# NBC cancels Community



## mwhip (Jul 22, 2002)

It's over



http://tvline.com/2014/05/09/community-cancelled-nbc-season-6/


----------



## MikeMar (Jan 7, 2005)

BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOooo


----------



## TIVO_GUY_HERE (Jul 10, 2000)

But they renewed "Hannibal" and "About a boy"

I really like Hannibal


----------



## mwhip (Jul 22, 2002)

TIVO_GUY_HERE said:


> But they renewed "Hannibal" and "About a boy"
> 
> I really like Hannibal


I like About a Boy


----------



## Gunnyman (Jul 10, 2003)

5 Seasons and no movie


----------



## jjd_87 (Jan 31, 2011)

Don't worry guys, 2 Broke Girls is still on. 

#darkesttimeline


----------



## Demandred (Mar 6, 2001)

jjd_87 said:


> Don't worry guys, 2 Broke Girls is still on. #darkesttimeline


LOL!


----------



## aadam101 (Jul 15, 2002)

Awwwwww man!


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

It probably got 5 seasons when it shouldn't have gotten more than 2 based on the ratings. Sad to see it go. At it's best, it was the sitcom on TV. For me, sadly it was only about half the episodes each season.

Reading this and the ABC thread....looks like I will have some room for some new stuff next season.

I like About a Boy, but it's one of those series that I wouldn't miss if canceled, but will watch when it's on.


----------



## laria (Sep 7, 2000)

They cancelled Revolution and Growing Up Fisher as well.


----------



## DreadPirateRob (Nov 12, 2002)

Proof that we are all living in the darkest timeline.


----------



## Alfer (Aug 7, 2003)

Too bad. It was an amusing time killer and was just starting to get back on track after sucking pretty bad the last couple of years.

Oh well. It was fund pretty much while it lasted.


----------



## moose53 (Aug 30, 2011)

laria said:


> They cancelled Revolution and Growing Up Fisher as well.


I liked Growing up Fisher. Jenna Elfman brought the show into the ditch, though, IMHO. It would have been a really good show without her.


----------



## Rainy Dave (Nov 11, 2001)

moose53 said:


> I liked Growing up Fisher. Jenna Elfman brought the show into the ditch, though, IMHO. It would have been a really good show without her.


I normally like Jenna Elfman...but not in this show. I can't put my finger on it, her character just seemed off.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Bummer about Community. Although I'm not surprised. As steveknj said, it already lasted longer than it really deserved to based on the ratings. It kept getting renewed because NBC was in such bad shape and it had things that were in worse shape to cancel.

But NBC will finish this season as the #1 network with Adults 18-49, and that's true even if you remove the Olympics from the calculations. So I guess NBC has decided that it's time to start moving forward with new stuff rather than holding on to these symbols of NBC's own #darkesttimeline.


----------



## JLucPicard (Jul 8, 2004)

moose53 said:


> I liked Growing up Fisher. Jenna Elfman brought the show into the ditch, though, IMHO. It would have been a really good show without her.


I strongly agree with this! Jenna Elfman's character seemed like just that little extra that ruined (though "ruined" may be a bit strong) it.

I really liked the rest of it a lot.


----------



## laria (Sep 7, 2000)

laria said:


> They cancelled Revolution and Growing Up Fisher as well.


And Crisis and Believe.


----------



## Ereth (Jun 16, 2000)

laria said:


> They cancelled Revolution and Growing Up Fisher as well.


I love Growing up Fisher! It's one of my new favorites! I'm sorry to hear that.


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

moose53 said:


> I liked Growing up Fisher. Jenna Elfman brought the show into the ditch, though, IMHO. It would have been a really good show without her.





Rainy Dave said:


> I normally like Jenna Elfman...but not in this show. I can't put my finger on it, her character just seemed off.





JLucPicard said:


> I strongly agree with this! Jenna Elfman's character seemed like just that little extra that ruined (though "ruined" may be a bit strong) it.
> 
> I really liked the rest of it a lot.


I'm detecting a trend here... 

... and I agree.


----------



## Kablemodem (May 26, 2001)

This should teach college students that they don't need more than five years to graduate.


----------



## TiVo'Brien (Feb 8, 2002)

Ereth said:


> I love Growing up Fisher! It's one of my new favorites! I'm sorry to hear that.


What Ereth said. 

At least "About a Boy" got renewed. It's like watching my childhood on TV.


----------



## sharkster (Jul 3, 2004)

moose53 said:


> I liked Growing up Fisher. Jenna Elfman brought the show into the ditch, though, IMHO. It would have been a really good show without her.


I like it too!  I always liked Jenna, but I mostly tuned in for JK Simmons. What a drag. I would have kept on watching.


----------



## sharkster (Jul 3, 2004)

TIVO_GUY_HERE said:


> But they renewed "Hannibal" and "About a boy"
> 
> I really like Hannibal


Cool! I like both of these.


----------



## WhiskeyTango (Sep 20, 2006)

Sorry to be a dick, but I'm glad to see Community go. If only they would also get rid of Parks and Rec then maybe some of their "I'm better than you because I like 'smart' comedies" fanboys will be quieted. Case in point...



jjd_87 said:


> Don't worry guys, 2 Broke Girls is still on.
> 
> #darkesttimeline


People have different tastes in humor. I still can't understand why fans of NBC comedies have such a holier than thou attitude.


----------



## spartanstew (Feb 24, 2002)

Bummer.

I do like About a Boy, but finally gave up on Hannibal a week or so ago. Just got too weird for me.


----------



## Crow159 (Jul 28, 2004)

I had a feeling....

I've been checking everyday for the last week for this news. There were some sites that had it leaning towards being renewed but I just had this feeling it was done for.

I'll miss you Community, you were my favorite comedy on TV and the only show I watched live.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

Rainy Dave said:


> I normally like Jenna Elfman...but not in this show. I can't put my finger on it, her character just seemed off.


I liked her on Dharma & Greg, DIDN'T like her on whatever show she was on a couple years ago about getting pregnant, and she was decent on this show.


----------



## scandia101 (Oct 20, 2007)

Each season has had it's great episodes, but overall, Community has been going down hill starting with season 2 with only a slight upturn this past season. but I'll miss it.


----------



## Bob Coxner (Dec 1, 2004)

I'm streets ahead as a Community fan but even I was disappointed with most of the episodes this season. It was time for it to go.


----------



## GoPackGo (Dec 29, 2012)

Allison Brie and Danny Pudi should be big star household names IMO.


----------



## gweempose (Mar 23, 2003)

Bob Coxner said:


> I'm streets ahead as a Community fan but even I was disappointed with most of the episodes this season. It was time for it to go.


Agreed. It was one of my absolute favorites back in the day, but I'm now three episodes behind this season. That never used to happen, and it's a clear indicator that the show isn't nearly as compelling as it once was.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

mattack said:


> I liked her on Dharma & Greg, DIDN'T like her on whatever show she was on a couple years ago about getting pregnant, and she was decent on this show.


Never liked her. At best, can only tolerate her. She was actually lower key here and was just part of the background.


----------



## vertigo235 (Oct 27, 2000)

Isn't this like the 3rd time it's been canceled?


----------



## lambertman (Dec 21, 2002)

vertigo235 said:


> Isn't this like the 3rd time it's been canceled?


No.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

WhiskeyTango said:


> Sorry to be a dick, but I'm glad to see Community go. If only they would also get rid of Parks and Rec then maybe some of their "I'm better than you because I like 'smart' comedies" fanboys will be quieted. Case in point...
> 
> People have different tastes in humor. I still can't understand why fans of NBC comedies have such a holier than thou attitude.


This....in spades.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

Bierboy said:


> This....in spades.


I think smart comedies thrive to make people who don't get the jokes look stupid....and I really LIKED Community...when I got the jokes.


----------



## aadam101 (Jul 15, 2002)

vertigo235 said:


> Isn't this like the 3rd time it's been canceled?


The show has never been cancelled until now. The show was just left hanging several times and the premiere dates were constantly moved around to fill the show in for holes in the schedule.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

I like "smart" comedies (like this & to some degree Parks & Rec, though I don't think it's quite as smart) AND 2 Broke Girls.


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

Steveknj said:


> I think smart comedies thrive to make people who don't get the jokes look stupid....and I really LIKED Community...when I got the jokes.


There are all different kinds of humor. None is necessarily more valid than the rest. Chris Farley made a career out of (in his words) "see fatty fall down" comedy, even as his SNL castmates were doing more so-called sophisticated things.

A show like Community wasn't trying to make anyone seem stupid, I don't think. It was just doing a particular brand of comedy. And it was was as broad as comedy gets at times, unless you think featuring a monkey AND naming it "Annie's Boobs" is subtle.


----------



## gweempose (Mar 23, 2003)

mattack said:


> I like "smart" comedies (like this & to some degree Parks & Rec, though I don't think it's quite as smart) AND 2 Broke Girls.


2 Broke Girls is "smart" comedy? The show relies on sexual double entendres for 90% of its laughs. I find the show to be funny, but I'd hardly call it "smart".


----------



## DreadPirateRob (Nov 12, 2002)

gweempose said:


> 2 Broke Girls is "smart" comedy? The show relies on sexual double entendres for 90% of its laughs. I find the show to be funny, but I'd hardly call it "smart".


He was saying it's possible to like both smart comedies (i.e. _Community_) and dumb comedies (i.e. _2 Broke Girls_).


----------



## gweempose (Mar 23, 2003)

DreadPirateRob said:


> He was saying it's possible to like both smart comedies (i.e. _Community_) and dumb comedies (i.e. _2 Broke Girls_).


Ah. I read it too quickly and misunderstood.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

gweempose said:


> Ah. I read it too quickly and misunderstood.


More Three's Company for you.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

gweempose said:


> Ah. I read it too quickly and misunderstood.


Not "smart" of you. 

Anyway, just because a show has sex jokes doesn't make it dumb. Full House is dumb. 2 Broke Girls can actually be pretty clever.

Also, I don't think Community was "smart." Smart to me is wordplay and clever twists. Throwing a meme into a show is not "smart" in itself. Community was more pretentious and relied on in-humor making everyone think it was smart.

It was far more formula than it appeared because it used pop culture as it's backdrop and went into imaginary realms.


----------



## DreadPirateRob (Nov 12, 2002)

TonyD79 said:


> Anyway, just because a show has sex jokes doesn't make it dumb. Full House is dumb. 2 Broke Girls can actually be pretty clever.
> 
> Also, I don't think Community was "smart." Smart to me is wordplay and clever twists. Throwing a meme into a show is not "smart" in itself. Community was more pretentious and relied on in-humor making everyone think it was smart.
> 
> It was far more formula than it appeared because it used pop culture as it's backdrop and went into imaginary realms.


Calling 2 Broke Girls "clever" and Community formulaic makes me really question your mental acuity.


----------



## GoPackGo (Dec 29, 2012)

Norm McDonald is reporting on Twitter that Joel McHale is taking the Craig Ferguson spot on CBS.

http://www.complex.com/pop-culture/2014/05/joel-mchale-late-late-show


----------



## smak (Feb 11, 2000)

DreadPirateRob said:


> Calling 2 Broke Girls "clever" and Community formulaic makes me really question your mental acuity.


2 Broke Girls is basically a series of one liners, wrapped into a 22 minute "story".

Everybody plays it like they know exactly what the other guy is going to say, waiting to tee off with their joke.

Community is the opposite of formulaic.

Unless that formula is to do something different every week.

-smak-


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

DreadPirateRob said:


> Calling 2 Broke Girls "clever" and Community formulaic makes me really question your mental acuity.


It was formula. Just because they wrap the formula in a different environment or use a different meme or different homage does not make it non-formula. The formula was simple. Various members of the group fight with each other and at the end decide they are good for each other and are friends. The next week, start over. They even made fun of the formula on screen. Jeff always made some big speech at the end. They poked fun at that during the series.

While a lot of Community was funny, it wasn't really that clever. Ripping off other themes does not make a show clever. At least no more clever than Mad Magazine.

But. My god. I'm poking at a show that everyone has to think is smart and clever because it said it was. It has to be intelligent TV because it was odd. Nope. Two and Half Men is more intelligent. The Office was more intelligent.

Yes. Blasphemy. I know. Too damned bad. I liked it. I watched it. It made me laugh. But it was not challenging or unexpected or include clever dialog.

In short. Formula and not clever. But a lot of people think Family Guy is clever, too.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

smak said:


> 2 Broke Girls is basically a series of one liners, wrapped into a 22 minute "story". Everybody plays it like they know exactly what the other guy is going to say, waiting to tee off with their joke. Community is the opposite of formulaic. Unless that formula is to do something different every week. -smak-


A different skin doesn't make it something different. Same guts pretty much every week with a different skin.

You don't know what a formula is.


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

...and Hulu may uncancel it. They're in talks with Sony about making season six.


----------



## Sparty99 (Dec 4, 2001)

Why won't people just let shows go. We got three brilliant seasons of Arrested Development with a pretty good wrap-up. Then they decide Netflix can save them, come out with 14 new episodes, and they largely suck. How many of the 97 episodes of Community were truly memorable? Half? A third? Yeah, it was a smart show and it was funny, but it's time. Five years is plenty for every sitcom.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

cmontyburns said:


> ...and Hulu may uncancel it. They're in talks with Sony about making season six.


Although this should be viewed with a highly skeptical eye. The story was originally broken by Deadline, which seems to author a story like this every time a Sony-owned show gets canceled. Seems every single time, Sony is "in talks" with someone to revive the canceled show, but surprisingly, the talks never go anywhere.

So unless I hear otherwise from a more reputable source, I'm going to assume this is more of the same.


----------



## Sparty99 (Dec 4, 2001)

TonyD79 said:


> It was formula. Just because they wrap the formula in a different environment or use a different meme or different homage does not make it non-formula. The formula was simple. Various members of the group fight with each other and at the end decide they are good for each other and are friends. The next week, start over. They even made fun of the formula on screen. Jeff always made some big speech at the end. They poked fun at that during the series.
> 
> While a lot of Community was funny, it wasn't really that clever. Ripping off other themes does not make a show clever. At least no more clever than Mad Magazine.
> 
> ...


Ugh, the arrogance in your posts about your sitcoms is dumbfounding. I watched 2 Broke Girls until it got repetitive. It was not clever. It was repeated jokes about girls being broke or being a whore or making fun of the racist caricatures. The best part was the black dude manning the register, and that was basically just the actor telling stories that actually happened to him. Two and a Half Men was so atrocious one of the actors railed against it These were not intelligent shows. That's fine, they'll survive years longer than Community will. Be satisfied with that.

More annoying than the fanboys who insist that Community is a brilliant show are the contrarians are the people who rebel and say it's not that smart and the shows for the lowest common denominator are far more intelligent. Just because a show is made for idiots and lasts for a decade doesn't mean it's smart.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

Sparty99 said:


> Ugh, the arrogance in your posts about your sitcoms is dumbfounding. I watched 2 Broke Girls until it got repetitive. It was not clever. It was repeated jokes about girls being broke or being a whore or making fun of the racist caricatures. The best part was the black dude manning the register, and that was basically just the actor telling stories that actually happened to him. Two and a Half Men was so atrocious one of the actors railed against it These were not intelligent shows. That's fine, they'll survive years longer than Community will. Be satisfied with that.
> 
> More annoying than the fanboys who insist that Community is a brilliant show are the contrarians are the people who rebel and say it's not that smart and the shows for the lowest common denominator are far more intelligent. Just because a show is made for idiots and lasts for a decade doesn't mean it's smart.


In some cases, actually many cases, we have critics telling us what is "intelligent" or people who fancy themselves as TV intellectuals. You can tell those people because they won't watch shows that are "beneath them". "Oh I don't like reality shows", or "I only watch stuff on cable because shows on the major networks are too dumb" and stuff like that. I have to agree with Tony here. All shows have formulas. Community essentially followed a formula as well. What set it apart was that they filled each episode with tons of pop culture stuff. It worked well when they had enough of an audience that "got it" but didn't work all that well when the stuff was so "niche" that only a select few who "saw the movie" or "read the book" or "played the game" got it. That's not necessarily smart writing as much as it's "smug" writing. "I don't care if you don't get the jokes, we do, so too bad if you don't". I give them credit for trying, and many episodes were as funny as anything I'd ever seen. But those episodes I "GOT" the jokes. I bet a lot of people didn't and were left scratching their heads. Perfect example, this season they did a spoof on the GI Joe cartoons of the 80s. Well, I never watched those, I was too old so half the stuff went over my head and I didn't think it was all that funny. But people of that generation here, LOVED the episode. It's a LOT harder trying to be funny AND to appeal to a wide audience.

As for shows on cable being "better" than network shows because they can be edgier, it reminds me of the comedian (Maybe Cosby, maybe Seinfeld, I can't remember) who in an interview, said that it's a lot more difficult to be funny telling clean jokes than off color ones. To me that is the same thing here. I think it takes MUCH better writing talent to write a good show under the constraints of Network rules than it is where "anything goes". It's why someone like Sorkin can pull it off under both, and be successful at it. I wonder how many of the writers who have successful cable shows could write for mainstream TV?


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

Sparty99 said:


> Ugh, the arrogance in your posts about your sitcoms is dumbfounding. I watched 2 Broke Girls until it got repetitive. It was not clever. It was repeated jokes about girls being broke or being a whore or making fun of the racist caricatures. The best part was the black dude manning the register, and that was basically just the actor telling stories that actually happened to him. Two and a Half Men was so atrocious one of the actors railed against it These were not intelligent shows. That's fine, they'll survive years longer than Community will. Be satisfied with that. More annoying than the fanboys who insist that Community is a brilliant show are the contrarians are the people who rebel and say it's not that smart and the shows for the lowest common denominator are far more intelligent. Just because a show is made for idiots and lasts for a decade doesn't mean it's smart.


Stick it. I find wordplay much more clever than cosplay. I enjoyed community but it was repetitive.


----------



## Sparty99 (Dec 4, 2001)

Steveknj said:


> In some cases, actually many cases, we have critics telling us what is "intelligent" or people who fancy themselves as TV intellectuals. You can tell those people because they won't watch shows that are "beneath them". "Oh I don't like reality shows", or "I only watch stuff on cable because shows on the major networks are too dumb" and stuff like that. I have to agree with Tony here. All shows have formulas. Community essentially followed a formula as well. What set it apart was that they filled each episode with tons of pop culture stuff. It worked well when they had enough of an audience that "got it" but didn't work all that well when the stuff was so "niche" that only a select few who "saw the movie" or "read the book" or "played the game" got it. That's not necessarily smart writing as much as it's "smug" writing. "I don't care if you don't get the jokes, we do, so too bad if you don't". I give them credit for trying, and many episodes were as funny as anything I'd ever seen. But those episodes I "GOT" the jokes. I bet a lot of people didn't and were left scratching their heads. Perfect example, this season they did a spoof on the GI Joe cartoons of the 80s. Well, I never watched those, I was too old so half the stuff went over my head and I didn't think it was all that funny. But people of that generation here, LOVED the episode. It's a LOT harder trying to be funny AND to appeal to a wide audience.
> 
> As for shows on cable being "better" than network shows because they can be edgier, it reminds me of the comedian (Maybe Cosby, maybe Seinfeld, I can't remember) who in an interview, said that it's a lot more difficult to be funny telling clean jokes than off color ones. To me that is the same thing here. I think it takes MUCH better writing talent to write a good show under the constraints of Network rules than it is where "anything goes". It's why someone like Sorkin can pull it off under both, and be successful at it. I wonder how many of the writers who have successful cable shows could write for mainstream TV?


I've tried plenty of shows that people would consider "beneath them". For someone to call Community repetitive and then play up the merits of 2 Broke Girls (not you) is the height of irony. I've never been into Parks & Rec, The Office didn't grab me, but I like Community, probably because I did get a lot of the in jokes (the Dungeons & Dragons stuff was beyond me). I liked Mike & Molly at the start, but it eventually became one big fat joke that I didn't care about. The trend was disappointing.

As for writing for network TV, why would anyone want to? You bring up Sorkin, but really he's only had one network hit - The West Wing, which was brilliant. Sports Night and Studio 60, while good, were generally flops. You get shows that are interesting but if it's not a reality show or the latest iteration of Law & Order, CSI or NCIS, you're just not going to last. A network sitcom may get 13 episodes to prove itself. Meanwhile Louie's on its 4th season and Legit gets 2 seasons to prove itself. If you want a unique show to survive, why would you aim for the networks?


----------



## Sparty99 (Dec 4, 2001)

TonyD79 said:


> Stick it. I find wordplay much more clever than cosplay. I enjoyed community but it was repetitive.


Keep it classy Tony.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

Sparty99 said:


> I've tried plenty of shows that people would consider "beneath them". For someone to call Community repetitive and then play up the merits of 2 Broke Girls (not you) is the height of irony. I've never been into Parks & Rec, The Office didn't grab me, but I like Community, probably because I did get a lot of the in jokes (the Dungeons & Dragons stuff was beyond me). I liked Mike & Molly at the start, but it eventually became one big fat joke that I didn't care about. The trend was disappointing.
> 
> As for writing for network TV, why would anyone want to? You bring up Sorkin, but really he's only had one network hit - The West Wing, which was brilliant. Sports Night and Studio 60, while good, were generally flops. You get shows that are interesting but if it's not a reality show or the latest iteration of Law & Order, CSI or NCIS, you're just not going to last. A network sitcom may get 13 episodes to prove itself. Meanwhile Louie's on its 4th season and Legit gets 2 seasons to prove itself. If you want a unique show to survive, why would you aim for the networks?


I watched Louis and I never thought it was remotely funny. I like Louis CK's stand up much better than his acting.

The reason why anyone would want to? It probably pays more for one. And if you can do it well and get a hit, then you get way more than 13 episodes a season. I think it's MUCH harder to write well for a network sitcom. Throw in a few explicit sex jokes and a ton of curse words and you have a successful cable sitcom. The beauty of Seinfeld, was that they could hint at ALL of that without actually saying any of it. And it made it SO much funnier. And THAT'S much harder to do.


----------



## Sparty99 (Dec 4, 2001)

Steveknj said:


> I watched Louis and I never thought it was remotely funny. I like Louis CK's stand up much better than his acting.
> 
> The reason why anyone would want to? It probably pays more for one. And if you can do it well and get a hit, then you get way more than 13 episodes a season. I think it's MUCH harder to write well for a network sitcom. Throw in a few explicit sex jokes and a ton of curse words and you have a successful cable sitcom. The beauty of Seinfeld, was that they could hint at ALL of that without actually saying any of it. And it made it SO much funnier. And THAT'S much harder to do.


Have you watched your average network sitcom? All it is is sex. It may not have the curse words but it's not far off.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

Sparty99 said:


> Have you watched your average network sitcom? All it is is sex. It may not have the curse words but it's not far off.


Not really. Maybe the ones you watch.

I watched this past season:
The Middle
Modern Family
Brooklyn 99
Community (now gone)
The Big Bang Theory
The Goldbergs

Among others. While there might be a little subtle sex talk, none of these shows could be considered ALL SEX. Maybe Two And a Half Men or Mike and Molly is, but I don't watch those. I agree, stupid.

On the other hand, on Cable I have watched:
The League
Playing House
Silicon Valley
Sirens
The Stephen Merchant HBO show (the name escapes me)

These shows ALL have a LOT more sex than the shows I mentioned, overtly shown, with strong language, and either nudity or semi-nudity. I'm no prude and I have enjoyed these shows, but I think they are a lot easier to write without the restrictions. I don't think ANY of them are funnier than any of the sitcoms I watch on network TV.


----------



## Sparty99 (Dec 4, 2001)

Steveknj said:


> Not really. Maybe the ones you watch.
> 
> I watched this past season:
> The Middle
> ...


You're separating it into network vs. non-network and working it only into the shows that work to prove your point.

For example, 2 Broke Girls, Mike & Molly and Mixology had as much sex as anything I can think of. How I Met Your Mother wasn't far off. On the flip side, Community and Modern Family would have minimal sex and were generally thought of as fairly brilliant.

Now, look at shows like Louie or Wilfred or Veep and if there's a sex discussion it's just a side joke or something, not a CBS show saying, "Hey, we can't think of a joke for Kat Dennings, let's just write something about how she was a whore when she was growing up broke."

So I'm sorry, there may be more language in cable shows, but not by much (I don't know that I've ever seen a blatant anal joke on a cable sitcom like I did on 2 Broke Girls). But I just don't buy that there's more sex on cable sitcoms, especially when looking at the lowest common denominator shows.

I get what Cosby's saying about writing clean, but that doesn't mean network television shows are clean.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

Sparty99 said:


> You're separating it into network vs. non-network and working it only into the shows that work to prove your point.
> 
> For example, 2 Broke Girls, Mike & Molly and Mixology had as much sex as anything I can think of. How I Met Your Mother wasn't far off. On the flip side, Community and Modern Family would have minimal sex and were generally thought of as fairly brilliant.
> 
> ...


I named 6 shows on network TV that's non-sexual, you names three, yet you said that the *AVERAGE* network sitcom is ALL sex. I'm just trying to say your completely wrong, that it's no better than your average CABLE sitcom, only without the language and (semi) nudity.

The quality of the sitcoms I've mentioned are at least on par with those that you mentioned if not better.


----------



## Howie (May 3, 2004)

Oh, U2 guys go back to the baseball thread and argue.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

Howie said:


> Oh, U2 guys go back to the baseball thread and argue.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

Sparty99 said:


> Two and a Half Men was so atrocious one of the actors railed against it


No, an actor who turned into a religious wacko rallied against it for religious reasons.

(Don't get me wrong, I agree that 2.5 Men & Two Broke Girls are the "dirtiest" shows on regular TV.)


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

DevdogAZ said:


> Although this should be viewed with a highly skeptical eye. The story was originally broken by Deadline, which seems to author a story like this every time a Sony-owned show gets canceled. Seems every single time, Sony is "in talks" with someone to revive the canceled show, but surprisingly, the talks never go anywhere.
> 
> So unless I hear otherwise from a more reputable source, I'm going to assume this is more of the same.


I'll certainly stop short of assuming a deal will get done, but in this case I see no reason to assume that it's not being discussed with some level of commitment. On Sony's side of it, they'd surely like to get another batch of episodes to sweeten their syndication deals for the show. And on Hulu's side of it, I'd bet they are pondering their future, and concluding that they may need to start offering original programming, like Netflix and Amazon have done before them. What better way to dip your toe in that water than buying an established show with a loyal audience?


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

cmontyburns said:


> I'll certainly stop short of assuming a deal will get done, but in this case I see no reason to assume that it's not being discussed with some level of commitment. On Sony's side of it, they'd surely like to get another batch of episodes to sweeten their syndication deals for the show. And on Hulu's side of it, I'd bet they are pondering their future, and concluding that they may need to start offering original programming, like Netflix and Amazon have done before them. What better way to dip your toe in that water than buying an established show with a loyal audience?


Hulu already has some original programming, and they're certainly looking for more.

And Hulu already owns the online replay rights for all the other episodes of Community, and supposedly it's one of their most-watched offerings. So the thought process is that if Sony is willing to give them a good enough deal, Hulu could make a big splash if they can offer additional original episodes, just like Netflix did when it had new episodes of Arrested Development. Let's just hope that if this Hulu deal does happen, the new episodes turn out better than the new episodes of AD did.


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

DevdogAZ said:


> Hulu already has some original programming, and they're certainly looking for more.


Thanks. After I posted, I started thinking they already did, but I didn't get around to checking. (I don't use Hulu, obviously.)


----------

