that people in the States hold up British TV as a shining example. In the UK it's the opposite. Perhaps a result of the fact we're never exposed to each other's complete dross which makes up the vast majority of programming on either side of the Atlantic.

We used to have a fantastic TV writer called Dennis Potter who wrote The Singing Detective (watch the TV series, not the movie). But since his death nobody has come to the fore - no David Chase, no Aaron Sorkin. It's so boring.

And I was on an English site were every one was debating why American TV is so vastly superior to the UK. I even heard Syd Field in London answer questions about the UK's poor state of TV and Movies. His off the cuff opinion was that it came down to writing. There aren't a lot of truly great writers coming out of England - which then started a debate about why that may be.

[ShaneBlackFan]

Re: John August says: TV dramas better than films

There are great writers in the U.K. but there's a problem, a huge problem, production companies rarely take chances. It took Life on Mars ten years, for instance. They prefer Cop dramas, soaps, then something radical during prime time on a prime channel.

[Hardy]

Re: John August says: TV dramas better than films

What about Paul Abbott, Jimmy McGovern, Tony Marchant, Andrew Davies and Russell T. Davies? And Tony Jordan at a pinch.

The UK has some terrific dramatists who have created some great shows which hold up against the best that the US has to offer. And on a fraction of the budget available to US networks.

Hmm... time to be an iconoclast. Yes, those are the best we've got. But British TV dramas do tend to be a little monotone, beaten too heavily with the reality stick. They wear their sincerity on their sleeve and wipe your nose with it. In contrast, look at '24', an utterly ridiculous premise, but approached with such vigour and panache. The same with 'Lost'. And any David Chase written Sopranos episode. Personally, I think it's also to do with economy of storytelling.

[magicman35]

Re: John August says: TV dramas better than films

Hmm... time to be an iconoclast. Yes, those are the best we've got. But British TV dramas do tend to be a little monotone, beaten too heavily with the reality stick. They wear their sincerity on their sleeve and wipe your nose with it. In contrast, look at '24', an utterly ridiculous premise, but approached with such vigour and panache. The same with 'Lost'. And any David Chase written Sopranos episode. Personally, I think it's also to do with economy of storytelling.

The constant battle in British TV is against literalism. You're asked to spell everything out for the audience. Frank Cottrell Boyce put it nicely when he said in an interview that if there's a car chase on a British show you have to show them stopping for petrol.

It was also interesting that when Paul Abbott spoke about State of Play (which incidentally has been bought in a 7 figure movie deal) he said he wrote it and then took out every second scene. I don't think the fault lies with the writers so much as an inability for producers to trust writers to do their job. At least that's been my experience.

[ShaneBlackFan]

Re: John August says: TV dramas better than films

Did anyone enter the Red Planet comp?

[Jake Schuster]

Re: John August says: TV dramas better than films

I would say Stephen Poliakoff is a fine TV writer, who has produced an uneven but always interesting body of work for the medium since 1978. And Jimmy McGovern is nothing to sneeze at, either.

I mean, back in the late 70s and early 80s TV was the medium to write for. And, yes, Potter lead the pack, with "Pennies from Heaven", "The Singing Detective" and his various one-offs.

[Priya]

Re: John August says: TV dramas better than films

Interesting article on John August's blog. Here are two exerpts:

Why are TV dramas so good these days? Because they've borrowed the look, style and ambition of features. They're mini-movies that are better than movies. It's time to steal back. ....

So -- agree? Disagree? Currently, TV is offering better drama fare than film?

I agree. But then, I would.

It's interesting that he, more than anyone, says this. I loved the pilot for PUSHING DAISIES (not sure how well it'll do as a series). Whenever I tell people about it, I ask them: "Did you like BIG FISH?" Because its look, style and ambition reeks of BIG FISH.

As for his examples, I think they're perfect examples of what could be great high concept movies, but work equally as well as series (if not better). His examples have direct big screen correlations -- which is what I think he means (again, going by look, style and ambition):

DESPERATE HOUSEWIVES = AMERICAN BEAUTY (not as high concept, granted).

24 = DIE HARD

HEROES = *Any superhero movie*

LOST = THE ISLAND (not a success, but yeah)

The great thing about TV nowadays is that you can take these concepts and instead of only spending two hours with the characters, you can spend seasons getting to know them. Or, at least, that's why I prefer TV over features.

As for English writers, an omission on the above list is Steven Moffat. Who created COUPLING (genius) and was EP on JEKYLL (did he create it?) and wrote some incredible episodes of DOCTOR WHO (most notably "Blink").

Just my opinion, of course.

[magicman35]

Re: John August says: TV dramas better than films

As for English writers, an omission on the above list is Steven Moffat. Who created COUPLING (genius) and was EP on JEKYLL (did he create it?) and wrote some incredible episodes of DOCTOR WHO (most notably "Blink").

Just my opinion, of course.

Not to be pedantic but Steven Moffat is Scottish.

[Captain Jack Sparrow]

Re: John August says: TV dramas better than films

TV=more time.
More time=easier to write.

Now go watch your average TV movie when they don't have that luxury - total rubbish.