Serving up this steaming pile of
Celebrity Gossip
Gay Politics
Gay News
and Pointless Bitchery
Since 1995

Arrested Development

Why did this tv series never do very well in the ratings?

It seemed like one of the smarter, funnier shows around at the time.

by Anonymousreply 6804/27/2013

Too smart for the average "Two and a Half Men" and "Yes Dear" viewer.

by Anonymousreply 108/11/2012

Too many Jews probably for middle America...

by Anonymousreply 208/11/2012

People were like "I don't get it!" or "This is weird!" I think you need a certain level of education/cultural understanding to understand the show. Most people are at a King of Queens level.

by Anonymousreply 308/11/2012

You're asking a question that answers itself.

by Anonymousreply 408/11/2012

Too self-referential for viewers starting mid-series.

by Anonymousreply 508/11/2012

I think it was one of those shows you had to watch from the very beginning or else it was hard to pick up or understand all the running gags.

by Anonymousreply 608/11/2012

Agree with R3, the majority of TV viewers like simple minded comedies such as Two and a Half Men, where the jokes are so dumb anyone can get them. Arrested Development requires an appreciation for irreverence and satire, things that force the viewer to pay close attention to, much more than hit-you-over-the-head lowbrow comedies. Examples:

Two and A Half Men Rose: What's the name of that hemorrhoid cream again? Charlie: Fire in the Hole.

Arrested Development Lucille: How am I supposed to find someone willing to go into that musty old claptrap? (Long pause, Michael stares at her awkwardly] Michael: The cabin... yes! That would be difficult, too.

by Anonymousreply 708/11/2012

"Arrested Development" owes a huge debt to "Soap."

by Anonymousreply 808/11/2012

They have no taste

by Anonymousreply 908/11/2012

.

by Anonymousreply 1009/15/2012

Looks at the homosexuals. Everything they do is so dramatic and flamboyant. It just makes me want to set myself on fire.

by Anonymousreply 1109/15/2012

Along with what others have already said, Fox kept moving it around, preempting it for sports etc. without a regular time slot, it had a real hard time getting an audience.

by Anonymousreply 1209/15/2012

the chicken dance

by Anonymousreply 1309/15/2012

R12 is right. Networks suits are quite skilled at killing off good shows.

Nobody know when the show is on because there's no promotion and it's getting bounced around. Then the same suit who's bouncing the show all over the schedule and not promoting it will shrug and say "Nobody's watching it. Get rid of it."

by Anonymousreply 1409/15/2012

it was too smart and I believe it had a lot of competition.

by Anonymousreply 1509/15/2012

They really did a great job casting it. Everyone was superb.

by Anonymousreply 1709/15/2012

Do you guys know where I could get one of those gold T-shaped pendants?

by Anonymousreply 1809/15/2012

I liked Ann Egg who's now on Parenthood. Very talented.

by Anonymousreply 1909/15/2012

I Love Lucy set the bar low and for better or worse, any show since then that exceeds the one liner sense of humor doesn't appeal the majority of the viewing audience.

Ricky Ricardo: Lucy's actin' crazy.

Fred Mertz: Crazy for Lucy, or crazy for ordinary people?

by Anonymousreply 2009/15/2012

It's not like you had to have a graduate degree to laugh at Mrs. Featherbottom crashing through the coffee table, but I think you did kind of have to pay attention for it to be really funny. Some shows are about as entertaining as they're going to get when half-watched while you're doing the dishes, but AD wasn't.

by Anonymousreply 2109/15/2012

R16 = Big Bang Theory fan

by Anonymousreply 2209/15/2012

I don't understand the question, and I won't respond.

by Anonymousreply 2309/15/2012

What r16 said. That shit was only funny to poseurs who think they're smart.

by Anonymousreply 2409/15/2012

It was before it's time. It was a single camera half-hour comedy with no laugh track that premiered at a time when Friends, Everybody Loves Raymond, Will & Grace were still the TV standard. Viewers didn't get comedy that didn't have laugh tracks telling them what was supposed to be funny.

by Anonymousreply 2509/15/2012

Uncomfortable with implied incest?

by Anonymousreply 2609/15/2012

GOB: "My God, what is this feeling?"

Michael: "Well, you know the-the feeling that you're... that you're feeling is-is what many of us call 'a feeling.'"

GOB: "But it's not like envy, or even hungry."

Michael: "Could it be love?"

GOB: "I know what an erection feels like, Michael."

by Anonymousreply 2709/15/2012

R24, why are you so threatened? My God, you sound insecure.

by Anonymousreply 2809/15/2012

It was good until the third season when it went completely over the top with Buster losing his hand as if it were no big deal and a retarded Charlize Theron.

by Anonymousreply 2909/15/2012

Buster losing his hand always bothered me because it is such a tragedy but they all acted like he just chopped off his ponytail or something. In real life, it would be a huge deal. Not a "oh well, he lost his hand." Buster himself didn't even seem to care.

by Anonymousreply 3009/15/2012

r28, why do you assume I'm threatened? I'm not threatened at all. Rather, I'm insulted and appalled that people actually thought that show was "smart" and "funny." It was not.

by Anonymousreply 3109/16/2012

R31's insecurities can be seen from space.

by Anonymousreply 3209/16/2012

And r32's intelligence can't even be perceived by the gnat that crawled up his ear canal into the chasm of his skull.

by Anonymousreply 3309/16/2012

Wasn't that the joke though, r30? That no one really seemed to care or were too self involved to care that he lost his hand?

by Anonymousreply 3409/16/2012

[quote]I liked Ann Egg who's now on Parenthood. Very talented.

Her?!?

by Anonymousreply 3509/16/2012

Yes, r35. Is there a problem?

by Anonymousreply 3609/16/2012

Her??

by Anonymousreply 3709/16/2012

I don't think Seinfeld would have been popular if it didn't have a laugh-track...

by Anonymousreply 3809/16/2012

Seinfeld was filmed in front of a studio audience. AD is not.

by Anonymousreply 3909/16/2012

I was about 11 when the show started airing, and I loved it. (even only getting about 1/3 to 1/2 of the jokes)

It's hard for me to think that adult's out there just couldn't get it, but i often under estimate the stupidity of the general population.

by Anonymousreply 4009/16/2012

I didn't get it.

by Anonymousreply 4109/16/2012

Wasn't this the first US comedy without a laugh track? That threw people, along with the fact that it was way too smart for broadcast television audiences.

by Anonymousreply 4209/16/2012

[quote]Wasn't this the first US comedy without a laugh track?

No, there were numerous comedies that didn't have one before that, the biggest one being "The Simpsons."

And, wow, R33 needs some therapy. I can understand if you don't like the show, but hating people who do like it seems a bit much.

by Anonymousreply 4309/16/2012

The show's fans are amusingly self-congratulatory.

by Anonymousreply 4409/16/2012

They have reason to be; they enjoy a superior television product.

by Anonymousreply 4509/16/2012

R45: It's a fucking sitcom, not Proust. Get over yourself.

by Anonymousreply 4609/16/2012

Simply put;

Arrested Development was funny as hell.

There really is no debate.

The cast were all seasoned pros (maybe excepting Maeby and George Michael).

The stories were crazy, ridiculous and entirely possible. (most of us have 1 or 2 certifiable lunatics in our families).

Also as quiet as it is kept, Ron Howard has a WICKED sense of humor (watch Night Moves).

Last but not least, Jason Bateman was a pleasure to watch. Being a straight man to every single other character is not easy. Bad actors CANNOT carry any kind of show that well for three seasons without jumping the shark after show 3.

by Anonymousreply 4709/16/2012

R33 needs some Temocil.

by Anonymousreply 4809/16/2012

He just never got that trip to dad's cabin, r48.

by Anonymousreply 4909/16/2012

R49, maybe some candy beans will help change his mind?

by Anonymousreply 5009/16/2012

It was trying too hard for me to get into.

Sometimes a show's target audience is not specifically for you but you still reluctantly watch it for other aspects but not this one. Never thought I was missing out on anything. It's an "all or nothing" program.

by Anonymousreply 5109/16/2012

He'll have to eat a whole thing of them.

by Anonymousreply 5209/16/2012

It was a production clearly pleased with itself. NBC tried everything to get people to watch, but it was about as likeable as post-9/11 Dennis Miller.

by Anonymousreply 5309/16/2012

Because it's WAY over most people's heads. It's just too smart.

by Anonymousreply 5409/16/2012

I watched this montage of quotes. The one at 0:57 made me laugh out loud.

by Anonymousreply 5509/16/2012

R53, NBC didn't do a thing to keep this show on the air. It aired on FOX.

by Anonymousreply 5609/16/2012

It was supposed to be revived on Showtime and all the cast was ready to go back but the lone holdout was Michael Sarah. He was doing movies and thought going back to TV was beneath him. They finally convinced him to sign on to the Arrested Development movie after a few years. What a cunt.

by Anonymousreply 5709/16/2012

R16? You just made a fool out of yourself in front of T-Bone.

by Anonymousreply 5809/16/2012

Actually, Ron Howard wanted a 3 season deal with Showtime and that has never been done before. Cera was apparently a holdout for the movie, though.

Or do I have it wrong? Btw r58 T-Bone is a flamer.

by Anonymousreply 5909/16/2012

Who would want to "R" her anyway?

by Anonymousreply 6011/16/2012

Will Arnett was so sexy in this! Even though GOB was a ne'er-do-well, he had charm and charisma and oozed sex. In short, Michael was the one I'd like to settle down with, but GOB was the one I wanted to fuck me hard! haha

by Anonymousreply 6111/20/2012

R47, that's one of the things I loved the most. Jason Bateman seemed to be the straight man to the other crazy characters, but he wasn't. He was just as disordered as his family. That is why this show is amazing.

George Michael was more the 'straight man' to the others, including his dad.

by Anonymousreply 6211/20/2012

The movie is being filmed currently. There will be 13 new episodes to bridge where the show left off and the movie, and they will air exclusively on Netflix in March of next year, with the movie being slated for release in summer/fall of 2013.

I agree - this show was just too smart for most people. I can't wait to see how it all ends.

by Anonymousreply 6311/20/2012

R63, is the movie going to be a theatrical release? If so, I don't see how that will translate to the big screen. I'm still mourning "Strangers with Candy," which was crucified on the screen.

by Anonymousreply 6411/20/2012

Yes, theatrical release. I know what you mean about it maybe not translating well...but then I remember it's Ron Howard and I stop worrying.

Strangers with Candy was also great. However, unlike Arrested Development, Strangers with Candy had an end. A finale episode. Arrested Development was never able to tie anything up. It just wasn't on anymore. I think the people who liked it, like me, will want the answers to the questions we were left hanging with when the show was cut, and hopefully that will translate into good numbers for the film.

by Anonymousreply 6511/20/2012

Bumping for the impending (May 26) release of all 15 new episodes on Netflix streaming. EW has a cover story (three AD covers with the main members of the cast) on the new episodes, along with a good article about what shows are best for different types of "binge watching."

by Anonymousreply 6604/26/2013

Also, looks like Liza is back as Lucille 2, and there will be guest appearances by Kristen Wiig and Seth Rogen.

by Anonymousreply 6704/26/2013

Will Seth be doing this on set?

by Anonymousreply 6804/27/2013
Loading
Need more help? Click Here.