Wow. Into October already. Where has the quarantine time gone?
Phil starts us off:
The MTM show spun off no less than three shows, all reasonably successful (Lou Grant, Rhoda, Phyllis). Do you think this reflects the good genes those characters inherited from the The MTM Show? Or were those shows so different from MTM that they were, in effect, whole new creations?
They were mostly worthy of spin-offs but remember, back then spin-offs were the rage – the way reboots were a few seasons ago. Between the Norman Lear shows, MTM shows, and Garry Marshall/Paramount shows there must’ve been twenty spin-offs or more.
So all you needed was a popular supporting character on a hit show and you were off to the races.
As for the MTM spin-offs, this is just my opinion but none of them were nearly as good as THE MARY TYLER MOORE SHOW. RHODA married too quickly in its first season and became a series of course corrections the rest of the run. PHYLLIS was snake-bitten. One of the stars was murdered coming out of a restaurant in Venice. The funniest character on the show died (although she was probably in her 90’s), and the second (and final) season they changed the whole premise. LOU GRANT became a drama. That was an excellent show but Lou Grant wasn’t Lou Grant.
And speaking of spin-offs, Kyle Burress wonders:
How soon was it after knowing Cheers was coming to an end that a spinoff (Frasier) was in development? Were there other characters considered and how did it ultimately come down to Frasier?
Kelsey Grammer had a series commitment for 13 episodes upon completion of CHEERS. But at the time the deal was signed it was not specified that he would play FRASIER. Another premise was originally developed for him before he agreed to play Frasier Crane.
For the real inside story, check out my podcast episode with series co-creator David Lee. You can find it here.
NBC also wanted to spin-off Norm & Cliff but that never materialized. And there was THE TORTELLIS, spinning off Carla's ex-husband Nick. That was short-lived.
From Brian Phillips:
I just finished watching a movie that put all of the credits, save the titles, at the end as opposed to the beginning. I understand that from an artistic standpoint, you can set up your universe faster, etc., but from a practical standpoint, if I wrote a movie, I'd rather it be out front first, with the bulk of the titles at the end.
What is your preference?
The beginning because when they appear at the end, other the first few credits (director, producer, writer, star) everyone in the audience bails.
If the credits are in the beginning, people actually see them.
And finally, from Michael:
I know you were a producer on CHEERS the first season and then left to work on other shows. When you returned to CHEERS in later seasons as a writer, were you and David full-time staff writers involved with the show every week or was it on a free-lance basis?
We were on staff but not exclusive to the show. We consulted a day a week so were involved with all scripts. We also wrote numerous episodes. And we had an office and assistant. But we were able to pursue other projects like developing pilots, consulting on other shows (notably WINGS for me), and writing movies.
It was the best of both worlds. Another reason why I so love CHEERS.
What’s your Friday Question? Stay safe. Save our country.
from By Ken Levine
Comments
Post a Comment