Case in Point:
This is the headline I saw this morning:
Second City, CBC team for series
"Yoinks!" I thought to myself. If you're like me, kids, and let's face it -- you are, my darlings... you secretly have been waiting all these years for somebody to get it together, kick Andrew Alexander in the pants and get a new version of SCTV on the air. Back up the truck for Joe Flaherty, coax Eugene Levy back for a payday, appeal to the nostalgia factor for the others to make an appearance, and build the show around the hot talent that's passed through the doors in the last couple years. I'm thinking people like Lee Smart.
I know for a fact that there are a ton of comedy writers and TV writers who would move heaven and earth to work on something called SCTV. Who knows. Might even be good. And CBC, a perfect place for it, right? CBC does comedy, after all.
Wow, I think...they're finally going to do it! Then I click through to the rest of Bill Harris' article:
Second City and the CBC are teaming up for a reality-TV series called The Second City's Next Comedy Legend.
It will air on the CBC this summer.
Aspiring sketch comedians from across the country will compete for a spot with the troupe. As is the tradition with reality TV, each week one of the contestants will be forced to walk the comedic plank.
Hosts and judges still are being finalized, but you can bet that many notable Second City alumni, and perhaps some Canadian celebrities from other entertainment fields, will be involved.
Auditions for the show are scheduled to take place in Vancouver (March 20), Calgary (March 24), Halifax (March 28) and Toronto (April 4). Registration information is available at nextcomedylegend.com.
Sigh. Note to any actually gifted young comedians. (Especially if you're a young, female comedian.) DO NOT audition for this show. It is NOT the way.
Remember the old axiom about laughing with vs. laughing at.
Now I've got to go ice this disappointment. Enjoy your bullshit Hallmark Holiday.
18 comments:
Hey Denis,
Well, you know this is an issue close to my heart. As for the show they announced, there may be some merit to the idea, I dunno. But I share your SCTV-related disappointment tenfold.
I cornered Andrew Alexander at a Second City party a few years ago to ask him the question I suspect he hears nearly every day. Why no new SCTV? You cherry pick the best of the best from the Toronto cast, the touring casts, etc. And, whenever possible, bring in an old cast member who's available, block shoot a bunch of short sketches, and scatter them throughout the run. A nice mix of the old and the new, but with the emphasis on the new.
As he's said countless times, most recently on a commentary track on the latest batch of DVDs, he's basically against the idea because he doesn't want to "compete" with the old show. No matter how good the new show was, people would always compare it to the classic and it would invariably suffer by comparison.
I'm sympathetic to this. Lord knows, anyone who watched "The New WKRP in Cincinnati," say, or the reunion of the Dick Van Dyke Show a couple of years back, knows that there's something to the idea of letting sleeping dogs lie.
Nonetheless, if Second City were to do an SCTV old-cast-reunion-type dealie as simply a cynical cash grab, it would've happened years ago. I don't think a genuinely "new" show would have to carry that kind of baggage. Yes, comparisons would be inevitable, but so what? There is nobility in trying.
From a strictly emotional standpoint, the old SCTV occupies a special place in the hearts of a certain generation of comics and comedy writers, myself included. It was absolutely the one big thing that I saw and thought "wow, I'd like to do something like this for a living." In reference to your post from a couple of weeks ago, SCTV was my "original sin."
But forget all that. This is a business, and SCTV is a brand. One of the few truly name brands of Comedy that ever came out of Canada, and its great success here and abroad is something to be proud of. Can you fuck up a brand? Sure you can, faster than you can say "New Coke" (I'm really dating myself today, but anyhoo...)
But the truth is (and I'm speaking from strictly a cynical business standpoint at this juncture) there really isn't much more money to be squeezed out of the old brand anyway. The syndication package has seen its best days, and the DVD sales have peaked and subsequently slowed. A new show could no more hurt the legacy of the old one than the "new" WKRP hurt the classic. No one talks about the new WKRP anymore -- they tried it, it sucked, we moved on. But people are STILL talking about those non-flying turkeys, and I know that there are many TV geeks out there like you and I, Denis, who are currently salivating over the prospect of the show finally coming out on disc.
This is way too long. At any rate, I guess I'm just saying, hey, yeah, I want a new show too. Call the CBC, Mr. Alexander. Please. Do a short order if you like: 6 shows, 8 shows, work out the kinks. Acknowledge that yes, SCTV was unique in its time, and that today there are countless sketch shows that have come and gone, but be emboldened by the fact that no one ever parodied the medium of television with as much wit, subtlty and precision as the best of the old SCTV did.
As I say, there is nobility in trying.
For good or ill, the marketplace is not currently interested in sketch comedy shows. Ask around.
I don't have to ask around, Geoffrey. But your view's a little simplistic. We're not talking about another sketch comedy show. We're talking about a beloved brand. If there wasn't juice in the brand, they wouldn't be doing the reality show. The fact that they're trying to exploit the brand for this show shows its value. You can't compare it to a cookie cutter comedy inc, four guys in a sketch troupe show.
I guarantee you that if a package for the New SCTV went out, you would have every Canadian Network, including CBC, trying to put it into development. No matter "what the market's saying" now.
I am very confident that the CBC, with its stated preference for "family" and its stated aversion to anything "edgy", would not be among them. I also doubt CTV would have much interest. Maybe Comedy.
i've seen this show already in many incarnations on the comedy network. hasn't led to anything for those winners, why should it lead to anything for the winner of this show?
sadly, the only money going to comedy seems to be for "reality" programming like keys to the hiv and punched up.
Geoffrey,
Really - what are you talking about?
CTV has proven they buy shows to keep other people from having them. They have Degrassi mainly because they didn't want CBC (the home of the first show) to have it. There is nothing edgy about SCTV, and CBC has BOUGHT the SCTV/reality show already.
For a guy who advises others to "ask around" to get the pulse of how the business is...well...
CBC isn't going to buy a sketch show. They have bought a reality show. Let me say this again, CBC is not going to buy a sketch show. They are looking for a situational comedy that the whole family can watch between 8 and 9 pm. The model is "Happy Days". It would be irresponsible to suggest to anyone that they will buy a sketch show for they will be wasting their time. CBC doesn't have the desire, the money or the real estate. This is not conjecture.
It is very unlikely the CTV will buy a sketch show.
The Comedy Network claim they have no interest in a sketch show.
You are exagerating the value of the SCTV brand. The show was on a looooooong time ago. It means nothing to the kids who are the audience for comedy.
All three of the terrestrial networks are scrambling right now ... if they can see the hook, they'll bite on anything. As for CBC not being edgy, desperate times call for desperate measures. And they did buy Arrested Development as an acquisition, bet you never thought you'd see that on CBC, either. Probably one of the smartest lessons I learned early on in my career is what networks say they want and what they actually end up buying are almost always two different things. I'm with DMc on this one (happy crass commercial day to you too, D).
I appreciate what Caroline is saying but even if we absolutely discount CBC's oft repeated statement that they are interested in broadly accessible narrative comedy series, with a strong emphasis on returning empathetic characters, we have to look at the fact that they already have 2 & 1/2 sketch shows on their schedule.
Caroline is, of course, perfectly correct in observing that what a bunch of network execs say and what they finally do have no relationship.
I suppose the only way anyone will know whether this is really the CBC's intention is if they actaully do hire an experienced showrunner and new writers for Mosque. If they are going to stick to their stated plan, they have to do so. Seeing that they continue to spend big on ads (today in the large markets) I'm coming around to the argument that they will. This could be bad sign for the existing sketch shows.
he's basically against the idea because he doesn't want to "compete" with the old show. No matter how good the new show was, people would always compare it to the classic and it would invariably suffer by comparison.
If Lorne Michaels had thought this way in the "dark days" of SNL when it was almost cancelled then we wouldn't have the Fey...
If Hasselhoff had let things lie we wouldn't have had umpteen seasons of Baywatch.
(wait, that's actually working against me isn't it?)
Geoffrey, the 2 + 2 = Yellow statements you're making are really beyond the pale. What CBC does or doesn't do with Mosque has absolutely no reflection on the "2 1/2 sketch shows." You're positing a link where there is no link. Mercer, Air Farce, and 22 are all cost effective shows with very complimentary ratings. 22 and Mercer particularly are up -- which is astounding for such mature shows. Their fate has nothing whatsoever to do with Mosque, except in the broadest definition of the fortunes of the network.
But I guess this is part and parcel with the "kids who are the audience for comedy." Never mind the fact that the data for 22/Mercer and Air Farce do not support you, and neither does the audience profile of Arrested Development reruns, or Raymond reruns, for that matter. You've made a statement that on its face seems to state something bold, but when compared to the reality is actually meaningless.
"Kids" are not the audience for comedy. There is no one "audience for comedy." What the robust marketplace proves is that there are several marketplaces for comedy, just as there are niches for drama and reality.
I'm so pleased to have contributed to an argument with no apparent end. Let me just clarify, Geoffrey, that when I said "call the CBC" it was more or less a random choice.
Well, no, I'll ammend that. I think CBC would be the logical first place to shop this mythical-show-which-will-never-see-the-light-of-day-anyway. They were the first national broadcaster to carry the show (Global carried it first, of course, but back then they were not a national network).
Regardless, I don't think we have to worry too much about being "irresponsible" by encouraging anyone to pitch any show of any type to any network. If you can get the meeting, congrats. You're 90% there. If they aren't buying what you're selling, you pitch something else. It's not like they're going to run you out of town on a rail.
Whoops. Sorry. It's been a loooong time since anyone was literally run out of town on a rail. The "kids" won't get that. I being my self-flagellation now.
Matt, clearly you've just proved why no one travels by train anymore, and why there isn't any appetite for rail travel either for passenger or freight.
Nobody but Alex, you mean.
Actually, I'm not totally sure that CBC was the first network to carry SCTV. I have this hazy recollection that it was shot at a an Edmonton private affilate of the Allarcom network.
If they started redirecting resources, human and otherwise, from those existing sketch shows to prop up their new shows, would that be a connection? Just a theoretical question.
hey everyone:
I don't know if this is germane to the discussion but...
(I'm not even sure what if the word "germane" is germane to that sentence)
I can't speak for rmr and air farce, but from my point of view as one of the execs at 22 the success of LMOP is hugely positive and not a threat to our very existence. Of course I could be just wrong. It's network tv after all. And 22 does cost some money; not very much compared to most half-hours, but there are obviously some costs. But we're not worried down here in Halifax that resources will be re-directed away from us. Could happen, sure. But we're not worried about it.
I for one am happy that Mosque is doing well (unrelated: did you see the story in the Globe Business section where the reporter claimed Mosque was only getting 300,000 viewers ?) In fact the more people that start hitting (or re-hitting) cbc on their remotes is good for the canadian tv industry imo.
Germanely yours,
Mark
www.thevideocomicstrip.com
Post a Comment