Compare and contrast the varying successes of a TV franchise using Law and Order, CSI and Criminal Minds. Why have some succeeded, such as CSI Miami and others failed, such as Criminal Minds: Beyond Borders. Take a look at how the actors have succeeded in other shows such as Shemar Moore in SWAT. Not only has the franchise done well but the actors have moved on to other shows with enduring popularity over decades.
CSI used to be one of my guilty pleasures - I don't know why I feel guilty, I can't be watching subtitled black and white films about the awfulness of it all every day!
If you have never seen the series - a difficult feat as the CBS franchise (CSI: Las Vegas, CSI: Miami, CSI:NY) is repeated frequently - it concerns a group of criminal investigators who use forensic science as the main tool of detection in solving graphically depicted murders. Allegedly the most watched show in the world, the franchise is now crumbling with CSI: Miami and CSI:NY being dropped from the schedules. The success of the programme, with its focus on science based methods of crime detection, has led to what is known as the ‘CSI Effect’, namely the unrealistically high public expectations of forensic crime detection as well as a multitude of people (now probably unemployed) enrolling in forensic science courses. Silke Panse in, ‘The Bullets Confirm the Story Told by the Potato,’ (yes, I had to read that twice and it is indeed a direct quote from the Grissom character) discusses the faux-scientific approach of CSI and its ability to visualise that which is normally concealed and (apparently) raise the dead. Indeed, CSI makes direct communication with the dead seem almost commonplace. For a period of time I was totally hooked on CSI and OD'd on endless editions of the show. Of course having watched so many episodes and become thoroughly immersed in the ‘CSI Effect’ I knew I hadn’t really overdosed as my breathing, heart rate and pulse were normal, my pupils had not reduced to pinpoint and my lips and nails hadn’t turned blue. However, after viewing twenty episodes or so, I was finding it difficult to keep my eyes open and stop my jaw going slack. I may even have dribbled a bit. Using my newly acquired bogus skills of forensic detection, I came to a typically swift diagnosis - which I leave to the reader to identify. The series has been the subject of considerable research with lecturers, researchers, television critics, media executives and scientists all aiming to consider the reasons for the huge success of, ‘such a strictly formulaic, endlessly repeated, modular drama,’ and seek to understand and analyse its popular appeal using theoretical frameworks including, ‘notions of Derridean trace, Lacanian lack and Mulveyian to-be-looked-at-ness.’ In his book, ‘So Many Different Ways to Tell It,’ Michael Allen sets CSI within its historical and contemporary context both as a police investigation show and a long running, lucrative franchise. Allen argues that CSI was successful due to a combination of factors, the most notable being timing, star actors and location.The show came along when a post 9/11 America was at its most anxious and vulnerable offering an image of scientific certainty and committed professionalism. CSI differed from other TV programmes within the genre by shrewdly casting actors, ‘with notable, if occasionally checkered, Hollywood careers’. These include William Petersen, David Caruso and Gary Sinese. As Allen points out, star names alone are no guarantee of success and that oddly enough, the, ‘ lack of character development, formulaic repetition, etc...little narrative or character continuity,’ actually attracted viewers who could watch episodes out of sequence as well as allowing schedulers/buyers to fill in gaps in weekly schedules. The major city locations, Miami, New York and Las Vegas also lent themselves to a kind of dramatic schadenfreude, whereby the audience could enjoy the sight of the veneer of the glittering American dream being torn away to graphically expose its often repulsive and rotting underbelly. Although emerging from the same franchise stable, the three shows strongly emphasise their distinctive locations in terms of composition, actors, costumes, sets, props, sound and lighting - and of course there is also the famous, ‘CSI Shot’, the method of showing animated CGI reconstructions of, for example, the trajectory of a bullet through a body or the effect of a toxin on brain cells. Sadly, since my mega-binge on CSI, I have now fully purged my curiosity and have not watched another episode for about five years. However my lust for faux-science is still strong and has now been sated by, 'The Big Bang Theory.'
– BlueStocking1 year ago
Explain why you think (or may be not) that Tv shows or Sitcoms portraying a well sculpted world, with friends for support and effortless enjoyment can posses a serious threat to how people view reality and their life outcomes?
Another approach could be exploring the dependence people have on such television shows as a form of escapism. By illustrating an alternate sitcom reality to our own, creators are effectively entrapping people in a make belief society with different rules that follow the laws or comedy rather than reality. – ninaphillips276 years ago
i don't think those shows necessarily demonstrate consistent support, rather they should how friends often take the mick out of each other to keep them grounded. the characters in big bang theory are often mocked and ostracised my most members of society and find solace within their own little community. A common trope of sitcoms given its a common sensation in the human experience – Iliasbakalla6 years ago
I agree with Iliasbakalla and Munjeera. These series often extrapolate characters' quirks to the extreme for comic effect. It would be interesting to discuss why this results in a broadly enjoyable experience, e.g. perhaps we identify with characters' flaws etc. The cultural setting of the show and the assumed cultural setting of the viewer would be another interesting aspect to explore, e.g. What is the cultural setting that producers are assuming when they write and produce the show? Do viewers from other cultures have more or less difficulty enjoying these shows? Why/why not? – bethlauren6 years ago
Its definitely an interesting theory... do we change our own behaviours based on what we see as successful in a tv show? Do we try to become more sarcastic because me might find Chandler so incredibly funny and relatable? And then, is this notion of "what we should be living like" having a negative impact on our lives or a positive? – miaraszewski6 years ago
Could it be helping people in some way? As a child, watching shows like that helped me to develop communication skills and made me strive towards finding friends that would support me the same way. I really think the fabrication of such strong friendships is a good thing, it may seem unrealistic but it's also quite endearing. – pixiehabits5 years ago
I have to say that Friends in particular had me wondering what they did for a living. Constantly swanning around the coffee shop, and living it up in their expensive inner city apartments. Not exactly a deeply moral tale, but it's difficult to hypothesise about its effect. Also, why can't I have my own canned laughter!? – Dion5 years ago
Not if you're white suburban and lame. – Antonius8655 years ago
In this technological age…new books are being streamed out alongside movies and TV shows. How can we persuade the new generation to read rather than just seeing the show? Especially supporting the struggling readers when the books could be more than 400 pages long…
Examples that could be included… Game of Thrones The Mortal Instruments Hunger Games Harry Potter
Since so much has been written in this area already, I'd stress the importance of finding a new angle on it, and a non-partisan one in particular. There are so many contributing factors when it comes to film adaptations, it might be an interesting idea to pick a narrower lens - for instance market over-saturation, or the difference between book adaptations of shows as opposed to tv show/movie adaptations of books. – Cat6 years ago
In my experiences I have always found the book to be more enjoyable. The reason for this being they have so much more freedom to write the story exactly as they envision it to play out. It can be as long or as short as they like. In the TV show, they are restricted with what content they are allowed to air. There are also time constraints resulting from trying to fit everything into a half hour time slot. Important storylines are often cut to make way for the sake of fitting the time limit. The TV show is still cool to see the book come to life, it will just never be able to match the book for quality. – JoshuaFtk6 years ago
You should also probably take into account visual achievements which were much better than the original writeups themselves. Case in point being Band of Brothers, Drive and Fight Club to name a few. – Vishnu Unnithan6 years ago
The books serve a purpose which movies cannot. Obviously, for the upcoming generation, the impatient ones will go for a movie and the creative ones shall opt for a book. Regardless of the fact that there would have been no movies without the books.
The words let you imagine and make a world of your own. They get into your instincts and sometimes you live those characters. You learn a lot from them and you try to imitate their character rather than something worthless shown on silver screen. Movies mould the actual meaning and one tends to just develop a scenerio which is displayed rather than applying his/her own mind.
Words let you fly whereas movies restrict your thoughts. – vipulmanuja6 years ago
Analyze how TV shows can put people in a certain mindset which alters their real life behaviour. Are they just influencing and changing their perspective? or are they brainwashing as not every aspect of the situation is shown?
When thinking about reasons why people go to movies or why they are so engaged in television shows, it is either done to unwind and relax or to escape from one's own life.
TV shows often take place in very realistic settings, where the probability of the events taking place in the show are likely to take place in the viewers own life. However, especially after binge watching a show for hours on end, it is easy to get caught up in the TV shows world and try to apply their problem solving skills to one's own problems. This almost impossible to do. To perform a monologue of one's undying love for another may work in the staged construct of the show, but in reality it is kind of creepy and very over the top.
The situations on TV shows are being carefully calculated and balanced by the writers, and in real life people do not have set boundaries that they must act within. – Naomster77 years ago
I believe the TV shows give us unreasonable expectations for how relationships and behavior function. For example, How I Met Your Mother examines the relationship's between 5 friends in New York. Throughout the entire show I felt desperate to find similar relationships in my own life; but this is nearly impossible. Although fictional, the behavioral exchanges between characters seems realistic, but people do not behave like that in real life. Many of the characters have candid exchanges with new, and old, friends, but if the acted this way in real life, the responses would be quite different. For example, Ted's many romantic acts might warrant a restraining order in modern day society. People cannot be as carefree and friendly in real life as they are in shows, because our society does not support this type of behavior. – megduckworth7 years ago
I would actually be more worried about the influence of reputed news organizations in affecting the behavior of individuals. There are many viewers who will only watch one network, and since "news," follows the title, these individuals believe this to be the absolute, undisputed truth and will not pursue different avenues of thought. This leads to biases and ideologies that are difficult to change. – danielle5777 years ago
True. Look at right and left wing media. It does portray news in an unworthy way. – Munjeera7 years ago