I disagree wholly.

This is a silly complaint. Mad Men? Breaking Bad? Lost? Friday Night Lights?

You don't have to like any of those shows (Lost has its many detractors, to be sure), but this has been an amazing decade for TV, and I only listed the 4 which are still on the air. Even if you look at shows which are recently off the air, you have:

Rome
Battlestar Galactica
The Sopranos
The West Wing
Deadwood
The Shield

I really have no idea what's Matt complaint is. Yes, The Wire was the best show of the decade - some show had to be. But to complain other shows don't have ambition? I don't even know what that means. That's like saying its a shame A Midsummer Night's Dream is less ambitious than War and Peace. They are just different. Maybe they don't always match up with *the blogger's* ambitions, but that's an entirely different sort of thing.

Lost is and BSG are pretty easily the most 'abmitious' sci-fi shows TV has ever made. Just because they don't involve intergalactic warfare doesn't make them small. And just because Mad Men doesn't involve telling the story of an entire city doesn't make it unambitious.

I still don't get all the love for The Wire. It's not bad per se; it just doesn't do anything for me. It might be because I just see it as another police drama. Breaking Bad and Mad Men are superior shows in my opinion.

I would like to submit Sons of Anarchy for your consideration.

DamnYankees: this has been an amazing decade for TV

Without a doubt. I would submit Monk and Psych as two formulaic comedies that actually deliver on the comedy. Those haven't been funny in just about ever.

And this is just American television. The BBC pretty consistently delivered as well. Black Books, Life on Mars, Doctor Who to name a few. There have been well-written and ambitious projects out there, this guy's just pissed his favorite show is over.

DamnYankees: But to complain other shows don't have ambition? I don't even know what that means.

I read it as the attention to detail and story with the intent on creating a quality show (not just ratings). One of the reasons The Wire didn't go for another season becasue they didn't have enough resources/research to do justice to the chosen arc to the level they had the previous 5 seasons. Not many shows have that kind of commitment.

I never have seen The Wire because I don't get HBO anymore, but I will say that between LOST and Deadwood, I've actually gotten back into weekly episodic TV this decade, something I haven't really done since Deep Space Nine went off the air.

ManRay: Not many shows have that kind of commitment.

Not on American TV, no, but in the rest of the world this isn't exactly uncommon.

DamnYankees: I disagree wholly. . .

Rome
Battlestar Galactica
The Sopranos
The West Wing
Deadwood
The Shield

I came in ready to agree with the writer but you make a great point. I highlighted the ones you mentioned that I've seen and I think you're spot on: There have been a lot of great shows but one had to be the best.

However I would argue that it's beyond "best of the decade". I can't think of a better show from the 90's. In fact, for excellent and relevant writing, you might have to leave the genre and go all the way back to "All in the Family" to compete.

I Said: However I would argue that it's beyond "best of the decade". I can't think of a better show from the 90's. In fact, for excellent and relevant writing, you might have to leave the genre and go all the way back to "All in the Family" to compete.

Well this decade has been the true golden age of TV. Very little of the previous decades would really even compete. I think if you made a list of the 10 best TV dramas of all time, something like 8 or 9 of them might come from this decade. Maybe all 10 depending on who you ask.

I disagree.

DamnYankees: I Said: However I would argue that it's beyond "best of the decade". I can't think of a better show from the 90's. In fact, for excellent and relevant writing, you might have to leave the genre and go all the way back to "All in the Family" to compete.

Well this decade has been the true golden age of TV. Very little of the previous decades would really even compete. I think if you made a list of the 10 best TV dramas of all time, something like 8 or 9 of them might come from this decade. Maybe all 10 depending on who you ask.

And yet it has also been a blight on TV. I think perhaps you should amend your statement to say this has been the golden age of cable television dramas. There have been very, very few good dramas on network television for a long time.

DamnYankees: I disagree wholly.

This is a silly complaint. Mad Men? Breaking Bad? Lost? Friday Night Lights?

Mad Men is great but there is nothing very innovative or ambitious about it. It is basically just a cool drama in a different setting.

FNL? Good show, nothing very unique or ambitious.

Lost started before The Wire, but I can see your point there maybe. Its ambitious, not in any way like The Wire, but in its own way (even though the writing got atrocious and the show knida sucks).

Breaking Bad I need to start.

Unixfreak: I disagree.

Damn right.

/Chibs is disappointed with TFA.

Hender: And yet it has also been a blight on TV. I think perhaps you should amend your statement to say this has been the golden age of cable television dramas. There have been very, very few good dramas on network television for a long time.

What blight? Please. It hasn't been a blight at all. There have been lots of good network dramas - Friday Night Lights, The West Wing, and Lost are the obvious ones. Not to mention stuff like House, CSI (which was supposedly good in its first 5-6 years or something), and SVU (same). I'm not sure what past shows you think are really that good on the networks.

Bill Frist: Mad Men is great but there is nothing very innovative or ambitious about it. It is basically just a cool drama in a different setting.

I'm not sure what "ambitious" means in this context then. You have to be ambitious towards a goal - so what goal are we talking about? I think TFA is using "ambitious" to mean "sprawling" and that's not the same thing at all.

DamnYankees: Rome
Battlestar Galactica
The Sopranos
The West Wing
Deadwood
The Shield

I really have no idea what's Matt complaint is.

Well his complaint, right or wrong, is that the CURRENT TV landscape sucks. All the shows you just listed have ended.

I think Matt is correct, there isn't much very ambitous stuff on TV these days.

However, I'm not sure I can totally back his point because when almost all the ambitious shows were linked to HBO, maybe they were destined to never make it to network TV. ANd HBO will probably get something good going again soon.

palladiate: DamnYankees: this has been an amazing decade for TV

Without a doubt. I would submit Monk and Psych as two formulaic comedies that actually deliver on the comedy. Those haven't been funny in just about ever.

And this is just American television. The BBC pretty consistently delivered as well. Black Books, Life on Mars, Doctor Who to name a few. There have been well-written and ambitious projects out there, this guy's just pissed his favorite show is over.

I'd add The IT Crowd and The Office for comedy and the BBC State of Play for drama, if we're including miniseries.

/Black Books is one of my all-time favourites

Bill Frist: Well his complaint, right or wrong, is that the CURRENT TV landscape sucks. All the shows you just listed have ended.

So the complaint is that in the 1.5 year gap between The Wire, BSG, The Sopranos, and The Shield leaving the air there's not enough good stuff? That's a pretty small window. It takes time to develop this stuff. Not every single year is going to be brilliant.

The Wire is good but the fanboy obsession with it has to stop.

Anyway, I think there are good shows out there but there aren't any that are social realist, which is what The Wire essentially was. We do need more of those shows I think. There's A LOT of rich material out there in America, considering the financial crisis, the health care disaster, rising poverty, etc. But of course the most important thing is that it tell a good story, which is what The Wire did.

Btw, what happened to David Simon's Treme project? That sounded like awesomesauce.

I Said: DamnYankees: I disagree wholly. . .

Rome
Battlestar Galactica
The Sopranos
The West Wing
Deadwood
The Shield

I came in ready to agree with the writer but you make a great point. I highlighted the ones you mentioned that I've seen and I think you're spot on: There have been a lot of great shows but one had to be the best.

However I would argue that it's beyond "best of the decade". I can't think of a better show from the 90's. In fact, for excellent and relevant writing, you might have to leave the genre and go all the way back to "All in the Family" to compete.

Oz.
It's at least on par with the Wire, and IMO even better.

DamnYankees: I disagree wholly.

This is a silly complaint. Mad Men? Breaking Bad? Lost? Friday Night Lights?

"Mad Men" is good, but not quite as clever as people think it is. The SNL sketch last year perfectly captured how quickly Don has become a parody of himself.

DamnYankees: Hender: And yet it has also been a blight on TV. I think perhaps you should amend your statement to say this has been the golden age of cable television dramas. There have been very, very few good dramas on network television for a long time.

What blight? Please. It hasn't been a blight at all. There have been lots of good network dramas - Friday Night Lights, The West Wing, and Lost are the obvious ones. Not to mention stuff like House, CSI (which was supposedly good in its first 5-6 years or something), and SVU (same). I'm not sure what past shows you think are really that good on the networks.

It's been a blight because all four of the networks have dramatically shrunk their programming of scripted dramas in favor of "reality" television. Looking at the list of the generally agreed upon best television of the decade, the vast majority of it is from cable: Deadwood, The Shield, Battlestar Galactica, Mad Men, Breaking Bad, The Wire, The Sopranos, etc.

There are certainly exceptions with The West Wing and a few others, but cable's coming into its own. This is the last decade in which we'll see "best" anything on network TV. If 30 Rock picks up and moves to cable due to low ratings, then all the Emmys will go to cable shows next year.

coco ebert: Btw, what happened to David Simon's Treme project? That sounded like awesomesauce.

In development. Supposed to start airing in 2010.

DamnYankees: Bill Frist: Mad Men is great but there is nothing very innovative or ambitious about it. It is basically just a cool drama in a different setting.

I'm not sure what "ambitious" means in this context then. You have to be ambitious towards a goal - so what goal are we talking about? I think TFA is using "ambitious" to mean "sprawling" and that's not the same thing at all.

I guess I think it is you who is using ambitious is a nonsenseical way. What does ambitious mean to you? "well made"? Mad Men is basically your normal TV show. Its unique in that its set in the 60s ad world, but basically every drama has some kind of setting spin (this one is set in a hospital! This one is set in a mortuary! this one is set in a futuristic world based on shakesepare! etc.)

Mad Men is a rad show because the writing is above par, the acting is above par and the set design and costumes are top notch. Maybe the latter is what you think is ambitious?

Begs to differ.

/haven't seen the Wire yet though
//I plan to!

Hender: It's been a blight because all four of the networks have dramatically shrunk their programming of scripted dramas in favor of "reality" television. Looking at the list of the generally agreed upon best television of the decade, the vast majority of it is from cable: Deadwood, The Shield, Battlestar Galactica, Mad Men, Breaking Bad, The Wire, The Sopranos, etc.

I agree with this, but you seem to be implying there used to be a ton of great dramas on the networks. What are you referring to. ER? Homicide? The Practice?

Bill Frist: What does ambitious mean to you?

I don't think I'd ever use that word in describing a TV show, because I really don't think it means much. I'm not the one who is using that term as a barometer for TV - the article is.

If I had to say, I think a show is "ambitious" if it tries to explore deep themes in a complex way. And I think Mad Men does that tremendously. The setting is barely relevant.

Hoboclown: /haven't seen the Wire yet though
//I plan to!

Give yourself a lot of episodes to get into it. The show doesn't start out nearly as good as it becomes (season 4 is easily the greatest drama to ever be on TV)

Bill Frist: Hoboclown: /haven't seen the Wire yet though
//I plan to!

Give yourself a lot of episodes to get into it. The show doesn't start out nearly as good as it becomes (season 4 is easily the greatest drama to ever be on TV)

Indeed. I didn't really get into it until the end of season 2. But I plowed through because of all the plaudits, and its deserved. Then when you rewatch it you realize how good it was from episode 1.

DamnYankees: If I had to say, I think a show is "ambitious" if it tries to explore deep themes in a complex way. And I think Mad Men does that tremendously. The setting is barely relevant.

Guess I don't see it doing that much more than any other decent drama. LIek I said, the quality is better for most things (costumes, acting, directing) but they are still playing the same sport, so to speak.

Treme will be farking good when it comes out. Some Wire folks are working on that. Also my favortie drummer in the whole wide world will be on that show. I think even Kermit Ruffins will be making a cameo a few times.

Also I dont get complaining that there is nothing good on TV anyway. You dont like it then turn it the fark off and go read a book or play with your dick. Sheyat there is a ton of crap to do besides watch tv and beyatch and moan. pussow!

Bill Frist: Guess I don't see it doing that much more than any other decent drama. LIek I said, the quality is better for most things (costumes, acting, directing) but they are still playing the same sport, so to speak.

I don't know what you think its equivalent to. What other period-drama is even on the air?

Unixfreak: I disagree.

I was SHOCKED by last nights episode. I thought the writers were going to wuss out on their handling of Donna's death. Great episode.

wiredmaverick: Oz.
It's at least on par with the Wire, and IMO even better.

I disagree. I liked it a lot, but it so farcical it was practically science-fiction at points. Which would be fine, if the show wasn't billed as a drama taking place in the real world.

DamnYankees: Hender: It's been a blight because all four of the networks have dramatically shrunk their programming of scripted dramas in favor of "reality" television. Looking at the list of the generally agreed upon best television of the decade, the vast majority of it is from cable: Deadwood, The Shield, Battlestar Galactica, Mad Men, Breaking Bad, The Wire, The Sopranos, etc.

I agree with this, but you seem to be implying there used to be a ton of great dramas on the networks. What are you referring to. ER? Homicide? The Practice?

Yes, yes, and yes. And Law & Order (which is a shell of hos it used to be). And The West Wing. And NYPD Blue. And The X-Files. And Northern Exposure. Hell, I'm just looking at the list of Emmy nominees from the last twenty years and those are the ones that jump out at me. It's not that there aren't dramas on network TV, there just aren't that many really good ones. I watch House, Fringe, Flash Forward, Lost and Castle, and I'm not deluding myself that any of them are the same quality as Doctor Who, or Battlestar Galactica, or X-Files, or The Wire, or Deadwood. They're solidly entertaining for me, but extremely formulaic. It's doing a disservice to them to say they're bad, but there just aren't as many good scripted shows on network television any more because there aren't that many scripted shows on network television.

DamnYankees: I don't know what you think its equivalent to. What other period-drama is even on the air?

I thought you said the period wasn't relevant? I'm saying I don't think it explores deep issues in a complex way anymore than basically any drama on TV.

I guess one might argue that it deals with issues of race and sex in unique ways throughi ts period scope, but I feel it has actually been pretty timid on that front.

Maybe this makes it sound like I'm drying for deep political critiques of culture, which I'm not. Just don't really see what Mad Men does that is unique or ambitious but hey I still think it is a good show, so maybe the point is moot.

Hender: Yes, yes, and yes. And Law & Order (which is a shell of hos it used to be). And The West Wing. And NYPD Blue. And The X-Files. And Northern Exposure.

Fair enough. But The West Wing is a show from this decade, not the 90s. (It only aired about 12 episodes in the 90s.)

I just don't think the network dramas have really collapsed (until maybe these last 2 years). You list 5-6 dramas from the 90s, and there are also 5-6 from the 2000s. I think you might see it collapse next decade, but in the 2000s they did fine.

Yeah, but how many Emmys did The Wire win? That's how I tell is something is good!

DamnYankees, It seems like Network TV hasn't found a dramatic series to run over three seasons since...uh Heroes? Maybe FNL, it's not been a ratings success but seems to have lasted. And Heroes should've been killed by the second. There's nothing in the pipeline at all this year that looks to go anywhere either. Compared to the middle of the decade when it seemed the dramatic serial was the answer to reality TV, there was so much promise. Now we've got the networks giving up on the time slot all together with NBC viewing Leno and informercials as more profitable than developed products.

Bill Frist: I thought you said the period wasn't relevant? I'm saying I don't think it explores deep issues in a complex way anymore than basically any drama on TV.

Well then I think you're nuts. I don't know what shows you think its really comparable to.

Does Band of Brothers count as a Drama? It was technically a mini-series, but if it counts it's probably the closest to The Wire then.

Literally just finished watching the last episode of The Wire last night. I watch a lot of tv shows, including a lot of the ones other people in this thread have mentioned. In my opinion, the writing for The Wire is easily better than any other tv drama I have ever watched. I Still can't believe that it never won an emmy.

/really bummed out I'm out of new Wire episodes to watch
//think I'll start the series over

I Said: Does Band of Brothers count as a Drama? It was technically a mini-series, but if it counts it's probably the closest to The Wire then.

I usually list Band of Brothers in my movies lists, its so good and cinematic. It's barely TV.

Well DamnYankees, I don't even really know what deep issues you think it has been illuminated. Almost every show deals with shiat like love, death, betrayal, sexism, racism, etc. All standard stuff. What is Mad Men doing for you?

To me, I don't think anything about the human condition or American culture or life or whatever has been illuminated for me from that show, although I do think The Wire did that.

DamnYankees: Hender: Yes, yes, and yes. And Law & Order (which is a shell of hos it used to be). And The West Wing. And NYPD Blue. And The X-Files. And Northern Exposure.

Fair enough. But The West Wing is a show from this decade, not the 90s. (It only aired about 12 episodes in the 90s.)

I just don't think the network dramas have really collapsed (until maybe these last 2 years). You list 5-6 dramas from the 90s, and there are also 5-6 from the 2000s. I think you might see it collapse next decade, but in the 2000s they did fine.

To be fair with The West Wing, real fans know that nothing came after the fourth season. Nothing! :)

It's definitely a later half of the decade thing. My implication wasn't there hasn't been anything good in the 2000's, just that the quality of the network dramas has dropped dramatically compared to cable.

Bill Frist: What is Mad Men doing for you?

Doing it incredibly well? I literally can't ask for anything more. You could say that Hamlet and Dosdoyevsky and The Wire "deals with shiat like love, death, betrayal, sexism, racism, etc. All standard stuff." I'm not sure what exactly you want out of your fiction.

Bill Frist: To me, I don't think anything about the human condition or American culture or life or whatever has been illuminated for me from that show, although I do think The Wire did that.

Well I think they both do it brilliantly, only in different worlds. I'm not sure how a character like Sal Romano or Don Draper doesn't get to you, but I guess its ok if it doesn't. It just bewilders me.

Bubblegum Tate: Literally just finished watching the last episode of The Wire last night. I watch a lot of tv shows, including a lot of the ones other people in this thread have mentioned. In my opinion, the writing for The Wire is easily better than any other tv drama I have ever watched. I Still can't believe that it never won an emmy.

/really bummed out I'm out of new Wire episodes to watch
//think I'll start the series over

I really wish it had been produced in high definition. Will just make the series look all the more dated when I rewatch in a few years. Wife's been teaching Title I and rennaissance schools since it went off the air so she'll have a whole new perspective going through season 4.

Hender: It's definitely a later half of the decade thing. My implication wasn't there hasn't been anything good in the 2000's, just that the quality of the network dramas has dropped dramatically compared to cable.

Well that's true. But I don't think its really indicative of anything. Networks are just less relevant as more and more people get cable.

Bill Frist: DamnYankees: I disagree wholly.

This is a silly complaint. Mad Men? Breaking Bad? Lost? Friday Night Lights?

Mad Men is great but there is nothing very innovative or ambitious about it. It is basically just a cool drama in a different setting.


Sorta this. I liked the first season, but the current season feels more like a soap opera. Part of the issue (IMHO) is all the sub-plots in seasons 1 and 2 are now full blow story lines.

There were more professional tensions - 60's era business vs. the prototypes of new marketing we see today and they played up the changing culture angle more (Don smoking pot!). Now it's who's-banging-who for the main story arcs.

Hender: To be fair with The West Wing, real fans know that nothing came after the fourth season. Nothing! :)

The final season is worth watching. Otherwise you are correct.

DamnYankees: Doing it incredibly well? I literally can't ask for anything more. You could say that Hamlet and Dosdoyevsky and The Wire "deals with shiat like love, death, betrayal, sexism, racism, etc. All standard stuff." I'm not sure what exactly you want out of your fiction.

I mean, this is exactly how I feel about your posts :P

Everything youv'e said is pretty vague and I feel like any fan of almost any show could plug in their name to your posts in place of Mad Men.

Granted what I've said is vague too, but I still see Mad Men as merely a higher quality drama, not a unique drama (like say The Wire, Twin Peaks, maybe BSG, etc.)