Reality Television

Jackie Mason | May 14, 2005
[hidden by request]

Scott Hardie | May 14, 2005
Just today I watched a terrible Julia Stiles movie called "Carolina," in which she gets fired from her job in the fall (sometime before Thanksgiving), and complains to a friend that she has only fifty dollars to her name. It's not until many scenes later, the following May, when she gets employed again. Never mind that she lives in a huge and well-furnished apartment, or can throw elaborate parties, or seems to have any source of wealth among friends or family to carry her through. Then again, that movie is a fairy tale in every aspect of its story, so why bother complaining?

Kris Weberg | May 15, 2005
I remember someone once pointing out that "Cheers" would be really depressing if you thought about as a realistic show. You've got a bunch of guys in dead-end jobs who sit and drink all night, every night because they hate their home lives.

"Seinfeld," though, used one of the more typical TV leaps of logic -- average-looking to downright ugly guys (all of them obnoxious to boot) constantly getting extremely attractive women to go out with them. At least George, Jerry, and Elaine had plenty of professional ups and downs, albeit absurd ones.

Jackie Mason | May 16, 2005
[hidden by request]

Scott Hardie | May 16, 2005
One of my favorite things about "Seinfeld" was that it eventually explained how Kramer had so much free time, and did so brilliantly. Not the most plausible story for most people (as I recall, he had been on strike from a greeting card factory the entire time), but totally within the realm of possibility for Kramer.

Kris Weberg | May 16, 2005
Bagel fast-food restaurant, actually.

Anna Gregoline | May 16, 2005
Well, Kramer really always had money coming in with various schemes as well. He was always going into business with one person or another.

Seinfeld is a brilliant show. I love Larry David, and I wish he was doing more stuff.

Jackie Mason | May 16, 2005
[hidden by request]

Kris Weberg | May 16, 2005
For that matter, I never quite believed any of them made the kind of money you'd need to have an apartment that nice right by Central Park. Chandler, maybe, but half of them were unemployed half the time on the show, or at least seemed like it.

Michael Paul Cote | May 16, 2005
I liked Cheers because I knew alot of the in jokes living near Boston and frequented bars where people in dead end jobs went to drink all night. I hated Seinfeld because any group of people that anally obsessive probably would have committed mass suicide out of sheer depression. Friends was just fluff that no one could really take seriously. Sometimes, ala MASH, writers just try to make something understandable, and therefore humorous or touching, out of the worst situations.

Kris Weberg | May 16, 2005
The thing about "Cheers" was that Sam's bar seemed halfway upscale -- nice furnishings, well-dressed clientele, and so on -- even as the characters all seemed like dead-enders.

Jackie Mason | May 24, 2005
[hidden by request]

Anna Gregoline | May 24, 2005
Now that is truly lame.

Scott Hardie | May 24, 2005
They didn't use the same footage for both the sunrise and the sunset, did they? Because that would be icing on the cake.

Scott Horowitz | May 24, 2005
A few years ago a news station around NY did a report on how much the Seinfeld and Friends apartments would go for. Jerry's was like $4500/month based on location. The girls in Friends was almost $7000/month. You don't find something that big in Manhattan for cheap. Also, the Friends' apartment was downtown in the Village, not near Central Park. Seinfeld lived closer to the park than they did.

Kris Weberg | May 24, 2005
Ah. I guess the name of the coffee shop they inexplicably spend all their time at confused me.