Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by Delameko 3554 days ago
Not to mention that Firefly's cancellation has posthumously added to its notoriety. Nearly every Firefly mention is in relation to its cancellation. Would it be as popular if it hadn't been cancelled?

I really like Firefly, but the cancellation meant they didn't have the opportunity to fuck it up. Every other Whedon series has had poor seasons.

3 comments

Actually, I think this is consistent. 13-26 or so episodes is a pretty good length. Beyond that, ideas get stale, characters get repetitive, plots get either formulaic, or too convoluted to ever resolve, and a show generally starts to tilt downward.

I wish there were more shows that just were OK with planning an ending. I like stories with endings. Just know your limits, don't try to make a show that can go on for a million seasons, end it when its still good, and then use the goodwill garnered from making a masterpiece to build the next creative thing.

I'm not sure why this model seems to be more successful in, say, Anime as opposed to western TV. Budget, maybe?

I think they're starting to get it. Breaking Bad fully executed its ending. Game of Thrones announced their end years in advance. TV producers are finally starting to come on board with the idea of stopping a show even though it's popular.
The alternative is to mint an evergreen series like Law & Order. Someone finds a dead body in NYC; investigation, trial, and silly social commentary ensue. Then vary the parameters a bit and you get SVU, Criminal Intent, et al. Characters are interchangeable, guest spots abound, social commentary changes with the politics of the day.

Walking Dead -- eh, it's getting a little old. I thought they were going to explore some primitive economics, and maybe they will, but the cliffhanger gag last season reminded me too much of "Who Shot JR?" Not sure I care. And the spinoff went too heavy on the social commentary, couldn't even finish Season Two.

Mr. Robot is more promising, but I haven't seen one yet that comes close to the satisfaction I got from the clear arc of the story in Breaking Bad. Sons of Anarchy tried, but fell short somehow.

Walking Dead, I just wish they could find another model for a season.

"Oh, we're walking or driving through the woods" "Cool, we found a place that looks cool and has cool people" "Oh, the cool people were actually horrible for some reason" "Time to blow it up I guess."

Wish that were true with battlestar Galactica, very disappointed in its last season
And then there's Caprica, in which we discover that Battlestar Galactica's awesomeness was apparently a complete and total accident:-(
>Budget, maybe?

Budget and the revenue from a hit.

Making a hit is such a crap shoot that depends on a lot of things including what basically boils down t luck, i.e. it grabs the limelight for whatever reason. So when something does become a hit, there's a lot of pressure to just keep things going.

- The network likes that they have a predictable money-making show.

- A lot of fans will continue watching out of habit/duty.

- Many actors and others associated with a hit show may think (often for good reason) that they'll likely never see as good a payday again.

It's also worth noting that shows like Breaking Bad and Game of Thrones still had relatively niche audiences compared to a hit on a major network. Probably makes it easier to plan for a fixed length.

You do see some of the same effect in, say, genre fiction though. There are a lot of interminable series because they have a built-in readership.

> I'm not sure why this model seems to be more successful in, say, Anime as opposed to western TV. Budget, maybe?

It's mostly a US thing. The UK is fine with making shows that have short seasons and that only last two or three seasons.

Actually, I think the UK is the exception in this regard. Most other countries that shoot their own local TV shows have 6-9 month seasons. Brazil, India, China, Turkey.. etc.

Furthermore I'm not convinced UK's shorter season format is a good thing. I actually think it's a symptom of much smaller budgets.

Yes! You made me realise that I was applying my own limited view of tv shows (what I see on English TV) and appying that to the whole world.
The consistent, long-term revenue for a series comes via syndication, which typically becomes feasible for a 30-minute sitcom around 100 episodes (can vary by format, however).
I suspect that any boost gained by early cancellation would also have been gained by more episodes, and time for word of mouth to popularize it... unless Fox pulled more slow death dickery.

I can't really speak to Buffy and Angel, but with regards to Firefly and Dollhouse... The indication is that Whedon wouldn't so much fuck it up, but requirements by Fox would force him to fuck it up. Compare "Train Job" to the original first episode of Firefly. Compare early episodes of Dollhouse to later ones, particularly the encore episode.

Dollhouse could have been really good.

The idea of using the Big Red Reset Button as a continuous plot element, and telling the arc story through seepage across resets was a brilliant way of giving the finger to almost every other series.

And it turned into a young adults' barbie show.

Dollhouse was a misfire IMHO. I watched both seasons on Netflix and it never really found a groove. I was really annoyed that they more or less sidestepped the obvious ethical and moral issues and instead ended the show with outright supervilliany. It was just so dumb by the end that I felt kind of embarrassed to keep watching.
That's what happens when the network forces you to cram 5 years worth of story into 1 year. :/
That feels a bit like a cop-out to me. Part of the job of a television creative is effectively working inside of your network.

Although it's better today, with Netflix and the free reign a lot of producers get, I think there is an art of show business maneuvering that shaped so much TV and kind of added to it's character. The classic "medium with a limitation" theory.

While I think Firefly had one or two more good seasons in it, I do support your argument. There are so many examples of shows having a strong start and then screwing up in a later season, making the whole series terrible. I think Heroes was the worst example of this: brilliant first season, complete garbage after. Glee is another example. I would have hated to see Firefly do this.
Heros fell apart during the writers strike.

Personally I think shows should get three seasons by default, and should need a _really_ compelling reason to go beyond that.