Television is uncanny in its mimicking abilities. When "Who Wants To Be a Millionaire?" became an overnight hit for NBC in 1998, networks were quick to take notice. Within a year game shows like "The Weakest Link", "Greed" and even a "21" revival attempted to emulate "Millionaire's" charm for similar ratings boosts. A few years later "Survivor" overtook the "must-see" sticker and networks again flocked to the scene and filled their schedules with inexpensive, unscripted reality-TV. Both situations seemed to work, temporarily.
In 2005, the game-show trend was revisted and updated with "Deal or No Deal". The gaming concept was slightly altered, featuring a more open, 'flashy' set, a celebrity host, and a mindless theme. (maybe the concept wasn't that different) The suitcase-opening phenomenon was a surprise smash for NBC, and networks again observed programming potential. Months later, "Show Me the Money" (similar look to "Deal" with William Shatner at the helm), "Identity", and "1 vs. 100" jumped aboard the game-show rennaisance, proving yet again television's cyclical behaviour. This time, however, the concept could have a shorter self-life.
"Deal or No Deal" concluded its second season last night, and as the show attempted to stay fresh throughout the year by offering tangible prizes in deals and surprising contestants with celebrity guest stars, the reality of the show's repetitiveness began to sink in. Luckily, Howie Mandell has performed hosting duties masterfully, and his charasmatic interaction with contestants as well as his genuine emotion over the game at hand has been critical to the show's success. Mandell, however, can only take the game show so far.
Like "Millionaire" the program follows similar patterns every night, and with new shows airing twice a week TV audiences could grow weary of the formula. The show will undoubtedly rely even more on special deals, weekly spectacles, and celebrity guests to energize the game-show, but don't be surprised if ratings begin to slip next season and NBC announces "No Deal" sooner than expected.
Monday, June 18, 2007
Wednesday, June 13, 2007
Worst.... Sitcom.... Ever
Most of the sitcoms deserving of the "worst sitcom ever" title were cancelled before their second episode so it may seem unfair to award that distinction before sifting through television's garbage bin. However, after watching only five minutes of one episode I feel no guilt in proclaiming TBS's "House of Payne" to be the worst sitcom ever. And I mean ever.
I won't go into great detail because frankly, it doesn't deserve it. The sitcom is so 'payne'-ful to watch, it is astonishing that the TBS network who claims to be "very funny" would even allow this on television. I only recommend watching this show out of curiosity, but if you are as disgusted by the outrageously terrible humour backed by an equally awful laugh-track, you won't be watching for very long.
I won't go into great detail because frankly, it doesn't deserve it. The sitcom is so 'payne'-ful to watch, it is astonishing that the TBS network who claims to be "very funny" would even allow this on television. I only recommend watching this show out of curiosity, but if you are as disgusted by the outrageously terrible humour backed by an equally awful laugh-track, you won't be watching for very long.
Friday, June 8, 2007
The Good 'Ol Hockey Game
The NHL season concluded Wednesday as the Anaheim Ducks hoisted the Stanley Cup in front of a raucous California crowd. Outside of the Honda Center, however, few people took notice.
The fifth and final game of the series attracted merely 2.88 million viewers for NBC - the smallest audience for an NHL finale in 12 years. That statistic only caps off an abysmal ratings run for the NHL that prompted commisioner Gary Bettman to downplay the importance of TV ratings in his State of the Union address last week.
Versus, the exclusive distributor for NHL games during the regular season, experienced similar playoff woes. Game 1 of the Stanley Cup Finals managed 769,000 viewers, narrowly behind the Food Network's "Build a Better Burger" at 807,000. Perhaps that is an indicator of the NHL's order-of-importance south of the Canadian border.
But should NHL fans and analysts simply blame the States for ignoring the sport? Of course not. The NHL made a crucial mistake following the lockout by cashing in quickly on Versus' (then OLN) generous two-year, $130 million offer for regular season coverage. While this pooled a few more million to all 30 teams, it hid the league in a non-traditional sports network, and lost the league considerable exposure that ESPN could have provided. Not only does ESPN reach over 20 million more households than Versus (as well as hotels and bars), but they know how to promote a league. Unfortunately, ESPN was smart enough not to offer $130 million.
The NHL's ratings troubles reached a peak for game 3 of the Cup finals when NBC recorded their lowest ratings for a prime-time program in network history. The 1.1 national rating was 31% below last year's third game showdown between Edmonton and Carolina.
So what does this say about the future for the NHL? In Canada, no sport even approaches hockey's national popularity, but in the US the sport's wanning popularity has become the only topic for discussion regarding the NHL. With recent rumours of expansion teams in Las Vegas and Kansas City it appears the league is still trying to market the game to places that just aren't that interested. Lost in the mix are Canadian fans, who have watched three different Canadian teams fall at the hands of American teams over the past three consecutive seasons. Sure Tampa Bay, Carolina, and now Anaheim have embraced their winning squad, but in these Canadian cities where fans eat, sleep, and breath hockey, it almost doesn't seem fair.
The fifth and final game of the series attracted merely 2.88 million viewers for NBC - the smallest audience for an NHL finale in 12 years. That statistic only caps off an abysmal ratings run for the NHL that prompted commisioner Gary Bettman to downplay the importance of TV ratings in his State of the Union address last week.
Versus, the exclusive distributor for NHL games during the regular season, experienced similar playoff woes. Game 1 of the Stanley Cup Finals managed 769,000 viewers, narrowly behind the Food Network's "Build a Better Burger" at 807,000. Perhaps that is an indicator of the NHL's order-of-importance south of the Canadian border.
But should NHL fans and analysts simply blame the States for ignoring the sport? Of course not. The NHL made a crucial mistake following the lockout by cashing in quickly on Versus' (then OLN) generous two-year, $130 million offer for regular season coverage. While this pooled a few more million to all 30 teams, it hid the league in a non-traditional sports network, and lost the league considerable exposure that ESPN could have provided. Not only does ESPN reach over 20 million more households than Versus (as well as hotels and bars), but they know how to promote a league. Unfortunately, ESPN was smart enough not to offer $130 million.
The NHL's ratings troubles reached a peak for game 3 of the Cup finals when NBC recorded their lowest ratings for a prime-time program in network history. The 1.1 national rating was 31% below last year's third game showdown between Edmonton and Carolina.
So what does this say about the future for the NHL? In Canada, no sport even approaches hockey's national popularity, but in the US the sport's wanning popularity has become the only topic for discussion regarding the NHL. With recent rumours of expansion teams in Las Vegas and Kansas City it appears the league is still trying to market the game to places that just aren't that interested. Lost in the mix are Canadian fans, who have watched three different Canadian teams fall at the hands of American teams over the past three consecutive seasons. Sure Tampa Bay, Carolina, and now Anaheim have embraced their winning squad, but in these Canadian cities where fans eat, sleep, and breath hockey, it almost doesn't seem fair.
Tuesday, June 5, 2007
Everybody Loves Larry
Few people have experienced the television success of Larry David. After co-creating "Seinfeld", arguably the most popular sitcom in TV history, he went on to star in the cult-classic "Curb Your Enthusiasm" for HBO. So with a combined 14 seasons between the two shows and counting, shouldn't Larry's trophy case be overflowing with Emmy's?
Before discovering the writers room, David was a standup-comedian, and while his stubborn personality and off-beat humour didn't always resonate with audiences, he was considered a 'comedian's comedian.' Perhaps that helps to explain why David, who has personally been nominated for 19 Emmy awards (12 on "Seinfeld", 7 on "Curb Your Enthusiasm") has only won twice, both for "Seinfeld" in 1993. Clearly Larry's work has been recognized, but there seems to be a stigma involved with voting for his projects after the nominations have been cast. Of those 19 nominations, 11 have come in the "Outstanding Comedy Series" where he has been shut-out for "Curb" and defeated five years in a row by "Frasier".
Maybe this legacy fits well with David's reputation as the hapless loser -- a character he has utilized in both series' to great success. Perhaps Jerry's infamous "Newman!" catchphrase originated from David himself, who after yet another Emmy defeat couldn't help but lement "Frasier!"
Before discovering the writers room, David was a standup-comedian, and while his stubborn personality and off-beat humour didn't always resonate with audiences, he was considered a 'comedian's comedian.' Perhaps that helps to explain why David, who has personally been nominated for 19 Emmy awards (12 on "Seinfeld", 7 on "Curb Your Enthusiasm") has only won twice, both for "Seinfeld" in 1993. Clearly Larry's work has been recognized, but there seems to be a stigma involved with voting for his projects after the nominations have been cast. Of those 19 nominations, 11 have come in the "Outstanding Comedy Series" where he has been shut-out for "Curb" and defeated five years in a row by "Frasier".
Maybe this legacy fits well with David's reputation as the hapless loser -- a character he has utilized in both series' to great success. Perhaps Jerry's infamous "Newman!" catchphrase originated from David himself, who after yet another Emmy defeat couldn't help but lement "Frasier!"
Friday, June 1, 2007
"30 Rock" Packs Comedic Punch
How do you decide which new TV shows to watch?
Networks would like to say it's their clever advertisements that capture viewer attention, but is that accurate? Maybe you scour the internet for information on next year's best programs, or maybe you just flip through the box and make the decision for yourself.
I've grown to accept that, as Bart revealed roughly 15 years ago, TV sucks, so when network spinners articulate why their new programming is the best of the best, I tend to tune it out. The first show that I read about before its premiere and made sure I was at a television for the series pilot was 1999's "Futurama". My anticipation was rewarded, so when I read about a cartoon tentatively titled "American Dad" from the creators of "Family Guy" in late 2003 (before the "Family Guy" revival was known) I thought I may have discovered another hit before the series hit the airwaves. Most recently, I was washed away in the "Studio 60" publicity wave that promised Sorkin's next behind-the-scenes concept would take flight for a grounded NBC. My latter two hopefuls did not pann out as hoped, so lately I've relied purely on word-of-mouth. So when NBC's one-hour drama about the 'adventures' behind an SNL set did not deliver on its promises, I was more than skeptical to try "30 Rock" (same premise but half-hour comedy) when told it was near-"Office" funny. Apparently, he was right.
After watching the first few episodes of the series I concluded my intial perception of the series was correct -- interesting to watch, funny at times, but nothing special. However, much like "The Office", after the fourth or fifth episode the show suddenly gells, and it becomes a legitamite 'laugh-out-loud', entertaining comedy. I was never a fan of Tina Fey on Weekend Update, or of "SNL" as a whole during her stint as head-writer, yet she has not dissapointed yet with "30 Rock". Tracey Morgan never seemed to click on "SNL" but he too has found a role that allows him to excel.
Alec Baldwin has embraced his part in a television comedy, and the transition from villain to just odd is likely the leading reason for the show's improvement during its first season. Much like "The Office", some of the best moments involve the secondary characters, and the series will benefit in both storylines and humour outlets from such a strong ensemble.
"30 Rock" hasn't generated significant attention, but if the second season carries on where the first left off, it certainly should. However you decide which shows to watch and which to snub, hopefully you'll give word-of-mouth a try. If I hadn't, I still may not have discovered "Arrested Development". I've also been told to give "Gray's Anatomy" a shot, but I like to think I'm just not that desperate for more TV.
Networks would like to say it's their clever advertisements that capture viewer attention, but is that accurate? Maybe you scour the internet for information on next year's best programs, or maybe you just flip through the box and make the decision for yourself.
I've grown to accept that, as Bart revealed roughly 15 years ago, TV sucks, so when network spinners articulate why their new programming is the best of the best, I tend to tune it out. The first show that I read about before its premiere and made sure I was at a television for the series pilot was 1999's "Futurama". My anticipation was rewarded, so when I read about a cartoon tentatively titled "American Dad" from the creators of "Family Guy" in late 2003 (before the "Family Guy" revival was known) I thought I may have discovered another hit before the series hit the airwaves. Most recently, I was washed away in the "Studio 60" publicity wave that promised Sorkin's next behind-the-scenes concept would take flight for a grounded NBC. My latter two hopefuls did not pann out as hoped, so lately I've relied purely on word-of-mouth. So when NBC's one-hour drama about the 'adventures' behind an SNL set did not deliver on its promises, I was more than skeptical to try "30 Rock" (same premise but half-hour comedy) when told it was near-"Office" funny. Apparently, he was right.
After watching the first few episodes of the series I concluded my intial perception of the series was correct -- interesting to watch, funny at times, but nothing special. However, much like "The Office", after the fourth or fifth episode the show suddenly gells, and it becomes a legitamite 'laugh-out-loud', entertaining comedy. I was never a fan of Tina Fey on Weekend Update, or of "SNL" as a whole during her stint as head-writer, yet she has not dissapointed yet with "30 Rock". Tracey Morgan never seemed to click on "SNL" but he too has found a role that allows him to excel.
Alec Baldwin has embraced his part in a television comedy, and the transition from villain to just odd is likely the leading reason for the show's improvement during its first season. Much like "The Office", some of the best moments involve the secondary characters, and the series will benefit in both storylines and humour outlets from such a strong ensemble.
"30 Rock" hasn't generated significant attention, but if the second season carries on where the first left off, it certainly should. However you decide which shows to watch and which to snub, hopefully you'll give word-of-mouth a try. If I hadn't, I still may not have discovered "Arrested Development". I've also been told to give "Gray's Anatomy" a shot, but I like to think I'm just not that desperate for more TV.
Thursday, May 24, 2007
There's Just No Justice
I don't follow many TV shows. That is, when most people are racing to their couch on Monday to watch "24" or on Thursday to catch the latest "Grey's Anatomy" I was comfortable watching Futurama reruns. Outside of "The Office" there wasn't one show I felt compelled to keep pace with. While this diminishes my credibility in critiquing TV, I have skimmed through much of what the small screen offers, so when presented with a few puzzling statistics, I natuarlly search for the most logical answer.
This week's mystery is the enourmous popularity of "CSI" relative to "Law and Order". Both original police dramas had two spinoffs, both franchises are considered cornerstones to their respective networks, and all six shows follow similar 'find the bad guy' episode formats. (Law and Order - NBC; CSI - CBS) So if they're so similar on the surface, what is the underlying difference that explains the ratings gap? "Law and Order" has been an NBC primetime staple for over 15 years, and combined with multiple-station syndication contracts, you've likely caught a glimpse of the series at some point. Unfortunately for NBC, fewer and fewer people decided to tune into the "Law and Order" franchise last year.
The original L&O series narrowly escaped NBC's "cancellation" stamp last week and has been ordered to significantly cut costs for the 2007-2008 season. "Law and Order: Criminal Intent" received even more cancellation buzz, and although it too escaped the axe, NBC demoted the series to sister-station USA Network.
"CSI", premiering in 2000, has become a ratings giant for CBS, with "CSI: Criminal Scene Investigation" and "CSI: New York" averaging over 20 million viewers per episode. While this should imply "CSI" is the superior drama, from the amount I have seen of each, "Law and Order" appears better written, more engaging, and with a significantly more talented acting ensemble. I recently caught a "CSI: Maimi" episode, and was bewildered by its terrible, if not laughable dialogue that made "Star Wars" love scenes appear nearly Shakespearean.
I often look for reasons to explain why seemingly inferior TV shows are well-received (How did "Yes, Dear" last six years whereas "Arrested Development" didn't even air three full seasons?") but this case has been difficult to crack. Perhaps "Law and Order" has been branded as 'stale' or 'boring', while CSI's illuminated setting has given the series a 'fresh' feel. Whatever the reason, if the ratings story doesn't turn around for "Law and Order" next year, NBC may be forced to find new programing for their vacant primetime slots.
This piece is not to mock people who enjoy "CSI", but rather do help dispell the misconception that the "Law and Order" franchise should be 'put out of its misery'. The recent cancellation speculation will not help this cause, but if you get a chance, watch a complete "Law and Order" episode, start to finish. As catchy as the original "CSI" theme is, if you give the veteran series just one hour, you may find yourself humming a different tune.
This week's mystery is the enourmous popularity of "CSI" relative to "Law and Order". Both original police dramas had two spinoffs, both franchises are considered cornerstones to their respective networks, and all six shows follow similar 'find the bad guy' episode formats. (Law and Order - NBC; CSI - CBS) So if they're so similar on the surface, what is the underlying difference that explains the ratings gap? "Law and Order" has been an NBC primetime staple for over 15 years, and combined with multiple-station syndication contracts, you've likely caught a glimpse of the series at some point. Unfortunately for NBC, fewer and fewer people decided to tune into the "Law and Order" franchise last year.
The original L&O series narrowly escaped NBC's "cancellation" stamp last week and has been ordered to significantly cut costs for the 2007-2008 season. "Law and Order: Criminal Intent" received even more cancellation buzz, and although it too escaped the axe, NBC demoted the series to sister-station USA Network.
"CSI", premiering in 2000, has become a ratings giant for CBS, with "CSI: Criminal Scene Investigation" and "CSI: New York" averaging over 20 million viewers per episode. While this should imply "CSI" is the superior drama, from the amount I have seen of each, "Law and Order" appears better written, more engaging, and with a significantly more talented acting ensemble. I recently caught a "CSI: Maimi" episode, and was bewildered by its terrible, if not laughable dialogue that made "Star Wars" love scenes appear nearly Shakespearean.
I often look for reasons to explain why seemingly inferior TV shows are well-received (How did "Yes, Dear" last six years whereas "Arrested Development" didn't even air three full seasons?") but this case has been difficult to crack. Perhaps "Law and Order" has been branded as 'stale' or 'boring', while CSI's illuminated setting has given the series a 'fresh' feel. Whatever the reason, if the ratings story doesn't turn around for "Law and Order" next year, NBC may be forced to find new programing for their vacant primetime slots.
This piece is not to mock people who enjoy "CSI", but rather do help dispell the misconception that the "Law and Order" franchise should be 'put out of its misery'. The recent cancellation speculation will not help this cause, but if you get a chance, watch a complete "Law and Order" episode, start to finish. As catchy as the original "CSI" theme is, if you give the veteran series just one hour, you may find yourself humming a different tune.
Tuesday, May 22, 2007
Out of the FOX-Hole
It wasn't long ago that NBC was revered within the television industry as the model network. Between 1985 - 2000, NBC boasted the top rated series eleven times in the sixteen season span. For two decades NBC overlapped hits from "MASH" to "The Cosby Show" to "Cheers" and "Seinfeld". Their overwhelming success even prompted Brandon Tartikoff, president of NBC during arguably its most successful period, to refer to incoming network FOX as a "close-hanger network". Lately, however, the peakock's feathers have faded and FOX has raced to the front of the network pack.
There are two recognitions that networks fight most fiercely to earn - most viewers, and most viewers between 18-49. When FOX was launched in 1986 the "Big Three" (NBC, CBS, and ABC) generally agreed FOX would never become a legitimate threat, and in the network's earliest years it drew little national attention. FOX's first show to break the top 50 rated shows, "America's Most Wanted" didn't exactly have the potential to challenge ratings giants "60 Minutes" or "ER". Over time the network that branded itself as 'edgy' made risky decisions with polar-opposite outcomes. The controversial "Married With Children" put FOX on the map in the late 1980's, and the bizzare idea of greenlighting a prime-time cartoon series with "The Simpsons" struck TV gold.
Although FOX has been criticized heavily for its share of flops, it has slowly built a strong repitoire of programs that has rewarded the "clothes-hanger network" with the most viewers in the 18-49 demographic for the third consecutive year. Three of the year's top five rated timeslots are FOX shows - Tuesday and Wednesday's "American Idol" and "House". NBC meanwhile rarely lands one series in the top 20 weekly rated programs, and only NBC's "Heroes" has consistently cracked the top 15 among 18-49 year-olds. What was unimaginable just 15 years ago has become reality in television's ever-changing landscape.
Network success can be considered cyclical, so NBC executives may simply be waiting for the TV public's preferences to turn in their favour. But as FOX starts next season bolstered by "American Idol", "House", "24", and a consistent cartoon-filled Sunday, NBC may need a few more 'heroes' to rescue the network from yet another ratings finish at the bottom of the "Big Four".
There are two recognitions that networks fight most fiercely to earn - most viewers, and most viewers between 18-49. When FOX was launched in 1986 the "Big Three" (NBC, CBS, and ABC) generally agreed FOX would never become a legitimate threat, and in the network's earliest years it drew little national attention. FOX's first show to break the top 50 rated shows, "America's Most Wanted" didn't exactly have the potential to challenge ratings giants "60 Minutes" or "ER". Over time the network that branded itself as 'edgy' made risky decisions with polar-opposite outcomes. The controversial "Married With Children" put FOX on the map in the late 1980's, and the bizzare idea of greenlighting a prime-time cartoon series with "The Simpsons" struck TV gold.
Although FOX has been criticized heavily for its share of flops, it has slowly built a strong repitoire of programs that has rewarded the "clothes-hanger network" with the most viewers in the 18-49 demographic for the third consecutive year. Three of the year's top five rated timeslots are FOX shows - Tuesday and Wednesday's "American Idol" and "House". NBC meanwhile rarely lands one series in the top 20 weekly rated programs, and only NBC's "Heroes" has consistently cracked the top 15 among 18-49 year-olds. What was unimaginable just 15 years ago has become reality in television's ever-changing landscape.
Network success can be considered cyclical, so NBC executives may simply be waiting for the TV public's preferences to turn in their favour. But as FOX starts next season bolstered by "American Idol", "House", "24", and a consistent cartoon-filled Sunday, NBC may need a few more 'heroes' to rescue the network from yet another ratings finish at the bottom of the "Big Four".
Monday, May 21, 2007
Simpsons Did It
It's hard living in a Simpsons world for a cartoon, isn't it? Haven't they covered every story imaginable? The term "Simpsons Did It", coined in the writers room at "South Park" when story ideas were continually shot down because 'The Simpsons already did that', even spawned an entire "South Park" episode that paid homage to all that "The Simpsons" had covered. However, now that television is dominated by five prime-time cartoons, the originality struggle is impacting everyone, including "The Simpsons".
"The Simpson's" 399th episode "24 Minutes" helped advertise fellow Fox series "24" through a visually impressive half hour installment. But was it original? Less than two months ago "South Park's" episode "The Snuke" made the same lampoon on the action thriller.
The computer gaming industry is certainly enjoying their cartoon publicity, as "South Park", "American Dad", and "The Simpsons" have each aired episodes where their lead characters take on the role of the game's heroines. In October of 2006, "South Park" aired the first spoof, "Make Love, Not Warcraft" where the kids were visually transformed into the "World of Warcraft". Steve Smith joined the online gaming realm the following month in an "American Dad" episode "Dungeons and Wagons" that saw Steve and his friends become characters in "Dungeons and Dragons". Most recently "The Simpsons" placed Bart and Marge inside the interactive fantasy game "Earthland Realms". All three parodies within the span of one year!
Wallmart has become a ripe target for satire in recent years and again, the cartoon world was quick to take aim. In late 2004 "South Park" aired an episode "Something Wall-Mart this Way" where the boys (minus Cartman) attempt to shut down the supercenter that is bankrupting the South Park bussiness district. Both Homer Simpson and Peter Griffin have worked at Wallmart, even if the store name wasn't quite the same. In 2005 Homer worked as a greeter in "Sprawl-Mart" and in 2006 Peter took a job in "Superstore USA" shortly after campaigning to close the store down when Quahog's local stores were being priced out of the market.
Even "Family Guy" and "American Dad", both created by "Seth MacFarlane" have featured similar storyines within short intervals. Just months after George Bush joined the Smith family for dinner and explored the neibourhood with Stan Smith, Bill Clinton stopped by the Griffin house, before he and Peter took their antics to the streets of Quahog.
There is good reason why "The Simpsons" and "Family Guy" are most often attacked for copying one another. Both shows have now aired episodes satirizing the over-censorship of the FCC, in "Family Guy's" 2005 "PTV", and more recently "The Simpsons" season 18 finale, "You Kent Always Say What you Want". Both Marge and Lois have gambing problems, and both Santa's Little Helper and Brian have run onto a dog race track to 'maul' a female dog - both incidents resulting in puppies.
So who copies who? It may appear on the surface that "South Park" has yet to copy anyone, but considering a "South Park" episode can be written and completed several months before any of their prime-time opponents, it is likely that "The Simpsons" and "American Dad" computer gaming spoofs were already in production before "South Park's" parody kicked off the trend.
It's also possible, (and the show's creators will certainly argue) that no one is intentionally copying anyone else. Perhaps there is just not enough material for five cartoons to air an entire season without a cartoon counterpart inadvertently writing a similar story. Whatever spin you'd like to believe, the 'similarities' have become more noticeable in recent years, and the battle to air 'the best story' may soon become the battle to air 'the best story first'.
"The Simpson's" 399th episode "24 Minutes" helped advertise fellow Fox series "24" through a visually impressive half hour installment. But was it original? Less than two months ago "South Park's" episode "The Snuke" made the same lampoon on the action thriller.
The computer gaming industry is certainly enjoying their cartoon publicity, as "South Park", "American Dad", and "The Simpsons" have each aired episodes where their lead characters take on the role of the game's heroines. In October of 2006, "South Park" aired the first spoof, "Make Love, Not Warcraft" where the kids were visually transformed into the "World of Warcraft". Steve Smith joined the online gaming realm the following month in an "American Dad" episode "Dungeons and Wagons" that saw Steve and his friends become characters in "Dungeons and Dragons". Most recently "The Simpsons" placed Bart and Marge inside the interactive fantasy game "Earthland Realms". All three parodies within the span of one year!
Wallmart has become a ripe target for satire in recent years and again, the cartoon world was quick to take aim. In late 2004 "South Park" aired an episode "Something Wall-Mart this Way" where the boys (minus Cartman) attempt to shut down the supercenter that is bankrupting the South Park bussiness district. Both Homer Simpson and Peter Griffin have worked at Wallmart, even if the store name wasn't quite the same. In 2005 Homer worked as a greeter in "Sprawl-Mart" and in 2006 Peter took a job in "Superstore USA" shortly after campaigning to close the store down when Quahog's local stores were being priced out of the market.
Even "Family Guy" and "American Dad", both created by "Seth MacFarlane" have featured similar storyines within short intervals. Just months after George Bush joined the Smith family for dinner and explored the neibourhood with Stan Smith, Bill Clinton stopped by the Griffin house, before he and Peter took their antics to the streets of Quahog.
There is good reason why "The Simpsons" and "Family Guy" are most often attacked for copying one another. Both shows have now aired episodes satirizing the over-censorship of the FCC, in "Family Guy's" 2005 "PTV", and more recently "The Simpsons" season 18 finale, "You Kent Always Say What you Want". Both Marge and Lois have gambing problems, and both Santa's Little Helper and Brian have run onto a dog race track to 'maul' a female dog - both incidents resulting in puppies.
So who copies who? It may appear on the surface that "South Park" has yet to copy anyone, but considering a "South Park" episode can be written and completed several months before any of their prime-time opponents, it is likely that "The Simpsons" and "American Dad" computer gaming spoofs were already in production before "South Park's" parody kicked off the trend.
It's also possible, (and the show's creators will certainly argue) that no one is intentionally copying anyone else. Perhaps there is just not enough material for five cartoons to air an entire season without a cartoon counterpart inadvertently writing a similar story. Whatever spin you'd like to believe, the 'similarities' have become more noticeable in recent years, and the battle to air 'the best story' may soon become the battle to air 'the best story first'.
I thought I told you to trim those sideburns!
Certainly "The Simpsons", in both concept and originality, can be considered ahead of its time. These cases, however, may take that label to a slightly different level.
Consider this: In Season 3's "Homer at The Bat", Mr. Burns continually screams at Don Mattingly to shave his sideburns. Only two months before the episode aired (but well after the script was written) Yankee's General Manager George Steinbrenner fined Mattingly for his long hair, and ordered him to cut it shorter.
In that same season, the publicized episode "Stark Raving Dad" featured Michael Jackson singing a birthday song to Lisa. The song, apparently written by Jackson, has a verse where Bart wishes Lisa "better than your heart desires" and then Jackson adds "and your first kiss from a boy." Something tells me if that episode aired five years later, that 'sweet' moment would have been greeted with a different reaction.
More recently, look at "Brother's Little Helper" where Homer and Marge attempt to control Bart'd ADD with riddlin-like "focusyn". After a crazed Bart shoots down a satellite that he claims Major League Baseball is using to spy on the town, Mark McGuire is helicoptered in to downplay the suspicion. This was of course Mark McGuire straight from his 70 home-run season. When Bart asks for an explanation behind MLB's ploy, McGuire responds: "Do you want to know the terrifying truth, or do you want me to sock a few dingers?"
As Barry Bonds nears Hank Aaron's all-time home-run record, I'm sure Major League Baseball is hoping fans will also only want to watch more "dingers" and not learn the "terrifying truth".
Consider this: In Season 3's "Homer at The Bat", Mr. Burns continually screams at Don Mattingly to shave his sideburns. Only two months before the episode aired (but well after the script was written) Yankee's General Manager George Steinbrenner fined Mattingly for his long hair, and ordered him to cut it shorter.
In that same season, the publicized episode "Stark Raving Dad" featured Michael Jackson singing a birthday song to Lisa. The song, apparently written by Jackson, has a verse where Bart wishes Lisa "better than your heart desires" and then Jackson adds "and your first kiss from a boy." Something tells me if that episode aired five years later, that 'sweet' moment would have been greeted with a different reaction.
More recently, look at "Brother's Little Helper" where Homer and Marge attempt to control Bart'd ADD with riddlin-like "focusyn". After a crazed Bart shoots down a satellite that he claims Major League Baseball is using to spy on the town, Mark McGuire is helicoptered in to downplay the suspicion. This was of course Mark McGuire straight from his 70 home-run season. When Bart asks for an explanation behind MLB's ploy, McGuire responds: "Do you want to know the terrifying truth, or do you want me to sock a few dingers?"
As Barry Bonds nears Hank Aaron's all-time home-run record, I'm sure Major League Baseball is hoping fans will also only want to watch more "dingers" and not learn the "terrifying truth".
Friday, May 18, 2007
"The Office" Review: The Job
The third season of "The Office" concluded Thursday with a supersized one hour special that saw Michael, Jim, and Karen head to New York to interview for a corporate position. Season three featured a number of story arcs, and actor contracts aside, "The Office" crew was provided with a variety of directions to take in this episode to lead into the next season. So how did it all fare?
This week's humour fell short of last week's "Beach Games" with more emphasis placed on exposition, and character emotion, but that is to be expected from a season finale where cliffhangers are abound. That's not to say "The Job" lacked laughs - Dwight and Pam's interplay during Michael's brief absence was wonderfully written, and Michael's discussion with the accountants about his decision to sell his condo (on eBay no less) quickly come to mind - but other parts noticably fell short. Dwight painting his office black was clever, but the idea of Dwight finally in charge of Dunder Mifflin was a concept with enough potential material to have received the season's best gags. Schrute-bucks, a joke played out similar to Dwight's citations given to Jim earlier this season, was not the best decision given their options.
Michael and Jan's reconciliation was not paticularly welcomed. I may be alone on this, but scenes with Jan are the most unbearable to watch, and the akward humour the writers hope to generate through the Jan/Michael relationship are strikingly off-beat with the show's 'fun' comedy style. I had hoped they realized the Jan plot was not one of their stronger storylines when they broke up in "Women's Appreciation", but with boob job and all, it appears that story will grow bigger as well. (that sounded more clever in my head)
Finally, there is the Jim/Karen/Pam love triangle that has so far garnered the show the most attention. This story was again treated very well, and I uncharacteristically found myself cheering and booing at the TV during various parts of these scenes. Karen revealed her claws for the first time, and like she has done the entire season, Jenna Fischer portrayed Pam as unavoidably likeable despite moments when the character could potentially become annoying. Jim's interview scene where he found a message from Pam (written on a yogurt lid from "Office Olympics") was touching, and although it nears the 'corny' label, it came across just right. As for when Jim asked Pam to dinner just before the closing credits, well, I must be a sucker because I cheered.
After finding "The Office" last September and literally downloading and watching every episode of the series, I was delighted to see season 3 build on the strong aspects of season 2 and continue to develop into TV's hands-down strongest comedy. I've tried to advertise the show to as many people as possible (despite receiving no cheques from NBC, yet) but it looks as though the TV public has taken notice. Here's hoping season 4 keeps "The Office" charm going.
This week's humour fell short of last week's "Beach Games" with more emphasis placed on exposition, and character emotion, but that is to be expected from a season finale where cliffhangers are abound. That's not to say "The Job" lacked laughs - Dwight and Pam's interplay during Michael's brief absence was wonderfully written, and Michael's discussion with the accountants about his decision to sell his condo (on eBay no less) quickly come to mind - but other parts noticably fell short. Dwight painting his office black was clever, but the idea of Dwight finally in charge of Dunder Mifflin was a concept with enough potential material to have received the season's best gags. Schrute-bucks, a joke played out similar to Dwight's citations given to Jim earlier this season, was not the best decision given their options.
Michael and Jan's reconciliation was not paticularly welcomed. I may be alone on this, but scenes with Jan are the most unbearable to watch, and the akward humour the writers hope to generate through the Jan/Michael relationship are strikingly off-beat with the show's 'fun' comedy style. I had hoped they realized the Jan plot was not one of their stronger storylines when they broke up in "Women's Appreciation", but with boob job and all, it appears that story will grow bigger as well. (that sounded more clever in my head)
Finally, there is the Jim/Karen/Pam love triangle that has so far garnered the show the most attention. This story was again treated very well, and I uncharacteristically found myself cheering and booing at the TV during various parts of these scenes. Karen revealed her claws for the first time, and like she has done the entire season, Jenna Fischer portrayed Pam as unavoidably likeable despite moments when the character could potentially become annoying. Jim's interview scene where he found a message from Pam (written on a yogurt lid from "Office Olympics") was touching, and although it nears the 'corny' label, it came across just right. As for when Jim asked Pam to dinner just before the closing credits, well, I must be a sucker because I cheered.
After finding "The Office" last September and literally downloading and watching every episode of the series, I was delighted to see season 3 build on the strong aspects of season 2 and continue to develop into TV's hands-down strongest comedy. I've tried to advertise the show to as many people as possible (despite receiving no cheques from NBC, yet) but it looks as though the TV public has taken notice. Here's hoping season 4 keeps "The Office" charm going.
Wednesday, May 16, 2007
The Ratings Race is On
All four major television networks (NBC, CBS, ABC, and Fox) released their plans for the upcoming Fall season this week, and if campaigning for the 2008 Presidential election, spinners were quick to patt their network on the back. As diverse as the networks advertise themselves, the end product hopes to achieve one common goal - more viewers. And they've all taken a similar approach.
NBC hopes to capitalize on "Heroes" success with next season's spinoff "Hero's: Origins", much like ABC anticipates a faithful following from "Grey's Anatomy" with spinoff "Private Practice." Why think up new ideas when you can milk existing ideas that already have a large audience? It worked for "Joey", didn't it?
Further throwing originality out the window, newtorks continued the fad of looking to Britain for television inspiration. CBS is hoping to strike "Office"-like magic with their takeoff on the musical/drama/comedy series "Viva Blackpool".
Perhaps most shocking is ABC's latest method to avoid thinking up new program ideas. We've all seen networks steal from each other, but ABC took it one step further - steal from commercials! Premiering next Fall is "Caveman", a comedy that places the character from Geico Insurance commericials ('so easy a caveman could do it') into Los Angeles to deal with real life as a caveman. It's actually quite remarkable that they continue to come with ideas on how to not have to come up with ideas.
Should ABC expect "Caveman" to become a cornerstone comedy for the network? If you've seen the commercial you have probably chuckled, the first time. But for anyone who watches TV more than once a week the 30-second ad that plays multiple times a day has likely become unbearable to sit through. What's going to happen when those 30 seconds become 30 minutes? This is just a guess, but after the concept's buzz wears off after the first episode, expect to hear 'cancelled' within the month.
As for the network's original programming? The outlook appears similarly disheartening. In a 2005 conference that gathered some of television's brightest scripters to analyze the small screen's current creativity drought, HBO's chairman and CEO Chris Albrecht attempted to provide an answer: "Broadcast networks make a mistake in that they strive for popular and hope for good. I think to strive for good and hope for popular is a better formula." Maybe that insight explains why when considering the "Big Four" networks, HBO is arguably the biggest.
NBC hopes to capitalize on "Heroes" success with next season's spinoff "Hero's: Origins", much like ABC anticipates a faithful following from "Grey's Anatomy" with spinoff "Private Practice." Why think up new ideas when you can milk existing ideas that already have a large audience? It worked for "Joey", didn't it?
Further throwing originality out the window, newtorks continued the fad of looking to Britain for television inspiration. CBS is hoping to strike "Office"-like magic with their takeoff on the musical/drama/comedy series "Viva Blackpool".
Perhaps most shocking is ABC's latest method to avoid thinking up new program ideas. We've all seen networks steal from each other, but ABC took it one step further - steal from commercials! Premiering next Fall is "Caveman", a comedy that places the character from Geico Insurance commericials ('so easy a caveman could do it') into Los Angeles to deal with real life as a caveman. It's actually quite remarkable that they continue to come with ideas on how to not have to come up with ideas.
Should ABC expect "Caveman" to become a cornerstone comedy for the network? If you've seen the commercial you have probably chuckled, the first time. But for anyone who watches TV more than once a week the 30-second ad that plays multiple times a day has likely become unbearable to sit through. What's going to happen when those 30 seconds become 30 minutes? This is just a guess, but after the concept's buzz wears off after the first episode, expect to hear 'cancelled' within the month.
As for the network's original programming? The outlook appears similarly disheartening. In a 2005 conference that gathered some of television's brightest scripters to analyze the small screen's current creativity drought, HBO's chairman and CEO Chris Albrecht attempted to provide an answer: "Broadcast networks make a mistake in that they strive for popular and hope for good. I think to strive for good and hope for popular is a better formula." Maybe that insight explains why when considering the "Big Four" networks, HBO is arguably the biggest.
Greg Daniels: The Comedy Mastermind with the Midas Touch
He's worked on some of television's greatest comedies. He's responsible for some of the most memorable moments on the small screen. And his feel for funny is matched by few in show business. Most profound of all, you've probably never heard of him. He's Greg Daniels, and with a resume that includes "Saturday Night Live", "The Simpsons", "Seinfeld", "King of the Hill", and now "The Office", he has developed a television record that ranks him among Hollywood's elite.
Daniels quickly broke into television in 1983 with fellow Harvard graduate Conan O'Brien when he landed a writing position for HBO's sketch comedy series "Not Necessarily the News." As if a sign of things to come, the series was a take-off of a British comedy, "Not the Nine O'Clock News." The show's sharp satirical writing earned more critical acclaim than rival Saturday Night Live during the period, and gave HBO one of its first ratings hits.
Daniels, along with Conan, would eventually give in to mainstream TV joining SNL's crew in the late 1980's - a period that many consider to be the show's creative peak. After winning an Emmy on SNL in 1989, Daniels joined Seinfeld's writing staff for its first full order season. Although only credited with season three's "The Parking Space", Daniels work with Seinfeld came during the two seasons that most agree were the comedy's finest. After season four, Daniels moved to LA where he roomed with Conan O'Brien and began writing for his third iconic series, "The Simpsons." Through its first four seasons "The Simpsons" had already garnered a large following, but a burntout writing staff created the largest writer turnover in the show's history and gave Daniels an opening to Evergreen Terrace. His contribution was quickly noticed, penning fan favourite episodes "Bart Sells His Soul", "Lisa's Wedding", and "Homer Badman", among others After season seven, Daniels pursuaded fellow Simpsons writers to work on his newly developed cartoon for Fox's primetime lineup - "King of The Hill", cocreated with Mike Judge. The unconventional series challenged the genearlly followed notion that a cartoon needed a bumbling idiot in the lead role, and through subtle humour and dialogue-driven scenes, KOTH became the second longest-running cartoon behind only "The Simpsons."
Daniels collected five more Emmy's from KOTH, bringing his total to nine. At age 42, Daniels had a flawless comedy track record, and was an easy choice by NBC to develop the American version to the UK's cult comedy "The Office." British adaptations had not proven fruitful for the network in the past (most recently, 2003's "Coupling" that lasted only four episodes) and a season one order of only five episodes by NBC suggested a similar fate. Ratings were low, and both fans and critics detested Carrell's interpretation of Ricky Gervais's "Office" lead. The comedy seemed destined for a 'not as good as the original' label and another example for critics who argue British shows do not translate well in the US. However, after favourable lobbying on "The Office's" behalf from a small contingent of NBC executives, the series was rewarded a second season, and Daniels quickly proved his successful comedy background was no fluke.
Carrell's Michael Scott character was toned down, the secondary cast was given a more prominent role, and the sharp writing that had riddled Daniels career transformed "The Office" into television's strongest comedy. How does he do it? It's a question I'm often tried to answer myself. I think it comes down to making decisions. Daniels seems to have a remarkable perception for how a joke on paper can translate on screen, and in a comedy like "The Office" where the writers walk a narrow tight-rope between genius and idiotic, Daniels has yet to lose his balance. Besides writing and directing a handful of "Office" episodes, Daniels is the series' showrunner, meaning all scripts and storylines are passed his way before final production. As "The Office" concludes its third season tomorrow equipped with a 25 episode renewal contract next season (five of which will be an hour) the comedy that seemed destined for cancellation is in very capable hands. It's hard to imagine "The Office" jumping the shark too early when at the helm is the man with comedy's midas touch.
Daniels quickly broke into television in 1983 with fellow Harvard graduate Conan O'Brien when he landed a writing position for HBO's sketch comedy series "Not Necessarily the News." As if a sign of things to come, the series was a take-off of a British comedy, "Not the Nine O'Clock News." The show's sharp satirical writing earned more critical acclaim than rival Saturday Night Live during the period, and gave HBO one of its first ratings hits.
Daniels, along with Conan, would eventually give in to mainstream TV joining SNL's crew in the late 1980's - a period that many consider to be the show's creative peak. After winning an Emmy on SNL in 1989, Daniels joined Seinfeld's writing staff for its first full order season. Although only credited with season three's "The Parking Space", Daniels work with Seinfeld came during the two seasons that most agree were the comedy's finest. After season four, Daniels moved to LA where he roomed with Conan O'Brien and began writing for his third iconic series, "The Simpsons." Through its first four seasons "The Simpsons" had already garnered a large following, but a burntout writing staff created the largest writer turnover in the show's history and gave Daniels an opening to Evergreen Terrace. His contribution was quickly noticed, penning fan favourite episodes "Bart Sells His Soul", "Lisa's Wedding", and "Homer Badman", among others After season seven, Daniels pursuaded fellow Simpsons writers to work on his newly developed cartoon for Fox's primetime lineup - "King of The Hill", cocreated with Mike Judge. The unconventional series challenged the genearlly followed notion that a cartoon needed a bumbling idiot in the lead role, and through subtle humour and dialogue-driven scenes, KOTH became the second longest-running cartoon behind only "The Simpsons."
Daniels collected five more Emmy's from KOTH, bringing his total to nine. At age 42, Daniels had a flawless comedy track record, and was an easy choice by NBC to develop the American version to the UK's cult comedy "The Office." British adaptations had not proven fruitful for the network in the past (most recently, 2003's "Coupling" that lasted only four episodes) and a season one order of only five episodes by NBC suggested a similar fate. Ratings were low, and both fans and critics detested Carrell's interpretation of Ricky Gervais's "Office" lead. The comedy seemed destined for a 'not as good as the original' label and another example for critics who argue British shows do not translate well in the US. However, after favourable lobbying on "The Office's" behalf from a small contingent of NBC executives, the series was rewarded a second season, and Daniels quickly proved his successful comedy background was no fluke.
Carrell's Michael Scott character was toned down, the secondary cast was given a more prominent role, and the sharp writing that had riddled Daniels career transformed "The Office" into television's strongest comedy. How does he do it? It's a question I'm often tried to answer myself. I think it comes down to making decisions. Daniels seems to have a remarkable perception for how a joke on paper can translate on screen, and in a comedy like "The Office" where the writers walk a narrow tight-rope between genius and idiotic, Daniels has yet to lose his balance. Besides writing and directing a handful of "Office" episodes, Daniels is the series' showrunner, meaning all scripts and storylines are passed his way before final production. As "The Office" concludes its third season tomorrow equipped with a 25 episode renewal contract next season (five of which will be an hour) the comedy that seemed destined for cancellation is in very capable hands. It's hard to imagine "The Office" jumping the shark too early when at the helm is the man with comedy's midas touch.
Tuesday, May 15, 2007
Opening
Welcome to the blog!
This blog will mainly cover what's going on in the TV world. Do you like The Office? Are you looking forward to the upcoming Simpsons movie or return of Futurama? Who actually watches My Name is Earl? Is South Park the best cartoon on TV right now? This blog will try to answer these questions, and hopefully many more...
This blog will mainly cover what's going on in the TV world. Do you like The Office? Are you looking forward to the upcoming Simpsons movie or return of Futurama? Who actually watches My Name is Earl? Is South Park the best cartoon on TV right now? This blog will try to answer these questions, and hopefully many more...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)