News > What Makes a Great Sitcom?
April 16, 2007
Written by Lukas Kaiser
When it comes to dramatic, hour long shows...TV has been kicking butt lately. Sure, "Sopranos" and "Lost" might be in a slight slump, but even something like "Big Love" on its worst day is better than the cop shows of the '60s and '70s. That being said - the sitcom is, for the most part, dead. "30 Rock" and "The Office" certainly carry on the torch, but they're single camera shows with no live audience, so they're more like short comedic episodic...film...thingies than sitcoms. The current feeble attempts at sitcoms have a lot to learn. And that's where I come in.
This is the list...of what you need to make a great sitcom.
#1) A Rock Solid Premise
This is the "sit" part of "sitcom." The situation, or premise, is the most important part of the show. It's where all the jokes come from. When someone asks what a show is about, the premise is the answer. What's the premise of "Cheers"? Friends hanging out at a bar. What's the premise of "M.A.S.H."? Soldiers in the medical unit of the army during the Korean War. Jokes like Norm hiding from his wife Vera at the bar or Klinger being a cross-dressing soldier are born out of their premises. "Seinfeld" and "Friends" both are often cited with having no strong premise, with "Seinfeld" classically being described as a show about nothing. But that's not true - it was a show about four assholes. These days, when someone would ask what one of the few sitcoms still on the air is about, you'd be scratching your head for quite some time before you found an answer. Is "Three and a Half Men" really about two guys and a kid? Or is it about Charlie Sheen being manly and his brother being a pansy? Or is it about...hell, who knows. It's a shame there's no sitcoms on these days with strong premises when dramas seem to be flourishing with the same formula. Hell, "Lost" was already done as a sitcom...remember "Gilligan's Island?"
#2) Strong Characters
Once a sitcom has it's situation, it would be easy to jump right into the jokes. That'd work if you were just making a sketch. But if you want people to tune in week after week, you better craft some strong characters. Some of the best characters ever crafted? Sam Malone, Frasier and Woody from "Cheers;" Felix and Oscar from "The Odd Couple;" and Monica and Phoebe from "Friends." With strong characters, you get yet another avenue for jokes as well. Phoebe's incessant horrible open mic performances are funny not only because of the lyrics or her songs or the horrible singing actress Lisa Kudrow brings to the screen; the fact that despite her utter lack of talent, Phoebe keeps trying adds a new layer to her character that keeps people tuning in over and over. Take this example as compared to "The War at Home," a show currently in production at Fox. The characters are all one dimensional idiots, from the bigoted dad to his flamingly homosexual son to the "hot" wife and daughter. It works for a few one liners, but the characters are so repulsively one dimensional and stupid that after one episode, you "get" what's going on and never want to return again.
#3) Great Writing
How can you screw up a sitcom with a great premise and perfect characters? Well, fire all your good writers and hire hacks...that's probably the fastest way. A perfect example is "The Simpsons." There's a show with some of the strongest characters in TV history and though not a unique premise, it's by no means weak. And for the first, oh, I don't know, 7 to 10 years of the show, the writing was superb. This was evidenced not only in funny jokes but also in plots which themselves were both funny and well constructed. Now fast forward to a newer episode of "The Simpsons." The once classic show has now lost all sense of focus and direction in its writing, replacing strong plots with song and dance numbers and an incessant string of jokes repeated one after the other. I can still tune in and enjoy the show somewhat because the characters and premise are that strong - but the writing has fallen off so hard, I start to feel ill within the first ten minutes of the show.
#4) COMEDIANS in Leading Roles
Why is Charlie Sheen the top actor in a television comedy these days? While, sure, Charlie is a decent actor and has some fine timing, compare his performance to a classic comedian in a starring role of a sitcom (say, Jerry Seinfeld in "Seinfeld," Gary Shandling in "The Larry Sanders Show" or Ray Romano in "Everybody Loves Raymond") and Sheen's work starts to show its cracks. While there are tons of examples of great actors who've never had a comedy background carrying shows (such as the aforementioned "Friends," "Cheers," and even Lucille Ball in "I Love Lucy") it's certainly odd when the leading comedic actor is a burned out action star.
#5) A Live Audience
As I mentioned in the intro, there are some great shows on today still - "30 Rock," "The Office," "Scrubs" and even "Ugly Betty" all in some shape or form follow the above four criteria rather well. But like I said, these shows, while of comedic tone, don't have that classic "sitcom" feeling. Some people think that's a good thing. I don't. I'd like to see how well something like "Arrested Development" would've played in front of a live audience. Would it still have cult status if the jokes didn't land properly in front of an unforgiving live audience? And why does EVERY show these days have to be about awkward pauses and innuendo-filled glances? Can't our sitcoms "go for it" anymore? I know we're a sophisticated audience...but think of it like this...a comedy filmed in front of a live audience is like seeing theater. And that's pretty damn classy.
I don't think the sitcom is dead, but it's certainly in hibernation. Even if it is dead, comedy itself will never die. There's comedic aspects of all television, from Simon Cowell's schtick on "American Idol" to Sawyer's wise-cracking on "Lost." So we certainly haven't lost our sense of humor here in America. I just think it's about time the people who make sitcoms start getting theirs back.
