Re: Re: Let's start an Anti-Sitcom Movement
 

Sorry, but I have to stop you here. :) Whether you like pop music or not (I don't), many of the people on American Idol do have talent -- at least singing talent.

If you can sing as well as them, I'd like to hear it.

On just about every other show you blasted, I agree. :)

However, I do enjoy quite a few reality tv shows: Amazing Race, Newlyweds, (old) Real World and (old) Road Rules, Joe Schmoe, Worlds Apart (On National Geographic), some of the PBS ones: 1940s House, etc., I used to watch shows like Cops too, but its gotten old.

I think reality tv is blasted more because of its sudden popularity than because of its quality. There is some downright awful reality shows out there, but there are some awful comedies, sit coms, and dramas too.

Re: Re: Let's start an Anti-Sitcom Movement
 

Haha, I could be wrong here, but the fact that you said, "People enjoy", equals entertaining and the fact that you said, "pain and embrassment", could also mean emotionally affecting. As far as innovative goes, I agree that reality shows aren't as innovative as I'd like, but it's better than another sitcom filled with wacky misunderstandings with absolutely zero innovation or another cop/doc/lawyer drama.

Re: Re: Re: Let's start an Anti-Sitcom Movement
 

I have been singing since I was about 5 years old. Now, I'm not saying I am better than the average AI finalist, but I also don't think I deserve a record contract for my abilities.

I have been around truly talented people my entire life. But they probably don't fit into the right demographic for American Idol finalists.

I hate sitcoms, but I like a few without laugh tracks. Laugh tracks are terrible. The only thing I own with a laugh track is Red Dwarf...

British sitcoms are very funny, but have terrible laugh tracks... most of the time worse than the american ones. I don't get it.

the best two "sitcoms" that i watch don't even have laugh tracks.
the office
scrubs

Okay, several points to make here:

1. Not all sitcoms with laughter have "laugh tracks." Many are shot in front of a studio audience, for various reasons (some, like THE HONEYMOONERS or ALL IN THE FAMILY, absolutely had to be shot that way because the actors depended on playing off a live audience, like stage actors, and the episodes were like 25-minute stage plays). Shows with "laugh tracks" are shows that are done without an audience and have fake laughter added in; these include most '60s shows (Andy Griffith, Beverly Hillbillies) and M*A*S*H. Most shows don't use laugh tracks nowadays, though (except to fill in "blank" spots where the audience doesn't laugh).

2. I think any half-hour comedy show that has the same characters every week -- but in different situations -- counts as a "situation comedy" or "sitcom." THE SIMPSONS is 100% a sitcom; it's got a family, it's got wacky neighbors, it's got the structure and style of a sitcom, the writers came from sitcoms and the creators included James L. Brooks (THE MARY TYLER MOORE SHOW, TAXI) and Sam Simon (writer for TAXI and CHEERS). Some people redefine "sitcom" so that the category leaves out any comedy show they actually like. It's not so. There are good sitcoms and bad sitcoms.

3. The most important reason why the sitcom will never die is this: dramas are for now, but sitcoms are forever. That's an exaggeration, but it is true that the shows that do the best in syndication, and have the most long-term impact on popular culture, tend to be sitcoms. If you look at the '50s and '60s shows that are still hugely popular, most of them are sitcoms: I LOVE LUCY, HONEYMOONERS, DICK VAN DYKE, GILLIGAN'S ISLAND, ANDY GRIFFITH. Very few dramas -- STAR TREK is one -- have that kind of enormous cultural impact for so long after they're cancelled, and for various reasons, sitcoms tend to "date" less quickly than dramas. So sitcoms are where much of the big syndication money is, and they're also the shows that have, overall, the biggest impact on pop culture.

The last time there were "death of the sitcom" articles was in the mid-'80s, when most of the hits were gone, most of the new sitcoms were terrible, and the good new sitcoms were struggling in the ratings (CHEERS, FAMILY TIES). Then along came THE COSBY SHOW to change all that. I don't know what the next Big Thing will be in sitcoms, but I think it's fairly clear that it will come. Probably we are at the end of the era that COSBY started, of multi-camera sitcoms built around standup comedians. I sense a move back to one-camera, no-audience sitcoms like most shows were in the '60s (among the big '60s hits, only DICK VAN DYKE was done with a studio audience). Anyway the sitcom will never die completely, because a successful sitcom is such a long-term gold mine and a cultural lodestar.

Why not an anti-drama movement? I get fed up with dramas being one of the few things to watch at 8PM or 9PM central. No interests in any of the many CSI incarnations, ER, NYPD Blue, 24, OC, etc.

I say if anything, start a anti-law show movement. How many do we need to have? ;)

I just can't watch sitcoms anymore. Friends for me now is actually PAINFUL to watch. I tried watching Wil and Grace a few times and I couldn't watch that either. No matter how hot Debra Messing is.

I find myself coming back to the same things;

Star Trek the Next Generation
South Park
The Simpsons

Those are the three programs I've consistantly watched over the past few years. Now add;

Chapelle's Show (for my money BETTER than any sitcom right now)
Most Extreme Elimination Challenge
Stripperella

.....and I'm all set.

Very well said. I don't have much to add, except for the observation that the success of tv on dvd might change things in a significant enough way that the financial benefits of sitcoms are not as great. Dramas might not play as well in syndication, but they seem to be good candidates for dvd sales immediately after the season is over, which might bridge the gap somewhat. This is especially true of dramas with big cult followings. I might be overestimating the financial benefits of tv on dvd, but only time will tell. Either way, excellent post.