Are TV shows now made so that multi-taskers don't get lost?

[repoman]

So, I have been watching episodes of the old TV show Columbo. It is a decent show and one of the most interesting things is how little he talks about the clues he is gathering in some of the episodes. There can also be stretches of up to 2 minutes of no talking, just watching a criminal set up a crime or Columbo look for clues and be confused.

I think that this would do poorly now, with many people multi-tasking a lot on their computers or phones. Even missing 30 seconds of video from Columbo can ruin the whole episode.

Are the shows now being very verbal compared to the past?

If I had a choice to watch a Columbo style show or a hyper verbal show like Sherlock, I would pick the former every time.

 

[fast]

Columbo is my most absolute tv series ever. I own the entire set, both the original seasons and the later seasons, and I have watched each episode more times than it would be wise to admit; after all, I don't need you guys trying to have me admitted.

As to new tv shows, what I dislike most is the excessive introductions of what's to come five minutes later to turn and tell me again what I just watched with yet another stint of what's to come. Hell, I might see and hear a partial scene upwards of four times in one sitting. I know it's designed for people tuning in mid show, but damn.

 

[repoman]

hmm, but what about Netflix shows, which are basically TV shows seen on streaming? I haven't seen any yet. I would think they would not have the post commercial break reiteration.

Are there any of these streaming shows that are made for full visual attention?

 

[hurtinbuckaroo]

So, I have been watching episodes of the old TV show Columbo. It is a decent show and one of the most interesting things is how little he talks about the clues he is gathering in some of the episodes. There can also be stretches of up to 2 minutes of no talking, just watching a criminal set up a crime or Columbo look for clues and be confused.

I think that this would do poorly now, with many people multi-tasking a lot on their computers or phones. Even missing 30 seconds of video from Columbo can ruin the whole episode.

Are the shows now being very verbal compared to the past?

If I had a choice to watch a Columbo style show or a hyper verbal show like Sherlock, I would pick the former every time.

You can multi-task while watching Sherlock?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

As a parent of an extremely active 4 year old, I can confirm, no, shows today aren't made differently for multi-taskers.

 

[braces_for_impact]

So, I have been watching episodes of the old TV show Columbo. It is a decent show and one of the most interesting things is how little he talks about the clues he is gathering in some of the episodes. There can also be stretches of up to 2 minutes of no talking, just watching a criminal set up a crime or Columbo look for clues and be confused.

I think that this would do poorly now, with many people multi-tasking a lot on their computers or phones. Even missing 30 seconds of video from Columbo can ruin the whole episode.

Are the shows now being very verbal compared to the past?

If I had a choice to watch a Columbo style show or a hyper verbal show like Sherlock, I would pick the former every time.

No, it's made for a juvenile, hyperactive crowd. Watch any of those old shows and movies and you'll notice it's not just less verbal, but the scenes themselves don't change nearly as much. Having the scenes change makes for a more stimulating and exciting experience, or so they say. Watch any show or movie now, and it's rare to go for more than a few seconds without the scene changing somehow.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

So, I have been watching episodes of the old TV show Columbo. It is a decent show and one of the most interesting things is how little he talks about the clues he is gathering in some of the episodes. There can also be stretches of up to 2 minutes of no talking, just watching a criminal set up a crime or Columbo look for clues and be confused.

I think that this would do poorly now, with many people multi-tasking a lot on their computers or phones. Even missing 30 seconds of video from Columbo can ruin the whole episode.

Are the shows now being very verbal compared to the past?

If I had a choice to watch a Columbo style show or a hyper verbal show like Sherlock, I would pick the former every time.

No, it's made for a juvenile, hyperactive crowd. Watch any of those old shows and movies and you'll notice it's not just less verbal, but the scenes themselves don't change nearly as much. Having the scenes change makes for a more stimulating and exciting experience, or so they say. Watch any show or movie now, and it's rare to go for more than a few seconds without the scene changing somehow.

Can you expand on that? I was under the impression this was the case to save money and reduce the required production costs of having so many sets or sites to set up.

 

[hurtinbuckaroo]

So, I have been watching episodes of the old TV show Columbo. It is a decent show and one of the most interesting things is how little he talks about the clues he is gathering in some of the episodes. There can also be stretches of up to 2 minutes of no talking, just watching a criminal set up a crime or Columbo look for clues and be confused.

I think that this would do poorly now, with many people multi-tasking a lot on their computers or phones. Even missing 30 seconds of video from Columbo can ruin the whole episode.

Are the shows now being very verbal compared to the past?

If I had a choice to watch a Columbo style show or a hyper verbal show like Sherlock, I would pick the former every time.

No, it's made for a juvenile, hyperactive crowd. Watch any of those old shows and movies and you'll notice it's not just less verbal, but the scenes themselves don't change nearly as much. Having the scenes change makes for a more stimulating and exciting experience, or so they say. Watch any show or movie now, and it's rare to go for more than a few seconds without the scene changing somehow.

Are you talking about switching scenes, or switching cameras in the same scene? Switching cameras is massively overdone now.

 

[braces_for_impact]

No, it's made for a juvenile, hyperactive crowd. Watch any of those old shows and movies and you'll notice it's not just less verbal, but the scenes themselves don't change nearly as much. Having the scenes change makes for a more stimulating and exciting experience, or so they say. Watch any show or movie now, and it's rare to go for more than a few seconds without the scene changing somehow.

Can you expand on that? I was under the impression this was the case to save money and reduce the required production costs of having so many sets or sites to set up.

Well, call me cynical. That's not the only reason these cutscenes happen so much more now, one reason is the one you state above, plus some others, so it's actually a variety of reasons, probably best discussed by people that know what they're talking about on this subject, unlike myself.

Here's a couple of recent reads on the subject I've come across.

http://scienceblogs.com/cognitivedaily/2008/01/31/cuts-in-movies-and-their-impac/

https://www.wired.com/2014/09/cinema-is-evolving/

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Can you expand on that? I was under the impression this was the case to save money and reduce the required production costs of having so many sets or sites to set up.

Well, call me cynical. That's not the only reason these cutscenes happen so much more now, one reason is the one you state above, plus some others, so it's actually a variety of reasons, probably best discussed by people that know what they're talking about on this subject, unlike myself.

Here's a couple of recent reads on the subject I've come across.

http://scienceblogs.com/cognitivedaily/2008/01/31/cuts-in-movies-and-their-impac/

https://www.wired.com/2014/09/cinema-is-evolving/

Jebus braces! You cite an article about cutting films that uses as their main source a man with the last name of Cutting?!?! Seriously?! How in the heck can anyone read that article and keep anything straight?

Interesting. Based on all of this, it sounds like technology is the reason for shorter cuts. It is more possible. Generally, longer cuts require people to hit all their lines (something I found cool with All in the Family with long flowing scenes). When shooting films this is a risk. But I don't think the shorter cuts are a result of trying to keep people's interests, that would be mindless plots (see latest Star Trek plots). Though I would be interested to see the average length of cuts or scenes in Wrath of Khan v The Undiscovered Country v Beyond Comprehension.

 

[braces_for_impact]

Well, call me cynical. That's not the only reason these cutscenes happen so much more now, one reason is the one you state above, plus some others, so it's actually a variety of reasons, probably best discussed by people that know what they're talking about on this subject, unlike myself.

Here's a couple of recent reads on the subject I've come across.

http://scienceblogs.com/cognitivedaily/2008/01/31/cuts-in-movies-and-their-impac/

https://www.wired.com/2014/09/cinema-is-evolving/

Jebus braces! You cite an article about cutting films that uses as their main source a man with the last name of Cutting?!?! Seriously?! How in the heck can anyone read that article and keep anything straight?

Hee hee. I wondered if anyone would catch that.

 

[Underseer]

So, I have been watching episodes of the old TV show Columbo. It is a decent show and one of the most interesting things is how little he talks about the clues he is gathering in some of the episodes. There can also be stretches of up to 2 minutes of no talking, just watching a criminal set up a crime or Columbo look for clues and be confused.

I think that this would do poorly now, with many people multi-tasking a lot on their computers or phones. Even missing 30 seconds of video from Columbo can ruin the whole episode.

Are the shows now being very verbal compared to the past?

If I had a choice to watch a Columbo style show or a hyper verbal show like Sherlock, I would pick the former every time.

Those old TV shows were made for people with your superior white genes. Modern TV shows are made so that dirty brown people can watch, so the speed have to be dumbed down. Make America great again! Yee haw!

PS -- if you complain about what I just said, you are committing White Genocide and are just like the Nazis!!!!!!

 

[credoconsolans]

Can you expand on that? I was under the impression this was the case to save money and reduce the required production costs of having so many sets or sites to set up.

Well, call me cynical. That's not the only reason these cutscenes happen so much more now, one reason is the one you state above, plus some others, so it's actually a variety of reasons, probably best discussed by people that know what they're talking about on this subject, unlike myself.

Here's a couple of recent reads on the subject I've come across.

http://scienceblogs.com/cognitivedaily/2008/01/31/cuts-in-movies-and-their-impac/

https://www.wired.com/2014/09/cinema-is-evolving/

I've read the same thing, but years ago. Movies/TV started doing cutting away every so many seconds like a commercial. Something about keeping the attention of the viewer. The first time I realized this was happening was with the movie Armageddon.

 

[KeepTalking]

So, I have been watching episodes of the old TV show Columbo. It is a decent show and one of the most interesting things is how little he talks about the clues he is gathering in some of the episodes. There can also be stretches of up to 2 minutes of no talking, just watching a criminal set up a crime or Columbo look for clues and be confused.

I think that this would do poorly now, with many people multi-tasking a lot on their computers or phones. Even missing 30 seconds of video from Columbo can ruin the whole episode.

Are the shows now being very verbal compared to the past?

If I had a choice to watch a Columbo style show or a hyper verbal show like Sherlock, I would pick the former every time.

Television shows today are all over the map, you can watch any style of show you like. Back in the '70s, when Columbo first aired, you had the choice between 3 TV stations, at best. Innovation was slow because when a studio hit on a winning formula, they stuck with it, and tried to make every other new show just like it.

These days there are so many channels out there competing for eyeballs, including streaming services like Netflix and Amazon, that there is a huge variety to chose from. It is almost overwhelming. Certainly you get those lame reality shows that show the same 5 minutes of footage before and after the commercial break, with maybe 2 minutes of new material thrown in. They are attempting to present you with something compelling before the break to make you come back, but it is always just misleading bullshit that never manifests anything interesting. It's just stringing you along for 30 minutes to an hour, and for some reason people keep coming back for it week after week.

Then, on the other end of the spectrum, there are shows like Daredevil, where they take an action scene that would have had 30 cuts in a typical movie, and film it in one amazing long shot with no cuts. And there is a huge amount of variety in between. You can find whatever it is you need to scratch your particular itch, you just might have to look around a while to find it. Then when you do find it, you can often binge watch every episode in a weekend, and the experience is over much too quickly for some. You then are faced with the difference between waiting a week for the next episode to drop, or waiting a year for the next season to drop.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Well, call me cynical. That's not the only reason these cutscenes happen so much more now, one reason is the one you state above, plus some others, so it's actually a variety of reasons, probably best discussed by people that know what they're talking about on this subject, unlike myself.

Here's a couple of recent reads on the subject I've come across.

http://scienceblogs.com/cognitivedaily/2008/01/31/cuts-in-movies-and-their-impac/

https://www.wired.com/2014/09/cinema-is-evolving/

I've read the same thing, but years ago. Movies/TV started doing cutting away every so many seconds like a commercial. Something about keeping the attention of the viewer. The first time I realized this was happening was with the movie Armageddon.

I don't think that film is a good benchmark for anything, other than Bruckheimer films are shit.

 

[Jayjay]

Netflix and HBO don't have to worry about commercial breaks, so it's a bit unfair to compare them to network tv. On the other hand, there were some shows that made the breaks work for them: like Prison Break, that had a cliffhanger before every commercial.