Today news has come down that both Last Resort and 666 Park Avenue have been cancelled by ABC – two big, expensive, serialized shows that were focused on big, giant concepts (Nuclear Sub Goes Rogue w/ Conspiracy Backdrop, Couple Moves Into Building Probably Run By Satan) and the drama that comes out of that. From a pure ratings standpoint, both shows were not doing particularly well, and their eventual cancellation is not, ultimately, much of a surprise.
But what it does highlight, at least to me, is the debate between serialized vs. non-serialized when it comes to television (and particularly dramas). The problem generally being that people claim that they love serialized shows – they’re more complex, and when done well, provide rewards for patient, attentive viewers (see, for example, the way things pay off in Breaking Bad or Mad Men, or the complexity of The Wire or the beautiful journey of Friday Night Lights – all feats that would not have been accomplished or even remotely possible had the shows not been serialized).
But the problem is, much of the country (and apparently, much of the country that also has Nielsen boxes) doesn’t watch television this way. Look at the success of the Law & Order franchise. Or the CSIs. Or NCIS. Or virtually all of the programming on USA. (Come to think of it, maybe we just like murder.) Sure, these shows have serialized elements (usually of character growth) but for the most part they rely on a case-of-the-week structure, or, if they have become more serialized (such as White Collar or Covert Affairs on USA), the serialization of the shows happened over time, after a base audience had already become familiar with the characters.
Which leaves us with the conundrum, perfectly highlighted by critics like Variety’s Andrew Wallenstein, who said back in September (in an NPR piece explaining serialized television):
“…as much as I’d like to be one of those (hyperactive super-fans) for “Last Resort,” I’ve been burned too many times before. Sorry, but I can’t fall in love if you’re just going to end up leaving me.”
And here we see the worst kind of television consumer – which almost always happens to be the super-consumer, the person who watches so much television (in this case, to be fair, it’s his job) that he must be discriminating about his choices. But this type of consumer is the same one who complains about the “same old thing” every year, then refuses to watch/support a show when something different airs, because he/she is afraid of committing to a show and then being angry when it is cancelled.
In this particular instance, it would be one thing if this were a regular viewer. But this is a professional TV journalist telling the viewing public that this kind of behavior is acceptable! It’s tough enough to get viewers to watch a new show, tougher still when that show isn’t a standard doctor/lawyer/cop show.
We want serious dramatic television. But we don’t want to be burned. Which has pretty much led us to where we are now – where all the good dramas are on cable (where a show at least will get to air an entire season before being cancelled), and the network shows are safe/reboots/tired. And then we complain about how network television is terrible.
This is on us, the viewers. There are no excuses. You know why American Idol and The Voice keep chugging along? Because we’re watching them. It’s our fault, not the networks.
And if we want serious, serialized drama on network television, we’re going to have to tune in.
