What makes a good, captivating, and successful TV show? Some
of the most critically acclaimed shows of 2014 include “Game of Thrones”, “Orange
is the New Black”, “Breaking Bad”, “True Detective”, and “Boardwalk Empire”-
but what really makes these shows “good”?
Is it the amount of well-known actors in the program? Is it the advertisements
that make a show successful? The answer is
no. Though advertisements and big names
are essential in attracting viewers to a show quickly, a show’s quality will
determine the number of fans in the long run.
For example, “Game of Thrones” and “Orange is the New Black” are Netflix
and HBO originals, meaning they have no advertisements. However, they continue to be not only critically
acclaimed, but also at the height of discussion in and out of the television
industry.
It
is not everything surrounding the TV show--the network, the promotion, the
fame--that makes it good, but rather what is actually happening in the program
itself. It’s about the characters, the
scripts, the ingenuity. In order for TV
shows to be successful, they don’t need advertisement-what they need is a
likeable, leading character. Main roles,
whether it’s Olivia Pope sleeping with the president (Scandal) or Walter White
cooking meth to support his family (Breaking Bad), need to have a secret that
makes viewers demand more. A complex
leading character will hook his or her audience, and allow screenwriters to
expand these intricate ideas. These types of characters are necessary for building
a successful show so that viewers are able to empathize with them, while also
being able to learn from them, and grow with them, week after week.
A
captivating show must also be willing to cross lines. HBO’s “Game of Thrones” is a prime example of
this. It is one of the best television
shows of this time, and the main reason why is because of its constant shocking
moments that push the limits and take its viewers by complete surprise. The show essentially reveals that the heir to
the throne was born out of incest. This
very concept is shocking, and is followed by the equally as shocking murders
that take place episode after episode. This
element of surprise is crucial for hooking the audience and keeps them wanting
more.
There
are so many elements to television that just the action and drama. Writers must create characters in which people
can identify with and a plot that is flexible enough to allow for shocking
revelations. People want to be
surprised. People want to be excited for
what will happen next. The only time a
television show can thrive is when it is focused on the story rather than the
monetary benefit.
Hello Shannon
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed your post a great deal as it talks about something many people do not think about often. Everybody just sits down and watches the show without wondering why they watch it or what makes them want to see the next episode. I agree that viewers have to be able to connect to the main character and feel the same emotions as them, however I don’t believe that the characters have to be likeable. There are many shows that have an antihero as the main character such as Netflix’s “House of Cards”. These characters do bad things that normal people might wish they could do on occasion but experience no regret while doing it. The antihero’s lack of concern for appearances and conformity is something that many people wish they had, but they don’t have the ability or courage to do.
The opening paragraph was very strong. It immediately introduced me to the topic and made it interesting and engaging by starting with an open-ended question. You used examples from many shows to illustrate your point, referring to “Breaking Bad” and “Game of Thrones” characters as a means of communicating the characters that viewers can relate to. However you refer to “intricate ideas” in the second paragraph without previously explaining what these ideas are. There are also a small amount of grammar errors that detract from the quality of the post. Overall, this is a good post that examines a topic that many don’t ponder greatly.
Thanks Shannon, I agree with Nolan's comments. Your post is interesting to read. While you do write well overall, there are some minor writing mistakes that make the reading experience just a bit bumpy. I agree with Nolan that your introduction is very strong. I was hooked, and looking forward to learning some insight about what makes television "good." My biggest issue is that you don't really answer this question with any compelling evidence. You talk about the types of characters that shows have, and the unanticipated events in the plot of "Game of Thrones," but you really don't prove that anything specific makes a show "good." I think what you are saying is that the quality of the writing is more important the than names of the actors or the sponsorship. Oddly, though, you don't even mention the writers until the last paragraph, and you do so in passing.
ReplyDeleteOverall, this was fun to read, but I was hoping for more substance. You could have tried to find the results of view surveys. Also, which shows have a greater viewership, these well-written shows or reality shows like "Kardashians"? Are there certain networks that typically air shows that fit your definition of "good"?