This isn't a review on "Kaleidoscope." The reason is the fact that the Netflix series about heists that debuted on Sunday, isn't particularly noteworthy, unless you count one trick. Another reason has to do with relate to the nature of the trick.

The episodes, that take place prior to and after a hefty attempted robbery, are offered by Netflix customers in chronological in a random order (except when it comes to the show that focuses on the actual heist, which is shown the last). Therefore, in a way I'm unable to evaluate the series in the way you would as I don't know what episode [tries to draw my factsorial knowledge from middle-school mathis one of many of possible combinations you might encounter.

That's what's interesting about "Kaleidoscope." And let's be real that at this point the show isn't that fascinating! When it was first introduced certain, the show could have been considered an experiment that was bold on the ways that technology could alter the way TV is viewed.

For exactly the same reasons "Kaleidoscope" feels like an old-fashioned throwback. It's one of a string of efforts to make use of streaming to change the space-time structure of television so that it is less linear, and in some cases , more interactive. A lot of which have garnered notice, but none which has really been able to stay.

Netflix was the platform that was the most active in these tests perhaps because it was also the one most interested in the notion that it could be an alternative to broadcast or cable networks but also to the genre as well as the business of television.

The revived in 2013 from "Arrested Development" was a sort of puzzle that was deconstructed that saw its episodes rerun in different chronological order and from various perspectives of the characters. The show's interactive game "Black Mirror: Bandersnatch" let viewers select the direction the story was taking. The same was true for"The Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt" special "Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt" special "Kimmy vs. the Reverend" The animation "Cat Burglar" added a trivia-based game aspect. Netflix was not alone in this either, with Steven Soderbergh going the choose-your-own-adventure route in the HBO series/app "Mosaic."

After all this, about a decade or more into the revolution of streaming TV looks today -and it is a bit like television. Interactive attempts have gained little more attention than Smell-o-Vision which is perhaps because we already have an extremely popular and young type of interactive entertainment, games on video. (One of them, "The Last of Us," is currently being developed by HBO as a standard television drama.)

The dominant format of TV is still the static season, where episodes are broadcast in a predetermined order. In most cases -- even when streaming, they are shown every week. The only thing viewers can choose is to decide what they want to see, when to watch it and whether or not to make their own snack bowls with pretzels or chips.

Additionally, it has transformed the aesthetics and business of television. In a piece as I wrote about in the year 2015 providing viewers with the ability to stream whenever they like has led to the creation of a narrative that is more concentrated on the seasons and not so much on the particular episode. Netflix's ethos that "the first season is the pilot" -- an evolution of the serialization approach used by networks such as HBO has led to a longer-form narrative and not just on streaming platforms.

In recent years, television shows in the last decade tend to not be able to hook viewers right from the beginning instead of letting them take in the story as if they were the sand of. Interview with Rolling Stone, Tony Gilroy as the showrunner for"Andor," the "Star Wars" prequel series "Andor" on Disney+, dismissed"the idea that you must wrap every episode with the form of a bow" and also defended the show's slow-burning start as an "investment." (Granted, it's easier to convince audiences to invest in that series in the case of selling one the most famous franchises.)

This has changed the game both for the better and worse. This has certainly added the TV's repertoire of tricks, giving creators the opportunity to make longer-form, more unidirectional films. (Among other things the streaming era was the peak of multi-hour-long limited series.) Sometimes, it creates the requirement of length, even when it's not required. Another aspect "Kaleidoscope" has in common with other streaming shows is that it has the appearance of an hour-long movie which was then repackaged and expanded into television seasons.

The TV experience In the meantime, it is less dependent on the cable box or the television schedule. A new generation of viewers are today accustomed to watching TV in the moment and at the time, and in the size that they prefer. FX was a pioneer in that High Cable Era of the early 90s, is more of a niche subplatform from Hulu in the same way as an actual cable channel. There's still a distinct distinction in between HBO (the high-end channels) as well as HBO Max (the streaming service) However, I'm not certain that anyone who isn't in the TV business cares about it much anymore.

In recent times it's been that we're at the limit of the amount of changes TV can take on and the amount of audience demand. It's clear that TV's desire is for its linear format to stay. But not always in chronological orderbecause of the flashbacks and -forwards in "Lost," TV has been overloaded with openings in media res and Vonnegutian disstickings that are time-bound. However, in most cases you move from scene to scene or episode by episode by following a narrative sequence that was crafted by the creator, not you or the roll of an automated dungeonmaster's 8-sided die.

Some critics of the build-your-own-TV experiment employ the analogy of a restaurant It's your desire for the chef to cook your meal; you don't want cook the food yourself. But that doesn't mean that you would like to eat hamburgers each evening throughout your life. With that old-fashioned structurean artist's creative mind deciding which food items you will be served, and in what order individuals are open to changing the amount of meals (episodes) or choose an experience that is family-oriented, where all the food (season) is brought to the table in one go.

The flexibility is available both ways. Since more streaming companies have been launched and some have chosen more of a like a TV schedule for release. Apple has a habit of introducing series that have a couple of episodes before releasing one each week. Disney prefers a single-at-a-time tuning-in-next week pattern for its tent-pole Marvel as well as Star Wars series. Also, Amazon was once like Netflix by dropping seasons simultaneously, adopted an a week-long program for their Mithril-plated Tolkien production, "The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power."

There's a specific kind of TV enthusiast and critics -- they're"the episodicists -- who declare these changes to be evidence that the traditional ways are the correct way. Television requires tightly-constructed individual episodes, according to this argument. Moreover, viewers wants the collective experience of being able to tune in at the same time to an identical bat-channel (or platform).

I believe something deeper is taking place It's like a decision by choice, television is collectively navigating it's way to figuring out what kind of viewing experience is best for the type of show. The writer Kathryn VanArendonk wrote in Vulture A well-crafted TV season is not just "a ten-hour movie." However, it's not the case that every show that airs in 2023 have to be planned and experienced as "Dragnet."

Some shows are benefited by the excitement of opening the latest present each week. "Game of Thrones," even though its episodes are mainly focused on one story, would not have become so popular without the daily excitement cycle.

However, FX has a show on Hulu called "The Bear," whose whole season aired simultaneously this summer, generated greater discussion and excitement than FX's other shows that air on a weekly basis. It could be that this kind of drama that is character-driven, relatively small in length, and not driven by huge plot detonationsshould be consumed in one go.

Other streaming services, with similar TV practices are resurfacing from the sheer dollar-and-cents realization that the market does not have a limit.

Netflix has moved from saving cancelled shows to dropping shows such as "1899" after a single season, much like an old-fashioned broadcaster with an irritating trigger. If you think of streaming as an endless video library, the reality is that it's becoming more limited, with shows like "Westworld" pulled from circulation to save money and a return to the days before VCRs, where a show that was cancelled simply disappeared into the memory.

At the moment, at the very least, TV and streaming seem to be forming an undefined middle that includes elements of both the future of media and its past. Talent is flowing into streaming. Director Rian Johnson ("Knives Out") is one example. The director Rian Johnson ("Knives Out"), for instance is set to launch his debut series, "Poker Face," on Peacock. However, rather than being an experimental narrative like the film "Looper," it is an investigation-based story of the week like NBC in the 1970s.

For Netflix as a company, in light of recent indications that it won't be expanding at a rapid rate for long the company has implemented something that used to be considered a scourge that is a subscription-based level that includes advertisements. Ten years ago, Netflix defined our current concept of streaming. The next stage could involve changing itself into a television.

 
http://www.dream11today.com/what-shows-like-kaleidoscope-tell-us-about-streaming-and-tv/