> "FishFood" <d...@home.com> wrote in message
> news:k8bfjg$mbs$1@speranza.aioe.org...

>> On the point of Brit TV writing like stage plays, i would say it does go
>> back to budget, eg how many location can you afford in that 40 min slot.

>> Today's 'green screen' tech, on the face of it, should allow many more
>> interesting ways to tell a story, trouble is it is so labour intensive
>> and costly.

>> Then there's the core question, what is entertainment for?

>> There use to be a stronger sense of purpose for drama, there was a
>> sense of drama as communication, education and stimulation. One
>> wonders if indoctrination and intellectual stagnation isn't now the
>> media's resendetra. Unchallenging understimulating fodder. Safe
>> escapes to keep the wheels of production in motion and smug about
>> itself. Is this still drama?

>> Drama when its stimulating, is about who we are, its about what we need
>> dispite ourselves, whether we see it now as such, or seek it out in the
>> future. Its about that potential in the human psyche for better or
>> worst, which will always need to be re-educated. We forearm ourselves,
>> forewarn ourselves, with our dramas.

>> Like a few of you here, i grew up on 3 channels. Beebs 1 & 2, itv.
>> That was it up until the 80's. Then you had c4 and c5, and then the
>> explosion of satalite/cable channels.

>> With only 3 channels to choose from we were exposed to gamut of ideas
>> and influences. Back then day time tv comprised of programs for
>> schools, which in its own way must have acted to civilised the harsher
>> elements of society. Late night tv had open university programs, again
>> exposing you in a benign way to ideas which hinted, in its own way, at
>> the rational order of things.

>> Our dramaa can comedies ran parallel to our debates, high and low brow
>> with a fair amount of course humour thrown in, [carry on's no
>> withstanding]. It was the mix, this wide selection from a few channels
>> which entertained and educated. These days there is so much to choose
>> from, that we now select our own entertainment, and in that way cease
>> to be entertained. We can now avoid what's good for us and never know
>> it.

>> One way pass this habit of seeking what we already know, is simply to
>> settle on a given channel on for an extended period of time and in
>> that way be surprised by the unexpected, but i digress.

>> But back to that core question, before the money, and the apparent
>> need have the biggest audience, what is entertainment for?

> Nikita is a show that manages to put a story into 40 minutes without
> looking like a stage play. I was actually quite impressed with the
> last episode which threw in an inventive twist. In comparison Hunted
> is a wall of static.

> In simple terms entertainment is about reveals, delight, and pacing.
> Exactly how you mix things up obviously depends but I just find UK
> TV does nothing for me.

> Under pressure from the US and audiences beginning to be more vocal
> about US shows being better the BBC ramped things up. Unfortunately,
> people often mistake ramping things up for change (in the same way
> they regard "cutting costs" as saving money).

> I do think you make a good point about "choice" and, given the drop in
> quality of current affairs and documentaries due to shrinking budgets, how
> the pot of available money in the economy is spent on entertainment. It's
> just a fact the US is a bigger (and more uniform) economy so they will
> always have bigger budgets and more choice. This is why, to some degree,
> the UK may have specialised in less and less and been driven to make more
> collaborative deals. However, this doesn't seem to be working very well and
> is coming off the rails. So, again, we're back to change.

> Lew Grade, like Hitchcock, got entertainment. Post-war American movies did
> very well in the UK while even today some people still sneer at US
> entertainment. Yet, where has this sneering got anyone? Where have all the
> dreary kitchen sink dramas that win obscure awards got anyone? The most
> exportable Japanese directors also get entertainment. So what is it that
> Lew Grade. Hitchcock, Kurosawa (and others) get? I have my ideas but I'll
> leave the question open for others to answer.