The Moonlighting Theory, or curse as some people call it is a very interesting test in writing television. For those of you who don't know what this is, I will explain.
The theory: When a couple (man/woman usually) with sexual chemistry and tension finally get together in a program, the sexual tension is dissipated, and the show goes downhill because the writers have nothing to fill the gap with.
The theory stems from the 80s TV Series "Moonlighting" with Cybill Shepherd and Bruce Willis. As Maddie and David, they oozed chemistry on screen (despite hating each other's guts offscreen.). The ratings were through the roof. However, when they finally got together in the third season, I believe, the ratings sunk like a stone and the show was cancelled a couple of years later. Now Bruce Willis' rising career and tensions backstage might have been major factors in it as well, but the common belief is that when Maddie and David did the deed, there was nothing else for the characters to do.
This danger presents itself when the romance becomes front and center in the series. Two television series of note recently have had to combat this. Bones and Castle. One series did it pretty well, while the other floundered.
The series that did it well was Bones, mainly because the writers were not afraid of the theory. In fact, head writer Hart Hanson said in 2011 to Adam Bryant of TV Guide:
"I feel like it re-energized the series," "I think it breathes new life into the franchise — into the story engine of Booth (David Boreanaz) and Brenann (Emily Deschanel). The reason we put them together is that it's just been so long. It had to happen. We just could not put it off anymore."The trick, Hanson says, is finding drama to replace the sexual tension.
"We knew we did not want them getting together and breaking up. We didn't want misunderstandings," Hanson says. "So, they're contending with a brand new relationship. 'How together are they?' is a question that needs answering. And how are they going to deal with having a child together? As we started banging out this season, it just gave us so many places to go with story."
So they went about it by offering different challenges. It helped that star Emily Deschanel was pregnant at the time so it gave them an entry into baby land; thus creating a new line of drama. Bones viewers were apparently satisfied because their ratings were not affected, and the show lasted until March of this year.
Castle is a very different story. From almost the beginning, questions were asked about the star couple; Richard Castle (Nathan Fillion) and Kate Beckett (Stana Katic). And it seemed that they were wary of it. Fillion and series creator Andrew Marlowe seemed to mention Moonlighting in some interviews without the vim and vigor that Hanson did for Bones. What ended up happening is that when they did get together, after a lot of theatrics, the writers seemed to try and separate them by different ways and means (non commitment, a new job, lies etc.) The audience did not like that, yet ratings were still solid, as people were determined to root for the couple
But, like the original Moonlighting, behind the scenes tension was bubbling. It was rumored that Fillion and Katic did not get along at all in the later years of the show. Combine that with budget cuts and the last year of the show was marred by the surprise firing of Katic for a potential 9th season. The fans were angry and the show was cancelled at the last minute, leading to a lackluster finale.
When a romance becomes front and center in a show, the clock is started for many writers. Hart Hanson seemed to embrace the challenge, while Andrew Marlowe and company did not. And the results speak for themselves.
So will this "curse" go away? I don't think so because of the natural progression of drama in general. Other shows have handled it well (Psych, Ed) and other shows have fumbled with it a bit (Chuck, The X-Files) It will usually depend on the strength of the writing and the base concepts that each individual program is rooted in.
What are some of your favorite "will they won't they"s. PLease comment
No comments:
Post a Comment