When Mr Teletart and I have run out of the usual things to bicker about, we turn to our old favourite: Arrested Development. As I'm sure so many of you do. Why doesn't it rate? Why don't people watch it? When it's so damn fine? Why? WHY?
Theories espoused so far:
1. It's on the wrong channel. Neither of us is sure what the right channel is. HBO? Has it come to this - niche comedies on niche cable channels? What about the rest of us? Besides, Fox is still home to The Simpsons, Family Guy, Malcolm in the Middle, and American Dad. There's no reason that Arrested Development shouldn't work. Is there? (Then again, Fox also hosts American Idol, Stacked, The Swan and The War at Home.) Hmmm.
2. Buster and Tobias double up on the dubious sexuality front, giving the show just slightly too much gayness for the Fox audience. Yeah, I'm not really buying this either.
3. It's too fast. There's something in this theory - for new viewers, the dizzying pace of an Arrested Development ep can be challenging. Even with Ron Howard's deadpan voiceover, it's hard for people to keep up. I wasn't actually aware of this until we watched last night's hilarity fiesta with someone who had never seen the show. They laughed at the odd line, but you could see the cogs turning. Why were there so many characters? Who was the guy with the chicken beak? Why was there a cabin on a trailer? How come that guy got hair plugs?
While I've always thought the joy of the show was in giving yourself over to the wild ride each week - even if you don't know what the hell is going on - the stories do run like soap plots on speed. This is exactly why they're great - but not everyone's ready to engage their minds and jump on board the rollercoaster, when the more sedate living room/kitchen carousels of The King of Queens and According to Jim await. (And thus endeth the amusement park analogies.)
4. It's too cerebral. Yeah, I thought this was a ridiculous claim too. The show's full of slapstick! It's rude! It's crazy! Still, it does require a certain kind of attention. The dialogue is quick, the plot quicker. You can't just lie around, half-asleep, with a growing pile of pistachio shells on your chest. You know, the way you do when you watch Two and a Half Men.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Lono
it's a great show, and I haven't missed a single episode yet.
2 - Rich Powers
Arrested Development is the best show on TV, no questions asked. The casting, actors, and writing are nothing short of brilliant. I watched the pilot episode years ago, but never followed up…until my friends started showing me episodes. The show grew on me; I’m now an Arrested Development addict.
AD’s biggest problem is that it requires a lot of “effort” on the viewer’s part; you really have to get into this show. You can’t just sit down and watch one episode because so many span three or four episodes, maybe an entire season.
I think FOX should try the Law&Order method: sell the show to a smaller network that will air episodes en masse. Like L&O, viewers we become addicted the format and tune into FOX for the new episodes.
Here are some short clips from the show. I too am saddened by the lack of viewers and it would be a tragedy if this show got canned.
3 - Chris Beaumont
I love AD!
It is so good, I'm surprised it hasn't been cancelled yet! Especiallyh on Fox, which doesn't exactly have a good track record.
Long live Arrested Development!
4 - Bob A. Booey
My heart is broken. Mr. Teletart? No, I just can't accept that. Who is he and does he know he doesn't deserve you, darling?
I need a second to compose myself.
OK, just a second more.
I'm almost over it.
OK, I think I can almost go on and live now.
The reason this show doesn't work is simple. Yes, people are dumb and yes, they're used to the multi-camera, laugh-track sitcom format, hence the success of the mediocre "fat guy with a hot wife" comedies on CBS and ABC.
Ratings history shows that NO single-camera comedy without a laugh track has been a ratings success. "Scrubs" does OK, but the only show that's ever seen any ratings success was "Malcolm in the Middle," probably the first in the genre on network TV that invented the quick-cutting editing style seen on "Arrested Development." And the only reason "Malcolm" has enjoyed such a long run (and saw higher ratings in its early days) was its cross-over appeal to kids as well as adults.
"Arrested Development" is neither too cerebral nor too fast-paced. Hardly.
I think the subject matter of the show may be largely unrelatable to Peoria, however. It touches on some hilarious themes and has richly flawed comic characters, but incest, infidelity, corporate crime, and such other hilarious topics aren't typical for the genre, which makes the show great in my book but might turn off average viewers.
I definitely think the show would get a look from someone like HBO if it got cancelled this year by Fox. And trust me, folks, WATCH THIS SHOW because it WILL be cancelled if it doesn't perform this year. It was a miracle that it got renewed last year due to critical acclaim and Emmy nominations. All fans of good TV should be happy that both "Arrested Development" and "The Office" got their reprieves, although we will likely only be able to enjoy both for the rest of this season. I don't think "Arrested Development" would be a great fit for HBO, however, because the show has a certain puckish innocence to it and wouldn't seem right with F-bombs and more adult language and situations
I don't think either "The Office" or "Arrested Development" will be like "Seinfeld" and have the public catch up to the work because "Seinfeld" was a bad show its first season and only got funnier when Larry David took more control and made it more absurd and "jokey." The best they can hope for is decent ratings so they can stick around like "Scrubs" has to enjoy the critical acclaim, although NBC's screw-job proves that even "Scrubs" isn't immune to network idiocy.
I somewhat object to the cheap shots at Fox in the comment above. Of the major networks, they've consistently shown the most initiative and open-mindedness in supporting quality scripted TV that's not for your grandparents, including a majority of the best comedies on TV in the last decade. "The Simpsons," one of the top shows in TV history, wouldn't have been possible on any other network and that's just the start.
That is all.
5 - DrPat
I don't watch AD, but I could be persuaded. (I'm intrigued by the offer of money...)
Seriously, I'm your typical inert viewer, unwilling to jump into the show now with so much episode-water under the bridge. An AD marathon might suck me and many others in.
Halloween, anyone?
6 - Chris Beaumont
Season 1 is available and well worth the buy or Netflixing.
7 - Bob A. Booey
Dr. Pat, I hold you directly responsible for the failure or survival of this show.
What comedies do you watch on TV? Be honest, no one will judge you.
That is all.
8 - steve burns
After reading all the theories as to why no one is watching "Arrested Development", I think the answer is very simple: the vast majority of people do not think the show is funny. I think you would have to admit that with the overwhelming critical plaudits, the Emmy awards, the favorable time slots (at least the first 2 years), the Friday night summer "marathons", etc., that many, many people have tried out the show, watching it once or twice. The fact that the show still cannot build an audience (ratings were down from week 1 to week 2 this year, and I think down from last year) leads to the conclusion that the vast majority of people do not think this show is funny. I watched it twice each of the last 2 years and didn't laugh once (actually, the show kind of creeped me out; I was thinking maybe a laugh track would have alleviated some of the creepiness). And not liking AD does not mean you automatically like other comedies that aren't funny, like "Yes, Dear". I don't mean to bad-mouth the show, especially on a site that loves it (I know I don't like it when I post a favorable book review on Amazon and see people disagree with me). But I (and evidently a lot of other people) don't think AD is a good show, or that it is funny, and all you AD fanatics will maybe someday accept the fact that you are in a very small minority with a sense of humor not shared by many others.
9 - Bob A. Booey
Steve Burns and everyone who doesn't like "Arrested Development," what comedies do you watch that you think are funny? I'm not baiting you here, I'm really curious to know where "Arrested Development" fits into the comedy spectrum. I'm trying to think like a network exec here and figure out what shows to compare or contrast it to in terms of appeal.
That is all.
10 - teletart
Steve, you make good points that, while I don't want to hear them, may well be accurate. Maybe AD just isn't to majority taste and we should face that fact.
It's true that it doesn't offer the kind of escapist comedy that viewers seem to enjoy - the kind where you settle in with a familiar 'family' and enjoy their antics. Well, you get the family and the antics part - you just don't get to settle in.
I have a love/hate relationship with Fox, but have to give them props for keeping AD on the air. However, if there's any justice in the world, Kitchen Confidential will get the can shortly, and The War at Home shortly after. Or is anyone enjoying those shows?
O! Arrested Development! How I love thee! I hope I'm not putting people off by suggesting that it can be hard to follow. For those feeling trepidation (Dr Pat) I figure two weeks' viewing ought to get you up to speed. And one week is enough to dip your toe in the water and enjoy.
Bob, excellent points re the style of the show. I think you're onto something fer sure. And so sorry to break the news of Mr Teletart to you this way. I know things look bleak now. But one day, you'll wake up and feel better. Besides, we'll always have cyberspace.
:-) teletart
11 - John B
Sadly, I believe that the previous post is correct. The bottom line is that most people don't think the show is funny. There is a reason why 95% of network comedies are of the sitcom variety (multi-camera, studio audience, laugh track, predictable punchlines). That is the format the average American is comfortable with. Arrested Development (along with The Office and Scrubs) is not written for the average American - it shoots for something better. And a few million people who watch TV get it and appreciate it as something unique and entertaining.
I only hope that Fox has the nerve to keep it on this entire season. If not, maybe Comedy Central or Bravo could pick it up...It's the sharpest show on television today.
12 - steve burns
Thanks for taking my comments in the spirit they were intended. My favorite comedy is "Seinfeld", followed by "Frazier". The only current ones I watch with any regularity are "The Simpsons" and "Malcolm in the Middle", which, as someone pointed out, shows that a comedy can be successful without a laugh track.
13 - Dan
I wrote a paper on AD last semester for English and its lack of ratings. Someone above said something that spurred my interest. Arrested Development isn't an escapist show. It isn't set in a false world. I mean, the situations the characters get into are absurd but the characters are recognizable. People can reflect into the show and it shocks them.
14 - Eric Berlin
Great analysis teletart. I agree that AD is the funniest show on the air at present, with The Office running a funny yet distant second.
It may just be a matter of some people get it, and others don't.
15 - DrPat
I'll step up, too. I don't watch The Office or <Malcolm in the Middle, either, and when it was current, I didn't watch Everybody Loves Raymond or Seinfeld. (I still don't now that they're in permanent re-runs.)
I do, however, watch Kitchen Confidential and The Simpsons. And Tripping the Rift. (And I watch Futurama in endless re-runs, when I'm up that late.) I can't tell you how long I'll stay with Kitchen Confidential, but it's worth a half-hour so far.
I'm serious about being willing to get into AD via a marathon, though. Plus a small emolument...
16 - Baronius
I find nothing funny about AD. I've tried. I watched 5 or 6 episodes because people I trust like it, and I've liked many of the actors before.
My favorite sitcoms? The Simpsons, Malcolm, NewsRadio, Scrubs. I liked Chris Elliot's Get A Life and Andy Richter Controls the Universe. I love oddball, bad tempo, no laugh track, nonlinear comedy. I should love Arrested Development. But there's nothing funny about it.
Everything is a reference to an earlier episode. Fine, I've watched enough to get the references. That doesn't make them funny though. The cousin got hired by a studio; the brother tried out for the Blue Man Group; I remember. But they weren't funny when they happened, and alluding to them isn't funny either.
I'm sorry; I actually get frustrated over this. In a world of Raymonds and According to Jims, the hip people can muster enough support to sustain one or two shows like Scrubs or The Office. The resources squandered on a bad show like AD could keep some other maverick show alive.
17 - Scott
Part of AD's "problem," if you want to call it that, is that if you just catch one episode, you may not understand all the hype. That's because there's so many over-arching storylines with so many characters, it's impossible to understand the show by watching one episode and judging it by that. The flip-side is if you do watch it week to week and stay with it, it gets more and more funny and rewarding to see the eventual conclusions of the stories that are going on. I echo the sentiments expressed here about it being the funniest show on TV at the moment.
18 - Sterfish
I found an interesting blog post by Jaime J. Weinman that doesn't so much say why Arrested Development did poorly as tell why a show like My Name Is Earl, which has stylistic similarities to AD, did so well in its premiere. It's a very interesting read. Check it out here.
19 - Bob A. Booey
Those are all good theories by Weiman and good opinions by the rest of you as well. I'm glad to see "Earl" did so well but then I'm also not, because I think it will ultimately mean that the superior "The Office" will lose out when "Scrubs" gets back on the schedule sometime in the next month or two.
Another factor is that "Earl" has recognizable stars, albeit stars on the downside of their careers, in Jason Lee and Jamie Presley. Jason Bateman is recognizable and very affable, but he hasn't been a household name for his acting in a while.
Teletart will be with me on this, but how can you think "Kitchen Confidential" is a better show than "Arrested Development," Dr. Pat? It boggled the mind. There were marathons every Friday the whole summer -- apparently you missed em :)
I think smart TV viewers can only hope that people get more accustomed to the visual style of single-camera comedies and embrace some of the elements of good film comedies that they can find on these shows. The traditional, studio audience sitcom is such a stale and dead genre -- hence the brilliant satire of 80s sitcoms in the episode of "Scrubs" last year that was a tribute to "Cheers" where the last half of the show was done as a traditional sitcom. And the traditional sitcom is such an artificial, numbing viewing experience that we've grown used to after years and thousands of viewings.
Eventually, ratings and talent will simply run out on sitcoms and networks will have to give up the comedy genre entirely or embrace smarter, single-camera type shows and promote them aggressively. "Everybody Loves Raymond" was a good show and also the last of its kind, I think, in TV to enjoy huge ratings success with some critical approval.
That is all.
20 - Eric Berlin
Bob -- What evidence can you present that Jason Lee is on the "down side" of his career?
The guy is fronting a buzz-drenched new sitcom.
21 - Bob A. Booey
Because he's on TV, Berlin.
It's just a fact that he hasn't been in a hit movie since his Kevin Smith days and that the money, prestige and exposure of going to TV is way lower than it is with film.
If he were getting the primo roles he wanted at a high quote, he'd be doing feature films right now.
That is all.
22 - Eric Berlin
That's not true anymore, Bob -- plenty of big time stars actually choose to do TV over film for a variety of reasons: money, stability, family, etc.
Additionally, Lee has done a lot of great and noteworthy work outside of Silent Bob land.
23 - Bob A. Booey
Big time stars such as, Berlin?
If Jason Lee had ever gotten that chance to star in that ill-fated Superman project and had it been a box office success with 2 sequels, he would not be on NBC right now.
There's just no comparison in the kind of money that's available for top actors in film vs. TV.
And Lee's a young guy, so I don't think family concerns are his reason for doing TV, which is notoriously unstable as well in terms of constant ratings pressure and how hard it is to make new series stick.
That is all.
24 - Eric Berlin
The entertainment industry is "notoriously unstable" in total, my friend.
On top actors and money: you think Jerry Seinfeld (and cast), Ray Romano, etc. etc. are hurting for cash?
25 - Sterfish
I view TV somewhere in between you and Bob. I don't think that being on TV automatically means that your career in the tubes. Many of the known actors who do TV could probably live comfortable lives doing film but as you said, TV provides stability.
At the same time, true big-time stars will never do more than a guest appearance on a show, a TV movie (probably for HBO), or possibly produce a show themselves. And while TV has gotten more respect over the years, it has not reached the level where an A-lister would not consider a TV series to be a downward move. Charlize Theron, who is guest starring on Arrested Development for a few episodes, would not become a regular at this point in her career.
I think TV is still a medium that best benefits the new or the mid-level stars.