In the thread about unpromising pilots turning into great shows, this post struck me:
I’ve never thought about it before, but without MJF, Family Ties would have been just plain awful. FT is one of my favorite shows ever, and I recognized I liked it because of Fox, but until bup’s post, I never realized how bad the rest of the show was (Ok, I liked Skippy and that obscure actor who guested a few times as Uncle Ned).
You take out MJF and put in even a decent replacement, that show doesn’t make syndication. It demonstrates how incredible Fox is.
Any other ones? Not just shows where there was a scene stealer. But shows where if you took out one actor, the whole remainder is terrible?
I cannot think of any.
Just testing the theory at random:
Cheers had such a rich cast that even Danson was replaceable.
Happy Days had the Fonz, but other characters were really good, and I think other actors could have played a serviceable Fonz.
Urkel was the breakout star of Family Matters, but Family Matters sucked WITH him, so it wouldn’t have mattered had he been played by another actor.
It may be a stretch to call it an ensemble show, but Dennis Franz in NYPD Blue is the first that comes to my mind. They could have, and did, replace the “lead” several times, but Sipowicz kept the show going and was always one of the most interesting characters.
Let’s be honest: without John Larroquette, Night Court would have been nice, innocuous, and utterly benign, with only 1/4 of the laughs (and most of those from the bailiffs).
I discovered, on watching old episodes of Mork and Mindy, that Robin Williams’s performance is the only thing that really keeps it from being a bland, dated, dime-a-dozen sitcom. But maybe that doesn’t count because the show was created as a vehicle for Williams.
There may not be a clear, bright delineation of what is an ensemble show and what isn’t, but Mork and Mindy and Fawlty Towers definitely aren’t. Each was created to showcase the comedic talents of one particular performer. Yes, John Cleese had a talented supporting cast, but without him the show would never have existed (even ignoring the fact that he created and wrote it).
I’ll nominate one that had a little reverse on the question; one that should have been just as good without it’s “leading” star.
Northern Exposure
When Rob Morrow left the show, they should have had enough faith in their excellent supporting cast to be able to carry the show. As it was, they tried to replace him with another doctor played by Paul Provenza and that, for me, is what killed the show.
I think 30 Rock would be lost without Alec Baldwin. Jane Krakowski, the hillbilly page and the guy that isn’t Chris Rock or Eddie Murphy are annoying and Tina Fey is just Baldwin’s straight man, her character would be adrift without him.
My favorite sitcom ever is Seinfeld and the four leads (Jerry, George, Elaine, and Kramer) are all terrific.
But I think Jason Alexander (George) is the one whose absence would have hurt the show the most. Michael Richards was great as Kramer, but Alexander had to carry a lot more of the storylines and he really makes the show what it is.
I loved Seinfeld as well but I think any one of the actors leaving probably would have ruined the show.
Whether or not I found Kramer funny was always hit or miss; to me he was funniest when engaged in a foolish scheme and least funny when they were just trying to cash in on his physical-comedy (like the slide into Jerry’s apartment.)
Jason Alexander was, in my opinion, the best actor in the show by far. But even still I’ve never seen anything else with JA in it that I particularly liked, same goes for the entire rest of the cast as well.
I absolutely disagree. Alexander made the show totally unwatchable. He wasn’t funny; he overacted; and he was painful to watch. In fact, Alexander has to remarkable talent to suck out any quality from anything he’s ever in (including Doritos commercials).
Of course he overacted. So did everyone else–purposefully, I’m sure. That was the style of the show. I know *Seinfeld *is kind of a polarizing show, but as a big fan (I still watch it almost every day) I stand by my opinion that George (as played by Alexander) was the best character. He was over the top, neurotic, obnoxious, dishonest, cheap, and I wouldn’t want to be friends with him in real life. But the same could pretty much be said for the other characters, to a lesser degree. I guess I would say that George is the epitome of Seinfeld. If you don’t like him, then certainly you won’t like the show. I think he’s hilarious.
I don’t agree, but even conceding your point, the show took on new life as new characters joined the ensemble: Frasier, then Woody, then Rebecca, then Lilith. If it had stayed with Sam/Diane/Carla/Coach/Norm/Cliff it would have gone stale much faster.
Speaking of which, Frasier wouldn’t have been nearly as good without Niles. I’d go as far as to say the show wouldn’t have succeeded without David Hyde-Pierce.
I think Mary Tyler Moore would have failed without the counterbalance of Lou Grant to Mary’s perpetual optimism.
And Everybody Loves Raymond may have been built around Ray Romano, but he was the weakest link in the cast. If you watched it at all, you watched it for Doris Roberts and Peter Boyle. Ditto with Roberts in Remington Steele.
The show existed before him and until this season has stood on its own without him, but the late, great Jerry Orbach brought something to Law & Order that can’t be replicated.
Similarly, ER chugged on the past five years, but without Noah Wyle’s John Carter, the heart of the show was missing.
The last season of Homicide: Life on the Streets was missing a vital spark; a number of the core of the squad were gone, but it was Andre Braugher that was creating the vacuum.
Lastly, Taxi would’ve been banal and completely lacking without the biting wit of Danny DeVito.