Column: Why are TV’s two big fantasy shows so epically humorless?
Why are TV’s two big fantasy shows so epically humorless?
While no one can say they didn’t enjoy the second episode of “Game of Thrones”–it was one of the best episodes of any TV series–and while the “Thrones” season finale was a bit of a letdown because the “Game of Thrones” fans didn’t get what they wanted, the show’s other half, “True Blood,” is going to need a few more episodes. “Buffy the Vampire Slayer,” “Sons of Anarchy” and “Angel” have had their hooks into the world of TV’s other showbiz-ish fantasy series.
And then there’s “The Walking Dead” and “Dancing with the Stars.”
“Dancing with the Stars” won the Emmy for best variety hour for its season finale, and “The Walking Dead” is going to win the award for best drama series again.
But the two shows don’t quite gel.
“Dancing With the Stars” has a much more complicated history than its “Wizard of Oz”-ish competitors show, but the “Wizard” approach was to create a story around celebrity dances that’s a bit different from past “Dancing With the Stars” seasons. The show is based on the premise that the stars are the winners of the “Dancing With the Stars” and are therefore the ones whose dancing skills best demonstrate their performance on the show.
That’s why the “Wizard of Oz”-ish season of “Dancing With the Stars” seems so easy. Every week the stars spend time on camera practicing their routines, and they always do it to the music of the song “The Wizard of Oz.”
Every season some of the dancers will fall into the “Dancing With the Stars” mold, and some of the stars will develop a real show.
“We do have a lot of great athletes, and we’ve got a lot of great dancers come out of all backgrounds, both male and female,”