I'm hoping to move into a phase where I do more reviews of TV shows. The goal is really to deconstruct them to uncover what does and doesn't work. This should hopefully be the first of many
The Pillars of the Earth
I had the good fortune of finally finishing the book this series is based on, after eagerly making my way through it for about two months. Naturally I was excited to see the miniseries translation immediately afterwards, So I spent the last weekend watching the series in it's entirety, and I was unimpressed. Perhaps the problem is that I'm a purist. Now Ken Follett's book wasn't perfect, but it was damn close, and I feel that there were too many deviations from the source material and too much expansion of the villainous characters at the expense of necessary character growth by some of our heroes. Look, I understand, when you have the wonderful Ian McShane at your disposal, you want to use him in every scene possible, but I'd like to believe there's a better middle ground than to make the story suffer to give a high-profile actor a meatier role. I could continue with my quibbles on the series as a whole (I greatly hope they find a better writer for the sequel when they bring that to screen) but the point of this post is solely to critique the series finale.
After decades, our heroes have almost all achieved their goals, but there's a few steps left to travel. With Jack at the helm, the grand Kingsbridge Cathedral under Prior Phillip is nearly complete, and Richard is elated to learn he has been granted the Earldom of Shiring by the King's son Eustace. Our dear enemy Waleran has a few steps left as well, starting with a mysterious letter he receives, telling him his darkest secret will be outed. But there's always a twist in store for our characters, Jack discovers the roof he has built is starting to fall like Alfred's did and takes out his anger on Aliena, Richard learns that though he's been given the title, he must raise an army to take Shiring Castle on his own, and Waleran refuses to be intimidated by his enemies and plots their downfall instead.
Richard rallies the townsmen and recruits William Hamleigh's beleaguered wife Elizabeth to help him overtake the castle, and kills William's right hand man Walter in a one on one fight to avenge the innocence Walter stole from him as a youth. As Jack discovers a solution to the cathedral's problem, Waleran and his new sheriff William, frame him for the murder of his step brother Alfred. Waleran holds a kangaroo court, eager to hang Jack after a lifetime of misery, but Jack's mother Ellen intervenes holding a letter containing proof of Waleran's crimes. Her former lover and Jack's father witnessed Waleran and Percy Hamleigh murder the old king's son following the burning of the White Ship. Jack's father held onto the prince's ring as proof he witnessed it. Waleran notes that none of them have the ring making the letter invalid, but Jack's stepsister Martha produces the ring, Jack's heirloom that she stole when they were children so she could remain close to him in the smallest of ways. The crowd turns on Waleran and William, when they are reminded how William had twice attacked Kingsbridge the mob revolts and hangs him. Before he dies, William fingers Waleran as the mastermind behind all the schemes and plans. Waleran runs into the church to escape and climbs onto the roof. Spying scaffolding on the side he attempts to shuffle along the outer edge to reach it, but falls, hanging onto a gargoyle for dear life. Jack straddles onto the edge to pull him up, but Waleran instead chooses to drop and fall to his death. In the denouement, 14 years have passed, everyone is older, but the church is finally finished, and our heroes, Jack, Aliena, Richard and Prior Phillip are all there to witness it's completion, for all eternity.
While it was gratifying to watch some characters get what they deserve, it felt more like we were merely going along for the ride with this story and it lacked...connection. One of my biggest complaints with the series has been an overemphasis on witnessing those in power, as contrasted with the book which was very much more about the little people, who had their own story on the fringes of a much larger story. I don't want Forrest Gump meeting the celebrities of his time, I want the nobodies, and how their lives are continually affected by these grandiose events. As clear cut as the synopsis is above, in the actual viewing it was far more muddled with a number of other characters experiencing events that are almost unnecessary to the main story. King Stephen's madness. Eustace on the battlefield, William Hamleigh promising to build his mother a church. I have no doubt in my mind, adapting any book, especially a lengthy tome like The Pillars of the Earth for television is hard, you must show not tell, storylines must be scuttled to fit in the 8 episode time frame. But ironically enough the reason why Pillars is so long is because Ken Follett insists on showing us, and not telling us. Most writers would have started the story with all of our characters converging on Kingsbridge, instead this only occurs about a third of the way into the book, there's already 300 pages of backstory shown to us. All this to say, I wish the writer had been more exacting in what he chose to keep and cut in his adaptation. I feel the script was too different to make little references to the book of much help sometimes. Take the character of Jonathan, I have no problem with the trial regarding his paternity being scuttled to save time and space, but shouldn't he at some point have been told of his paternity in the series? It's another storyline picked up from the book and then awkwardly dropped, so the writer could have his own way with the series. None of the characters arc in the series (granted, there is not so much arcing in the book as well, but there are some exceptions, exceptions which get ignored here)
I really wish this series could have been better, I know there is a large and vocal fanbase for the miniseries, and I can understand why, there is such a fascinating world created. And I will praise this casting director day and night, I can think of no characters in this series I would like recast. She has done a marvelous work picking all the characters, beautifully acted by thespians who have a magnificent understanding of their characters. But the picture painted of this world is so sadly bland, and should be so much richer. I hope people read the book as a result, and get to experience just what a joy this story truly should have been.
Things they did right: As stated, the casting was superb, and I believe the sets department did an absolutely wonderful job translating all the cities and castles to life on the screen in such a beautiful, visual manner. While I struggled to understand what was often discussed in the book surrounding the architecture, it was much more easily seen on the screen.
Things they did wrong: The story was a mess, and though the finale felt built to, it also felt a little...convenient, Why Waleran sought Jack's death was beyond me (I know it was a trap for Ellen, but how exactly?) and there was too much change from the novel to truly feel like I was watching a recreation of the book. I believe more faithfulness to the book is required to feel like I'm watching the story I love. I feel only about 50% - 60% of the story was ported over. I'd prefer something closer to 80%. As well there was too much of an emphasis on the villains of the story. This needn't be a bad thing, but it becomes a problem when we don't get to spend as much time with the heroes as we should. A closer focus on the main characters of the story - Jack, Aliena, Prior Philip, would have allowed us to really let their character shine, and more empathize with their journey and struggle. I don't care about Regan Hamleigh's struggles, or King Stephen's, I want to identify with Jack's.
What I learned: Outline. The more time you can spend outlining the story, the more cohesive you can make it feel. Too often in the series I didn't feel drawn in to some of the previous episodes. Good blocking can ensure that each episode feels stand alone in a good way, with a clear structure, yet constantly building to the finale. I think if more time were devoted to breaking down each episode and the series, before the script was written, it would have been tighter. As well, don't bite the hand that feeds you. The Pillars of the Earth is close to 1000 pages, you can shorten storylines (but not too short, some of these stories could have used more room to breathe), but new ones shouldn't always be invented just to make the series feel different. There are more than enough good twists and turns in the book to cull from.
AB
6.24.2012
5.05.2012
The Perils of NBC
Hello blog, it's been a long time! After a longer than imagined hiatus, I feel like blogging again. This will be the first post of hopefully many to come. And it's a doozy.
For the last half decade now former heavyweight TV titan NBC has been mired in last place in the network ratings. Things are getting so bad that Univision is even besting it on some nights. So many reasons have been attributed to this from bad management to bad luck. But every year there are umpteen articles describing how NBC can pull themselves out of this tailspin and return to it's former glory. But I think they're missing some of the points. It's not easy to pull a network out of a reckoning like this. Better/More innovative shows isn't always the answer. And the reason why is because people misunderstand some of the biggest perils NBC faces.
1. A Shrinking Audience. It's sounds obvious doesn't it? What's the point of this article if not to reiterate that NBC is losing viewers? Well I'm afraid it's a little worse than that. See existing shows are really the best places for TV networks to advertise their other shows. They don't have to pay money to advertise because it's on their own network and with some luck you can introduce a show and have your brand and audience dive right in. With fewer people watching NBC, it's getting a lot harder to do that. Let's draw an analogy. Say you send a letter to 100 people telling them about a big party you're hosting. Well it shouldn't be too hard to get a good portion to come right? Some might have prior commitments but let's say you can get 80 people that way. Now what happens if you only have 80 people you can send this invite to? Well then we're down to 60-65 or so. And so on and so forth. NBC doesn't have that 100 people. NBC has like 50 right now. So how are they going to get viewers to watch their show? Well it means they're going to have to advertise out. If you only know 50 people, you can only send 50 invites. But what if you convince your friend to lend you his contact list? Well now you know 100 people. But guess what? Your friend's not so nice. He wants you to buy him a drink as a thanks. It's a trade-off. I would argue NBC needs to rely more on outside advertising, billboards, or bus ads. But let's be realistic, few people see a poster of a TV show and feel the need to watch it. It's TV, you get drawn in by viewing it in action. Perhaps internet ads are the solution? I'm not going to lie. I don't have a concrete answer for this issue. But we need to realize that shows alone won't solve the issue. You can have the best shows in the world (And NBC does have some of the best on the schedule right now) but it won't mean a lick if no one's watching. Which brings up a final related point. With less people watching, there's a lot less money going around. Which means when money is forced to be spent on outside advertising, the pinch is felt a lot more
2. A Branding Issue. It's tough for networks to find their signature brand. Right now CBS is going through a period of being the old person's network. Their shows, mainly their dramas, lack edge, are mostly procedurals, and do well in the ratings, but not in the all important 18 to 49. FOX used to be the edgy network. I don't know if they still are as much anymore. But in the early days they cut their teeth on having the kinds of shows that none of the other networks would try. I'm worried that NBC has rebranded itself as a more cerebral network. NBC has been getting great reviews for some of their shows. Community, 30 Rock and Parks & Recreation are some of the best comedies on television. Awake might be one of the most interesting experiments on the procedural format ever. But there's a gloomy flip side to this, in that the shows are exceptionally low-rated. One of the better theories I've heard for next season is for NBC to scatter their current Thursday comedies and introduce a brand new line-up, save for maybe The Office. I'd encourage this approach. I hate to state it, but there's a really old TV maxim that works gangbusters - Go for the common denominator. Go low brow, don't try to have the smartest shows in the room, go for the dumbest. It's not pretty. 2 and a Half Men is not pretty, but guess what? It brings in the ratings and the cash for CBS. See because if you're smart you can watch a dumb show and maybe eke a few laughs out. But if you're not, then you're not watching a smart show no matter what. Granted we live in a different age now. If you don't think anything on TV is up to your high standards you don't have to watch. But the underlying concept is still there isn't it? Sadly NBC needs to get away from this smarter viewing model. Yes, they'll lose points with the critics, but critics don't keep the lights on.
3. TV's down everywhere. There's a dirty little secret among all the networks. Every year the margins for a 'hit' TV show lower. I doubt we will ever see the kind of shares posted in the 50s, where a 33% of all TV sets were tuned to a specific show. But with the rise and dominance of the internet, TV is finding it harder to make a place for itself. Every year fewer people tune in to watch shows. A hit show this year with say 5 million viewers would be considered dead in the water ten years ago. What does this mean? Well it goes back to the earlier point about less money in NBC's coffers. It's easy to sell advertisers with the lure that 1 in 3 people who owns a television will see your ad. It's a lot harder to sell them the idea that only 2 million will watch. Advertising is all about finding outlets that match your brand. But at a certain point if there aren't enough people in that outlet, it becomes virtually worthless and not worth the price. With viewership dropping it will be inevitable that we will reach that tipping point.
I've tried to stay away from discussion on what NBC needs to do to win. There's talk of rebuilding, frankly there's a lot of talk. I'm intrigued by their attempts with the fall. Pulling in stars to make their own shows and bring their audience with them - Dane Cook and Sarah Silverman are the first that come to mind. But honestly, I feel that the quality of the tv show is not the most important arbiter in how NBC can revive their fortunes. The truth is the problems run a lot deeper, and they're not NBC specific either. And that should be a ray of hope for NBC, other networks can face this too. It might just be a matter of time. I hope NBC takes advice from FOX's approach in the 90s. It will take time, years probably to rebuild. But it's possible.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)