TV For Liberals.
More often times than not I'm not one to laud the marvels of television. In fact, I'm the guy that's had the "Kill Your Television" bumpersticker on every vehicle I've owned since 1994. What is means is that I'm a hard sell on any show from the outset. Welcome Studio 60.
The bad news is that this show is doomed to fail for three reasons:
1) I like it. Shows that I've even thought of as slightly entertaining have a nasty habit of being too smart, not budgeted well enough for retention or simply too eccentric for large audiences. Since when does taste matter in television?
2) Aaron Sorkin's last show had the same problem after week three. What put it over the edge and kept it up for eight seasons? Poor poll ratings and the desire to see a different Administration in the White House. The beauty of having a one-hour show every week that offers an alternative set of policies from those of reality left the country's liberals a lifeline after losing the 2000 election. Harsh? Sure is. Likely? Two words: eight seasons. You bet it helped. "Porno for liberals" a friend of mine in college called The West Wing. Sorkin's take on politics worked great when Bush's rating levels fluctuated between catfish bottom-feeder and the acting abilities of the "hack-lawyer-of-the-week" on Law & Order. Now that we see him on the way out, and the fact that this show focuses on Hollywood not the White House (per say) means he's biting the hand that feeds him. He admitted this himself though a Gershwin-inspired opening "skit" in the second show The Cold Open with lines stating: "Yes, it's hard to be a player when you've always had a hunch; to bite the hand that feeds you is a scary way of doing lunch." Chomp!
Finally,
3) No one's watching, the show's expensive, the actors are great, the look is fresh, and it makes us wish that SNL was half as good or interesting now as it was in the 90s or 70s. Unlike politics, taking shots at everyone through a pseudo-Saturday Night can only offer so much insulation from those in Hollywoodland.
Rumors of cancelation have started gaining strength and a missed week all-but confirmed them. The timeslot doesn't help much: NBC late night Mondays at 10pm. It's main timeslot rival? CSI: Miami on CBS. Yeah, David Caruso has more draw than Matthew Perry, Amanda Peet and social comedy. Not by a little gap either. Ratings three weeks ago showed CSI with over 1M more in the market share with viewers and a retention level above 95%. On top of that... "Are Ya Ready For Some Football?" Why is it that NBC think's that Studio 60 would win out when ESPN has the game late in the fourth quarter or into OT? To NBC: You want audiences to tune in about red-state/blue-state comedy when I could be drinking a Bud Light?
It's ballsy to say it's great and all, but at least Studio 60 will get the chance to finish the first season. After that, well I think we'll take the lunch check now and hope to get at least the DVD set.
The bad news is that this show is doomed to fail for three reasons:1) I like it. Shows that I've even thought of as slightly entertaining have a nasty habit of being too smart, not budgeted well enough for retention or simply too eccentric for large audiences. Since when does taste matter in television?
2) Aaron Sorkin's last show had the same problem after week three. What put it over the edge and kept it up for eight seasons? Poor poll ratings and the desire to see a different Administration in the White House. The beauty of having a one-hour show every week that offers an alternative set of policies from those of reality left the country's liberals a lifeline after losing the 2000 election. Harsh? Sure is. Likely? Two words: eight seasons. You bet it helped. "Porno for liberals" a friend of mine in college called The West Wing. Sorkin's take on politics worked great when Bush's rating levels fluctuated between catfish bottom-feeder and the acting abilities of the "hack-lawyer-of-the-week" on Law & Order. Now that we see him on the way out, and the fact that this show focuses on Hollywood not the White House (per say) means he's biting the hand that feeds him. He admitted this himself though a Gershwin-inspired opening "skit" in the second show The Cold Open with lines stating: "Yes, it's hard to be a player when you've always had a hunch; to bite the hand that feeds you is a scary way of doing lunch." Chomp!
Finally,
3) No one's watching, the show's expensive, the actors are great, the look is fresh, and it makes us wish that SNL was half as good or interesting now as it was in the 90s or 70s. Unlike politics, taking shots at everyone through a pseudo-Saturday Night can only offer so much insulation from those in Hollywoodland.
Rumors of cancelation have started gaining strength and a missed week all-but confirmed them. The timeslot doesn't help much: NBC late night Mondays at 10pm. It's main timeslot rival? CSI: Miami on CBS. Yeah, David Caruso has more draw than Matthew Perry, Amanda Peet and social comedy. Not by a little gap either. Ratings three weeks ago showed CSI with over 1M more in the market share with viewers and a retention level above 95%. On top of that... "Are Ya Ready For Some Football?" Why is it that NBC think's that Studio 60 would win out when ESPN has the game late in the fourth quarter or into OT? To NBC: You want audiences to tune in about red-state/blue-state comedy when I could be drinking a Bud Light?
It's ballsy to say it's great and all, but at least Studio 60 will get the chance to finish the first season. After that, well I think we'll take the lunch check now and hope to get at least the DVD set.
Patch Adam Perryman wrote this at 04:57
<< Home