Coming Attractions

Here are some things you can expect in the months ahead on That’s Entertainment! 

 

Situation Comedy Tuesdays

Two And A Half Men (Starts February 2024) 

After that, look forward to…
Curb Your Enthusiasm, Arrested Development
My Name Is Earl, The Office, and more…

 

Wildcard Wednesdays

Ask Jackson (once every other month)

The Literary Society of Broadway (monthly)

And much more… 

 

Musical Theatre Mondays

Wildcard Series (The third Monday of every month)

 

 

Last Updated: February 21, 2024

80 thoughts on “Coming Attractions”

    • Hi, R! Thanks for reading and commenting.

      I have no plans at this time to dedicate Sitcom Tuesday coverage to any show that premiered after 1999 (that’s where the internal contract with myself currently ends), but if I do ever move into the 21st century (which, theoretically, is appealing), I will consider the series!

  3. Since the final season of Newhart is coming out on DVD in March, do you have any plans to cover it sometime in 2017?

    • Hi, Charlie! Thanks for reading and commenting.

      I haven’t seen confirmation of the March release yet, but it fits the timetable that’s been set by the last few seasons, so I hope and assume you’re right! As for scheduling the series here, unless a planned show with a similar longevity falls out at the last minute, I don’t foresee breaking momentum and reversing course to cover NEWHART until I’m finished discussing all the shows premiering in the ’90s that strike my fancy.

      But NEWHART will be covered here eventually — that’s a promise!

  4. I’d love to see a Wildcard Wednesday devoted to GOOD & EVIL, the last of Susan Harris’ three serialized comedies. (And I did my duty and voted for THE JOHN LARROQUETTE SHOW.)

    • Hi, Red Herring! Thanks for reading, commenting, and voting.

      Regarding GOOD & EVIL, your interest in the series is duly noted (again). As previously mentioned, it remains a possibility, but neither in the foreseeable future nor of pressing interest. Frankly, I can think of no occasion within the next 18 months in which discussing another Susan Harris series makes sense, but you never know; stay tuned…

    • Hi, Track! Thanks for reading and commenting.

      My current intent is to follow the order listed above, which will take us through the summer of 2018.

  7. I was doing a broad search yesterday on Raymond Hitchcock. Was so delighted with the Hitchy Koo recordings. More!

    • Hi, Joanne! Thanks for reading and commenting.

      I’ve no plans for any more HITCHY KOO posts at the moment — but stay tuned for a REALLY exciting Musical Theatre Monday next week!

    • Hi, Lisa! Thanks for reading and commenting.

      The ’70s/’80s version? No plans at this time. The current version? Ditto.

  9. Hi Jackson,

    Apologies if you’ve answered this elsewhere but I was wondering what you think of King of Queens and do you intend to cover it here?

    Many thanks.

    • Hi, Jeremy! Thanks for reading and commenting.

      Possibly — but it’s just the opposite: I won’t cover any series currently producing new installments, so if I do look at ROSEANNE here, it’ll have to be a while from now.

  12. Hi! I have been reading your sitcom analysis for years now, since I stumbled upon your posts when you were covering “The Dick Van Dyke Show”. I went back and read everything you’d done prior to that and have since kept up with Sitcom Tuesdays (and many related Wild Card Wednesdays) ever since. In fact, your current posts on Friends has made me start watching my DVDs of the series once again (I just started season 2 this morning!)
    Our taste in sitcoms are very similar and you’ve covered almost all of my favorites over the years. One truly missing is “The Andy Griffith Show”, which I figured you didn’t cover because it’s a single camera series, but I know you’ve covered other single camera shows, such as Bewitched, Gilligan and Green Acres. However, I recently stumbled across a post from several years ago stating you weren’t covering TAGS because you didn’t yet own the entire series on DVD. Now that it’s available to stream on several platforms, will you be going back to cover? Also, you’ve grown so much in your analysis over the years and your posts are much more detailed that they were when I first started following you. I know you said you’ll eventually go back and revisit your “I Love Lucy” posts when you’re done covering all the others, but will you redo other early series as well? I’d love to see a more analytical, detailed analysis of another of my very favorites, “The Dick Van Dyke Show”.
    Also, I swear you covered “The Munsters” at one point – or did I make that up? I can’t seem to find the posts when I Google for them, but I really thought I remembered reading them! Also, what about “I Dream of Jeannie”?
    Thanks for all the time you put into your blog! I really have enjoyed it!

    • Hi, Derek! Thanks for reading and commenting.

      I have since acquired THE ANDY GRIFFITH SHOW and it’s definitely a candidate for future coverage, as are THE MUNSTERS (which I have not yet discussed) and I DREAM OF JEANNIE. I make no promises, but they’re all on my radar. Also, I’d love to do an eleventh hour revisit of THE DICK VAN DYKE SHOW (and THE MARY TYLER MOORE SHOW) in addition to I LOVE LUCY, but that’ll be a matter of scheduling when the time comes to finish things up here.

      Thanks for your kind words — I really appreciate them, and I’m so grateful for your interest and support!

  13. Hi Jackson. I love reading your sitcom critiques. I am a big fan of British sitcoms. Would you ever consider covering British TV in addition to American TV? What about dramas in addition to comedies? Also, I wondered if you plan to cover any of the following shows: Get Smart, MASH, Everybody Loves Raymond.

    • Hi, David! Thanks for reading and commenting.

      I thought in the past about covering a few Britcoms, but aside from FAWLTY TOWERS, that’s yet to occur. Truthfully, there are so many American shows to discuss (and they’re inherently my preference), that I don’t feel I have enough time to cross the pond in a meaningful way.

      I’ve done a few dramas (PEYTON PLACE being the most notable) and don’t have any plans to do any more. Because they’re not as hard to write as comedies, it’s more difficult to offer nuanced discussion. Additionally, covering them requires a lot of time and effort and they’re never popular. Thus, I’ve found that dramas are a lose-lose for this website and don’t jibe with what I have to do to ensure original material here every week.

      M*A*S*H has been discussed several times before in the comments on this blog. I don’t feel capable of making an 11-week commitment to a series that I find more heavy-handed and dramatic than character-driven and comedic.

      GET SMART is a possibility when we circle back to shows from the ’50s, ’60s, and ’70s that I neglected in my first pass. I can’t say it’s a favorite, but the Leonard Stern connection makes it hard to ignore.

      Now some good news for you: EVERYBODY LOVES RAYMOND is one of my favorites and this blog was established with the intention of making the series one of its tentpoles. Look for it sometime within the first half of 2019.

      • Thanks for replying! I completely understand your feelings about MASH. I like the show but it often feels more like a drama with comedic moments than a true sitcom. I look forward to your posts about Raymond, one of the funniest shows of the 90s.

    • Hi, Paul! Thanks for reading and commenting.

      I have not yet committed to featuring shows that premiered in the 21st century, but if/when I do, THE OFFICE would be a staple of its era’s coverage here.

    • Hi, Jacob! Thanks for reading and commenting.

      I have no plans to cover HOME IMPROVEMENT or HOW I MET YOUR MOTHER at this time, but stay tuned for THAT ’70S SHOW in late 2019!

    • Hi Jackson,

      I can’t wait to read your critique of Everybody Loves Raymond, which is my second favorite 90s sitcom after Frasier. Do you plan to cover either Cybil, Scrubs, or Will and Grace?

      David

      • Our focus is going to shift back to the ’50s and ’60s in the second half of next year, and the remaining ’90s sitcoms I plan to feature are the ones I feel are essential — including those listed above, THAT ’70S SHOW, and possibly BECKER.

        I have decided not to cover CYBILL, and any consideration for SCRUBS depends on when/if I get to series that premiered in the 21st century; as of right now, I have no plans. However, I’d very much like to discuss WILL & GRACE… once the current revival concludes.

      • I mostly enjoy it for the performances from Ted Danson, Hattie Winston, and Shawnee Smith. I’m able to consistently laugh while watching it as well. I know it’s not the most popular series, but I consider it to be underrated.

        • Thanks for the endorsement. I haven’t yet been able to cultivate enough of an interest in the ensemble (I think it’s Danson’s show and nobody comes close — contrast it against FRAISER, for instance, and see why this is a problem) to enjoy the series unconditionally. But I haven’t given up on it yet. I do feel as if at least one other show from the era needs to be discussed after THAT ’70S SHOW to round out our look at turn-of-the-century multi-cams, so we’ll see…

  18. Hey Jackson,
    I thought I read where you were going to review “3rd Rock From The Sun”. I really enjoyed this show. any chance it might show up down the road?

    • Hi, Smitty! Thanks for reading and commenting.

      Yes, I considered giving full coverage to 3RD ROCK earlier this year before deciding against it. I put the change-of-plans notice up for a month on this page, but never said it anywhere else.

      Incidentally, I was asked for some general thoughts about the series several weeks ago in the comments of a post. Here’s what I wrote about it — in relation to THAT ’70S SHOW — then:

      Thanks for the great question. I think 3RD ROCK FROM THE SUN is a similarly laugh-laden, fun watch — with characterizations that are actually pretty specific and well-defined (and well-cast).

      However, I think THAT ‘70S SHOW has a better time with story because it’s got a more low-concept premise. The most ostentatious thing is its ‘70s setting, and while we *do* want this fundamental part of its identity reinforced on a weekly basis, the nature of the series’ simple design makes it possible to do this while supporting the characters, keeping them at the fore.

      3RD ROCK, on the other hand, has a high-concept premise, and in order to fulfill its promise to the audience, it has to be story or idea-driven on a regular basis, and as a result, character matters less. It’s therefore a less ideal form of sitcom to me — situational, but not because of character.

  20. Jackson, hi. I have been looking at past entries of your blog all year and enjoy them very much, particularly how you believe that what was funny in 1970 can still funny today.

    I can’t be the only person who has asked this. Will you be getting to “Barney Miller,” and also say a word about Danny Arnold’s two hospital sitcoms and “Joe Bash”?

    Thanks

    • Hi, Paul! Thanks for reading and commenting — and for your kind words.

      I’ve not made any plans yet for Sitcom Tuesday coverage beyond our return to the 1950s and ’60s, but I’ll let you know if/when I do!

  21. Jackson, hi.

    Thank you for getting back quickly.

    While I have your attention, I do have two sitcom grails I am looking for which I want to ask about.

    [message removed by editor]

    • Hi, Paul — I don’t have the episodes you’re seeking and please be advised for the future that this is not a venue for trading. Your comment, which included personal information, has also been edited as a result.

    • It was the most requested ’60s sitcom when I polled readers. But brace yourself — I much prefer BEWITCHED and it will be impossible when discussing JEANNIE not to compare the two, to the latter’s detriment.

  24. Is GET SMART still on your radar for the second half of the ’60s?

    Another series from that era (which I mostly do not like) that has grown on me greatly is HOGAN’S HEROES.

    • Hi, Guy! Thanks for reading and commenting.

      I do not believe any ’60s series after THE BEVERLY HILLBILLIES (that we have not already discussed) is necessary for coverage here, so I am actively debating how much longer to remain in this decade. There are lots of shows I could look at, but few that I want to. At this time, GET SMART is on my radar, but not my to-do list.

  25. Jackson, hi. Before leaving the ’60s, have you ever considered covering some of the TV reunion movies in the with original cast members, or at least the ‘Gilligan Island’ trio? Thanks.

    • No, but check out this month’s recent GILLIGAN’S ISLAND post’s comment section for my thoughts on the three reunion movies.

  26. Just one other thing. Do you believe if a write-up on GILLIGAN’S ISLAND sister series, IT’S ABOUT TIME, is warranted? The question if it deserves its reputation as one of TV’s worst sitcoms can be examined. Thanks

    • I’ve considered it. But ultimately, covering shows that are knowingly inferior is not a good use of my time. And more specifically, I’d never discuss a rotten show simply because it’s rotten. Believe it or not, I really want to love everything featured here!

  27. happy Thanksgiving Jackson. With CAR 54, THE MUNSTERS and THE ADDAMS FAMILY covered this year, any plans for F TROOP when we hit 1965?

    • Hi, Hal! Thanks for reading and commenting — and Happy Thanksgiving to you!

      No. I considered highlighting both F TROOP and HOGAN’S HEROES as possible examples of the mid-1960s’ genre-spoofing trend, but I’ve ultimately decided that GET SMART is the best written ambassador for this phenomenon and makes the most sense to cover, given everything that we’ve previously discussed. It will be our final ‘60s sitcom in this cycle, before we revisit the ‘70s. Stay tuned…

  30. I am looking forward to your coverage of GET SMART. It’s my favorite ’60s sitcom and one of my all-timers.

    And, wow, after many years of holding off on it, it’s great to see that you’ll be tackling BARNEY MILLER. I know one of the reasons you had an aversion to it was that it was too seriocomic for your tastes, but I believe the laugh-to-pathos ratio on BARNEY MILLER is much higher than it is for many shows, and the writing, performances and characterizations are superb across the board.

    I feel just the opposite about GOOD TIMES, your other ’70s coming attraction. There’s a good case to be made that it’s the worst series to come out of the Norman Lear stable.

    • GET SMART is not one of my favorite ‘60s sitcoms and certainly not an “all-timer.” I am primarily covering it because of Leonard Stern. I hope your expectations are adjusted accordingly — I will be optimistic, but not exorbitantly.

      As for GOOD TIMES, I studied the series in a professional capacity outside of this blog, so including it here takes advantage of that work. And by the way, any stable that includes fare like HOT L BALTIMORE, A.K.A. PABLO, and SUNDAY DINNER (among many others) is certainly not going to count GOOD TIMES as the worst of its output. But that should go without saying.

      And regarding BARNEY MILLER, my thoughts on the show in relation to the material we were covering in 2014/2015 remain unchanged, but the context surrounding my standards as they apply to this blog has — our figurative aperture has widened, and there’s more room now. Stay tuned…

  31. Hello! I’m very impressed by your website.

    “Frank’s Place” was a comedy-drama series starring Tim Reid that ran in 1987 with only 22 episodes. Have you ever seen it? I loved it dearly. I’d enjoy hearing your thoughts about it.

    • Hi, Sean! Thanks for reading and commenting.

      No, I think THE FACTS OF LIFE is a relatively noxious effort, and based on last month’s survey, where less than 3% of responders bothered to mention the series as something they’d like to see here, there’s no popular demand to encourage suffering through coverage for purely rhetorical purposes (and likely no worthwhile offerings to show for it). However, stay tuned for the final GOOD TIMES essay, where there’ll be a pertinent FACTS OF LIFE shoutout…

      As for other ‘80s comedies, I’m still examining my options and taking into consideration the results of that survey. I don’t plan to make any more announcements until after BARNEY MILLER wraps. Stay tuned…

      • Thank you for responding. I’ve been reading your sitcom essays for a very long time and I think you do excellent work. Thank you for all the effort you put into each season.

  33. Hi,
    I’ve been reading your sitcom posts for years and have really enjoyed your writings and analyses of some of my favorite shows. Do you plan to revisit any sitcoms that you’ve already covered, for example, The Honeymooners? You featured the Classic 39 season back in 2013, and at the time your posts were shorter than they are today. I would love to see you highlight that season of The Honeymooners again but using the longer more detailed writings that you employ on your current posts.

    Thanks!

    • Hi Paul — I have no plans to go back and redo coverage of any series entirely, with the exception of I LOVE LUCY, which will bookend this blog when I’m ready to call it a day.

      However, I use the RERUN series (and the new CLIP SHOW entries) to share updated commentary on previously discussed shows. I did so for THE HONEYMOONERS’ Classic 39 in January, even sharing new picks for my favorite episodes: See here.

      Also, this 2020 essay on THE PHIL SILVERS SHOW offers a lot of insight into how I would talk about THE HONEYMOONERS today, and it’s the basis for my above RERUN piece. See here.

      Subscribe to this blog using your preferred email address so you never miss a post!

  34. Jackson, hi. If the public wants “Laverne & Shirley” well…okay.

    Do you think a write-up on “The New Odd Couple” is possible after the 70s? In 2018 I finally digitalized my own BET repeats recorded 30 years ago now. I again saw firsthand that the series wasn’t exactly “The Munsters Today.” Wilson and Glass had genuine chemistry in my opinion.

    Thanks

    • No, I don’t think it would be merited by quality or revealing in our study of the genre.

  35. I have a strong feeling a particular 80s comes finally going to be covered but I’m going to wait till next week

Comments are closed.