<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: A must read for people who take TV seriously...
Review: I bought this book as the required text for one of Prof. Thompson's classes at Syracuse. It puts today's television in context, and at the same time uses history to teach why certain shows are popular today. You need to respect the past in order to create the future. Learn about Television's "superior genes" by exploring the MTM family tree. You need to read this book if you want to study TV and not just watch it. A must for anyone truly serious about writing, programming, developing, producing, or directing for television. The television I watched after reading this book was NOT the same television I had watched before reading it.
Rating: 
Summary: reflections on quality TV from the 1980's
Review: I purchased this book primarily for it's advertised chapter on thirtysomething, since analysis of one of my favourite TV shows is rare. That the coverage here is disappointing is due probably more with my expectation, since the book covers a collection of shows that also include Hill Street Blues, St. Elsewhere, Twin Peaks, China Beach, Cagney and Lacey, Picket Fences, Moonlighting, Northern Exposure, and L.A.Law, none of which capture my imagination as much as thirtysomething, though I enjoyed reading about the evolution of Moonlighting. However, author Robert J Thompson does contextualise each series, and provides a fascinating epilogue in an exploration of the first "golden age of television". Thompson's thirtysomething chapter running at 8 pages, includes an acknowledgement of the show's written excellence much awarded and celebrated by a published anthology of scripts, the advertising controversies about gay issues, the show's innovative treatment of subject in spite of the cliched claim that "it's a show about nothing" (prefiguring the Seinfeld hook), a quote from a script ie Miles Dentrell about the nature of advertising, the series' cancellation and last-minute talks of making a fifth and final series. If Thompson relies a lot of quotes from critics and detractors of the show eg Jay Leno on the death of one of the principal characters "One down, six to go", his notes lead me to the two issues of Playboy magazine with relevant articles, The Thirtysomething Journal interview and The Creators and Cast of Thirtysomething.
Rating:
Summary: the place to start
Review: It's all too easy to assume that simply because we vegetate in front of the TV all day, that we have some kind of understanding of its history and how it works. This book summarises the importance of several landmark shows of the 1980s and 1990s, helping to show how a few select producers (chiefly refugees from The Mary Tyler Moore Show) were able to transform the quality of television, at least for a while. Note that the shows are discussed in their American context -- British viewers may be surprised to hear that anything was innovative about the "MASH without the laughter track", because MASH was always broadcast in the UK without a laughter track. But for placing the history of American TV in its natural home habitat, this remains an important and interesting introduction to quality television.
Rating:
Summary: The case for television dramas as the mediums high art form
Review: The title of this book is provocative but something of a serious misnomer. Robert J. Thompson points out early on that the original "Golden Age of Television" took place in the Fifties and was built on the variety shows like "Texaco Star Theater" and "Your Show of Shows," the anthology dramas like "Playhouse 90" and "Studio One," and, of course, "I Love Lucy." Thompson also acknowledges that in the Seventies the situation comedy reached its "literate peak" with "The Mary Tyler Moore Show," "All in the Family," and "M*A*S*H." However, the argument for "Television's Second Golden Age: From 'Hill Street Blues' to 'ER'" covers a period from HSB's debute in 1981 to the present, where "ER" continues to be one of the top dramas on television. That is a period of more than two decades and while Thompson devotes a chapter to "The Second Golden Age of Television: "Cagney & Lacy," "Moonlighting," "L.A. Law," "thirtysomething," and "China Beach," essentially focusing on the Eighties, it is hard to say that the following decade, with "Twin Peaks," "Northern Exposure," "Picket Fences," "NYPD Blue," "Law & Order," "Homicide," "The X-Files," "Chicago Hope," and "ER" was not at least as strong (feel free to add to the list). Even if we are talking about the first decade of the 21st century we have "Buffy the Vampire Slayer," "24," "The Practice," "Ally McBeal" and short-lived series like "My So Called Life" and "Once and Again" (and that is without dipping over to HBO and talking about "The Sopranos," "Six Feet Under," and the rest of their kind), all of which speak to quality dramatic programming. That is why in the final analysis I see Thompson's argument as being not so much for a specific time period of great television, but rather advancing the proposition that the hour-long dramatic television series is the chief art form of the medium (yes, even more so than the situation comedy). I would even extend this argument to the mini-series, from "Roots" and "Shogun" to "War and Remembrance" and "Lonesome Dove," because the guiding principle of the extended narrative form remains the common denominator. "24" takes the idea of season-long story arc a unique extreme, but "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" did all of its complete seasons have a first-half story arc (e.g., Spike & Dru in Season 2) that then merged with a second-half story arc (e.g., the return of Angelus) that provided a framework for all of the individual episodes. Then there was "Murder One," which rather successfully devoted an entire season to one sensational murder trial. When a series loses its driving story arc, as when Dave and Maddie consummated their love on "Moonlighting," or when what was supposed to be the hook becomes the line and sinker as well, as when the question of who killed Laura Palmer ultimately derailed "Twin Peaks," the demise of the show simply affirms the principle in the negative. Thompson's starting point is January 1981 when prime-time television was about to make a sudden and dramatic turn towards quality because of "Hill Street Blues," the show that Steven Bocho did not want to make and that nobody wanted to watch, but which became "television's first true masterpiece." However, Thompson argues that it was "St. Elsewhere" that was "TV's greatest show, ever" (having to do with key notions of "intertextuality" and "self-reflexivity"). Ultimately he is not defining a particular time period (especially since the "golden age" in question is clearly not over), but explaining why in the "vast wasteland" that Newton Minnow bemoaned so many years ago "quality" television is flourishing in terms of hour-long dramatic programming. Within that context Thompson clearly makes his case for much of the best television ever made having appeared on the networks since 1980. The book is half critical evaluation of these programs and half insider's tour looking at the decision-making process as well as the social, economic, and artistic forces that ended up revolutionizing the medium. Thompson also more than adequately proves he knows his television history, which is necessary to help convince those of us who are true students of the medium. Consequently, the fact that the title of this book is not a fair representation of its most significant claim, is not to be held against the author, because he has made in public an argument I have been making in private (okay, in class as well), for several years.
Rating:
Summary: The case for television dramas as the mediums high art form
Review: The title of this book is provocative but something of a serious misnomer. Robert J. Thompson points out early on that the original "Golden Age of Television" took place in the Fifties and was built on the variety shows like "Texaco Star Theater" and "Your Show of Shows," the anthology dramas like "Playhouse 90" and "Studio One," and, of course, "I Love Lucy." Thompson also acknowledges that in the Seventies the situation comedy reached its "literate peak" with "The Mary Tyler Moore Show," "All in the Family," and "M*A*S*H." However, the argument for "Television's Second Golden Age: From 'Hill Street Blues' to 'ER'" covers a period from HSB's debute in 1981 to the present, where "ER" continues to be one of the top dramas on television. That is a period of more than two decades and while Thompson devotes a chapter to "The Second Golden Age of Television: "Cagney & Lacy," "Moonlighting," "L.A. Law," "thirtysomething," and "China Beach," essentially focusing on the Eighties, it is hard to say that the following decade, with "Twin Peaks," "Northern Exposure," "Picket Fences," "NYPD Blue," "Law & Order," "Homicide," "The X-Files," "Chicago Hope," and "ER" was not at least as strong (feel free to add to the list). Even if we are talking about the first decade of the 21st century we have "Buffy the Vampire Slayer," "24," "The Practice," "Ally McBeal" and short-lived series like "My So Called Life" and "Once and Again" (and that is without dipping over to HBO and talking about "The Sopranos," "Six Feet Under," and the rest of their kind), all of which speak to quality dramatic programming. That is why in the final analysis I see Thompson's argument as being not so much for a specific time period of great television, but rather advancing the proposition that the hour-long dramatic television series is the chief art form of the medium (yes, even more so than the situation comedy). I would even extend this argument to the mini-series, from "Roots" and "Shogun" to "War and Remembrance" and "Lonesome Dove," because the guiding principle of the extended narrative form remains the common denominator. "24" takes the idea of season-long story arc a unique extreme, but "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" did all of its complete seasons have a first-half story arc (e.g., Spike & Dru in Season 2) that then merged with a second-half story arc (e.g., the return of Angelus) that provided a framework for all of the individual episodes. Then there was "Murder One," which rather successfully devoted an entire season to one sensational murder trial. When a series loses its driving story arc, as when Dave and Maddie consummated their love on "Moonlighting," or when what was supposed to be the hook becomes the line and sinker as well, as when the question of who killed Laura Palmer ultimately derailed "Twin Peaks," the demise of the show simply affirms the principle in the negative. Thompson's starting point is January 1981 when prime-time television was about to make a sudden and dramatic turn towards quality because of "Hill Street Blues," the show that Steven Bocho did not want to make and that nobody wanted to watch, but which became "television's first true masterpiece." However, Thompson argues that it was "St. Elsewhere" that was "TV's greatest show, ever" (having to do with key notions of "intertextuality" and "self-reflexivity"). Ultimately he is not defining a particular time period (especially since the "golden age" in question is clearly not over), but explaining why in the "vast wasteland" that Newton Minnow bemoaned so many years ago "quality" television is flourishing in terms of hour-long dramatic programming. Within that context Thompson clearly makes his case for much of the best television ever made having appeared on the networks since 1980. The book is half critical evaluation of these programs and half insider's tour looking at the decision-making process as well as the social, economic, and artistic forces that ended up revolutionizing the medium. Thompson also more than adequately proves he knows his television history, which is necessary to help convince those of us who are true students of the medium. Consequently, the fact that the title of this book is not a fair representation of its most significant claim, is not to be held against the author, because he has made in public an argument I have been making in private (okay, in class as well), for several years.
Rating: 
Summary: Required reading for students of television
Review: This is a brief but entertaining and convincing argument for the artistic value of one of the most unfairly condemended media outlets -- television. Working from the hypothesis that the quirky dramas that dominated television from the '70s to the '90s (Hill Street Blues, St. Elsewhere, thirtysomething, ect.) actually made up television's second golden age, author Robert J. Thompson actually makes a pretty good argument for taking TV seriously. Each chapter provides detailed (and refreshingly witty) analysis of all the TV shows that we previously took for granted and shows how the writers and producers of those shows were able to create great art in the guise of great entertainment. Of particular worth was Thompson's long and informative chapter on St. Elsewhere, over the course of which he manages to break down a few of that show's intricate inside jokes and show how the show's controversial final episode actually served as a powerful and still-relavent statement on the state of television and American culture today. This book is a must read for anyone who sees television as more than just a distraction.
Rating:
Summary: Required reading for students of television
Review: This is a brief but entertaining and convincing argument for the artistic value of one of the most unfairly condemended media outlets -- television. Working from the hypothesis that the quirky dramas that dominated television from the '70s to the '90s (Hill Street Blues, St. Elsewhere, thirtysomething, ect.) actually made up television's second golden age, author Robert J. Thompson actually makes a pretty good argument for taking TV seriously. Each chapter provides detailed (and refreshingly witty) analysis of all the TV shows that we previously took for granted and shows how the writers and producers of those shows were able to create great art in the guise of great entertainment. Of particular worth was Thompson's long and informative chapter on St. Elsewhere, over the course of which he manages to break down a few of that show's intricate inside jokes and show how the show's controversial final episode actually served as a powerful and still-relavent statement on the state of television and American culture today. This book is a must read for anyone who sees television as more than just a distraction.
<< 1 >>
|
