Something that’s been in vogue around Hollywood as of late is the idea that we are currently living in a ‘golden age of television.’
The phrase refers to a ?supposed resurgence of the power of television in telling gripping and artful stories that were once reserved for the big screen.
But mostly, it refers to the money-making machine that television has proven to be.
Because, come to find out, Hollywood is a business that doesn’t necessarily care about the quality of the product it produces just as long as said product can make as much money as possible.
In this day and age, if you want to make big bucks in the entertainment business, go ?to TV.
I’m writing this column so, obviously, I am critical of this whole ‘golden age of ?television’ thing.
Granted, there are some pretty good stories being told on TV, and the creative gap between the small screen and the big screen has never been as narrow.
Shows like “House of Cards,” “Breaking Bad,” “Transparent” and others are proof of this.
But there are limits to TV.
Television will always ?favor plot over character.
Its purpose is to transmit as much information in as ?little time as possible to get you to keep watching more episodes, so it has to prioritize plot over character to keep viewers hooked.
Films don’t necessarily have to do this.
Sure, mainstream cinema is all about the plot because that’s what most people look for in a movie: an engaging storyline.
But it’s not a requirement like it is with TV because a film isn’t going to try to convince you to watch more episodes. Once a film is released, it’s all over. Not so for TV.
But this is changing. Services like Netflix and Hulu and Amazon Prime don’t typically rely on commercials, so their aim isn’t to get you to continue watching each ?episode week-to-week.
Instead, they want you to binge-watch all 13 episodes in one night and convince your friends to sign up for a subscription like some kind of pyramid scheme.
I think it is because of this that there’s this so-called ‘golden age of television.’
Until very recently, TV had been pretty much the same since its inception in the ?mid-20th century.
You wait all week to see “Love Boat” or “Friends” and are forced to sit through a ?million commercials for a few laughs. But with streaming services this practice has been reformed. TV shows are ?becoming more like films.
The same story is ?developing with each episode instead of a different story or situation playing every week.
No matter how much it changes, though, it’s still TV.
It’s limited in its scope to a screen in your living room.
That screen may get bigger, and there may be a lot more options, but it’s still a small screen.
I know this sounds grouchy. It’s not like I’m ?reluctant to change. I love the direction TV is going.
But, to me, ?nothing beats kicking back in a room full of people with an ?overpriced vat of soda and bucket of stale popcorn in my arms, ?escaping the doldrums of my daily routine for an hour and a half to watch moving ?pictures projected on a screen.
zipperr@indiana.edu
