>But everybody is having a field day pointing out what is
>'missing' from AD, and for me that's the only component that
>lacks. I love the show. I don't really care to see a 'very
>special' episode of Arrested Development. But the fact still
>remains that I don't care one iota for what ultimately happens
>with these characters. And I do think that some form of
>emotional investment is necessary for a long-running sitcom.
>The show itself doesn't have to be sentimental, but I think
>you'd have to care *a little bit* about these characters if
>you're going to let them into your living room every week for
>an extended period of time.

First of all, from the lloks of the ratings, this isn't going to be a long-running sitcom, but that's neither here nor there. Second, I've always found the idea of "emotional investment" in characters extremely overrrated. I've never bought into, the argument that in order to enjoy a movie, film, book, whatever that there must be a character that you can identify that or feel sympathy toward.

>Thanks for not singling me out... But using words like
>'obsession', 'detractors' and 'harping', this still comes off
>as a loaded statement. Don't file me into the Haters column. I
>love this TV show.

Well, I shouldn't have replied directly to your response. My feelings were more of a reaction to the general expressions of this thread, not to yours in particular. However, I do have a prior history of arguing with you over stupid shit, so I felt I should honor that.

>Yikes, you're kind of stacking the deck there, aren't you?
>I've only seen a handful of ELR, but there appears to have
>been some decent 'moments' on the show. But I'm calling foul
>on the Home Improvement mention. That's no fair.

Okay, Home Improvment was a low blow; I apologize. I never did get how ELR lasted for so long. The humor never really struck a chord with me. It was the basic wacky family sitcom. Maybe it's because I hate Patricia Heaton.

>I'm not talking about a Last-5-Minutes-of-Full-House brand of
>sitcom sentimentality here. I'm talking about characters that
>feel like real people that you can care about. I haven't
>gotten there with AD yet. That show is a hilarious
>acquaintance, but not necessarily a friend yet, you know?

I think there are moments of genuine feeling in AD that people are either forgetting or ignoring: A lot of the stuff between Michael and George Michael, and the scene at the end of season #2 where George gives his speech about sacrifice for the family and heading to jail (of course it was all bullshit, but effective at the time). And I'd also like to reiterate the Seinfeld example, which had no sympathetic characters, yet is generally loved by all but the contrarians around here.

>Well what you are talking about there is a never-changing
>status quo. Which pretty much exists in all sitcoms. I don't
>see what this has to do with anything else you've mentioned
>though. But it's funny you should bring up The Simpsons,
>because I think that show has had some really sentimental
>moments over the years! And you can't tell me you don't care
>about the characters. Come on man. You know everytime Homer is
>in the doghouse you can't wait for him and Marge to make
>amends. Admit it.

I guess I was trying to make the point that the Simpsons is mostly just concerned with being funny. It's not working as much as it used to, but that's whatever. And I've never liked the sentimenal episodes of the Simpsons (I like to call them the Lisa Episodes), they only time they ever work is when they're finely tempered with good doeses of humor (e.g. the Homer soul-mate episode).

>And what about Futurama?! Some of those episodes were
>downright Kleenex-worthy.

Yeah, I got seriously broken up with the Fry's pet dog episode. And Fry rearanging the stars to get Leela to love him was pretty touching. But I never was never emotionally invested in Fry. He was always a doofus.