Post apocalypse TV takes over

We live in a time where there’s not ONE or TWO or even THREE post-apocalyptic TV series. There’s FIVE!

Falling Skies
Falling Skies

The Walking Dead (AMC)

  • Do I watch? Yep.
  • The good: When the story is paced well, the stories of TWD are amazing.
  • The bad: When the story is paced poorly, TWD can be as slow as molasses.

Revolution (NBC)

  • Do I watch? I did, but I gave up on it.
  • The good: Revolution is a fantastical version of The Walking Dead minus the zombies that’s heavy on action and light on horror.
  • The bad: Ultimately, Revolution had a lot of promise but it tried to hard to sell the central plot point of why all electrical devices stopped working. Which honestly I just didn’t find all that interesting.

Falling Skies (TNT)

  • Do I watch? Yep.
  • The good: At it’s best, Falling Skies is a dark look at last remnants of humanity trying to hold on to what’s left and fight back against an alien invasion.
  • The bad: I didn’t think the second season of Falling Skies was as good as the first. It seemed a bit lighter in tone and this might be intentional. Regardless, I still really like this show.

Defiance (SyFy)

  • Do I watch? I haven’t seen this one.
  • The good: Anytime SyFy creates original programming other than reality series is a good thing.
  • The bad: So I need to play a video game in order to fully understand the Defiance TV series? C’mon!

Under the Dome (Premiers June, CBS)

  • Will I watch? I’m planning on it.
  • The good: Based on a Stephen King novel of the same name. Need I say more?
  • The bad: CBS isn’t exactly known for critically acclaimed series. And the vibe I’m getting from Under the Dome is more Revolution than The Walking Dead.
“The climb is all there is.”

– Petyr “Littlefinger” Baelish, Game of Thrones “The Climb”

Is it time to cut the cable TV cord?

A few months back I received an e-mail from my satellite TV service. What it essentially said was that my cost for their service would be going up this year like it has almost every other year. And while they’re sorry about that, they also wanted me to know that they’re dedicated to providing me the best programming content they can.

This e-mail got me thinking; what exactly am I paying for? As I flipped randomly around the TV dial I saw that mostly it seems as if I’m paying for lots of sports channels and loads of awful reality series neither of which I really watch. In fact, I figured that last winter I might have only watched a few hours of new TV series each week.

So I wondered, could Bert Ehrmann, a bonafide TV junkie “cut the cord,” cancel my satellite service and being using legal web TV services only like Netflix, Hulu and iTunes instead?

I started by doing the math. Last year I watched around 15 non-network series from The Walking Dead to Veep to Doctor Who. While I watch other shows like How It’s Made and Wheeler Dealers, I figured I could probably live without knowing how cheese is made or how to fix a busted ’86 Plymouth Turismo.

I calculated that it if I bought these 15 shows via iTunes and subscribed to Hulu+ to watch network series and other odds and ends it would cost me around $430 per year to do so. Now, let’s assume that I’ve forgotten to include a bunch of shows on my list, so for safety’s sake let’s double that number and figure on Internet only TV costing me $860 per year.

Admittedly, that number sounds insane – $860 per year for zombies and a time traveling doctor?! But what’s absolutely insane is that this number still less than what I pay each year for the mid-level satellite programming package plus HBO! And at least if I ever went to cord-cutting route I’d only be paying for what I actually watch and most of the shows would be mine to keep afterwards.

One reason I like having a satellite TV service is that old shows I used to dig and still enjoy watching on occasion like The Twilight Zone, Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Star Trek turns up from time to time on various channels. But The Twilight Zone, Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Star Trek are all available on the Netflix instant service that I also pay for, so why watch them on some random TV channel when I can call them up online whenever I want?

Now I understand the realities of TV and that most channels aren’t designed to appeal to me. However, one would think that in the 210+ channels I get there would be something I’d be interested in watching each night of the week. But this TV season there’s been long stretches of me not watching all that much at all.

In the previous years during these dry spells of TV I used to be able to watch interesting series on channels like Discovery, TLC, Syfy and A&E. But I can’t say that I’ve watched much of these networks over the last few years as each and every one of them have turned to airing an almost constant stream of “reality” TV series. Honey Boo Boo has taken over TLC, Syfy dedicates nights to Ghost Hunters, Discovery loves it’s faux men shows like Deadliest Catch and A&E seems to have Duck Dynasty on infinite repeat.*

Now if you’re into Amish Mafia, Next Great Baker, Face Off of Storage Wars then more power to you. But I find those shows repugnant and everytime I see an ad for one of them it makes me question why TV keeps getting more and more expensive when reality shows like those flood the channels and are so cheep to produce?

Honestly, though I’m having a hard time justifying my cable bill I still don’t think I’m ready to cut the cord yet. While I probably will go to a lower/cheaper channel package in the near future, I enjoy watching movies on the service and don’t think that I’d be capable of waiting for HBO shows like Game of Thrones to eventually be released on iTunes or Blu-ray months after they air on the channel. However, if the current trends of TV continue with low-brow reality series becoming the norm and less and less interesting dramas and comedies being released cutting the cord for me could happen.

Are you listening Comcast, Dish and DirecTV? Are you listening network and cable channels? I’m your biggest fan, your online ally and if I’m considering “cutting the cord” you’ve got serious troubles in your future.

* What I find most humorous is that one of the most popular reality shows is Honey Boo Boo which received around 3 million viewers each episode. Which is great until you take into consideration that 3 million viewers is just .009% of the population of the US. That’s right, .009% now makes a hit series.

The ages of actors who have played Doctor Who over the years

The age when they started playing the Doctor to when they ended.

doctor_who_ages

Of interest:

  • Peter Davison was almost as young as Matt Smith when he started as the Doctor. And people complain of Smith’s age but not Davison’s. (Though maybe they did complain when Davison started 30 some odd years ago.)
  • The actors of the classic Doctor Who start off older, get younger before going older again. I wonder if the same will hold true for the modern Doctor Who?
  • Both Eccleston and McGann were only the Doctor for a very short time relative to the others. Though Eccleston was a much more successful incarnation of the Doctor than McGann. 😉

8/26 – Added Peter Capaldi