Newsgroup: it.fan.tv.friends
Titolo: Decima stagione: è ora di smettere?

Contra Costa Times
Sun, Jan. 05, 2003
CHUCK BARNEY: AS SEEN ON TV
Friends don't let friends overstay their welcome
IMAGINE, for a moment, this scary scenario: You have just thrown a wild bash
at your house and now you're zonked and ready to pack it in. All your guests
have departed -- except for six annoying stragglers.
Over in the corner is a ditzy blonde named Phoebe, strumming a guitar and
singing really lame songs. Sitting on the couch next to you are Ross and
Rachel, who just won't stop babbling on and on about their "perfect" baby
daughter. In the kitchen, gluttonous Joey has his face jammed in the fridge
and is sucking down your last imported beer. Splayed across the carpet are
Monica and Chandler, making out like animals and blocking your view of the
TV.
"Why oh why," you think to myself, "won't these people go home and leave me
alone?"
Ever since NBC decided to fork over the big bucks to extend the life of
"Friends," this bleak metaphorical vision keeps popping into my head.
Another season of TV's top-rated sitcom? OK, whatever, but can somebody
please tell me when it will all end?
Don't get me wrong. Since the show launched in 1994, I've been a loyal fan.
Even now, when Thursday evening rolls around, I'm usually right there,
joining television's most attractive sextet for a few laughs.
Still, I had to roll my eyes when news broke that NBC granted the show its
third extension in as many years by agreeing to pay as much as $10 million
an episode to bring "Friends" back for a 10th season. Obviously, it's yet
another show-biz decision dictated by commerce rather than creativity, and
I'm starting to worry that our pals will be slurping their Central Perk
lattes through denture plates before issuing their final goodbyes.
So here's another opportunity to ponder the age-old question: When is it
time for a successful TV show to call it quits? Does it get off the stage
leaving viewers craving more? Or does it milk every ratings point until fans
feel bored and let down?
Unfortunately, most good series -- even great ones -- behave like
punch-drunk boxers who hang around way past their prime. For every
"Seinfeld," a show that retired as the reigning Nielsen champion in 1998,
there are dozens of shows that wheeze and sputter and spit up blood before
making it to the final bell.
"The X-Files" is perhaps the most glaring recent example of the latter. It
should have ended after its eighth season, or even its seventh, but it went
on through nine, despite the defection of star David Duchovny and plots that
had grown moldy and stale. As for comedies, NBC's "Mad About You" is a
perfect example of a show that overstayed its welcome. The network paid
series stars Paul Reiser and Helen Hunt $22 million each for one last-gasp
season, and it proved to be a money-wasting disaster.
Of course, it's often difficult to know ahead of time exactly when a good
show will go bad, because the time frame varies. The whimsy of "Ally
McBeal," for example, was wearing thin by the end of its second season (it
retired after five). On the other hand, "Law & Order," a venerable crime
drama that doesn't rely on ongoing story lines and one that routinely
shuffles its cast, actually has increased its ratings in recent years (it is
now in season 13).
Truth be told, many of TV's most popular shows are already well past their
freshness dates. The list includes, among others, "ER," "Frasier," "NYPD
Blue," "The Drew Carey Show," "Dawson's Creek," "The Practice" and "That
'70s Show." Yet these series keep going and going and going -- not because
of their creative vibrancy, but because either they've become a
hard-to-break viewing habit and/or their networks don't have anything better
to put in their place.
At times, I wish American television was more like its British counterpart.
In England, shows are given short shelf lives by design. They are typically
written to last two or three seasons and then it's on to something else.
Implement such a system in Hollywood and it would keep producers from
getting fat and lazy and, hopefully, keep the fresh creative blood flowing.
And now back to "Friends," which makes for an intriguing case study. By
delving into a 10th season, it will have outlived many of TV's landmark
comedies, including "Seinfeld" (nine seasons), "The Cosby Show" and "I Love
Lucy" (eight each) and "The Mary Tyler Moore Show" (seven). With that in
mind, you'd think that "Friends" can't defy gravity much longer.
But despite ubiquitous exposure through syndicated reruns and home video
packages, the show still reigns as TV's top-rated current sitcom. And, in
some respects, it remains on a creative high. Yes, "Friends" has had some
lulls over the years, but last season it enjoyed a remarkable resurgence and
captured its first Emmy for best comedy. As Entertainment Weekly once
proclaimed, "Friends" is the sitcom gift that keeps giving.
So you can't blame NBC for clinging to "Friends" with all its might -- even
though the network will lose money on the deal. The renewal was crucial for
a number of reasons, not the least of which is that NBC has failed
repeatedly in recent years to produce and groom a suitable heir apparent.
"Friends" also anchors NBC's most successful -- and profitable -- lineup on
Thursday nights, and it helps to promote other shows. As a signpost series,
it holds a similar sort of prestige for NBC as "The Sopranos" does for HBO,
and it will be interesting to see if HBO similarly will push to keep its
touted mob series rolling after next season, despite creator David Chase's
claims that it will conclude.
Of course, the "Friends" producers also claimed that this would be their
show's final season, and members of its high-profile cast in recent years
have repeatedly hinted that it's time to move on. Obviously, they didn't
have Jerry Seinfeld's type of artistic courage when NBC waved the greenery
under their noses.
In a way, that's too bad. After last season's highly watched birth-night
cliffhanger, I had the impression that the series was steaming toward some
major character developments, and that this season would build momentum
right up through a compelling closure. It seemed like the perfect time to
wrap everything up.
But even before the renewal announcement, some of this season's plots seem
strained. And now that the writers are scrapping script outlines for what
were supposed to be the final episodes, you have to wonder if the show will
run out of gas as they bide their time and stretch to keep it going.
Yes, "Friends" may be the sitcom that keeps on giving, but even the best
shows can give only so much.
Chuck Barney is the Times TV critic. He can be reached at 
925-952-2685
 or
cba...@cctimes.com
.
www.bayarea.com/mld/bayar...862130.htm

 Friends don't let friends overstay their welcome
PARDON ^___^;;;

"Friends," this bleak metaphorical vision keeps popping into my head.
e poi tutto tranquillo, mi pare :)