Response to "Heroes vs TSCC" from BDO
I know, I know I never post anything here any more. To be honest I can never muster the time and instead whenever I find something interesting I tend to refer it to James over at BDO who always does a much better job of blogging it!
This post started life as a comment again his article "Heroes versus Terminator the Sarah Connor Chronicles". Where he analyses why the former has spectacularly fallen from grace while the latter has slowly placed him in an iron grip.
For the most part I absolutely agree with James. Here is my take....
Heroes was clearly only ever conceived as an origin story arc that played out to a satisfying conclusion at the end of the first series. Sure they added a few cliff hangers on the end to keep us around for the second season but basically things were done and dusted there and then. The cliffhangers got pegged on when it became clear that the show was a phenomenon and they needed a hook to get people to return.
Certainly the writers strike did them no favours in Series 2 but they have no such excuse with series 3 which has become pretty shambolic. As James says they're chasing ratings but their lack of a coherent structure beyond the first season means that they're clutching at straws now. Where do you go when several characters either have every power available or can easily obtain it? Throw in the ability to time travel and the stories spring more holes than a colander.
The problem is that when their focus is on making big effects moments and changing the established rules and characters constantly it just begins to alienate your viewers. Settle things down, give us and the characters a chance to breathe and some time to develop. A few extended downbeats between the big action sequences will give us a chance to invest in the characters and story PLUS it'll be cheaper to produce with less effects shots. I expect the network screening Heroes will have to start making cut backs on budget as the viewing figures dwindle. So maybe this'll force them back to basics. What it needs, as James says, is a detailed structure setting in place that arcs to a conclusion in a couple of seasons time. Then let it play out. This brought Lost back from the brink. Unfortunately I think Heroes went over the precipice the moment I saw Peter and Peter arrive in the future to see everyone on the street flying to work with their briefcases.
So why does TSCC work so well? Firstly, here's where I stand on the movies that preceded it. I love them. Everyone agrees on the first 2 Cameron movies but I also think that the story in the 3rd movie was very strong. The 3rd movie was only let down by the lacklustre direction and unthreatening female Terminator. In particular the notion that the future war could never have been averted was great.
Back to TSCC - there were so many reasons not to think it would work. 1) Sarah Connor being not being played by Linda Hamilton. 2) The assumption that this would be a cynical attempt to coast on the success of the movie franchise. 3) Surely they can't keep throwing Terminators back again and again? Then on the back of all of these negative expectations the writers strike torpedoes the running time available to establish the characters and story.
Despite the low expectations I was hooked enough by the Terminator brand to tune in from day one and I certainly can't say that I was converted overnight. However each episode did just enough to keep me hooked and I was probably aboput 4 or 5 shows in before I realised that I was really getting into it? Why? Well I think that this is a show which is is built from a several really good key components into a really great end product. I'll end up repeating what James has said here but I agree with it all. The casting of Lena Headey was a great move. She's stunningly attractive but understated to the point where you could actually believe that someone this beautiful could blend into the underbelly of LA. Thomas Dekker is pretty good and the guy guy who plays Derek Reese is convincing too. The supporting cast of Cromartie and the FBI agent are solid too. Summer Glau isn't great but her character is becoming more interesting now.
This leads me to another point James made. The characters have been with us for about 20 episodes now and yet we're still learning a lot about them and about the future, the slow reveal keeps us hooked.
TSCC clearly has a smaller budget than Heroes and this forces the writers to be cleverer and use the effects moments sparingly for maximum impact. They can't afford to throw in a mushroom cloud whenever they can't think of a new twist. In the end it does come down to the writing and direction. The subdued tone and style is the antithesis of James Cameron but it works really effectively and rings a lot truer to life. I think I'll do a Google later to see if Cameron has commented on the show. He must have a grudging respect for it at the very least by now.
Anyway, it's Saturday night and I'm rambling now. Just wanted to get some thoughts down -a very late case of blogging withdrawl symptoms......
This post started life as a comment again his article "Heroes versus Terminator the Sarah Connor Chronicles". Where he analyses why the former has spectacularly fallen from grace while the latter has slowly placed him in an iron grip.
For the most part I absolutely agree with James. Here is my take....
Heroes was clearly only ever conceived as an origin story arc that played out to a satisfying conclusion at the end of the first series. Sure they added a few cliff hangers on the end to keep us around for the second season but basically things were done and dusted there and then. The cliffhangers got pegged on when it became clear that the show was a phenomenon and they needed a hook to get people to return.
Certainly the writers strike did them no favours in Series 2 but they have no such excuse with series 3 which has become pretty shambolic. As James says they're chasing ratings but their lack of a coherent structure beyond the first season means that they're clutching at straws now. Where do you go when several characters either have every power available or can easily obtain it? Throw in the ability to time travel and the stories spring more holes than a colander.
The problem is that when their focus is on making big effects moments and changing the established rules and characters constantly it just begins to alienate your viewers. Settle things down, give us and the characters a chance to breathe and some time to develop. A few extended downbeats between the big action sequences will give us a chance to invest in the characters and story PLUS it'll be cheaper to produce with less effects shots. I expect the network screening Heroes will have to start making cut backs on budget as the viewing figures dwindle. So maybe this'll force them back to basics. What it needs, as James says, is a detailed structure setting in place that arcs to a conclusion in a couple of seasons time. Then let it play out. This brought Lost back from the brink. Unfortunately I think Heroes went over the precipice the moment I saw Peter and Peter arrive in the future to see everyone on the street flying to work with their briefcases.
So why does TSCC work so well? Firstly, here's where I stand on the movies that preceded it. I love them. Everyone agrees on the first 2 Cameron movies but I also think that the story in the 3rd movie was very strong. The 3rd movie was only let down by the lacklustre direction and unthreatening female Terminator. In particular the notion that the future war could never have been averted was great.
Back to TSCC - there were so many reasons not to think it would work. 1) Sarah Connor being not being played by Linda Hamilton. 2) The assumption that this would be a cynical attempt to coast on the success of the movie franchise. 3) Surely they can't keep throwing Terminators back again and again? Then on the back of all of these negative expectations the writers strike torpedoes the running time available to establish the characters and story.
Despite the low expectations I was hooked enough by the Terminator brand to tune in from day one and I certainly can't say that I was converted overnight. However each episode did just enough to keep me hooked and I was probably aboput 4 or 5 shows in before I realised that I was really getting into it? Why? Well I think that this is a show which is is built from a several really good key components into a really great end product. I'll end up repeating what James has said here but I agree with it all. The casting of Lena Headey was a great move. She's stunningly attractive but understated to the point where you could actually believe that someone this beautiful could blend into the underbelly of LA. Thomas Dekker is pretty good and the guy guy who plays Derek Reese is convincing too. The supporting cast of Cromartie and the FBI agent are solid too. Summer Glau isn't great but her character is becoming more interesting now.
This leads me to another point James made. The characters have been with us for about 20 episodes now and yet we're still learning a lot about them and about the future, the slow reveal keeps us hooked.
TSCC clearly has a smaller budget than Heroes and this forces the writers to be cleverer and use the effects moments sparingly for maximum impact. They can't afford to throw in a mushroom cloud whenever they can't think of a new twist. In the end it does come down to the writing and direction. The subdued tone and style is the antithesis of James Cameron but it works really effectively and rings a lot truer to life. I think I'll do a Google later to see if Cameron has commented on the show. He must have a grudging respect for it at the very least by now.
Anyway, it's Saturday night and I'm rambling now. Just wanted to get some thoughts down -a very late case of blogging withdrawl symptoms......
posted by Dave T @ 8:20 PM
1 comments
