Why I Dislike So Many Modern Sitcoms

I don't like negative threads, and I am not trying to be negative with this one. It's not that I think they are bad, but I have a personal problem with the fact that so many modern sitcoms revolve around characters that have absolutely no redeeming values. They are completely self-absorbed a-holes that are completely clueless regarding their complete lack of character, or complete blithering idiots. I think this really says more about me than about the writers and cast of the shows.

A perfect example is Schitt's Creek. I am a huge fan of Eugene Levy and really like Chris Elliott, so I had high hopes for this show. The cast is overall amazingly good and I think the writing is good and I see the humor in it, but there is not one likeable character in the show. I just can't get into a show or movie where I could care less what happens to the character.

I think all sitcoms have deliberately annoying characters and have always had, but they are usually foils to the main characters who have at least some redeeming qualities.

The main reason I am posting this is not to just rant, but I would like to know if anyone can list some sitcoms that are not like this. Also, since I couldn't watch more than a few episodes of Schitt's Creek, do any of the characters develop into even moderately likeable characters? If so I may give it another chance as I really wanted to like it.

Thanks.

 

Other than the fact that they stink, I'm good!!

 

I’ve never understood why some people need to like a character in a sitcom to enjoy watching them. I am not looking to marry them or be their friend...I am looking to get a few laughs out of my 30 minute time investment. If the writers make an unlikable character funny then I am good with it.

Seinfeld was the best example of this...none of the characters were people you would want in your life but they were hilarious. Same with Schitts Creek...if they make me laugh thats all I need from them.

I look for redeeming qualities in my friends...not in my comedy sitcoms.

 

I am missing comedies & have recently re-watched: The Neighbors (not the 2019 CBS series; an ABC comedy which ran 2012-2014. I remembered lol-ing @ the time & this time, too - every single episode - but, a cousin (who actually is pretty humorless) remembers it & didn't care for it. One I missed when it originally aired & enjoyed it - The Good Guys. Maybe 1 or the other of these 2 will give you something you might enjoy. Comedies currently airing - sorry, can't name one which I watch. The most recently aired comedy I enjoyed was The Kids Are Alright, on ABC 2018-19 season & not renewed after Season 1. Oh, I'm also watching Back to You - don't recall seeing that when it first aired.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B_iJy5auBko - The Neighbors
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FKsni_M-Zic - Back To You (this is the only clip I can find, to upload. It's an interview interspersed w/show clips...but, it doesn't include the rest or the ensemble cast, other than Josh Gad. There's also Ty Burrell (Modern Family) & Fred Willard).

 

I liked most of the characters on Curb Your Enthusiasm, except Larry, since the premise of the show was that they were nice, normal people (except Suzy), and he was a misanthropic a••hole.

 

I think the fact that they are all fish out of water and refuse (or find it hard )to adapt is what's funny. Moira's narcissism is one of the catalysts that drive the show. Roland is a hick buffoon. The personality flaws are the engine that moves everything. Sounds like the show isn't for you, but that's OK, because nothing appeals to everyone. I feel left out when I don't click with something, but I can't force it.



Dan

 

Bloody laugh-tracks!

 

I suppose it's a historical ethic from the days when everybody on television "appreciated you letting us into your home". But, styles never change, so much as the architects just examine what they're doing, and flip something around the other way. Then if it works...you can expect a whole lot more where that came from.

You know, Seinfeld may have been about four people you wouldn't like, but that's not what the show was "about" (and it wasn't about "nothing", either, although that was the public sell). . Star Trek wasn't "today's issues couched in metaphorical science fiction scenarios", but when they saw they could do it, the just did more of that; for everybody else, it was just, "those guys in that spaceship". The audience seldom sees "the big picture" of a series idea, until it's already flopped or succeeded.

 

The lingering influence of Seinfeld and Arrested Development, I reckon - lots of unlikable/sketchy characters and a certain forced quirkiness as the shows went on. At least one or two characters on them started off likable enough, though.

I must admit I've never given Schitt's Creek a chance, and that was largely due to the name. I figured, if that sort of adolescent - and oddly old-school - humour was indicative of what the show was like, why bother?

 

Because, Eugene Levy.

 

Perhaps this is an overcorrection of the plasticity of most sitcoms in the past where people were so perfect they didn't even go to the bathroom.

 

Yes, imagine what a dynamic like that would do for a saccharine-fest like the Disney Channel...

Boy Meets Real World, anyone?
Zack and Cody and Ted and Alice
The Suite Life...with mini-bar and full cable privileges
Duck Dynasty Tails

 

Which sitcoms of the past do you mean?
Maybe just in the past twenty years?

I can't think of any, from The Honeymooners through Seinfeld, that had plastic, perfect characters. All my favorites had characters with tons of flaws, but with plenty of charm to endear them to the audience.

 

There’s Stevie, Ted, Patrick, Jocelyn, Twyla....

The focus in the first few SC episodes is the Rose family and Roland, who are not “likeable” characters on the surface, but the influence of the supporting characters softens them up and you grow to like them (except for Roland, who remains annoying and awful for the whole series).

 

Oh come on, since the beginning. From the Andersons, to the Cleavers to the Bradys to the Huxtables and so on and so forth.

 

Far more sitcoms had laugh tracks in the good old days than now.

 

Larry is not meant to be liked. That's why he's the funniest person on the show.

 

Rob and Laura Petrie in their twin beds...

 

It may take you to the end of Season 1 to like it but you will eventually. Just stick with it.

 

Ray, I had the same exact reaction that you had. I came into the series somewhere near the end of the 3rd season and wasn't sure I'd stick with it. But I'm now catching up given the repeats of the series on MeTV and MOR. I remember thinking about how much I loved Levy and O'Hara from their SCTV days but I wasn't sure from week to week if I'd keep giving them a chance to hook me. I finally took the bait and enjoyed the series to the end. It's been a lot of fun to see them evolve from S1 E1. There were echoes of "Northern Exposure" in the show.....but I may be stretching a bit there. However, the episode I watched last night ("Happy Anniversary") was the 2nd season wrap-up and it redeemed the rough spots for me and confirmed why this show won so many awards.

 

It's not about the characters per se but how good they're written. Fawlty Towers and Black Adder were inhabited by some of the worst human beings imaginable and yet: you just love them. Lazy, unimaginative writing, that's what puts one off.

 

Anybody who asserts that Schitt's Creek is about unlikeable characters beyond redemption has not watched the show. From my perspective, the characters are incredibly endearing because they are capable of personal growth. Seeing their decency emerge is genuinely moving.

 

This.

Be careful what you wish for.

When I think back to every show over the years that eventually jumped the shark, its often because the writers started giving into fan service over what drew the audience in the first place


The most famous example being the man who originally jumped the shark - the Fonz. While always family friendly, his character arc went from a greaser to Mr. Rogers in a leather jacket over the span of the show, in an attempt to expand his appeal to the widest possible audience.

 

There was an excellent movie called Grifters that starred John Cusack and Anjelica Huston from some 25 years about con artist - or grifters. I went to see it with some friends one of whom a foreign student. I guess he didn’t know what a grifter was and when I asked him what he thought he gave a brief review: the movie sucked, it was the worse movie I have ever seen. I said really? I thought it was great. He said: It was about grifters! I don’t want to see a movie about grifters! The characters were all bad people. Well there you have it.

 

Rather than amused, I was always irritated by the "that's just the way it is"-ishness of Green Acres. The main character is a guy from out of his element who innocently tries to do the most sensible tasks in his way, but everything is stacked against him. The show is somehow "punishing" him for wanting to do something sensible, in an environment where nothing works. From his pancakes in the morning, to the bedroom closet door that two "carpenters" can't seem to keep in its' track, and everybody around him seems to see this as perfectly acceptable.

What I dislike most about it, is that without even realizing it, they pull every little thread of his chain, and once he explodes out of frustration, he is blamed for having a short temper. And the show expects us to find that "funny". What's worse is, we also know, just down the tracks at the Shady Rest Hotel, everything seems to work perfectly, the characters are reasonable, and the bucolic nature of the goings-on seem to be charming. But Oliver, living in the same place, is beset by every impediment possible for being allowed to enjoy that same life. What is he being "punished" for? For being from New York? Nobody's punishing his wife for that. She even is openly resentful that she has to be there, and nobody is pulling her chain; she is just part of the "greek chorus" of people with no better reason to exist, then to scorn the main character - her own husband! - for pursuing his dream. What has he done to deserve this? And again, we are expected to accept this as, "funny".

Just like Ted Danson in The Good Place, I think Mr. Drucker is the real "tormenter".