Too many new shows offering the same old crap.

[thwart]

It's weird to see how so many shows are still trying to capture the, "Friends", look and feel. Is anyone else sick of the "Friends" format or any of the other tired formats that the big networks are still trying to get us to watch?

All of the catastrophic "ER" shows and the hallway walking, witty bantering presidential shows can take a hike too.

Maybe I'm just upset because I haven't found a good sitcom since Raymond went of the air.

I'm glad that shows like Lost have come about that let us interact with the mythos, but there aren't a lot of shows that are doing that.

I wonder how long it will be before advertisers start demanding more avenues from the entertainment providers to sell there products and services. Commercials are at the beginning of their end. Product placement doesn't seem like a good fit. Perhaps putting little easter eggs from a show within a commercial or in between the commercials will be one of the new ways for advertisers to be successful. Monster.com has supported Lost's "Hanso Foundation" internet game.

[Fleck]

How about all the "job" shows. Lawyers, Cops, and Doctors are in most of the primetime spots on all the major networks its ridiculous! LOST is indeed a breath of fresh air. (Was the episode they showed tonight with Michael and Sawyer on the raft the first episode of the second season? I need to catch up before fall!)

[fmowry]

Do you watch Rescue Me? The Office? Deadwood? Rome? How I Met Your Mother? Two and A Half Men? The Shield?

Plenty of good TV that's not like everything else IMHO.

Frank

[bicker]

I agree. There's far more new good stuff these days than there ever was, in my memory.

[Steveknj]

Do you watch Rescue Me? The Office? Deadwood? Rome? How I Met Your Mother? Two and A Half Men? The Shield?

Plenty of good TV that's not like everything else IMHO.

Frank

While I love HIMYM, it is in the Friends genre (and probably the most successul clone of it to date), Two And a Half Men? Show's like that have been done. Having not watched The Shield, I can't really speak to it, but it is a cop show, no? I would agree, The Office (with the British version being better than the US version), Deadwood and Rome are definitely different, but the latter two are NOT adverstiser supported so they can get away with being different.

Me personally, if I never watched another cop show, I'd be too happy. TV has always followed a successful trend to death, usually killing it off within 4 or 5 seasons at most. In the 80s the family sitcom and the nightime soaps were king, in the 90s it was quirky comedy and medical shows, now we are getting Reality TV and Investigative cop/lawyer shows. Hopefully Lost will start a new trend of quirky adventure shows (although the few new ones they tried this season pretty much all failed).

[Sirius Black]

The Shield is not your average cop show. It is in a class by itself, IMO. Defintely no holier than thou preaching from a Sam Waterson lawyer type to sum up the 'issue of the episode".

[gchance]

Having not watched The Shield, I can't really speak to it, but it is a cop show, no?
"Good cop and bad cop have left for the day. I'm a different kinda cop." -- Vic Mackey

The Office (with the British version being better than the US version)
This one here just isn't fair. Better? No. Different? YES.

I think what we're seeing right now is a redefinition of all the genres that have been held sacred for many, many years. Right across the board, shows are changing the face of television. Of course after that everyone copies, but you see it all over.

Sci-Fi, cop shows, westerns, medical shows. House? Where have you seen House before, geez! I don't like it, but I can see it as a breakthrough. Lost is different, but it's also straight drama. The same could be said of Battlestar Galactica.

Don't be so quick to judge. There's a lot of stinkers but the ratio of good to stinker these days is much higher than it used to be.

Greg

[MickeS]

All of the catastrophic "ER" shows and the hallway walking, witty bantering presidential shows can take a hike too.

I tried to watch "The West Wing", but what you mention above turned me off of it within 5 minutes. Plus the hallway they walked in was so freaking dark! I had read that the show was supposed to be at least somewhat realistic, but those 5 minutes I watched were as much sci-fi as "STar Trek".

Maybe I need to watch some of these shows like "House" or "The Shield" but just the description of them makes me want to puke. I too am so tired of shows about doctors, cops and lawyers, that I can't even bring myself to try and watch one anymore.

[WinBear]

Have you checked out "My Name Is Earl"?

[Jeeters]

Do you watch Rescue Me? The Office? Deadwood? Rome? How I Met Your Mother? Two and A Half Men? The Shield?"Rome" is really just a night time soap opera (of the Dynasty/Dallas ilk) set back in ancient Rome. But I still like it. HIMYM is an (fairly successful) attempt to jump start a Friends-like sitcom again.

[Steveknj]

"Good cop and bad cop have left for the day. I'm a different kinda cop." -- Vic Mackey


This one here just isn't fair. Better? No. Different? YES.

I think what we're seeing right now is a redefinition of all the genres that have been held sacred for many, many years. Right across the board, shows are changing the face of television. Of course after that everyone copies, but you see it all over.

Sci-Fi, cop shows, westerns, medical shows. House? Where have you seen House before, geez! I don't like it, but I can see it as a breakthrough. Lost is different, but it's also straight drama. The same could be said of Battlestar Galactica.

Don't be so quick to judge. There's a lot of stinkers but the ratio of good to stinker these days is much higher than it used to be.

Greg

Well, we all have our opinions, I suppose. I really enjoyed the UK Office, but have watched a couple of episodes of the US version and just didn't like it.

Ratio of good to bad is probably the same as always, but, there are so many more choices that you can almost always find something decent on. The advent of cable showing original series is key because with a smaller audience expectation and a niche audience at that, a cable network can take a lot more chances on something different. It's something that I've really only recenlty discoverd (The 4400 was the show that changed my opinion of cable serious). I've often discounted series for cable (outside of HBO) as 2nd or 3rd rate, but there's definitely some good stuff out there. Like you said, some of the networks are now more willing to take some chances on some more unusual shows because of the success of some of these cable shows. Lost to me was made possible because of the success of some of these.

Now if we can convince the networks to do away with all of these reality clones, I'll be convinced they really want to do something different!!

[Magnolia88]

It's weird to see how so many shows are still trying to capture the, "Friends", look and feel. Is anyone else sick of the "Friends" format or any of the other tired formats that the big networks are still trying to get us to watch?

I completely agree. But the problem is: networks use the "same old, same old" formulas because they WORK. No matter how many variations of CSI and L&O make it to the air, those shows tend to get a lot of viewers. And HIMYM has been a big hit for CBS, no matter how much it follows the Friends formula. So "same old tired format" works for most of the American viewing public.

Shows that take a risk and try something new tend to be shows that get low ratings. You mentioned Lost and it's the obvious exception to the rule because it's a big hit (so of course it spawned several imitators). But there are others.

The Office is certainly trying something new with its deadpan dry humor and faux-documentary style. (Yeah, it copied the UK version but it's still different for American TV.) It's been doing pretty well but it's not a Friends-level hit. Ditto for My Name is Earl, with its wacky "Raising Arizona" style comedy.

Veronica Mars is also pretty unique and original and it's begging for an audience. Yeah, it's got the basic Twin Peaks premise of a whodunit mystery surrounding the murder of a teenage girl in a small town, but it has a completely fresh approach by using the hard-boiled film noir style straight out of the 40s, combined with razor-sharp wit and humor.

I'd say that Rescue Me was pretty original also, but it's on cable and cable shows have the luxury of trying new and risky stuff. HBO lives for it. But networks don't want to try anything risky because risky shows can't get the viewers that a network show needs - they inevitably land in the "brilliant but canceled" heap. So if you want "original" shows on network TV, WATCH original shows. Support shows like The Office and Veronica Mars and turn off CSI: Toledo.

Do you watch Rescue Me? The Office? Deadwood? Rome? How I Met Your Mother? Two and A Half Men? The Shield?

Cable, cable, cable, cable. The OP was talking about network programming specifically. Cable shows have a lot more latitude to try new things, and HBO is the hallmark of risky programming.

As for the network shows you mention, I agree that The Office is original (see above). I don't see HIMYM as original at all (a total Friends clone imho, although NPH is a hoot) and Two and Half Men seems like standard "wacky sitcom family with bratty kid" to me. Didn't My Two Dads cover the same territory? YMMV, but I don't see anything "fresh" or "original" about it, even if it's done well and it's funny.

[fmowry]

Doogie makes HIMYM the anti-Friends. Has Two and a Half Men been done? Maybe if you consider My Two Dads a predecessor. Heck, than I guess House is just a Quincy ripoff.

I think your definition of been done and my definition are quite different.

Frank

[Steveknj]

Doogie makes HIMYM the anti-Friends. Has Two and a Half Men been done? Maybe if you consider My Two Dads a predecessor. Heck, than I guess House is just a Quincy ripoff.

I think your definition of been done and my definition are quite different.

Frank

I think what he's saying is that the ideas are not new really, just a different spin on the same ideas. Nothing wrong with that if done well, but really not totally new ideas. I suppose you could say pretty much any show, no matter how different has had roots in other shows. I think though, that if the same idea of the show was done like 30 years ago, even though it's rehashed, I'd consider it new and different from what is shown today....

[Magnolia88]

Has Two and a Half Men been done? Maybe if you consider My Two Dads a predecessor. Heck, than I guess House is just a Quincy ripoff.

I'm not a regular watcher of Two and a Half Men, so I may be wrong. If so, by all means explain how it's fresh and original and different from what has come before. Maybe I'll start watching.

House has very little in common with Quincy, other than the medical angle. House takes the standard medical procedural show format but turns it on its head with an unbelievably unlikable protagonist. His whole schtick is that he's a big jerk who hates his patients and barely tolerates his co-workers. When has that been done before? (If anything, House reminds me of Hawkeye Pierce. Brilliant doctor, but sarcastic and irreverent. But Hawkeye didn't ridicule his patients.)

I think House walks the line between "tired old format" and trying something new. It uses and old format but gives it a new twist.

[mqpickles]

Have you checked out "My Name Is Earl"? :up: I think Earl is the best new sitcom since Seinfeld. (I never thought Raymond was that great; Debra was too much of a witch for me to enjoy.)

I really enjoy The Office too. I loved the BBC original, but I think the American one is almost as good, just in its own way.

[hc130radio]

I thought "It's Always Sunny In Philadelpha" was pretty funny and original. I liked all the characters last season. Hopefully this new season will be just as funny.

[balboa dave]

I'm not a regular watcher of Two and a Half Men, so I may be wrong. If so, by all means explain how it's fresh and original and different from what has come before. Maybe I'll start watching.

House has very little in common with Quincy, other than the medical angle. House takes the standard medical procedural show format but turns it on its head with an unbelievably unlikable protagonist. His whole schtick is that he's a big jerk who hates his patients and barely tolerates his co-workers. When has that been done before? (If anything, House reminds me of Hawkeye Pierce. Brilliant doctor, but sarcastic and irreverent. But Hawkeye didn't ridicule his patients.)

I think House walks the line between "tired old format" and trying something new. It uses and old format but gives it a new twist.What makes Two and a Half Men fresh and original is the writing. It's smart, clever, cynical, and adult. The cast has great chemistry, and I think they're fun to watch. Head and shoulders above the conventional sitcom format.

House has been done before, but as a series of newspaper stories. It was called Sherlock Holmes. :D

For a similar curmudgeonly doctor, you only need to look as far as Becker (Ted Danson).

[thwart]

I so agree with the earlier posts to this thread about "reality tv".

Dumb, dumb, dumb, dumb, dumb.

They're usually all actors anyway. Even in the case where there not, it seems like they're all about embarrassing the heck out of everyone.

I'm not too keen on the gameshows either.

[ClutchBrake]

I so agree with the earlier posts to this thread about "reality tv".

Dumb, dumb, dumb, dumb, dumb.

They're usually all actors anyway. Even in the case where there not, it seems like they're all about embarrassing the heck out of everyone.

I'm not too keen on the gameshows either.

I crap on most reality TV but am hooked on Deadlist Catch* and The Ultimate Fighter.

*Not sure if Deadliest Catch is what you would call reality TV though.