There seems to be a current fascination by streaming platforms and TV networks with the idea of creating a mini-series based around recent historical events. These flashy productions range from exploring Elizabeth Holmes' meteoric rise and fall from grace, the strange and shady business practices behind the business wework, and of course, the shocking true story of Anna Delvey, who scammed her way into the upper echelon of American pop culture. What is it about these topics that is making streaming platforms so excited? Is it as cynical as simply wanting to make a quick buck out of flashy, recognizable content with A list talent? Or, is there something deeper? A cultural fascination with being able to voyeur over the 1% and their public scandals?
When the first season of Stranger Things was released in 2016, one of the strongest appeals of the show was its tight focus on its small group of characters and one major setting. Each subsequent season of Stranger Things has expanded the number of characters and settings in significant ways. With this in mind, has the overall narrative of Stranger Things gotten too big to fully develop and explore its characters in the same way that Season One did? The upcoming season four looks to have at least three different character groups in different settings including the town of Hawkins, a city in California, and a prison camp in Russia. An article could explore or trace which settings and characters are added to each season, and if they were properly utilized in the story/narrative.
I'd love to read this as an article!
To anyone wanting to write about this, it may be worth including a look at how the writers/directors involved have fluctuated over the seasons, and how their influence ties into the show's narrative development – seriouscourt3 years ago
Many times in television, TV shows air way past their expiry date. That is to say, it got old, it got ridiculous, and it's still airing. Other times, genuinely good shows have been cancelled despite a good following. Sometimes, a show is cancelled after several seasons, perhaps due to lack of ideas and not wanting to 'milk the cow' so to speak. Other times, a show is done to death regardless. This article should explore why. Explore what makes both happen. WHat are the network's incentives to keep a show running? Do ideas have anything to do with it, is it what they believe audiences want? An agenda? All three? When, ideally, should be the time to cancel a show or keep it going.
Seinfeld was a trailblazing show when it came to new wave comedy. Elaine Benes consistently sticks out as a reinvention of the "typical" woman throughout the show because she is extremely strong, sex positive and self aware for the time. She primarily spends her time with Jerry, George and Kramer, the men of the show, but she is consistently depicted as an equal, both in the comedic sense as well as their day to day lives. How did this depiction of an everyday woman set the scene for more characters to be written like this? Do you think her character suited the show and did its due diligence to women in the US? What could have been done differently?
A number of interesting questions that could frame a good discussion. – Sarai Mannolini-Winwood3 years ago
Elaine's participation in the masturbation competition was a particular trailblazing episode in that respect. So too was her particular fondness for her birthcontrol she stock piled. These are a lot of interesting avenues to explore in this topic for sure! – cchaisson3 years ago
I wonder how Susan Ross, George's short-lived fiance who died from licking too much envelope adhesive, would play into this discussion. It certainly doesn't seem particularly empowering, but should this be viewed through a feminist lens? Does it have anything important to tell us, or was it just a funny gag? – BenWoodIsMe3 years ago
'The Wiggles' are an Australian children's music group that was formed in 1991. Around 1997 they sold a self financed show to Disney Channel Australia and became a hit. They broke into the USA market in 1998 with successful airing of their show and touring. In 2017 they signed a deal with NBC Universal to be available to 58 million American households. To say they are doing well is an understatement. But why, and how, did a children's band win a national poll?
Triple J Hottest 100 has been around in different forms since 1988. In 2022 2.5million votes had been submitted for the selection of this years selection. The selection of music is limited to favourite Australian and alternative music of the previous year. The tipping lead was actual Kid Laroi and Justin Beiber's collaboration. Although largely a popularity vote it is still considered a great honour to be selected onto the top 100 list.
So again, why is a children's TV show even in the running? For whatever reason The Wiggles were invited to perform on Triple J in 'Like A Version,' which is for a band to cover in their own style another's work. The Wiggles covered Tame Impala's 2012 song Elephant while also infusing it with a chorus from their song Fruit Salad. That is the song that won.
What happened? Well two main thoughts are: it is nostalgia or it was a joke. Both of these are interesting to pursue at a deeper level.
If this is about nostalgia is this a response to the pandemic life of the last few years? A reach backwards to a simpler time and a happier world? What is it about nostalgia that drives a response stronger than any other factor? Is there a rise in nostalgia driven popular culture due to the pandemic? I'm not actually sure there has been. Instead most of the discussion about nostalgia was happening five years ago around the endless remake and reboot of film and TV.
If it is not nostalgia is it a joke? What is it about Australian culture that drives the desire to use humour in every place? A recent TV show that actively challenges concepts around Indigenous rights and Settlement, 'Firebite', uses humour to tackle colonisation. Is humour then more important in Australian popular culture than any other approach? Is this the defining characteristic of Australian popular culture.
Good questions, but I think you're jumping topics a bit here. Try broadening from just The Wiggles winning this competition, to an article on how Australian culture handles humor, laughs at itself, etc. – Stephanie M.3 years ago
The love triangle is a well established trope. The most common version is for three people to connected through love, decisions and actions that will determine a final pairing of two. There are many versions and alternatives of these tropes, but they are all largely beloved by readers and viewers. What is it about the love triangle that is so appealing? Is it that it provides a voyeuristic pleasure of imagining yourself in the position of the desiree? To be so desired and pursued by not one but two people? Is it just that the level of anticipation is increased as now there are multiple ways to introduce sexual tension in their interactions? Is it simply that it makes good character foils to highlight the protagonist's own qualities?
In fandom the obsession with "shipping" couples is a huge driving point for fan-fiction. Whether it is about the impending wars or the impending threesome, it is also about the distinction of choice. Should Carrie have ended up with Aiden? Should Buffy have just had a threesome with Spike and Angel (the comic series in fact implies she'd have been down with that)? Even beyond the main characters there is a lot of repositioning of characters to end up with others. This has also occurred to great affect in better representations of the LGBTQIA community by showing a variety of love options. But again, why do we get so engaged as fans in these love triangles, and with wanting our preferred match to occur?
Love is an universal theme. It is a vital ingredient, whether we are talking romantic or platonic. But viewers love complicated love. Why can't love be honest and straight forward? Well obviously that would make less of an interesting story for many shows. But is this representation of complicated love healthy? Are love triangles real things? Why is it normalised that it is okay to string along two perfectly decent people because you can't make a decision or have an honest conversation?
The love triangle – an interesting topic to break apart.
“Viewers love complicated love.” I love this. And I am going to play devil’s advocate a little here by asking: Is there such a thing as uncomplicated love? It is, in fact, a legitimate societal pursuit, but maybe fictional representation—especially commercial romance fiction—is exactly looking for that kind of love to depict. – T. Palomino3 years ago
Great topic. Lots of great triangles to draw on. Rory's boyfriends on Gilmore Girls, Jan and Carol to Michael on The Office... It seems a simply intentional act by entertainment programs to have the audience on "teams," rooting for different characters, to warrant giving those characters more or less screen time. – StephRose3 years ago
I think this is a super interesting and relevant topic! I think love triangles really draw on the idea of 'forbidden love'. Usually the person of desire begins with one love interest and then later, finds themselves infatuated with the second love interest (the second being perhaps the more 'forbidden' option of the two, or the one who is usually the more morally ambiguous). Think of Damon and Stephan from the Vampire Diaries as an example for this. Elena first begins with Stephan who is kind, considerate and protective. However after 3 long seasons, Elena finds herself with Damon, the 'bad' guy with a very different moral compass to Stephan. The tension between Elena and Damon is long and suspenseful, peaking interest in audiences; When will they get together? How will they get together? Will they even ever get together? What will happen to Stephan? – celeste2393 years ago
The discussion on love triangles is thought-provoking and resonates with a broad audience. The exploration of emotional intensity, relatability, and the portrayal of human nature within love triangles adds depth to the analysis. The personal touch in reflecting on the intersection of these narratives with sexuality and identity contributes a layer of authenticity to the exploration. The essay's conclusion ties the elements together seamlessly, inviting readers to reflect on the complexities of love and relationships. Overall, the essay provides a nuanced and engaging perspective on a topic that is both timeless and continuously evolving – Bahar1 year ago
Discuss the context and content of the popular show Euphoria, most widely watched by adolescents. Consider its graphic depictions of sex, drugs, and self-harm. Many of the actors on the show have issued trigger warnings. Does the show romanticize self-harm, drug use, etc? With it's music-video esque film style, does it glorify these issues? Or does it normalize them in a way that makes viewers feel less alone?
This is a super interesting and nuanced topic that I think could be written about in great depth! On one hand, I personally believe the show seems to teeter between romanticising and creating awareness, with season 2 seemingly falling more towards glorification in the earlier episodes. However, the question of the visuals impacting the core message is a super interesting one - could it be harmful to make such dark matters visually appealing and will that affect one's psyche in a manner that the show may not have intended? Great topic! – Mana3 years ago
That would definitely be something interesting to explore. A really complex analysis could be made. – danitamapes3 years ago
I think this has the potential to be a very insightful and nuanced piece! In my opinion, Euphoria likes to play up a lot of the more dramatic and explicit aspects of itself in order to create a deeper sense of investment from us. In season two in particular, I found myself disappointed after almost every episode and quite upset with how it all turned out, but like the show depicts I kept coming back. I kept chasing the potential for the show feeling good to watch again, perhaps in futility. It is certainly not the same as any serious addiction, but I think the show has ambitions to really say something about what it's like to watch and experience something so difficult. I hope this was helpful! – noahlsmith3 years ago
I think the popularization of Euphoria-inspired makeup and fashion among primarily teen girls on social media could be an interesting aspect to explore here as well as it relates to the glamorization of the show and its content. – roseytay2 years ago
Various TV series are loved and enjoyed for different factors that lead to producers investing more as time passes and ratings rise. It’s good for the show, the production, and the fans as more seasons get made. But when is the limit of stretching a story? Especially when lead actors decide to leave the cast?
Helpful examples are long running shows such as Grey’s Anatomy, Supernatural, the CW Arrowverse, Once Upon A Time, etc., and even more recent hit shows like Stranger Things. Also, a good comparison are with shows that did well with just one season, particularly “limited series”, a current television trend that includes Netflix’s Maniac and HBO’s Sharp Objects.
This is a really cool topic, I actually think about this a lot. For example, Dexter is my favourite show, but I do think they should have ended sooner than they did, since the story felt stretched. What do you think is a good gauge for knowing when to end a show? – priyashashri4 years ago
Any good show should end when they run out of stories to tell or when the narration should obviously conclude. The order should be story>show. With so many shows, it is the other way around- They decide there should be more seasons because ratings are good or whatever and come up with a clearly forced narrative. – abky4 years ago
I think a really good example is ‘Community.’ In it’s final episode the characters address that it must be the last episode for various reasons, including the fact that many actors had left. They offer suggestions as to what the storyline of the hypothetical ‘next season’ will be, and they conclude that it can’t be.
Or there’s a reference in an episode where the earliest seasons are referred to as the best era (that’s paraphrased, I cant remember verbatim).
Just a really cool example of a show’s self awareness that it has run its course, and the decision process the show’s creators would have had to go through. – leersens4 years ago
Every day I pray that they'll stop renewing the Simpsons for another season, if you love something, let them go. – Daniel Duncan3 years ago
I think the time to write this article would be now. In a sort of 'as the walls fell' perspective. We are seeing now more than ever studios dragging IPs out for the closet and a slew of new content to see what gets traction. It isn't entirely a model of reprint what is proven like it used to be. I think seasons and run times are more defined by data than ever. This should be a focus in the article, how interpretation and use of seasons has changed over time. – MichaelOlive3 years ago
This is a really interesting topic! I guess you could discuss the way art is almost incompatible with Capitalism, a profitable commodity is reproduced but when it comes to art the reproduction of it can destroy or at least greatly damage the art. Some of it of course is fan interest in wanting the series to continue, and so does it become arrogant to decide for fans that they don't want it to continue? Anyway just some thoughts! Again, super cool topic. – Lucinda2 years ago