Strange Things Afoot

Each year, around the beginning of the new year, I try to watch the Talking Heads' film Stop Making Sense. I stumbled into this tradition by accident a few years ago. It's definitely performance, it's definitely an artistic statement, but for me, it's all about the joy exhibited by David Byrne. He's having a fucking blast. He jogs. He dances. He's present. I watch it each year to remind myself that there should always be something in your life that brings you pure joy. Contentment. Some sort of combination of dedicating your time and energy to something where success is measured by some sort of freedom, some sort of outburst of joy that can only be displayed with the best kind of reckless abandon, to not forget what John Keating taught me about the importance of sounding my barbaric yawp. 

Craig Ferguson's last Late Late Show celebration stirred up something similar for me. In part, a LLS mission statement, and in part, a personal statement of being in charge of one's life, and in its entirety, a good time. I've viewed it again and again. They did a fantastic job writing their own tribute.

Ferguson's Late Late Show was a show had an undercurrent of DIY ethic, a small budget that created limitations but also kept them off the radar of the network. I kind of can't believe it existed at all, let alone on network television. Ferguson has often spoke of never thinking himself as part of the late night talk show world, both in time of peace and time of "war":

He was recently quoted as saying “I don’t give a f— about the late-night wars… If late-night is a club, I don’t want to be a member.”

“What I meant by that was, I don’t want somebody to lump me in with a whole form of TV that I’m not necessarily a real part of. We do a show that’s on late at night, but it’s not ‘a late-night talk show.’

- EW.com

Craig made a show that started out being rooted in British comedy and grounded in Ferguson's sheer talent, ability and intelligence. He was a happy contrarian in late night and no one on television has had more fun. He made friends along the way, including Grant Imahara who built Geoff Peterson, Craig's robot-skeleton sidekick, for him as a Twitter exchange. Geoff had some glitches, made Craig laugh, and was voiced by Josh Robert Thompson. Before Geoff joined him, Craig just talked to himself. He suffered power outages in the building, a roof that leaks, and one time he broke the camera. And often it was simply cracking up at something. Usually himself.

Ferguson is known and respected for his free-form monologue, sometimes on a single topic, like Ancient Rome, an area of discussion, like Jackass 2 and being a retired jackass himself, or meandering, like a discussion that starts out about vegetables, discusses Christopher Columbus, Kim Jong Il, and ends up on Roger Moore's Bond and muffin baskets. Or his of-the-moment reaction when Captain Sully made the emergency landing on the Hudson River in 2009.

He was frequently (comically) riled up by his live audience's reaction to something, whether it's his knowledge of Elvis or feeling bad for his producer. Or just holding them accountable. But always being willing to win them over. And those lip sync cold opens - introducing Geoff, having a Wonderful Night, Istanbul, Saying Hey, and even the ones that didn't air (because although he wrote an entire musical number, someone failed to get clearance). Le Late Late Show avec Craig Ferguson (I believe with an appearance by Ben Dukes himself), and taking over vocals himself when he felt like it.

Plus, the dancing. So. Much. Dancing. Sometimes by request. Sharing news of his marriage, his son's accomplishments, gaining American citizenship. A delightful chat with his sister, Lynn.

He also spoke from the heart - about making sure his comedy is going after the powerful and not the vulnerable, speaking of his own sobriety.  He spoke beautifully in memory of his father and his mother.

Since it was also, technically, a chat show - the guests, particularly Kristen Bell, Neil Patrick Harris, Jim Parsons, Michael Sheen, Robin Williams, Ben Schwartz, anyone who was a fan of the show - like Jeffrey Dean Morgan, and, well, anyone Scottish.

I'm gonna miss the Late Late Show... miss Secretariat (and getting my cardio), miss the harmonica, awkward pause(es) and games, miss when Craig was wearing his cranky-pants, remember the skits and phone calls.

Until the end of my days, I will always know that Iceland is in the North Atlantic and its capital city is Reykjavik. 

In his final monologue for the LLS, Craig shared:

... you came to a show that was, let's be honest, a bit of a fixer-upper and it kind of stayed that way... but what I hope we've done ... maybe "art" is a very grand word but what I was trying to do here, and what I think that we've managed to do here is make something that wasn't here before. So in that sense, maybe it is a piece of art - it didn't exist, now it does. 

"I really mean this, and I want to make this clear....: I'm not retiring - I'm stopping doing *this*, I'm not stopping doing *it*... What was more overwhelming than anything else in the experience of doing this show, was making a connection with a country, which I became a part of. Which is astonishing to me... However, what I can't be is a member of a club, which I didn't really ask to join. I wanted to do *this show* and now we've done *this show*, and if you'd indulge me in whatever I'm doing now and come to whatever I do next, I'd be very grateful." 

Why should you say 'NKOTB' when 'New Kids on the Block' is the same number of syllables? Joey McIntyre weighs in: http://t.co/Rxez3CIikt

— Dan Snierson (@dansnierson)

I don't know why the loss of Robin Williams this year was such a sucker-punch, but it has felt like I let a friend down somehow. Someone I certainly didn't know in real life, and when everyone started sharing their (personal) "Robin Williams" story, someone that I didn't really know too much about to begin with. But the thought that he somehow maybe didn't know how loved he was, how respected and valued he was, how important he was, and how important his work was... it's the simultaneous thought that what Robin gave everyone was invaluable and that there is a chance he couldn't feel it in his own life... those are thoughts that are hard to reconcile. The world paused to grieve when he passed away. Think about that... we all stopped and collected ourselves to move past a place of disbelief... and we grieved. We still aren't at a place where we are celebrating him and his contributions. We're still remembering his work and trying to get to know him a little better.

I'm too young to think of Robin as a stand-up comedian, and everything that it entails. I remember Comic Relief and I knew he started in stand-up... watching his Live on Broadway special with family several years ago is the most I've seen my sister laugh... ever. Still, for me, Robin was an actor first, beloved talk show guest second, and also someone who I understood to be a respected comedian. When I was between the ages of 9 and 12, the movies I watched most were Aladdin, Hook, Mrs. Doubtfire, Dead Poets Society and Good Morning, Vietnam. There was a time in the early 90s where I'm pretty sure the USA network aired Field of Dreams, Good Morning, Vietnam, Bull Durham, What About Bob? and Mrs. Doubtfire 90% of the time. You add in The Cutting Edge or whatever was playing on TBS's Dinner and a Movie, and basically you have my entire movie schedule for my early teenage years.

I bring this up because Robin felt like a member of the family. He was always around, either silly or serious, but always showing kindness and a gentleness of spirit. I've seen Dead Poets Society so many times, I straight up count John Keating as an influential teacher in my life. I watched Aladdin  this summer and was pleasantly surprised to discover that I can still recite it verbatim 20+ years after the last time I had seen it. Mrs. Doubtfire is still a solid family movie about a man trying to remain a part of his family, and (I would argue) maybe one of the best comedies to come out that decade. Birdcage, Fisher King, Good Will Hunting, Awakenings, One Hour Photo, Insomnia, World's Greatest Dad... his performances will be remembered. It's a true legacy. No question. And he was still very present - from Crazy Ones to his upcoming films, it's the loss of someone who felt like part of my life.

The outpouring of "Robin Williams" stories... of his generosity, his kindness, his sheer talent. It seems that everyone in comedy has a story of Robin supporting them, introducing them to other legendary comedians, of always complimenting and encouraging them, and being appreciative of being included in an opportunity to go on stage. 

My favorite is Chris Gethard's piece in Vulture about doing improv with Robin:

I’ve rarely been steamrolled onstage like this in my life. But I’ve also rarely felt so much adrenaline. Part of this, I’m sure, is being up there with someone I’d admired so much for so long. But a big part of this is also the joy of realizing I am in the presence of an impatient, wonderful, big-hearted genius who was still humble enough to ask if he could be on my show before he stole it.

I strongly recommend Gethard's piece because he does a beautiful job speaking of Robin's legacy within the world of comedy, of reconciling Robin's mind and talent, with the performer who was equally as comfortable making non-edgy comedy meant for mass-appeal. Reviewing his filmography after his passing, I realized it had never occurred to me that he primarily made movies for families. Night at the Museum, Bicentennial Man, Flubber, Jumanji, Jack, Toys. And if they weren't expressly family entertainment, they were broad-audience films - RV, Old Dogs, Father's Day, Patch Adams, License to Wed. I don't know if it was pure calculation on his part, but he clearly put his clout behind movies and television intended for mass audiences.

A.O. Scott wrote a lovely tribute to Robin in the New York Times. Paul F. Tompkins wrote about finding solace in Robin's work as a kid who enjoyed silliness. Norm MacDonald wrote about Robin's generosity.

David Letterman spoke about knowing Robin, beginning as comedians in the 70s, and how Robin shared his Mork and Mindy success, and what it meant to have Robin as a guest:

I can remember the night... at the Comedy Store... all of the sudden he comes on stage, and it's like nothing we had ever seen before, nothing we had ever imagined before... this guy comes in and we're like morning dew, and he comes in like a hurricane. And now the longer he is on stage, the worse we feel about ourselves because it's not stopping. And he finishes and I thought 'Well, that's it, they're gonna have to put an end to show business because what can happen after this?'

PBS aired a wonderful overview of Robin's career, which also speaks to his USO tours over the past decade. Charlie Rose has a great compilation of interviews with Robin over the years.

From Twitter:

Robin Williams was my hero growing up. You know someone is special when the whole world considers them family.

— Chris Colfer (@chriscolfer) August 12, 2014

Your humor, like hot jazz, was topped by your sensitivity, compassion & kindness. Standing on my desk for you, always. #RIPRobinWilliams

— Josh Charles (@MrJoshCharles) August 12, 2014

pic.twitter.com/xmA6pa2O6u

— Adam Scott (@mradamscott) August 12, 2014

We mourn the loss of our friend Robin Williams, who always made us laugh and smile. pic.twitter.com/UOY8LTjVRA

— Sesame Street (@sesamestreet) August 11, 2014

He was always the funniest guy in the room. http://t.co/Qnb7rFMerP

— Chris Rock (@chrisrock) August 12, 2014

I didn't know Robin. But I loved him. I love that he laughs with his whole body. I love that in spite of all of his talent, intelligence, ability - he always seemed humble and genuine, that he seemed to live a life rooted in kindness and a belief in generosity, that he seemed to be someone who was just grateful to be there, for the opportunity to meet new and interesting people, to be entertained and to get to make others laugh, to exercise his brain, to get to expend some energy. He has been incredibly important in my life. And he continues to inspire and remind me what life should be about.

I can't remember a time before the Charlie Rose Show. It's been on most of my "thinking" life. I probably started watching it regularly in my early twenties... when I would talk about guests and interviews, the feedback I would receive would be regarding how late it was on. Now, in our era of streaming and dvrs, there is no excuse to not have Charlie a part of your viewing life.

Charlie Rose is often recognized as the best interviewer out there. He's celebrated for having a conversation, for listening to his guests, for being curious and for being genuinely interested in what they have to say. If he feels like they aren't there to have a conversation, but to feed him some pre-packaged talking points, he gets visibly annoyed and shuts it down. (IT'S AWESOME.) If he thinks his guests are being insincere or disingenuous, he pushes back. He doesn't want his time wasted, he doesn't want his intelligence insulted and I get the sense that he doesn't want it for his audience either. He operates from a place of integrity and a lack of maliciousness. He asks some direct questions, but not from a place of coldness, or to get a "moment" - but because he's trying to get at something of quality. Due to this, the guests on his show come to have a conversation - generally, they are honored to be there and out of respect for him and the show's staff, they are present and they are ready to have a conversation. This is why watching Charlie Rose is never a waste of time... I will always learn something, I will usually be entertained, I will feel a little bit better about the world, because there are people who are paying attention, people who care, people who aren't interested in hearing their own voice, but in documenting on where we are as a society, how we got here, and where we may be headed in the future.

During times of major current events, Charlie opens with a clip package that is straight-forward, lacking in hyperbole and drama, and informative. When warranted, there is someone there to explain what is going on and why it matters. (We know this because Charlie asks the guest to explain what is going on and why it matters. I never said I was smart, just that I'm smarter having watched his show.) He may dedicate an entire show that week around the topic, or air an episode compiling recent interviews on the subject matter. It's public television programming at its best.

I strongly recommend his interviews around the grand jury's decision and resulting outcry in Ferguson, MO, including the reporting by Jelani Cobb. His extremely delicate interview with the parents of Michael Brown, which includes an erudite explanation of why the public reaction from the Trayvon Martin trial was different, by the attorney for the Brown family.

The rest of the time, Charlie is interviewing people he finds interesting... from the worlds of technology, architecture, public affairs, science, literature, dance, theater, and entertainment (directors, actors, comedians and performers). It's the artists that I'm most interested in... those who Charlie has personal relationships with, those who have projects out that are getting a lot of buzz, those who are at the forefront of their profession or industry. I enjoy it all... the ones that Charlie maybe didn't get time to do much homework or research on ("Why do people find this movie so interesting?"), the accomplished artists who try to whittle down an entire career in the one boring talking point they've been asked about for years ("I'm not interested in that.") and the ones that make Charlie laugh. They are the best. Charlie will certainly let anyone have as much time as needed to go on a tangent that makes him laugh. If Charlie has a good conversation with you, he'll air the entire thing (60 minutes, 90 minutes, whatever is warranted). If you are someone having a "moment" but didn't have anything of substance to offer, you will have ten minutes packaged in with a bunch of other stuff. Charlie Rose is a litmus test... not of relevancy, but of candor and knowledge.

Charlie is one cool cat, and based on asides over the years, apparently lives life every hour of the day. He is somehow having dinners and taking calls, and seeing shows, and traveling, and reading books, while simultaneously having two full-time jobs, and also he's 72. He knows everyone and is still making friends, he is taking on new high profile professional posts, and he wasn't kidding eight years ago after having heart surgery when he said he told the doctors that he was planning to live a long, full, life.

"(Lambert's) most famous songs range from pistol-packing revenge jams to tender, nostalgic ballads, but what they have in common is a shortage of pretension and a surplus of lived-in authenticity."

Profile: Richard Linklater The New Yorker, (June 30, 2014)

Last week I watched happythankyoumoreplease and Liberal Arts and I left the experience relieved and feeling assured. Both films are written and directed by, and star, Josh Radnor - a guy of a certain age and certain background who set out to tell stories about certain people learning and growing and dealing with life. I think, overall, this is the topic that most of the films I have watched deal with... stories about people with a specific kind of upbringing and background, between their mid-20s and mid-30s figuring out "life". The mechanics of the movie-making system, independent or otherwise, leans heavily on white guys from a certain socio-economic status, getting to tell their stories. And apparently the story these sensitive fellas want to tell is that life is hard and feeling is hard and the solution to everything is the perfect girl-lady and a sensitive-dude acoustic soundtrack. So much has been written about the manic-pixie-dream-girl trope that I won't bother dwelling on it, other than to say it's absolutely an archetype, I can't fucking stand it, and the only reason I think Nathan Rabin should apologize would be if there were any remorse that he dragged Cameron Crowe into it. (I think that with some distance, Elizabethtown isn't the most frustrating example for use of the character, and I believe Crowe is an example of sensitive-fella movie-making done right). But I'm thankful MPDG is part of the vernacular. I am sad that the archetype is still utilized.

I have had rage around "the sensitive-dude figuring out life and finding happiness all due to the perfect girl-lady" film genre for several years now. It hit me one day, after watching some entry into the canon, and I haven't been able to outgrow it or shake it. My frustration is real. For several reasons. One reason: why, if you get funding to make a movie - given all of the time you are going to put into writing and producing and making the movie - is this the story you want to tell?? What about your contribution to the discussion is new or different? Why is this story even needed - has it not been covered? Is it really so deep of an experience that it can support even more being written about it?

Another reason: you are writing about a whiny, spineless, directionless, unhappy, self-absorbed, possibly self-important, doofus and the solution to life's happiness is a magical love from the perfect girl-lady who fixes his entire existence. Your lead character being unhappy and lonely, and how you write female characters/see women are - without question - related. Figure your shit out and stop making movies that I stumble across and watch with hope that I might enjoy them.

Also, why are white dudes getting all the support? Why do they get the education and experience and funding - their output seems pretty one-note to me. They, apparently, only have one story to tell. I wish women got the same level of opportunity. I wish there were enough female writer/directors that I could complain about, er, highlight their similarities in storytelling technique and exploration of genre. Instead, in order to make it to a finished product, that story has to be strong - the filmmakers have had to argue and fight for appeal and marketability and have strength in their writing and a clear vision/purpose. I may not always think every film by a female writer/director is genius but I can tell why it was made, why it gets to exist and I can always identify some value. There is always value. And I don't believe it has anything to do with the gender of the filmmaker(s), but I do think that the gender of the filmmaker(s) can cause higher scrutiny before the cameras even come out, which leads to a stronger product in the end. 

Related, why are ladies solely associated with the rom-com genre? Women don't make those movies - guys do. Well, I guess not rom-coms - they make rom-dramz. The sensitive white dude writer/directors make movies that are largely about finding "the one". Not sure why ladies got saddled with proliferation of the genre due to single-minded focus - seems to be pretty equally obsessed-with to me. (Although I suspect that there is a related argument for "marketability" and that it contributes to why so many of these dude-focused "the one" movies get made. And in theory, given that I watch them, that argument has some validity. Well, a big eff-you to the argument anyway. You know, out of principle.)

So anyway, Radnor. He avoided the "rom-dramz" curse. And I couldn't be happier about it. His story to tell - it had depth and purpose. His female characters - actually believable and not offering a magical love. His (male) lead characters - not lacking in spine and actually relatable in their ever-evolving ways. The tone of both films: devoid of smugness, self-importance and pretension. Which is nice in general, but also impressive given the topics the films cover and the tools utilized to tell the story. And on top of it, he offered something to the conversation that was worthwhile in exploring. In Liberal Arts, he wrote a female character that captures the experience of being 19-21, of being smart and confident, and wanting to experience life - but struggling to find peers to experience it with. So you find individuals who might be your peers intellectually or in the scope of enthusiasm and passion and excitement of life, but they aren't your peers in age. And how they respond showcases that they aren't a peer in maturity, for better or for worse. I think this is an experience most women have, in the process of growing up. How the experience ends differs, but I think the beginning is a pretty common part of being a college-age girl. And Radnor captured it. And then he captured my heart by writing a male character who was an adult. There is a beautiful scene in Liberal Arts that represents what it is to be young and how it should be to be an adult and it's the best possible outcome to the scenario. And having that scene exist - even though it may not happen too often in real life - is healing. And the fact that it exists, even though it may not happen in real life, is one of the reasons I watch movies.

There is a smaller mission statement buried near the end of happythankyoumoreplease that reminds me of Stephen Bishop's "It Might Be You," a song I adore because it's featured in Tootsie and for most of my life has caused me to think of Charles Durning and Dorothy Michaels on a tractor but in later years got me thinking about my own maturity around matters of the heart. The song includes the lines "if I found the place, would I recognize the face?" - a sentiment explored a little between Tony Hale and Malin Akerman's characters in happythankyoumoreplease culminating in a discussion around what it means to look for, and also accept, love in your life.

Although Radnor is far from the only male writer/director to successfully make lovely films that are smaller in scope but not in heart or smarts, he's clear-minded as a filmmaker:

"I've decided that if I'm going to spend years writing, prepping, casting, shooting, editing, sound mixing, color correcting, and publicizing a movie, I'm going to want it to be the kind of movie I would love, where people grow up and get out of their own ways and open up to something bigger than their own egoic needs. Not because this is a truer version of reality, but because it's the reality I wish to grow, the kind of world in which I would most like to live. When so much else is calling attention to the dark and dysfunctional, I just don't feel it's my job to contribute. Too many people are already on the case."

Enlisted is such a strong show, that as someone who is on the outside - as a fan of television - it seems obvious that any financially-responsible content provider would be jumping at the chance to pick it up. It's a "safe" bet for anyone who is looking to expand their programming. I’m sure the creator/executive production team have business plans (or industry-equivalent) prepared with actual numbers, facts and data but from the fan perspective, certain things are readily apparent.

Enlisted is a known product: It comes with an experienced and proven creative team, there are 13 episodes that demonstrate how solid the writing is, and its cast possesses both talent and chemistry. There is no need for the show to find its footing, or its voice, or learn its assets and strengths. The show is ready to go.

It's funny! It's heartwarming! It really is a New Classic.  Enlisted came out fully realized, with a firm vision, an incredibly strong cast and talented writing staff. The cast is one of the strongest on television, especially in the comedy genre, for chemistry and talent. Their individual talent is multi-faceted and they represent a wide range of abilities across the board. The strength of the writing means that episodes hold up for multiple viewings and the show overall employs a variety of comedy styles - successfully. The show is highly quotable, plus it delivers in its more dramatic, relationship-based and heartfelt moments. Last, in production value - the show is beautifully shot and lit, and allows its directors some creative freedom from episode to episode. The success of casting for Enlisted in chemistry and talent, plus creating a cohesive vehicle quickly has been rightfully compared to catching lightning in a bottle.

Enlisted utilizes valued and important themes. The show is built primarily around the theme of family - the one you are born into and the one you create, and from there incorporates military service and offers one of the few accurate portrayals of how individuals deal with PTSD. Additionally, it passes the Bechdel test and offers testament to the value of both female friendship and brotherhood. It also passes the "mirror test" for diversity in its characters and in casting. It is already representing what viewers expect from our media, which has been proven for higher ratings.

Enlisted has a built-in fanbase: The fans of Enlisted are loyal and vocal (as anyone monitoring the @YahooScreen twitter account can attest) and have demonstrated their dedication. They appealed to Fox to give the show a better chance and they donated to Wounded Warrior Project to demonstrate their commitment to what Enlisted represents. They stuck with the show through schedule changes, and when the show was removed from the broadcast schedule, they organized viewings and tweet-athons to watch the show anyway. After cancellation, the remaining episodes aired on Sundays in June at 7p eastern and 6p central - and the numbers stayed steady. I repeat: Viewer support never wavered, to the point that they watched the show in the summer, on Sundays, at 6:00p. The only thing left is to give the show an opportunity to grow its fanbase, which providing a home and accurate marketing will accomplish.

It has support from military members and families, including the Army Times. It also needs to be mentioned that Nielsen doesn't track viewers living in military barracks housing. Based on social media, we know the audience and fanbase for Enlisted is already larger than Nielsen ratings have captured.

Viewership numbers are strong: Maybe not the Nielsen listing. But there has to be more to it than some chart reflecting "Nielsen viewers"  - a mythical person that you never actually meet in life. Here's how I know that viewership must be pretty decent - Enlisted episodes continue to be made available for streaming and VOD. I've spent time re-watching episodes and ads for those episodes get longer. Episodes that expire in their run come back to the listing a few weeks later. Entire runs are extended for availability by a few months. More ads are incorporated.  I review the Fox OnDemand listing every so often, and Enlisted - a cancelled show - has remained as an offering, with a very high episode count, currently until the network relaunches its fall schedule. I am not seeing that same showing for other Fox shows, cancelled or those with vocal support from the network. What I've witnessed for the past four months strongly suggests that Enlisted is financially viable for the network and show distributors, which means that viewership is there. It has to be. Additionally, an Enlisted behind-the-scenes initiative - a mobile app for iPhone users - is being used for research for additional financial opportunities (i.e. hey app users - did you love the content enough to pay for it?). Also, the show's audience created such a strong presence on social media that the show attracted two corporate sponsors (potentially at a time when the show wasn't even on the broadcast schedule).  The audience for the show must be larger than how the television industry currently measures it.

Social Media and Fan Relations: The creative team and cast actively engage with the fans and audience for Enlisted, plus they encourage discussion around all feedback. Enlisted comes equipped with cast members, writers and production team who have demonstrated competency and dedication in social media relations. Willingly. Because they love the show they are creating and they respect the show's audience.

Enlisted has support from television critics: I'm not getting into content/episode analysis because it has been covered wonderfully by professionals, including:

Les Chappell for A.V. Club

Alan Sepinwall for Hitfix

Maureen Ryan for Huffington Post

VyceVictus, an Active Duty Service member and Veteran, for Badass Digest

Additional Thoughts: Enlisted is a show that cultivated a very passionate following in a very short timeframe. There is a vibrant community on Twitter who organize viewing parties and tweet-athons to prospective networks/services, and get crafty to both celebrate and promote the show. I'm not sure that anyone believes the chances of another network or service picking up Enlisted for additional seasons are very strong. But they tweet. They are trying. Because when a show is as good as Enlisted, you gotta try.

It made it to air as a midseason show and was confidently placed on Friday nights with very little promotion, after an initial marketing trailer - from the previous summer - received a poor response from prospective fans. The trailer was cut without the creative team's input but the show runners and cast executed a fan relations social media plan that was successful in getting prospective fans to give the show a chance.

I started watching Enlisted because I was a fan of a couple of the actors involved in the show. It quickly became the highlight of my week for any tv, films or reading consumed. A couple months in, the show was pulled from the Fox schedule and I realized that a valuable part of my week was missing. Enlisted made me laugh out loud, and true enjoyment and entertainment- a reason we watch tv, movies or plays - offers a break from the stresses of life and a chance to share an experience with others. So I started re-watching episodes. I've never re-watched tv episodes before, at least not without a multi-year break. 

I find that I keep describing Enlisted as "strong" which isn't exactly helpful. Here's the deal - I have watched episodes of this show numerous times. At first, because I just plain enjoyed it. And later, in an effort to show viewership support. The reason I can keep watching it - it holds up. The writing is incredibly assured, the performances are fantastic and it's lovely to look at. 

The writing is strong because the characters are fully realized and the jokes hold up. The performances are fantastic because the cast possesses talent (across the board - no weak links) and they are each dedicated and present in their work. Each time I watch, I pay attention to a different performance and it always pays off - everybody is doing something that renders a different take on the scene, completely in character, and it is just wonderful. It's lovely to look at because the show doesn't have a visual template, its composition isn't static. It employs various lighting techniques and camera-work. The look of the various storylines contribute to the mood and atmosphere for that episode or story. It's a sitcom that isn't afraid to go cinematic in style and substance (see: the closing of "Alive Day") and it's a dramedy that loves and respects broad humor.