MSN: State of family sitcoms is not so funny

[Mikintosh]

http://www.tv.msn.com/tv/article.aspx/?news=322725&GT1=28103

I'm not very enthused about what I've seen of Engvall's show (though nothing with Tim Meadows can be too bad), but I agree with the sentiment. I think it also applies to three-camera sitcoms in general. Other than How I Met Your Mother (which I didn't think was too great, especially considering the talent involved), and New Adventures of Old Christine (which I haven't seen), what else is there? I understand the networks' desire to diversify, but the more literate sitcoms like Seinfeld and Friends were almost like short plays, and you just don't see that much nowadays. I loved Arrested Development (though I don't like what I've seen of Curb Your Enthusiasm, which is being held up as some kind of genius), but that one show doesn't make up for a general slide into Grey's Anatomy/Lost sort of network slush. What're they gonna show on TV Land in 2040 when they start mining this era for good comedy? Two and a Half Men? Please.

Though Nick at Nite is already showing friggin' George Lopez, so maybe they won't be worrying...

[Gokou Ruri]

I've actually been prefering Nick/Disney's sitcoms to the Broadcast network ones for some time now... sadly enough. I found Ned's Declassified and Suite Life better/more unique than what they had to offer.

[Mikintosh]

...which is sad. For me, only Hanna Montana (and formerly That's So Raven) comes close to approximating network material, which the networks themselves seem incapable of producing nowadays.

[Movie06]

I'm not interested in the family sitcoms that are churned out nowadays including the Nick/Disney sitcoms. That being said, well it is true but I guess family sitcoms just aren't interesting anymore.

[Kolbar]

I'm even starting to watch Disney Channel now, and I never used to ever before. I'm really surprised at the quality of shows like "Hannah Montana" and "Life with Derek." I can't really get into "The Suite Life" though, probably because the kids are just so much younger than those in the other shows.

[Peter Paltridge]

Many genres have changed with the times, but family sitcoms have never evolved. No one wants ultra-predictable plots, smarmy actors and a forced laugh track anymore.

Another problem was mentioned in the article itself: networks are so sweaty over appearing hip at all times, they don't give two cents about children anymore. So maybe they're just not being given the chance to evolve (and Disney tweencoms are not that evolution; "family" means the WHOLE family, not just kids or just grown-ups).

I'd point to Everybody Hates Chris as the direction family sitcoms should go, if anyone watches it.

[GregX]

I always felt that "Titus" was the perfect family sitcom.

[Silly McGooses]

I am more than happy to see that these three-camera family-centered sitcoms are dying out. The lack of diversity over the past fifty years in these shows has been astounding. The same tweaked formula used again and again...and the same plots used from series to series and the same laugh track. There's only so much you can do with it. Having a few is fine, but TV comedy has, for the most part, taken a huge turn for the better in recent years with more unique shows like The Office, Pushing Daisies, 30 Rock, My Name is Earl, etc. After years of stagnancy, it seems like broadcast TV comedy is finally growing up. Unfortunately, The Disney Channel is currently feeding classic formula three-camera comedy with the stupid-meter up to eleven down the throats of all American children.

[Zorak Masaki]

I do agree that we do need shows that the whole family can watch together. I mean, i love the office, my name is earl, lost, pushing daisies, etc, but do you really think families are gathering together to watch those shows? If more family sitcoms were like everybody hates chris or malcolm in the middle, maybe theyd have a shot at being popular again.

[Silly McGooses]

I do agree that we do need shows that the whole family can watch together. I mean, i love the office, my name is earl, lost, pushing daisies, etc, but do you really think families are gathering together to watch those shows?

Yep. I seen it.

[Squall]

I am more than happy to see that these three-camera family-centered sitcoms are dying out. The lack of diversity over the past fifty years in these shows has been astounding. The same tweaked formula used again and again...and the same plots used from series to series and the same laugh track. There's only so much you can do with it.

I agree; once you've seen one, you've seen them all. Literally. I feel a physical desire to turn the channel whenever a live action sitcom comes on.

Supposedly the reason TV/movie studios liked making live action sitcoms originally was because they were cheap to produce, and easy to write for.

But, times change, and societies change, and it seems that Americans' hunger for live action sitcoms is just about done. (It seems to be replaced with a hunger for 'reality' shows, though...)

[Hobbes829]

it would seem weird to me that families gathered together to see friends (it is a great show though), but maybe a show like scrubs counts.

[Storm Eagle]

One thing I find annoying about sitcoms in general these days is how the main male characters are portrayed to be stupid. King of the Hill seems to be the only one where the main character isn't an idiot. His wife is actually the one who's the tool. Hank Hill might be a bit square, but some sensibility in male characters can't be TOO far off. Oh well, I guess people just prefer to see men act stupid for some odd reason or the other.

So I guess I'll just stick with drams like the CSIs if I want to see more examples of decent males. Especially Grissom. He's the man. Then there's Miami's Horatio Caine who's wily, and NY's Mac Taylor, who has a good sense of humanity.