Rod Serling was Right in 1970: Television Has Little Relevance
by Warner Todd HustonIn 1970 University of Kansas Professor James Gunn interviewed famed “Twilight Zone” creator Rod Serling and what he said about how badly the subject of race was handled on TV in his day is particularly trenchant.
Gunn, a science fiction writer in his own right having won many awards for his work, asked Mr. Serling if he felt that any current television fiction was relevant to the human condition. Rod was discouraged that it was, especially where it concerns the issue of race.
“Most television fiction that I watch has very little relevance. I think it’s one thing to say that we will now have a program called Mod Squad, say, and we will have one black man and one oriental and one Hawaiian to show this marvelous melting-pot concept. But I think, Jim, that’s altogether phony. I don’t think that’s… I think at best condescension and at worst exploitation. The fact is that we have so distorted the pure ethnic minority over the years by making every black man a banjo player, and a village idiot, and a coward, that suddenly we are going to reverse switch, he is now a brain scientist or an atomic scientist or any one of an equal distortion at the other end. Needless to say I’d much prefer the distortion on the good side of the scale… but all television fiction I find quite irrelevant and quite unrelated.”
That was a pretty dismissive view for Rod Serling to think of the medium that made him famous, but on the other hand it’s hard to argue with his logic. For all the ballyhooing about TV it has rarely been relevant to much of anything.
The interview is about 20 minutes long and is quite interesting:
Things haven’t gotten much better, have they?
The sad thing about this great bit of film history is to realize that this genius, Rod Serling, had only five more years to live after the shooting of this interview.
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
131 Comments
I'm amazed Serling didn't fall asleep from those long, rambling, nasal, monotone questions.
Rod Serling was a genius. Pity there's mostly dumbed-down trash on TV these days.
Wow I'm enjoying this. Rather sad that we lost Serling so young. He seems like an all-around swell guy, someone to be held up as an icon of how a creative person should act.
The Twilight Zone, the Ayn Rand of Sci-Fi and fantasy.
Maybe if Rod had knocked off the cigarettes he'd have avoided his heart attacks and lived a bit longer. Amazing guy, and I do love that voice! Twilight Zone was progressive in the days before 'progressive' became a slander. (ie he used female & minority actors and themes in much cooler and more equitable ways than mainstream tv did) I thnk he was strongly anti-the Vietnam War as well, and a big ACLU supporter. It would be fascinating to see what he would have done today with cable giving scifi so many more creative outlets/budgets as well has his reactions to America's current wars.
“On ‘The Twilight Zone,' I knew that I could get away with martians saying things that Republicans and Democrats couldn’t.”
Serling was a freakin' genius. How many television programs have ever come close to matching The Twilight Zone's creativity and poignancy?
If you ever get the chance, pick up the series on DVD and watch all the episodes they don't repeat every Thanksgiving. Many in Hollywood (I'm looking at you M. Night Shylaman) would NEVER had a career if it wasn't for him.
And another favorite quote by Serling: “Hollywood’s a nice place to live if you’re a grapefruit.”
"I don’t think that’s… I think at best condescension and at worst exploitation. The fact is that we have so distorted the pure ethnic minority over the years by making every black man a banjo player, and a village idiot, and a coward, that suddenly we are going to reverse switch, he is now a brain scientist or an atomic scientist or any one of an equal distortion at the other end."
I agree with this. You guys can catch "The Adventures of Merlin" on Hulu and there are some random black people thrown in the mix…nothing against this on a personal level, but I sort of wonder what was the director's intent? There weren't really black people in Dark Age Britain (which is what the series is ostensibly showing) unless you allow for a Numidian Regiment, but this was either legendary fabrication by romantic authors, or almost certainly withdrawn by the Romans as they tried to defend provinces in the continent.
Reading Stirling's answer makes sense to me. I'm not requesting there be no black people, but the way they're integrated in the story I just feel like the director is saying to me in a not so subtle fashion, "government quota, don't ask or you are racist."
If the director felt the setting could use more black people, why not play off the legend of the Numidian Regiment and have a full squadron of fully armed black people, and so it makes sense? Is making a show that has armed black people look fearsome politically incorrect these days?
Twiilight Zone Season 1 on Bluray this month. Season 2 in mid-November.
Classic shows where people really had to act and project emotion from their facial features. I would take Burgess Meredith as the teller who liked to read but had his glasses broken when he was the only survivor of the nuclear holocaust anytime over any of these new yahoos.
What writers need to write and producers need to produce is the truth–then nobody will have to do that "reverse switch." The reverse switch, while well intentioned, is still a lie.
Funny that he mentioned The Mod Squad because I loved that show. Peggy Lipton was hot to me then (I was 12).
"They got busted… then they got badges." LOL!
I totally agree with you. I also hate it that when they do add a minority to a TV show, especially if it's modern, they often make sure that it has something to do with race. Like they're character is going to have to deal with something racial, or they have represent something racial.
I don't know his politics, but I appreciated that Wes Studi, a Native American, was in 2 movies where it was obvious that his race was irrelevant – that one with the fake superheroes, with Ben Stiller and he was The Sphinx and Deep Rising where he was just a merc. No references to Native American stuff. Just a person.
That's what I can appreciate – color blindness.
Rod Serling grew up in my home town of Binghamton, New York and was actually an acquaintance of my Dad's. As a youngster, I just loved the Twilight Zone: "submitted for your approval . . . " Anyway, interesting interview.
I've never been particularly bothered with Merlin having black actors since it's set in a mythical kingdom.
Rather, it's the BBC series of Robin Hood, since it's set in 12th century England, that I find amusing for casting blacks(though I should make it clear that I'm not an expert on that period). I wouldn't have a problem if the cast included the character played by Morgan Freeman in Prince of Thieves, but they put a black actor in the role of Friar Tuck instead of Matt Lucas from Little Britain who would have been perfect.
Serling was one of the multitude of marxists. In any case, I think the article here is engaging in wishful thinking. Yes, for independenty-minded people, tv is irrelevant, but it is the means by which the sheeple are taught to view the world. By election results, we can see that most people are not above the level of tv discourse.
My favorite Serling quote: “It is difficult to produce a television show that is both incisive and probing when every twelve minutes one is interrupted by twelve dancing rabbits singing about toilet paper”
I don't think it's Wes Studi, but I do know an American Indian Actor who is a Libertarian. He also said that Native Americans should be called "American Indians" because he thought Native Americans sounded incredibly politically correct.
I can't think of a single film with a black actor in it that didn't – at one point or another in that film – mention his race. He'll jump, shoot, get drunk, yell, add figures, kiss, fly a kite, laugh; in short, do everything on that screen white actors do – but unlike white actors, a black actor's race always come up. Always. Race is never out of the equation for them on screen. It can be for only a split second, as subtle as a picture on the wall, a raised eyebrow or a glance – or it can be a sledgehammer between the eyes – but, regardless, their race is always there on that screen. You never lose sight of the fact that they're a 'black' actor. Just think about it for a moment. Does Katherine Hepburn's race ever come up? ("Wow. What a great white actress!") Does Spencer Tracy's race or Laurence Olivier's or David Niven's or Bruce Willis or Robert Pattinson's race come up? Do you ever define them as a 'white' actor? No, you define them instead as a good actor or a bad one or a lousy one or talented, etc. Race just doesn't enter into the equation for white actors. But it always does with black actors. You can talk about how talented or skillful or funny or bad or whatever they are. But always, always in that definition of them is race. Unlike white actors, race is always included in the definition of a black actor. Always. That's not fair.
well you are correct, there weren't really any Blacks in Britain until the late 16th century latest and even then it was a rarity. The film Amazing Grace covers elimination of African Slavery in Britain and does a fairly good job of showing the situation in the 18th Century. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q6Cv5P9H9qU
Michael Apted is a great director no one really seems to be aware of. He might also be more right leaning (?)
I believe that's Russell Means. He started out as a radical and has evolved somewhat in his political views over the years.
"Television is a medium that is rarely well-done."
Those of us who grew up in the 50s can still remember their favorite Twilight Zone episodes. Just think — he had about 20 minutes to develop a plot.
BTW the story of the soldier in the Philippines during WW2 who had the premonitions of death was based on….his own experiences.
Man today look at most of the crap on TV – reality shows.
That is hilarious – and true. Of course someone has to pay the bills…
Yes I do remember that he was a bit radical. But Wes Studi, I'm not sure where he stands. No matter, he was in roles that just had him portray a human being. That is what we should be reaching for.
Yes I know it probably is. But I also feel that it's just more correct historically speaking rather than politically speaking. I usually interchange though.
It's… It's a COOKBOOK!!!
OK, somebody had to say it.
Just received the complete definitive collection. Has lots of great extras, like interviews and seminars led by Serling. Wonderful stuff. I'd forgotten just how intelligent and universal those stories were.
Next stop….Willoughby! Yeah, that would be nice!
Rod Serling: Symbol of the time in which one could be on the Left and still think for oneself. The Twilight Zone was truly one of the great television series of history, if not the greatest.
Considering it's a British production, it's not real surprising. They're even more PC over there than here and it doesn't help that the biggest player in TV, BBC, over there is run by the government.
I will add a couple of minor defenses for them. One, they don't play any of the black characters as specifically black. In other words, they are played as all of the other characters. If they play Guinevere as black and made that a plot line it would be more of a problem. Second, since the British make a lot of historical dramas, locking out blacks except in historical roles is really going to limit job opportunities.
All that being said, yes it feels like they are forcing it on you. Dr. Who and Torchwood are really degraded quality wise because of their need to be so PC.
Oh, man, that is my FAVORITE! I loved that one.
Serling was definitely a liberal but one of a different breed and time. His writing was pro-religion and anti-state control. Submitted for your approval: The Obsolete Man
http://www.fancast.com/tv/The-Twilight-Zone/97525...
and "The Mirror" (not a fan of Castro)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mirror_%28The_Tw...
Serling was nothing less than a genius. He didn't think the Twilight Zone made any impact on the programs developed through the time of this interview, but there is no doubt the show influenced the next generation of thoughtful fans of good TV and film. I am really grateful to have gotten the chance to see this interview. Thanks Mr. Huston!
Ernie Kovacs, I believe…
I think it's not quite fair to cite films from the Golden Age, as racial distinctions on screen reflected societal inequality (and laws) at the time. No-one was going to give a black actress the same opportunities as Kate, or Bette, or Olivia, or Ginger. Black actors were in a separate niche by the conventions of the day that thankfully we've mostly moved beyond. But in the modern age: Shawshank Redemption? Hancock? Taking of Pelham 123 (remake)? Iron Man 1 or 2? Book of Eli? Karate Kid? A-Team? Red Belt (ok, no-one saw it)? Vanessa Williams on 'Ugly Betty'? The leads in the upcoming series "Undercovers?" While there are still many roles that are defined by race (Precious and many of, say, Denzel's roles where he plays a historical person) I don't think it's quite correct to state that in EVERY role a black actor plays race is front and center. It's slow, but it's changing. (Robert Pattinson is famous for playing a character defined as (corpse) white in the immensely popular novels the movie is based on. Some things would be jarring to change) As a black person I'm aware that decades of casting has still resulted in most roles being cast based on race (casting listings are quite specific about races sought for a role–"All American" has been code for blonds for decades, just as 'urban' has become code for everyone else) but it's evolving…slowly. The unfairness of decades past has often become self-ghettoizing, but I truly feel that's slowly being shed in favor of best actor for the role. Just think! It only took about 100 years!
First, congratulations to Huston – his piece here is much better that today's entire LA Times issue –
Now to Serling – loved this, and this guy's frankness – 70's? that's forty years ago!
And now – have ever herd any of those communications dolts pontificating these days on TV abot media and crap, describing so honest this miserable affair that the "minorities" representation on TV and media is, or should be?
And now let's try to imagine what Serling would have said about dba Obama's ascension, a completely, fictional character, completely designed, maintained and improved by media, a hybrid of "When The Truman Show Meets the Manchurian Candidate" – a Potempkiniade production on any venue in your neighborhood -
He kind of reminds me of the Mad Men guy…
As a kid begging my Mom to stay up and watch the Twight Zone, I thought he was the coolest..
Did you note his eerie comment when he had difficulty with the cigarette paraphrasing :"Maybe God is telling me to stop smoking"
His writing work on Twilight Zone does not indicate a love of Marxism.
Think about how those aliens promised a liberal style utopia, and they did, but look at the price.
The most memorable one for me is the astronauts who land on a strange desolate planet – the food is running out – they fight each other and the last one remaining starts walking – finding they never left earth…
But To Serve man – that was good! (no pun intended)
That was a GREAT episode! As well as the one where the people began to look like – sorry almost spoiled that one…
We used to see him working at the Brentwood Country Mart, looking over scripts (or whatever) like a regular guy.
I have to agree. It's been eons since I've seen an episode of TTZ, but several stand out as straightforward humanitarian moral tales, as in, "If you were in this situation; how would you behave?" Typically Marxists can't deal with this, because they want to do the moralizing for the viewer. He strikes me more as a libertarian/Galt type. He had strong Judeo-Christian underpinnings, and through the new medium of television and his out-of-this-world contexts, asked us to think about things, like a Socratic teacher, pastor, rabbi or priest might.
P.S. Some examples: Leslie Nielsen (yes that one!) becoming a [spoiler], or the one about the guy who has a wager with his friend to keep silent for a year, or…
By the way, one bit of trivia about "Twilight Zone". The original announcer for it was to have been the actor Richard Egan who was noted for his deep, rich voice. Unfortunately, Egan was under contract to another studio which wouldn't release him for the series. Since this fell through at the last moment, Serling stepped in and did the announcement himself. And the rest, as they say, is history.
Dang, Egan is one of my favorite (and very underrated actors). One of those who came close to stardom but never quite made it like he deserved to. I would have loved for him to have achieved immortality this way.
The first season is coming out in a super snappy Blu-Ray version in about a week. It was shot on film, and it's been restored, so it's supposed to look pretty great.
11th Airborne. Pacific Theater.
RIP, Rod. TV sure has gotten worse. But then, you already knew that.
Carolyn-
I am not sure what you are arguing. You segued from the character on the screen to the actor in real life. And what is it that is "not fair"?
fwiw – I could probably think of any number of films where the race of the black actor is not mentioned.
Sidney Poiter in THE BEDFORD INCIDENT – a photographer
Rex Ingram in THE THIEF OF BAGHDAD – a genie
James Edwards (or his clone) in DETECTIVE STORY – a street cop
Others, too.
No. It was Fred Allen.
And the quip is a bit longer .
"Space Dust".
Waiiiittt a minute!"
You and me both, on Peggy Lipton!! Hubba Hubba!!
"THE BEDFORD INCIDENT" is a great movie IMHO, and yes the photographer's race is not referred to at all. Loved Wally Cox.
Sorry – what I didn't mean about 'fair' was that Hollywood classifies black actors by their race. And I generalized too much; I should have said the majority or most. Of course, there are exceptions but still – the gist of my complaint was that the subject of race can come up with black actors – but never with white. There's the inequality and that's not fair.
As for James Edwards? Yes, he was awesome. But I wonder if you mean "Coogan's Bluff" instead of 'Detective Story'?
I don't have a particular favorite, but "The Bewitchin Pool," is up there on the list.
Funny you mention Richard Egan, I just saw "The Hunters" with him Robert Mitchum & Robert Wagner.
Yes, I didn't explain myself well. I generalized too much in saying 'all' when there are exceptions. But still, the gist of my argument is that while the race can – to varying degrees – arise in terms of a black actor, race never comes up with a white one. It's that 'never' I'm stuck on.
And, nope, I never saw 'Red Belt' either. (Never even heard of it until you mentioned it now.) That's kind of unusual because I'm a very big fan of Ejiofor. Any actor who can do both 'Dirty Pretty Things' and 'Kinky Boots' has got talent to burn. My only complaint is I wish he'd change his name to something easier to pronounce. It sure would help his fame.
Dang! Thanks for that. Believe it or not, I haven't seen that film of his. I just now put it in my Netflix.
That's how I saw it, we returned it last Tuesday, I think. Check it out!
I'm a 51yo straight married female, and I still think Peggy Lipton's hot.
"THE BEDFORD INCIDENT" – absolutely!
One of the great Cold War thrillers along with FAIL SAFE, SEVEN DAYS IN MAY, MANCHURIAN CANDIDATE and others I cannot recall at this late time.
Curious –
Wally Cox – comedian, but gives a great straight performance in "THE BEDFORD INCIDENT".
Dom de Luise – comedian, but gives a taut performance in FAIL SAFE. His few minutes on screen as an Army Sergeant are riveting.
Positively DETECTIVE STORY – one of my fave films.
It may not be James Edwards, though. Was never sure, but he is not listed in the credits. Just a NYC street cop taking care of business. An Irish cop does get singled out, though!
You know – I still don't actually understand what you are trying to say or are saying. Let me look at this in the morning.
Rod Serling may have been the greatest tv writer of all time. Here's an excerpt from 'Requiem For A Heavyweight' 1956 starring Jack Palance (born Vladimir Ivanovich Palanuik).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZ7ND1o2OJA&NR...
"Requiem for a Heavyweight" — 90 minutes — Performed LIVE — I was six years old and I still remember it.
It has always been my understanding that Rod Serling turned to science fiction because it was the only way he could do the social commentary that was his true passion.
Also, I loathed the vain attempts at "relevancy" by television briefly touched upon in this interview which spawned an era of "tokenism" that I found absolutely insulting. I felt sorry for Clarence Williams III, I really did, and I wondered for years what ever became of him. I was so very happy when, finally, there he was in "Purple Rain."
Replying to spinalcracker-
Why that episode?
Keep in mind, the fact that many blacks and their friends complained back in the 60's that they weren't getting roles. It didn't matter if the play or film was a period piece tha did not include black characters. They asserted that skin color didn't matter.Do we apologize for the fact that the great works were written by dead white men? Could never figure that one out. There was a great deal of pressure put on every studio to use black actors, hence the need to figure out how to write in a black character in a story line that tkaes place in Great Britain or Germany.
Might be painting with too broad a brush, but I was going by an interview with him I heard on the radio.
Also, 7 days in may which indicated america had more to worry about with its own military command than from russia.
I don't know if Serling was a 'genius' or not, but his comments have kind of a faded hipster quality to them from a guy carping about the medium that paid him….very Stan Freberg like. Kind of irksome.
I grew up on T-Zones and have seen them all once twice or many more times. And is some cases, IMHO, the series has not held up well at times.
I find many of the episodes to be ungodly preachy with tracts telling me how I should live my life. Thanks, but, no.
Rule of thumb – the 'comedy' episodes are terrible. Anything with hillbillies – terrible. Most of the western themed episodes – terrible. If you see desert or cactus or tumble weed, change the channel. If you see computers, run. Awful.
One of my favorite episodes is WALKING DISTANCE with Gig Young who, in 1960, manages to walk back into the hometown of his youth in the 1930s. But even that one is a fast shuffle as Young never realizes he is back in 1935 until deep into the episode. Impossible for him to have not seen it before then.
Some of the hour long episodes are good.
Serling's other series NIGHT GALLERY had some superior episodes, some far better than the T-Zones.
Happy Labor Day to all!
Serling was right about "equal distortion at the other end" Watch any TV commercial today. The black guy is always the smart one and the white guy is an idiot.
Think I'm making that up? Watch and keep score.
fast forward fifty years…
which would you rather watch? the Twilight Zone or Two and a Half Men?
I think most of what was on TV even then was terrible. Most of it doesn't stand the test of time. Studios produced TV episodes not much different from a factory that produces toys. I think television today, thanks to cable, is much better. You have to hunt for it. Mad Men and Breaking Bad are two fine examples. Damages is another. I could go on. Theme-wise, we live in freer times.
You remind me of the uproar over Saving Private Ryan a few years ago. People were actually upset at Spielberg for not casting any black men for the Normandy invasion. He had to remind people that there were no blacks there in 1944. I mean people were really going after him and attempting to create a controversy.
I believe that there is an element of society who would rather be historically inaccurate, while maintaining a perception of equality and multiculturalism in our pop culture, than actually tell the truth.
I feel much the same way. The formula was that he'd set up a situation, usually very mysterious, and they'd be the denouement at the very end. As a child, the tone of the show creeped me out, but as I've seen them many times now on SyFy, I found the vast majority of them were just dumb. Simple entertainment that didn't try very hard. But it was the only show of its kind at the time, and we all lapped it up. There were some exceptions, and I thought that the hour-long version of the show was superior on average to the half-hour episodes. But some episodes, once you know the trick ending, are dreadfully slow. They were also so often the same plot line: for example, an otherwise inanimate object (a slot machine, an electric razor) comes to life for reasons I've now forgotten. But for the most part, it was the snappy endings. I don't really think it was that good. Serling was just the first with the most.
Actually, it's just the opposite. Television is much better these days. The Twilight Zone was trite, and doesn't stand the test of time that well. I used to love it when I was a kid, and thought it scary as hell. But I do remember a couple of episodes that went on a long time before we get to the twist ending. It was a long way to go for an ah-ha moment, that was rarely as good as the build-up. As an adult, I see that this was the template for most episodes. But in those days, you didn't have much science fiction so we clutched at any attempt.
If we could all learn to say "Schwarzenegger" without any trouble, we can certainly learn to say "Ejiofor." But my understanding is he will answer to "Chewie," so if you run into him you can try it. ;-D "Red Belt" has its flaws but it's worth tracking down.
I think Jake is right. But I have seen the full quote as: "Television–a medium. So called because it is neither rare nor well done."
Two and a half men was funny – for 2 years. But then you realize they are writing about the same thing – over and over. The Twilight Zone would hit you with something completely different – each week.
BTW – talking about why the Twilight Zone was so good and what we have is crap today – well, at least 2 reasons. First the Networks have such a smaller share of audience – making expensive productions far more difficult to justify.
Second, they have far less patience for letting the audience "discover" the show. A friend of mine had introduced me to Joss Whedon and his many shows. Well written, with plenty of twists and turns.
But other than Buffy most of them were never really given a chance. Well, I'll give you Angel. What Fox did to Firefly was borderline stupidity – not showing the pilot first to "set" the circumstances of the series, showing the first episodes out of order…
Buffy is a masterpiece IMO. But a Rod Serling today trying to do a fictional Twilight Zone wouldn't get his foot in the door.
Perhaps Whedon's work isn't analogous as I have learned to really "get into" his shows, one has to follow them from the beginning to learn of the character's origins.
Each Twilight Zone episode was independent of the others.
But a writer of Serling's caliber would find it very difficult to break in today.
And don't forget Snookie!
Wow,
Totally the opposite.
While not every episode of the Twilight Zone is awesome, or even above fair, the classic episodes hold up superbly over time, and always will. That includes several that are fatally dated by their depictions of technology.
I'd have to do a 'head count' of all the shows and I guess we would have to define which ones are the "classic episodes". Some folks think they are all classics.
"….an otherwise inanimate object (a slot machine, an electric razor) comes to life…"
Good call. I agree. And the hit and run car that begins to trail its owner by itself. These are 'one-trick' episodes.
otoh-
THE HOWLING MAN was very good and still is.
The AGNES MOOREHEAD episode where terrifying aliens from Earth land on her planet is very good.
THE ODYSSEY OF FLIGHT 33 – still good.
THE MONSTERS ARE DUE ON MAPLE STREET – still pretty good.
Lots of good ones.
Purely PC.
It is because they do not dare make the black guy the idiot.
Good point about the interview; haven't heard that one. OTOH, on "Seven Days in May" he was just the screenwriter, working off what was written in the novel. IDK how much input he had relative to the political intrigue. That's a movie that would make for an interesting treatment here at BH.
Around the time it came out, in LA we practiced duck and cover under our puny school desks: "face away from the windows, get on your knees under your desk and cover your head with your arms". The air raid sirens were tested on something like alternate Fridays at 10 AM.
I identify with it, a lot, you know getting away to a safe place and all. Looking back I don't think there is any episode of TZ that I dislike, it was/is such a great show, but that one always struck a cord with me.
TV land was always a propaganda factory , only drivel and dreck from the TV people. The internet is where the truth is currently available . LA wants its fat , doped up , drunken , illiterate slaves ( viewers ) to stay that way.
Re: Whedon–they did give "Dollhouse" 2 seasons…people just didn't watch, nor did enough people watch "Firefly," or go see the movie they put out. Sometimes quality shows just don't attract enough audience for network sponsors. I think Serling might have very good luck today–on cable. Look at Mad Men, a show critics wet themselves over yet that still draws a tiny audience. Or the Battlestar Gallactica re-do. HBO champions shows that pull ratings that would get them axed in a week on a major network. The formula has shifted a lot in 40 years (Holy crap!! 1970 was 40 years ago???). I would posit that TZ would find a niche today on syfy or FX.
I'd agree with that statement….
I never could get into Dollhouse. I did enjoy Angel and was told by my friend that Joss was given a month's notice about its cancellation, and he did some rewriting.
You are right about Mad Men and cable – it seems the good writing (what there is) is on cable and the reality shows on network TV. Perhaps – in thinking about this – episodic shows have a far tougher time of it because to be knowledgeable one has to be in at the beginning – but then, wasn't the Sopranos episodic? Deadwood? The episodic shows draw you in and keep you (if they are good) while the shows like Twilight Zone had to keep audience interest each week on completely unrelated episodes – so it seems (in writing this) that these type shows are far more difficult to do….well.
I liked Serling's comments on trying to do a good show and be interested by dancing bunnies talking about toilet paper – and still keeping audience interest!
"About a third of what I wrote for the series was crap, [in retrospect]." — Rod Serling
Personally I didn't care for Dollhouse from day 1–just an elaborate, creepy prostitution fantasy, IMHO. But while I enjoyed most of Buffy, I'm not a Whedon fanatic. (although Dr. Horrible was pretty darn great) Good point abt. episodic aspect of TZ & others.
I miss Serling's work in The Twilight Zone and Night Gallery.
First of all, I enjoy the twilight zone and night gallery as much as anyone. Although I haven't watched twilight zone since I was a kid, so I wouldn't have noticed the subtext.
I recall the kid who had magical powers and everybody had to keep being nice to him or he would 'wish' something terrible on them. I always thought that referred to stalin, but who knows.
As I said, it was some years ago and I heard sterling talking about how he put political messages into his work. I was surprised, but it gave me pause to hear that. I just kind of filed that away.
Think about today when a half hour show is only 20 minutes.
Good point on 7 days, but it is notable that we have never had a movie about russia launching nuclear war on us. We have 7 days, and dr strangelove–both of which were apparently inspired by lemay.
I am proud to say I located an official department of defense fallout shelter sign–new old stock at a surplus store–to decorate my garage. We never did the drills, that I can remember–as if covering ones head will protect against a thermonuclear blast. We did have storerooms and basements at school designated as fallout shelters.
On a similar note, I was watching conan the destroyer and noted that oliver stone was a writer on it. Fortunately he appears to have had little artistic control back then.
There were black soldiers in Normandy in '44, but most of them were stevedores and truck drivers – not paratroopers. There may have been some blacks-only combat units there, but I'm not aware of them. I don't see what the complaints were about; it wasn't the black men's fault that they were often relegated to menial jobs. And every job during that war was important.
I think the guys who really made a mark were the men who drove the 'Red Ball Express.' There was even a TV show about them back in the 70s called "Roll Out." It was supposed to be sort of a M*A*S*H clone and wasn't successful at all.
I recall a black comedian who was visiting a radio morning show. He was funny and tried to defuse the race issue with self-deprecating humor. He did note that he played 'the black' guy on some tv shows. Someone mentioned a show and asked him which character and he responded 'the black guy'.
My take was it was a mocking of tokenism. If there is only one black guy on a show, he will never have any unflattering attributes. Gotta have two black guys if one of them is bad. Special treatment is not color-blind, and it diminishes those who receive it–hence the bad art and institutional race-consciousness in movies and tv today.
Yes. There are more commercials per hour/half hour than there were in Serling's time! That's why most TV theme songs have been eliminated, to pack more commercials in.
Rod would be turning in his grave today…if he were really buried! (Sorry! Just had to channel my inner Serling, there!)
Can't avoid mentioning the masterful episode with william shatner and the thing on the wing of the plane.
And the old peasant woman killing pests with her broom which turn out to be american astronauts who landed on a planet of giants.
And wasn't there a guy who wished people would be eliminated in the world so he could just read books, and after this happens, he drops and breaks his coke-bottle lens glasses.
I think the Star Wars films were exempt form that…Billy Dee Williams and Samuel Jackson (but then, they were "aliens"). Also Billy Dee Williams in Michael Keaton's Batman, played the DA Harvey Dent without reference to race as I recall.
Your greater point is well taken, though. No one I know refers to white actors as "white actors".
I was in the third grade when "To Serve Man" first aired. I remember discussing it with my friends the next morning in the hallway at school.
Freer times does not excuse the instant descent to the lowest common denominator, or lower. It merely proves the dearth of talent and shameless nature of the television establishment. Some cable can be very good. Unfortunately, what we seem to get is, just that many more channels of regurgitated screen re-writing. Very little imagination in that industry today.
I can't believe you mentioned Buffy the Vampire Slayer as an example of good writing, but I wholeheartedly agree. Whedon had an imagination that just wouldn't quit. Like you, I had a friend turn me on to the show. He kept emphasizing to me how good it was, but the title alone just put me off, thinking it was something like that movie, which was totally forgettable. Not only that, I thought it was going to be something aimed at teens. My cable provider didn't carry the network it appeared on. Finally, FX played them in syndication, two episodes a day, which allowed me to catch up on the mythology pretty fast. And I fell in love with it, enough to buy a few seasons on DVD (with the aim to buy them all). Of course, I learned that the title was ironic and pretty much defines the show completely. And it was far, far superior to that movie.
Anyway, it's an example of terrific writing. The show was funny and weird and I love those characters and the actors, so when I want to relax, I put an episode in and sit back for a long grin. I guess the point is, there is indeed very good writing, even today. If you look at the various Law & Order series, there is actually no violence on camera. They're all intelligently written with rich dialogue (my personal favorite these days is Criminal Intent). In fact, I find the modern age the real golden age of television. I bought a few vintage series on DVD, and watching them from my current perspective is quite the eye-opener. The Wild, Wild West was played as camp, something I didn't notice as a kid. I think I tuned in because I wanted to be James West. He was just so cool and handsome. I ended up buying the entire series on DVD as the seasons were released, because it was fun to watch, but the production values were very, very low. The first season of Mission: Impossible was so bad, I opted not to buy anymore. What made it so bad was that were not playing it as camp.
I guess what I'm trying to say is, there has always been programming that ranged over the spectrum from terrible to great, back then down to today. In the end, I find the better modern shows superior to the stuff that were hits when we were kids, because competition over cable has raised the standard. The production values are higher, for one, and the writing is more daring.
It hasn't changed. It's always been like this. Good shows were always a minority. I look at stuff like I Love Lucy and I cringe at all the Lucy cuteness. Or The Beverly Hillbillies or Petticoat Junction and just about anything with a laugh track. It was all sort of funny when I was young, but unwatchable as an adult.
I remember sitting up on Saturday nights watching wrestling broadcast from some TV studio. Now they can fill arenas with it and any channel that carries it gets high ratings. TV is a market-driven medium. But the stuff that's good is very, very good, and it's out there. You just have to look for it. The junk-to-quality ratio is about the same as it was back then, and in some ways, these days, the competition provided with so many channels has encouraged higher production values. AMC is really putting out some new stuff, which seems to be raising the bar. The the premium channels (like HBO and Showtime) are producing stellar original series.
You must be logged in to post a comment.