Beyond Favorite vs. Best - the Cream of the Crop (TV/Film Discussion)

[Zardnaar]

I feel that sometimes filler is a good thing. It allows for worldbuilding and character development, particularly of supporting characters, so that the entire series isn't 100% about serving a single plot.

In short, there are many times I want my TV to be more of a sandbox, but lately all anyone seems to want to make are adventure paths.

As long as the filler is fun its fine. Stargate Atlantis, B5, SG1 (to a lesser extent) had reasonably good filler. DS9 as well.

TNG, Farscape not so much.

 

[Micah Sweet]

As long as the filler is fun its fine. Stargate Atlantis, B5, SG1 (to a lesser extent) had reasonably good filler. DS9 as well.

TNG, Farscape not so much.

Depends on what you mean by filler I guess, and how much you value the worldbuilding and supporting character development I referenced. TNG for example never has a series or even season-long plot, so it can be hard to even say what counts as filler.

 

[Shades of Eternity]

The Best Animated shows
Reboot (1st cgi show and it's season 3 is on par with any show, plus fantastic characters)
Batman: TAS (used the Timmverse), and not only is it a phenomenal show in itself, but it also laid the groundwork for the Timmverse.
Disney Gargoyles (a brilliant show about being not human in a world with humans that is amazing at worldbuilding)
Gravity Falls (distinct storytelling style, original premise, solid storytelling and laid down a style of storytelling and animation).
Tron Uprising: (better then any movie, incredibly stylizied and solid)

the also rans
Avengers: Earth's Mightest Heroes (before the avengers run, there was this and honestly, this was better).
Spectacular Spiderman (Greg Wiseman makes the list again and shows he can tell a story well).
Transformers: Beast Wars (took the base premise, turned it on it's ear and then essentially brought back transformers from a stagnant brand , and has some of the most fantastic characters in fiction)
X-men TAS/X-Men 97 (This initially didn't cut initially, but it's still pretty good. Then it came back a generation later, picked up where the original series better then any other series I've ever seen, and in a season, showed its worth. Plus, the best portrayal of Magneto).

and because it is my list
The Tick (the single best parody of superheroes ever and the original animated cartoon really knew the tropes of 4 color superheroes, then subverted them lovingly).

 

[TiQuinn]

I'd like to hear the reasons beyond "I like that format" though. Folks love to talk about the good old days of 24 episode season TV. They put out a few examples of long running series like DS9, B5, Buffy, West Wing. What they dont mention is that 9/10 other shows are pretty much unwatchable. Single sets, small main cast, same topics different week. Even the beloved B5 is so full of filler to make that 24 episode quota its a stretch to say its a good show. There are some great examples of writers doing it well and consistently, but there are far more examples of it going badly and rightly forgotten.

I think there was less of an expectation for every episode to be better than the last, or for there to be no filler. There was room for smaller episodes where little happens but that in itself can be a good thing when played out over 100 to 200+ episodes if a show ran for years. On the flip side, for shorter series, think about the pressure to “stick the landing” and how few shows are actually able to do that despite some of them being the most popular shows of their time.

 

[payn]

I think there was less of an expectation for every episode to be better than the last, or for there to be no filler. There was room for smaller episodes where little happens but that in itself can be a good thing when played out over 100 to 200+ episodes if a show ran for years. On the flip side, for shorter series, think about the pressure to “stick the landing” and how few shows are actually able to do that despite some of them being the most popular shows of their time.

Nailing a finale is hard, but I think the overall floor is just much higher now. I read a NY Times article about how the floor has come up so much in this age of television thats its hard to imagine a truly bad show anymore. The alternative of course is its harder to achieve cream of the crop.

Smaller episodes that build world and character are great, but often they don't achieve either that well in the 24 episode era in my experience. Again, I recall the absolute best at it, and the absolute best list is very small.

 

[The Firebird]

I'll weigh in on the side of 24 episode seasons. The shorter form seasons have never worked for me. The best I've seen was Breaking Bad, and I found it a slog to get through. Then I decided that style of TV just wasn't for me.

In contrast I like longer shows that are more episodic. House is my top pick here.

I think part of it is that the Breaking Bad types seem to still have more space than they know what to do with, and would more properly be done as movies or otherwise condensed. While the serialized stuff is easy to expand, because the point is sitting there and dwelling with the characters.

Breaking Bad, for instance, is broken up into seasons, each of which has its own sequence of rising action, which means we start every season with this "will they won't they" dance where we all know the answer. And that gets dragged over three or four or five episodes. Or they throw in other extraneous stuff to fill the time--the many scenes of the silent twins gallivanting around looking spooky. I always felt, man we get it, let's get moving.

Compare to longer novels, (Moby Dick, The Brothers Karamazov, Anna Karenina) which don't suffer from the seasonality and use their space effectively.

For movies:
Furiosa--a hair less watchable than fury road but with more thematic depth
Fellowship of the Ring
The Sting
The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly
Lawrence of Arabia

 

[jian]

The classic K-drama format is 26 1-hour episodes, though you do get shorter series (say 10 episodes) especially on Netflix. But great K-drama series are like crack, we can watch 3 episodes at a sitting almost without noticing.

They’re usually incredibly tightly plotted with almost no wasted space - the ones on Netflix particularly aren’t subject to the previous network vagaries of “this series is really popular so the network would like 10 more episodes” since Netflix basically never does that.

Classic recent examples include Sky Castle, Celebrity, Mystic Pop-up Bar, and Queenmaker. They have the intensity of short British series but with a lot more cliffhanger and plot twists to keep you going. This of course can be excessive sometimes (series that do too much of this such as Golden Spoon, Marry My Husband, and Little Women, are sometimes called makjang dramas).

 

[sevenbastard]

feel that sometimes filler is a good thing. It allows for worldbuilding and character development

I could have watch an extra 6 hours of The Hound and Arya traveling the Seven Kingdoms.

 

[payn]

I'll weigh in on the side of 24 episode seasons. The shorter form seasons have never worked for me. The best I've seen was Breaking Bad, and I found it a slog to get through. Then I decided that style of TV just wasn't for me.

Im curious what makes 8 episodes a slog, but 24 episodes engaging?

In contrast I like longer shows that are more episodic. House is my top pick here.

House may have started that way, but it certainly was serial in the background. Though, the episodic gimmick gets old fast, at least for me. Like Homeland, eventually you find it hard to believe anyone would employ this person who is a complete liability.

Though, looking at my question above, im guessing the self contained episode makes it seem like a complete story. Would you say that is what it feels like?

I think part of it is that the Breaking Bad types seem to still have more space than they know what to do with, and would more properly be done as movies or otherwise condensed. While the serialized stuff is easy to expand, because the point is sitting there and dwelling with the characters.

Breaking Bad, for instance, is broken up into seasons, each of which has its own sequence of rising action, which means we start every season with this "will they won't they" dance where we all know the answer. And that gets dragged over three or four or five episodes. Or they throw in other extraneous stuff to fill the time--the many scenes of the silent twins gallivanting around looking spooky. I always felt, man we get it, let's get moving.

The modern serial short format is certainly not immune to filler wheel spinning episodes. Some networks do it much worse than others. HBO is really good about making each weekly episode complete in the series in a way that makes sense and is paced well. Netflix produces shows that work well for binge drop (although they have been playing with a finale release format). Amazon Prime is absolutely terrible at this. Their hook em with a small dump and then provide nothing but weekly filler format is simply awful.

Compare to longer novels, (Moby Dick, The Brothers Karamazov, Anna Karenina) which don't suffer from the seasonality and use their space effectively.

This isnt something I think is dependent on format. Both long form and short form television series can suffer from "seasonality". The best or "cream of the crop" do not, imo.

 

[Blue]

The Tick (the single best parody of superheroes ever and the original animated cartoon really knew the tropes of 4 color superheroes, then subverted them lovingly).

Side note, the original tick comics are wonderful. When they came out we'd make a sojourn to buy them and then read them together doing voices. So yes, there's a lot of nostalgia there, but they really were great.