At the height of the network sitcom boom back in 1997, there were 62 comedies on the fall schedule. This year, there are only 20. The reason so few make it to air these days would seem to be painfully obvious — they're just not funny! — but the answer isn't that simple. In exchange for their anonymity, four prominent members of the TV industry (a high-level network executive, a hugely successful writer, and two Emmy-winning veteran actors) spoke candidly with EW, and tried to answer a question that's vexing Hollywood: How did the once-powerhouse genre devolve into a bad punchline? What they have to say may surprise you.
The Network Executive
I think the orgy of success that happened in the '80s and early '90s
ruined comedy. As comedies like Seinfeld and Friends dominated the
airwaves, it led to this spending spree on TV writers. Low-level writers
on any comedy staff were getting multimillion-dollar deals. And if you
made a list of all those deals, almost none of them amounted to
anything. As comedy became more important, more executives got involved
[in the creative process], which has been incredibly unhealthy. I also
have seen a real lack of creativity on the writers' part. If you go
back, comedy was truly born on the streets, with a real kind of
immigrant sensibility. Sitcom writers were the least educated of the
bunch, which led to comedy that had guts. Now you have lots of
overeducated young guys, who don't have a lot of life experience, making
lots of money. They go from the dorm room to the comedy room. I also
feel the talent agencies are filtering what the networks hear. If you
want to sell a show to CBS, then you need a fat guy with a pretty wife,
set in the middle class. For NBC, it better be young and hot and set in
New York. And your ABC show should have a bunch of precocious kids in
it. The networks are complicit in all of this, not really pushing any of
the writers for fresh stuff. And it just has reached a tipping point
where the audience has said, ''We've had enough.''
The Actress
Look back at The Honeymooners. You really don't need more than a room
with four people who are related in ways that bind them together. I've
seen sitcoms in their first seasons rely on very empty jokes that were
not character-related or plot-related in terms of telling a story about
something real. Even if you have the most charismatic, fabulous star, if
the writing doesn't spring from a true consideration of how people
relate to one another, it's not going to fly. Our attention is so
limited these days.... I don't care how jazzy [the show] looks, how much
it goes on location, I don't care about stunt casting! If writers don't
put in a fun mix of characters, I ain't gonna watch.
The Writer
I think networks and producers think the one-camera sitcom is the
solution to their problems. [EW 101: Popular single-camera comedies
include My Name Is Earl and The Office; multi-camera comedies are more
traditionally filmed and have a laugh track, like Two and a Half Men.]One producer actually told me you don't have to be as funny if you do an
hour-long, single-camera comedy. So I'm thinking, That's great. Not
funny for twice as long! The networks think the audience won't laugh if
there's no laugh track. But we still do! The funniest movies we go to
have no laugh track and somehow we find them funny. Single-camera
comedies are not edited properly. They think a fast pace is all that's
necessary and it's not. The production schedule on a single-camera show
is so grueling because they're making little movies every week, so
there's no time to worry about the content or the jokes. There are
exceptions like The Office, but I would say that's about it right now.
As for multi-camera comedies, the networks seem to care less about
story, character, and content and more about style. They think the look
of the show is more important. And everything seems to be pitched at a
younger audience. Take that CBS sitcom The Class: There was a bidding
war for that show because it came from a Friends writer and everybody in
it was 28. Shows that deal with really old people — like anyone over
40 — are not wanted. Twenty Good Years is an exception; I hope it's good.
I'm rooting for it.
The Actor
Doing a sitcom is tough; you only have one strike and you're out! I've witnessed firsthand how networks' owning their own shows has changed everything. The networks could suddenly promote what they were producing, whether it was any good [or not]. Quality was no longer at a premium. It's incredibly difficult to maintain quality when junk is being promoted. The other problem is the tendency for the industry to imitate itself, therefore something like CSI spawns so many copycats. That's why there were 60 comedies 10 years ago. Everybody was desperate to be another Seinfeld or another Friends. Nowadays everybody is desperate to be CSI, so all these dark, hour-long dramas are spread across the schedule. This is also a dark age. We're still reeling from 9/11, and network entertainment has been deeply affected by that. And that has sort of crowded out comedy exactly at the moment we need it badly. But you know, there have been significant moments in TV. The Cosby Show was put on at a moment when everybody said sitcoms were dead. Not dying, but dead. So everything goes in cycles. It's just the nature of the industry.
