TV

Breaking Bad, Mad Men, Game of Thrones, Sherlock, Hannibal. Critics and everyday viewers alike say that we are living in a golden age of television. Shows that have depth and actually evolve slowly. It's a throwback almost to a time gone by, and folks are loving it. However, the way we watch these amazing shows is changing, at a ridiculous pace. Netflix, the former DVD mail service is now a titan and posterchild of the new way we "television." We watch shows when we want to. No more appointment TV, Must-see TV, or anything like that. There have been some folks, in articles in the Atlantic, and Entertainment Weekly among several others, that have been warning that these days are numbered. That our habits will eventually force TV to drastically change to our new, random habits. The staples and trappings of TV culture may be gone forever. Will watercooler talk exist when everyone is watching TV at their own pace? No more phenomena like the MASH finale, where millions all watched at the same time. There's another group that says this is all silly. That these habits won't go anywhere. The medium can be different; the habits can stay the same. Can they? WIll they? Sounds like a debate!

The new Netflix original series 'Master of None', brainchild of Aziz Ansari and Alan Yang, covers important social themes in some of its episodes, for example racism against Indian actors and yellowface, sexism in the media and in daily life, how the elderly are treated, and being the child of immigrant parents in the U.S. What effects does the show's handling of these topics have, is the balance right between comedy and commentary, and where do these themes go by the end of the show?

Discuss the joy, frustration, anxiety, etc. of trying to write stories, plays, memoirs, or screenplays to eventually become a pitchable TV show. Or vamp a hypothetical TV series concept and discuss all of the reasons not to commit to writing it. Develop a cast, a location, time period, class, gender roles, ancillary characters or diversified cast, genre, subtext, political/not political etc. Fully commit as if this were something you were going to do, and then do it.

Explore the extent to which fandoms influence the progression of the television show they are associated with. The show "Doctor Who" comes to mind particularly, especially in terms of the episodes that feature more than one incarnation of the Doctor working together. This can be seen as an appeal to what the fan base would want to see, though the producers are able to fold it into the internal logic of the "Doctor Who" Universe. This article might also explore the motivation for shows like "Doctor Who" to incorporate popular aspects of their fandoms into the show.

It seems that in many television series produced for mature audiences, there is an abundance of explicitness, whether it be in gory violence or raunchy romance. Especially in HBO shows such as Game of Thrones, True Detective, and Rome, all of these rather "carnal" appeals almost dominate the shows. It is almost as if these themes are what define these series. What is it about such adult themes that makes these shows popular? Do they take away from the show's overall message? Are there shows that don't even seem to have a message beyond explicitness for entertainment?

There's violence everywhere these days, but it seems most prevalent when it comes to real incidents that are later broadcasted or written about on loop. Anything from random muggings to mass shootings winds up disseminated on every major, and many minor, news sources, which not only makes viewers increasingly anxious, but may inspire copycat attacks by appearing to glorify them. However, few sources will avoid these stories because they're popular and attract more viewers.

What can we do to mitigate this cycle without ignoring the news entirely? While we should know about such incidents, should we change the story, i.e. stop focusing on the criminal and focus more on the victims/aftermath? And, how do we explain violence in a way that doesn't leave the more vulnerable of our population, like children, afraid that something will happen to them as well?

In Japan, the ideologies behind "love" are a little different than that of the United States. Through television and film – which are the primary sources of information on both cultures, outside of individual research – How is the culture and moral beliefs portrayed in affect to how people view "love" in either country? And how does that affect marriages? How do the customs of each country delegate the reasons behind marriage, and does that affect the ideologies behind "love"? Is there a difference between what is being portrayed through the media and what is true to the culture?

In the recent decades, the History channel, as well as other networks have shown great interest in brining major historical characters or events to TV screens. Vikings, an Iris-Canadian historical drama has gained popularity since its premier in 2013. We get a contrary image of the vikings, unusual to the brutal, and "savage" warriors . While brutality and war is a dominant feature of the series, we also get a glimpse of loyalty, honour, compassion and of strong females who occupy significant roles in the storyline. To what extent are these images representative of a true viking culture? What historical events can we detect that are somewhat accurate?