This may be the one piece of television news that Kevin Spacey doesn’t want to hear (save for any further announcements of theatre casting shows), but the BBC is putting its weight, and its reduced budgets, behind drama series and serials rather than single plays.
Speaking at the Royal Television Society, Jane Tranter, Controller of BBC Fiction, sounded somewhat exasperated at the prolonged harking back to a golden age of Play for Today by many people, of whom Spacey was just the latest:
I am beginning to lose the will to live over the continual conversation about how wonderful television drama used to be, with particular reference to Play For Today.
Yes, it was a fantastic strand of work and it gave voice to some wonderful writers, and we can all remember many examples of the stand-out plays from its run? Can’t we?
There’s a lot to digest in her speech — a full transcript of which is online at the BBC press Office website. The Stage’s resident media expert Maggie Brown has analysed the speech in far better detail than I ever could on The Guardian’s media blog.
One point that Tranter made is that drama series tap into TV’s unique ability to provide us with ongoing stories in ways that cinema and theatre cannot.
So why are so many commissions seemingly afraid to take advantage of that?
The vast majority of drama series that we see on screen today have a tendency to comprise standalone episodes — with, if we’re lucky, one or two minor storylines threaded through. A favourite of mine in this vein, New Tricks, returns to BBC1 next week.
But while successful drama series are often compared with novels, New Tricks and its ilk are closer to short story collections. You can dip in and out, even watch them out of sequence, and your enjoyment isn’t going to be affected too much. Award winning series such as The Street (and, before it, Clocking Off) take the concept to the extreme, effectively becoming ‘shared universe’ anthologies.
It’s rare that a BBC-produced series, adaptations, excepted, has such an ongoing storyline that it virtually demands that we watch every week. A big deal was made of Spooks moving to a serial format for its last series, but while there was a sense of progression from week to week it didn’t feel like an unfolding series in the way that US series such as The Wire, Dexter or Heroes does.
On the rare occasion that the BBC does commit to an ongoing, unfolding story, the current vogue seems to be to strip it across the schedules as quickly as possible. That’s happening this week with Criminal Justice, and we hear that the third series of Torchwood will be presented in a similar fashion. One may argue that stripping across the schedule makes for ‘event television’, but it can also look like the schedulers don’t want to risk committing to a series for weeks on end in case it doesn’t perform in the ratings.
But audiences have shown time and again that they want to be able to commit to shows for long periods. ‘Soapification’ is a term that gets bandied about any time a drama series introduces ongoing storylines that lead from ‘character’ rather than ‘plot’ — as if that’s a bad thing. Soap opera audiences are among the most loyal long-term followers of drama, matched only by audiences for science fiction shows. And an indication of how involved fans of both genres get in their favourite shows are the number of discussions that take place about how storylines will develop.
Even outside the world of fiction, the docusoap genre, which has receded of late, is about to be celebrated with BBC2’s Return To…, continuing storylines which grabbed returning vistors over many weeks purely because they wanted to know what happened next.
There’s clearly an appetite there for series with ongoing stories. Here’s hoping that broadcasters don’t leave it to the soaps and docusoaps to fill that need.
I'd never really analysed my own viewing behaviour before, but thinking about it, I only tune in to "see what happens next", in the above mentioned US shows, like Heroes and Dexter. There is a continuing mystery, alongside individual episode occurrences. This is also something that keeps me hooked on Dr Who. I love the very individual eps, but also look for the clues linking everything in to the big finale. As well as this I look at the development of the characters every week, and would feel disappointed if there was no progression.
Apart from Dr Who (and the soaps) I can't really think of other dramas in the mould of the US interlinking format. I miss that from our schedules.
I also had a look in on Criminal Justice, and feel it's a shame to squeeze it out the way over just one week. Additionally, in the final week of Wimbledon when matches have a high likelihood of running on into the evening, shunting Criminal Minds into a scheduling hinterland. Because CMs is quite full on, packed full of juicy intense story telling, I think it would be better to let it breathe over several weeks.
But then, who would listen to me, I'm just jo shmo of the viewing public.
And I actually miss Play for Today - it's a brilliant strand for emerging artists across all fields. Why should a new actor be trapped into 18 months on Holby City, when they could take a character on a unique journey in a stand alone drama. Well, I'd prefer the latter anyway.
Back in the 70's, US shows were always separate episodes and it was British ones that had the story-lines. Now it's gone in reverse ,in line with the quality of the drama. The sooner it changes on British drama the better. I hate to say it but apart from a few shine-out examples (Doctor Who, Torchwood) I find US drama much more satisfying these days.
This week's Doctor Who with the great cliff-hanger makes me relaise how much I miss than anticipation of waiting to see what happens next.
I hate the daily stripping of serials. There have been several times (this weeks Criminal Justice for example) when I would have watched it weekly (even twice weekly) but didn't want to watch the same thing every night.
It would be bad news if they strip Torchwood. We've got a short series anyway next year, I wouldn't want it all over in a flash.