movies/tv Is progression in a tv show a bad thing?

[Poetic Justice 170]

I was reading through a forum topic about "TV shows jumping the shark", and although I agree with a lot of them, I was starting to see a pattern. A lot of people disliked it when the show progressed too far from the pilot. Rugrats was one that come up, with people complaining that Kimi was a bad idea. Another complaint that I saw was the show Ed Edd n' Eddy, when the later seasons had them going to school. (Which hurt because I personally loved the school episodes)

 

A few other examples included Fairly Odd Parents with Poof being born, Scrappy joining the Scooby-Doo group, and etc.

 

If you'd like to read the thread, here is a link. Forum Link (It is in MLPforums)

 

The appearance of Kiki in Rugrats made sense to me because it was a plot point that Chuckie's dad was (divorced?) single. It was not some random situation that made an appearance for one episode.

 

Now, Poof being born in Odd Parents, I can understand because there was no interest in the two godparents wanting a child. Also the fact that "No fairy baby has been born in one-thousand years" term that was passed in the movie that Poof was introduced in.

 

The Ed Edd n Eddy going to school is very middle ground. I can't argue for or against it without bringing up personal preference. All I can say is that, they are kids, school happens. Now, it is a tv show and if the creators wanted, it could have been an endless summer.

 

Another example (although not in tv) is Solid Snake being old in Metal Gear Solid 4. A lot of players complained that Solid Snake has the potential of dying. Even though it is a very real thing and makes sense in the lore, a lot of players would rather see Snake defy all laws of logic and live forever through game sequels.

 

So, is too much progression in a tv show a bad thing? Maybe I just don't understand the term "jumped the shark" well enough to draw this comparison, but it seems like those two go hand-in-hand often.

Edited August 28, 2014 by Poetic Justice

[Christmasy Britty 2,553]

I think it depends on the show that your looking at, something like cartoons are say different in comparison to something like lost or supernatural or game of thrones. I think personally it just depends on the show and on the fans. If a show goes into a direction that is different and new depending on what they direction is it will be good however the opposite can be true and if there is no progression like with supernatural then the fans start to lose interest cause its just the same story being told over and over again

[Keypassion 232]

I'd have to say the point a series jumps the shark is more or less a personal deciding moment. For example, in that other thread someone said that Digimon jumped it when season four aired, the one where they turn into Digimon. Now, I would agree if season three didn't have the kids combining with their respective partners. For me though, it jumped the shark when season five aired. Sure it was still enjoyable to watch, but kind of lacked what made the first four enjoyable.

 

But as I said, that's just my opinion. As is the specific point a series jumps the shark.

[Darker 1,351]

I myself included a minor example, when you begin a season WRONG. In the cartoon Samurai Jack, which is about a samurai trying to return to th past somehow and stop the evil demon that is Aku, now ruler of practically the entire Universe, before he even exists.

 

After two very strong seasons, with fun and entertaining episodes, how do they start the third season?

 

By transforming the most bad-ass warrior of all Cartoon Network into a CHICKEN.

 

Seriously, what the heck. That is not jumping the shark, that is JUMPING THE FRIGGIN' WHALE!

[Stancet 673]

I am a writer. I know how to progress a story and I can read the minds of other writers when they make progress decisions.

 

Coin Side A: There are plenty of weak writers who come up with good ideas but don't understand the essence of the show that makes it good. So there are plenty of writers who take the show down the wrong path but don't realize how they are making it worse.

 

Coin Side B: There are plenty of dumb fans who don't know what they want or fall in love with a TV show for the wrong reasons. So when a show takes a smart step in the right direction, writers take lots of unnecessary criticism.

[Poetic Justice 170]

I am a writer. I know how to progress a story and I can read the minds of other writers when they make progress decisions.

 

Coin Side A: There are plenty of weak writers who come up with good ideas but don't understand the essence of the show that makes it good. So there are plenty of writers who take the show down the wrong path but don't realize how they are making it worse.

 

Coin Side B: There are plenty of dumb fans who don't know what they want or fall in love with a TV show for the wrong reasons. So when a show takes a smart step in the right direction, writers take lots of unnecessary criticism.

Let me ask you, one writer to another. At what point do you compromise what you want to write with what the fans want to be seen written. I've actually had a situation like that pop up, and would like to hear your thoughts on that.

[Overdrive 5,366]

At some point, a new direction has to be taken in ANYTHING. Otherwise, we'd all still be using the same Apple computers from the 80's, all of our cars would be from years ago, and things in general wouldn't evolve. You can't keep using the same ideas forever; at some point, something has to change in order to keep viewers and fans intrigued. Progression isn't a bad thing, it just depends on how much is being progressed, and by how far.

[Anilewe 2,178]

Hm, progress is usually good, but it can be bad if the writers of the show take it too far. In your examples, the changes were just too big and they changed the whole dynamics of these cartoons. And the audience just wasn't prepared for this.

Edited August 28, 2014 by Anilewe

[Poetic Justice 170]

At some point, a new direction has to be taken in ANYTHING. Otherwise, we'd all still be using the same Apple computers from the 80's, all of our cars would be from years ago, and things in general wouldn't evolve. You can't keep using the same ideas forever; at some point, something has to change in order to keep viewers and fans intrigued. Progression isn't a bad thing, it just depends on how much is being progressed, and by how far.

Very true, but you are drawing parallels with progression in the real world and progression in a fictional setting. I don't think the same laws of logic applies to both

[Overdrive 5,366]

Very true, but you are drawing parallels with progression in the real world and progression in a fictional setting. I don't think the same laws of logic applies to both

A lot of fictional entertainment, to a degree, has real life tie ins. The plots might be made up, the environments might not truly exist in real life, and the characters are created, but they're all still tied to the real world somehow. Events in the characters' lives, plot twists and such all have mirror examples that occur in real life(well, most do). That bridge between reality and fantasy does exist, albeit not literally. The progression in fiction, at times, is drawn from real life.

 

Look at video games, for instance. Look at game series' such as GTA and CoD. Both are meant to be fictional, but still contain progressions and altering events that are mirrored from real life progression. A lot of fiction, a lot of television, and a lot of entertainment is fictional events and versions of the world coexist in. Because of that, you are going to see progressions, mainly to help get a better understanding for the situation, as well as character development. Otherwise, it would be nothing but news, sports and reality tv.

[Stancet 673]

Let me ask you, one writer to another. At what point do you compromise what you want to write with what the fans want to be seen written. I've actually had a situation like that pop up, and would like to hear your thoughts on that.

 

Heh, I don't compromise. Before I start a story, I already have the ending in mind. And at the start of a story I make it clear to people what they can expect and I show them the flag that will mark the end of the story. 

Actually, no. I take it back. I make stupid decisions too. Normally I try to avoid them at the start of a story, otherwise you'll be making trash. But I believe writers must stand by their decisions, which is why I hate the 'it-was-just-a-dream' twist. So I give in when I realize the path to progress is better if I take another route instead of the one I'm currently on.

Edited August 28, 2014 by Stancet

[Jeric 46,834]

I just lost a six paragraph post. 

 

Jeric SMASH! 

 

Sigh

 

1. @Poetic Justice - You are an awesome user

2. I don't pay too much attention to jumping the shark

3. Kimi was important to Rugrats

4. Story is God.

 

I can't believe I lost all of that. My words ... I will always miss you.

[Abia 258]

@@Jeric, I type out my longer responses in Google Drive, which saves automatically. You might find that useful. 

 

As others have said, it really depends on the type of show you are watching. Dexter, House M.D., and My Little Pony are focused more on their characters, so some drastic development is essential. Shows like Dexter's Lab, Futurama, and Garfield (the comic strips, because I ran out of TV shows) are focused more on comedy and the entertaining adventures of a set crew, so changes and additions to the main cast aren't as important as the actual events that the cast go through.

[Poetic Justice 170]

I just lost a six paragraph post. 

 

Jeric SMASH! 

 

Sigh

 

1. @Poetic Justice - You are an awesome user

2. I don't pay too much attention to jumping the shark

3. Kimi was important to Rugrats

4. Story is God.

 

I can't believe I lost all of that. My words ... I will always miss you.

Doesn't the text box auto-save the text as you type? I dunno....maybe I am just crazy.

 

aannyywwaayy.

 

 

1)uuhhh, thanks? Idk why you say that though. xD It was a good boost to my self esteem though

2) I agree. Jumping the shark seems to be a personal thing, just like @Keypassion mentioned in his response.

3) I read your post from the original forum. Kimi did not make much of an impact on me since I was really young when the show was on, but I do see the angle you are coming from. If for some reason I ever re-visit the series, I'll pay more attention to her character.

4) I.......kind of disagree. Although story is VERY important, I think characters are slightly more important. A strong story cannot carry weak characters, but strong characters can carry a weak story. Somewhat. However, that is just my opinion and that is a debate for another topic. 

[MidnightFire1222 1,682]

Like it's been said, it all depends on the show.

 

Like Roseanne for example. It was a good show that lasted several seasons, and was popular because people identified with it. Then they had the family win the lottery, and it suddenly became unidentifiable. The show died after that.

 

Another example is Ghost Whisperer. I personally love that show to pieces, and have seen every episode at least 3 or 4 times. In the fifth season though, the last season as far as I'm aware, they do a sudden time skip of five years and they suddenly have a 5 year old son. The show was brilliant, and season 4 is arguably my most favorite. I even like the idea of them having a child with the same abilities.

 

What I don't like is how they did the child. I don't like that the child is supposed to be much more powerful than his mother. She was the heroine and main character of the show, and the fact that her son is more powerful than she was undermines the fact she was a fairly strong heroine, not just because she could talk to ghosts either. I also hate the fact that they waited so long to give her a child, and the fact they skipped over the baby part. i think it could've been a great concept to see Melinda 9that was her name for those who haven't seen it) to have had to deal with her ghost-saving stuff and having to juggle that with raising a child, and it could've been done so much earlier.

 

Even if they didn't do it in an earlier season, the time skip could've been so much smaller! Why five years? Why not two? Maybe three? Try to get a toddler to understand why they see dead people! Not have a kid that's supposed to be 5 act so much more mature than he's supposed to be at his age!

[FlitterFlutter 1,568]

To be simple NO I do not think that progression in a TV show is bad per say. Like everyone has said it really depends on what show it is and what they are changing. In a show like MLP I think that progression is a good thing IE give twilight her wings, or give the CMC cutie marks. But I don't know that is just my opinion.   

[duidamasterXD 9,626]

If it goes on long enough, most anything will lost its soul. While not all changes are going to be well-recieved, I think it's much better to keep trying new things than to just keep pumping out the same old product until all the fans hate it and you hate writing it. I will say that ideally, you'd be experimenting all the time instead of whipping out something big in a desperate bid to keep people's interest, after things are already feeling stale. That tends to alienate people more than anything . It's like procrastination. Do little, new, fun things all the time instead of trying to do it all at the last minute.

 

To answer the question directly, I love a measure of progression in most things I'm interested in.

[SparklingSwirls 21,261]

I think progression can be good as long as it doesn't change the show too much, or make the show focus on something completely different. Still, it's nice to have at least some progression in order to keep things interesting.

[Jeric 46,834]

Doesn't the text box auto-save the text as you type? I dunno....maybe I am just crazy.

 

I was on mobile using the mobile skin. :okiedokielokie:

 

 

 

4) I.......kind of disagree. Although story is VERY important, I think characters are slightly more important. A strong story cannot carry weak characters, but strong characters can carry a weak story. Somewhat. However, that is just my opinion and that is a debate for another topic.

 

Actually, there isn't much debate you will find from me on that. It's a bit harder to elucidate in three words distilled down from the multiple paragraphs I made originally, but in two examples I used, I drove home the conclusion story and character progression need to be in sync. Breaking Bad is one example in television that I didn't use.

 

To your point - whether character or story is more important - I actually think that in literature it depends on the approach you take at the beginning as the seed is allowed to leave the nursery of your consciousness and enter a physical medium. Hemingway alone wrote novels and short fictions that focused on one with only cursory attention paid to the other. He did so with intent - purpose. With television, character progression without a relevant story to drive said development is like a car with the a perfectly running engine and a bad transmission. You may be able to get the car going, but you aren't going to go far.

 

Here is what tends to work best. Subtle progression over the long haul. The best shows are ones that if you sit and watch the pilot episode and finale episode back to back focusing on a character ... you find disparate elements. But, watch the same show from beginning to end and you don't notice the slow march of the character development. A show can use an external story element (new character) or on internal one (mental breakdown).

 

Not as long as before, and I went in a slightly different direction.

[Radiance64 7,051]

Of course not. The absolute best TV Shows imo are the most progressive ones.

As long as it's done right though, of course.