S02.E03: Form Fetish

[Bort]

Quote

Abby and Dan try to undo some drastic budget cuts by taking on City Hall and a bureaucrat who lives to say "no." Olivia and Gurgs stumble on a business opportunity and quickly realize why friendship and discontinued soda don't mix.

Airdate: January 9, 2024

[AnimeMania]

Daniel Acker as Miles
Jackie Hoffman as Linda

John Gemberling as Bryant

[DanaK]

I kind of loved Linda. I enjoyed the episode overall

[Annber03]

I liked Linda, too :). 

[Starchild]

Linda was the best part of the episode. Wish she could be a regular.

[Scott]

37 minutes ago, Starchild said:

Linda was the best part of the episode.

...which still only brought it from a 1/10 to a 2/10.  I mean, I'm not going into these expecting anything more than fluff, but this season hasn't even been holding my interest when I try to watch.  I hope that changes soon...

[Starchild]

The writing in this version is definitely not as good as the old one. I seem to recall the 80s version had writing almost on par with Designing Women (except it didn't tend towards the dramatic as often), and that's saying something.

But I think that might be a reflection of TV sitcoms today in general. I often think that newer generations of writers, on average, don't have the life experience that older ones did at the same stage of life.

I generally worry about what younger generations aspire to. It seems that more people are trying to make money on TikTok and YouTube, rather than trying to become doctors, engineers, construction workers, people who create and build things, instead of reacting to what others are creating and building.

Sorry for the existential dread lol.

[Keywestclubkid]

La la la Linda ... ok that was funny 

[North of Eden]

First real stinker of the reboot. Ironically because it embrassed the sureal elements of the original series with people acting weird over the old soda.

General thoughts: I understand why Neil was replaced as last season I didn't feel his character was working or was funny, however...I cringe whenever the new clerk has lines. His character sucks and it just feels like they wanted to go for a goofy anti-Mac character and it isn't working. My only hope is that he's not listed in the main credits.

Speaking of which they should have kept the photo credits. It feels like a disservice when actors' names flash by on the screen under a scene.

The heart of the show is the Dan/Abby relationship. I like the more heartfelt tone of the first season.

The Roz episode...I don't understand why Harry is the only one continually referenced. Roz and Dan should have brought up the fate of Christine, Bull, and Mac as to whether they are still dead or alive in this universe.

Bring back Will, the bum Phil's brother only this time make him having lost all his money and he really is a bum.

If the show weren't already weighted with females I would say bring back Mac's wife played by the original actress to be the clerk and provide continuity. Or maybe make it a clerk of the week who does not have any lines and focus on creating a permanent stenographer character.

[Yeah No]

Eh, I'm still not loving this show except for "Linda"/Jackie Hoffman in this episode, although I like her better on "Only Murders in the Building".  Too bad it seems she won't be a regular.

Even though there were issues with Neil I think the new one is much worse.  They could have changed course with him rather than let him go.  

On 1/11/2024 at 2:43 PM, Starchild said:

But I think that might be a reflection of TV sitcoms today in general. I often think that newer generations of writers, on average, don't have the life experience that older ones did at the same stage of life.

Amen to that.  I've said pretty much that on other threads.

[benteen]

I enjoyed this episode and have been liking the show more. The Linda thing was fun and I used to find Olivia too broad a character but have liked her more and more every week. I like the Olivia and Gurgs friendship.

I cut it more slack then say the new Frasier. Night Court was a great comedy but Frasier set the bar so high that I feel like it shouldn't have been brought back unless the writing would be to that standard. If you look at the resumes of the original Frasier writers, it's some of the best comedies on television. The resumes of the new Frasier writers absolutely pale in comparison and I'mbeing generous there. 

An excellent point about how today's writers don't have the same life experience as yesterday's writers. I was actually thinking about it in regards to college football with the recent retirement of Nick Saban. It feels like he was the last of the old school coaches. College football thrives on these coaches because athletes only play a short time in college. When a guy like Saban retires, college football as a whole loses something. I'd read a biography of a coach who started his career in the 70s as opposed to one of the newer breed of coaches. I guarantee that would be a much more interesting read.

The best sitcom on network TV is Abbott Elementary. It's a great show and not just great for network TV great. It really is great. The creator of Abbott Elementary, Quinta Brunson, I read based the show on her mother's experience teaching in the Philadelphia school system as she grew up. That makes for interesting life experiences to write about. 

I certainly wouldn't mind getting an update on Christine or Mac. But I don't want to hear that the characters passed away. The reason you had to do it with Harry was because they made the decision for Abby to be Harry's daughter. Otherwise, Harry would possibly still be alive off-camera. I wonder for instance if Christine continued on in politics and became Senator Sullivan.

Edited January 14 by benteen

[Fosca]

Jackie Hoffman immediately raises the quality of any show she's in; I've seen her in several shows in New York and she's absolutely wonderful and completely hysterical.

Quite frankly, if this show didn't have John Larroquette playing Dan Fielding, I wouldn't be watching it.  I watched some clips from the NBC website of the old show and was reminded just how great that show was; I may spend my time rewatching that instead.

I didn't even try with the Frasier reboot; there's no way they could catch that lightning in a bottle twice.  And without David Hyde Pierce as Niles for Kelsey Grammar to play off of (and vice versa), it's not worth my time.

[Starchild]

2 hours ago, benteen said:

An excellent point about how today's writers don't have the same life experience as yesterday's writers.

I was struggling a little to really describe my thoughts.

I may have written this somewhere before. If you've ever stumbled across a kid's sitcom on YTV or Nickelodeon or something in the last decade or two, what you've seen is a very broad, , shrill acting style. And of course, since this is for kids, the comedy itself is very simplistic.

It feels like the kids who grew up watching this, who've done little as they've grown up beyond scrolling their phones and tablets, and have become writers themselves, think that this is what comedy is, even for adults.

And the new generation of TV executives who greenlight these shows don't know any better either.

Between these lightweight sitcoms, reality TV, and cookie cutter procedurals, network television seems to be an idiocracy these days. The more enlightened and mature writers seem to gravitate to HBO and other premium sources.

 

24 minutes ago, Fosca said:

Jackie Hoffman immediately raises the quality of any show she's in; I've seen her in several shows in New York and she's absolutely wonderful and completely hysterical.

Quite frankly, if this show didn't have John Larroquette playing Dan Fielding, I wouldn't be watching it.  I watched some clips from the NBC website of the old show and was reminded just how great that show was; I may spend my time rewatching that instead.

I didn't even try with the Frasier reboot; there's no way they could catch that lightning in a bottle twice.  And without David Hyde Pierce as Niles for Kelsey Grammar to play off of (and vice versa), it's not worth my time.

Are you me?

[North of Eden]

On 1/14/2024 at 12:50 PM, Fosca said:

Jackie Hoffman immediately raises the quality of any show she's in; I've seen her in several shows in New York and she's absolutely wonderful and completely hysterical.

I didn't even try with the Frasier reboot; there's no way they could catch that lightning in a bottle twice.  And without David Hyde Pierce as Niles for Kelsey Grammar to play off of (and vice versa), it's not worth my time.

Agreed on Jackie Hoffman. I always stand up and take notice whenever she appears in something. Excellent character actress.

Disagree on FRASIER.  You are missing out. It's actually very good. The British actor playing Alan is the MVP. The only weak link is the nephew David...he is out of place in a modern-day sitcom. Straight out of GILLIGAN'S ISLAND but he's only there to appease Niiles/Daphne fans. It was great seeing Lilith again and hoping for CHEERS cameos next season.

[Yeah No]

On 1/14/2024 at 1:23 PM, Starchild said:

I was struggling a little to really describe my thoughts.

I may have written this somewhere before. If you've ever stumbled across a kid's sitcom on YTV or Nickelodeon or something in the last decade or two, what you've seen is a very broad, , shrill acting style. And of course, since this is for kids, the comedy itself is very simplistic.

It feels like the kids who grew up watching this, who've done little as they've grown up beyond scrolling their phones and tablets, and have become writers themselves, think that this is what comedy is, even for adults.

And the new generation of TV executives who greenlight these shows don't know any better either.

Between these lightweight sitcoms, reality TV, and cookie cutter procedurals, network television seems to be an idiocracy these days. The more enlightened and mature writers seem to gravitate to HBO and other premium sources.

Are you me?

I actually think you're me too....I have written almost exactly this in other threads.  

You're right, but it's also that the kids writing this stuff are engaging in imitation of an original, not coming up with anything creative themselves.  They don't really "get it" so their imitation is going to miss the mark at best.  Everything is like a poorly done caricature of the original.  I see this with young people's perceptions about decades past.  They have a stereotyped impression of what things were like in those days based on watching old TV shows and YouTubes.  Then they think they're experts about it when they're most definitely NOT.  They'll tell you what decade something was from and are often wrong.  My husband's nephew once insisted we were watching the '70s, meanwhile my sister in law and I both said, "No, it's the '80s" at the same time.  This guy was born in the '90s, WTF does he know?  So their perceptions of it are skewed going into it at best.

I once wrote that one of the reasons young people today have difficulty with comedy is because they didn't grow up in the "school of hard knocks" like so many great comedians and comedy writers did in decades past.  Great comedy often comes out of pain and a lot of these kids were so sheltered they didn't get to experience any of that.  There is no "edge", no way of relating things to a crude reality.  Their cartoons were milquetoast and pablum by comparison to Looney Tunes.  Parents thought they were saving their kids from their own harsh experience by sheltering them from harsher realities, but at the same time they were depriving them of experiences that give you depth and make you a better writer.

A lot of the great comedic writers of the past came from the streets of NYC and that's no accident.  A lot of the great situation comedies were set in NYC because that's where the people that created and wrote them were from.  I grew up there in the '60s and '70s.  It was no piece of cake, and the people were very colorful and interesting in general.  I don't think the people writing this show now have much of a clue about NYC either past or present.  And they and their writing suffer for it.

I've also theorized that some of the head scratching stuff I'm seeing on these new shows has been written with the assistance of AI, which also is not up to the task of comedy in general.  

 And the reason the more mature and better writers are on the streaming channels is probably because they're willing to pay more.  Although the Frasier reboot is also lousy so the problem even exists there.

[Irlandesa]

I don't think any issues with comedy is because kids are coddled. They still face addiction, abuse, economic insecurity like people did in the past. I also don't know the ages of the writers for this show.

Professional writers these days can get a professional writing job and still need to do odd jobs to make ends meet.  It's a different scenario from the past, where you could be a lower-level writer or writer's assistant in a writers' room, earn a living, and learn from the more experienced writers before you progress into higher-up roles.  

But producers, started by streaming, are more reluctant to want to fund a writers' room.  Then, if you add in the fact that there have been progressively fewer multi-camera sitcoms being produced, it reduces the available apprenticeships even more.  In addition, the reduction of writers in writers' rooms means fewer people are available to punch up scripts or add even more jokes. 

[Yeah No]

39 minutes ago, Irlandesa said:

I don't think any issues with comedy is because kids are coddled. They still face addiction, abuse, economic insecurity like people did in the past. I also don't know the ages of the writers for this show.

Professional writers these days can get a professional writing job and still need to do odd jobs to make ends meet.  It's a different scenario from the past, where you could be a lower-level writer or writer's assistant in a writers' room, earn a living, and learn from the more experienced writers before you progress into higher-up roles.  

But producers, started by streaming, are more reluctant to want to fund a writers' room.  Then, if you add in the fact that there have been progressively fewer multi-camera sitcoms being produced, it reduces the available apprenticeships even more.  In addition, the reduction of writers in writers' rooms means fewer people are available to punch up scripts or add even more jokes. 

I've read about the reduction of writers in writers' rooms and agree with you about that.  The other thing is that they're writing these things piecemeal, with bits written by different people being woven together.  Some of the continuity and comedic timing are lost.  

But getting back to the "coddling", part of that is that young people are taught today that a lot of humor is offensive and wrong.  Several older comedians have complained that they have been stifled by this atmosphere.  Young people are primed to find things we used to take in stride offensive and that includes not being able to laugh at themselves.  But ironically as this is going on there's a greater trend to laugh in a mean spirited way at someone else's failure.  I blame YouTube and stuff like "Word's Dumbest Criminals" for that.

Also I think being exposed to the things you mention above is different than being exposed to taking your lumps in real life social situations with other people and given that the young people today don't grow up exposed to as many of those social situations and mostly see life from the point of view of a computer or phone screen makes them more sheltered in terms of social situations and have developed a skewed perception about "real life" and that's what I'm talking about.

[Yeah No]

1 hour ago, Irlandesa said:

I don't think any issues with comedy is because kids are coddled. They still face addiction, abuse, economic insecurity like people did in the past. I also don't know the ages of the writers for this show.

Another thought:  People used to find humor in their misfortunes.  Today young people tend not to process their feelings about it through humor but instead wallow in entitlement, anger and depression, which can lead to violence and self destruction.  Humor is one of the best ways to deal with a crap hand in life, in my opinion.  There used to be a value place on self-reliance and picking yourself up.  When I say "coddled" I mean that they somehow learn that they have no options and so never take any risks.  If your parents don't encourage you to become self reliant you're going to stay home and never learn anything about life.  And hence you don't ever get to the point of being a good comedy writer!

[Irlandesa]

14 hours ago, Yeah No said:

Several older comedians have complained that they have been stifled by this atmosphere. 

But why do they get to determine what is funny and who is too sensitive?   I've seen some older comics do this too and I find it highly ironic these often very successful comics, who are still raking in millions of dollars, whine about not being able to tell that one homophobic joke because a younger audience won't like it. 

But there's always been a generational aspect to comedy in that people who loved the comedy of the 60s didn't always appreciate the comedy of the 70s, 80s, 90s...etc.  And people who liked comedy in the 80s might think the comedy of the 60s is just so silly.

I don't know that I've seen a younger generation unable to laugh at themselves.  Like any generation, they probably take the jokes easier when it's from their peers as opposed to when it's by someone older who is out of touch with the struggles they face just as baby boomers don't love when they're made fun of by 20-somethings.

[Yeah No]

1 minute ago, Irlandesa said:

But why do they get to determine what is funny and who is too sensitive?   I've seen some older comics do this too and I find it highly ironic these often very successful comics, who are still raking in millions of dollars, whine about not being able to tell that one homophobic joke because a younger audience won't like it. 

But there's always been a generational aspect to comedy in that people who loved the comedy of the 60s didn't always appreciate the comedy of the 70s, 80s, 90s...etc.  And people who liked comedy in the 80s might think the comedy of the 60s is just so silly.

I don't know that I've seen a younger generation unable to laugh at themselves.  Like any generation, they probably take the jokes easier when it's from their peers as opposed to when it's by someone older who is out of touch with the struggles they face just as baby boomers don't love when they're made fun of by 20-somethings.

This is just my opinion, but good comedy stands the test of time or we wouldn't have reruns of 30, 40 and 50 year old situation comedies that young people also watch just as my generation watched comedies from before our time too, like "I love Lucy", etc.  My 30 year old nephews are familiar with all the great comedians and TV and movie comedies of my youth and I don't think they're unique.  Also, I think we used to have more young comedians that appealed to audiences of all ages, like Robin Williams and many that have come out of SNL.  My parents, who were born in the 1920s used to LOVE SNL back in the day and called themselves my "parental units" after the Coneheads.  It was just good comedy, it knew no generation.  Why should a generational divide exist in comedy at all?  Just a rhetorical question.

I just took a look at a couple of "best young comics" lists and only recognized a handful of names on them (even though one of them had my maiden last name which is not that common).  I do happen to catch the Sirius comedy channel when I drive in my husband's car and some of it is very funny but they tend to play stuff going back a few years too, not just current stuff.  And how many of these people are in their 20s, which is what I consider "young" today?  Most of them appear to be older than that.   And on the IMDB list most of them were born in the '70s. 

I think part of the problem is that there are so many places to see comics now that you really have to be paying attention to comedy in general to know them or just happen to watch a show with them in it.  Back in the day you only had a few places to look.  So they get lost in the shuffle.  I don't personally have the time to be on all of these platforms 24/7 to know all of them.