‘There Has to Be Meat on the Bone’ to Create Long-Running Series, Executive Producers Argue at Monte-Carlo: ‘Follow the Stories You Want to Dig Into’

The debate over what makes a long-running television series sustainable isn’t just about ratings—it’s about the fundamental art of storytelling in an era where audiences have more choices than ever. At the Monte-Carlo Television Festival, industry voices like *Vikings* creator Michael Hirst emphasized that a series must offer depth, not just longevity, suggesting that world-building isn’t a luxury but a necessity. This isn’t just about keeping viewers engaged for years; it’s about whether television can still command the kind of cultural attention that once belonged exclusively to film or literature. The pressure is on creators to craft worlds so immersive that audiences feel they’re entering a living, breathing ecosystem rather than just tuning into another episodic narrative. The challenge is compounded by the fragmentation of the modern media landscape. With streaming services prioritizing bingeable content, many shows are designed for short-term consumption, leading to a glut of disposable storytelling. Hirst’s insistence on "meat on the bone" speaks to a counter-trend: the resurgence of serialized, high-stakes drama that rewards long-term investment. Think of the recent success of *The Crown* or *The Last of Us*—series that don’t just sustain interest but deepen it over time. Yet, this approach isn’t foolproof. The risk of oversaturation looms large, as even the most meticulously constructed worlds can falter if the storytelling becomes repetitive or the characters lose their emotional resonance. What’s at stake here is the future of prestige television itself. As budgets balloon and competition intensifies, will creators double down on mythic, expansive narratives, or will they pivot toward shorter, more experimental formats? The answer may determine whether television remains a dominant cultural force or cedes ground to other forms of entertainment. One thing is clear: the days of filler-driven, network-era TV are numbered. The question now is whether the industry can deliver the kind of richness that justifies its increasingly voracious consumption.