MCN Blogs
Noah Forrest

By Noah Forrest Forrest@moviecitynews.com

Television Goldmine

I’ve written about this subject several times over the past few years, but now it seems like it’s gaining steam more and more: television is a much more interesting landscape than film these days. That is not to say that I think all TV shows are better than all movies, but that I think television is an inherently more fascinating medium for character-based narratives. In a film, we get maybe three hours to see a character develop and grow and change; in television, we could have upwards of a hundred hours. Great film actors like Daniel Day-Lewis are able craft a persona and give us an idea of the depth of a character in something like There Will Be Blood, but how do I compare that greatness to, say, Jon Hamm’s creation of Don Draper on Mad Men.  It’s almost impossible to compare the two, but when all is said and done, I will probably feel like I know Don Draper and his motivations better than Daniel Plainview.

I was realizing just that point when I was watching Mad Men this past Sunday.  I’ve gotten to know Don Draper so well at this point that I feel like I can guess what he may or may not to do in any given situation.  That might make it sound really boring, like it would take the fun and excitement out of it, but instead it made me feel comfortable with the fact that I’ve spent almost four seasons getting to know this person (upwards of 40 hours) and now I know his tics.  And that’s a testament to the acting of Jon Hamm, that he’s able to convey the feelings that I know Don is having, but without having to state it as such.  Every furrow of the brow, every hesitation of an inhalation of cigarette, every faux-tender kiss on a woman’s mouth…we know what Don is feeling as he lies to the world.

It’s not just on Mad Men either.  All across the television landscape, there are shows and characters that are just starting to scratch the surface of what can be done with the medium.  No longer do we have stand-alone episodes of every show where we follow one character as they solve a mystery.  No, now we have mysteries and narratives that last for the entire length of a show’s run and characters that fall believably in and out of love.

Look, I will always love movies with all my heart – it’s my primary passion.  But even I can’t deny that television is kicking some serious ass right now.  It’s starting to feel more and more like film is the equivalent of a short story while TV shows are novels.  That’s not a knock on films at all, as some of the best stories are short ones.  But, I’ve got it on pretty good authority that Boardwalk Empire is going to kick all of our asses when it debuts on HBO in a couple weeks.  And, you know, it’s gotta say something when even Scorsese is noticing what television can offer these days.

4 Responses to “Television Goldmine”

  1. Amazing mob at Lovato’s Hotel in Toronto today! I was right behind 2 idiots who were much taller than me!

  2. We tried their restaurant and had the exact same experience.

  3. christian says:

    So tired of this meme. TV is for people who want a continuing serial. Do not confuse it with the theatrical experience. I find the overreaching suspect — I think people want to justify how many hours a week they spend watching these shows and then demanding that “you don’t get it unless you get to episode 25 of the sixth season.”

    And why are all TV characters scumbags these days?

  4. hcat says:

    I am quite a snob about television having spent most of the last two decades with Rabbit Ears and missing the “Golden Age of Cable”. And while I always thought the intention of a television program was simply to keep you interested through the commercial break, I have to say this season of Mad Men is absolutly incredible and keeps suprising me with little moments of brilliance.

    One person’s scumbag is another person’s complex character.

Leave a Reply

Quote Unquotesee all »

“Jonas Mekas spoke a lot about ‘necessity’ last night at the Film Society. “Why do anything if it’s not needed,” he asked at one point. Mekas said that he created a publication, wrote for the Village Voice, founded an archive, because it was necessary.

“Somebody had to do it,” the 93 year old Mekas said, standing during the entire hourlong Q&A. He also spoke to the notion of curation: “If I see something I like, I don’t really enjoy it unless I can share it with others.”
~ Jonas Mekas, via Eugene Hernandez

“There are critics who see their job as to be on the side of the artist, or in a state of imaginative sympathy or alliance with the artist. I think it’s important for a critic to be populist in the sense that we’re on the side of the public. I think one of the reasons is, frankly, capitalism. Whether you’re talking about restaurants or you’re talking about movies, you’re talking about large-scale commercial enterprises that are trying to sell themselves and market themselves and publicize themselves. A critic is, in a way, offering consumer advice. I think it’s very, very important in a time where everything is commercialized, commodified, and branded, where advertising is constantly bleeding into other forms of discourse, for there to be an independent voice kind of speaking to—and to some extent on behalf of—the public.”
~ A. O. Scott On One Role Of The Critic