A revelation in darkness: Unveiling the debate over modern TV's gloomy aesthetics
Imagine a world where the only light you see is that of a Guinness, with its iconic contrast of a creamy head and a deep, mysterious black body. Now, picture a TV show that embraces this darkness, but perhaps a little too much. This is the intriguing dilemma we're exploring today.
The Dark Side of TV: A Growing Trend?
From House of the Dragon to The Luminaries, and even the critically acclaimed Game of Thrones, viewers have been voicing their concerns about the excessive darkness in modern TV shows. It's a trend that has sparked debates and left many wondering if it's an artistic choice or a creative misstep.
"The Long Night" episode of Game of Thrones, for instance, became a symbol of this controversy. Viewers found themselves straining to see the action, questioning if the darkness added to the atmosphere or simply made it hard to follow. It's a valid concern, especially when considering the show's critical decline during its final season.
The Justification: Verisimilitude and Cost-Cutting
Defenders of this trend argue that darkness enhances the realism of a scene. After all, in a fantasy world without electric lighting, a battle under moonlit skies should be dark. It's an immersive experience, they say, designed to make viewers feel the claustrophobia and anxiety of the characters.
But here's where it gets controversial: is this artistic choice worth sacrificing the viewer's experience? And this is the part most people miss - it's not just about the creative vision, but also about the practicalities.
The cost of production is a significant factor. VFX teams often have limited budgets, and darkness can be a convenient way to reduce the need for expensive, photorealistic CGI. It's a strategy that works for shows like Game of Thrones, but what about smaller productions with tighter constraints?
The Challenge of Historical Epics
When it comes to historical dramas like King & Conqueror or House of Guinness, the challenge is even greater. Every detail, from costumes to props and settings, must be authentic to the period. Darkness becomes a tool to hide imperfections and create an illusion of candlelit scenes.
However, there's a fine line between artistic expression and making a show 'unwatchably dark'. Decreasing the black point too much can result in an unnatural, almost amateurish look. It's a delicate balance that producers and directors must navigate.
The Subjectivity of Art
But is it all just a matter of personal preference? After all, some of the greatest filmmakers, like Stanley Kubrick, have used low-lumen lighting to great effect. So, where do we draw the line between artistic freedom and viewer experience?
The BBC's adaptation of Jamaica Inn faced similar criticism for its inaudible dialogue, which led to a significant drop in audience. Yet, at the same time, the 'mumblecore' genre was thriving, embracing realism and natural lighting. It's a paradox that challenges our understanding of what makes a successful TV show.
The Democratic Nature of Television
Ultimately, the success of a TV show lies in its ability to engage a diverse audience. Television is a democratic medium, and realism should not come at the cost of viewer enjoyment. While we can appreciate the artistic choices made by filmmakers, we must also consider the practicalities of how TV is consumed.
With thousands of different TV sets and viewing environments, it's impossible to control the lighting conditions. Some watch on bright iPhones, others on laptops with various distractions. It's a messy, uncontrollable nature that television makers should embrace, rather than fight against.
So, let's bring a little more light into our TV shows. It's time to ensure that our viewing experience is as enjoyable as the creative vision behind these productions.
What's your take on this debate? Do you think darkness adds to the atmosphere, or is it simply an obstacle to enjoying a show? Share your thoughts in the comments below!
