I've just started watching the DVD's, and it seems that every episode has the exact same plot (just with a different patient), even in the same beats. Do they mix it up as the show progresses, or is this all the series is?

I asked the exact same question when I started watching. Yes 95% of the episodes have the same beat but it's how they get to the conclusion that interesting and the interplay between House and his staff and between House and Wilson and House and Cuddy that makes it interesting.

Yes, I can see where you would say that... patient comes in w/ a mysterious illness.. they think they have it figured out.. and then when the patient makes that horrible turn for the worse and almost dies.. they pull the cure out of thin air and 9 times out of ten, they save the patient..... but it's really the side story that keeps my interest.
I usually have a half season stacked up before I start watching so I guess it's not one of my top 5 shows.. but it's worth watching.

Most shows, patticualy all the crime shows have the smae plot from episode to episode.

I can't wait for S3 to hit dvd. About 4 weeks I think. I was still watching S2 on dvd so I wasn't able to catch it when it aired. Yes they are mostly the same, but damn I want more House! It's so wrong you can't help but get hooked.

Yes, every show seems to follow a fairly strict formula...and as said, I couldn't care less about the medical mysteries on this show, I watch it for the character bits with the team and of course, for House himself. Hugh Laurie makes this character so damn compelling and interesting while being a total bastard, that I have to watch it every week even if the format is tiresome.

Agreed, especially CBS.

Yes, almost identical. One or two don't follow the formula, but all the others are interchangeable. You watch House to see his wild misanthropy and hilarious one-liners, not for compelling dramatic storytelling.

das

Yes, and I'm sure it's much more obvious when you are watching them on DVD one right after the other. That said, there is probably no great writing on TV, IMHO.

Here is every House script:

1) House is asshole
2) Person comes in with terrible disease
3) House is asshole
4) Person turns critical, House can't figure it out
5) House is asshole
6) House miraculously figures it out at the last second, putting his job, career, and livelihood on the line on a hunch he explains to no one else
7) People revel in House's brilliance
8) House is asshole, wishes he was dead.

Next week - repeat.

Yep! That about sums it up!

But, it's still worth watching!

Yeah, I checked it out (first season) after seeing all the critical raves. Maybe it's just because I watched the episodes one after the other, but they felt very repetitive and aside from Laurie's performance had little in the way of real entertainment. The episode "Three Stories", though, was fantastic.

Really? I personally think that the last few years have brought us the best dramatic writing in TV history. TV is finally getting the competitive accolades it deserves. Pulling in talent from the movie industry and raising the bar. Much of "what TV can be" was explored by HBO, but kudos must be given to 24 and Lost (and now Heroes) for increasing production values. Shows like The West Wing, Everwood and more recently Friday Night Lights (plus many many others) have proven that drama doesn't have to be episodic or a soap opera. It can be intelligent and honest without the melodrama. Letting us into their lives without the feeling we are being manipulated. ... much like independent film.

I may be way off base here, but I think the movie industry could learn a lot from television. Ten years ago, the reverse was true.

House is dialog driven show, the events are circumstantial. The performance elevate it from a mere formula procedural drama. All the characters are ultimately likable and multi-dimensional. You really route for House, even though he is a tool and that has to be one of the more difficult characters to create. I think Hugh Laurie makes it look easy.

Yeah, my bad....I meant...no "greater" writing on TV than House. I think it is great...

Yeah, just like CSI, Law and Order, etc; it's procedural.

The overarching stories range from great to horrendous.

As others have said, the formula writing on most shows is comical.

Every CSI is the same, like CSI Miami, Delko: "We've combed through the scene, we found nothing", Horatio: "Then go back and look again!" They then find the hidden fingerprint/hair strand/blood splatter that implicates the bad guy.

I'm also getting tired of Medium. Same plot with each dream sequence gives a little more evidence, up until final dream shows the bad guys face.

You forget House's trip to the clinic. He can't solve the mystery until treating a clinic patient with contempt allows him to stumble on a seemingly unrelated event that triggers the miraculous cure. Also, someone must say "Differential Diagnosis" in the first 10 minutes.

das

Can we rule out Lupus?

I made the mistake of marathon watching the first two seasons. I got so burnt out I didn't even want to watch the 3rd season once per week. Definitely seems the same every week.

Boston Legal has a similar problem IMO.

Josh's pseudo House script is dead on. I had delayed watching the show for so long for no real reason, and before I started watching it became a little running joke in my head to imagine the conditions/treatments House was having to deal with based solely on the tv spots. For the last 3 years, every one of them is prefaced or ended with something along the lines of "House's most ridiculous patient yet!" or "House's most radical treatment ever!". I had assumed that after this long, he must be getting an elderly albino midget in with elephantitus whose only means of treatment is to soak him in fresh baby blood to meet those statements.

I'm only finished with the first disc of season 1, but I'll probably not bother going through the whole run if it doesn't hook me a bit better somewhow.

I also can't stand any of those CSI type shows (mentioned cause someone brought them up in comparison). I tried watching a couple episodes, but they were so boring (and predictable).

At least this show has good acting, unlike most things on TV.

Is House somewhat of a rip-off of Dr. Cox from Scrubs? I've never seen House, but he seems like a very similar character. Even season five of Scrubs references the likenesses. If they are closely-related, then why does Hugh Laurie collect award after award when John C. McGinley remains completely unrecognized?

Don't forget the brainstorm session with his staff. That serves no purpose other than to come up with wrong answers for House to shoot down.

And at some point a couple of the underlings will be sent to the patient's home/workplace to investigate possible causes for the illness. Where they will stumble unknowingly upon a telling clue as to the mystery illness. But only House will pick up on it at subsequent debriefing.

100% correct, and it's no wonder I hate this show.

They bare their similarities. House has a more dramatic role than Cox does and plays the sarcastic asshole a little more grounded. Both shows have their dramatic and extremely funny moments (House is a borderline comedy in most episodes). And personally I think Hugh deserves the awards nom just for sticking with that damn american accent so well. Yes, the format is repetitive, but the writing is constantly fresh and often very humorous and interesting.