I’ve been getting into watching TV shows and analyzing them lately. I’ve been reading that Seinfeld is the most influential TV show of all time. I was just a kid when Seinfeld ran, so I didn’t watch it growing up.
For those who did, how did Seinfeld change TV?
Who said that? What was their justification? Was the author born before 1980?
Because frankly, I don’t buy it.
Supposedly it changed TV because it did away with the typical, inane sit-com narrative arc. While this was a welcome stylistic move, the actual writing–the jokes themselves–was typical, run-of-the-mill sit-com humor, so in that sense, it wasn’t such a big change. Superficially Seinfeld seemed like a big change, but at its core, it was just another stand-up comedian who got a TV show.
Good, but not the revolution some would claim.
Not sure I understand this. Classic sitcoms typically had self-contained episodes and rarely, if ever, referred to things that came before. ***Seinfeld ***did this constantly, going back weeks, months, and even years. You missed a lot of the jokes if you weren’t familiar with the series’ backlog.
I think of Seinfeld as evolutionary, not revolutionary. Some TV programs perpetuate the genre, some extend it. Seinfeld extended it, but didn’t overturn it.
Seinfeld is famous for having 4 non-likable characters as the leads with the motto “no hugging, no learning”. One could argue that it set the stage for anti-hero drama as it showed you don’t have to have a likable lead for people to watch a show.
What shows came afterwards that probably wouldn’t have existed if not for Seinfeld?
Hill Street Blues was doing story arcs long before Seinfeld. And, of course, Doctor Who was referring to older episodes by the 70s. Days and Nights of Molly Dodd switched it into a sitcom format.
Green Acres had constant callbacks to earlier episodes.
Buffalo Bill from 1988 had a very unlikeable character at its center.
Seinfeld was pretty standard sitcom overall – it’s just that it avoided pat resolutions and often had the characters no better off then when they started.
I think of Seinfeld as a transitional show from the 20th century sitcom to the single-camera sitcoms of the 21st century. It was modern in its lack of sentimentality but still had a laugh track and multi-camera setup. By the time Curb Your Enthusiasm came along in 2000, the transition was complete and you had Seinfeld-like plotlines and characters now expressed in the new sitcom style.
Yes, exactly, as I said.
Also, having (superficially) “unlikable” characters was not really new.
Oh. Well, then. That explains it.
The characters in Seinfeld were more than just unlikable. Jerry was a complete jerk when it came to women. George was a compulsive liar. Newman had no redeeming characteristics whatsoever. And Kramer was just batshit crazy.
In a sitcom populated by less than admirable males, the featured female is usually an island of stability and sanity. Elaine, on the other hand, was just another loser. Couldn’t find or keep a man, couldn’t hold down a job, couldn’t even dance well. More often than not, she was the butt of other people’s humor.
It was not the most influential. Not even the most influential sitcom. The writers who write it are lazy. All in the Family had the biggest influence on TV changing of any show. It really isn’t close. Before All in the Family, edgy sitcoms were Get Smart or Julia. All in the Family changed everything about TV comedy.
For as maligned as it often is I Love Lucy was more influential than Seinfeld. It established a lot of sitcom norms for decades and more importantly the use of film cameras was huge.
Seinfeld changed TV? Since when?
There were at most a couple shows that tried to follow the Seinfeld model in the few years afterwards and they never made a mark. How many people here remember, let alone watched, It’s Like, You Know…?
The best sitcom since Seinfeld was Community and I don’t see all that much of a connection. (And trying to draw a line from Seinfeld to Letterkenny is even harder.)
The overwhelming majority of sitcoms on network TV have been the usual premise overburdened, see the jokes a mile away, type of stuff.
Now with streaming there’s a whole new world in TV out there. So things are significantly changing. But that has nothing to with what Seinfeld did 30 years ago.
It was famously a “show about nothing”. All it really did was prove that if the jokes were good enough, you didn’t need a story. Thing is; writers don’t charge any more for a half-hour script with jokes AND a story than they do for a script with just one of those things. So why not include both?
It’s probably fair to say that Seinfeld was an important, influential show. But so are many others (including many other sitcoms).
I LOVED ‘The Days and Nights of Molly Dodd’ - it was in a category of its own, not a sit-com, but a dramedy with a little humor - mostly, it was ineffably whimsical, but not stupid-whimisical. Not really cute, but blessedly free of kids… I wish it was on DVD I would buy a box set tomorrow if I could.
Seinfeld was nothing like a ‘standard sitcom’. There were no smart-mouthed kids, no big happy family that in the end had a big kumbaya love-you moment, no drunken WA
SP moms, no wise old grandpas…it was so downright refreshing to see selfish, although often well-meaning, well-off young folks of the era sometimes trying to do the right thing, or face strange situations in life, and get shot down - ‘all for naught’! (Though the repulsive Kramer could die in a fire. He looked like his pants stunk like ass.) And George, that pig, well, he got by because he was one of the few straight single men in NYC who had a job, wasn’t a drug addict or drunk, not into any perversions AFAIK - that right there: employed, straight, not rolling around vomiting in a gutter: catnip to all the hordes of single women desperate for a man.
Just to be clear, we’re talkin’ about George *Costanza *here?!? :eek:
What percentage of the time did he actually *have *a job, or appeal to any woman? :dubious:
Roseanne premiered a year before Seinfeld and changed TV at least as much. The Simpsons came along a few months after Seinfeld (although the characters had been around for a few years,) and had a much bigger impact.
Seinfeld was notable because it presented selfishness and superficiality as attractive qualities. Friends occasionally did this (mainly with Rachel), and House shows some influence from it.
The Cosby Show was notable because it inspired an entire genre of backlash shows intending to be “The Anti-Cosby Show”: Married With Children, Roseanne, The Simpsons, The Tortellis, Unhappily Ever After, Grounded For Life, etc. Basically, it left its mark on every subsequent “family” sitcom I can think of.
If you want “unlikable” then Married With Children may have started at this time, and that was written as the anti-Kumbaya show to the conflit-less Cosby Show. Remember when Bill had to lash out at Bart Simpson’s behavior? 'Member those days?
At about this time, I was watching Farscape, and my sister was like – “Watching soap operas are you, now”
“Wha-wha-wha. I don’t watch soap operas, this is an irreverent sci-fi, like Deep Space Nine or Babylon Five. They’re not soap operas, they just have story arcs that call back to earlier episodes, they even do that on Friends.”
What was an enigma was Mad About You. Was that part of the new, irreverant genre like Seinfeld and Friends, of was it just an ordinary, traditional, husband and wife sitcom? Apart from being in color and Paul Reiser much thinner, how was it not just the Honeymooners – struggling married couple in a NY aprtment?