Thursday, September 28, 2006

What on earth...

As if we needed more definitive proof that American audiences have craptastic taste, here it is. I'm sorry, I didn't realize Two and a Half Men was still on, let alone that anyone watched it. The linked article says that apparently the highest-paid sitcom star ever was Ray Romano, for that steaming load that some people call "Everybody Loves Raymond."

This would make me laugh if it weren't so frightening. Fox can't even pull together an audience to save the best comedy show of all time from cancellation (yes, better than The Cosby Show, better than M*A*S*H, better than All in the Family, and better than I Love Lucy), yet Charlie Sheen makes $350K a pop for brainless gags and jokes you can see coming from a mile away. My God.

The next time I wonder why our country's going down the crapper, I need only read this post again. Audiences who enjoy this drivel actually are allowed out in public places like voting booths.

(As an aside, it's not that I particularly have any animosity for the show, like I do for "Raymond," it's just that it's so damn mediocre. I mean, top salary for this?).

Labels:

10 Comments:

At September 29, 2006 at 9:51 AM, Blogger heartinsanfrancisco said...

In the last season before the ubiquitous Friends ended, every miscreant in the cast was paid One Million Dollars for Every Episode. The population of a small country could have eaten for years on that.

I do not get why anyone would watch Charlie Sheen do ANYthing. He's a cheesy moron, unattractive, and a bad actor besides. The writers of most shows are cretins who pander to a nation that adores mediocrity.

Why can't we aspire to something better than this crap? If enough people boycotted these rotten shows, maybe there would be more than a handful of intelligent ones.

But yes, they all vote. That probably says it all.

 
At September 29, 2006 at 10:01 AM, Anonymous roonie said...

I hear you on that. TV is full of trash these days; I had never even heard of that Two Men show until Rolando told me that Charlie Sheen was the highest paid sitcom actor. I was like, "Um, come again?"

 
At September 29, 2006 at 9:55 PM, Blogger The Special Sauce said...

I think the problem lies with the accepted format of television comedy these days. That is ,the "sitcom" (situation comedy)

Everybody seems perfectly happy watching the same characters say the same things in remarkably similar situations. All in a neatly packaged 21 miute box. (possibly with a bow)

It allows for no creativity and in fact, widdles down the viewings audiences attention span to the point where creativity is completely last, or down right resented. Thats why I stick to blogging.

 
At September 30, 2006 at 11:06 AM, Blogger NWsixer said...

Guys... you need to remember what happens when Charlie Sheen gets succesful.... booze, hookers, and drugs... patience my wee pals...

 
At September 30, 2006 at 11:14 AM, Blogger NWsixer said...

Oh, and if I can repeat post, I can't reccomend this British show enough... if you have a alightly twisted sense of humour I reccomend you get it...

http://www.amazon.com/Peep-Show-1-Jeremy-Wooding/dp/B000A2UBOS/sr=8-1/qid=1159639598/ref=pd_bbs_1/102-8836793-5226515?ie=UTF8&s=dvd

 
At October 1, 2006 at 10:16 AM, Blogger The Law Fairy said...

heart, it's CRAZY how much actors make -- although I'm far more scandalized by how much professional athletes make (a lot of them make even more, for reasons I just can't fathom). I don't even see the value in sports, whereas I can see the value in (*some*) television and movies. But either way, both salaries are unconscionably high.

roonie, seriously. I'll admit that I watch a lot of tv but probably even the shows I *do* like are by and large non-great. I can proudly say I am just not into reality tv. Blech.

special, it used to be that people did creative things with sitcoms. But, as with processed food, when you get used to consuming shit that has no flavor, you have a hard time readjusting to anything that has the smallest bit of quality.

sixer, I will have to check the show out. I hope Charlie doesn't destroy himself again this time around... destroying just the show would be plenty :)

 
At October 11, 2006 at 7:08 PM, Blogger Micah said...

Raymondisn'tthat bad. I like it because it's a family sitcom where the children are rarely onscreen. That, my friends, is refreshing.

As for AD, we've been over this before. I don't have nearly as much vitriol towards Fox as others. They did with it what they could. People just didn't tune in (the highly serialized nature where you'd miss half of an episode's humor if you didn't watch ALL of the previous ones didn't help it gain new viewers).

And Fox still airs the best comedy of all time: "The Simpsons". Well, now it ain't, but seasons 3-9 were absolutely golden.

Never seen the Sheen show (I just made a tongue twister!), so I can't comment on it.

 
At October 11, 2006 at 7:21 PM, Blogger The Law Fairy said...

I see your point, micah, but I still hate hate hate hate hate that show.

Hate.

Sigh... I suppose I might be a bit of an AD groupie... but it's just SO DAMN GOOD!!! But you could be right -- it did have a very "inside joke" quality to it.

But still SO DAMN SMART AND FUNNY. Gah!

I don't know that Fox did "everything" it could have... I will grant that it gave the show a fighting chance, but I bet that had much more to do with the fact that it won the Emmy for Best Comedy, and NO ONE wants to be the network who cancels an Emmy winner the following season. Fox certainly didn't make a huge effort to promote the show or put it in a choice time slot, that's for sure.

Is it naive of me to hold out hope for the Simpsons? A few years back they rallied... I think they could do it again! And don't get me worked up about how psyched I am that Futurama's coming back, albeit to Comedy Central.

 
At October 12, 2006 at 4:27 PM, Blogger Micah said...

Okay, maybe I gave Fox too much credit (they did reduce AD's episode orders each season, after all), but they did promote it and at least kept its time slot consistant.

As for Fox cancelling Emmy-winning shows, they've been in the position before (see "Ben Stiller Show, The").

"The Simpsons" has rebounded somewhat these past couple of seasons, but it is still a shell of its former self. And the upcoming movie is about 8-10 years too late.

"Futurama" is a show that Fox truly mishandled. I am sooooo looking forward to Bender's Big Score.

 
At October 13, 2006 at 8:31 AM, Blogger The Law Fairy said...

(Fry-voice): EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEHEHEHEHE!!

 

Post a Comment

<< Home