|
The Seattle Times
Friday, July 19, 2002 - 10:30 a.m. Pacific
Auntie Kay in
L.A.:
The nominees for an Emmy are a tribute to anti-comfort TV
By Kay
McFadden
Dear Readers:
None of you wrote questions about the subject I wish to discuss
today.
That's understandable, given the Emmy nominations are not an Earth-
shaking issue.
Still, your Auntie Kay thinks such prognostications serve as a sort
of cultural Hubble telescope — the flawed, earlier one — that conveys
something significant about TV and society despite obvious
distortions.
For instance, various network heads have been telling television
critics that we're elitist foofs out of touch with what real people
like.
While this sort of vox populi appeal gets Bill O'Reilly followers on
Fox News Channel, it's a bit odd coming from an industry whose
decisions often appear to have less science behind them than "Pet
Psychic."
Wednesday, ABC president Susan Lyne said one reason her network was
indulging so heavily in domestic sitcoms this fall is because
ordinary viewers don't want provocative, edgy stuff when they come
home at the end of the day.
I'm not sure where that puts the inconedgy "Alias," which ABC touted
as its biggest success last season and was a hit with both critics
and audiences.
But supposing viewers do want more family entertainment, need it be
the kind of bland pap that apparently will make up much of this
fall's new content?
For clues, let us consider the current Emmy nominees, beginning with
Best Drama Series: "CSI" (CBS), "Six Feet Under" (HBO), "Law & Order"
(NBC), "24" (Fox) and "The West Wing" (NBC).
Of this group, only "Law & Order" could remotely be called comfort
TV — if comfort is seeing a criminal wend his or her way through the
justice system.
The other shows focus on government ethics, mortality, forensic
pathology and thriller paranoia. Their popularity ranges from the No.
1 drama on network TV ("CSI") to the selective environs of premium
pay cable ("Six Feet Under").
None are wishy-washy or dumbly reassuring.
In the Best Comedy Series category is "Curb Your Enthusiasm"
(HBO), "Everybody Loves Raymond" (CBS), "Friends" (NBC), "Sex and the
City" (HBO) and "Will & Grace" (NBC).
You don't get quirkier than "Curb Your Enthusiasm" or franker
than "Sex and the City," which took on a deeper emotional tone that
richly earned its Emmy nod.
"Will & Grace" has made homosexuality a ho-hum fixture on the TV
landscape. The adult comedy "Friends," last season's highest-rated
show, got even more grown-up by merging life issues into its racy
shtick.
That leaves "Everybody Loves Raymond," which only at first glance
seems like an ordinary family sitcom.
As fans know, however, the series can make you flinch at its intense
scenes between husband and wife. "Raymond" is bold in another way,
too: It dares us with some of TV's most audaciously timed comic
turns.
If you look at individual nominees (list, below), there's little
designed to pat audiences on the head. Michael Chiklis, world's
scariest cop? Rachel Griffiths, world's scariest date?
Auntie Kay could go on and on. From World War II ("Band of Brothers")
to Vietnam ("Path to War") to tragic biopic ("James Dean"), the Emmy
nominations give little indication that what the nation needs is
happy-faced pablum.
So what to make of a coming season that looks to be one of the
blandest in recent memory?
Here's my theory: It's not viewers who required solace after this
past year; it was the financially hard-hit TV industry. The most
successful network will be the one that doesn't conclude what
Americans want is to sink into a benign stupor.
Sincerely,
Auntie Kay
©
seattletimes.com
 Back To All About Alias 2002
|
|
