(no subject)

[jebbypal]

I need to preface this by saying, I am not a mystery person. Nothing bores me to death than watching a show or reading a novel where there are loads of clues and red herrings and trying to figure out what the answer to a mystery. I don't bloody care. I'd rather see it all happen and know about the characters.

Which gives me problems since 99% of all cop/crime/law/medicine/etc dramas on TV currently are procedurals. Take slot A, fit it into groove B, paint on some character moment shades, and you end up with table C in X color. Many times, you can also use this formula to figure out the characters themselves: One reckless/flamboyant/expensive taste person, one hrad nosed/by the book/clean cut guy, token female of varying personalities (and really, what does it matter---not like it's the main character 99% of the time), one or few people of color, all under the guidance of a boss with varying supervisory styles. Usually, boss yells.

Which leads to the next problem - procedurals wouldn't be so bloody boring (yes, I've ODed on british TV again, sue me) if there wasn't one on network TV every frikking hour. But there is, so that pretty much guarantees that unless you only started watching TV last season, you've probably seen the story before on another show. And god forbid you started watching TV back when the first Law and Order started --- I guarantee you that there's pretty much no chance you'll see a new story line (and the characters will only get more cardboard and boring on any Franchise procedural. If it's CSI, the writing will start to stink to high heaven as well).

However, good writing and excellent actors cann save a procedural for me: witness my finally giving in last year and starting to fan for CSI the original (mostly because it was the only prompt I could answer for a ficathon, but hey, I got sucked in by the Tarantino episodes). MI5 works as well because it's a tad different and well, accents are cool.

A good premise though can remake the procedural. Life on Mars accomplished this for the first four episodes. After that though, I have a major gripe: the overall plot for Sam is the exact same thing!! If I don't want to see the same mystery over and over, I sure as hell don't necessarily want to see the same character go through the same torture over and over. The actors save it and keep me coming back for more, but I'm telling you, season two -- they better get Sam something to do other than be a whiny bastard to what's her face and to stop trying to show up Gene Genie.


In my opinion, this is why Lost and Desperate Housewives have gotten so huge. They aren't procedurals and the general public is sick to death of procedurals (maybe not as much as moi, but they are). Granted, procedurals are nice in that they are easy for the viewing audience to start watching in Season 3 without having ever heard anything about the show. Alias on the other hand, forget about it.

But I don't care, death to the procedurals I say. There should be a law that only one procedural can air on any one network any given season instead of the current 1-2 a night routine. Please please please!!

Comments

[neuralclone.livejournal.com]

Are you watching this series on BBC America? Because if you are, they've cut out a lot of good character stuff to make room for the ads. *sniff* What really hooked me on LOM was the character interaction, and you see it development by increments over the first series - how Sam relates to the Gene Genie and his other colleagues, and vice versa. There's a lot more to Sam than "whiny bastard", and it's a shame if the editing has made it look otherwise.

[nos4a2no9.livejournal.com]

I found myself nodding along to this even though I watch procedurals religiously. I'm all about Without a Trace and Bones and Law and Order: SVU and CSI and CSI: New York (but not Miami, dear god. Never Miami). But I see what you mean - if you're at all able to recognize particular character archetypes, or plot lines, or even mystery-solving problems, well, most network procedurals will be fairly miserable viewing experiences for you.

Personally I'm awful about solving the crimes before the detectives/lawyers/Mounties do. Despite having watched thousands of hours of TV crime shows I can never put the clues together and the question of guilt or innocence always seems to come to a fairly random, if pat, conclusion. So I'm always surprised, and always intrigued by the sort of personality it would take to be good at the sort of job I can't even begin to tackle even from the vantagepoint of my couch and with the benefit of a straightforward narrative presentation of the evidence. I think your frustration and boredom with procedural dramas is a product of a high-functioning intellect, familiarity with science/forensic procedure, and the expectation for something more from your viewing experience. I tend to be satisfied with remarkably little, or far too much of the same thing.