3 Responses

1. johnroy3742 says:

   September 21, 2007 at 12:58 am

   I’m not sure why we should have any emotional energy invested in the survival of the multi-camera sitcom. It may be a form that is indeed on its way out, like the Jack Benny Show, which is funny and relevant for its time, is not a format relevant for our time. Art and performance change constantly. Comedy and television evolve. The past, is, rightly, left in the past. What we should care about is that funny shows are made, not what format they are in.And studio laughter and laugh tracks ARE off putting to parts of the audience. I could barely get my 22 year old girlfriend to watch Newsradio, an excellent show, because the laugh track is grating to a perosn raised with the Simpsons, Arrested Development, and Family Guy.I say, let the shows work that work, fail that fail, and if the multi-camera sitcom must go the way of the 15 minute news show or the radio drama, then that is just fine. It doesn’t diminish the greatness of M.A.S.H., it just shows that 2007 demands a different kind of comedy, but any comedian worth his salt knows that.

   Reply
2. Brian McKim & Traci Skene says:

   September 21, 2007 at 2:22 am

   We should indeed have emotional energy invested. The sitcom, the multicamera sitcom, is the direct descendant of radio comedy, which is the direct descendant of vaudeville comedy. And that is where standup comics come from.The sitcom is the best vehicle for standup comics ever devised. Many of the most-watched, best-loved sitcoms were built on a sturdy foundation of a single comedian’s act, his persona, his imagination. We see echoes of the current assault on standup comedy in the recent attack on the sitcom. We hear comedians assailed for being “too jokey.” We hear similar things said about sitcoms. The parallels are there.And the sitcom is one of the most successful kind of television show in the medium’s history.You have misread the dozens of postings we’ve made about the “demise” of the sitcom or the “death” of the genre.We, too, say “let the shows that work continue to work” and “let the shows that fail disappear.” On that we are in agreement. Where we differ with the execs, and where we disagree with the critics, is here: They say that multicamera sitcoms are dead. They go a step further and say that this is a good thing. They go a ridiculous step or three further by concocting all sorts of ludicrous theories as to why they died and why they are extinct. And why the shows that have supplanted them (for the moment) are somehow “better.”Of course, all of this is utter nonsense.The genre is not dead. It is not gone for good. It will be back.And, unlike the critics, we don’t believe for a minute that one type of show should prevent another from existing. Setup/punchline sitcoms can and should exist side-by-side with Hybrid Humor or single-camera sitcoms. All can and have evolved.There is absolutely nothing about a multicamera sitcom that is irrelevant. It was wildly successful up until a few months ago and it will continue to be so in the future. The format is durable, it is familiar, it is flexible.When a TV exec parrots ridiculous platitudes about this format being “dead,” or this genre being “outdated,” <>not even he believes it<>. TV execs don’t know a thing about comedy and/or art evolving. You give them too much credit.This is what we like to ridicule and this is what will come back to haunt them.

   Reply
3. johnroy3742 says:

   September 21, 2007 at 2:33 am

   This argument makes sense, but I disagree about the Multi-camera sitcom being the best medium for showcasing the standup comic. Standup Comedy is the best medium for showcasing a standup comic.Everything else, is, like Mitch Hedburg said, asking a great cook, if he can farm.I’m not sure the Seinfeld of “Seinfeld” or the Raymond of “Raymond” is any more like the essence of their onstage persona than Woody Allen is in “Sleeper.”But I will agree with you that TV Execs don’t know anything about the creative aspects of comedy. But as a comedian, I would argue myself that, creatively, the last multi-camera sitcoms to really have something to offer as great comedies were Frasier and Seinfeld. I felt that Lucky Louie had promise if HBO hadn’t been shortsighted and cancelled it prematurely.I’m sure I am omitting something, but recent examples of the genre have not impressed me. I find Two and A Half Men to be a shining example of the kind of mediocrity that does force you to consider if this format has left the building creatlively. You can blink and imagine that it’s still 1986 and Eddie Money rules the airwaves.I hope that “Back to You” is good, but I think if the multi-camera is to survive, it needs a shot of genuine new thought. the kind of new thought Larry David gave it when he abandoned standard three act structure and sentimentality for Seinfeld. Continuing to pump out shows that would have looked at home on the NBC line up in the 80’s is not where we should be taking comedy.

   Reply