One of my favorite
post-Comfort TV era shows is Veronica Mars. So I was elated when I heard fresh
episodes were coming this year. Then I read a spoiler about how the new story
arc ended, and it diminished my desire to watch. I still haven’t gotten around
to it.
It appears I wasn’t alone.
Most fans (at least according to those places where they congregate online)
hated the “shock” ending. But critics praised the decision by series creator
Rob Thomas, because it wasn’t “fan-friendly.”
Thomas himself echoed these
sentiments, and remained defiant in the midst of the backlash. “I understand
that there will be big a section of the Veronica Mars fan base that will not forgive me for this,” he told
the Collider website.
This is another example of
how the Comfort TV era differs from today’s television landscape. Think about
any popular show from the 1950s through the 1970s; can you imagine a writer or
producer saying “I’ve got an idea for a story that will really devastate the
audience. It will make a lot of them angry and they may stop watching, but I
still think it’s the right thing to do.”
That was not an option. And
with very few exceptions I don’t think it should be. The idea back then was to
create a series with characters the audience would embrace, and return each
week to find out what’s happening in their lives. With cop shows or detective
shows there was an element of danger, but deep down viewers knew that nothing
was going to happen to Amos Burke or Joe Mannix, no matter how
dire the situation seemed.
Now if any of these
characters fell in love, viewers knew the woman might not survive the closing
credits. But sidekicks and secretaries – those were off-limits.
These were the unspoken
rules of Comfort TV shows. In a family sitcom a kid might struggle with a bad
grade in math but never with a life-threatening illness. An occasionally
unethical boss might fire a breadwinner dad like Darrin Stephens, but he’d have
his job back by the final scene. No one’s mortgage payment was ever in
jeopardy.
Is this lazy writing, or
boring to watch? To a modern audience it might be. I recall a Friends episode
when Chandler mockingly asked “Is this the episode of Three’s Company where there’s a
misunderstanding? Yes, Chandler, it probably is. Misunderstandings were
surprisingly plentiful in that beachfront apartment. And the fans didn’t mind
at all.
Even the most loyal viewers
of classic television would not dispute that these shows are formulaic – they
just don’t view that as a fault. “Fan-friendly” was a phrase that may not have
even existed back then, but the question of whether a series should please its
audience would have seemed absurd.
If you asked Ozzie Nelson
or Sherwood Schwartz or Quinn Martin, they’d tell you that escapism was what
they tried to offer. The philosophy was
that viewers had their own problems. When they settled in for a night of TV,
the last thing they wanted was to watch characters going through the same
stressful realities that they had to endure.
Yes, there are exceptions.
The biggest shock to viewers in that era that I can recall was the death of
Col. Henry Blake on MASH. But there were two factors to consider – first,
McLean Stevenson wanted to leave the show, so one way or another his character
was not going to be there anymore. Second, this was a series set against the
backdrop of a war where people died every day. So from a practical standpoint
and a storyline standpoint, it was a decision that seemed fitting.
That was not the case on
the Veronica Mars revival. The last-minute, out of left field killing of a
major character was a cheap stunt that removed a popular character from the
landscape for…what, exactly? Because Veronica is more interesting when she’s
miserable?
There are those who say
killing a major character is brave – I think it’s lazy. If you want to engage
viewers, an event that dramatic makes it easy. But telling stories week after
week, season after season, without resorting to such tactics, and still keep
fans coming back for more – that’s an achievement.
When did “fan-friendly”
become something to avoid? Probably around the same time that a lot of things
we used to rely on began disappearing. Times change – so let them. We’re 50
years past the debut of The Brady Bunch, a series that never introduced a
crisis more serious than a football to the schnoz. And judging by the ratings
of A Very Brady Renovation, people still care about it.
If you have to shock your
audience to get attention, maybe you didn’t have that much to say in the first
place.
Mr. Hofstede, remember when Rhoda and Joe broke up on "Rhoda"? The decision to divorce them really hurt the show's ratings.
ReplyDelete