Ah, yes, I remember that one now; I liked it quite a bit.
As far as I'm concerned, all the good episodes were in the first three seasons. At the time, they were trying to subvert a lot of what made a standard sitcom. I admired their avoidance of standard sitcom plots. Then they just stopped caring, and, like so many show before it, lived years longer than it was actually entertaining.
That does suggest an advantage to the British practice of not having fixed numbers of episodes per season, and having short series. On the other hand, there are enough examples of great episodes showing up after a series has mostly lost its spark (e.g., Buffy's musical episode) that I'd be wary of adopting it as a rule.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
momijizukamori
Re: On a tangent...
Date: 2004-04-02 01:58 pm (UTC)As far as I'm concerned, all the good episodes were in the first three seasons. At the time, they were trying to subvert a lot of what made a standard sitcom. I admired their avoidance of standard sitcom plots. Then they just stopped caring, and, like so many show before it, lived years longer than it was actually entertaining.
That does suggest an advantage to the British practice of not having fixed numbers of episodes per season, and having short series. On the other hand, there are enough examples of great episodes showing up after a series has mostly lost its spark (e.g., Buffy's musical episode) that I'd be wary of adopting it as a rule.