Tuesday, October 10, 2006
ABOUT CRANE, POOLE, AND SCHMIDT: An interesting question raised from my TV viewing tonight. Studio 60 has been widely panned and many attribute its ratings decline to its "smugness" and need for liberal sermonizing. But how is Boston Legal (which gets substantially better ratings) any less smug and sermonizing? Obviously, smug speeches work a little better in the context of a courtroom than they do backstage at a sketch comedy show, and rather than blatant Mary Sue-ing, we get ridiculous levels of meta and fourth-wall breaking ("You think we win too much? Losing all suspense?"). But how is "cocaine isn't as bad as drunk driving" any more ludicrous than "cannibalism isn't such a big deal?" It's even odder because the competition faced by Boston Legal (L&O:SVU) is (IMHO) 10x the quality of CSI: Miami, yet Boston Legal gets the better ratings. Explain and discuss.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment