Friends of Northstar

[Teague]

More on Seinfeld: I think it was more that I appreciated how willing the writers on that show were to make their primary characters slightly unlikable. George is a perfect example of this. It's the small lines on that show that slay me.

Elaine: You know, just admitting that another man is attractive doesn't mean that you're gay.
George: It doesn't help.

So is that drop-dead funny? No, but it's dry, and I love dry humor. Maybe that's part of it. And as always, you have to get into the rhythm of the show, and love the characters. If you can't do one or the other (or both) of those things, I doubt the show would hold much for you.

Did I find it to be the perfect show? No, but it hit the zeitgeist at the perfect time, I'd argue.

[JDH]

I love dry wit too, but I'd take Frasier for clever writing and Friends for character-based humour any day of the week. Both were consistently laugh-out-loud for me, Seinfeld never did it. It was never the success in the UK that the others were, though admittedly the BBC scheduled the hell out of it. It takes all sorts!

Recently, US comedy writing seems at its sharpest in comedy dramas: House MD and Studio 60 are rapier sharp, Ugly Betty is pretty good, but aside from Scrubs and That 70s Show (which we watch on DVD) there isn't a single half-hour non-animated sitcom import we sit down to watch. What's going on? Maybe Seinfeld would have stood a better chance with my wife and I now, when it doesn't have the two competitors we consider to be superior.

[Jesse321]

Along with Heroes and Battlestar Galactica, Ugly Betty is the show that I'm most looking forward to seeing again this season.

In so far as total laugh out loud comedy, nothing will ever beat "I Love Lucy" and "The Carol Burnett Show" to me ... those shows will go on FOREVER!

[Teague]

Originally Posted by JDH

I love dry wit too, but I'd take Frasier for clever writing and Friends for character-based humour any day of the week. Both were consistently laugh-out-loud for me, Seinfeld never did it. It was never the success in the UK that the others were, though admittedly the BBC scheduled the hell out of it. It takes all sorts!

I'd agree with you on Friends, even given their propensity for indulgence themselves (which grew to monstrous proportion in the last couple of seasons, when they realized that they could literally do nothing to lose their audience...), because the character dynamic were what held that show together. Absolutely.

But Frasier? I liked that show on and off, but too often it indulged in this farcical slapstick sort of thing that I just found exhausting. I loved it when it was dry and mature and intellectual--but too often, it dipped into this weird well of "aren't these snooty folks just as dumb as the rest of us?" schtick (like when Frasier and Niles buy a restaurant together, and...hilarity ensues!). Also just as annoying to me (and something else Frasier did to death) was the Three's Company plotline--two characters are talking about one thing, a third thinks they're talking about something more prurient, and...hilarity ensues! Yawn.

Don't get me wrong--I loved Frasier as a character, just as I loved Cheers before it. But both those shows suffered from the same split personality--sometimes they were wise and funny and affecting all at the same time, and in that, they were tops. But other times, they sold out their own characters for a laugh, and both series did it too often.

The best evidence of this is what Cheers did to Sam Malone. Early in the series, Sam isn't the empty buffoon he becomes later. He's not book-smart, but he's street-smart, and he's able to outsmart Diane nearly half the time. He gives as good as he gets. Example: when he uses his charms to compare Diane's eyes to the color of the sky the last time he skiied Vermont, and she's taken in by it, even though he's just using a (very skilled) line. He's not an idiot. Even when Diane leaves for good (when Shelley Long left the series), he's the one of the couple that knows this is it, that it's over. I love that last scene. They're saying goodbye, and Sam says "Have a good life." Diane scoffs and this, and says "This isn't goodbye! I'm coming back. You'll see. I'll be back. I will!" And Sam nods and quietly says "Okay." And the Diane leaves, and we see her legs climbing the stairs up to the streets of Boston for the last time. Cut back to Sam, looking at her go--and he just quietly repeats, "Have a good life." Beautiful.

And later on in the series, he's nothing but a joke--a walking erection, and a dim one at that. I missed that early Sam quite a bit.

Anyway, that's the stuff I loved from both those series. But in both cases, they misused their characters horribly for the sake of easy laughs.

Sorry for the rant.

[JDH]

I can see your point on Frasier (in truth, I was young when I watched Cheers so I can't necessarily offer up much analysis other than I enjoyed it and loved the early years more than the so-so later ones, when the plots went screwy) but I think it got away with it more often than it didn't. Maybe I'm naturally disposed to be more accepting of pure English farce, but even in farce-based episodes you could always rely on Frasier or (more likely) Niles to deliver some incredible lines.

Frasier's 'I am not a man' declaration on his radio show remains one of my favourite pieces of writing of all-time, and I loved the physical comedy of Niles' restaurant trip after he'd been to the dentist.

When I like a show, it tends to be character based and I'm more interested in a happy romantic ending - I'm rooting for Ross and Rachel, Chandler and Monica, Niles and Daphne, Betty and Daniel, and (when it all comes down to it) David and Maddie. With Seinfeld, in all honesty I wouldn't wish any of the characters on any of the others, or anyone else.

[Jesse321]

Betty should be with Henry! Daniel should end up with Amanda.

[hawkeyethearcher]

Originally Posted by Black Cat

Merlose you don't have to be mindless pervert to enjoy hot men. I know that is not what your all about. Now on the other hand, straight men are mindless perverts!

now that is just cold. men are complicated and emotional no matter what sex they like. we have to stick to one simple mind set cause we cant open up to eachother. we are taught to be competitive and mean to eachother. if we try to open up to you women yuo listen and then tell your friends we are full o crap and are just trying to get into your pants. if you think we want to be disguting farting burping pervs think again, we just cant get a break. we are judged harshly by everyone. no one believes us when we try to be sincere. it sucks and makes us act more disgusting. you would think living in california i could find a group o tree hugging emotional cry babies but no. i dont do drugs or believe we should just hug the terrorists so i cnat hang with them. its a very emotionaly empty life being straight and the only way to stay happy is to look at naked boobies on the net so i am going to do that now. oh no wait you are correct i am going to look at them cause i am a perv. forget all that other stuff.

[Merlose]

Originally Posted by Jesse321

Betty should be with Henry! Daniel should end up with Amanda.

if its anything like the telenovela Betty will end up with the Daniel character

[Jesse321]

Originally Posted by Merlose

if its anything like the telenovela Betty will end up with the Daniel character

The show has taken a lot of liberties from the original "Betty La Fea" ... I just don't see Betty ending up with someone like Daniel (at least for right now), there's too much of a past there. Besides, we all know that Henry is a TOTAL hottie under all those nerdy clothes.

[JDH]

Originally Posted by Jesse321

Betty should be with Henry! Daniel should end up with Amanda.

Henry is great (he'd be a superb Clark Kent) but Betty and Daniel are made for each other!