The Contradicting Tastes of Today's TV Audience

Trying to satisfy modern viewers is a complex riddle. Everyone imagines they know the answer, but even a TV series considered a sure bet can crash and burn.

The quality of the product is only one aspect; scheduling, marketing, and social media presence (in terms of public reaction/interaction) play a part.

But the basic pitch is the first step. And whether or not a pilot is picked up is influenced by broad ideas of what the audience wants.

Turns out today’s audiences are a fickle bunch.

Nostalgia vs. Dissatisfaction With Reboots

For a long time television makers clung to the idea reboots were a sure-fire key to a ratings winner. If people have fond memories of the original, they’ll love the reboot, right?

Wrong.

Whether the show is faithful to the original or reworked to match current storytelling styles, the initial interest soon turns to dissatisfaction, disinterest, and downright hostility. Sure, a few succeed, but it’s rare.

Dynasty

You see a similar effect with shows that are sourced from books and graphic novels or comics, but the success rate is higher. Still, it’s far from a guaranteed route to small screen success.

In each case, the network feels the financial risk is lessened because of the established fan base. But the premise is flawed.

Shadowhunters

Personally, I loath the presumption a bad show based on a book series or comic will be an easier sell than a great original show. I’d much prefer something fresh and fantastic, than a mediocre adaptation soon dropped. The fear of losing money has made the industry forget so many cult shows became hits out of nowhere. In summary, this business model is overrated.

The best take on the nostalgia angle has proven to be creating a show that reminds viewers of a past series, but is technically a fresh entity. People experience familiarity but the show isn’t competing with an earlier version of itself in their memories.

Stranger Things

Sex and Violence Sells vs.
Tired of Sex and Violence

Sex and violence in entertainment has been increasing over the years to the point where it’s not just common, but expected in adult TV fare.

What’s interesting is “gritty” television has become code for content with graphic sex and violence. A show gains cred with the audience by offering excessively violent scenes. They take it more seriously: darker themes have become synonymous with an interpretation of quality.

Westworld

I believe it has to do with a Western interpretation of feminine and masculine, in the traditional sense. Sex and violence are connected to ideas of strength and power, past definitions of masculinity. Thus shows that offer more “masculine” fare—to clarify, it can be female characters partaking in sex and violence; the trait itself is what is subconsciously gender identified by the culture—are taken more seriously.

Game of Thrones

Television shows that focus on traits historically viewed as more traditionally feminine, are more readily derided: quirky, kind, romantic are now often presented in simplified formats, as if the themes are only allowed to exist in substandard material.

This is obviously a fallacy. Television can be intelligent with or without graphic violence and sex. But the audience has become accustomed to this idea and Western networks now use it as a framework for new material. When combined with intelligent plotting, it is often successful. If not, well, not so much. 

Santa Clarita Diet

As a result, some viewers are tiring of fare that is graphic yet doesn’t have a decent storytelling foundation. Upping the anti, in terms of risky content, isn’t the drawcard it once was. Audiences are suffering a form of ennui when it comes to violence and sex. 

The formula needs to be redefined: more complex storylines, and a cleverer use of onscreen violence that isn’t just gratuitous, and inclusion of a broader emotional spectrum that may have been omitted from “gritty” fare in the past.

Walking Dead

Intelligent Storylines vs. Too Complicated

With so much television production these days, and full season drops becoming common, people are demanding diverse scripted dramas. Jaded audiences are less tolerant of lazy and generic television writing.

Thing is, how intelligent a script are we talking? This is also the point where emotional intelligence comes into play. A lot of great television isn’t so much about standardized intelligence, as it is about brilliant characterization.

12 Monkeys

I’ve written about E.I. before. Nuanced characters and complex emotional subtext make for memorable television but like a classic novel, sometimes the person taking in the story just doesn’t get it.

Sherlock

A quick browse through recap blogs shows even avid fans may miss underlying themes and character motivations in innovative episodes. Intrigued is one thing; puzzled is another.

Twists are great, but if the viewer can’t understand the motivation behind them, and foresee the potential consequences, they end up disgruntled rather than engrossed.

Finding the fine line between challenging and entertaining television, without alienating less intelligent viewers, is key. And it’s not an easy task.

The Expanse

Celebrating Tropes vs. Trope Fatigue

Tropes aka plot devices are a funny thing. Storytelling patterns that reappear over and over, they’re a large part of what people love about television. Thing is we’re comfortable with the familiar, but familiarity can also breed contempt.

At it’s best a trope is a tool, and they’re favorites for a reason. Some tropes are associated with certain genres. Star-crossed lovers are popular in teen dramas, and odd couple pairings in procedurals. Sci-fi is packed with antiheroes and reluctant heroes who end up fighting the system.

Elementary

Modern audiences are beginning to split when it comes to tropes. A lot of people love feeling comfortable with certain types of characters, and plot twists. They prefer shows that are remixes of their favorite elements. Tropes for many TV writers are a necessary part of their creative arsenal.

Killjoys

On the other hand, other viewers are extremely tired of seeing the same tropes repackaged. They want fresh blood. Added to which, a lot of established tropes aren’t quite up with the times, being at best stereotypical, at worst sexist or racist.

A less heavy-handed approach is probably the path of the future; a sparing use of established storytelling devices mixed with the creation of new ones that challenge old norms. Whether or not this makes for riveting TV is still to be seen. At least it'll be an interesting ride.

Riverdale

Subbed Television

Stories make the world go round. With binge watching a thing, viewers are looking further, to scripted TV shows beyond their cultural lexicon. Subbed TV has become more common—and more diverse. The web globalizes audiences, allowing viewers to reach past the scope of local networks. Subs are available not only in languages like English, Mandarin, or Spanish, but also in local dialects. (Side note: Star Trek Discovery is translated to Klingon. Out of this world!)

I grew up watching subbed television from around the globe. My dad loved introducing my bro and I to international productions (remember Oshin?). Reading while viewing seems easier if introduced in childhood. Font and speed are also relevant, especially to dyslexic viewers. Nowadays even the speed of subs can be adjusted.

Many are surprised by how much television can vary across countries/cultures. The entire structure of a one-hour drama can change (whether serialized or episodic). Screen time given to subplots, pace and editing, closure or lack of, flashbacks, style of dialogue, lighting, camera angles... So many elements you didn't realize were either open to experimentation, or evolved differently in another country's television scene.

What is lost relying on subs? Probably nuance, in regard to the script. An episode subbed by two different people can offer distinct translations in terms of word choice and overall mood. Since you’re getting another person’s interpretation, subtext may accidentally filtered out. The focus is more on helping you follow the narrative, especially if the goal is to sub quickly and keep up with the country of origin's schedule and subsequent online chatter.

In today's world where people read less, and are less worried (especially younger generations) about the structure of sentences, subbing can often be quite rough—especially unfunded fan sub projects. If grammar issues are a pet hate, well, you've been warned!

Every now and again viewers come across what I call cultural subber/s who will change the viewing experience. This person (or team) explain aspects often lost in translation: references to sport, ancient texts, pop songs, urban legends, popular commercials, childhood games, foods... Completely altering the way an episode is perceived.

Japanese television can be prone to clever wordplay. Korean characters may switch between formal and informal ways of addressing each other; important to the tone of the scene but rarely translated. Swedish procedurals are often so intelligently subtle that you might miss plot aspects if used to blunter storytelling styles.

And of course the world's cultures have differing attitudes to gender, violence, relationships, age, sex, work, family, death, emotion—and everything inbetween. Probably the most glaring relate to the presentation of sex. On some shows it's openly gratuitous, others avoid all sexual content, or infer it showing minimal skin. European TV is known for a style more akin to casual realism but obviously that changes from country to country.

America generally equates violence and cynicism with "good" TV, and gentler emotions with lesser quality outings, especially if the plot has a romantic focus (arguably as a result of stereotypical gender associations and dismissive attitudes to traditionally "feminine" emotions—but that's a whole other blog).

These kind of unconscious attitudes aren't global, so television from another culture can be intriguing and open your eyes to many ways of telling an entertaining visual story. It's best, though, to understand your own (entertainment) prejudices, and try for more of an open mind when exploring the (TV) world.