'Charmed' is a tv show that spanned from 1998 to 2006 following the lives of sister witches that vanquish demons. The show remains a popular choice for reruns and still has a strong following. Although in no way original in plot, lore or dialogue it has remained an enduring favourite. I would argue that in many ways, similar to 'Supernatural,' the show's popularity is based not on the genre but the relationship between the sisters and the drama inherent in their lives. An interesting discussion would be to look at the comparison of the fantasy genre elements to the drama elements to see what truly is the appeal of this show.
I approve. :) Might you consider comparing Charmed to similar shows that deal with female friendships, such as The Golden Girls or even a romp like Fuller House? You subtitled the topic The Power of Three, so I'm extremely interested to know what you think about female trios/quartets/friendship groups across genres (supernatural, dramadey, dom-com). – Stephanie M.6 years ago
The trailer for the remake has been released and might be worth taking a look at. Supporting your argument, the central thread still involves three sisters and their relationships with each other and to magic. However, because the women casted are people of colour, I am wondering how race will impact the narrative. – oddiem6 years ago
The same could be said about Supernatural. If this is to be a comparison. – PoweredxJarvis6 years ago
Analyze both the successes and failures the TV show Supernatural has encountered; the plot lines of different seasons and where the original plan to end the series was found, the success of the fanbase, the acting, the writing, and the plans to continue the series. Compare it to other long-lasting TV series, and consider what makes them so successful. Consider as well, the well-done series that are cut short and what made them end up failing.
there is so much to talk about with this one, i love supernatural and sometimes i am surprised it is still standing and going on because normally you get tired of tv shows after 11+ seasons; but, not with supernatural. – scole9 years ago
There's definitely a lot to talk about here, from the interesting use of mythology from around the world to create interesting threats to humanity as well as the bond between family and what exactly that means at the end of the day, to how writers and producers created in my opinion the perfect ending to the series at the conclusion of season 5 but continued the series, to the general attitude of queer baiting that seems to permeate the dialogue and interactions between Dean and Castiel. – Nayr12309 years ago
Definitely talk about what it's like to be a road show with an overarching plot. In movies that involve road trips, there is typically not a strong plot-driven story; instead, the story is character driven, and the point of the story is the character development that occurs on the road. Road movies/shows can't have plot-driven stories, because it defies the point of a road movie. The early seasons of Supernatural are set up like a road movie, where the episodic storytelling style connects only slightly. The main focus of the Winchesters was finding their father, an act that tested their strengths and weaknesses as characters. However, in the later seasons where the show was thought to be heading off the rails, there is still a road-movie style, but also a very strong overarching plot. – Sarah Bish6 years ago
This topic requires a look back at the early days of TV, which might not seem to matter but still has an influence. TV, at one time, was an experiment and it might end up being a surprise that certain shows became popular and had a following. Looking at the early days of children's shows and how they contrast with the present provides an insight into how far TV has come–not necessarily always for the better, just a reflection on how far we have come. Contrasts or evolution or maybe it is just development are a way to measure change: What is different about the present and whether it is better or just different from the past is useful. An historical perspective is a good way to look at the present. In this situation, looking at children's TV shows can provide that perspective. Change should not always be seen as an improvement, sometimes it is just change–we do things different than they were done in the past just not necessarily better, just different.
It is possible to look back after the first season of a show and develop a feeling that it was a good show, or even after several seasons. But, when a show first appears on TV and all that exists are those first few episodes, maybe no more than the first two or three, then what type of opinions can develop about it? It is possible to talk about a "tipping point" what something starts to take off, but here, at the beginning, the tipping point might not yet have been reached. Early on character development, character interaction, plots, story lines might be seen in different ways then might be the case after the show has been on for a longer period. When a show has been on for a season or more, the audience has more of a history to draw upon in how they see character interaction and plots develop, that is not there with only a few episodes. Those first few episodes can begin to lay the foundation for what is to come and, perhaps, it is how the audience speculates about where they think the show and its characters might be headed that matters in determining if viewers see a show as having the potential to be a good show.
This is definitely an interesting topic! And definitely something that would be interesting to look at. It would be interesting to talk about the difference between shows that try too hard and those that bring you in slowly. – ChaosMistress58176 years ago
This is quite an interesting concept to delve into. Especially because of how often shows get cancelled early in the season due to ratings in our current television network climate. It is almost essential now to have that "it" moment early on to get people talking and tuning in. A bit off topic, but it might also be of interest to look into how streaming services and binge watching may prolong having those "tipping points" later in the season because the entire seasonal storyline is available at hand. What does this mean for network shows? – Lexzie6 years ago
Sharknado is suppose to end its run on TV with the release of the sixth in the series of made-for-TV movies. These movies can best be described as "camp" which might express the poor quality yet, at times, hard to resist desire (or curiosity) to watch them. Camp and television have had a long relationship, with shows such as Batman and Gilligan's Island in the 1960s to Charlie's Angels and CHiPs in the 1970s and 1980s best described as camp. What is it that attracts viewers to camp TV? Is there a clear dividing line between comedy and camp?
A bit of a historical background and theoretical framing of the concept of 'camp' will be required. Otherwise I think it is a fair discussion to have. It could be widened further to generally look at the appeal of what is such an odd series of culturally successful TV movies. – SaraiMW6 years ago
This can be a very topic to talk about it. Not every piece of entertainment has to aim to thought-provoking high art, that's why Camp exists. It's entertainment junk food that only aims to keep people entertained. Also talk about how guilty pleasure and camp can go hand in hand – cbo10946 years ago
Those of you who have seen my profile and work on The Artifice know I'm a Oncer. Of course, Once Upon a Time ends next week, and of course, the fangirl in me is bummed about it. But I recently came across some interesting cast interviews, where Lana Parilla, Ginnifer Goodwin, and others talked about the "resonance" of OUAT. According to the cast, OUAT was a hit and ran for seven seasons primarily because it resonated with its audience. This got me thinking – what exactly is "resonance" in the television world? What other shows have achieved it, and are there different ways to do so? How do you know when a show has achieved the type of resonance that will ensure a multi-season run, a broad and loyal fan base, and overall endurance? Discuss.
This sounds like a very interesting topic, especially when comparing the producer's intentional and unintentional factors. – inkski7 years ago
Oof, resonance. I agree with inkski in that producers play a role in, I suppose, sustaining that resonance. I think good TV shows recognise their influence and will strive to prolong their on-screen stay. The biggest example of resonance I know of is from Doctor Who, whose influence can be derived from one of the greatest ideas in television history: the constant return of its titular character via 'regeneration'. I think Doctor Who's stories of life, death and how you spend the adventures in between, are what resonates with its loyal audiences. Though in sustaining resonance, I'd say there needs to be constant growth in the story. I haven't watched OUAT in ages but I'm sure it still resonates because it expanded beyond Storybrooke, in the same way it expanded on characters. Doctor Who constantly expands on the nature of the Doctor. I'm interested in how you tackle this topic, not only in how 'resonance' can be identified, but captured and sustained. – Starfire7 years ago
Hell on Wheels (2016) with Colm Meaney and Deadwood (2006) with Timothy Olyphant represent a scattering of western shows over the past decade or so. In the year 1959, for example, there was Rawhide (with Clint Eastwood), The Californians (with Richard Coogan), The Rifleman (with Chuck Connors) and Bonanza (with Lorne Greene) and several more. What changes have taken place to reflect greater sensitivity to issues that were not always addressed in earlier Westerns? Is it possible to say that more recent TV Westerns have improved upon earlier ones? If so, in what ways?
Already addressed (with political undertones and and analysis):
1) https://the-artifice.com/the-virginian-political-journeys
2) https://the-artifice.com/symbolism-in-the-western-genre – L:Freire6 years ago
"Justified" with Timothy Olyphant (2010-2015) and "Westworld" (2016-present) are also golden examples of a modern take on the Western genre. – ValleyChristion6 years ago
FOX has released several live versions of musicals, most recently tackling Jesus Christ Superstar. They have previously opted to do Grease, Little Shop of Horrors, Hairspray, and others. Fans of these shows have offered mix reviews and criticism, including being dissatisfied with editing the tone and content of the shows. Why do these live, for-TV musicals continue to be made? Why are they not being met with the success and acclaim of their theatre counterparts?
Good topic. Maybe watching TV is different than being in a theater. Also, this topic could be approached contrasting recent TV musicals with ones from a decade ago or farther back to see what insight can be gathered. – Joseph Cernik6 years ago
