Philly Cinephile starts us off.
In your opinion, which sitcoms improved the most during their runs, and which declined the most during their runs?
Let me start by saying most sitcoms improve over time as they discover what works and find their groove. That said…
Probably PARKS AND REC was the most improved. THE ODD COUPLE improved considerably when it went from single-camera to multi-camera. NEWHART got better as it went along. So did THE OFFICE, MOM, and FAMILY TIES. I'm sure there are 40 others I can't just think of at the moment.
SEINFELD is an interesting case because it both improved and then (when Larry David left) got worse. (More about SEINFELD next Monday.)
BIG BANG THEORY got progressively worse. Early episodes were hilarious. You could always count on four or five solid laughs. The stories were never great. But by the end the jokes were forced and the lazy storytelling drove me nuts. In almost every later episode you could remove two or three scenes and nothing would change.
Here’s a pretty accurate tell: If a sitcom totally changes its sets, cast, or premise it’s a good bet it’s not long for this world. B POSITIVE is just the latest example.
Milton the Momzer asks:
Every TV drama, almost, ends every season with its version of Who Shot JR. Why do most TV dramas, especially renewed shows, have to end on a cliffhanger? Do they think fans won't return in the fall? Is it against the writers code to end a season with a satisfying episode?
It’s a time-honored tradition to end on a cliffhanger to entice audiences to return. They would do these in Saturday morning serials in movie theaters as far back as a hundred years ago.
The thing is: the audience has to really care. Especially now that practically every show does a cliffhanger. Writers of these shows naturally are really invested in them. And it’s hard to think that audiences don’t share the same zeal for your show and characters as you do. But in 90% of cases they don’t.
Serialized shows are now the trend, but some shows, mostly on broadcast networks, are self-contained. And there’s something satisfying about that.
I say there’s room for both, but cliffhangers lose their punch when a show’s been on hiatus for so long you don’t even remember what the cliffhanger is.
Mike Bloodworth queries:
Considering your drawing ability, have you ever considered combining your playwriting and illustrations in to sort of a "graphic novel " or comic book format? I'd read that.
Thanks. I used to draw comic books when I was 13 (that no one read) and had a comic strip briefly in a local Woodland Hills newspaper when I was in High School. But I’m not really a graphic novel fan, and the type of rendering is a very different style from mine. So I’ll stick to single-panel cartoons and stage plays.
And finally, from Bronson:
Hi Ken. Many people don't like to hear the sound of their own voice. Was that a problem for you as you developed your "on air voice?”
Good, bad, or indifferent, I don’t believe in developing an “on air” voice. I wish I had a voice like James Earl Jones, but I believe a listener cares more about someone sounding genuine and is also more interested in the content rather than the voice itself. Still, I wouldn’t mind having Morgan Freeman’s voice.
What’s your Friday Question?
from By Ken Levine
Comments
Post a Comment