The recent launch of Strange New Worlds, a new series in the Star Trek franchise (a prequel starring Captain Pike, Spock’s captain before Kirk) had me thinking about bottle episodes vs. the current more episodic trends in television, and how those apply to church attendance. Buckle up, mofos, for a weird look into why Church keeps us going (or loses us), and how that relates to America’s favorite pandemic pasttime: binge-watching.
Strictly speaking, the actual definition of a bottle episode is more contained than how I have colloquially used the term. A bottle show is technically one in which the set of characters are all in one place together for the episode, like Seinfeld’s Chinese restaurant episode in which they wait for a table. The show is often cheaper as a result, focused on dialogue. Here’s a list of twenty well-done bottle episodes.
I have usually used this term in a different way, meaning a show in which each individual episode is contained without an arc that extends into additional episodes. Star Trek (the original series) is basically all episodes like this. Every episode is its own adventure or problem to solve, following a formulaic approach to identify and explore the problem. Star Trek Discovery is generally not like this. There might be some shorter arcs within episodes, but there are also extended arcs that span an entire season (season=series for those in the UK). The first show I recall running this way was Veronica Mars. It felt like an entirely new way to create a show. Each season contained one overarching big investigation, and within that, each episode contained smaller arcs, but also advanced the longer arc with a new important clue, suspect, red herring, or additional evidence. I can only think of one Veronica Mars episode that was truly a bottle show (by my definition): Drinking the Kool-Aid. It’s possible they tacked something onto the end to make it attach to the longer arc, but if so, it wasn’t really woven into the episode. Episodes like that one don’t hook you in. There’s no cliffhanger.
This type of show is sometimes done as a “filler” to complete a season. Story-telling might really only require 16 episodes, but the show is approved for 22, so there will be 6 more, even if they are subpar. The Smallville series did a lot of episodes like this, that we referred to as “Freak of the Week” episodes. Rather than advancing character development, some new person who was mutated by the Kryptonite in the meteor strike was a guest for that week’s episode (shout out to Amy Adams who devoured her way through the senior class!), went rogue, starting killing or attacking people, and Scooby and the Gang, er, Clark and his friends had to investigate and resolve the issue.
Lest we rest on our laurels and think that episodic storytelling is more advanced and better than the old one-episode story method, let’s take a moment to reflect on the aptly named Lost. We watched with anticipation, discussing the new mysteries weekly around the watercooler next to our colleagues. We went online to find even more clues and mysteries. Fascinating characters were introduced and killed, replaced by equally fascinating ones with more mysterious and compelling stories. Ultimately, though, a lot of these threads were just left hanging. It was kind of a cautionary tale for those writing shows with cliffhangers. There has to be a payoff. Ambiguity for its own sake ends up feeling lazy and disappointing. Humans like resolution.
Enter Netflix’s series Stranger Things. Now, obviously this show started before the pandemic, but this style of watching TV was a completely new experience. Like Lost and Veronica Mars, there was a lot going on in each episode, some resolved in the episode, and some carrying forward. Each episode had a “hook” that made you want to continue to watch, even late into the night. Netflix and other streaming platforms deliberately changed settings so that you had to opt out of the next episode, making it more likely you would continue to watch until there were no new episodes (and even then, teeing up something it thought you might want to watch, too).
It’s easy to see why we keep watching these types of shows, but I’ve been pleasantly surprised at how enjoyable a single-story arc per episode show can be. Rather than being focused on character development, a twisty-turny plot, or the “hook,” these types of stories (that I will continue to think of erroneously as “bottle shows”) can potentially dig deeper into 2-3 themes and tie them all up in an interesting thesis by show’s end. If most shows have a season that’s like a novel, these types of shows are more like short stories, strung together into an anthology.
Pivoting abruptly to Church meetings, it seems to me that in the past, they used to be more thematic than they are now (or at least in prior wards they were). Perhaps there is still some attempt to make them thematic, but there is often a break between the second hour content and the sacrament meeting talks, even if there is a theme in the talks. I suspect there are two causes for this shift: 1) local leaders’ choices, particularly the “talk about a talk” trend that is basically the worst, rehashing someone else’s ideas rather than hearing the ideas of our neighbors and friends, and 2) the curriculum which feels less deep thematically than days of yore, more focused on tortured proof-texting and literal interpretations and less on open-minded exploration of application and moral implications.
If each Sunday is a “bottle” show, they just don’t seem to be as good as they used to be, even though they are shorter (hallelujah for that!). If they are meant to be episodic, stretching over a lifetime, the arc seems to be a problem after one’s early years, once the milestones are met. Having kids helps, potentially, until those kids decide this isn’t for them, or until they leave the nest to build their own. Also, if each Church president is its own “season,” that also becomes potentially problematic when a vigorous leader makes big changes that erode the fanbase (e.g. demoting Uchtdorf seems to keep coming up in progressive discussions). Plus, favorite characters die and are replaced, sometimes by ones we like less. Such is life.
It occurs to me when I see friends who have attended other Churches and been amazed at how welcoming and wonderful they are and how high quality the sermon was that this could be so, or it could be the novelty of the experience and the natural outreach to strangers that many congregations do (certainly not all do, though). In that sense, it reminds me of the Pepsi-Coke challenge from the late 70s and early 80s in which Pepsi handily beat Coke in a blind taste test, but later it was shown that it’s because Pepsi is sweeter, and in a sip, sweetness gives the taste-test an edge. Over time, the sweetness can be cloying, resulting in a stronger preference for Coke over the long run, but for Pepsi in a sip test (YMMV). Those other congregations may have a better experience overall, better sermons, friendlier people, and more Christ-centered content with better human insights. Maybe their shows are just better written.
- Does Church experience “hook” you and make you want to watch more or to change the channel?
- How has your experience changed as characters have died and been replaced?
- Do you think church attendance works better as a “bottle show” or multi-episode story arc?
- What has been your favorite individual Sunday meeting that you can remember, and what made it so memorable?
Discuss.
Wheat & Tares 
If you’re going with a theme that compares television watching to attending church the analogy I’d draw is reruns, reruns, reruns, reruns.
Stranger Things likes to repeat the same themes but the show finds clever and entertaining ways to do it. Church is straight up watching the same episode of Leave it to Beaver again and again and again and again. If you find some way to squeeze blood from that turnip and somehow come up with a new take on the Leave it to Beaver episode, the people at the water cooler will get grumpy and tell you to stick to the same talking points. They want rerun takes on a rerun.
Talks about talks? Rerun takes on a rerun.
Sunday School questions that fish for Sunday School answers? Rerun takes on a rerun.
General conference? Rerun takes on a rerun.
Definitely not hooked and definitely don’t want to watch more! My sister and I were having a discussion this past Sunday regarding the concept of bringing a guest/visitor to sacrament meeting. Our conclusion was that this is something neither of us has ever been comfortable doing. It’s rather awkward to bring a visitor and have the topic of the day be missionary work, temple attendance, or a host of other topics that never mention the words “Jesus Christ”. It’s revealing when you think about it – you’ve sat through a meeting and thought “wow, I’m glad I didn’t bring a friend today!” Personally, those days (and they weren’t infrequent) were ones I wish I hadn’t been there either so I don’t crave more. In full disclosure, I stopped attending 3 years ago but have well over 50 years of weekly attendance to draw from.
I do like the idea of continuing a theme from sacrament meeting to the next meeting, unless the topic is missionary work…(I also think it is revealing how hard we’re pushed to sell membership). Having a learning arc and continuing to build on a topic weekly appeals, but I suspect that would be difficult given that you have a multitude of different people presenting with no coordination and vastly differing approaches. My preference would be to eliminate the second hour completely and only have sacrament meeting. I feel like that would be a good platform to build topics weekly or at least make logical segues. Perhaps a monthly theme is feasible.
I believe that church is a single camera show. Everything must be done several times with the camera shifting direction and then having to repeat the whole scene to get the different angles. Thus the reason for all the reruns and retakes. If we moved to a multi camera setup as pioneered by I Love Lucy, we could do it all in one take!
Familywomen, you would need a professional clergy to do a continuing theme that ran a month or so.
Bishop Bill,
Assigned tooics are pretty normal. Say we had a monthly theme on tithing. First speaker is assigned tithing: biblical basis. Second is assigned tithing: restorationist scripture. Third talks about how the church uses tithing for good. Fourth talks about application in our lives.
Ok that would not be my favorite topic but is the first to come to mind. Would all of these have the same quality? No. Could there be repetition and boredom? Yes. Could this be greatly mitigatedby some excellent training? Yep. If there are going to be meetings anyway, let’s have them be useful ones.
@Fred VII, you malign Leave it to Beaver by comparing it to a typical LDS church Sunday.
As for my most memorable episode, I mean Sunday meeting, a few years back the missionaries found the most amazing woman who, as a single mother, was raising her two Black teenage boys. Before being baptized she gave the most real testimony about her life and its challenges. It was so “not a rerun” that I remember it to this day.
Prepandemic after I stopped attending the LDS church, I most often ended up in the pews of the local Lutheran church. Not only was it a heck of a lot closer than my Ward, 5 minutes vs. a 20 minute drive, the sermons were so much better. I thought the novelty would wear off, but it never did. It’s amazing how much better church programming can be when done by paid clergy who felt the call to the ministry instead of bishops who were called to serve but whose heart isn’t in it
Also, I question the title of this post. Who in their right mind would Binge Church? Even if there were a “Watch next episode” feature, I can’t think of one sane member who wouldn’t hit the cancel button before the Prelude started on the next episode
Great post but what I really need to know is – is Strange New Worlds any good? Cause I loved Discovery seasons 1&2 but have not been a fan of the rest so am about to drop Paramount+ …
I’m thinking maybe Elder Uchtdorf disagreed or crossed swords with then-Elder Nelson a time or two behind closed doors in earlier years. Hence the demotion.
Or it might be more general, a matter of personality and approach. Uchtdorf is an assimilation guy. Nelson is a retrenchment guy; we’re not even “Mormons” anymore.
@Dave B., I think the Mormon=Victory for Satan was when the Russell M. Nelson presidency jumped the shark. And it wasn’t even the end of his season 1
Elisa – four episodes into Strange New Worlds, I’m loving it! Obviously ymmv but I think it’s absolutely worth a look.
In actually considering these questions (as opposed to just thinking about Veronica Mars and Star Trek …)
Absent a professional pastor (which I have enjoyed listening to), I generally like hearing people I know speak. Even if the talk isn’t super good, I can at least appreciate being in community with someone and getting to see things from their perspective better. I like it when people are honest and when they connect a gospel principle to their actual life. I also like close readings of scripture stories but it takes skill to pull that off in a talk (so
Pastors generally do it better).
This is why things like high council Sunday suck so much. I’ve heard maybe 3 good high council talks in 41 years. Listening to someone you have no community connection to and is also not necessarily a good speaker is totally pointless.
That’s also why I don’t like GC. It’s so impersonal, and in an impersonal talk it better be a really good sermon to keep my attention. Generally only Holland and Uchtdorf have managed, and Holland’s jumped the shark.
Hands down the best church meeting I’ve ever been to was an adult session of stake conference a few years ago. It was 100% about the atonement, and the speakers all shared very powerful experiences. One had lost a spouse. One had cheated in and then saved his marriage. One had caused a death in a terrible accident. One had a horrible relationship with a parent and learned to forgive. It was seriously amazing hearing these speakers talk about how the atonement had ACTUALLY helped them in seriously big life problems.
@bishopbill, since you’ve actually been a bishop and I haven’t, maybe I’m naive. But I seriously think that with some planning, sacrament meetings could be themed monthly. Also with a little bit of planning we wouldn’t have several weeks in a row of only male speakers (which is the case in my ward currently). I am sure it is hard finding speakers week after week, but most bishoprics I’ve observed closely put very little effort into planning sacrament meeting and setting speakers up for success. I’ve had one bishopric that made it a real priority and our sacrament meetings were above average as a result. (My observation came when my spouse was executive secretary hence I knew some of the inner-workings of the planning.)
I agree with commenters re how embarrassed I would be most weeks to bring an investigator. Same goes for general conference. I always curious at people who post on FB inviting their non-LDS friends to watch. I’m like – really? Like you actually think they will enjoy it?
Elisa: Like you, I loved Disco seasons 1 and 2. Then, not as much. I am absolutely LOVING Strange New Worlds. I highly recommend!
I’ve come to really value using the Revised Common Lectionary as a framework for worship services in CofC. There’s still freedom and variety for speakers and other parts of the service, but you don’t have to start at ground zero each week. The lectionary 3-year cycle covers the important parts if the OT & NT, to which CofC scriptures from D&C and BoM are included as possibilities for use. The CofC worship office assigns a theme for each week related in some way to lectionary passages, as well. Occasionally, a speaker will focus much more directly on the theme than scriptures. Of course, you get the “dud Sunday” along with an amazingly good experience. In effect it’s a mix of bottle and arc.
To continue the television theme, to me church attendance is like the medium place in the show “The Good Place.” Everyone you think you want, but worse. Your favorite beer, but it’s always warm. Pretzels, but unsalted. One song and one VHS tape only. In all respects, Church SHOULD be good. But we do it wrong, so it’s not. For starters, sacrament meeting is impossible with young kids. Our hymns and the way we engage them are bleh. Rest hymns are dumb (the name and the concept). Speakers and their topics make for a great 3-minute talk but we force everyone to stretch them into 15-minute talks. You get the picture.
I also agree with Elisa. I can muddle through when I know the speaker personally. But that’s rare now. It seems most of our meetings are given over to high council, visiting authorities, and young couples that move in and out of the ward in the same month. It makes church feel foreign to me. There are so many better things to do with my time than sit through another meeting re-hashing a talk or concept I already understand.
Finally, I wonder if God and Christ are beyond frustrated with us. For example, we seem to correlate church activity as the litmus test to being a good Mormon. But is sitting in endless meetings really what deity expects of us?
Elisa: you stated that the best meeting you’ve ever attended was an adult session of stake conference. I’m going to bet that the meeting you are referring to was indeed just for adults…18 and over. My wife and I used to love those meetings until they changed it to 12 and over and suddenly the messages got watered down to accommodate our teen and pre-teen audience.
Chadwick, the problem with the youth today is they expect to be entertained, what with their video games, crass music and hanging out in Honky-tonks. They need to learn to suck it up and sit still for a boring sacrament meetings like we did as young people. If it was good enough for us back in the day, writing in the old blue hymnal the words “under the covers” after hymn names and then snickering, it should be good enough for kids today!
I also give a hearty recommendation to Strange New Worlds. It contains enough foreshadowing of Star Trek TOS to keep most Trek fans engaged, but it’s also not inaccessible to newbies. Episodes are mostly self-contained stories, rather than continuing a complicated season-long story arc (like Discovery), which makes it easier to follow and it won’t cause too much confusion if you skip an episode or watch out of order. And while it is not short on action, SNW doesn’t have the level of gratuitous violence and darker themes that Discovery has, so I’m mostly OK with my kids watching it too.
As far as Church is concerned, it doesn’t grab my attention and keep it the way well-made streaming series do. “What a cliffhanger of a meeting! I can’t wait to find out what happens next Sunday!” said no Mormon ever. While the Church has never claimed to be entertaining, it has long overstated its insightfulness and value to members.
My current ward has a longstanding tradition of assigning all 3 sacrament speakers for each Sunday the same topic (and the same source GC talk). The intent is that each speaker provides a different perspective on the same principle, which has some upsides. In practice though, it results in a lot of dull redundancy, as most members give the same shallow book report on the original source talk, with the same wholesale quotes and not much insight. Dry Council Sundays are the worst; no, you don’t need to bring with you the “love of the Stake President” anymore. He can keep it.
@jack Hughes good to know! I want to try it with my kids in that case. I’ve tried to get them into TNG but it seems it’s a little to cheesy / bad special effects for them, even though I still love it.
Elisa: That’s the problem with sci fi in general. It often contains some of the best storytelling, so well-crafted and thoughtful, but the special effects just keep getting better. You’ve got styrofoam rocks bouncing off Spock’s head, but the actual themes and content of the show is far better than most Sunday meetings. I’ve often thought that a Gospel Doctrine class based on an episode of Star Trek would be some incredible, thought-provoking content. In a similar vein, it was a real misfire when I tried to substitute reading The Star by Arthur Clarke instead of the Nativity story one year. I stand by that decision on principle, but my kids were horrified.
Our ward uses the current Come Follow Me lesson for the talk topics. While it has worked out – mostly, I do wonder if we are overdoing it with the Come Follow Me when Seminary, classes and talks are all on the same scriptures.
Some favorite talks of mine include the RS President who started the talk with a GA quote from conference and basically read his whole talk. When she said “In the name of Jesus Christ, Amen” then said, “and I agree, in the name of Jesus Christ, Amen,,” I realized she just read an entire talk over the pulpit without adding any of her own thoughts. If it was meant to troll those who ask us to regurgitate talks, I would have been impressed. Instead, it was just how she did talks. My other favorite was a 45 minute, step by step instruction of the FamilySearch website. Thrilling!
Actually, I have shifted how I look at talks in the last few years. I often would go to church and hope to gain new insights from the speakers and when I didn’t I would be disappointed. Having a son with a learning disability and a speech disorder has helped me to see things differently. He never turned down an invitation to speak even though it terrified him. He wanted to face his challenges head on. Even though I would write his talk and he would mumble through it, he still did it. The fact that a person is willing to get up and speak in front of 100+ people is a feat unto itself. If you can comprehend what they are saying that is a plus and if yuo gain new insights, that is a blessing. Regardless, as a community of Christian believers, we can celebrate each person’s willingness to get up and speak to us as a reminder that we all are part of the body of Christ.
Since Hawkgrrrl hijacked her own OP, Sci Fi shows I’ve liked are Travelers and OA on Netflix, and Station Eleven on HBO
Chadwick: “Finally, I wonder if God and Christ are beyond frustrated with us. For example, we seem to correlate church activity as the litmus test to being a good Mormon. But is sitting in endless meetings really what deity expects of us?” Spot on!
And I’d like to add we seem to correlate CORRELATED church activity as a litmus test, resulting in a “Middle Place” church experience you referenced in your previous comment.
Joshua 24:15 (as for me and my house…) – how can we avoid weaponizing this verse of scripture?
I’m going to ask the above question in the Gospel Doctrine lesson I am teaching coming up in four days. I hope my ward can handle it…
“Buckle up, mofos”
Agree or disagree this is why I always love you Hawk.
Memorable Sunday:
A black woman spent most of her talk reading from Jane Manning James’ autobiography. She talked about what Jane’s story meant to her.
In Sunday school, the teacher invited people to tell about how they remembered hearing about the priesthood and temple ban being lifted.
It was so refreshing to have some real talk about church history!
Favorite Sunday meeting happened around 10 years ago. I was visiting a ward in SLC and the concluding speaker gave a talk about family history. She was in her mid 30s and came across as a sort of “free spirit”. She was adopted as a child and there were parts in her family tree she knew nothing about, and determined that the only way she could start to fill in the gaps was by getting help from her dead family members. So she headed up into race Canyon, found a place where she could be alone and summoned all those beyond the veil for a family council. Once they were gathered together, she explained what she was trying to accomplish and that she needed their help, to which they all agreed. She then shared some crazy experiences that seemed impossible except for divine intervention, and then concluded by sharing how the experience led to a better understanding of her now deceased alcoholic father, and was finally able to forgive him for the way he treated her.
It was the most amazing talk I have EVER heard!
@angela I agree re SciFi. When I was in college there was a whole course offered on Philosophy & Star Trek. Of course I didn’t take it because it was too early in the morning …
Come to think of it, church talks that tie in pop culture references tend to be engaging if done well. My husband once started a talk out whispering, “the snow glows white on the mountain tonight, not a footprint to be seen … a kingdom of isolation, and it looks like I’m the queen.” You could hear a pin drop. All the kids were hooked. I can’t actually remember his topic but it tied into a theme in Frozen and everyone loved it.
Elisa: There are several books based on Philosophy of [TV Show]. I own ones on Battlestar Galactica and Arrested Development. Each chapter is a deep dive into a concept, each by a different author, and they are really well done. Also, the best talk I have ever heard was about tacos. Riveting. (Unfortunately, within 2 years, they left the Church).
I just finished up the first half of Season 4 of Stranger Things, and since I usually report out on Mormon characters in media, I should mention that the Susie character (Dustin’s Utah girlfriend he met at a science camp?) brings Mormon culture front and center into the series. She’s got a million siblings who are completely wild, a huge Salt Lake City house, and a dad who takes away her computer because she has an “agnostic boyfriend.” The problem, IMO, with that portrayal is that she’s not yet 16 (I’m pretty sure), so saying that she’s “dating” Dustin is the bigger issue, not that he’s agnostic. I mean, he lives in Indiana, so it’s not like real dating, but the show makes it out like Dustin being agnostic is the problem, but I think it would be far more accurate for the dad to couch it in terms of her not yet being 16. Otherwise, though, I did think the portrayal the Mormon dad was pretty well done. He’s kind and gentle, and totally in over his head.
I don’t care if it’s serialized or bottle episodes, when the program “Church” comes on I change the channel.
I’m a Deep Space Nine fan. I much prefer novels to short stories. So I loved season one of Picard and really enjoyed season two. Prodigy is surprisingly really really good. I like all seasons of Discovery(and the showrunner for season3-5 is a BYU grad)
If you like season two of Discovery and Pike as the captain, give Strange New worlds a go. So far all the bottle episodes have been excellent. But, but…I feel a vague discontent. The episode just starts going and then it’s over, Most irritating
The whole use a General Conference talk bit really needs to go. I was asked to speak on Mother’s Day on one (and, instead, focused on the holiday).
I was trying to decide whether church is more like MASH or Bonanza. Both are “bottle episode” shows that ran for decades but took place within a couple of year period in the 1950s and 1880s(?) respectively. The time periods both work for modern Mormonism. Both shows had core characters disappear (what really happened to Adam Cartwright? Did B.J. complete his 17 year tour and go home or was his character just ersased?) to be replaced by serviceable stand-ins. A lot of changes occurred in American society during both series’ runs. However, while the writers of MASH at least attempted to address many of the issues on the minds of its viewers (ie. the horrors/futility of war, ptsd, racism, gender equality), while managing to be at least moderately funny and only little preachy, Bonanza…. well…. Bonanza featured a highly patriarchal family that introduced the occasional woman (who would show up in one episode and disappear) as either a sex object, a damsel in distress, or a frontier Yoko Ono who threatened to ruin the jovial harmony between the Cartwright boys. Non- white characters were either depicted as one dimensional villians or ridiculous stereotypes (remember the Chinese cook?, yeesh). Native Americans were depicted with the familiar Hollywood western tropes of the time. The Cartwright Boys were shamed by their brothers and censured by their dad if they ever did anything to upset the harmony and norms of the family. Questioning Ben’s authority was a big no-no. As a kid, I preferred watching Bonanza over MASH. It was neat and tidy. It seemed secure and safe. There were no messy operating tables or men in dresses (yes I know Klinger’s cross-dressing was an attempt to appear “crazy” in order to be released from the army, but it was progressive for the time). No wisecracking army doctor questioning authority. Asking questions. Not having all the answers. Allergic to BS. Now I prefer MASH. But every Sunday I’m still stuck with Bonanza.