tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1507242165120640932.post2247475233355674482..comments2023-05-05T14:09:49.745+01:00Comments on From Oedipus to Samuel L. Jackson's Wallet: Teacher, mother, secret loverTheTelfhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10726790253029374308noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1507242165120640932.post-76706147873966010262008-04-07T16:02:00.000+01:002008-04-07T16:02:00.000+01:00Just as a quick point - I don't like the inclusion...Just as a quick point - I don't like the inclusion of the 'Best Episode' note on the Empire countdown. It means I can't really look at entries there for series I haven't seen, because OMG teh spoilz0rs.TheTelfhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10726790253029374308noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1507242165120640932.post-12982729960934406312008-04-07T15:04:00.000+01:002008-04-07T15:04:00.000+01:00Thanks guys, good to see some feedback on a post I...Thanks guys, good to see some feedback on a post I read back a little after writing and felt was a bit too "ranty" in places ;-P<BR/><BR/>I'd say the list's two main failings are sheer scope as mentioned in my entry and by others, and something that I intended to mention in my post but appear to have omitted: not defining its terms. What makes a series great? Is it popularity? Amount of viewers? Highest ratings? Awards won? To me, I don't really look at those things per se. Greatness to me means evidence of high and consistent quality in the series as a whole. Therefore, if a show was written superbly but the acting was crap, it wouldn't be quite as great. Equally, if a series was of very high quality for its first three series, for example, but then the quality dipped significantly in the following three series, the series overall would not be great. The Simpsons definitely falls into this category. I have only seen seasons 1-3 of Scrubs so far, so I can't comment, but I have heard from multiple sources that that is the case with that programme too.<BR/><BR/>The other thing I would define greatness through is positive influence the series has had either culturally, socially or just on other media. That's why I'd place The Office a lot higher than it is, and another reason I'd knock The Simpsons down several places at least.<BR/><BR/>I also agree with James' point about the lack of factual series and documentaries. I'm guessing Empire decided to stick to fictional series, although with the scope they'd already set themselves I would have liked to see documentaries included. There would almost certainly be some David Attenborough in there, possibly along with some Michael Palin travel series as well.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1507242165120640932.post-68206846560893168362008-04-07T12:25:00.000+01:002008-04-07T12:25:00.000+01:00As a different comment; is this exclusively dramas...As a different comment; is this exclusively dramas and comedies?<BR/><BR/>Whilst I don't like soaps in generaly they are extremely popular and so some must have some merrits? Also, documentaries? My choices would be Attenborough and World at War, but surely there should be some? Any kids shows? Disney cartoons / Luney Tunes / Thomas the Tank engine are all obvously high quality in their own way and you don't need 3 star treks.<BR/><BR/>Anyway West Wing for the win.Jameshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14477129836862243762noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1507242165120640932.post-30166636677183602692008-04-06T23:41:00.000+01:002008-04-06T23:41:00.000+01:00Obviously the problem with this kind of list is th...Obviously the problem with this kind of list is that in order for it to be a judgement of quality (rather than popularity), every voter needs to be equally familiar with every show, something that is just not possible.<BR/><BR/>Another issue is that it's difficult to compare shows with totally different feels. Saying The Wire at 8 is slightly lower than Friends at 7 says almost nothing, given the differing audiences and content of the two shows. Really, as you say in your post, it needs to be more specific (at least breaking into comedy, drama etc.).<BR/><BR/>As a list of highly rated television shows, it seems pretty reasonable, though with some strange omissions (no M*A*S*H? no Oz? Carnivale? House??). Clearly any one person's list would be different from any other's (and I might actually do one for comparison at some point). For the moment, I'll just stick down some thoughts on what in general I would have done differently.<BR/><BR/>Firstly, I'd have included Oz and Carnivale, as well as Green Wing and House, Sealab, and possibly Robot Chicken and The Mighty Boosh. Not that all of those would ever get into a general top 50, but we're talking about my preference here.<BR/><BR/>I'd have gotten rid of all those I hadn't seen, clearly, along with Arrested Development and Spaced, both of which I have seen, but don't rate highly (I know, I know, I'm a philistine).<BR/><BR/>While it's not fair to exclude a show that hasn't 'finished' as such, I would also generally exclude those shows that have only had one season (and which haven't finished their run) on the grounds that they haven't had a chance to prove consistency. So no Dexter and no Heroes (both of which I enjoyed season 1 and have been unconvinced by season 2).<BR/><BR/>The main problem I have is with shows like The Simpsons and Scrubs. I'm not going to go off on a rant about the Simpsons, but I agree with a fair amount of what you say in the article (I'd maybe give it a bit more kudos for influence on TV, but that's an argument for another day). The Simpsons in general would probably just about make the back end of my list, but seasons 6 to 11 (or there abouts) would be near the top. Scrubs, seasons 1 to 4, would certainly be top 10, seasons 5 and onwards, not even top 50.<BR/><BR/>And my favourite? I don't know. I'll think about it and maybe do a post or another comment with some rankings.TheTelfhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10726790253029374308noreply@blogger.com