Cannes Film Festival 2013

Book review: Warren Littlefield's 'Top of the Rock: Inside the Rise and Fall of Must See TV'

Former NBC president dishes entertainingly on the era of 'Seinfeld,' 'Friends,' 'ER' and more

  • Critic's Rating B+
  • Readers' Rating A-
<p>"Seinfeld" was one of the biggest hits of the Warren Littlefield era at NBC.</p>

"Seinfeld" was one of the biggest hits of the Warren Littlefield era at NBC.

Credit: NBC

Warren Littlefield was the first NBC president I knew as a TV critic, but not the first NBC president I knew as a TV viewer, and that unfortunately meant he was always playing catch-up in my eyes.

Littlefield had ascended to run the network after the departure of Brandon Tartikoff, who had run the entertainment division during the Peacock's mid-'80s ascension, and who had such a gift for self-promotion that even a kid like me who didn't read Daily Variety knew his name and face. (Among other tricks, he liked to play himself on his network's shows, whether hosting "SNL" or popping into one of my favorite episodes of "Night Court.") That some of the defining shows of the Tartikoff era were actually the work of other men (predecessor Fred Silverman greenlit and renewed "Hill Street Blues," while "St. Elsewhere" came from the production company of Tartikoff's boss Grant Tinker) wasn't information I was privy to, nor did I know about the diastrous 1983 season where every single new show Tartikoff put on the fall schedule — including gems like "Manimal" and "Mr. Smith" (a sitcom about a talking orangutan) — failed to be renewed. From my living room couch, he was the man responsible for everything I watched on my favorite network.

So when I first interviewed Littlefield as a rookie 22-year-old reporter in 1996, it was hard to feel impressed. Had this guy hung out with ALF? No. Had he come up with the idea for "Miami Vice" by writing "MTV cops" on a cocktail napkin? No.

Then again, the "MTV cops" may be a case of the legend becoming fact. In Littlefield's new book (written with T.R. Pearson) "Top of the Rock: Inside the Rise and Fall of Must See TV," he says that what actually happened was that Anthony Yerkovich and Michael Mann pitched Tartikoff on "Miami Vice," and Tartikoff replied, "I get it: MTV cops."

"Not quite the same thing," Littlefield writes, "but people don't always argue with network presidents."

Beyond the shadow cast by his famous predecessor, there was the confusing hierarchy of NBC in the mid-'90s, when the more boisterous Don Ohlmeyer was installed as Littlefield's boss — and who, according to Littlefield's accounts, mostly stood in the way of that era's big hits (Ohlmeyer famously stormed out of a pilot screening of "ER," convinced it was going to get destroyed by CBS' "Chicago Hope") — and also a sense of institutional complacency during that era.

This was the NBC of "Seinfeld" and "ER" and "Friends," but also the NBC of "Suddenly Susan," "Caroline in the City" and "Veronica's Closet." It was a period where NBC seemed awash in forgettable sitcoms that ran forever because they had at one point aired next to one of the shows people actually cared about(*), and Littlefield seemed baffled that anyone objected to "Union Square" or "The Single Guy" getting to air after "Friends."

(*) Paul Simms, whose "NewsRadio"  spent its run seemingly bouncing around every night on NBC's schedule but the hallowed Thursday, once gave an infamous interview in which he described the "Must See TV" line-up as "a double-decker shit sandwich," and insulted network scheduling chief Preston Beckman. Simms later felt so bad about the thing that he sent a signed copy of the article to Beckman, which Beckman keeps framed in his office.

But the Littlefield era is a classic example of not knowing what you've got 'til it's gone. Since Littlefield was replaced by Scott Sassa — who begat Garth Ancier, who begat Jeff Zucker, who begat Kevin Reilly, who begat Ben Silverman, who begat Jeff Gaspin, who begat Robert Greenblatt, who has to clean up the toxic landfill that most of the men in between Littlefield and himself turned NBC into — it's become easier to recognize what an achievement his tenure was.

In hindsight, and as well-illustrated by the oral history approach of "Top of the Rock," while Littlefield greenlit a lot of junk — and in many cases gave the junk the best possible timeslots(**) — he consistently did the one thing that his successors all failed to do. He took the successful, sturdy foundation handed to him and built on it with new hits, rather than (as Jeff Zucker repeatedly did) trying to stretch out the pre-existing successes while failing to find their replacements.

(**) Littlefield doesn't get into it in the book, but some of the bad shows — "Jesse" and "Veronica's Closet" in particular — wound up on Thursdays because of deals the network cut with producers of hits like "Friends." They got to keep the big hit, but had to then pair it with lesser works from the same people.

Before we get to the Littlefield era, "Top of the Rock" first looks at the creation of "Cheers" and "The Cosby Show," two of the biggest hits of the Tartikoff era, which Littlefield worked on in his days in the network's comedy development division. Littlefield still has good relationships with a lot of the people he worked on, so the voices in each chapter are a diverse, impressive bunch: writers and directors, fellow NBC executives and a lot of the stars. When he gets to "Seinfeld," for instance, he doesn't get Larry David, but he does get Jerry Seinfeld and Jason Alexander, and he has half of the "Friends" cast. George Clooney didn't talk in the "ER" chapter (though knowing Clooney, I'd guess that's more about scheduling than ego), but Anthony Edwards, Julianna Margulies, Noah Wyle and Eriq La Salle all did.

The "Cheers" chapter introduces legendary director James Burrows, who sets up something of a throughline for the book, as he was there for the start of "Cheers," "Friends" and "Will & Grace." The transition from one hit to the next wasn't always as orderly or easy as it seemed from the outside, but throughout the Tartikoff and Littlefield eras, NBC seemed to have a knack for always finding the right up-and-coming show to replace an outgoing one.

So when Littlefield took over the network, "The Cosby Show" was gone, but "Cheers" was still there to carry the flag, and when Ted Danson decided to walk away, "Seinfeld" had been put in position to succeed it. (***) "ER" came along just as "L.A. Law" was ending. There was a steady stream of success: not only the era-defining Thursday shows, but "Frasier" (which was quickly sent off to colonize a Tuesday sitcom bloc, much to the displeasure of Kelsey Grammer, who gladly recounts his feelings about that and many other things in the "Cheers" and "Frasier" chapters) and "Mad About You" (also banished quickly from Thursday, and to less good fortune than "Frasier" found on another night) "3rd Rock from the Sun," etc. And while the huge success of the Thursday shows makes them look like safe bets in hindsight, many of them seemed like potential catastrophes in development. Ohlmeyer wasn't the only person in the industry convinced "Chicago Hope" was going to vanquish "ER." Nobody knew what to make of "Seinfeld" or "Friends" in their early development. And "Will & Grace" was a show no one was sure America would want to watch after "Ellen" died so quickly after Ellen DeGeneres came out.

(***) Albeit after going through one of the stranger development processes of all time. Among other things: "Seinfeld" was developed as part of NBC's late-night division because executive Rick Ludwin was its only early champion. It aired a single episode in the summer of 1989, four more the following summer — what Alexander refers to as "The whopping four, the confidence four" — and only 13 the season after that before it finally became a fixture of the lineup. 


There were also tweaks to existing shows. Littlefield would have canceled "Law & Order" after its third season if producer Dick Wolf hadn't consented to add some women to the all-male cast; Wolf agreed, and the show ran for 17 more seasons after they had that discussion, spinning off two other hits (and a couple of misses) along the way.

There are times where "Top of the Rock" becomes too defensive of Littlefield's success and the credit others received for it. He goes on at length about his many feuds with Ohlmeyer, and about Ohlmeyer's drinking problem; where the accounts of Grammer's problems with sobriety are germane to the "Frasier" history, a lot of the Ohlmeyer material reads like score-settling with a boss Littlefield never much liked.

But as Bill Parcells likes to say, you are what your record says you are, and Littlefield's record at NBC in the '90s was tremendous. And many of the stories he tells are versions of ones I've heard before from other sources. He may be the hero of his own book, as so many authors are, but NBC's success on his watch was no invention. It was very real, and very powerful, and so far removed from the shabby state of the network today that it's easy to imagine Bob Greenblatt begging for even a mid-sized success like "3rd Rock," just to stop the bleeding.

It's a very entertaining book, particularly in the small details, like La Salle revealing the origin of Peter Benton's famous karate punch, or the "Friends" creators discussing all the actors who almost got cast — many of whom they were hoping would turn the job down so they could hire Matthew Perry, Jennifer Aniston, etc. And it's a reminder of just how much NBC(****), and television, has changed from the Must See era.

(****) My biggest complaint about the book is that the title is misleading, in that the "fall" is really only covered in a short chapter at the end dealing with Littlefield being fired. I imagine he has a lot to say about the many failings of Zucker and company, and even if he had to ditch the oral history format for a chapter to do it, it would have been a very interesting read.

When I started covering television, a lot of my fellow critics complained that Littlefield and his fellow NBC executives were too cocky for their own good. But it's not cockiness if you can actually get the job done, and I'd be willing to put up with some aloofness from my TV suits if they could preside over a sustained run of success through quality the way that Littlefield did.

Alan Sepinwall may be reached at sepinwall@hitfix.com

Alan-sepinwall-sm
Alan Sepinwall
Sr. Editor, What's Alan Watching
Alan Sepinwall has been reviewing television since the mid-'90s, first for Tony Soprano's hometown paper, The Star-Ledger, and now for HitFix. His new book, "The Revolution Was Televised," about the last 15 years of TV drama, is for sale at Amazon. He can be reached at sepinwall@hitfix.com

Comments

  • Option 1

    Comment instantly as a guest Guest
  • Option 2

    Connect
  • Option 3

    Login or create a HitFix account Login Signup
  • Default-avatar

    DAG

    Any mention of Homicide (my favorite NBC show of that era)

    May 30, 2012 at 9:33AM EST Reply to Comment
    • Midnight_run_mca255950_talkback_profile

      sepinwall Comes up briefly, but only in the context that it was in the running to inherit the LA Law timeslot before Littlefield and some other execs fell in love with ER.

      May 30, 2012 at 9:34AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      DAG thanks. Typical that Homicide wouldn't get much play.

      In the words of Pembleton. "You want glory, go work at ER. Homicide's fine by me"

      May 30, 2012 at 9:49AM EST
  • Tattoo_talkback_profile

    Hatfield

    I really need to read this. I watched a lot of NBC in those days, and I would love to hear what the people responsible thought about it.

    PS Preston Beckman sounds like a funny guy, if only we had an outlet for his opinions and stories too!

    May 30, 2012 at 9:43AM EST Reply to Comment
    • Midnight_run_mca255950_talkback_profile

      sepinwall Preston is hilarious. Some of the best anecdotes in the book come from him, and the Twitter feed is great, too.

      May 30, 2012 at 10:00AM EST
    • Tattoo_talkback_profile

      Hatfield Yeah, it's a shame his blog was taken down. Hopefully he'll get back to it one of these days.

      You've got about seven years on me, so your tastes were a little more mature at the time, but I remember generally liking everything I watched on NBC comedy nights. In hindsight my favorites turned out to be the better shows, but I absolutely enjoyed crap like Veronica's Closet and The Single Guy (didn't that have Ernest Borgnine as a doorman?). It kinda makes me want to go back and watch some of them just to see how bad they really were.

      May 30, 2012 at 3:07PM EST
    • Avatar_talkback_profile

      mcm99 Funny I just finished the book a couple of days ago. I had no idea that Preston fellow was the infamous Masked Scheduler who I follow after reading his tweets on Alan's feed!

      May 30, 2012 at 8:12PM EST
  • Default-avatar

    PolyWog

    You had me at Manimal. :) Oh, for the good old days of Automan too.

    May 30, 2012 at 9:47AM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    sangs

    Downloaded it to my Kindle on Monday and couldn't put it down. Very enjoyable read if you're from that era.

    May 30, 2012 at 10:06AM EST Reply to Comment
  • Lorisavatar_talkback_profile

    scoopie77

    I so didn't get a lot of those jokes in the Tartikoff monologue, but it was funny.

    Alan, did you think that Littlefield was taking too much credit for this all? Hundreds of people go into making hits and millions when you consider the audience.

    May 30, 2012 at 10:15AM EST Reply to Comment
    • Midnight_run_mca255950_talkback_profile

      sepinwall Given that he interviewed so many of the people involved — writer, directors, actors, development execs, etc. — I think he's acknowledging that. He was still the man in charge when this was all happening, though.

      May 30, 2012 at 10:19AM EST
    • Midnight_run_mca255950_talkback_profile

      sepinwall Also, the funniest Tartikoff line in either bit, to me, is his delivery of "Ohmigod, THE SANDWICHES!!!!" at the end of his "Night Court" scene.

      May 30, 2012 at 10:20AM EST
    • Lorisavatar_talkback_profile

      scoopie77 Thanks for the reply! Good to hear that he acknowledged the others involved. I guess he was the figurehead for a reason.

      That "Night Court" scene was pretty hilarious.

      May 30, 2012 at 10:24AM EST
  • Default-avatar

    Ellen B.

    I interned in NBC Programming in the early '80's. I picked up the Nielsen Ratings every morning and delivered them to the executives in charge of Program Scheduling. I watched them determine what show would air and when. They had a board with all the time slots for NBC, ABC and CBS.

    I remember that they kept yanking Hill Street Blues all over the schedule and even at that tender young age I knew this was not good. It took a long time for them to be convince it was an important new direction in programming. Fred Silverman was still there. I never saw him. I believe he lived with "the the Gods" on the 6th Floor but his hot programming guy, Brandon Tartikoff, was seen around the various offices. My main recollection was that he had a positive disposition but mostly he was just very "tall". (Warren Littlefield was still a lesser God and on the West Coast at the time.) But for all his shiny youth, he did seem to be championing the right program direction. But it was all so new then. Cheers, was in the works and they did not have much hope for it. These executives were mostly guys still living in a "Mad Men" sort of mentality. They were all in awe of Silverman despite the fact that the ratings were in the toilet much of the time I was there. Still, he did hire some promising young talent.

    Despite all the distractions, I did recognize that this was an important transition time at NBC and that some of the new shows being created signaled some very important changes in programming direction. And, this was not happening at the other networks.

    The one thing they did not acknowledge much was the beginnings of cable television. No forward thinking there at all - and that seemed the mentality at the other networks. They were still living in a bubble of free broadcast television. It was probably better for all us consumers in the end. Now we get most of the best programs on cable anyway.

    I remember as a young woman that I didn't much like the male dominated atmosphere at the time. But I had to admit - there was a rarefied atmosphere because of it. So, cocky - yes. But it was of a certain time period.

    May 30, 2012 at 10:56AM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    joshmassey

    I was actually disappointed with the book - too many things were glossed over (the "Cheers" section seemed to jump from the first season to the finale in three pages), and the oral history format was awkward when Littlefield seemed to be interviewing himself. Overall, it just seemed choppy.

    And yes, the book seems to argue Littlefield was responsible for every good decision made during his years, but none of the bad ones.

    May 30, 2012 at 11:35AM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    Alice

    Aww, everyone always picks on poor Caroline In the City and Suddenly Susan. They weren't the most groundbreaking pieces of art ever, but I really enjoyed them when I was little. There was nothing wrong with them, and they're definitely better than a lot of the stuff that's on now. I think Richard/Caroline was my first proper ship (though, was Lois & Clark on at the same time or before? If before, then they are the first). A couple of those Caroline season finales have stayed with me. The angst!

    May 30, 2012 at 12:19PM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      isaacl I really enjoyed Caroline in the City and its interesting characters and storylines. As with many shows featuring the "will-they-or-won't-they" question, it kept putting artificial barriers between Richard and Caroline (as well as always pulling the rug out of under Richard's success, a la Lucy pulling away the football from Charlie Brown), and the attempts to turn it into a workplace comedy didn't really work well. Nonetheless, I thought it had a lot of novel plots that took good advantage of the cast.

      May 31, 2012 at 7:00PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Jeannie Agreed. Some channel (TV Land, maybe?) is running Caroline in the City reruns, if you're interested. It was a great era of TV. Alan mentions many series that I miss. TV today is crap in comparison...

      June 1, 2012 at 9:56PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Ben Caroline in particular gets lumped in with the truly horrendous shows that inspired Paul Simms' unkind-but-frankly-accurate overview of what often got slotted into the 8:30 and 9:30 spots on Thursday. Remember "Cursed", "Union Square", and "Stark Raving Mad"? If you do, I am so sorry, and don't forget the Dabney Coleman horror show "Madman of the People" actually had the 9:30 spot during 1994-95 until "Friends" caught fire and was moved into the super block around "Seinfeld" and "ER". Caroline in the City was, much like Night Court many years earlier, an OK show that didn't really fit in with the blockbusters but didn't humiliate itself or NBC when it was around them. Too many hopes for springboard success during this era did both.

      June 11, 2012 at 9:54AM EST
  • Default-avatar

    Slam

    During the "Must See TV" era, there were maybe 10 or 15 channels that you could watch; now there are probably 50-75 that have a show you would possibly watch ; it was a different era.

    The best line in the book : " Zucker's top rated shows are fat people crying, and Donald Trump screaming YOU'RE FIRED ! ...and he'll probably get a promotion for it '

    I put it on my kindle and devoured it in 2 days, a very enjoyable read for anyone who watches TV

    May 30, 2012 at 2:09PM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    srpad

    I am still reading it but my favorite line so far was to the effect of "We had a Schedule so strong it took Jeff Zucker 4 years to kill it."

    May 30, 2012 at 3:25PM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      Brian J It IS kind of amazing, even after "Seinfeld" went off the air, how strong NBC was. It had something to boast about on pretty much every night of the week, I think.

      May 30, 2012 at 9:39PM EST
  • Default-avatar

    Joe

    Aww, I loved Mr. Smith when I was a kid...

    May 30, 2012 at 4:42PM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    The Bandsaw Vigilante

    There needs to be some "Wings" love somewhere in this book. Surely a show which ran for seven seasons during the Littlefield era deserves at least a mention or two.

    May 30, 2012 at 5:47PM EST Reply to Comment
    • Midnight_run_mca255950_talkback_profile

      sepinwall It's discussed a fair amount in the context of the "Frasier" chapter, since Casey, Angell and Lee left "Cheers" to create and run "Wings" before being brought in to create and run the spin-off.

      May 30, 2012 at 5:56PM EST
  • Default-avatar

    mgrabois

    So Preston Beckman is the Masked Scheduler? Was that known or did you inadvertantly "out" him?

    May 30, 2012 at 6:28PM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      joshmassey It's out. He's admitted it.

      May 30, 2012 at 6:52PM EST
  • Default-avatar

    Daggor

    Could you quit with the asterisks? That's needed if you're writing a paper for college, but here it just serves to break up the flow of the paragraph. (*****) If it happened every once and a while, maybe it wouldn't be as jarring, but when you do it several times per article, I do not see the need to drop a typographical fart in the middle of a paragraph. I'm reading the article, then I'm shown that there is more information pertinent to the idea being expressed - under the text I'm now reading. This isn't a "Chose your Own Adventure."

    (*****) You could easily insert the information you've pulled out as an aside into the paragraph itself.

    May 30, 2012 at 7:35PM EST Reply to Comment
    • Tattoo_talkback_profile

      Hatfield Did I miss the email about Gripe Week?

      May 30, 2012 at 7:48PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Hunter13 Yes! A really weird habit for such a good writer like Alan.

      May 31, 2012 at 6:41PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      coolwhipbaby Typographical fart - brilliant!

      May 31, 2012 at 8:07PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Ed G. Personally, I've always liked the asterisk asides.

      June 1, 2012 at 10:15AM EST
  • Default-avatar

    Ted

    Don Ohlmeyer fired Norm MacDonald from SNL because he was friends with OJ Simpson and didn't like Norm ripping into him every week. There is nothing you could say about the man, true or false, that would be worse than he deserves.

    May 30, 2012 at 8:02PM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    trpearson

    I was Warren Littlefield's co-author on this book, and the above is as detailed and thoughtful a review as I've come across. Thank you, Alan Sepinwall.

    If there are any questions about how the book was put together, who got interviewed and why, etc., I'll be happy to try to answer them.

    May 30, 2012 at 8:34PM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      Dezbot How come Larry David wasn't interviewed about "Seinfeld"? Something mundane such as availability, or something more sinister? :-)

      May 31, 2012 at 11:26AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      trpearson Early on, Warren Littlefield made a list of everyone he wanted to interview, and only Matthew Perry flatly refused to participate. He said he wanted to look forward rather than back. Fair enough. Warren worked through managers, agents, assistants, and a former NBC publicist to help schedule interviews, and both Larry David and George Clooney never responded to any requests.

      Warren ran into Clooney when the book was about to come out, and Clooney said the interview requests never reached him and that he would have been happy to contribute. I can't speak for Larry David. Warren asked every way he knew how but got no response. He even recruited Jerry Seinfeld to talk to David. Still nothing.

      Courtney Cox and Jennifer Aniston agreed to be interviewed face-to-face (our goal was to interview everybody in person), but then they decided they would rather do phone interviews. Soon thereafter, Courtney Cox said she'd prefer to be interviewed via email, and Jennifer Aniston said the same. Time was short by then. We already had half the cast of FRIENDS, the two writer/creators, and Jim Burrows, who directed the pilot. It seemed pretty unlikely we'd get anything useful via email (if we got anything at all), so we said, "Screw it."

      Without exception, the people we interviewed couldn't have been more gracious with their time and recollections. It was Warren's decision to leave Don Ohlmeyer off the interview list. When I asked him why, I think he said something along the lines of, "I've heard enough out of him already."

      I know this is more than you asked, but I've been getting a lot of these questions, and this seems like good place to leave a full response.

      May 31, 2012 at 12:10PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Harry thanks for being here! love the book, it's awesome. my question: has anyone asked bob wright if he regrets his decision to back ohlmeyer over warren? if he acknowledges how crazy it sounds to call warren a "dry hole" when they had the biggest shows on tv and were the top ranked network? did he not know about ohlmeyer hating er and will and grace?

      thanks

      May 31, 2012 at 2:27PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      trpearson We asked both Bob Wright and Jack Welch about the hiring of Ohlmeyer as Warren's boss -- they created a position for him -- and Warren's eventual firing. As I recall, it was Jack Welch who called Warren "a dry hole," did it right to his face. Neutron Jack all over. Wright was a bit less blunt, but he said some version of the same thing. They figured Warren was wrung out. I can't say why, given what was on the air.

      Welch seemed to put a lot of stock in Ohlmeyer having more gravitas than Warren. That was his view anyway. And Ohlmeyer was one of Welch's golfing buddies. So if it was Warren or Ohlmeyer out the door, that wasn't much of a contest.

      The lesson I take away from how it all unwound is that people on the business side of the network don't always understand what it takes to develop and nurture a successful TV show. But they surely think they do.

      I'm glad you enjoyed the book. It was great fun to work on.

      May 31, 2012 at 2:59PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      harry thanks so much for the response. jack needed to play golf with smarter (and sober) people.

      May 31, 2012 at 3:03PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Dezbot Thank you, Mr. Pearson!

      May 31, 2012 at 4:26PM EST
  • Default-avatar

    Brian J

    I flipped through this book briefly the other day, just to see if I would want to buy it. (It's kind of expensive, so I will have to delay purchasing it, perhaps until I get an iPad or something.) It definitely seems like the perfect sort of book for me, as it gives a lot of the history of shows I do or used to care about and the network I think most about. In no particular order, here are my thoughts, with me apologizing in advance for saying something that might be addressed in the book:

    1. I am not sure what to think about the shows that failed, because most shows failed, and even the really successful ones usually fade from memory after a while. I might feel differently now, but I don't think there was anything THAT objectionable about "Jesse" or "Veronica's Closet." And if you are a network executive, are you going to worry about a show with a seasoned veteran like Christina Applegate or Kirstie Alley? For better or worse, they seem like much safer bets.

    I can certainly see why NBC ended up canceling them, but let's remember that during its first season, "Veronica's Closet" was the number three show. No doubt that was due to "Seinfeld" being in its last season and dominating the ratings, but still, if you are working at NBC, would you cancel it right away? Again, I could be remembering the show too fondly, and perhaps it was never going to get as good as some other shows, but we can never know until we let shows in that situation grow.

    2. I often wonder how Thursdays would have shaped up had NBC moved "Frasier" to the night earlier in the season, or perhaps even from the beginning. Would more viewers have stuck around?

    3. On the same note, would "Friends" have held down Thursdays at 9:00 better? Would "Frasier" have done well in the old "Friends" spot? Let's also remember that ABC's "Millionaire" was blowing up at the time, and had the network put it at 8:00, it could have really hurt NBC.

    4. NBC, perhaps more than any other network in recent times, did and does have a bad habit of bouncing shows around. I get networks some moves, even some moves that are made in-season, like "CSI" being put after "Survivor" way back in the day, but does anyone think "Newsradio" or "3rd Rock" benefitted from being in 11 and 12 different time slots? What about "Scrubs," to name another? Viewers aren't complete idiots, but not all are as plugged-in as people like us are. Constant changes probably breed apathy.

    5. Along the same lines, does network television need to be part military, part imperialist in its focus? In other words, does it need one night where it could establish a beachhead and then send shows off to colonize other nights? If so, why wasn't a show like "Scrubs," which was actually good and trendy in style" allowed to blossom on Thursdays? It might never have been "Cheers," but it could probably have been a legitimately larger hit and, after a while, used to launch a new show.

    6. Perhaps television has changed to the point where no show can be as big as "Cheers" or "Seinfeld" used to be, but I am not sure. Until we have definite proof that is the case, NBC shouldn't give up. Some of its new shows look questionable, but I could see "Revolution" and "Go On" being hits. If so, it needs to find good shows and be patient. There comes a point where people just don't want to watch a show, but despite what network research might say, I don't think that can be proven after just a few episodes.

    7. Also, while Jeff Zucker probably deserves a lot of the crap he gets, I will mention that in Tina Fey's book, Bossypants, she describes how he and Kevin Reilly were the "champions" of the show and how he intervened to give the writers room to breathe. Apparently, someone was inspecting the "30 Rock" scripts and noticed the jokes about NBC and GE, but Zucker told the corporate legal department at GE that they were to be left alone because "they were just jokes." There's something (good) to be said about a move like that.

    May 30, 2012 at 9:37PM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      Ben Kabak So Zucker gets credit for 30 Rock. A show that would have been cancelled in 3 weeks at the old NBC for shitty ratings.

      May 31, 2012 at 2:55PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Brian J @Ben Kabak:

      That was not my point at all. Whatever credit he deserves for that show or any others or jeers he should get for his actions that are still hurting NBC today, he let the writers have more freedom than some others wanted. Like I said, there's something good to be said about that, particularly since Tina Fey's show was still very new at that point.

      May 31, 2012 at 4:40PM EST
  • Default-avatar

    ed w

    A good blog entry but if I may nitpick one aspect: "Scott Sassa — who begat Garth Ancier, who begat Jeff Zucker, who begat Kevin Reilly, who begat Ben Silverman, who begat Jeff Gaspin, who begat Robert Greenblatt, who has to clean up the toxic landfill that most of the men in between Littlefield and himself turned NBC into"

    I'm not sure what that is based on. To me, Kevin Reilly was the one good guy they had during that string. He kept The Office alive when it was the only decent thing on NBC and gave us 30 Rock and Chuck. I'd say he came closest to classing up the joint. Under Greenblatt, looking at this last season and the pilots ordered for this fall it looks like a further tumble downhill.

    May 31, 2012 at 1:35AM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      Jack Smash is terrible. But, Revolution looks to be a big hit.

      May 31, 2012 at 3:56AM EST
    • Midnight_run_mca255950_talkback_profile

      sepinwall Ed, note that I said "most." Firing Kevin Reilly so he could hire Ben Silverman was among the dumbest moves of Zucker's tenure.

      May 31, 2012 at 7:21AM EST
    • Madmen_icon_talkback_profile

      LJA Begs the question, is Ben Silverman a relative of Fred Silverman's by chance?

      May 31, 2012 at 12:22PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      tmb What also begs questioning is whether NBC can still create hits. Viewers have left that network in droves, and if shows like 'Awake' and 'Prime Suspect' can't make it, I see little hope for 'Revolution'.

      June 1, 2012 at 12:25PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Brian J @TMB:

      I don't think they are in any worse position for creating hits than any other broadcast network, in the sense that it's still possible but perhaps to a lesser degree than it was before cable exploded and viewing habits changed. The problem is, they don't have a launching pad, i.e. no "Friends" or "Seinfeld" or some hit drama behind which they can put a new show to give it a chance to grow. That is, besides "The Voice."

      The solution, of course, is to find one. Easier said than done, but I think it's still possible.

      "Revolution" has far, far more YouTube views than any other show, perhaps more than all other combined. There could be any number of reasons for that, but if it's any legitimate indication of interest, it should get a high initial tune-in. Whether it can sustain that if it does happen is another question.

      But then, it's at 10:00. It's probably got a good time slot, based on the competition, but if it's a hit, NBC probably needs to move it in order to get the most use out of it.

      Also, I don't think Greenblatt was responsible for much of this past season as far as show ordering went, and if he's not, then we should only judge him as far as next season goes.

      June 2, 2012 at 11:16AM EST
  • Default-avatar

    natx

    call me crazy, but would an american idol style reality show picking tv pilots not work? hearing some of the shows that flop i always think, couldn't the public do just as a good a job picking shows?

    May 31, 2012 at 1:41PM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    natx

    call me crazy but wouldn't some sort of american idol style reality show geared towards picking pilots or at least one or some pilots be a no-brainer? I mean hearing about some of the shows over the years that these execs greenlight leads me to believe that the public could do as a good a job.

    May 31, 2012 at 1:44PM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      natx sorry thought my original comment didn't get posted.

      May 31, 2012 at 1:45PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Brian J I've thought that NBC should take the normal pot of money for a sitcom (or, I guess, a drama, but this would probably work more easily for a sitcom), divide it up a few ways, and give it to novices who have interesting ideas. Give them six episodes, or something like that, and put their shows on less high profile nights, perhaps even on Saturday. If something clicks, critically or better yet commercially, the network can order the show(s) for a full season.

      If nothing else, this would send a signal NBC is trying something different and not afraid of thinking outside the box to be successful. And while it might end up being a waste of time, given that the expenses involved would be far lower per show, the risk would also be lower.

      May 31, 2012 at 4:59PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      tmb Love the outside-the-box thinking Brian J, but unfortunately the Comcast suits only care about the financial bottom line and not about a potentially creative idea like this.

      June 1, 2012 at 12:29PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Brian J @TMB:

      Given that this could cost significantly less than a traditional pilot, I would think NBC/Kabletown jump at the chance to try it. I'm not saying just anyone should be handed a big check, nor should the traditional pilot process be abandoned, by the way.

      June 2, 2012 at 11:18AM EST
  • Default-avatar

    JDDrake

    I read the book over the holiday weekend & agree w/ most of what Alan says here. It's a quick read & if you read the oral history of Friends that was in the April (I think) issue of Vanity Fair, you've already read 2 of the chapters. My thoughts:

    - If you're looking for insights into Law & Order, don't bother reading. Although the show is featured on the cover, it is only touched upon very briefly in the book.

    -Actually, the only NBC drama covered at length in the book is 'ER.' But really, the network was comedy heavy at the time.

    - I agree there is not much about 'the fall' of the network. SO,since no one asked, here is a bit of my quick take:

    I know Littlefield would not be able to have a non-biased opinion (nor is he required to in his own book), but could it be that a lot of the C-grade or failing sitcoms on the schedule during the late 90s might have a little to do with the start of the "fall?"

    Look at the schedules from 97-98 to 99-00. Among the aging barely-hits taking up real estate include: Jenny, Men Behaving Badly, Suddenly Susan, Caroline in the City, Fired Up, The Naked Truth, Newsradio, Just Shoot Me, Mad About You, Encore! Encore!, Jesse, 3rd Rock From the Sun, Working, Veronica's Closet, Mike O Malley Show, and Tony Danza, among others. None of those shows made it far into the 2000s. Was NBC over-reliant on comedy? Should they have diversified their portfolio more in the late 90s?

    In the early part of the 2000s, as the Must-See sitcom bubble was starting to burst, & while ABC & CBS were hitting it big w/ 'Millionaire' & 'Survivor,' holes in the NBC schedule were filled with Dateline episodes 5 NIGHTS A WEEK (sound familiar, 'The Jay Leno Show'?) plus a 2 hour movie on Sunday nights. Eventually the network had too many time slots to fill and not enough money to fill them with scripted programming, especially when reality TV was all the rage. To have all this happen at the exact moment TiVo/DVRs come into being was just another kick in the teeth.

    - Overall, good read for anyone interested in the art vs. commerce discussion as it relates to TV. Reading it makes me want to go back and revisit some of the early seasons of 'ER' this summer. Curious to see if it will still be as earth-shattering as it was back then, or will it seem more like a generic hospital drama now?

    May 31, 2012 at 4:19PM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      Brian J I'm not sure what years in particular you are referring to, but I don't think there was ever a year where the network planned from the get go to have "Dateline" on so much. There might have been a point when it was on five nights a week because other shows failed, but I doubt that lasted long.

      As far as having too many comedies, the networks tend to follow what works, on their own network and other networks. NBC was really dominant during those years, and it makes sense that they would try a lot of comedies, even if many of them ended up being bad. The other networks did the same thing, but they mostly failed. Of course, when dramas were really big, NBC had them all over the schedule, too, like CBS did and still does now.

      I think the biggest problem has been a reluctance to think for the long-term. I can see why "The Biggest Loser," for instance, was relied upon so much, but perhaps NBC could have moved "Community" and/or "30 Rock" to Tuesdays at 9:00 after "TBL" to build a comedy block on another night. Expectations would have been lower, and Thursdays could be devoted to finding more mainstream and/or immediate hits.

      Which is, generally speaking, the problem: if you condition audiences to expect filler, they do just that. No doubt reality shows can be helpful and even good, but they shouldn't be the cornerstone of programming; scripted programming should be. Assuming the business hasn't changed forever, it'll be a long process for NBC to rebuild, but it's doing the right things, like putting scripted programming on Friday nights, even if the programs in the particular slots are questionable.

      May 31, 2012 at 4:55PM EST
  • Default-avatar

    Anthony Foglia

    The audio book is read by professional Littlefield impersonator, Bob Balaban.

    June 1, 2012 at 1:34AM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      Ed G. This must be Bob Balaban week! He gave a great interview with Patt Morrison on KPCC public radio yesterday. Seems like a nice guy.

      June 1, 2012 at 10:31AM EST
  • Default-avatar

    Tom

    Any mention as to why they pretty much gave up the AFC package in 1998 and the reason for highly overpaying for the Olympics?

    June 3, 2012 at 9:22AM EST Reply to Comment

Get Instant Alerts on What's Alan Watching

Latest Posts
More Posts
Recent Activity on Facebook
Most Popular on Facebook
Top Stories From Around the Web