E-MAIL RYALL | E-MAIL TIPTON | ARCHIVES

MAIL SHOOT

November 21, 2005

COMICS 101 is in Session

Brad W. writes: A very off topic question for you.

Several years ago there was a television series, I think it lasted maybe three episodes, about a comic book character entering the real world.

I only remember the pilot: The superhero kept reliving his glory days, he realized that his life had become repetitive and wanted to know what was going on.

His creator, in our reality, was telling the same stories over and over because he was going senile or something. I remember he was telling the stories to a bunch of kids who told him the issue numbers that the story first appeared in.

Do you remember this series at all?

I was just thinking about the repetitiveness of comic stories lately, and kept envisioning Jack Kirby's Ghost rolling his eyes and telling everyone that he'd already done that story is issue Number.....

That made me recall that old television series, but I don't remember the title or anyone that was in it.

Tipton: That doesn't ring any bells at all. Anyone?

Ben S. writes: Hello Mr. Tipton we meet again... (stroking white cat in lap) I have to say... I'm not a huge JLA fan... but your columns on the JLA are reallly eye opening. Wish DC could collect a Best of JLA "Satelite, Silver Age" Trades, hey even a "JLA Detroit" Trade (ha, just kidding). But it's been alot of fun reading them... and talk about a cliff hanger... leaving with the JLA International art... for next week. I have to say that for a long time almost every comic shop I went to had that art somewhere around. It's a great image (Guy Gander and Batman kill me everytime I see it), but I was a hardcore Batman fan, and I seem to remember, "A Lonely Place Of Dying" arc happening at the time and Legends Of The Dark Knight starting so I regret never getting those books... I can't wait to read your column.

and now to the questions...
1) is it just me or am I seeing a trend of writers taking on too many books? with great results (Geoff Johns) and horrible (Brian Bendis)

2) do you think that in this era of comics, we'll ever see a writer/creator team that will do a 100 issue count... or is that just something in the past?

3) if you could call any comic publisher, what 5 comics would you take with you on a desert island?

4) of all the comic book movies coming out this year... which one comic story would you want someone to literally copy line for line, and image for image?

Again... thanks for the answers and thanks for the columns.

Tipton: So far, Johns seems to be able to handle it (although it depends how involved he was with COUNTDOWN...grrr), whereas Bendis's books show the strain.

I do think the 100-issue run is a thing of the past, with the notable exception of Bendis and Bagley on ULTIMATE SPIDER-MAN. Work ethic just isn't what it used to be.

Five books on a desert island?
WATCHMEN
V FOR VENDETTA
Busiek & Perez' AVENGERS ASSEMBLE
SIN CITY: THAT YELLOW BASTARD
STARMAN: A WICKED INCLINATION

Five monthly series being delivered to a desert island?
JSA
GREEN LANTERN
ASTONISHING X-MEN
PLANETARY
SUPERMAN/BATMAN

As for the movies? If they could just do WATCHMEN right, I'd be happy.

Ron S. writes: I just finished up your article about Justice League Detroit and I wanted to drop you a line. Thank you for reading this dreck so I don’t have to. I am NOT a comic fanboy, and the last honest-to-god comic I purchased sometime in the eighties (Yay trade paperbacks!) But I like good stories told visually. It really helps when someone can steer you the right way so you dont waste your time on crap, Or worse get the idea that its ALL crap. I started buying trade paperbacks after looking at a rack at my local hobby store. I was there for games, but they sold comics too. Just the week before, I bought a DC history book at Waldens that was clearanced to next to nothing. While looking at the rack of "Must Read" books, I saw Watchmen. "Hey Trev, I think I remember seeing this book in the DC history book, and it mentioning that it was important. Is it any good?" I thought he was going to jump the counter and bash me. I read and was really blown away (I think it helps that I REMEMBER that period that it was written, yknow that whole mutually assured destruction thing) I have been on the lookout for good stuff and trying to catch up on continuity when I can. Your articles are a big help, cause man, I dont think I would have made it all 30 issues.

Tipton: WATCHMEN is so good I'm a little afraid to write about it. Gonna do it soon, though.

Jens S. writes: I’ve been enjoying Volume 1 of the Superman Animated Series and ran into something peculiar. In the Blasts from the Past two-parter, Kryptonian criminals locked up because of Jor-El escape from imprisonment in the Phantom Zone and wreak havoc on Metropolis. The “general” is called Jax-Ur. I figured it would be Zod from the theatrical movie. Is this a licensing thing? What’s the deal?

Speaking of which, can you give a quick summary of Zod as he relates to comics and maybe provide insight as to why he was chosen for Superman II? He’s currently in Lee/Azzarello’s Superman: For Tomorrow storyline which I’d also like to get your take on (as for me, I don’t think I’m smart enough to enjoy it).

Tipton: The STAS producers were just using a different Kryptonian villain, probably because people so clearly remember Terence Stamp's kickass performance in SUPERMAN II ("KNEEL...BEFORE ZOD!") they didn't want to complete with that.

The Zod character in the comics appeared as far back as 1961, with the premise pretty much the same: a warmongering Kryptonian general sentenced to the Phantom Zone.

Afraid I'm no help on the Azzarello SUPERMAN. I got bored with it and checked out a long time ago. I'm sure the problem isn't you.

Greg S. writes: I have been getting a lot of play in the Mail Shoot lately, is that due to the quality of my questions or the lack of emails? No offense meant here but the promptness and quality of your replies to my emails had left me wondering if you simply don’t get a lot of them or are more devoted to your readers than say the writers on ESPN’s Page 2. Don’t get me started those guys, how did some of the idiots in their intern contest get in over me? But I digress.

Anyway, I started watching Arrested Development a few months ago and every week I am both impressed with the quality and saddened by the fact that shows like this and Scrubs are on shaky ground for renewal (btw Zach Braff as Fletch would be sweet). I heard somewhere that the chick from Arrested dates Ellen. Is this true, cause I never thought I’d be jealous of Ellen.

On to comics, I was reading your Batman Animated thoughts and I have to agree that the show was simply amazing. I was always a strictly Marvel fan but I enjoyed Batman way more than the Spiderman and X-Men series’ of the 90s. It wasn’t even so much the stories because I always enjoyed seeing how they would translate familiar Spidey and X-Men stories over (and they usually did a good job). However the animation was so much better in Batman. The more simplistic characters just seemed to move more realistic and smoothly than the models used by Marvel. This still holds true for JLU and Teen Titans (though the anime exaggerations are bothersome).

Also you mentioned the Serpent Crown in your JLA/Avengers piece, good call. I loved the Atlantis Attacks story (is there a TPB for it) as well as the Atlantis Attacks What If issue. Speaking of What If, any possibility of a best of What If piece?

Tipton: No, the e-mails go into the Mail Shoot in mostly chronological order, unless something is very topical, or I just think it's really funny. I've got about 200 formatted pages of back e-mail waiting to run. That's why the Mail Shoot is always talking about columns from 4 or 5 months ago.

Yeah, nothing in TV animation in the '90s compared to Batman.

What If, definitely one of these days. Don't think there's a trade for Atlantis Attacks.

Rene L. writes: Just finished reading your articles about Animating Batman and found it to be very well written and right on the money in my opinion. I was wondering if you've considered doing any articles on the Batman Beyond? Of particular note is the animated movie "Return of the Joker" which I found to be very enjoyable, and in my opinion one of the darkest and grittiest parts of the Batman animated universe...especially when we found out what happened to Tim Drake aka Robin. I would love you hear you thoughts on that.

Tipton: Yeah, I just haven't had a chance to get back to BATMAN BEYOND yet. Definitely an underrated little gem of a show. And RETURN OF THE JOKER is just about the creepiest, most tense thing they ever did. Just awesome.

Pete S. writes: Hi there, I'm a huge fan of Batman, but can't figure out which title to pick up since there's so goddamned many. Should I wait for the Frank Miller/Jim Lee All-Star version or is there one worth picking up now?

Tipton: The Judd Winick one has been decent the last couple months. SUPERMAN/BATMAN is always great as well.

Cameron B. writes: Well, that seemed like a pretty awful piece of Justice League history. I think your initial comparison with The Avengers current status while apt might not actually indicate that we'll see the good ol' Avengers back. Someone mentioned it to me and I do agree that the new Avengers is basically an attempt to create a Marvel JLA, which is that Marvel's most popular characters be on one team (Or the characters Brian Michael Bendis dreams about the most be on one team, take your pick.). And the sales for the New Avengers suggest that fans find this concept rather appealing (Although, I believe if they had called it 'The New Defenders' the sales wouldn't be nearly as strong.). I've got a bad feeling that this shift in The Avengers' tone might be a fairly long lasting one. Which is too bad because I think that if Dan Slott and Paul Pelletier could do some really great old school stuff if Marvel would let them. Anyway, I do hope that they get back to something resembling the older team than what they have now (Wolverine is an Avenger? Don't the Avengers have a no killing rule?).

Tipton: I have to admit that NEW AVENGERS and YOUNG AVENGERS are much better than I'd expected. Although I still long for the return of the original team.

Dominic C. writes: I thoroughly enjoy your column...it is one of my favourite things to read...I used to consider myself pretty clued in when it came to comics, but your columns have shown me just how lacking my knowledge is...

Growing up, I was very much a Marvel dude, but nowadays, I much prefer DC. However, there's a question that's been niggling at me for sometime about the DC universe and I can't seem to get a straight answer out of anyone...

And guess what: It's about Crisis!

Crisis' goal was to clear up the DC universe of all its "worlds," and allow all its characters to have histories uncomplicated by all the multiple worlds carry on.

When the DC universe carried on following Crisis, as far as the characters within it were concerned, this was the way the DC universe had always been. They did not know that the crisis had occured, they just went about their lives like the world had always been that way...right?

My question is this: I'm sure I can recall Wally West talking about his dead uncle Barry. At the same time, as far as Superman knew, Supergirl never existed to begin with (until recently of course) so he doesn't mourn her death.

Do the characters in the DC universe remember the Crisis? How is Wally West taking over the mantle of the Flash explained if Barry Allen died during an event that know one even knows occured? Did Barry Allen ever actually exist in post-crisis continuity? If he did, why can the characters remember him, but not Supergirl?

Sorry if my wording was a bit convoluted. I know there is probably a simple explanation to all this that I am missing - please help!

Tipton: Yeah, post-Crisis continuity has always been a bit murky. Here's the deal:

Everyone remembers a time of red skies and cataclysm that they all refer to as the "Crisis." They remember characters dying in the Crisis, like Barry Allen. However, as a result of the universe remaking itself, certain characters' histories and backstories were altered and their lives unfolded differently. For example, in the new post-Crisis reality, Kara Zor-El's ship never landed on Earth, so no one remembers the original Supergirl becuase she never existed. Which is why the original Kara origin can be used in recent issues of SUPERMAN/BATMAN -- we're only just now seeing it happen. No one remembers the original Huntress, because there was no Earth-2 Batman and Catwoman to be her parents.

Does that make sense, or are you just more confused now?

Nick S. writes: Hey Scott, it's me again, the resident Nightwing fanatic. After a trip to the comic book store, I've got some questions for you.

I recently got Astonishing X-Men number eight, and I've never really followed Marvel, except for the X-men Evolutions show. What are Sentinels exactly, who built them, and how many are still around? Also, is Magneto and the Professor in this title, or exclusively in Excalibur?

Also, I picked up an issue of Stoker's Dracula. I know DC doesn't have many horror titles, so is there anyone besides Marvel that does Dracula/Frankenstein's monster/Wolf-man titles?

Finally, as you know I am a huge Nightwing fan, and am obsessing over Year One, what are your thoughts on Devin Grayson's awful run on the series?

Tipton: The Sentinels are giant mutant-hunting robots originally built by Bolivar Trask, and occasionally funded by secret branches of the government. There always seems to be new versions of them popping up. Magneto and Professor X are mostly in EXCALIBUR these days.

Dark Horse released some Dracula a while back, and IDW publishes all sort of cool horror/suspense comics.

Nightwing in the hands of Devin Grayson makes me sad. She absolutely destroyed that book from when Chuck Dixon made it my favorite DC series. Stink stank stunk.

Nate G. writes: recently came across your site and found it to be a wealth of information on my favourite characters, filling in some blanks and reminding me of old storylines and events.

like most people i can't nearly afford as many titles as i would like, so a site like this is invaluable to me.

After reading your open letter to J. Michael Straczynski, i agreed with your sentiments. i too was outraged at such a cheap and meaningless revalation. this sort of infidelity and out of the blue, out of character behaviour seems more at home on jerry springer than in marvel comics.

I stopped reading spidey sometime ago after the clone saga ended. i stuck out through the clone rubbish, but had to quit when norman osborne turned up alive, aunt may was an actress hired by the goblin and he was responsible for the jackal, cloning and everything else that had happened to spidey for the last twenty years.

unfamiliar with his recent heppenings, i was hoping you could update visitors to your site with a synopsis of spidey today. i heard he is no longer with MJ, that she died or commited suicide, is this true? did marvel needlessly kill off another character? haven't they heard of divorces, moving to another state? what happened to spidey's stolen daughter? is he a single dad or does osborne still have her?

any answers to these questions, either with a reply email or on your site would be greatly valued. with appreciation, keep up the great work

Tipton: Pete and MJ are still together, and the question of their missing daughter remains a story Marvel doesn't want to deal with. Nowadays Spidey is a New Avenger, and his wife and Aunt May (who now knows Pete is Spider-Man) have moved into the Avengers Tower for safekeeping.

If you want to read some good new Spidey comics, pick up the Mark Millar SPIDER-MAN 12-issue run and the recent Dan Slott/Ty Templeton SPIDER-MAN/HUMAN TORCH miniseries, now available in digest format.

Jonathan M. writes: Hi there. I'm slowly making my way through your archives and have only just now gotten to your column on the Golden Age by Robinson and Smith. Something that you may not have known is that the book wasn't originally meant to be an "Elseworlds" story. When James Robinson pitched the story, several years before, the JSA were still trapped in Limbo and DC had absolutely no plans on doing anything else with the characters. Robinson's pitch was given the go-ahead as the official post-war story of the characters (*after* All Star Squadron/Young All Stars were done). Then (apparently after a lot of the book was done, art included) it was shelved when plans changed and the JSA were brought back. Eventually, since so much work had been done on it, the decision was made to release it as an "Elseworlds" title.

Now, admittedly, some of this might be old urban legend, but that's the story as I remember it at the time. (I'm pretty sure it made the rounds, spread by Robinson himself.) And it's pretty obvious JR never liked the idea of the Golden Age being out of continuity, since he pretty much incorporated it wholesale into Starman's backstory.

Anyway, great job with the column. I'm really enjoying catching up on it. :-)

Tipton: I remember hearing that too, but never saw it confirmed anywhere. It makes a lot of sense, though. All the pieces fit.

TV RECOMMENDATIONS

ARRESTED DEVELOP-Laments

Luke D. writes: Love how the mail bag is still going strong! I remember when the site first opened, the mail bag was a great part of the site and I am glad it is still doing well... but enough kissing ass, onto business...

I was directed to a link yesterday from a friend, at which it basically said that Arrested Development is going to be cancelled, as it has now been bumped down to 13 episodes this season (from 18, which was bumped down from 22) and they won't have any new episodes air until the post "sweeps" period. It looks like the best show that no one ever watched (with the possible exception of "Push, Nevada") is going to finally be put to sleep (as was "Push"). What do you think the chances are of it returning to a different network or returning in any sort of capacity are? It's such a great show and to not have it on the air anymore would just kill me! Especially with so many great storylines continuing and starting up all at the same time!

I also was really enjoying "Kitchen Confidential", which in the same article they mentioned it too was facing it's demise. It's a funny show, and while hard to do a show based on a kitchen staff, I have really enjoyed the characters in the three episodes that have aired thus far...

It's truly a sad, sad day (again) for the viewers of our beloved shows!

Ryall: It is, yeah. The show is definitely dead, unfortunately. Meanwhile, tripe like THE WAR AT HOME stays on the air…

Alfred R. writes: I was commenting a few days ago on someone’s journal why AD was being canceled and I think some of your readers might agree.

What is really boils down to is their approach to comedy. I think it may be the writing staff or production, but somewhere someone in the lineage is too aware of the comedy being performed.

I thought it was the narrator at first, but he is actually doing it somewhat correctly (or what is written for him), the right amount of "god, these people are stupid, I need a drink and someone call my agent." I think if they got someone with a more authoritative voice, say in the likes of Alec Baldwin, that might work a little better and give a reason for more people to tune in. Ron's voice is a little too folksy. We need to know that the narrator is better than them.

The actors, themselves are fine, everyone knows their role and ! does it perfectly. I think the producers or someone in particular in that area is too aware of how 'krazy' they all are and does not understand that this kind of comedy works better when a subtle approach is used. I know that whenever I watch it, I can figure out what they are trying to do (show how insane these people are) but I don't think the average viewer does.

It's almost like the audience is given a job as a crime scene Investigator and told to go solve a crime.

let me know what you think.

Ryall: I think I totally disagree, actually. Ron Howard is perfect as the narrator, and has only gotten funnier as the show’s gone along. I don’t agree that the show would be funnier if it were more subtle, either. Lots of the comedy in the show is subtle, and the thankful lack of a laugh track only adds to the subtlety, since viewers aren’t cued in when to laugh.

Man, picturing the show with Baldwin instead of Howard makes my head hurt. I think Howard brings just the right amount of whimsy and jokiness to the role of “omniscient narrator.” Narration can easily fall flat or just add nothing to a show (this season’s DESPERATE HOUSEWIVES), but in this case, it added one more level of comedy, and is one more reason why the show’s cancellation is such a shame.

Alfred replies: maybe.

I love whimsical.

but american whimsical is different(seemingly) from british whimsical.

american can get really annoying really fast. it is hard for british whimsical to get annoying. I am sure people want formulaic(hence the reason monk did so poorly on network tv.) I think it could have done better if the narrator were more authoriative. I mean, you have to give them something they can understand before you lead them into something different. I think if you make all royal tennenbams spoof, people will like it more. Isn't that the reason people liked Dallas so much? people love seeing rich people suffer and this could have been the perfect comedy version of it.

Ryall: Eh, I can’t think that any change would have done anything but made the show worse.

Shaun M. writes: As Tobias Funke would say, I just blue myself... We've discussed ARRESTED before, so I figured I may as well offer up my eulogy, as this is the best outlet I have, inspired by your well-written intro to this week's TV RECOMMENDATIONS.

I watched 10 minutes of tonight's THE WAR AT HOME on FOX, and didn't laugh once. I didn't smirk once. I never chuckled nor guffawed. What I did do was notice the cloying laugh track, the attention paid to the racks of the teenage daughter and the mother (from what I could tell, that was tonight's "plot"), and the jokes that were set up miles down the road, with the punchlines coming at you with the horn blaring. And I wondered how WAR AT HOME is getting better ratings than ARRESTED did in the same time slot.

Ryall: Ah, yes, THE WAR AT HOME. I expect to see that execrable show in syndication some day. Nice job, America.

There's a lot of talk (especially from the inevitable lurking haters on aicn's forums) that ARRESTED fans are elitists. If that's the worst that can be said, I'll take it. Especially if this is coming from the same people that have kept YES, DEAR on the air for 5 years, or have helped WILL & GRACE perpetuate gay stereotypes for nearly a decade(!). Just thinking about those shows... yeah, I feel pretty damn elite. I may not feel the love for FOX (as a FIREFLY, ANDY RICHTER... and WONDERFALLS fan, they really are glorified cockteasers), but the problem lies with the general public. The same people who lament loudly that there is never anything good to watch forgo a show like ARRESTED (that rewards your attention) for paint-by-numbers sitcoms that inform you when you are supposed to laugh.

I'm depressed. If you'll excuse me, I'm going to lament the passing of the most daring and intelligent network comedy of all time... I think I'll take some Teamocil and get some of those corn dog crosses, with all the cruci-fixins.

I've been reading moviepoopshoot from the start, and I was so glad that you were an ARRESTED fan, Ryall. I think your efforts (and giving fans like me an outlet to praise the show) helped to keep it on this long. So thanks, brother.

P.S. According to the official site, the show returns December 5, 8/7c, before FOX seemingly kills it forever. Spread the word.

Ryall: Consider it spread. The thing about this cry of “elisitsm” is, I’ve heard that often, too, and had people accuse me of the same because of comments I’ve made. Well, in this case, what “elitism” means to me is that we feel shows like ARRESTED are better than, say, THE WAR AT HOME, and that we’re smarter and better for liking the former and loathing the latter. To which I’m all too happy to say “yep, I’m an elitist.” It’s so easy to just sit like a log in front of the TV and just let images of mindless sitcoms wash over us. These kinds of shows aren’t challenging and aren’t entertaining (really, do any of you who watch JOEY on a regular basis actually like it, or is it just that there’s a comfort factor to still seeing one of the people from FRIENDS on the air?).

It’s not like I/we have a “blue state” bias about our viewing habits—I might not like a “red” show like BLUE COLLAR COMEDY (ironic name, that), but I do really enjoy MY NAME IS EARL. So again, I’m all to happy to say I’m an elitist, if that means I expect my TV comedies to be more like ARRESTED and THE OFFICE and less like YES, DEAR.

Zach S. writes: First: Have a very long rant about AD's cancelation, but I'm in denial til the actual announcement. Yes, I'm delusional. I still maintain that in a fair and just universe we would be able to buy overpriced Franklin puppets at Hot Topic. Prepare for a longish mail when the axe falls...

Ryall: Accept it, man. Doesn’t make it easier, but denying the truth only holds out hope that’s not going to be realized.

Anyway, couple of things:

-SNOW WONDER indeed looks sappy as hell, but I might watch because it's based off a story by Connie Willis. Willis is an excellent SF/fantasy writer who has more awards in the field than just about anyone except Harlan Ellison. She does romantic comedy pieces very well, so this could be worth a watch. "Could" is the operative word here. However, I strongly recommend her collections IMPOSSIBLE THINGS and FIRE WATCH if you haven't read them.

-You have missed the one bright spot in this game of cancelations/renewals: 7TH HEAVEN is finally being wiped off this Earth. Possibly one of the most horrible, misguided, utterly dreadful "family" shows in the history of mankind. Last I heard, they added Hillary Duff's sister to the cast, which may have caused it to achieve radioactive levels of badness.

Ryall: Eh, it looked like a show I’d want to avoid right from the start, but I didn’t begrudge its existence. Some families want shows that are palatable for the entire family, so while the treacly fare ain’t for me, I never cared if it was on. I’m much more offended and elitist about shows that are willfully stupid. Yes, dumb sitcoms are easy to watch. Candy is easy to eat. Doesn’t mean I want a steady diet of it.

-DESPERATE HOUSEWIVES, THE O.C., etc. have indeed become less watchable. Here's the thing -- I don't know that a lot of these series are amendable to a long-run format.

It has long been the rule of thumb that most shows are supposed to run to 100 episodes, the amount required for syndication. That's about five full seasons. So, with any show, I have a "five year rule," which is: Can this show sustain five years worth of stories?

This rule becomes even more complicated when you realize that many of these shows have an average of four plotlines per episode. So, if you have five years and 100 episodes, that means that you have to be able to glean 400 stories out of this concept and characters. In addition, you have to ask: Is this premise sustainable?

For instance, five years from now, do you think anyone will still care of Dr. Whoever and Patrick Dempsey get together? Right now, it's the subject of every other article in the entertainment trades. But is it possible to get a full five years out of that premise?

Ryall: Different strokes, I guess—I already don’t care about the characters on Dempsey’s show.

Sure, all the second-season revelations on LOST are cool, but I have this sinking feeling that by season 3 or 4, the show will have become as boring and convoluted as ALIAS. How many flashbacks can they pull off for these characters? They've already introduced the possibility for another 30-40 characters that can be drawn from the existing and alternate castaways. How long before the audiecne just starts screaming, "SHOW US THE DAMN MONSTER ALREADY?!"

THE O.C. and DESPERATE HOUSEWIVES are already showing this strain. THE O.C. in particular has suffered because they have this constant need to hit the reset button. The first season was entertaining because you could watch the relationships evolve and see new characters enter the situation. They haven't successfully introduced a new ongoing character since that first season, and their need to constantly bring it back to the three or four main couples makes the show feel insulated and stagnant. And Adam Brody has gone from being a cool, funny actor to an annoying little bastard who needs to shut the hell up.

DESPERATE HOUSEWIVES is not a show I watch on a regular basis, so I don't feel that I can analyze it in depth. But the problems with it are pretty obvious from a distance: You have about four main characters, each of whom is more or less isolated in her own storyline. In addition, you have two or three peripheral storylines, that have some minor intersections with the existing four characters.

The four main characters are each based around one particular "desperate"-themed gimmick, so there's only so much you can do with them. In addition, most of the secondary characters only interact with one of the four main characters, so they're disposable. That creates a limited window of storytelling -- I give the writers props for killing off characters or what, but constantly filling the void left by one character creates more trouble in the long run.

For the best evidence of this, look at ER. Does ANYONE care anymore? It's managed to suck the life from a half-dozen or so promising young actors. It used to be kind of a cool, unpredicatable drama. Now it's a standardized soap with the occasional blow-up.

My warning is this: Most dramatic shows that aren't episodic crime thrillers are based around non-sustainable premises. They aren't designed to run for eight or ten years. They cannot possibly run that long without turning their interesting, complex characters into whiny little cartoons. Years from now, you, the viewer, WILL NOT CARE about these people. There are rare exceptions, but as Neil Young put it: "It's better to burn out than to fade away."

Which actually ties in nicely to ARRESTED DEVELOPMENT, which WAS good enough to run eight or ten years, but...

Eh. For a later time.

Apologies for the rambling nature of this, I've some downtime at work.

Ryall: Well, the thing about the long-running dramas is, they don’t have to burn themselves out in under five years. Look at LAW & ORDER, or even CSI. Or, maybe the best example right now, THE WEST WING. That show was creatively pretty dead a couple years ago, and yet it’s managed to reinvigorate itself this year. Might not be enough to give it a huge boost in the ratings, but it shows that good characters can always thrive with good writing.

Eddie C. writes: Please, Please tell me this is some kind of joke. Not that I'm overly surprised or anything, but . . . Fox is going to reconsider and leave AD on the air, right? What you printed was just a rumor or somehow you jumped the gun? Right?

Ryall: Er…

If it is true, this is exactly why I don't usually watch sitcoms (any sitcoms). As a matter of fact, AD was the only sitcom I watched with any regularity (aside from "My Name is Earl," although with all due respect to Jason Lee, AD was a much better show). I suppose typical laugh-track sitcoms will rule the day. And I thought maybe a new trend was starting, with better written comedies that didn't rely on predictable jokes and cutesy characters (I should've known better). With the cancellation of this and "Kitchen Confidential" (I know you didn't like the show, but I thought it had potential) I can't say much for future sitcom prospects (not on my TV anyway).

This may even lead me to stop watching sitcoms altogether. Sounds pretty drastic, but "My Name is Earl" seems kinda limited with its premise anyway and I have yet to check out "The Office" (if you're right, and I suspect you are, I needn't bother).

Ryall: Oh, you should bother. It’s so good, and good shows are ever at a premium. I’d hate for it and EARL and EVERYBODY HATES CHRIS to go away and leave us in a WAR AT HOME world.

Whatever happens, AD will sorely be missed. While crap like "Friends" will live on in infamy. Jeffrey Tambor just can't catch a break (I hope he and Cross at least go on to find projects almost as worthy).

I have to blame Fox (if only a little). There would have been a time (when Fox had no shows in the Top Ten) when AD really could've flourished (I emphasize could've). You would think its cult status could've carried it, but I guess not. They're not as patient as they used to be, and yet still mass produce a bunch of doomed-to-fail sitcoms (some decent, some really bad) which I'm sure is what will replace AD. Time will tell on that one.

Robert M. writes: I know AD meant a lot to you, and I really enjoyed it as well. This really sucks. I kinda suspected the move to Mondays wouldn't work, especially leading off the night. What they ought to do is move it back to Sundays at 8:30 - have you seen that piece of shit The War at Home? It's truly awful. It's like Married with Children, but played like a real sitcom with "heartwarming moments". It's crap. Forget about Freddie, you should wonder how Fox is keeping that garbage on the air. I DVR King of the Hill every week and watch it at 8:30 after the Simpsons, so I get a decent hour of entertainment. I can't imagine ever watching "TWAH" (just one letter off) again after sitting through it once. They could show that to Iraqi prisoners, but it might be considered inhumane.

Ryall: yeah, how come we proclaim we won’t torture prisoners of war but there’s no problem with torturing our airwaves with THE WAR AT HOME? I suppose because people can, and should, but don’t, change the channel.

Are they going to wrap up the show in a decent way, or did they already shoot the "last episode" before cancellation? I hate when that happens. A great show should at least get to wrap up its storylines (as much as possible on AD anyway) and get a fitting sendoff. I bet Fox won't even have the decency to promote the finale. "COME ON!!!!"

Ryall: They have more to film, so I expect to at least see some insane final episodes. How you top things like a blown-up photo of a character’s balls or a giant mole fighting a guy with a jet pack, I dunno, but I’m sure they will.

By the way, I got the chance to see the Argento episode of Masters of Horror early, due to a programming error on Showtime's "On Demand" service. It's absolutely INSANE. One of the most disturbing things I've EVER seen on television. If you get Showtime, check it out. It's really fucking freaky, and I don't say that lightly. This could cause rioting in the streets when it airs. It's one truly fucked-up show.

Ryall: Haven’t seen that one yet, and I don’t know if we’ll be adapting that episode at IDW, but that’s exactly what I’d expect from Argento.

Todd W. writes: Just figured I'd add my 2 cents worth to the lamentation of the news of "Arrested Development" being canceled.

This ran in my column in the Grants Pass Daily Courier with the headline "TV networks take another step backward":

Well, folks, it looks like “Arrested Development” has had its development arrested — permanently.

Fox is reported to have shortened the season for the show to a mere 13 episodes, and completely removed it from the network schedule for the vital November sweeps period, thus, seemingly sealing the fate of the most original and intelligent sitcom in at least a decade.

I’ve gone on and on in past columns about how the flawed Nielsen ratings system can doom creative, intelligent programming because of the more sophisticated methods that those who appreciate it use in consuming it. And I could go on and on about how the networks are dumbing down television — but they’re not.

You are.

You, me and everyone else who consumes the mindless drivel that the networks put out — while mostly ignoring the few intelligent programs that manage to squeeze their way through focus groups, network censors, corporate advertisers and prudish “family-focused” advocates — are contributing to the decline of television as a public marketplace of entertainment, news and ideas.

We’ve turned what was once famously referred to as “the opiate of the masses” into the equivalent of crack cocaine — a quick-burning high that is gone and forgotten two minutes later, which we try and repeat again and again with less success each time.

And it isn’t just entertainment programming that’s gotten hit so hard by this. Turn on cable news at any given point, and I guarantee you that within 15 minutes or so, you’ll be treated to the story of some pretty, young, suburban white woman who has gone missing, been kidnapped, gotten mutilated, murdered her children or been killed by her husband. Don’t worry if you miss it, because 15 minutes later, it’ll be on again. Never mind the bigger issues that affect everyone — you know, taxes, war and public policy — that’s not the kind of carnage we’ve lined up at the modern-day Circus Maximus to see, I guess.

Wow, that’s a heck of a rant to go on based on the demise of a sitcom, huh? Well, first of all, let me admit to a little bias. I haven’t laughed at any show as much as I have “Arrested Development” since “Seinfeld” went off the air. It’s an insanely original show that treats the viewer with a degree of intelligence unmatched by any show on the air currently.

The show deals with the trials and travails of the rich Bluth family, after the arrest and incarceration of the family patriarch, George (Jeffrey Tambor), who apparently engaged in insider trading and also violated a trade embargo by building cheap houses in Iraq for Saddam Hussein.

“Good” son Michael (Jason Bateman) has been drafted into helping his daffy family, which includes his alcoholic, shrewish mother (Jessica Walter); his greedy, clueless magician brother Gob (Will Arnett); his sheltered, childlike brother Buster (Tony Hale); his well-meaning but vain twin sister Lindsay (Portia de Rossi) and her obviously gay, but in denial, therapist/actor husband Tobias Fünke (David Cross).

The series also features hilarious narration by Ron Howard of “Happy Days” fame. In one episode, Howard angrily snaps that a character has gone “way over the line” when she insultingly referred to another character as “Opie.”

The plots are complex, but silly affairs, that often dovetail into each other. For example, an episode that aired last Monday had such disparate elements as a jet pack ordered by George in order to escape house arrest, a giant mole costume, an effort to deceive Japanese investors, and an investigation by the CIA into the Bluth family all colliding in a battle in which a phony city is wrecked in Godzilla-like fashion.

Obviously, it’s a show that you have to pay attention to understand. You have to be there.

Compare that level of complexity with, say, “Stacked,” the recently renewed Fox comedy starring Pamela Anderson’s breasts, and tell me that the lowest common denominator isn’t winning out here.

Clearly, if we were willing to watch more intelligent stuff like “Arrested Development,” the networks would put more of it on. But no, we just keep taking hits off the “crack pipe of the masses,” embracing the most simplistic material television has to offer. How much lower can the lowest common denominator go?

It’s no wonder that more and more viewers like me are deserting the “big four” (six if you count the WB and UPN) networks for the gutsier fare cable offers, which manages to somehow be far more intelligent than 90 percent of the offerings of the “big” networks despite the lack of content restrictions.

Hopefully, this isn’t the end of “Arrested Development.” Maybe some cable network somewhere will rescue this gem, which has received multiple Emmy awards as well as the TV Land “Future Classic” award, from the death that the realities of network TV have consigned it to.

Ryall: Yeah, this just serves to remind me of why I’m so sad about this.

The thing is, the show won numerous awards, and it garnered critical acclaim from all kinds of critics, and yet, at the end of the day, we see just what those things mean. No offense to television critics, but the number of people who are swayed by critical support of a show are obviously far less than those who want to watch portly men bicker with their too-attractive wife over familiar, non-taxing domestic issues.

So I’m with this guy—I DO blame the viewing audience more than Fox (although they’re certainly not blameless here). And I DO feel elitist in that I hate to see good, well-written shows constantly thrown on the scrap heap while ACCORDING TO JIM and YES, DEAR and THE WAR AT HOME and STACKED and even THE KIND OF QUEENS prevail. I suppose at the end of a work day, more people just want to stare at a show that floats over them harmlessly, offering familiar situations and predictable jokes and relatable characters (?). Shows that aren’t mentally taxing and don’t make you say “huh”? I’m not trying to say that fans of AD are better or more right than these types of people… even if they are.

More and more, these kinds of decisions, to let shows like this go in favor of generic crap, prove that you get what you pay for with “free” TV. Cable shows like WANTED and NIP/TUCK and RESCUE ME and THE 4400 and most all of HBO’s slate of shows and so many other cable programs just further help illustrate that network programming is tired and mostly not worth investing in. Which is sad to think, because I was so optimistic about the networks earlier this season. Sure, it’s a tentative optimism, since they’re always one or two bad decisions away from letting their viewers down, but still, consider the way the season started—LOST found new ways to stay fresh, EVERYBODY HATES CHRIS and MY NAME IS EARL helped revitalize the sitcom, and PRISON BREAK felt very much like a solid cable show (we’ll see if Fox really takes six months off before airing the final episodes of that show—if they do, they’ll continue to prove they have no understanding of what viewers want). Now, AD’s cancellation just reinforces that good network programming is an aberration, not a sign of a new renaissance.

Chuka M. writes: The news of cutting Arrested Development episodes down is,I hope, because of the surgery that Jason Bateman had to go through. If it is not,it is a long line of shows Fox has put on the chopping block that were good and/or loved by critics. Andy Richter Saves the Universe, Firefly and Fastlane all suffered the same fate. Even The Lone Gunmen and Futurama couldn't escape it. The lone survivor that survived that bullet was Family Guy and that was because of Cartoon Network and its dvd sales. Say it ain't so, Fox, say it ain't so.

Ryall: Don’t forget THE BEN STILLER SHOW, too.

DESPERATE, But Not Serious:

Rick P. writes: Love the column. Quick observation: Teri Hatcher did NOT win the Emmy (thank god!) -- it was Felicity Huffman (much more deservedly, I might add -- though the show is still NOT a comedy...)

They never should've killed Rex. He was the glue... now he could actually be made into glue! (I wouldn't put it past them...)

Mick C. writes: A note from Teri Hatcher’s ex-husband. Yeah. . .not really. BTW: what did Teri do to her face? Looks like the same thing Sandra Bullock did. Like the new & improved DC Bizzzaros.

Hey! Long time no ebug the MPS TV guy. Just a note to say thanks again for the smirks.

Not to mention, I had the same thought about Jaime Pressly. Though she resembles a ferret, say if one was a Penthouse Pet, she does nail the role.

Ryall: Regarding Teri Hatcher… well, I’ll leave that one alone, since I don’t know anything about her face either way (Aging? Plastic surgery? Bad diet?), but, well… yeah.

Getting HIGHLANDER

Will B. writes: It may not be as fancy as Peter Jackson's vlogs, but Highlander actor Adrian Paul ("Duncan McLeod") is turning in pretty regular blogs about the filming of the next Highlander film, from the set in lovely Lithuania (north of Poland)(in Winter)(in pain).

http://www.adrianpaul.net/current/thesource.shtml

Sounds like a horrible experience, but since Adrian Paul is more involved with the story this time it may actually end up as a good film.

For those who hadn't heard there was going to be another Highlander film, here was Adrian's statement from back in July: "The new Highlander movie is going to start shooting sometime later this year in Eastern Europe," reported actor Adrian Paul. "David Abramowitz is putting the final touches on to the script, and once approved it will go into pre-production later this year. I have always said that I would never do another one unless I had more control over the product. Well, this time I am executive-producing it. Brett Leonard is set to direct. Be ready to see a new Highlander film, one that has the quality of the television series with a new sound and look for 2006. Everyone is excited to be able to produce something that will revamp such a successful franchise. Once the rights fell back to Davis-Panzer after the dimise of Dimension Films, Peter Davis approached me to star and executive produce."

Look At All These Rumors

“CmorrisFo” writes: I have heard that an unkown actor named matthew foos will play Kyle Rayner in the upcoming Green Lantern Film.

Ryall: I’ll take an unknown named Matthew Foos over a known named Jack Black, I’ll tell you that. Not that I think any casting has actually been done, or that this movie will ever actually happen.

At Least He Didn’t Just Say “Snoochie Boochies”

“Boogj3” writes: ou said poop shoot shootin poop hahahahah are there any women in here whats that

Ryall: Ahh. JAY & SILENT BOB STRIKE BACK aired recently, eh?

Photos of the Week

E-MAIL RYALL | E-MAIL TIPTON | ARCHIVES