Why? Simple. Jason Alexander IS NOT FUNNY. Especially trying to hold up an entire show by himself. Some warning signs this was going to happen? Trouble amongst the writers and producers BEFORE the show started taping. Pilot episode was “re-worked” (that is, de-suckified). Two weeks in and it gets moved from a prime slot (Tues. 9pm) to a “at least we’ll get a decent lead-in” slot (Wed 9:30 AFTER Drew Carey). This is the second in the “Seinfeld Curse” trilogy (Julia Loius-Dreyfus gets her chance to get cancelled later in the season).
To any other person who was a regular on Seinfeld and hopes to parlay that credit into a TV show, INVEST YOUR SYNDICATION MONEY WELL!!
I don’t think you shuold blame Jason Alexander. The writing on that show was just awful. I don’t know if he would have done better left to his own devices, but I hear he is real good on Larry David’s cable improv show.
The idea behind Bob Paterson, a self-help guru who can’t even get his own life in order was a funny idea, but the show just was NOT funny. It barely even built on the original premise, and the writing seemed to go all over the place. This show could not be saved despite what I thought was a pretty good advertising campaign.
No, George Constanza was the single best reason to watch Seinfeld, and is one of the great supporting characters to appear on any situation comedy. As for Bob Patterson, when they resorted to having a midget fall out of the upper deck at a baseball game for laughs, you knew the show didn’t have long to last.
Writing, writing, writing. Even talented actresses like Bette Midler, Geena Davis, Joan Cusak and Christine Baranski came to grief last year because their godawful sitcoms were written by committee, “to appeal to the target-market audience.” And all individuality and wit were squeezed out of 'em.
Costanza was a whining moron. And his poor-man’s Woody Allen schtick was tiresome from the start.
I didn’t like Kramer all that much, either, but it was understandable why he was so popular. Costanza was someone you wanted to slap around every time he opened his mouth.
Maybe, but he was a funny whining moron, and the imbecilic behavior he usually exhibited provided the best laughs of anyone on the show. Without George, the show never would have been a success. Yeah, Kramer was funny, buy way to quirky to carry a large part of the show, and Jerry, while also funny, was more important to the show as someone George (and the others) could play off of.
“Elaine” is next, and will fair as well. Yes, George was somewhat funny- but he was funny due to Jerry’s takes on him, same with Kramer. Neither was funny without Seinfeld.
And bit actors are not the same thing; everyone has to start out in small parts. The guy who played Puddy- is not basicly playing him again on the “Tick”. But George is still George, and Kramer was still Kramer. They could still be funny as someone else’s second bannanas; but they likely feel they are too good for that now. Into obscurity and “Hollywood Squares” they go.
