As I sit in a converted dorm room at a college in Castine, Maine, waiting for either the start of my stand-up show or the sweet embrace of death to break up the monotony of my day, I find myself with gobs of time to explore some of the less-traveled corners of Wikipedia. After reading a 500 word analysis of what state Benson may have taken place in (really!), I moved on to the entry for "Jump the Shark." Gary Marshall is quoted there as admitting that even he felt a little weird watching Fonzie, leather jacket and all, jumping over that now mythic shark. He points out, however, that Happy Days remained a top-twenty hit for seven more years and produced more than 100 more episodes after it aired.It occurred to me that had the internet existed in the 1970s, the backlash to the jumping the shark episode would have been immediate and crushing....
Here's my logic for what would have happened:
1. Fonzie jumps the shark.
2. TV Squad 1975 writer Jay "Muttonchops" Black writes a scathing review of the episode. He's not alone -- every other episode review site chimes in with their own hatred of the show. Soon Digg 1975 takes a break from producing pop culture lists ("The Top 21 Forgotten Big Band Songs of our Youth") to produce a list of reasons why Happy Days is no longer relevant.
3. The Jumping the Shark meme is created and Happy Days loses its cool factor. People stop watching and it's canceled with little fanfare in the middle of the next season after eleven timeslot changes and an ill-conceived retooling that has Fonzie being replaced by an East Indian mystic played by Maharishi Mahesh Yogi.
4. We are robbed over seven more years and 100 more episodes of Happy Days.
You can easily make the argument that we'd be better off with a show being canceled once its downward slide begins (and, indeed, I'd like for you to make that argument in the comments, if you're so disposed). But I think there's a counter argument that's equally valid: a good show will continue to produce enough good episodes to remain viable even after its downward slide begins.
This is the source of endless argument between Simpsons fans and Simpsons haters. The former group (among whom I count myself a member) comes into constant online conflict with the latter. Usually the argument goes as follows:
Simpsons Hater: (Responding to an episode review) Worst. Episode. Ever. God, I haven't watched this show since [insert arbitrary season the writer thinks was the last good one] and after watching tonight's episode I can see my choice was the right one! What a horrible episode!
Simpsons Fan: The show might not be as good as it was in the classic years, but it's still better than 99% of the shows on television!
Repeat until doomsday.
The crux of the argument seems to be this: the Simpsons hater wants to preserve his memories of the show when it was still young and beautiful. Like the athlete dying young or the Grecian urn, it is better to kill a show earlier than watch it descend into mediocrity (or worse).
The Simpsons fan is of the belief that, though a good show in its twilight years is a shadow of its former self, you shouldn't throw the baby out with the bath water. Good episodes still spring up with regularity and, occasionally, the program can show signs of its earlier greatness. I mean, after all, the Dark Knight was a 55 year old man when he returned to rid Gotham of the Mutants -- sure he needed both his arms and his legs to climb ropes, but that didn't mean he wasn't capable of kicking some butt when the need arose.
I can see the reasoning behind killing a show early -- I mean, who would want to watch David Brent talking to a little green man only he could see on the 9th season of the UK Office -- but certainly any fan of that show wants to see more of it, right?
So, I thought I'd open the floor to you, the readers of TV Squad: where do you stand? Do you prefer a show dying early and preserving its greatness? Or are you okay with a show going on for too long, eventually showing its former greatness only in unpredictable fits over the course of its remaining seasons?
The TV Squad Podcast: Vik Sahay of Chuck, Oprah talk, brutal timeslots, and more!
TV Squad Ten: Top Ten ESPN shows from worst to first
Andy Richter: The TV Squad Interview
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
4-14-2008 @ 3:24PM
Scott said...
My problem with today's "Simpsons" isn't that they're less funny--it's that they are not funny at all. It's incredibly depressing to watch these characters and situations that I used to enjoy and care about doing things that aren't funny or entertaining. Kind of like the last 2 seasons of "Gilmore Girls". I suffered through the 2nd-to-last, but had no stomach for the final one. And I own 6 seasons of "Buffy the Vampire Slayer"--I have no interest in seeing anything from Season 7 again.
I think sometimes shows can find their bearings again. After a couple off-years, "West Wing" ended its run with a pretty good season. So shows should get a few years after their "shark" moment, especially if they were really good shows before that. But "The Simpsons" is in what, its 19th season? Why were they able to make the movie funny, but not the show anymore?
Reply
4-14-2008 @ 7:31PM
Thom said...
Interesting the black-and-white reasoning behind the Simpsons. It's not funny at all anymore? That's an exaggeration. It still has many funny moments at the least, in my opinion (I don't like to speak as if it's fact, which other people obviously have no problem doing).
I think the reason The Simpsons has such voracious argumentation on both sides of the fence is that there will never be any consensus as to when the show exactly "jumped the shark." I can understand why someone may not want to watch any of Season 7 of Buffy. There is a large (though certainly not majority) consensus that Season 6 was just nowhere near as good as previous seasons. It's hard to accept that, though, and it's not entirely fair - the show was originally slated to end after Season 5 with the network limbo situation Joss was in...it would have been a horribly sad series finale, but it would have been one of the best endings ever. "Chosen" was a decent ending though. And Season 7 had its moments, too (especially "Conversations with Dead People").
I don't think there is any consensus like that with the Simpsons. Most people, I think, agree that the quality declined somewhere along the line...where on that line it happened seems to be an endless source of debate.
Another interesting observation I find is that it is usually not until a show ends that people come to some rough consensus as to when the show "jumped the shark" - even with shows today. So it is difficult to say exactly whether a show should remain if I happen to dislike the current season. The only show I can remotely think of, for which I was glad it ended at the end of a particular season, was Season 9 of Roseanne. That particular season jumped not only over the shark, but over the friggin' moon (last episode aside).
In a world where I could control the lifespan of TV shows, I would be nice and let a show remain on some time after I began to enjoy it less and less. I'd never know if the show would hit greatness again...though I guess if I think it jumped the shark, I would have to assume it would never reach levels of previous greatness.
Answering this question is hard!
4-14-2008 @ 3:38PM
KMF said...
Good post. Hmm that is a tough question. As someone who hasn't been exactly loving the last few seasons of The Simpsons, I have to say I wouldn't know what to watch if the show was gone. I think people, including me, just like to complain. We're all a little bit Grandpa Simpson firing off hate mail to Modern Bride Magazine aren't we?
I concede your point. To be honest I can't think of a good argument for killing a show I do like to watch even if it gets uneven as the years go on. In fact I didn't have any complaints about Last night's Simpsons..
Reply
4-14-2008 @ 3:44PM
MosquitoControl72 said...
Gotta agree with Scott.
This season of South Park is less funny.
Seasons 9 through present of The Simpsons are simply not funny. In any way, shape, or form. Maybe they're comfort food, but they're not funny.
Reply
4-14-2008 @ 3:56PM
Cincinnati Mike said...
Jay, you called it. JTS is a "meme." It has burrowed into all of our minds, and the first time you don't like two episodes in a row of your favorite show, it's Jumped the Shark. I think the Observer Effect also applies. When we scrutinize our shows looking for the "JTS moment" then we are likely to find it!
Reply
4-14-2008 @ 4:03PM
upoh05 said...
Any series that has been on for more than 5 years is bound to have peaks and valleys. Period. The problem becomes when you can't get past that Valley and the show just gets worse and worse.
As for the Simpsons, I personally feel that the series is creatively back at a peak (but not nearly as high as season 4-8) by trying different styles of episodes (the multi-story within a story, the 24 parody, the eternal sunshine one) and these episodes are pretty good and are helping the show evolve. And yes, it still has some off days, but it's still funny.
Keep in mind- I can't get Homer making out with a gyro spit out of my head...so,so WRONG, but yet so, so RIGHT. And this was from this year. And yes it fit the plot.
Reply
4-14-2008 @ 4:05PM
james said...
The Simpsons are the same as SNL, everyone hates on it but it's still good enough to warrant being picked up again. There are certainly worse shows that APE both's formulas Family Guy - Simpsons ; MADtv - SNL. Jumping the Shark is simply the point that the show became unforgivable. Most shows jump the shark and continue, but "that moment" is what kills the audience's love for the show.
My wife and I were just commenting on the loss of Greg the Bunny an extremely well cast show that was never given a chance. Granted it was not for everyone but it certainly could have lasted a couple of more seasons but it may have sucked then so maybe we are better off.
NewsRadio was never the same after Phil Hartman passed.
That 70's show (while never great) totally sucked after Foreman and Donna broke up.
King of the Hill has not jumped the shark though, it's one of the few infallible shows that have lasted a long time.
Reply
4-14-2008 @ 4:34PM
Zachary Carr said...
I was recently thinking the same thing about greg the bunny, I got the dvd's on netflix and was laughing throughout, thinking it would be a perfect fit on adult swim. Gotta say I agree with your other comments as well. King of the Hill never really disappoints.
4-14-2008 @ 4:13PM
Oreo said...
What's this? No Smallville? I was sure Smallville would be in an article about shows "jumping the shark".
Reply
4-14-2008 @ 4:58PM
Simon Wakefield said...
I actually think that on the whole Smallville has improved over the last couple of seasons. It had a few awful seasons, season 4 especially and its certainly had seasons that have screwed the continuity but they in recent seasons they have really been moving the story on and started tieing more and more of the comics and the dc universe into the show. It now seems less of a "show about a kid with superpowers" and more of a "Superman Origin story"
4-14-2008 @ 5:38PM
Oreo said...
Season 4 is when I ditched the show. I have watched a few episodes here and there but they got rid of almost everyone and Lana is still a bitch. Chloe however has really grown and isn't annoying and useless anymore.
4-14-2008 @ 4:39PM
Argus said...
I remember back in season 10 when everyone was like "nothing past season 5 is any good!" People just like to piss on what's new because they lose perspective. Like how old people always go "today's kids! They suck! Waaa!"
Reply
4-14-2008 @ 5:09PM
Simon Wakefield said...
I don't know, in the UK we get alot of showings of the Simpsons, often from the earlier seasons and no matter how many times you see the earlier ones theres just more humor in them than the new seasons that magically appear on my computer :)
It can still have it moments where its as funny as ever but it seems to just have more flat points than ever before. At times i just feel they now go too 'zany' and I also feel the family dynamic has shifted and the charachters just don't gel the same.
Its still worth the 20mins to watch mind you but I would love it if they could find the heart of the show again
4-14-2008 @ 5:00PM
Midnight13 said...
I understand the idea of ending a series while its still great. Yet I do think this "Jump the Shark" mentality has leaked into mainstream television, and not necessiarly for the best. Too many great shows end after only three or four seasons now. And it just seems to go by so quickly. The "Jump the Shark" mentality has infested mainstream television. And now the creators are so afraid of keeping a show on too long that we end up with only two or three seasons of a series. To me it seems too quick to pull the plug. This is how we end up with only two seasons of "Extras", or four seasons of "Battlestar Galactica". I think maintaining quality on a series has less to do with fear of overstaying one's welcome as it does with the creators of the series staying with the show. Why do the creators of great shows either walk away from thier series or are forced out by network suits. "Gilmore Girls" comes to mind as one of the latest series to lose its creators, which caused a noticable downfall to the series.
Reply
4-14-2008 @ 5:17PM
Simon Wakefield said...
Do you not think though its better to have creators who are worried about jumping the shark and set out with a clear plan rather than ones who go out blindly and just meander along wasting episodes and peoples time on whats basically nothing.
Look at lost for example, we have had countless episodes that really were just filler and due to that we got episodes where the flashbacks went to well trodden charachters that we basically knew about their background and they just went over the same information and the island parts didnt add a great deal to the overall story.
Then there's X-Files where they padded out the mystery so much they tied themselves into knots and ultimatly lowered the quality of the show.
4-14-2008 @ 5:20PM
Jay Black said...
Simon, I agree with you when it comes to "mythology" shows like X-Files or Lost. A clear plan (and with a clear ending) helps those shows, I think.
When you're dealing with a situational comedies (by definition, a show which does not deal with continuity), they don't ever _need_ to end. You can keep making them for as long as you have ideas for good episodes.
(And this is not limited to comedies alone: Law and Order and CSI have like four million episodes a piece on the air by following the non-continuity rule).
4-14-2008 @ 6:11PM
Simon Wakefield said...
Even on a situation comedy I do think there are natural end points and going beyond them can be a problem.
Take How I Met Your Mother, theres only a finite amount of time we can really see Ted dating people before they really need to show the mother and end the show.
Judd Apatows shortlived sitcom Undeclared also had a finite length of time as it could only really last till they left college.
Even something like Friends started to outlive their stay as the situation they were in became a little strained.
Its why Extras ending when it did was great, there was only so long you can have Andy Millman being an extra before the situation would get boring, and when he ascended the status of an extra there was only so long he could last doing something he despised without it seeming old
4-14-2008 @ 5:53PM
Sancty said...
I get the argument... I recall the painful last season of That 70's Show, but I still watched it every week, because every now and then, a gem of what used to make that show fresh and relevant would show up... I'd rather watch it than the other totally crappy shows on television, and I think that's what its all about...
That being said, I did bail on The Drew Carey Show, so I guess I'm 6 of 1, half dozen of the other
Reply
4-14-2008 @ 6:18PM
mj said...
The last season of That 70's Show did not happen. Jackie and Hyde got married, had twins, and are happy. Fez and Laurie remained married and are happy. I found a fan fiction that was great. It gave the fans a PROPER ending, and as far as I'm concerned, is the real ending.
Reply
4-14-2008 @ 6:21PM
nattyff said...
i really don't get the idea of some people to impose certain things to others, if you don't like a certain show anymore, just DON'T WATCH IT, you can still get a good memory of it until the time you stop watching, just let the other people that still love the show alone, if they keep loving the show, why they have to keep sufering through the others complains???.
There is such thing like middle ground, there is room to please everyone, if you don't like it anymore, just stop watching and keep the good memory of the show in your head. I know that many shows decline with time, but sometimes we love some series and characters so much, that we keep watching just because they are still arround and we will keep seen them until the network finally pull the plug... just let them be!!! :)
PS: i do like the idea of show with an expiration date, you know that if that happen you will get a pretty even run through out the entire series... but if you ask me... i would totally be in favor or more season of BSG... i will miss them so much!!! (seems that i suffer some abandon problems... LOL)
Reply