Primeval Archers

Well, the 60th anniversary episode of The Archers seems to have received a lot of criticism.  It was certainly hard to listen to: every line seemed freighted with additional meaning - for example the comments on Tony's driving as he sped with Helen to the Hospital.

I was struck the following day, not so much by Vanessa Whitburn's gaffe - when she came on The Today Programme and gave away the fact that Nigel was dead 12 hours before the next episode made it clear - but by the way in which she claimed that the episode would have ramifications and reverberations for "the next ten years".  The Archers, it seems, can plan for the long term.  It isn't at risk (unless the current bad lot in power sell off the BBC and Murdoch doesn't like it), so they have the luxury of plotting strategically.

Now in this household, there was a challenge because that 60th anniversary clashed with the first episode in the new series of Primeval.  Which certainly seemed as though it had been cancelled a year ago, with multiple plot threads dangling.  No sense of a long-term strategy there.

Most of the family went off to watch telly, while I stayed behind with Radio 4, and joined in later.

Primeval was weird - topped and tailled by exactly the same adverts for Haven holidays as a year ago - they look even tackier now.  Haven come across as though they are part of the show, they've been there so long. 

The show retains its style of unreflecting bright lighting and thin, superficial relationships (or is it deeper and I've missed the point?).  It is incredibly sub-Doctor Who in all departments, but that is still clearly the audience it is aiming for. It must be expensive to mount, and it feels like it still only just clings on for survival, so the whole story seems a bit random, with threads picked up and dropped with no rhyme or reason.  Yet it is fun in a shallow way.  The Guardian Guide called it a "crisps and salad cream sandwiches" kind of show - which is close enough.

Ah - I've just found out what has happened - ITV are sharing costs with Watch, a digital channel: "ITV1 will premiere the fourth series of the show in early 2011. Watch – which already airs sci fi shows Doctor Who and Torchwood – will repeat it soon after and then premiere the fifth series later the same year, followed by ITV1".  Which I suspect means it'll cost extra to see series 5?

Between the long-term plotting of soaps like The Archers and a series at risk like Primeval, is there a middle ground in between, and what lies there? 

Very little I suspect.  Doctor Who perhaps, and similar long-term shows.  But they do tend to be structured quite episodically to maintain a thrill factor and keep their audiences excited.  Or like The Last of the Summer Wine, nothing happens, repetitively.  Comfort keeps the audience coming back for more.

Maybe it is only after a show has been aired for 60 years or so that you get the benefits of more novelistic pace and narrative...