Escapist fantasy vs 'serious' TV

[selenay]

Something my father said to me a few days ago has made me think. He's not too impressed with the new version of Survivors. I've got it saved and haven't had time to watch it yet, but his reaction was that it takes a very grim, pessimistic view of humanity and what people can be like. All the things that he thoroughly enjoyed about the original have been removed so that although it has the same basic story, it's not the same and it isn't enjoyable to watch.

I'm planning to make time to watch it at the weekend so I'll see how I feel about it.
His major disappointment is this idea that humans, under pressure, are selfish, cruel individuals and it's something that I've noticed in a lot of modern dramas. They can be unpleasant to watch just because of the characterisation and this insistence on seeing the worst that people can be and presenting that as the way everyone must be.

At the end of the email, he commented that Spooks continues to be excellent and completely watchable, that SJA is still superb and that he's thoroughly enjoying Merlin as well. Unfortunately Heroes hasn't been impressing him much and, er, I've been forgetting to record it because I'm in the same place.

It sparked the thought in me: why are certain shows (Spooks, Merlin, SJA, DW) so totally watchable and compelling yet so much other stuff is unwatchable? What makes the difference - Survivors is from the same fantastical genre as Spooks and SJA, yet it's been a disappointment.
One of the things that strikes me about these lists is that things like Survivors are being written and presented to be 'serious' TV despite the speculative fiction genre. Heroes is written the same way.

Nobody could accuse Merlin of being serious TV ;-)

Spooks, SJA, DW...they are all written as escapist fantasy (even though Spooks is firmly set in the here and now with no hint of dragons or aliens) that the audience can enjoy but not setting out to make big points. Yup, they all tackle the odd dilemma that has resonances with our lives, but that's not their core intention. Spooks changes the focus of their villains to reflect current concerns (with remarkable accuracy) which is why it's Russians that are the current threat and Islamic terrorists have taken more of a back seat this year, but it doesn't have an agenda or a moral imperative.

All of these incredibly successful, popular shows are written as entertainment. Nothing else, their core purpose is entertainment.

The writing on all of them is great, you engage with the characters and you are drawn into the central plot week after week. Could it be that this kind of escapist fantasy letting writers do their best work and actually show some hope for humanity where 'serious' stuff doesn't?

And why is that? What is it about 'serious' TV that insists that it must be grim, pessimistic and unpleasant? Why can there never be a likable, good intentioned character in 'serious' TV?
I'm not sure that I'll ever find an answer to that one.

Comments

[wadjet-theperv.livejournal.com]

What is it about 'serious' TV that insists that it must be grim, pessimistic and unpleasant? Why can there never be a likable, good intentioned character in 'serious' TV? ***


Sadly, I think it's because the human race as a whole is becoming more hard and cynical all the time and art strives to imitate life. At least in what's called 'serious' drama. Innocence is lost at an earlier age than it used to be, and being tough is prized more than compassion and softness. Life is a struggle and only the strong survive.

I may be wrong, but that's the impression I get sometimes. :o( Perhaps it's all part of evolution.

[selenay]

Hopefully we're just going through a phase of cynicism and, as the younger generations come through, perhaps we'll regain some of the hope and appreciation of joy that we seem to have lost.

[paranoidangel]

I'd love to know what the original Survivors was like because I've never seen it. But I've seen the first two of the new and I'm verging on the side of disliking it rather than liking it. It is a bit pessimistic and I was hoping to see more of them rebuilding etc than what we have got.

[selenay]

I need to track down the original because my memories are very vague. My father is hopeful that it's going to get better and he's decided to give it at least a couple more episodes. I think the original was more focused on the rebuilding, though, and that was possibly part of what he enjoyed.

[wimble.livejournal.com]

http://www.play.com/DVD/DVD/4-/6854993/Survivors-Series-1-3-Box-Set/Product.html (cheaper than Amazon UK. Dunno about Canadian suppliers, sorry.)
or http://www.mininova.org/tor/1679151

depending on your preference for internet technologies, and related questions.

[paranoidangel]

That does sound a lot more like what I'd hoped Survivors would be. I probably know a Blakes 7 fan with a copy, so I might see if I can borrow it.

[wimble.livejournal.com]

The obvious answer is that Survivors, at the moment, is entirely character driven, while Merlin is plot driven.

So Survivors has to create conflict between the characters, and the easiest way to do that is to make at least some of them unlikeable, at least some of the time, so the conflict can further the story.

Merlin, on the other hand, can have likeable characters running around in comedic fashion, as they try to foil the sorcery of the week. It's possible that Survivors could move more toward this, as the series settles in: this week, the Chicken Coop falls apart, and we accompany the group as they attempt to find a replacement now that the garden centres have all been looted.

I've never seen the original, so I can't comment on what your liked about it. But the current version is doing (approximately) what I expected. I'm also reminded of the "commune" portion of Day of the Triffids, once the survivors have escaped, and banded together: what do they do about the fact that society has collapsed around them, and the different opinions that arise at that point. (I should re-read it, just to jog my memory.)

[selenay]

Hmm, I hadn't thought of it in that way. All escapist fantasy shows that I listed are plot-driven. Although I'm watching primarily for the characerisation, the writers have the chance to engage us and allow the characters to go through the weekly adventure.

I'm hoping that Survivors does regain an element of this as it settles in because I'm not sure how long a series can run on character conflict without an element of plot to the episodes.

Did you hear that they're planning a re-make of Triffids?

[wimble.livejournal.com]

I did hear about triffids. Apparently, it's going to be updated. What on earth that means, I've no idea. But having just seen Dead Set (http://www.e4.com/deadset/) on channel 4 (it's a zombie-meets-big-brother miniseries, if you've missed it), and now Survivors, I'm thinking that the the post-apocalypse genre may be booming right now.

I've also seen one comment about the new Triffids (can't remember where, may have been the BBC) saying "What's with the remakes of *good* programs? Can't you remake the bad ones (but better!) or new ones?"

[gaspodex.livejournal.com]

they would be hard pressed to improve on the triffids tv series - except for updating its production values - the series was pretty true to the book, so short of uping its budget all they can really do is change it - so why remake it. They could of course make Night Of the Triffids which was OK - it was released on the 50th anniversary of the book - can't remember the writers name but he went out of his way to keep it in Wyndhams style.

I loved the original survivors ... I'll see what the new series is like when Reet and I get back tomorrow ..

[sunlightdances.livejournal.com]

I totally disagree re: Survivors. People are reacting in very, very different and cruel and noble and awful and wonderful ways, and not the people you'd expect. I think it shows how humanity can be awful, but can be great, and I'm really enjoying it.

Why can there never be a likable, good intentioned character in 'serious' TV?
There is in Survivors. *nods* There are several. :)

[selenay]

Now I definitely need to make the time to sit down with the first couple of episodes and see what it's like. Even my father is starting to feel a bit happier about it, so it can't be as hopeless as he initially described.

[paranoidangel]

One of the problems I have with Survivors is that although some of the characters are likable and good intentioned, I don't actually like any of them.