After all, even though there are a couple of watchable shows at the moment like 'The Mandalorian', especially when it comes to comedy shows, things are awful. Pretty much all the shows are unwatchable - with the exception of 'South Park' and 'Curb Your Enthusiasm'.
Nevertheless, when I checked that a comedy show called 'Schitt's Creek' had won tons of awards at this year's Emmys, I had to give the show a chance. I had to check it out, even though I was pretty sure that it wouldn't be even remotely funny.
Having now watched a couple of episodes from each season 'Schitt's Creek', I have to say that I wasn't impressed by the series. There isn't much going on in here comedy-wise, even though critics liked the show (the series ended this year after season 6).
Premise-wise, 'Schitt's Creek' is about a super rich family that loses all its fortunes thanks to their deceitful manager. The only remaining asset that they have is a raggedy town that they bought decades ago, so that's where they're headed together.
On a paper this kind of premise isn't necessarily that bad or hopeless, as long as the rest of the elements in the series work. As long you'll deliver characters that are relatable and storylines that are well written, then this kind of show might perhaps work in theory.
However, when it comes to 'Schitt's Creek', even though not all the elements are completely awful, there are way too many weak links here. The superficiality and the one-dimensional aspects of the show are pretty much what sink the ship here.
Character-wise, these flaws are especially obvious when it comes to Eugene Levy's son Dan, (the co-creator and the writer of the show) and Catherine 'Home Alone' O'Hara's character. They are just way too over the top and not likable or relatable in a meaningful way.
Indeed, Dan is a fashion obsessed super queer with a squinty face and O'Hara is a former soap actress that acts even more theatrically than the most outrageous diva. These are not the types that exist at least in my universe of believable characters.
Story-wise, the series has scripts that are filled with lazy writing (weak storylines and story beats in episodes) that make the stuff seem vapid and empty. The writers don't seem to know what to do with the characters and what the show is supposed to be about.
Indeed, as I kept watching the episodes, too many of the situations are just re-takes from other tv shows that already did them before way better. There's some fairly obvious references to shows like '30 Rock' and 'Arrested Development' based on what I managed to see.
Joke-wise (don't forget the show's title), it has to be also mentioned that the series wastes way too much of its energy on over the top potty humour and pee pee jokes. This approach is not engaging and tells us how immature and out of touch the writers are.
After all, especially when it comes to 'squinty' Dan's overreactions to anything that might have to do with bodily fluids they try to extract as many scenes as possible from them. This is not funny or relatable to a normal (non Hollywood gay) audience member.
In that sense, when I look at 'Schitt's Creek' as a whole, it's pretty clear to me, based on what I've seen, that we're not dealing with a great show here. It's fairly obvious that this isn't a funny series and that there just isn't enough solid material to make the show comedic enough.
After all, even though there are some redeeming qualities here (Eugene Levy etc.) for a supposed comedy series you'd need to have more good stuff to make things click. You'd need have way better ingredients than what the writers have managed to come up with here.
Unfortunately for us, that's not what the writers managed to come up with here. They didn't come up with stuff that could make us laugh and even though there are some heartfelt moments here and there, as a whole, those things weren't enough to make 'Schitt's Creek' funny.
No comments:
Post a Comment