CBS Cancels 'CSI: Miami,' 'Rob' & 'NYC 22,' Renews 'CSI:NY'
'Community' Renewed For Season 4 On NBC
Watercooler Talk: Should a show continue waterskiing after it jumps the shark?
As I sit in a converted dorm room at a college in Castine, Maine, waiting for either the start of my stand-up show or the sweet embrace of death to break up the monotony of my day, I find myself with gobs of time to explore some of the less-traveled corners of Wikipedia. After reading a 500 word analysis of what state Benson may have taken place in (really!), I moved on to the entry for "Jump the Shark." Gary Marshall is quoted there as admitting that even he felt a little weird watching Fonzie, leather jacket and all, jumping over that now mythic shark. He points out, however, that Happy Days remained a top-twenty hit for seven more years and produced more than 100 more episodes after it aired.It occurred to me that had the internet existed in the 1970s, the backlash to the jumping the shark episode would have been immediate and crushing....
Here's my logic for what would have happened:
1. Fonzie jumps the shark.
2. TV Squad 1975 writer Jay "Muttonchops" Black writes a scathing review of the episode. He's not alone -- every other episode review site chimes in with their own hatred of the show. Soon Digg 1975 takes a break from producing pop culture lists ("The Top 21 Forgotten Big Band Songs of our Youth") to produce a list of reasons why Happy Days is no longer relevant.
3. The Jumping the Shark meme is created and Happy Days loses its cool factor. People stop watching and it's canceled with little fanfare in the middle of the next season after eleven timeslot changes and an ill-conceived retooling that has Fonzie being replaced by an East Indian mystic played by Maharishi Mahesh Yogi.
4. We are robbed over seven more years and 100 more episodes of Happy Days.
You can easily make the argument that we'd be better off with a show being canceled once its downward slide begins (and, indeed, I'd like for you to make that argument in the comments, if you're so disposed). But I think there's a counter argument that's equally valid: a good show will continue to produce enough good episodes to remain viable even after its downward slide begins.
This is the source of endless argument between Simpsons fans and Simpsons haters. The former group (among whom I count myself a member) comes into constant online conflict with the latter. Usually the argument goes as follows:
Simpsons Hater: (Responding to an episode review) Worst. Episode. Ever. God, I haven't watched this show since [insert arbitrary season the writer thinks was the last good one] and after watching tonight's episode I can see my choice was the right one! What a horrible episode!
Simpsons Fan: The show might not be as good as it was in the classic years, but it's still better than 99% of the shows on television!
Repeat until doomsday.
The crux of the argument seems to be this: the Simpsons hater wants to preserve his memories of the show when it was still young and beautiful. Like the athlete dying young or the Grecian urn, it is better to kill a show earlier than watch it descend into mediocrity (or worse).
The Simpsons fan is of the belief that, though a good show in its twilight years is a shadow of its former self, you shouldn't throw the baby out with the bath water. Good episodes still spring up with regularity and, occasionally, the program can show signs of its earlier greatness. I mean, after all, the Dark Knight was a 55 year old man when he returned to rid Gotham of the Mutants -- sure he needed both his arms and his legs to climb ropes, but that didn't mean he wasn't capable of kicking some butt when the need arose.
I can see the reasoning behind killing a show early -- I mean, who would want to watch David Brent talking to a little green man only he could see on the 9th season of the UK Office -- but certainly any fan of that show wants to see more of it, right?
So, I thought I'd open the floor to you, the readers of TV Squad: where do you stand? Do you prefer a show dying early and preserving its greatness? Or are you okay with a show going on for too long, eventually showing its former greatness only in unpredictable fits over the course of its remaining seasons?
21 Comments