Are TV shows getting dumber or am I getting smarter? I’m not talking about TV as a whole, because obviously it’s dumber than it was 10 years ago. This is because of the influx of cheap TV — reality shows, game shows and talk shows — taking over primetime slots.
For the purposes of this discussion, I’m talking about quality scripted TV — the shows that are good enough for me to watch and blog about. So basically, I’m asking, “Are smart TV shows getting dumber?”
To lead off this discussion, I’ll take a swing at my favorite punching bag on this forum: “Lost.” A good number of the “surprise twists” and revelations on the show aren’t surprising. For example, a segment of for a recent episode ends with a shot of Un-Locke walking past Locke’s corpse, accompanied by one of those classic off-key violin strains. But I — and all viewers — already knew that Un-Locke wasn’t really Locke.
My friend Another Matt said that our “I already knew that!” reaction comes largely because the music scorers on “Lost” overuse the off-key violin strain. Also, up to this season, he experienced “Lost” via the DVDs, so he could watch it as one continuous story, where the slowness of the tale and the media’s over-hyping of the “surprises” wasn’t as apparent. He said this is the ideal way to watch “Lost.”
I think he’s onto something. When written on the page, the “surprises” on “Lost” aren’t meant to be surprises. But at some point during production, someone decides they should be treated like surprises. So the writers respect the audience’s intelligence, but further along the production line, the producers assume we are all idiots, or that this is the first episode we’ve seen. TV has a long tradition of being terrified of a viewer getting lost and turning the channel, and that’s hard for them to overcome, even though “Lost” is clearly a DVR, Hulu or DVD type of show.
Another problem with “Lost” is the contrived way they keep information from the viewer. They do this by having a character that knows something not tell what they know; this is why I hate Juliet, Ben and the new leader of The Others. Especially Juliet. As the show goes on, it becomes more and more clear that there is no organic reason for her to not answer Jack’s questions about The Others and The Island. Her behavior is dictated by the writers deciding, “We can’t reveal that yet.”
“Fringe” — like “Lost,” a J.J. Abrams production — recently had an “I already knew that” moment that was treated like a huge revelation. Since late last season, it has been obvious that our Peter is actually alternate-dimension Peter, Walter having kidnapped him at a young age after his Peter died. In the most recent episode, Olivia’s special vision kicks in, and she sees Peter glowing, confirming his alternate-dimension-ness. As with the “Lost” moments, this is a confirmation, not a surprise.
A decade ago, were stories presented so deliberately? By my selective memory, they were not. I remember being surprised by the story twists on my favorite shows. I’ll use “Buffy” as an example. Angel killing Miss Calendar. Faith giving a peek inside her head: “No, you don’t get it. I don’t care.” Spike being in love with Buffy. These twists all had clues leading up the big reveal; it would be poor writing if they didn’t. And yet, they didn’t seem so deliberate, like the revelations on “Lost” and “Fringe.” “Buffy” was a step ahead of me, but I feel like I’m a step ahead of “Lost” and “Fringe.”
Now, granted, there’s also the other extreme to be wary of — being three or four steps ahead of the audience — and there’s no better example than “The X-Files.” I never knew what the heck was going on in the mythology episodes of “The X-Files,” and some TV scholars have suggested that even the creators of “The X-Files” didn’t know what was going on (although Chris Carter, Frank Spotnitz and company have never admitted this).
And yet: I think “X-Files” is a smarter show than “Lost” (by a lot) and “Fringe” (by a little). A couple years ago, Entertainment Weekly did a “Versus” issue, and one of the matchups was “X-Files” versus “Lost.” It almost made me angry that they were even comparing the two.
Look, I admire a lot of things about “Lost.” But I felt like “The X-Files” was smarter than me, and I feel like I’m smarter than “Lost.” “The X-Files” doled out information organically (based on the conspirators’ plans); “Lost” doles out information artificially (based on the writers’ timeline).
I think I’m at roughly the same intelligence level I was at 10 years ago, but TV seems to think I have gotten dumber.
Have the elite TV shows dumbed themselves down? Or is the storytelling the same while we, as viewers, are getting more savvy? Share your thoughts below.