Have The Network Brass Run Out Of Original Ideas?

[Mark Giardina]

Over the past few years the networks have tried (and failed) to resuscitate shows from the 1960s and 70s. Examples include: The Fugitive, Charlies Angels, The Bionic Woman, just to name a few.

Now I read on here that network brass are considering airing The Munsters, and Bewitched.

So what's next; The Adventures of Ozzie and Harriet.....Leave it to Beaver.....My Mother the I Phone?

It sure appears to be that the brass hats at the networks are running out of original ideas for prime time television shows.

There are exceptions however. Once upon a Time, Grimm, Dexter, Sons of Anarchy.

Looking at the track record, reviving shows from the past few decades haven't really been that successful.

Here's an idea. How about a show where a criminal gets away with his/her crime every week despite efforts by the authorities to nab this person?

 

[imhomerjay]

There are far more "exeptions" than those taken over the same time span.

Pop culture has long been an arena for the derivitive. With minor modifications, ideas are re-packaged time and time again, which is hardly new to the past few years. Sometimes it's a direct re-make, or sequel, or what have you, in which comparisons are more easily made. But the failure rate of the "non remakes"--of the "original" ideas--is just as lengthy in terms of percentages as those of the remakes.


But that doesn't make for good griping.

 

[nocomradio]

I believe that just like in most of society these days, everyone's gotten lazy. Why work too hard when you can pull up someone else's old successful idea and rework it a bit to make a buck. Coming up with original ideas takes time, talent, and often means hard work along with little credit for it in the end. That just won't do for the current crop of young creators. Starting at the top is what it seems they all want.

Reality shows are a perfect example of this too. You don't need to write a script. Just follow someone around with a camera and you have a show.

 

[KeithE4]

I believe that just like in most of society these days, everyone's gotten lazy. Why work too hard when you can pull up someone else's old successful idea and rework it a bit to make a buck. Coming up with original ideas takes time, talent, and often means hard work along with little credit for it in the end. That just won't do for the current crop of young creators. Starting at the top is what it seems they all want.

Reality shows are a perfect example of this too. You don't need to write a script. Just follow someone around with a camera and you have a show.

Movie studios have done remakes for over 100 years. The classic Wizard of Oz from 1939 was itself a remake...of a remake. The original was a one-reeler from 1910, and the Larry Semon remake (with Oliver Hardy as the Tin Man) was made in 1925. They just added color, sound, and better production quality in '39.

Do we have to go into how many versions of King Kong have been released over the years? Nothing new here, it's just that it's creeping over to TV now.

 

[FreddyE1977]

I think we have witnessed the same thing in many businesses, and it is caused by the
proliferation of MBA programs.

The people running these companies are looking for a quick hit to the bottom line at minimal cost.
That is basically how an MBA program teaches you to think. Old line companies who were founded
and run by craftsmen who really cared about the product are largely a relic of the past.

TV is just reflecting the thinking that has taken over industry in general.

 

[KeithE4]

I think we have witnessed the same thing in many businesses, and it is caused by the
proliferation of MBA programs.

The people running these companies are looking for a quick hit to the bottom line at minimal cost.
That is basically how an MBA program teaches you to think. Old line companies who were founded
and run by craftsmen who really cared about the product are largely a relic of the past.

TV is just reflecting the thinking that has taken over industry in general.

The "people" that own these companies are institutional investors (401Ks, pension funds, and the like) who's job is to generate cash for their clients' accounts. They own the companies, in some cases they have seats on the board, and they have the authority as owners to dictate how the companies operate. Plus, in any for-profit business, the bottom line is the bottom line. There are no exceptions to this rule.

Check the ownership stats for CBS as an example.

 

[landtuna]

I think we have witnessed the same thing in many businesses, and it is caused by the
proliferation of MBA programs.

The people running these companies are looking for a quick hit to the bottom line at minimal cost.
That is basically how an MBA program teaches you to think. Old line companies who were founded and run by craftsmen who really cared about the product are largely a relic of the past.

TV is just reflecting the thinking that has taken over industry in general.

The same was true even way back to the glory days of the first movie studios. MBA's or not every CEO of a major studio has tried to maximize revenue by taking the short route to the bottom line. They'd find actors/actresses who were hits with the public and expose them in every vehicle whether it fit or not (think of John Wayne playing Genghis Khan) looking to maximize profits.

 

[nocomradio]

I think we have witnessed the same thing in many businesses, and it is caused by the
proliferation of MBA programs.

The people running these companies are looking for a quick hit to the bottom line at minimal cost.
That is basically how an MBA program teaches you to think. Old line companies who were founded
and run by craftsmen who really cared about the product are largely a relic of the past.

TV is just reflecting the thinking that has taken over industry in general.

That is exactly what was running through my mind when I wrote my first post, but I couldn't find a way to word it so well. Thank you.

 

[landtuna]

Every once in awhile a senior manager gets some publicity and gets full of him/herself.

I once sat in an employees meeting at a Fortune 100 company when the CEO said, in all seriousness, every single employee in this company will be performance-graded on their direct contribution to our bottom line.

One problem was....there were approximately 50,000 employees world-wide. If you can figure out a way to evaluate every employee's direct contribution to a multi-billion, multi-national corporation please get back to me. I will forward it upstream to the idiot in charge. ;D

 

[FreddyE1977]

I think we have witnessed the same thing in many businesses, and it is caused by the
proliferation of MBA programs.

The people running these companies are looking for a quick hit to the bottom line at minimal cost.
That is basically how an MBA program teaches you to think. Old line companies who were founded and run by craftsmen who really cared about the product are largely a relic of the past.

TV is just reflecting the thinking that has taken over industry in general.

The same was true even way back to the glory days of the first movie studios. MBA's or not every CEO of a major studio has tried to maximize revenue by taking the short route to the bottom line. They'd find actors/actresses who were hits with the public and expose them in every vehicle whether it fit or not (think of John Wayne playing Genghis Khan) looking to maximize profits.

You are correct, of course.
My observation was directed at the executive management, not the ownership.

 

[KeithE4]

My observation was directed at the executive management, not the ownership.

Executive management takes its direction from the Board of Directors, who represent the interests of the owners - in most cases the institutional investors that own most of the stock.

If the Board says "Maximize profit at all cost so we can pass those profits directly to our investors, for their clients," then that is exactly what Management will do, or they will lose their jobs. If the board members don't say that, and that's what the owners want, then those board members will be replaced.

 

[LKellerIII]

At least doing remakes is honest. Remember all those westerns in the 50s that were primarily the same, with minor tweaks in characters? How about the detective shows of the 70s? You know, the fat detective (Cannon), the blind detective (Longstreet), the old detective (Barnaby Jones)?

I remember reading decades ago that scripts were often "re-purposed." Producers would dig up some ten year old script from M Squad, and adapt it for a "new" episode of Streets of San Francisco, for example.

 

[Seltzer]

Over the past few years the networks have tried (and failed) to resuscitate shows from the 1960s and 70s. Examples include: The Fugitive, Charlies Angels, The Bionic Woman, just to name a few.

Now I read on here that network brass are considering airing The Munsters, and Bewitched.

So what's next; The Adventures of Ozzie and Harriet.....Leave it to Beaver.....My Mother the I Phone?

It sure appears to be that the brass hats at the networks are running out of original ideas for prime time television shows.

There are exceptions however. Once upon a Time, Grimm, Dexter, Sons of Anarchy.

Looking at the track record, reviving shows from the past few decades haven't really been that successful.

Here's an idea. How about a show where a criminal gets away with his/her crime every week despite efforts by the authorities to nab this person?


[/quote

Network TV is really bad. Even most of the original ideas lack originality.

 

[ercjncpr]

I think we have witnessed the same thing in many businesses, and it is caused by the
proliferation of MBA programs.

The people running these companies are looking for a quick hit to the bottom line at minimal cost.
That is basically how an MBA program teaches you to think. Old line companies who were founded
and run by craftsmen who really cared about the product are largely a relic of the past.

TV is just reflecting the thinking that has taken over industry in general.

Especially true in a 250 channel universe, where the old time nets (CBS,NBC,ABC) have a small fraction of the audience that they once did when the "craftsmen" still ruled the roost. Today's owners are just trying to bring in what little money they can from little viewed channels.

 

[ixnay]

Here's an idea. How about a show where a criminal gets away with his/her crime every week despite efforts by the authorities to nab this person?

Reality or fictional scripted?

ixnay

 

[Markxxx]

I am a huge fan of old time radio. You only need look there to find very funny scripts, filled with jokes that were once aired but no one would ever remember. You could copy them almost verbatim and 99% of the audience would think it's original, as few people remember it.

A quick listen to "My Favorite Husband" will show you line to line copy that evolved into "I Love Lucy."

The talent exists, all one has to do is read "The Simpsons" fan fiction to see there are lots and lots of original and good ideas that are just not getting a chance to be heard. Sure there is a lot of garbage, but networks might do a lot of good to actually employ talent scouts that look around for talent. A writer starting out would work on the cheap. You don't need to only go to Harvard or Yale to find exception talent.

It exists all around you. Just no one, in the position that matters, is bothering to look for it