The 90's comedy climate

[darklight]

Hi! I was reading an article the other day about Seinfeld and how its one of the greatest tv shows ever. Personally I don't get it so am not a fan, but I just wondered what your thoughts are on how difficult it must have been to be part of the Frasier when it started. Not only did you have to deal with the fact that you were a spin-off from a classic show but there was also the competition from shows like Friends, Seinfeld and Simpsons etc (90's was a great comedy decade) especially Seinfeld which had the more self-obsessed comedy and appeal about it. By which I mean, Seinfeld seemed to epitomize the 90's and people felt more relevance to these shows because they were similar to their own lives and the everyday trivial things that happen. Although Frasier had the critical succes Seinfeld, Friends and (worldwide) the Simpsons seemed to have the greater popular vote, i wonder how difficult it must have been for the writers to stick to what they were even though the comedy face was changing and frasier has a more classic approach. I believe Frasier is the greatest but looking back it seems to be overlooked by many in favour of Friends (dunno how) and Seinfeld and Simpsons.

[Ali 75]

I don't think the writers were that bothered about Frasier being the most popular, just about it being the best, which it was IMO. What I liked about Frasier was that the writers threw in a lot of 10% jokes that they knew only some of the audience would get. That takes b*lls, and they had the actors who could carry it off. I was always surprised that Frasier *was* so successful because the humour was so sophisticated and clever, I thought it might go over the heads of some of the audience, thankfully it was popular enough to last 11 seasons.

Seinfeld does nothing for me either, but it was probably the most acclaimed sitcom of all time. In saying that, it lost out to Frasier at the Emmys everytime it went up against it. Friends (sorry Strat) I couldn't stand, it was too cheesy and lacked the class of Frasier. I agree that it was popular, but I think it was mostly teens who watched it, not that there's anything wrong with that, but it wasn't critically acclaimed at all until other sitcoms ended or went off the boil.

The Simpsons is the only one you mentioned that I think was on a par with Frasier, and I'm pleased that it is so successful.

Like I said though, I don't think the cast/crew are that bothered that Frasier was not as popular as the others. It won a record 37 Emmys, and various other high profile awards, was more popular in the UK than Seinfeld anyway, and has been sold to pretty much every continent you can name. As for it being a spin-off, it helped it if anything. It had a lot to live up to, but the 1st season was so great that it built a strong audience who stayed with it for the most part.

Look at what's happened to Joey, Friends may have been more popular - but its audience haven't bothered sticking around for that spin-off. The fact that it's meant to be crap doesn't help though[:]:-}[/:].

[Squidgy69]

I have really tried to watch Seinfeld but have never got into it, I think it is one of those shows that you maybe needed to see from the beginning.

I am a big Cheers fan and was very apprehensive when Frasier started. I didn't think anything could take the place of my beloved Cheers. I am currently going through the entire series again with the DVD releases and i still think it is hilarious and IMO is the second greatest comedy of all time. It is surpassed only by Frasier which for a spin off is a massive achievement.

I admit I do like Friends but to me Friends is fast food comedy. Its ok to fill a gap but Frasier is far superior. Frasier is lobster at Le Cigar Valone to Friends Big Mac at McDonalds

PS Joey is terrible!!

[Ali 75]

It's difficult to criticise Seinfeld because most people do seem to like it, I think it more revered in the US though, it seems to split opinion here in the UK.

Sorry Strat, but I don't agree with you re; Friends, I don't think it was well written at all. Imagine the Frasier characters using some of that pathetic dialogue with all the "Oh My God's" and "Eww's", the same writers work on 'Joey' and they're getting found out now. Someone (Charlie?) posted a brilliant send-up of it a while ago and it summed up what many people hate about it - I'm not going to be cruel and post it, unless anyone wants to see it?[:]:-}[/:]. It definitely did have a dip too, I couldn't bear to watch it, (unfortunately it's inescapable if you live in the UK though[:]:-I[/:]), friends who did watch it said that it went off the boil when that English actress joined the cast, I think she played Emily? I read many TV critics who said the same thing, it missed out on an Emmy nomination that year too. Others have said it went off after the first two seasons, but I can't comment on that. All I know is whenever it is on I have to get out of the room.....and fast!

As Niles once said, "Popularity is the hallmark of mediocrity!"

[Squidgy69]

Sorry Stratman, I too must disagree with you. I watched Friends and for the first 3 seasons I thought it was very funny but they just reused old jokes all the time......I don't agree that Friends was consistent, I think seasons 4,5 and 6 were Friends low points. I think I am correct in saying it was nearly pulled after season 5 or maybe 6 because it was so bad ratings had slumped. It did pick up again in later seasons. The difference was that Friends was very glossy, aimed at the late teens early 20's market and had 6 attractive people in the lead roles that would all end up on magazine covers. This would get people watching the show.

You couldnt really see Kelsey on the front of Heat now could you.

[Chardonnay]

I think that the reason that Seinfield was consistant was that it was never as good as Frasier in the first place, and therefore it was noticeable that Frasier had a "slump", even though most of the episodes in those seasons ssstand up to most of Seinfield episodes, in my opinion.

Friends was good, Frasier was better.

[Jonno]

Oh, I don't know about that, Chardonnay! I appreciate that Frasier is your personal preference, but I think it'd be difficult to argue that the average Seinfeld episode doesn't beat Frasier in terms of creativity during the "slack years". I suspect Seinfeld just isn't your thing, because I can't see it as being the slightly bland and washed-out sitcom Frasier was at it's lowest. On peak form, I love them both equally.

I have to admit, the Simpsons is my favourite show ever. I think it's the Beatles of TV - adored by the critics, and the public, able to appeal simultaneously at the most sophisticated and most rudimentary level. Even more so that Frasier, The Simpsons has the balls to put in dozens of jokes they know 90% of their audience won't get, yet manage to be even more popular. The smartest and funniest writing and acting of any show IMO. AND it's a cartoon!

[Sideshow Meg]

I am a big Cheers fan and was very apprehensive when Frasier started. I didn't think anything could take the place of my beloved Cheers. I am currently going through the entire series again with the DVD releases and i still think it is hilarious and IMO is the second greatest comedy of all time. It is surpassed only by Frasier which for a spin off is a massive achievement

I agree, I have also been watching Cheers through repeats and DVDs and think it is hilarious and so consistently funny.

I love Seinfeld too because it is so randomly funny and doesn't require too much thought, much like Cheers, which is something i could just watch whatever time, although with Frasier, I have to watch right from the start. The 90s was really a great comedy era and had some really classics sitcoms in

[JamesB]

I would argue that Seinfeld is the best of the bunch of 90's comedy. I love Frasier, but if I had to choose only one sitcom for my desert island, I would choose Seinfeld: it is so original and unexpected. Added to which, the DVDs are just stuffed with extras that make you want to go back and watch things again and again.

Both Frasier and Seinfeld were innovative in that the characters were not immediately relevant to other people: rich, snobby Seattle folk and NY Jews. The fact that they both captured people's imaginations is a testament to great writing and acting

[mickeba]

On one hand James, I agree with you about "Frasier" and "Seinfeld". Frasier will always be the better show for me, but "Seinfeld", is right there with it. "Seinfeld" has some extremely memorable episodes, and the observational humor is great, whereas with "Frasier", it's about episodes, and story and it's on a different plane. The character of "Kramer", is brilliant and hilarious even now, eight years later. What I never understood was the appeal and the acclaim of the program "Friends". Talk about inferior! I always thought that Niles/Daphne was drawn out a bit too long, but never reached a completely stale point. In fact, it was concluded as a story line at a natural point. Not too soon, perhaps a bit late, but okay. On the other hand, Ross/Rachel was ludicrous and handled very poorly. Yet, "Friends", gets a lot of acclaim, whereas "Frasier", sometimes is forgotten.

[Sideshow Meg]

You say Friends got a lot of acclaim, which is true in ratings but in awards, Frasier proved the richer. I really got sick of the whole 'We were on a break thing' in Friends not only because it was boring and repetitive but also because the concept had been done more than a decade earlier on Cheers (Episode in season 2 called Old Flames)

[JamesB]

I think the main difference with Friends is that the comedy was driven by events more than characters. I don't think the same could be said of Frasier, and certainly not of Seinfeld.

You therefore, by definition, have to have more and more extravagent plots to carry the characters in the former. It is nice to watch, and has some funny moments, but it is not clever and everyone seems to remain a bit two dimensional except in moments of utter saccharine (?ed - check sp).

Driven by characters, comedy is fantastic as you don't quite know where it is all going. I've just watched The Contest today and it is simply brilliant: up there with The Matchmaker. What does it for me in both eps is the writing: not a word out of place in either. That marks both Frasier and Seinfeld out for me as brilliant: Friends is just an also-ran.

[Chardonnay]

My post makes me look like a Seinfeld hater. I am not, I love watching the odd episode. However I feel that Seinfeld has aged, and it now its jokes wear a bit thin, the show a bit dated, for me, at least. Frasier does not have this problem; it actually seems to get better with time; like the fine wines the Crane brothers drink. I also feel that Frasier has the sophisitication and intelligence that Seinfeld simply does not have, and Frasier does do well to risk its popularity with jokes of the intelligent nature that it has.

As for the Simpsons; it is a great program but I feel that it just lacks the jokes that most of the audience cannot get. It has a few, but many focus heavily on catchphrases and the stupidity of certain characters, which makes it feel as if the writers want a cheap and easy laugh.

[Jonno]

Well, IMO Seinfeld's writing is easily as clever as Frasier's. The difference with Frasier is the characters themselves are more intelligent and sophisticated - but I don't think that means the show necessarily is. Sure, there are plently of opera references, which serve to highlight the cultural chasm between the Crane boys and everyone else, whether the audience knows the opera or not. But really, Frasier's intelligence lies in the strength of the characters, the plot outlines and witty dialogue, but nothing hugely challenging.

The Simpsons, on the other hand, packs every episode with cultural references which really only serve any purpose to a small section of the audience. On top of that, many of the laughs are not conventional "jokes" at all, but appeal to a warped, surreal sense of humour. The trick is, the show moves three times as fast as a regular sitcom, so if a joke goes over someone's head, they have 10 seconds to wait for one they'll appreciate. As for Homer's "D'oh!" and his general stupidity - that's just one level of a densely layered show. But stupidity is a comedy essential, and the ways Homer's stupidity reveals itself are endlessly new and hilarious. My favourite is when he sees a family photo onto which Bart has stuck a speech-bubble from Homer's mouth saying, "I stink". Homer says, puzzled, "I don't remember saying that!". Utterly, utterly brilliant.

[Ali 75]

I can't believe how consistent The Simpsons has been, right up until this last year or two really. I think the last couple of seasons have been a bit of a letdown, but up until then it hardly put a foot wrong. I would place that and Frasier above anything else. Friends is nowhere in terms of quality, it was popular with kids, but critics didn't give it a second glance for years. Seinfeld does nothing for me, I've watched a few episodes from different seasons, but perhaps Frasier had spoilt me and I was more used to liking that style of comedy - I'm not really a fan of stand-up comedians anyway, so that put me off Seinfeld even more. I do think Frasier was the most clever, sophisticated comedy ever to grace our screens, it was like watching a theatrical production sometimes. I agree that the characters helped in creating that view, but I do think the writing was far more high brow and sophisticated than any other sitcom.

I just wish the Frasier DVD sets were as good as the Seinfeld ones[:]}:-([/:]

[mickeba]

The acclaim I refer to, (that Friends got) last year, as both Friends and Frasier were leaving the air, NBC chairman Jeff Zucker made a comment to the press, something to the effect that Friends was the crown jewel of NBC situation comedy. And he was serious. Friends is seen as the epitome of pop culture and I find that sad. Frasier, Cheers, Seinfeld, MASH, All in the Family, MTM- those are the quality comedy series. (not all NBC!) Friends clocks in as a solid entertaining program, and nothing more. IMO!!!


Mickeba

[Mr Blue Sky]

I enjoy Seinfeld but I can take it or leave it. Frasier just HAD to be watched every week for me, even during the lean season 8+9 years. It's obviously just a question of taste, I felt real warmth from the main characters in Frasier, whereas the Seinfeld characters were more caricatures, who funny things happened to. I can understand why people love Seinfeld but Frasier was the perfect sitcom for me. You can compile a 24 episode season of Frasier that simply cannot be bettered by any other show. The Simpsons and Seinfeld may come close, but I think Frasier will stand the test of time better than any of it's rivals.

Friends isn't even on the same planet IMO. I watched the first 2 seasons but couldn't be bothered after that as it resembled some god-awful US soap with plenty of pretty people and no substance whatsoever.

[Jocelyn]

Well said, BN. I think 'Frasier' will prove truly timeless whereas 'Seinfeld', for all it's good points, already has that slightly dated would be 'hip' 1990s feel about it (or 1980s in the case of the hideous slap bass theme muzak). Perhaps 'Seinfeld' doesn't seem so dated for those who watched it when it first aired. I got into 'Frasier' long before I saw many of it's contemporaries such as 'Seinfeld' so maybe that's why none of these shows seem to measure up. I also got so used to 'Frasier''s welcome method of ditching unnecessary link music and between-scene exterior shots of buildings that seeing this tiresome cliche deployed on other US sitcoms (including 'Seinfeld' sadly) makes them seem like old hat by comparison.

I adore 'The Simpsons' almost as much as 'Frasier', it's a miracle of television really and I always look forward to each DVD release. The consistency and quality did begin to dwindle around Seasons 9 & 10 but it's still one of the best shows around. And of course there's 'Curb Your Enthusiasm', Larry David's true masterpiece...[:]:-)[/:]

[Chardonnay]

I think Frasier had the edge over Seinfeld as the acting was amazing. I have thought about this a lot and realised that the writing was probably about even for both sitcoms, but the acting in Frasier is better than in Seinfeld. All the actors in Seinfeld are brilliant, but Frasier's are better, and this probaly what makes me feel that Frasier is the better sitcom. I also think that this is why Frasier won so many awards, as well as the fact that the characters were simply fantastic, making the whole sitcom come together in a neat package.



Post Edited (22-07-05 22:35)

[Ali 75]

Mickeba wrote:

"The acclaim I refer to, (that Friends got) last year, as both Friends and Frasier were leaving the air, NBC chairman Jeff Zucker made a comment to the press, something to the effect that Friends was the crown jewel of NBC situation comedy. And he was serious".

Jeff Zucker is a *ucker - THE END


Couldn't agree more with what you said about the caricatures thing re; Seinfeld B.N, that's what I was trying to say I suppose, you couldn't have the same depth of feeling for the characters. People have said that the Seinfeld characters weren't meant to be relatable, but I liked to care about the Frasier characters and looked forward to seeing how things panned out for them.

We've touched on what Jocelyn mentioned before re; the music between scenes/ outdoor shots, something that I'm so glad Frasier didn't bother with, it was little touches like that, that helped make Frasier so classy and unique. I think the amount of awards Frasier won speaks volumes, no-one will beat their Emmy records, not in my lifetime anyway!

[mickeba]

Well said indeed! The true show of respect were the Emmy's won by Kelsey Grammer and DHP after the last season. It was the greatest show ever produced and no one could beat the emmy record of Frasier. And not just because the television climate is different. The quality of this show is staggering and no one will pay the attention to quality that the crew at Grub Street did. I really miss this program, (of course on DVD, watch it whenever I like- it's new episode's I miss!) but watching the older shows on DVD such as MASH and All in the Family, Frasier of course, you begin to see the sorry erosion of production values existing in so many shows. Quite sad! A question for you Brits. What are the British programs that inspire the love that Frasier apparently has? I always loved Avengers and of course the Saint, but what are the beloved English programs, and what are the thoughts on those?

[Jocelyn]

US magazine TV Guide named 'Seinfeld' the best sitcom ever in 1996.

Although it should be noted that four years later the British Film Institute voted 'Frasier' the best imported TV show ever. Luckily this was just before Season 8 started which I fear may have changed the BFI's mind[:]:-))[/:]

[Mr Blue Sky]

I had sitcoms in mind rather than just English shows in general when comparing them to Frasier, Mickeba. I think Frasier has many similarities with the Croft/Perry shows of the 60's, 70's and 80's. Apart from the style and manner of the humour, the most striking similarity is 'the character you never see'. Of course in Frasier that character was Maris. The Croft/Perry penned 'Dad's Army' of the 60's and 70's (which you may or may not be familiar with) had it's main character (Capt. Mainwaring) married to someone the viewer never saw, but about whom numerous tales were told (mostly about what an old battleaxe she was!).

Another obvious similarity, touched on already by Jocelyn, is the lack of incidental music or building shots in Frasier which is so alien to the British viewer. I had a hard time trying to get into many American shows because of this tacky 'padding', which I think is totally unnecessary. I don't mean to put all US shows down, I just think the producers of many shows don't credit the audience with much intelligence.

[Ali 75]

No way is Michael Richards a better actor than Kelsey, DHP or John even. Kels and DHP have won far more plaudits and awards. DHP in particular is almost the exact opposite of Niles in real life, John is actually more like Niles in real life than David! I'm not knocking Richards, he did win two or three Emmys if I remember rightly, but at best he is close to being on a par with the three Frasier guys.

Mickeba, I think John Cleese is a big influence on Kelsey and DHP. I definitely see traces of Basil Fawlty in both of their characters.

[darklight]

Having started this I thought I might chip in now. I don't think Friends is up there at all but looking at Frasier, Seinfeld and The Simpsons I think they all approached the sitcom in 3 completely different ways but whereas Frasier raised the bar forever for the traditional sitcom, Seinfeld and the Simpsons created 2 new comedy landscapes. Take the Simpsons, look how many cartoon sitcoms there are now and plus it effect on animated films which try to replicate its consistency of jokes and appeal to to a mainstream audience of both old and young. Now its easier to accept a cartoon can be for adults. Plus I've been watching some Seinfeld since my first post and although I don't like the later episodes since the interveaving seems too unbelievable, I do enjoy the earlier eps which almost do seem to sum up everyday life in a comic fashion. I like the conversations about small points they have because we've all thought about those things or talked about it (....alright well I have at least) and the way it pushed back the boundary with eps like the Contest or the one where Jerry swears a lot. And there's the simple interveaving of the earlier eps which is brilliant like when Jerry got dumped by his girlfriend because she thought she saw him picking his nose when he wasn't and then later when George was trying to find a way to break up with his girlfriend he just picked his nose. Maybe its harder to get into Seinfeld because there had never been anything like its style of 'what goes around comes around' comedy, remember it even took the Americans a while to latch onto it. I always have more to say but I think this is enough to read for now!