Thứ Ba, 2 tháng 7, 2013

Following up on Yesterday's post

First off, you guys were GREAT yesterday!!   Thanks so much for the amazing comments.  I think I agree with every single one of your pet peeves.  If you haven't read yesterday's post, just skim my rant and go right to the comments. 

I even agree about the ones you cited from shows I wrote.  A MASH episode David Isaacs and I penned called "The Merchant of Korea" involved a poker game where they discovered Charles had a tell.  He whistled when he bluffed.  So in the show when he whistled everyone stayed in or raised.  The point was made that yes, Charles would lose, but so would all of them except one.   Why were they all throwing in their money?   Believe it or not, David and I did debate that at the time.  We decided to justify it (rationalize? fool ourselves?) by saying over the course of the night they all would win some hands and come out okay.  And it sold the joke way better to have everyone throw in their money rather than just the one or two who felt they had a legitimately good hand.  But was it a stretch?  Damn right it was.

 A couple of you flagged CHEERS, notably what we called "the cone of silence."  At times people could hear a conversation across the bar and other times the person sitting on the next stool couldn't hear it.   We'd say, "are they in the cone of silence" this week? 

I wrote a post back in 2007 that dealt with a lot of the CHEERS inconsistencies.  Thought I'd share it again today.  Just know we were aware of these at the time but for specific reasons went with them anyway.  I suspect they bothered us way more than they bothered the viewers.  Still -- guilty as charged. 

Here's the post, and again, thanks for playing!

(Recently)  I touched on CHEERS and how no one ever paid for a drink. We writers knew this was a little dicey but who wanted to see Carla make change for twenty-two minutes or Sam putting his flirting on hold while he ran a credit card for approval?

There were other things we did sheepishly knowing we were stretching credibility.

No one came into town and checked into a hotel. They would go from the airport straight to the CHEERS bar, not even bothering to call to check if the person they wanted to see was even there. And who just ASSUMES their friend will be in a bar at noon? It’s a stretch but it’s always better to see a character than just hear him on the phone. And we figured it wasn’t so bizarre that it would take the audience out of the show.

When those out of town visitors showed up at CHEERS they never had their luggage. We used to joke that there were taxi drivers in Boston with million dollar wardrobes.

The phone was wherever we wanted to place it for blocking purposes. At stage right one week, stage left the next. These were pre-cordless days.

The acoustics at CHEERS were very odd. Sometimes characters could hear all the way across the bar, other times they couldn’t. And the extras upstage at the bar could never hear anything, even though they were two seats away.

Sam cut more lemons than every other bartender in America combined.

Cliff wore his postal uniform even on Sunday. (We did a lot of things with that character but we did think it would stretch believability to ever have John Ratzenberger dance on a show.)  Note:  DWTS reference.  John was on it one year. 

In the second episode it was established that Sam was divorced, then never mentioned it again.

There were many times when no one was tending the bar. And after Diane left Carla was the only waitress. That must’ve made for some long 16 hour shifts.

As a noted psychiatrist and author of books and articles, Frasier spent as much time in the bar as Norm. When did he ever work we often asked ourselves in the room?

In one episode (that David and I wrote) Norm has to keep feeding a parking meter. That means a guy who drinks beer all day and night drives to and from the bar?

But I will say, to our credit, that we did not go through with the episode where Rebecca gets trapped in a giant Tupperware container. It was quite a discussion though. What clinched it was the argument that if the top were sealed tight Rebecca would get no air and die. There’s only so far you can with creative license and we felt death was just a little over that line. We’d get letters. I know we’d get letters.

0 nhận xét:

Đăng nhận xét