Is it time US TV networks slimmed down their season orders?
Simon argues the case for shorter runs… Thats 33 weeks, over which a 22 episode season has in the past few months been dribbled out.
Whilst the first ten episodes ran on a weekly basis, since then, its been anything but.
If a show is doing particularly well, it might get the full order in one go.
Particularly on a show as technically demanding asAgents Of SHIELD.
Ad content continues below
Lostfell prey to this too.
Then it took the traditional mid-season break, which in itself isnt a problem.
But when it returned, its schedule was all over the place.
We got three episodes, then a two week break, another two episodes, then another fortnight break.
One more, then three weeks away, before we at least got a straight block of four again.
How are you supposed to follow that?
No wonder we tend to binge on boxsets.
And its a system dearly in need of a change.
Theres another reason why change is needed too.
Breaking Badis the recent poster child for this.
Thats two seasons by pretty much anyones definition.
What about the recentTrue Detective?
Off the back of that, itll be selling boxsets for years.
The problem, of course, isnt necessarily in the 22 episode approach itself.
Its in the one-size-fits-all-and-damn-the-consequences.
But US internet television in particular must surely see that the time has come for something to give.
And that it means the overall narrative, momentum and feel of a season arc is damaged?
Would each have got more seasons if they were required to deliver 22 episodes apiece a year?
Would they have the same impact?
And would they all still be making significant revenues for the companies that funded them?
