Let's Talk sitcom III: Scrubs
If I had to choose one sitcom to pick as the king among them, I would have to choose Scrubs. It's the show I would like to have written, it's absolutely the one I often imagined myself participating in, in one role or another. Then again, I don't think you can select a single sitcom as the best in general, no one of these shows I love is perfect and neither is Scrubs which will become apparent below.
Also, I'm biased, Scrubs is "my" show in terms of age - in its run I'm a teenager and a young adult. Me and my friends adopt the show as ours and during the years we quote stuff from the series endlessly. "Eagle", "Brown bear" "So's your face" et cetera are staples within the banter in our group. My way of looking at the shows original run on air is undeniably through rose tainted glasses - it wouldn't really be fair to all the others if this would be cleared out as the best among them, but it is indeed my personal favorite, no question about that in the end.
Still. Scrubs are getting a lot right and its way of approaching the sitcom genre should in my mind be something of the prime example to study for those wanting to roll out a new one to the world. Scrubs were one of the first, if not the first, shows during this era to ditch the laugh track. Today this is commonplace, but I can imagine that some producers or other higher ups of the production were nervous about this decision. Will the humor actually carry through? We have talked a lot about humor in this series already, but one factor not mentioned is that humor and laughter is a distinct social activity. The laughing track is such an effective aid to a comedy show because it helps the viewers to be a part of a social circumstance, regardless in what setting they are watching the show from in the physical world, and thus have a clearance to laugh. Without a laughing track every form of humor runs the risk of fizzling out when transferred through the medium of television.
So there was a real risk involved in the decision to not use this particular device but when all is said and done we can see that it was a very wise one. Without the track the show is free from trying to deliver jokes and punchlines every third interaction to keep the live audience engaged or not making the artificial track sounds out of sync. Instead they could explore other, more subtle forms of comedy and most importantly - they could allow the sitcom to not be funny at all at times spending time exploring other themes and emotions. Yeah, Scrubs is the only sitcom I can think of that was as touching and deeply moving as it was genuinely funny. Several times during its run they succeeded with the feat of having the audience rolling with laughter at one moment only to be punching them in the gut with sincere emotions the next. You could legitimately and regularly find yourself laughing and crying with the show in a way I still would say is rather unique among TV-shows in general. I haven't seen them all, though, but this defining trait of Scrubs is its true mark of nobility among its peers.
*
The way the show is structured is that we are following J.D, a freshly baked doctor at a University Hospital in a generic city in California (it's never stated explicitly where they are within the show) from the perspective of his own head. This is important to remember, apart from some episodes where we are inside another character's head, everything told is the content of the main character's diary. This allows for a story telling style that doesn't have to care a whole lot about realism while still not driving off from being a show centered about life and reality writ large. J.D is also a dreamer, an easily distracted escapist of sorts and this allows the show to use a vehicle for its humor in the form of the absurd day dreams and fantasies of J.D regarding the situations we are following. This form of absurd and almost clownish-like humor is in my opinion almost completely absent in all comparable shows. Yes, Scrubs manages to be unique among its peers in more ways than one and while this doesn't make it automatically perfect, this achievement makes the show undeniably a very brightly shining milestone in the evolution of the sitcom- genre. Scrubs showed the genre that you don't have to be afraid to be a weird, serious, silent show while still being just generally funny and keeping true to your designated light- weight format.
*
Done with praise we have to talk about the issues with the show as well. The flanderization process of the show is almost difficult to stomach. To a degree this has to be intentional by the writers and producers of the show and I'll return to that later on but I still have problems overcoming how drastically Scrubs change both its tone and its treatment of their characters over the years. Scrubs is one of very few shows in general which have their absolute best years right from the start. The first two seasons the tone of the show is like a drama with comedy sprinkled in, a successor in spirit of Ally Mcbeal if you will (An excellent show in many ways, but distinctly not a sitcom so I'll have to wait to talk about that one) where we follow a slightly deranged persons mind in a serious setting but the content of the persons mind makes everything that happens naturally tilt to the absurd and comical. The characters are at this stage realistic, grounded and diverse in their traits. Quickly thereafter the show changes it's tone and becomes an absurd comedy where the characters are caricatures instead of anything that has a resemblance to realism. The shift is completed already at the roll out of season five and in the first few episodes of that season feels like a completely different show. As said, the shift is so rapid it's very likely to be a conscious choice by the creators but to me it's an odd one. I highly prefer Scrubs: the funny drama contrasted to Scrubs: the dramatic comedy.
When it comes to the characters this can most clearly be seen with the sidekicks to the main group. Aside from the Janitor (which always has been consciously used as a wild card, more on that later) all of them go from funny portrayals of real typical roles of a hospital to plain comic relief. Todd, the sexist surgeon, Doug, the poor screw up, Ted, the depressed lawyer and more goes from believable and tolerable stereotypes to progressively more and more tiring joke devices that simply isn't interesting in the long run. The main cast is better, it's only Jordan, the partner of Perry Cox, that really gets a one-sided bad hand by the writers - going from a cool, vibrant and somewhat scary woman to a cliche-styled bitch that never gets any engaging story lines to work with.
Still. Scrubs are getting a lot right and its way of approaching the sitcom genre should in my mind be something of the prime example to study for those wanting to roll out a new one to the world. Scrubs were one of the first, if not the first, shows during this era to ditch the laugh track. Today this is commonplace, but I can imagine that some producers or other higher ups of the production were nervous about this decision. Will the humor actually carry through? We have talked a lot about humor in this series already, but one factor not mentioned is that humor and laughter is a distinct social activity. The laughing track is such an effective aid to a comedy show because it helps the viewers to be a part of a social circumstance, regardless in what setting they are watching the show from in the physical world, and thus have a clearance to laugh. Without a laughing track every form of humor runs the risk of fizzling out when transferred through the medium of television.
So there was a real risk involved in the decision to not use this particular device but when all is said and done we can see that it was a very wise one. Without the track the show is free from trying to deliver jokes and punchlines every third interaction to keep the live audience engaged or not making the artificial track sounds out of sync. Instead they could explore other, more subtle forms of comedy and most importantly - they could allow the sitcom to not be funny at all at times spending time exploring other themes and emotions. Yeah, Scrubs is the only sitcom I can think of that was as touching and deeply moving as it was genuinely funny. Several times during its run they succeeded with the feat of having the audience rolling with laughter at one moment only to be punching them in the gut with sincere emotions the next. You could legitimately and regularly find yourself laughing and crying with the show in a way I still would say is rather unique among TV-shows in general. I haven't seen them all, though, but this defining trait of Scrubs is its true mark of nobility among its peers.
*
The way the show is structured is that we are following J.D, a freshly baked doctor at a University Hospital in a generic city in California (it's never stated explicitly where they are within the show) from the perspective of his own head. This is important to remember, apart from some episodes where we are inside another character's head, everything told is the content of the main character's diary. This allows for a story telling style that doesn't have to care a whole lot about realism while still not driving off from being a show centered about life and reality writ large. J.D is also a dreamer, an easily distracted escapist of sorts and this allows the show to use a vehicle for its humor in the form of the absurd day dreams and fantasies of J.D regarding the situations we are following. This form of absurd and almost clownish-like humor is in my opinion almost completely absent in all comparable shows. Yes, Scrubs manages to be unique among its peers in more ways than one and while this doesn't make it automatically perfect, this achievement makes the show undeniably a very brightly shining milestone in the evolution of the sitcom- genre. Scrubs showed the genre that you don't have to be afraid to be a weird, serious, silent show while still being just generally funny and keeping true to your designated light- weight format.
*
Done with praise we have to talk about the issues with the show as well. The flanderization process of the show is almost difficult to stomach. To a degree this has to be intentional by the writers and producers of the show and I'll return to that later on but I still have problems overcoming how drastically Scrubs change both its tone and its treatment of their characters over the years. Scrubs is one of very few shows in general which have their absolute best years right from the start. The first two seasons the tone of the show is like a drama with comedy sprinkled in, a successor in spirit of Ally Mcbeal if you will (An excellent show in many ways, but distinctly not a sitcom so I'll have to wait to talk about that one) where we follow a slightly deranged persons mind in a serious setting but the content of the persons mind makes everything that happens naturally tilt to the absurd and comical. The characters are at this stage realistic, grounded and diverse in their traits. Quickly thereafter the show changes it's tone and becomes an absurd comedy where the characters are caricatures instead of anything that has a resemblance to realism. The shift is completed already at the roll out of season five and in the first few episodes of that season feels like a completely different show. As said, the shift is so rapid it's very likely to be a conscious choice by the creators but to me it's an odd one. I highly prefer Scrubs: the funny drama contrasted to Scrubs: the dramatic comedy.
When it comes to the characters this can most clearly be seen with the sidekicks to the main group. Aside from the Janitor (which always has been consciously used as a wild card, more on that later) all of them go from funny portrayals of real typical roles of a hospital to plain comic relief. Todd, the sexist surgeon, Doug, the poor screw up, Ted, the depressed lawyer and more goes from believable and tolerable stereotypes to progressively more and more tiring joke devices that simply isn't interesting in the long run. The main cast is better, it's only Jordan, the partner of Perry Cox, that really gets a one-sided bad hand by the writers - going from a cool, vibrant and somewhat scary woman to a cliche-styled bitch that never gets any engaging story lines to work with.
Elliot deserves a mention as well, but her change is not as much a flanderization as it is a shift in her personality that in my mind is a mistake by the writers. She goes from an insecure, neurotic, nervous but incredibly funny and sweet wreck of a young woman to becoming more and more distant and shallow as her career develops. I'm not sure how to phrase it without sounding like a prick, but it is like the writers failed with writing a strong and successful woman which also happens to be funny. Later Elliot is just there, independent and successful but very hard to connect to. I sincerely don't like her, all the others of the main group manage to grow and develop while still being somewhat funny messes to watch and follow along with but Elliot not so much. Early Elliot is a character to fall in love with, she's just so precious and fun, but later Elliot is a piece of cardboard of a character allowed to make tonnes of questionable decisions (the handling of her young fiancee Keith, her decision to go private and some more) without getting her ass handed to her. She's untouchable and because of that she becomes deeply unfunny, all in my opinion
Talking about the characters I must take some time to praise Perry Cox. This amazing doctor is likely my favorite character of all sitcoms to date. In both the two styles of the show Perry is shining through as an anchor for what the show wants to do. The actor John C. McGinley does a re-eh-eh-eally amazing work handling the character and especially its defining trait of ending up in endless sarcastic monologues must been a true work load to make consistently funny. Yet, it is nailed to the tee by both the writers and McGinley. Regardless if the show wanted to portray Cox in a realistic way or more as a comical device McGinley stays true to the soul of Cox and just makes it work. In my opinion it's unmatched both within the show as in comedy in general. Cox rules, that's just the truth, and I hope he is enjoying that statement, you handsome bastard, you...
I think it must be mentioned in the context of the shows evolution that in its 7th season a sever writers strike struck Hollywood and Scrubs was one of the show that got highly affected. This season of the show was essentially butchered and can't be judged with the same standard as in ordinary circumstances. Maybe the creators wished to take yet another direction with the show at this critical stage of a shows age - "will you go into second gear or will you slow down and wrap things up?" And Scrubs never got a true choice. Season seven is a mess, strictly speaking, with severe continuity errors (Bob Kelso retires only to show up as usual in the very next episode) a very weak, if any at all, overarching plot and with a comedy style with no real stringency to it anymore and this leads into an eighth season that is nothing special more than that the team manages to create a finale that hits it out of the park. The final episode is everything Scrubs ever wanted to be and that fact just makes my hard judgement of the latter part of Scrubs much easier to bear. It doesn't matter too much that I disagree with the creators over their creative ambitions and decisions with the show, it's earlier run is TV history - a style of writing that has no equivalence anywhere as I see it and its later part might be frustrating if you care - a bit too much maybe - about the characters but the show still funny and they still manage to make deeply moving stories also with the butchered stumps of characters they carved out for themselves.
Another thing, something I very recently discovered on my latest re-watch.
Talking about the characters I must take some time to praise Perry Cox. This amazing doctor is likely my favorite character of all sitcoms to date. In both the two styles of the show Perry is shining through as an anchor for what the show wants to do. The actor John C. McGinley does a re-eh-eh-eally amazing work handling the character and especially its defining trait of ending up in endless sarcastic monologues must been a true work load to make consistently funny. Yet, it is nailed to the tee by both the writers and McGinley. Regardless if the show wanted to portray Cox in a realistic way or more as a comical device McGinley stays true to the soul of Cox and just makes it work. In my opinion it's unmatched both within the show as in comedy in general. Cox rules, that's just the truth, and I hope he is enjoying that statement, you handsome bastard, you...
I think it must be mentioned in the context of the shows evolution that in its 7th season a sever writers strike struck Hollywood and Scrubs was one of the show that got highly affected. This season of the show was essentially butchered and can't be judged with the same standard as in ordinary circumstances. Maybe the creators wished to take yet another direction with the show at this critical stage of a shows age - "will you go into second gear or will you slow down and wrap things up?" And Scrubs never got a true choice. Season seven is a mess, strictly speaking, with severe continuity errors (Bob Kelso retires only to show up as usual in the very next episode) a very weak, if any at all, overarching plot and with a comedy style with no real stringency to it anymore and this leads into an eighth season that is nothing special more than that the team manages to create a finale that hits it out of the park. The final episode is everything Scrubs ever wanted to be and that fact just makes my hard judgement of the latter part of Scrubs much easier to bear. It doesn't matter too much that I disagree with the creators over their creative ambitions and decisions with the show, it's earlier run is TV history - a style of writing that has no equivalence anywhere as I see it and its later part might be frustrating if you care - a bit too much maybe - about the characters but the show still funny and they still manage to make deeply moving stories also with the butchered stumps of characters they carved out for themselves.
It's difficult to be perfect, Scrubs didn't succeed in that task, but they still managed to be very, very good.
*
What about season 9? There is no season 9 of Scrubs and there never was.
Moving on.
A fan theory
*
What about season 9? There is no season 9 of Scrubs and there never was.
Moving on.
A fan theory
Another thing, something I very recently discovered on my latest re-watch.
It's possible, if intended by the creators or not I have not the slightest clue of, to see the show as a journey into the mind of J.D as in we are going deeper into its layers season by season. This would explain why the characters behaves and are displayed a certain way only to almost make a 180 flip in the latter part of the show. Take Bob Kelso as an example, he is a realistic character that is unpleasant to the borderline of evil in the beginning. He is greedy, a lazy doctor, disrespecting his wife openly and in the end of the show he is just a generally good guy dealing with a job where tough decisions necessarily takes a toll on you - An older Perry Cox with the same values and statures. What if this contrast is due to J.D's change of mind and that he has been an unreliable narrator to us of who Bob Kelso is? As an inexperienced intern he could only see bad stuff with Kelso, buying into the narrative of Cox in its entirety but as he got more experienced he got able to sort out all earlier impressions and see Kelso from a more honest light where he is a harsh sort of old style doctor, yes, but not evil itself incarnated as often were the impression in the first few seasons.
The drastic change of tonality can also be explained through this perspective. As we enter deeper into the mind of J.D reality gets more and more skewed. The first drama-styled seasons are portrayed this way because we are in the shallow territory of his mind and gets a rather objective, realistic view of the events happening around J.D but later on we have been submerged in the absurdity that is the mind of J.D and the characters cannot avoid being over the top silly and comical because that is how J.D sees them in his head. J.D is a hopeless dreamer and an escapist and whereas we got glimpses of this absurd outlook on the world in the beginning we as viewers are not allowed to escape from it in the later seasons of the show.
The drastic change of tonality can also be explained through this perspective. As we enter deeper into the mind of J.D reality gets more and more skewed. The first drama-styled seasons are portrayed this way because we are in the shallow territory of his mind and gets a rather objective, realistic view of the events happening around J.D but later on we have been submerged in the absurdity that is the mind of J.D and the characters cannot avoid being over the top silly and comical because that is how J.D sees them in his head. J.D is a hopeless dreamer and an escapist and whereas we got glimpses of this absurd outlook on the world in the beginning we as viewers are not allowed to escape from it in the later seasons of the show.
This would also explain why Elliot shifts so much, in the beginning J.D is heads over heels in love with her but later on he is forced to become more and more distant. Yes, they are still becoming an item in the end but it's level headed and serious and the portrayal of Elliot in J.D:s mind perhaps must be more strict than how he treats anybody else because she is so central, yet alien compared to his guy lover Turk, to him. I don't know, I mostly speculate. Again, this is likely not intended by the creators but I like the "fan theory" because it gives a proper framing to stuff within the show which without a frame becomes all too jarring and close to annoying.
I would like to speak about the Janitor connected to this. The Janitor is a character that is treated as an intentional wild card by the writers. The viewer doesn't get much information about him and the things we do get also get contradicted shortly thereafter by other "facts" and allusions about the guy. The Janitor is anything you want him to be and this gives an excellent opening to create fan theories as the one above. The only main thing confirmed by the team is that they initially intended him to be a ghost only J.D could see and interact with but Neil Flynn was so brilliant in his performance they ditched the idea in favor of opening the character up to more interactions among the cast from season two and on.
Since this is the case I like to see it this way. The show is indeed narrated by J.D from the perspective of his diary but this content is edited by the Janitor (he has the keys to J.D's locker and is frequently seen reading his diary). He is in charge of the story and how it is told and as he gets more and more acquainted with the content he takes more and more liberties with how he is presenting the story. Thus, J.D is always a mad man of a loser regardless how successful he becomes in his career and his impressions and the shenanigans going on in the hospital becomes wilder and wilder as the show moves on. It's not a fact, it's just a freaky fan theory of mine, but I personally wish it to be true.
I would like to speak about the Janitor connected to this. The Janitor is a character that is treated as an intentional wild card by the writers. The viewer doesn't get much information about him and the things we do get also get contradicted shortly thereafter by other "facts" and allusions about the guy. The Janitor is anything you want him to be and this gives an excellent opening to create fan theories as the one above. The only main thing confirmed by the team is that they initially intended him to be a ghost only J.D could see and interact with but Neil Flynn was so brilliant in his performance they ditched the idea in favor of opening the character up to more interactions among the cast from season two and on.
Since this is the case I like to see it this way. The show is indeed narrated by J.D from the perspective of his diary but this content is edited by the Janitor (he has the keys to J.D's locker and is frequently seen reading his diary). He is in charge of the story and how it is told and as he gets more and more acquainted with the content he takes more and more liberties with how he is presenting the story. Thus, J.D is always a mad man of a loser regardless how successful he becomes in his career and his impressions and the shenanigans going on in the hospital becomes wilder and wilder as the show moves on. It's not a fact, it's just a freaky fan theory of mine, but I personally wish it to be true.
You'll be the judge in the end.
Comments
Post a Comment