The Top 5 TV Shows Cancelled Before Their Time--#1

#1

ARRESTED DEVELOPMENT

Why I liked it: It had that rarest of rarities in a sitcom--it had true humor. The situations were funny, the characters were mostly witless, and style was somewhat original in the U.S. (the U.S. version of The Office was still a year and a half away). It had sight gags as well as cut-away gags (which actually worked in this format because, unlike Family Guy, the gags were related to the story being told or at least to what was being talked about at the moment), usually presented as flashbacks. The entire show was pretty Shakespearian in its genius. The basics of it consisted of the lone, sane member of a dysfunctional family, who was slowly being driven insane by the family he loved. Jason Bateman's portrayal of Michael Bluth was the perfect choice to the be the straight man in this whirlwind of funny folk. He often just stood in the center of the chaos, a frozen look of stoic resilience on his face, and waited for the disaster to die down so that he could start picking up the pieces. Never before has a show been so perfect at being so ridiculous. That’s probably why if you do an Internet search for a list of good shows that were canceled too soon, Arrested Development will appear on almost all of them, and at the top of many.

Why it got the boot: FOX. Need I say more? This show won three Emmys, a Golden Globe, and a bunch of other stuff (look up the details yourself). The critics loved it, the fans loved it, but the marketing wizards at FOX put it in the worst spot. They put it smack dab in the middle of dinner time on Sunday night as a supposed lead-in to their “more popular shows” like The Simpsons. So, while those yellow-pigmented money machines got a nice, primetime spot, Arrested Development was used as a doormat so that people could wipe their intellectual boots before joining in the “Animation Domination” on FOX’s Sunday night lineup. And to dive a steak through the heart of the show once and for all, thus proving how much FOX cared for good writing, they put the two-hour series finale up against the opening ceremonies for the 2006 Winter Olympics! 

So, after this lovely countdown, I’ve realized one thing: FOX is a horrible network. They keep around shows long after they’ve outlived their initial intrigue (I’m looking at you, House), and often ditch shows with a decent, but solid fan base. For proof of this, check out this blog. Three of my top five were on FOX. Or, you could watch any number of shows at were on FOX at one time (and some still are), that have been revived. Futurama often jabs at their too-quick cancelation from the network and ultimate rebirth in the form of three movies and a new batch of seasons on Comedy Central. Hell, even FOX’s own fat little bundle of terrible, Family Guy was cancelled for a good amount of time before being revived—and the writers took a long, unfunny, yet true, jab at the network in the show’s first episode back, listing all of the shows that were premiered, then cancelled during Family Guy’s hiatus. But my Family Guy rant is long, and has been heard before.

I hope you’ve enjoyed this experiment. I’ll probably do something like this again—though I may not put such a gap in between entries. Maybe just do one big one (that’s what she said). I was just using this as a gimmick to get people reading. So thanks to that ONE person who’s out there. Yeesh.

The Top 5 TV Shows Cancelled Before Their Time--#2

#2

DEADWOOD

Why I liked it: It should be noted that I never saw Deadwood when it originally aired on HBO. I watched it later on DVD. It was great because it was real--sort of. The show was set in the historical town of Deadwood, North Dakota and featured characters based on real people. Creator and producer David Milch chose this setting as a fall back because he originally came up with an idea of a show revolving around ancient Rome; HBO already had a show about that, so he came up with the old West. The beauty that was Deadwood came from the fact that it was on a premium channel, not network or basic cable. Because of this, they could get away with a lot more. And boy, did they. Rampant gratuitous nudity, brutally horrific violence, and every swear word there is (including a few new ones?). This was how the old West really was. It wasn't black hats versus white hats. It was every man for himself, and there has barely bin a Western that has had the guts to show the reality. The acting wasn't half bad; but the writing was out of this world brilliant.

Why it got the boot: The folks over at HBO wanted David Milch to create another show for them, so he came up with John from Cincinnati. That meant that he devoted all of his time and effort to the second show and let Deadwood die. There were plans for a fourth season that were eventually rumored to be a trilogy of movies that wrapped up the stories and the characters. But with the cast finding new work--especially the main draw, Ian McShane, becoming a movie star--plans for the films were scrapped.

The Top 5 TV Shows Cancelled Before Their Time--#3

#3

THE CRITIC

Why I liked it: The 90s were a great time for films and television. This show blended the two. It was produced by one of the two guys behind The Simpsons (which later came back to bite them in the ass). The premise surrounded a film critic, Jay Sherman (voiced by Jon Lovitz), and his wacky life. His main problem was that he thought the film industry was dumbing down movies to appeal to a wider audience, but in reality, Jay just thought he was smarter than everyone else. One of the best parts of each episode was Jay's show Coming Attractions, where parodies of popular movies were "reviewed." Often these were just silly, but had some serious comic weight to them--this was before the horrendous influx of the "Whatever" Movie franchise. One of the most memorable films lampooned was  The Merchant of Venice Beach, starring Keaunu Reeves as a tortured surfer where he says: "Hath not a dudes eyes? If you prick us, do we not get bummed? If you poison us, do we not blow chunks?" But the real heart of the show came from the people Jay surrounded himself with. He had a nutty family, a rag-tag group of nutty friends, and a boss that loved/hated him--much like the relationship between Tina Fey's and Alec Baldwin's characters in 30 Rock. The interactions Jay had with these people showed that he was more than just an egotistical movie critic who hated every movie being made, but that he also had a humanity to him that, no matter how hard he tried, he couldn't get rid of.

Why it got the boot: For one thing, it jumped networks in between seasons one and two. The first season aired on ABC, the second on FOX. One of the reasons for this was the apparent success of the animated sitcom that FOX had perfected. ABC just wasn't in to it. Fox put more of a driving force behind the show, but, ultimately refused to produce any more episodes--several scripts were written for a third season, pending another network jump to UPN, but nothing happened with that because FOX didn't officially cancel the show until after the deal with UPN expired. (Boy, FOX seems to be screwing with a lot of my favorite shows.) There were some digital webisodes that were shown at AtomFilms and on Shockwave in the first part of 2000, and they are included on the DVD box set.

The Top 5 TV Shows Cancelled Before Their Time--#4

#4

THE ADVENTURES OF BRISCO COUNTRY, JR.

Why I liked it: I was 12! It had everything a boy of that age could like. Gags and guns. It was funny, action-oriented, and set in the old west. True, it kind of ripped off the 1960s show WILD WILD WEST, but I didn't know that show existed then, and the basis for the plot was completely different. It was fun to watch John Astin (Gomez Addams on THE ADDAMS FAMILY) always give Brisco and his sidekick a "new" invention--usually a device that we see everyday now. Another plus was the humor itself. Bruce Campbell said

"30 percent of each episode is being played for laughs. But it's not a winking at the camera, Airplane-type of humor. We're funny like Indiana Jones is funny; the laughs come primarily from the wide variety of ridiculous, colorful characters that come in and out of this series."

Why it got booted: Like many shows, Fox just didn't give it a chance. They claimed it was low ratings, but in reality, the show had a fan base and decent reviews. Fox let it got because of a poor choice in time slots. It was on at 8:00 on Friday nights, up against the powerhouse that was ABC's TGIF lineup. When I was 12, I didn't know many of my peers (I didn't say "friends") who didn't watch TGIF. So, Brisco rode off into the sunset quietly, almost forgotten.

The Top 5 TV Shows Cancelled Before Their Time--#5

All this week I'm going to be counting down the top five TV shows that I think were cancelled too soon. Why five? Because it was hard to come up with ten, since many shows way outlive their appeal. So, without further stalling:

HONORABLE MENTION

FUTURAMA

I gave this show an honorable mention because it has now returned with all new episodes. and, unlike FAMILY GUY, these shows are as good as the first batch were eleven years ago! So suck on that, Seth McFarlane!

Why is FUTURAMA awesome? For starters, it takes the creative geniuses behind the once-great THE SIMPSONS and lets them target the same audience with new, smarter gags. If you've ever seen any of the behind-the-scenes features on any of the season DVDs or recent trilogy of films, then you know how hard the producers and writers work to sneak in any and all geeky gags they can. From a completely decipherable alien language (that fans can use to unlock even more inside jokes), to just plain ol' one-liners, FUTURAMA is the champagne (sham-pag-in) of animated comedy, where as FAMILY GUY is more like Mad Dog 20/20--it gets you where you want to be, but there is usually lots of vomiting involved and you always end up with a headache.

#5

JOURNEYMAN

Why I liked it: This show was a different kind of take on the whole time-travel kind of genre. Whereas most shows relied on some kind of device to create a portal in the space/time continuum (DR. WHO, QUANTUM LEAP), the main character in JOURNEYMAN, Dan Vasser, just popped to the past at random--there was speculation that there was some kind of genetic cause, but the series vanished before it could be developed. His unpredictable trips in time allowed for some very awkward scenes where he'd pop off at a very inopportune time, which added to the tension between his character and those of his family/friends. Now, I can't speak for everyone, but for me, I felt the show was well-written and had a strong cast. The stories were entertaining and the production was handled admirably, especially the scenes set in the past.

Why it got the boot: To this day there is still a campaign to get this show back on the air, but all efforts are futile. NBC put this gem of a show on immediately following the horrendous downfall of their primetime wunderkind, HEROES, which was hurting badly during its seconds season and was made all the more worse in the third. Sadly, because the networks ratings dropped, so did the ratings for JOURNEYMAN. Which was all the excuse NBC needed to pull the plug. But they allowed HEROES to die a very slow, and painful death--one that Silar couldn't have dreamed up in his twisted head--for another two years! Another major factor to deeply impacted the fate of the show was the WGA's Writer's Strike of 2007. This little skirmish between studio execs and the ever-abused writers caused many shows and movies to bite the dust because no one could work on them. Even with the outcry of staunch fans, there is no hope of a return to the show as the actor playing Dan found success on GRAY'S ANATOMY (as well as films like PERCY JACKSON), and the actor, Reed Diamond, who played his brother has found a solid home on the current hit (and one of my favorite new shows, ever) FRANKLIN & BASH.

Arachnis Ex Machina

The new teaser trailer for THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN is now available for viewing. The film has already been receiving mixed reviews based solely on the idea behind it. Director Mark Webb (ironic name, or product placement?) has said that he wants to distance himself from Sam Raimi's version the best he can. But I ask, what is so wrong with the other films? When SPIDER-MAN came out in 2002, it was under the same kind of fire the new one is, the only difference being that Raimi was able to intelligently defend most of his decisions (i.e. the organic web-shooters) whereas Webb seems to be using the defense of "well, since Raimi did it, I can't" thereby giving us the mechanical web-shooters that have appeared in the comics--and were subsequently replaced with organic ones around the time the first film came out, I do believe. My only real gripes about it are these:

1) Webb and Co. are retelling Spidey's origin story. I think that it's safe to say that we all know it already, so why go there? Why not just do a few simple flashbacks like Brian Synger did in SUPERMAN RETURNS?--though not the most wonderful of films to cite. Oddly enough, I started writing my own Spider-Man film before the release of the second Raimi film. In it, I spent the first ten pages or so focusing on a young Peter Parker and the sudden loss of his parents, which is exactly what Webb shows us in the teaser. This is important, I think, because most of the time, when we're talking about Peter's psyche, only the loss of his Uncle Ben is mentioned. I really think that the loss of his parents at such a young age is the first layer on his multi-tiered cake of misery served at his pity party.

2) The costume. Both Raimi and Webb have professed to being fans of the comics and their desire to stay true to the source material. Yet neither director seems to be giving up the secret of how a depressed teenager from Queens, New York is able to stitch together such a fancy-schmanzy costume that the studios have claimed cost more than $20,000 each! I thought the point was to make me believe that he made this thing himself. Perhaps Webb and Co. are taking a page from the Ultimate Spider-Man universe and having the costume be his wrestling outfit that he then buggers off with to battle his uncle's killer. In that case, it has more believability to it.

Some have already stated that they're going to boycott this movie, but I really think that's the wrong approach. If there is a movie that I think looks stupid, I wait for it to hit DVD so I can watch it at home, where I can pause it, comment endlessly on it, and just plain stop it if I want, and the most I'm out is maybe $5. And usually the people who protest the most about how much they hate where this looks like it's going, are the first ones in line to pay full price to see it and then gripe that they spent $20. Cut your losses! We all know that you're going to watch it eventually. Why are you putting up such a fuss about a reboot of a well-documented money-maker that actually has some talent behind it, when we are still getting trash like SCARY MOVIE INFINITY and SAW 900?

FADE IN:, Chapter One, Once Upon A Time . . .

The beginning. Whatever you call it, it is still just the starting point of a journey. Some of those journeys are in the form of films, books, or dreams--but they all have to start somewhere.

So here is where mine starts. Yours, too, if you want to come along.

I've done a lot of reading about blogging over the last few years, even seen some movies and TV shows get made based solely on the blog of a normal individual with good ideas. Some of my favorite writers have blogs where they share insight, tips, or anecdotes that make the process a little more bearable to us unaccomplished hordes trying to get out name out there. Many of them suggest blogging as not only a writing exercise, but as a way to get out writing in the public eye. I doubt that many publishers cruise the Internet looking for good writing in random blogs, but stranger things have happened.

I recently read an article on the importance of blogging for writers, but was a little upset that the piece omitted one very important detail: where to blog! The author went on and on about developing a relationship with an audience and making yourself available to the public, but said nothing of where to actually do these things. So I went on an exhaustive search through countless writer websites and into the vortex that is the blogosphere, only to discover that most of the information out there on blogging is A) a list of reasons why you should, and B) a list of blogs you should be reading. So finally I decided to cheat. I found the blog of a writer and followed it backwards to the general domain name and, presto, I have my own blog, though it is on one of the most popular sites. So I'm just a bit of plankton in the great sea of people who know more than me and get paid better, but at least I'm here--which is where I've been told to start.

So what am I going to be doing here? Well, I'll be doing some griping, complaining, moaning, and bitching. In between all of that I'll be updating how my novels, screenplays, short stories, etc. are coming along (which will include most, if not all, of the aforementioned). I'll also be reviewing books I've read and movies or TV shows I've seen. Also, some general observances that might make you laugh or roll your eyes, but will let you learn a little more about me and how things are going in the real world.

So spread the word. Tell your friends. Who knows, they may just make a movie about this one day . . . and I'll demand a "Screenplay By" credit!!