NO LAUGHING MATTER WHY DO NETWORKS CHURN OUT BLAND SITCOMS AND PASS ON EDGIER SHOWS?

Byline: David Kronke Television Writer

Jon Pollack, an executive producer on NBC's new computer-animated comedy ``Father of the Pride'' - one of only four comedies on NBC this fall - offers a sage assessment of network prime-time comedy today: ``The public right now has good radar; when a new sitcom comes out, people expect it to be bad,'' he says. ``That's a real problem. Clearly, audiences are skeptical of comedy right now.''

Much has been made of the lamentable state of the contemporary TV sitcom, but at the same time, late-night and cable comedy shows are thriving on good press and loyal audiences. Comedy Central, for example, produces shows such as Emmy winner ``The Daily Show With Jon Stewart'' - the satirical news program draws a modest million-plus viewers nightly at 11, but it's a fan base that has made its new textbook parody, ``America: The Book'' an instant best-seller - as well as ``Chappelle's Show'' (whose star, Dave Chappelle, pointedly bailed on the networks after enduring their mediocre manipulations), ``Reno 911!'' (which the Fox network shunned) and ``South Park,'' all of which receive far more effusive praise than, say, the prime-time sitcom ``According to Jim,'' which is generally cited as Exhibit A in the network comedy malaise argument.

And yet, the networks - with the exception of this year's Emmy winner ``Arrested Development'' - have continued to air shows closer to ``Jim'' than ``Jon.''

Too many chefs ...

``It doesn't surprise me,'' sighs Lauren Corrao, Comedy Central's head of development, who calls her tenures at Fox and ABC ``one of the reasons I'm back at cable. I don't understand it either. Selling shows to networks was incredibly frustrating; it never ceased to amaze me how the safest choices were the ones that get on the air. We'd create really decent pilots, but they were considered a little too noisy; they didn't appeal to every contingent in the network structure. Everyone wants to create shows that are new and fresh, but when it's time to pull the trigger, no one seems willing to take that chance.

``I was amused and appalled when I first sat in on'' a network meeting deciding on a fall schedule, Corrao admits. ``Everyone had a really important voice - the head of the affiliates, the head of ad sales. These decisions have to come from a creative place, and it amazed me how many voices had to be heard in the making of the schedule. Network presidents want certain shows, but couldn't get them on.''

``Anything decided upon by committee tends to be distilled as it's run through the various filters - sounds like I'm talking about a bottled water company, doesn't it?'' agrees Alan Spencer, creator of the atypically anarchic '80s sitcom ``Sledge Hammer!'' (currently a best-seller on DVD), who calls Corrao the best developer of comedy working in TV today.

``Every time a supposed 'innovative' or 'risky' show fails, network executives have direct evidence against trying anything different,'' Spencer adds. ``It's the main reason they quote chapter and verse from the gospel 'According to Jim.' ''

Robert Thompson of Syracuse University's Center for the Study of Popular Television suggests networks continue to schedule undemanding comedies because those shows ``work for an audience that is half-asleep, half-dead or comatose. They're user-friendly, easy to consume while you're engaged in various things, whether it's preparing your kids' lunch for school, answering the phone or diapering your child. They don't require a lot of engagement. You cannot watch two minutes of one of these and remain confused - these shows practically watch you.''

Besides, Thompson adds, sitcoms have always been formulaic; viewers got spoiled when classics popped up in short order.

``Networks made hits of shows like 'Diff'rent Strokes,' but the bar was so raised by shows like 'Cheers,' 'Seinfeld' and 'The Simpsons' - when you've seen those, it's hard to go back to 'Diff'rent Strokes,' '' Thompson notes.

`` 'Seinfeld' was easy to consume but brilliantly funny; 'Cheers,' same deal. NBC managed to take a genre defined by its lite-ness and lack of ambition and elevate them where they created masterpieces that didn't defy their conventions.''

TV creator (``Beggars and Choosers'') and novelist (the upcoming ``Manhattan Beach Project'') Peter Lefcourt notes that those shows were slow in finding viewers. ``In today's environment, there's no tolerance to develop such shows,'' he says.

A show to root for

Virtually everyone interviewed for this story championed this year's Emmy winner for Outstanding Comedy Series, Fox's ``Arrested Development,'' the saga of a greedy family undone by financial disaster. It deftly balances cable's cynicism and intelligence with prime-time's sentimental streak. When low ratings suggested it would be canceled, Comedy Central's Corrao confesses, ``We talked about how we could afford to make it.''

Lefcourt says, ``When you're about to mourn the fact that TV's given up, 'Arrested Development' stays on the air, almost to make a point - it's like a loss leader to Fox.''

Series creator Mitch Hurwitz acknowledges, ``We're the beneficiaries of the fact that it's been a very fallow period for sitcoms. Had there been a lot of successful sitcoms, Fox might be less inclined to stay with one that's been doing what we've been doing rating-wise.''

Hurwitz attributes his show's acclaim to ``the actors, who make (the characters) lovable, and the writers, who make them hate-able.''

Star Jason Bateman, who plays the family's lone source of sanity, neatly explicates the series' dichotomy: ``These awkward, sincere moments come as a result of how well the writing sets up the ludicrous moments. I did a scene with Michael Cera (who plays his son); we had this sweet moment making breaded cornballs. And from that heart-warming scene was me saying, 'That's a little cornball,' and of course he's rolled a tiny cornball that's just not as big as we rolled them. We get these dramatic moments that all actors want, but then they inevitably pull the rug out. Then you can swallow it.''

CBS' sophomore hit, ``Two and a Half Men,'' also artfully combines sentiment with sophistication in its examination of two brothers, scarred by an unfeeling mother, making a connection through their disparate coping mechanisms.

``We're certainly in a contracting industry, no doubt about it,'' series creator Chuck Lorre notes of network comedy. He adds, ``We have a writing staff of seasoned veterans who certainly know how to grind out treacle, and we also know cruelty for cruelty's sake isn't funny, just cheap. Somewhere in the middle is the truth. To say we know what the audience wants is pandering, so we put on the show we think is funny.

``We're looking to do more than insult humor - there are so many things to watch, it's time to step up and put something worthwhile on,'' Lorre continues. ``The way shows are going, we may not get another chance. The circus is leaving town, so we better put on something we're proud of, regardless of whether we fail or succeed.''

Robert Smigel has contributed to both late-night, cable and prime time. He's best-known for creating Triumph the Insult Comic Dog for ``Late Night With Conan O'Brien'' (Triumph recently released his own hilarious DVD), but Smigel also wrote for Dana Carvey's short-lived ABC prime-time series, which gives him a unique perspective:

``Shows that take risks have the best shot at being the biggest hits, if networks trust them,'' Smigel says. ``You have to lead the audience to have a hit, the way 'Seinfeld' did; that show was never going to catch on right away.

``Just once, it would be nice to see a network back off for one pilot season, forget about micromanaging, and just sign up their favorite artists/writers and give them carte blanche. Just, 'Do whatever you want, here's the money, we'll see you in April.' When you think of how many pilots are bombs anyway, and how many first-year shows bomb anyway, why not take a chance? How much lower could the success ratio be? You just might get one or even two shows that could really make a difference.''

David Kronke, [phone]

david.kronke(at)dailynews.com

CAPTION(S):

4 photos

Photo:

(1 -- cover -- color) OLD WAY NEW WAY

Which direction are TV sitcoms headed?

(2 -- 3) As networks have struggled to strike comedy gold, edgy programs such as ``The Daily Show With Jon Stewart'' (top) and ``Chappelle's Show'' have paid off for Comedy Central.

(4) CBS' ``Two and a Half Men,'' with Charlie Sheen (left) and Jon Cryer, has been one of the few well-received network sitcoms in recent memory. ``We're certainly in a contracting industry, no doubt about it,'' series creator Chuck Lorre says.