 |
| |
|
| |
|
|
Static Universe
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
SU: The X-Files was basically a cult show in the first years of its existance, as was Seinfeld. I fail to see how a 'cult' show would not break out of that under any circumstances, seeing how Fox torpedoed each show. |
Yes, but they weren't essentially one note shows like Futurama or the Family Guy.
Granted, these are both cartoons, but unlike the Simpsons where they left a lot of wiggle room for character development and plot, once you understood that Bender was a drunk, or the dog was a drunk or Peter was going to do something wacky or there would be a hovering head of a celebrity who would say something wacky, you've pretty much figured out every episode Futurama and Family Guy.
The problem with these shows wasn't that people didn't watch them and like them when they first came out, because they did. The problem is people tuned out of the re-runs and never came back because for general audiences it ceased to be funny after a while. And both these shows got plenty of PR up front as well.
John Doe is failing not because it isn't a decent show, but because it isn't pulling in more female viewers, which might have kept it alive long enough for it to catch on. That's the kiss of death for a Fox show on Sundays, which has always been geared equally to men and women, such as the X-Files, Simpsons, Malcolm, Married WIth Children, etc. And due to FOX's heavy commitment to crappy reality TV, there isn't anywhere else to put it.
Firefly was never going to be a success on Fox, because the show should have been put into syndication in the first place. It was a decent show, but not something that was going to pull a primetime audience in, no matter what anybody says. There hasn't been a genuine sci-fi success in prime-time for years, not even ST:TNG was prime time.
Millenium just shot itself in the foot. I think that probably could have broken out big time, but on the other hand it was a pretty dark show, so who knows.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Static Universe
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by monolith94
Dude, HedonismBot is a character anyone can relate to!!! |
But not my Grandma, unfortunately. But she sure can dig on those wacky adventures of Bart and Lisa.
And I'm sure she has no idea who Benjamin Disreali is...
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Static Universe
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
quote:
Yes, but they weren't essentially one note shows like Futurama or the Family Guy. |
Many people would disagree with your entirely. On Seinfeld, I have heard many say it is simply a one note show about annoying Jewish people. On the X-Files, one note show where the characters really didn't matter too much at all (the show didn't die because Duchovney left, it died because the plots became dumber).
Hell, I've even heard plenty say the Simpsons is a one note show... Homer is the moron father, Bart the mishaving son, Lisa the overachiever, etc... and once you figure that you have everything.
You can say anything is a 'one-note' show if you really wanted to. |
True, but I think the difference between a show that breaks out and one that dies out is in how it deals with the extended cast.
For example, on the Simpsons there were highly developed running characters besides the main family from the very begining, who were as interesting in their own way as the main "stars". They could do stories with Moe babysitting Maggie, Maggie shooting Mr. Burns, etc, etc.
On the Family Guy, every episode involved Stewie building a weapon, trying to kill the mom, and carrying out his "master plan". Sure it was funny, but it gets old after a while. And eventually you've done all you can do with the Stewie character.
Futurama had the same problem. The characters were funny but all the shows seemed to be variations on the same theme. I mean how many shows involved Bender leaving in a huff, getting lost, getting drunk then lost, etc. All the secondary characters were just disposable foils for the main players.
On FG, Peter's funny gay boss never became more than Peter's funny gay boss, while the Simpsons' Smithers became a very complex character in his own right.
The Simpsons was able to maintain an illusion of change by effectively managing the secondary characters. Maude Flanders can get killed, Apu can get married and have children, the Millhouse family can go through a divorce, etc.
Even though Bart never gets out of the 4th grade, the environment does go through change around him. On the Family Guy and Futurama, they never effectively built extended families and the shows never broke despite good word of mouth and PR.
There was nothing beyond the fact that they were both funny to keep people coming back, but the problem was they were always funny in exactly the same way.
X-Files and Sienfeld also had well developed secondary casts, and the more they played into that strength the more people tuned into the shows.
John Doe is another show that I think is good, but lacks the character interaction that The Pretender had. Both are about equal in terms of plot and acting, but John Doe lacks that something extra that kept the Pretender on for 4-5 seasons.
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:30.
Apolyton Time is 00:30. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
12-08-2003 01:11
|