In defense of Multi-Camera shows

Practically every great sitcom for the last 60 years has used some version of the multi-camera format. Yes, there are exceptions like MASH and WESTWARD HA! But for the most part, series that we all (younger, desirable viewers included) watch and relish are all multi-camera.

Single-camera sitcoms are more in vogue.   Networks claim we’re tired of the multi-camera form. We’re tired of bad lazy writing. We’re tired of old predictable rhythms. But we’re sure not tired of…

I LOVE LUCY
THE HONEYMOONERS
THE PHIL SILVERS SHOW
THE DICK VAN DYKE SHOW
ALL IN THE FAMILY
MAUDE
THE ODD COUPLE
THE MARY TYLER MOORE SHOW
THE BOB NEWHART SHOW
NEWHART
COSBY
CHEERS
TAXI
FRASIER
FRIENDS
SEINFELD
EVERYBODY LOVES RAYMOND
GOLDEN GIRLS
MURPHY BROWN
BARNEY MILLER
HAPPY DAYS
LAVERNE & SHIRLEY
SANFORD & SON

And three or four of your favorites I forgot to mention.

Comedy, a live audience and multiple cameras -- put them together and you have the uh... Big Bang Theory of sitcoms.

WINGS deserved more recognition

Howdy from Denver. Here are some Friday Questions from the Mile High City.

Michael gets us started:

I always felt "Wings", while not quite at the same level as "Cheers" and "Frasier", was overlooked in terms of critical acclaim. Do you agree and, if so, why do think that was so?

I totally agree. WINGS never got the recognition it deserved.  And the truth is it was a damn funny show – funnier than CHEERS and FRASIER on certain occasions. The stories were well-crafted and clever, and the cast was top notch.  Yet, it never achieved that sheen that prestigious shows enjoy.  Why?  Pure speculation on my part but following CHEERS always put it unfairly in its shadow. 

WINGS really was discovered once it began running on USA (fifteen times a day). Personally, I think WINGS holds up great is still funnier than most sitcoms on today.

Looking back, we really were in a Golden Age of Comedy if WINGS was considered second tier.


Brian Phillips has another WINGS-related question:

While looking at the first season of "Wings" on Netflix, I noticed that one of the producers was Roz Doyle, which, of course, is the same name of Peri Gilpin's character on "Frasier". I know you have mentioned how other characters in other shows have gotten named. Are there any other stories as to how the characters on "Frasier" were named?

Roz Doyle was the line producer of WINGS and passed away very young. Peter Casey, David Lee, & David Angell were the creators of both WINGS and FRASIER. They named Peri’s character Roz Doyle as a lovely tribute.

I can’t think of any other significant stories behind the naming of the characters. Since FRASIER was essentially a family show, they really only had to come up with first names for characters. That, by the way, may be the single best reason to do a family comedy.

And yet another WINGS question, this one from VegasGuy.

I was watching Wings (I'm going through them all on NetFlix) and I swear I saw an actor (he was a vacuum salesman) that was in an earlier episode (several years back) from another episode.

This made me think about The Practice where John Laroquette was a great villan character and THEN he showed up in Boston Legal (same universe) as a different character and a series regular.

So here's the question: Why do that? Are there not enough actors out there? I love John Laroquette (Stripes) as much as the next guy but surely someone else could have played the part?

It’s not a matter of a shortage of actors. In this town you can’t swing a dead cat without hitting at least five people who all guested on NCIS. But finding special actors? That’s tough.

And if you should get lucky and find that a guest player really scores through the roof, not only will you want to use him again, you’ll want to hire six bodyguards to make sure nothing ever happens to him.

On MASH, Harry Morgan, who played Colonel Potter, originally was in an early episode as a nutcase General. It’s actually my single favorite episode of MASH, and he’s exceptionally funny in it. If there was an opening for Hot Lips’ sister I would have suggested Harry. He was that good.

Yes, you have a continuity issue if you bring an actor back as another character, but it’s so worth it. And why should you let a special actor get away just because he did a small guest role two seasons ago as patron #3?

From Bill McCloskey:

Ken, since canceling my cable, I've had great fun watching all the Cheers episodes and now the Frasier episodes back to back. One "bit" I'd like to ask about because it is used so often in both Cheers and Frasier, that I wonder if you guys invented it. What I'm talking about is the situation where two characters start calling each other names and it ends with them falling into each others arms. Of course the first time I remember it being used was when Sam and Diane got together for the first time in season one. It then popped up more frequently, most recently between Frasier and the new Station Manager played by Mercedes Ruhl. Any thoughts on this recurring plot device?

I’m sure the convention had been used numerous times before CHEERS. Not being a scholarly student of old romcoms and screwball comedies I can’t produce specific examples off the top of my head (which is a little woozy anyway in this thin altitude), but I suspect Spencer Tracy & Kate Hepburn played out similar scenes in their movies. Same with Barbara Stanwyck and every co-star she ever had.

Doesn’t Rhett Butler get pissed and sweep Scarlet O’Hara off her feet and take her upstairs? My guess is a few of you readers will be able to cite specific examples (or, more likely, correct mine).

The key is passion.   And if the passion is really at a boil, a couple can switch from hate to love in one nano-second.  

So as much as I’d love to, I can’t take credit on behalf of CHEERS for that convention. For all I know, it was first employed in ancient Greece by Lucy and Desi Paparopolis.

What's your question?  Leave them in the comments section.  Thanks.    And join me tonight with Rick Rizzs for arena baseball at Coors Field on 710 ESPN Seattle, the Mariners Radio Network, and MLB.COM.  

What you can and can't say on television

A few weeks ago I spoke at a comedy symposium at U.C. Santa Barbara (along with other panelists the students had actually heard of).  There was a good crowd, several hundred at least -- all the more impressive because the surf was really up that day.  During one of the panels (not mine), they showed a clip from an ALL IN THE FAMILY episode from the early '70s.  It's the famous scene where entertainer Sammy Davis Jr. finds himself in Archie Bunker's home.

The students were stunned.  The scene deals with racial issues and prejudice.  And some of the words uttered were absolutely shocking to them.   The "N-Word" for one. 

Today there is no way in hell you could do this scene.  You probably couldn't discuss this topic much less say the words bandied about in this piece.

On the other hand, in the '70s even vague euphemisms for sexual body parts was strictly forbidden.  You could say the N-Word, but you sure couldn't say the V-Word.   Today, not only can you say vagina, you are required to say vagina at least five times an episode (six during sweeps).

So which era's brand of comedy is better?  Which is funnier?  Has more social value?

There is no real answer of course.  It depends on your age and sensibilities.  But to help you decide, here's an example of both.   First, the Sammy Davis Jr. ALL IN THE FAMILY scene, and then a representative clip from 2 BROKE GIRLS.

Would love to hear your thoughts.

I hate PowerPoint

Imagine you had to give a presentation to a fairly large group. The topic is something you know something about. The quarterly report. The latest advances in merkins. Whatever.  And while you're delivering this presentation you also have to put on rock climbing gear. Bulky jacket,boots, lacing up the heavy boots, attaching one or two harnesses, stocking up on flares and picks. All this while you're analyzing T.S. Eliot poetry.

Well for the most part, that's what it's like when you do a presentation with PowerPoint. Ive been to a number of conferences lately where good speakers with interesting topics were derailed by PowerPoint presentations. They spent half their talks fumbling around with slides. At first the audience is patient and has a little empathy. But after five minutes you want to scream, "Hey, numnuts! They're friggin' bullet points. Who gives a shit?! Just talk!".

PowerPoint and similar programs kill more lectures than they help. Yes, if you need visuals, fine. Let's say you're explaining how Facebook works or just "what is pornography?"  Slides would help -- in some cases the bigger, the better.

But now you can easily make graphs and graphics to just underscore the text of your talk. 68% of homeowners have spice racks.  "I don't believe you. Oh wait, I'm now looking at a slide of a spice rack and underneath it says 68% of homeowners have these. Okay, you sold me!".

The truth is speakers now use PowerPoint as a crutch. They think the can jazz up their presentations with visual aids. All too often though this results in technical snafus, fumbling around, the wrong slides, and takes the speaker right out of any rhythm. And most of the time the slides are boring, hard to read, and unnecessary.

Some people think if they don't arm themselves with PowerPoint that the audience will think they're unprepared. That's bullshit!

As a speaker, your job is to communicate. Talk to us. Share ideas, if it's a topic you're excited about let us see that.  You don't have to be the worlds greatest speaker. But your genuine enthusiasm will sell your message. Not a dizzying display of pie charts.

A helpful tip that will mean more than a slide proclaiming "4 warning signs of gum decay" is to start your talk with a story. People love stories and it puts them at ease. People think you have to begin with a joke -- the great woody Allen intro: " I'm reminded of the incestuous farmer's daughter...". No. You don't have to do that. If you got a great joke and you're good at delivering jokes then yeah, kill 'em. But a brief story, preferably personal, will achieve the same goal of disarming your crowd.

Speak with passion. Again, you don't have to be Billy Graham or Zig Zigler. But make us understand why the topic is interesting to you. In this case, a well placed word is worth a thousand pictures.

The Mariners are in Cleveland to begin a brief two-game series against the Sons of the Wigwam.  Join Rick Rizzs and me for the call tonight on 710 ESPN Seattle, the Mariners Radio Network, and MLB.COM.  

Now that the networks have announced their schedules, some random thoughts...

Unlike NBC, CBS opted to pick up comedies by proven showrunners. Max Mutchnick & David Kohan got a show along with Alan Kirschenbaum. And both show are multi-camera.

Meanwhile, NBC continues to assign showrunners to new series created by inexperienced writers. Now you’d think they’d try to match the perfect writer with the perfect project? No. They’re assigning showrunners that they have deals with. NBC is the Fantastic Sams of networks.

Yes, WHITNEY got picked up. But look where NBC scheduled it. In the Friday 8-9 death slot. And what did they pair it with? COMMUNITY – the show they don’t like but feel they have to re-order to appear cool. They’ll both be gone by mid-season when NBC will probably use that hour to just rerun shows from earlier in the week.

Meanwhile, PARKS AND RECREATION got an order of 22 (not 13 like COMMUNITY and WHITNEY) and assigned to Thursday night. This is a show NBC believes in… and rightly so.

Who was NBC kidding when they tried to tell us 30 ROCK had no plans to end their run? Crew members are already stealing props from the set for souvenirs. Yesterday they announced that it would be going off after 13.  It's time. 

NBC is making a big deal over the fact that “Emmy-winner Jimmy Fallon” has a new sitcom, GUYS WITH KIDS. He’s not going to be showrunning it. It’s just his company. His name is on it. There are already five or six other executive producers who will be handling the writing. Next they’ll tell us that multi-Oscar winner, Walt Disney has a new show on the NBC schedule.

Here’s an NBC head-scratcher (and then I'll move to other networks). ROCK CENTER WITH BRIAN WILLIAMS has gotten some of the worst ratings in the history of the network. Juiceman informercials beat it. And yet, not only did NBC renew it, they gave it an upgraded spot – Thursday at 10.  If they really want to get viewers for that show let Brian's daughter host it. 

Simon Cowell has now surrendered his last shred of credibility by naming Britney Spears as a judge on THE X-FACTOR. Paula wasn’t stupid enough? Does Simon seriously expect anyone on the planet to give a flying fig about what Britney Spears thinks… about anything? Your show is now officially a joke.

I applaud CBS for cancelling ROB! even though it got acceptable numbers. I’d like to think that at the end of the day CBS just said, “Is this really what we want to have on our network?” The ghost of William Paley thanks you.

What can I say about ABC? They renewed Nancy Travis and didn’t pick up Roseanne. I love ABC.

Comedy continues its comeback. FOX will now have an all-comedy night on Tuesdays. The new Mindy Kaling project looks promising.

And finally, I notice that Kate Hudson will be recurring on GLEE – a sure sign that her movie career is over. She’s saying she’s thrilled to be a part of GLEE but what she’s really thinking is, “Damn that Elizabeth Banks!”

Help Wanted: Showrunners

Just left New York before the big Upfronts announcements – not that any of the networks would’ve invited me to any of their launch parties anyway. (“Levine doesn’t have a show and he eats all the shrimp!”) Big new trend this year: new series picked up without proven showrunners. How can you tell? When the networks told the lucky pilot creators they were on the schedule they reacted by saying, “Yay!” and not “Oh shit!” Only seasoned showrunners, who know what to expect, say that.

In their quest to get new ideas and new voices, the networks have favored development with feature writers and actors and pretty much anyone who doesn’t have the stink of “knows how to do this” on them.  In fact, writers on existing shows were often discouraged from taking time away from work to develop.

Is it worth it? We’ll see in September. Will the ideas and voices be that fresh? My guess is no. My guess is another reason inexperienced TV writer/creators are sought are because they’re much more willing to take network and studio notes. I’ve been in pilot situations where literally twenty suits are giving notes. You sit around a giant conference table like in DR. STRANGELOVE and get bombarded by mandatory “suggestions” – many of which conflict. Do the people giving those notes have fresh ideas and voices? What do you think?

And then the downside. You obviously can’t put someone in charge of a multi-million dollar production who hasn’t done it before. Yes, there are generally Pod Producers attached (non writing producers – former executives who get cushy production deals), but this only underscores how unnecessary they are since they can't write or direct and that's sorta what's needed to make television shows.

So now you have to orchestrate arranged marriages. How often do they work? Many times the original creator gets trampled under the feet of the experienced showrunner. You’re a chef. You’ve created this delicate soufflé. And now Gordon Ramsey is brought in to run your kitchen.

And for the showrunners themselves – let’s be honest – they sort of resent just being hired guns. And I don’t blame them. The networks weren’t interested in their original ideas. Instead, they're just offered a job. They’re saddled with partners they don’t feel they need, and you can understand if they don’t have a real emotional investment in the project. Should the show be a big hit, all of the articles will center on the creator and the wonderful story of how she was Paula Abdul’s personal shopper until a year ago.

It just seems odd to me that a network would order a show before knowing exactly who is going to be the creative force. Let me amend that – odd that they would order so many shows. One or two? Okay. But this year there are eight or ten. In all genres.

Does the practice pay off? Sure. Sometimes. You can win a big jackpot drawing on an inside straight. But I suspect most big game poker players would tell you that’s not the best strategy.

Hello from Boston, where tonight the M's begin a brief two-game series with the Bosox.  Join me and Rick Rizzs for the action on 710 ESPN in Seattle and MLB.COM. 

Live from the train

This is a first -- a live blog post. I'm on the Mariners train from New York to Boston. The team won today so I get to ride inside and not on the cow catcher.

At the moment we're stopped somewhere near New Haven to let another train pass. I'll be pissed if it's the Yankees.

As for the scenery -- picture the French countryside with landfills.

But there's something romantic about a baseball team traveling by train. Oh for the days of club cars and Babe Ruth vomiting into spittoons!

Going to sign off now. The train has started up again. And I've got a movie to watch. I hope Unstoppable is good.

Happy Mothers' Day to all you moms and queens

HAPPY MOTHER'S DAY!!! Especially to the mom of my kids, Debby.

This year I'm spending Mother's Day the traditional way -- at Yankee Stadium, calling the Mariners-Yankees game on 701 ESPN Seattle, the Mariners Radio Network, and MLB.COM.  

But when you think of great mom's, who springs to mind first?  Why, Queen Elizabeth of course!   So for the first time ever, a blog post that combines Mothers' Day, the Queen of England, and baseball. 

In 1991 I was a rookie play-by-play announcer for the Baltimore Orioles. I kept a daily journal that year and sold it as a book. "It's Gone!...No, wait a minute"(my classic home run call unfortunately) was published by Villard and released in ’93. It’s available on Amazon or on a remainder table near you. Fifteen years ago today this is what happened:

WEDNESDAY, MAY 15, 1991, BALTIMORE

A typical day really, except that the queen of England and the president of the United States attended the game. They saw the A’s win 6-3, although Randy Milligan hit his first home run of the year and then his second.

Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II and His Royal Highness Prince Philip are visiting the United States and wanted to view something that represented the “epitome of America”. That meant either the Shopping Channel or baseball. So our little ol’ ballpark on Thirty-third Street got the nod. The weather was glorious, the traffic horrendous, and the crowd merely moderate (32,501) to see this historic occasion (The queen was not as big a draw as free wristbands.)

The entourage arrived at 6:30 via motorcade and were whisked into a private reception hosted by club owner Eli S. Jacobs (whom I have yet to meet, by the way). The VIP party, which also included Mrs. Bush, baseball commish Fay Vincent (who told me before the game that the role of the commissioner in affairs such as these is “to be seen and then leave”), Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney, Mrs. Secretary of Defense, the Governor of Maryland, the British Foreign Secretary, and a number of the queen’s personal valets, secretaries, and foot stools. They all dined on crab cakes and hot dogs. (What, no crumpets and nachos??).

Everyone lingered over dinner for fifteen minutes, and then the royal party moved on to the Orioles dugout to greet the players of both teams.

I did not get to meet the queen. Jon Miller and I were on the air describing the proceedings. At 7:20 a receiving line of players was rushed through (viewed by the crowd on DiamondVision), and to the horror of the Secret Service, the president escorted Queen Elizabeth (or “Sausage” as Prince Philip calls her) up the top step into the on-deck area in full view of the masses. Personally, I feel Harold Baines would be in greater danger than the queen, but the Secret Service men held their breath just the same. The crowd roared its approval.

From there the royal party repaired back to Mr. Jacobs’ sky box on the mezzanine level just to the left of the press box. They sat comfortably behind bulletproof glass as a high school chorus mangled “God Save the Queen” and “The Star-Spangled Banner” over a sound system wracked by feedback.

They stayed for two whole innings, and I sort of felt bad because they were two very boring innings. Five walks, little action. Really, Your Highness, baseball is not that dull! I wanted her to stay longer, but by 8:45 the motorcade had shuttled her away. I also was hoping to have her stop by our booth and possibly read the “Esskay Meats Out-of-Town Scoreboard,” but that was not to be. See if I vote for her in the next election!

All in all it was a very exciting night. In three previous years in the minors the most important dignitary I ever saw attend a game was the Phillie Phanatic.