Today's WSJ has an interesting story about Fox's effort to reinvent -- and reinvigorate -- its hit series, "24".
Against the real-life backdrop of global terrorist attacks, "24" at its peak fulfilled the fantasies of an insecure nation. It became one of the most important franchises for News Corp.'s Fox Broadcasting Co., with 17 million viewers tuning in some weeks and millions returning to watch on DVD. . . .
But those who ride the tide of the times can also get upended by them. As public opinion about the Iraq War turned south, the show's depiction of torture came to be seen as glorifying the practice in the wake of real-world reports of waterboarding and other interrogation techniques used on detainees.
Ratings dropped by a third over the course of last year's sixth season. Producers would later experience trouble casting roles, once some of the most desirable in television, because the actors disapproved of the show's depiction of torture. "The fear and wish-fulfillment the show represented after 9/11 ended up boomeranging against us," says the show's head writer, Howard Gordon. "We were suddenly facing a blowback from current events."
Last spring, Fox executives asked producers to come up with a plan for what to do with their onetime crown jewel. The producers decided to take the radical -- and rarely attempted -- step of reinventing the show. While some fans complained "24" had grown too formulaic, the producers also grudgingly saw the importance of wrestling the show from its ties to an unpopular conflict.
The result: "24" is nowhere to be found on the TV schedule. For weeks the show's producers tried to reconcile the show's premise with the new public mood. Should Jack atone for his sins? Is Jack bad? The script rewrites and philosophical crises left the show so far behind schedule that when the Hollywood writers went on strike in November, Fox had no choice but to delay its premiere date. The show could premiere this summer, next fall or as late as January 2009.
Alternate, non-bad-Sociology-101-term-paper explanation:
Viewers got tired of five seasons of the same old stuff.
Reruns of 24....
Aside from reading about it on blogs, that is. Mostly as a metaphor for the difference between popular desires (which, as this shows, are fickle as always) and populist principles (for example, an argument that unpleasantness short of torture to those with quite the opposite of a claim on civil rights, which has not been practiced in years now--see Mukasey--is somehow more to be decried than those who saw off heads while smiling for the cameras, and drag into court those who note it with disapproval).
They ought to take the 24-hour format, move it to a new location, with completely new characters, and come out with a much lower-key plotline, and use the format of the show to create the drama. No more president, no more nukes, and no more Jack Bauer.
actually, they already took most of your advice. CTU is no more, the show has been re-located to Washington, and most of the old characters (except for Jack, Chloe, and Bill Buchanan) have been cashiered -- except that they are bringing Tony Almeida back from the dead as a bad guy.
Season Five demonstrated how the show should be done -- Jack was all but superfluous to the truly interesting drama tht was played out in the white House. Indeed, I've always dreamed of Aaron Sorkin writing a "24" season for "The West Wing"....
The ensuing scene, and the lack of torture or other human response, results in the russian not particularly surrendering and the child slave finding a gun to shoot the russian with and I just couldn't help thinking how in most human situations there would have been a lot more torture going on.
One, that they should start spending some time with the outside world, such that we get to see what a newspaper frontpage or newscast looks like with all that happens in the "24" world.
Secondly, to continue the series' role as Dick Cheney's fantasyland, there should be some Congressional investigations, court cases, or otherwise account for those in the "24" world who might not like what's going on. Let the secrecy leak, make it less perfect.
As for the decline in ratings, I don't think it has anything to do with the content but the quality. Every season has been worse than the previous one. The first was Avengers, the second Mission Impossible, the third The Man from UNCLE, the fourth I Spy, the fifth Charlie's Angels, and the sixth A-Team. Add to that that last season aired against Heroes, and you've got real problems.
(Actually, that's probably a good call.)
At the same time, 24 does a commendable job of not whitewashing terrorists--helping us to remember that just because people on our side occasionally cross legal and moral lines (probably less in real life than in 24--but I wouldn't bet on that), doesn't mean that the terrorists aren't evil.
24 also succeeds at another level--reminding us that not every Muslim is a terrorist or sympathizer, and that even terrorists are humans, capable of human emotions, and not just stock bad guys.
And yes, good people get put into bad situations, and get punished by the legal process. A subplot involving ACLU attorneys defending the terrorists would be useful, but I rather doubt that Fox has the courage to allow that.
It could, but then the WSJ reporter would have to 1. actually watch the show and 2. know something about the TV business. Variety or the WGA magazine would have done a much better job.