Ruining TV's Dead Zone?
 

An article in the new TV GUIDE claims that co-creator Michael Piller was forced to de-serialize the series so that the new episodes will now be stand-alone shows. This not only means the death of any furthering of a relationship between Johnny and Sarah and/or Johnny and Dana, but it also means no long-term story involving Greg Stillson (Sean Patrick Flanery).

I think this is the WORSE possible thing that can happen to the show. My whole attraction to the program was because it was a continuing story. I really don't see why they can't do BOTH (have stand alone shows and shows that advance the overall storyline). The TV GUIDE article claims that they didn't want the show to turn into another X-FILES...but hey, X-FILES ran for what, 8 or 9 seasons, and was one of the most popular science fiction programs of all time? Yeah...we wouldn't want that happening, would we!

Am I the only DEAD ZONE fan upset about this?

I love The Dead Zone - but actually prefer the standalone shows, such as the episode on the ill-fated 747. I'm not able to watch the show on a regular basis though, so that's probably why I'm not really into the whole story arc...

I also got sick of the X-files after the first couple of seasons for the same reason... uh-oh... looks like THE DUMBENING is catering towards ME, the casual TV viewer :D

I'd rather have quality than longevity. Whether this move is a sound one remains to be seen, but if their goal is to avoid the crap that <I>The X-Files</I> became instead of simply dumbing down the show to add casual viewers, I can support that. Who knows what the real motivations are for this decision, but <I>The X-Files</I> has become the prime example of how to ruin a good arc. I seriously doubt they'll just drop the Stilson storyline, and I can't imagine they're also going to just ignore the building relationships between the characters, but having not read the article I cannot speak to that. The overall arc is enjoyable, but it's not stellar, and they've done some very good stand-alone episodes. If this move is to simply focus more on stand-alones and less on long-term development, I'll give it the benefit of the doubt and wait to see what happens before condemning it.

das

Well said...

I'd also add that even shows like "Friends" have a little bit of continuity. Stand alone doesn't necessarily mean the characters never go beyond their stock relationships.

And I have enjoyed the stand-alones more anyway (with the exception of the finales.)

I've had this little discussion/debate with Michael. He does feel that The Next Generation worked so well because of the fact that it was all stand alone episodes. He does like the idea of some kind of arc, but is worried that viewers would be lost to a continuing storyline. I can't say I blame him. TNG was more popular than Deep Space Nine.

I thought that TV Guide article was refering to the 6 episodes for the Mini-Summer season.

When Season 3 starts up in early 2004, the storyline continues.

My thoughts exactly. I have the TV Guide and the way I read it is that Piller won the debate on the Osama "The Hunt" epsiode in turn for making the Season 2 extension a series of mini movies. I don't feel that upcoming seasons will continue to be like this. It's probably too expensive to do every year for around 20 episodes.

The problem with X-Files is they wanted it both ways... they would have a Conspriacy episode, then three stand alones, then another Conspiracy and so on. I actually ended up preferring the stand alones because the storyline was too convuluted to remember after three weeks, worse if they were into rerun periods.

I still think Buffy (and later Angel) is the model of balancing a story arc with strong stand alone eps. Sometimes you'd watch what seemed like a stand alone episode, and then five episodes later you'd realize that episode actually contributed to the story arc after all. Hope Angel keeps this up now that Buffy is done.

I watched most of the first season of Dead Zone, but ironically it lost me when they started answering all the overall story questions too soon.

When did DZ start "answering all the overall story questions too soon" in the first season? Or are you referring to an episode in the second season?

I'm all for whatever keeps this show on the air.

It's a sad state of affairs when TV shows have to "dumb-down" their vision just to appeal to a greater audience. Although Alias was able to evolve, not every show can do so and survive.

I just hope Dead Zone is one of them.

I totally can't wait to see "The Storm" tonight. We'll see if it has been truly dumbed down.

Anyway, for those who are wondering about how true the TV Guide article is, check out this latest update on the second season extension by Exec. Prod. Lloyd Segan:

Lloyd Segan on second season extension of The Dead Zone

I think this will put people's minds at ease. See ya'all at 9pm/10pm EST.

I read on the dead zone site small teasers about each episode and it does not seem like they are going totally away from the storylines at all with dana and johnnies armaggedon visions

capt

Excellent Episode Last night. great way to start off the 6

I caught a rerun of the episode and didn't think it had been dumbed down at all. The writing's quite good. And I also noticed that the special effects are some of the best i've seen on a tv show.

who's this future man guy, though? i think i've missed something.

I've never watched the show, but the guy was on the Tom Green Show last night and he seemed like a real Douche. Just my opinion.