The Real Lance Brown

It didn’t seem super-easy to find a simple list of the Twitter accounts for the cast members of NBC’s “Community”, and since I was already following them all, I took a moment to make a Twitter “List” featuring them. You can follow it here: Tweets from the Cast of Community (@FreelanceLance/cast-of-community). The accounts of the actors are listed here: Cast of “Community” on Twitter.

I will keep it updated with additional cast members as they become available. Please let me know if you know of any additions by posting a comment below. (I don’t know all the actors’ names off the top of my head, but I don’t have accounts for the Dean, or Vaughan, or Britta, or Danny Pudi a.k.a. Abed. Or Chevy Chase, but I’m not holding my breath for that one.)

NOTE: NBC has also created Twitter accounts for the characters that the actors play; this list does not have those accounts, nor @NBCCommunity‘s, nor that of Dan Harmon, the creator of “Community”, or anyone else behind the show. It’s just the actors–currently: Joel McHale, Allison Brie, Donald Glover, Yvette N. Brown, and Ken Jeong. I thought it could get too crazy and unfocused if I opened it up to all the crew and “creatives” behind the show. But you should follow Dan Harmon too probably, right?

Two notable events in last night’s Colbert Report regarding capitalism/the free market and walking the walk vs. talking the talk:

1. At the end of his interview with Michael Moore about his new film Capitalism:  A Love Story, which focused on how capitalism is an evil, which causes the rich to do all they can to take money from the poor, Stephen Colbert asked Moore, “What happens if the market decides it doesn’t need a  ‘Michael Moore’ anymore?”

Moore’s smiling response? “Well, as long as people keep going to see my movies, I get to keep making them. That’s how it works.” (Colbert: “That’s how this show works too.”)

Early in the interview, I flashed on the irony of how capitalism (such as it is today) has made Michael Moore into a global megastar millionaire, and that every eye that has ever viewed any moment of his TV/filmography had that moment brought to it by (what we currently call) capitalism. Moore could not have played into that irony better with the way he closed that interview if I had scripted it myself–saying that his justification in the market is the fact that he keeps putting (paying) people in the seats.

(A Michael Moore fan might be defensively thinking, “Well what was he supposed to say?” He could have said any number of things, like: “I think that important messages like this should be out in the market, even if there isn’t financial support for it. So if the free market decided it didn’t need a ‘Michael Moore’ anymore, I would hope the federal government would have enough insight to provide funding for me to be able to get these ideas out anyway.” Isn’t that an approximation of what he supposedly actually believes in? Because it’s the total opposite of what he said.)

Just why does Michael Moore use the free market to get his ideas out there? Am I wrong to think there’s a conflict there?

2. A funny thing came up at the end of the main guest interview with author A.J. Jacobs. (Michael Moore was not the official guest on the show–he came in for a mid-show “issue” interview, which Colbert occasionally squeezes into the show.) Jacobs wrote a book about how he has tried all sorts of experiments on himself, one of which was to try “radical honesty” for 6 months. Colbert prodded Jacobs to give a “radical honesty” thing about him (Stephen Colbert), to which Jacobs replied, “Well I was a little sad that I got the small green room, while Michael Moore got this huge suite…” To which Colbert replied, “Thank you for coming!” (his standard guest sign-off line).

(Jacobs fades off…he may be saying “huge suite” or “huge, sweet…” It adds up to the same.)

Watch the interview here:

Jacobs’s behind-the-scenes leak illustrates that Michael Moore isn’t the only anti-capitalist who embraces free market values. In the structure of The Colbert Report, the mid-show interview/segments are subordinate to the main interview or segment at the end of the show. In most cases, the mid-show interviews are shorter than the one at the end of the show–they are more like the length of one of his other mid-show segments.  The way Stephen introduces the people also show that the real guest of the show is the person at the end. The mid-show guest is introduced most often like so: “With me tonight to discuss…” While the end-of-show guest is always introduced with: “My guest(s) tonight…”

A.J. Jacobs–clearly less recognized, valued, and exalted by the free market than Michael Moore–was  in fact Stephen’s “guest”, while Moore was merely “with [Stephen] tonight to discuss…”. Yet valuable Moore and his movie actually got more time than lesser-known Jacobs and his book. And as we now know, Jacobs also got the short straw when the green rooms were handed out.

It’s easy to see why Colbert and the show’s other producers would decide to invert their show’s guest hierarchy to accommodate Michael Moore–he is a giant global celebrity with a likely-to-be-blockbuster film coming out. But frankly, if not for the free market’s “valuation” of Moore, there would be no justification for him treating Jacobs that way. At least none that I can think of.

In case it’s not obvious, Colbert is bowing to the free market twice in this case. Once, by heeding the market’s insistence that Moore is more important than Jacobs, and at the same time, catering to the market’s signaling that more Moore will bring him (Colbert) more viewers. It’s a win-win-win all around, really, except for the fact that both Colbert and Moore conspired to short-change the small-voiced little guy (A.J. Jacobs) in favor of giving succor to the anti-god they both claim to despise. (Moore openly, Colbert in his subverted fake-conservative way.)

I guess I’m finding the concept of millionaire anti-capitalists a little hard to get my head around.

Reality TV Website.com – Reality TV Applications Page 1

CHANNEL ISLAND – Nothing to show but 53 shows

Lame duck ‘Arrested Development’ will expire 47 episodes short of the 100 mark. And, apparently, that spells failure.

By Scott Collins, Times Staff Writer

The strange fate of “Arrested Development” reminds us once again of the odd up-is-down commercial imperatives of American network TV.

Variety reported Tuesday that creator Mitch Hurwitz has decided to bail on the sitcom about a grandiosely strange Orange County family, which won an armload of glowing reviews, a best comedy Emmy after its first season and whispered reverence from Fox executives, who referred to the show the same way nuns might speak of a medieval relic associated with the Virgin Mary. Unfortunately, what “Arrested” could never do is get arrested. Not nearly enough viewers ever tuned in to justify all the heroic attempts to save the show, which is now evidently dead beyond all doubt.

“The fans have been so ardent in their devotion and in return … I’ve given everything I can to the show in order to try to live up to their expectations,” Hurwitz told Daily Variety. “I finally reached a point where I felt I couldn’t continue to deliver that on a weekly basis.”

In the annals of Hollywood, “Arrested” will go down as a tragedy — not because it was a creative flop (its small but intense legion of fans say quite the opposite) but because it committed the unpardonable sin of crapping out after three seasons. To TV executives, that is just about the worst thing a series can do, because it means that the studio has spent big money to keep alive a show that in all likelihood will never produce serious cash in syndication, where it takes about 100 episodes, or almost five seasons, to prosper.

Does that make any sense? Only to accountants at the TV studios. The economic model that American viewers are stuck with tends to encourage painfully incremental storytelling among dramas and formulaic situations in comedies. Why? So the shows can reach the vaunted 100 mark more easily. Producers lean toward that magic number whether creativity dictates it or not. For all the talk of the death of network comedies, precious little thought has been given to changing the financial formula.

This is the not the way it is everywhere. Consider the BBC. One of its most highly regarded sitcoms, John Cleese’s landmark farce, “Fawlty Towers,” produced precisely 12 episodes. Twelve! That’s one-half of an American season. BBC’s “The Office” produced a grand total of 14 episodes. The NBC version, in its second season, has already made roughly twice that many.

“Arrested” lasted 53 episodes. Only in America would that be considered an early death.

—
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.

This is another great example of a journalist who wants to write the AD is dead story so bad that he damages his craft in the process.

Check out the first sentence: “It now looks as if ‘Arrested Development’ is officially dead.

If it was officially dead, it wouldn’t “look like” it was officially dead. There would be no need for equivocation. It’s kinda like saying “I usually always do such-and-such.”

And note the gradual lightening of the show’s status as the article goes on. In the title, it’s the end of Arrested Development. No way to misinterpret that, right? But then the first sentence is “it looks like” it’s officially dead. (Michael: “Wait, you mean he is dead, or it just looks like it?” Literal Doctor: “No, it just looks like he’s dead. He’s got blue paint all over him or something.”) And then by the third paragraph, we’re down to “it now seems highly unlikely the show will get another season.”

By the end of the article, the show is renewed, and outlasting The Simpsons. (Just kidding.)

A+E Interactive: The End of “Arrested Development”
by Charlie McCollum

It now looks as if “Arrested Development” is officially dead.

Just days after sources said that a deal to move the Emmy-winning comedy from its old home at Fox (which pulled it off the air earlier this year) to Showtime was all but finished, show creator Mitch Hurwitz pulled out over what were reportedly creative and financial differences. Hurwitz confirmed his departure in interviews late Monday.

Imagine Television and 20th Century Fox, the comedy’s producers, could go ahead with “Arrested” minus Hurwitz. But since Showtime entertainment president Robert Greenblatt has said repeatedly he wouldn’t take the series unless Hurwitz was involved, it now seems highly unlikely the show will get another season.

Since making its debut in fall 2003, the often-brilliant satirical take on the lives of the Bluth family of Orange County has been widely viewed as television’s best comedy. It won the Emmy for best comedy in 2004 and was nominated again last season.

But the series never found an audience, despite heavy promotion by Fox after its Emmy win and again last fall. (This is one case where you can’t blame the network for not backing a good show.) At the end, “Arrested” was attracting barely 5 million viewers a week and often finished last in its time period.

—
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.

Variety.com – Hurwitz takes a hike

‘Arrested’ creator bails as showrunner

By JOSEF ADALIAN

“Arrested Development” creator Mitch Hurwitz says he will not be continuing with the series, throwing a major — likely fatal — monkey wrench into attempts to keep the Emmy-winning laffer alive for a fourth season.

Series producers 20th Century Fox TV and Imagine TelevisionImagine Television had agreed on a deal to move “Arrested,” previously on Fox, to Showtime — assuming Hurwitz was willing to come back. In the end, however, a mix of creative and financial concerns has prompted Hurwitz to move on.

“The fans have been so ardent in their devotion and in return … I’ve given everything I can to the show in order to try to live up to their expectations,” Hurwitz told Daily Variety on Monday in a telephone interview from GothamGotham. “I finally reached a point where I felt I couldn’t continue to deliver that on a weekly basis.”

Nonetheless, Hurwitz said he put off making a final decision on his involvement so Showtime and 20th could talk about a possible deal.

“Of course, if there was enough money in it, I would have happily abandoned the fans’ need for quality. But as it turns out, there wasn’t,” he said.

Indeed, Hurwitz and 20th have long been at odds over finances, sparring over everything from the show’s budget to Hurwitz’s own compensation. The two sides were unable to come to terms on an overall deal last year, and while creative concerns were clearly at play in Hurwitz’s decision, coincoin may have been a key factor, insiders said.

Hurwitz said he had briefed most of the show’s cast about his decision, as well as some of the writers. He also talked with exec producer-narrator Ron HowardRon Howard, who asked Hurwitz if he would be willing to continue as a consultant on “Arrested” should 20th and Imagine find a network willing to continue the skeinskein without Hurwitz.

“I said I’d be happy to do that, but that as showrunner, I’ve gone as far as I can go,” he said.

Showtime entertainment toppertopper Bob Greenblatt made it clear in January that Hurwitz’s participation in the show was essential to a deal (Daily Variety, Jan. 20). With Hurwitz out of the equation, Showtime is no longer a viable home for “Arrested,” insiders said.

It doesn’t help that one of Hurwitz’s key deputies, exec producer Jim Valleley, also says he won’t do the show without his boss. “We couldn’t do the show without Mitch Hurwitz, and I wouldn’t want to be the guy who tried,” Valleley said, who called the apparent end of the show “heartbreaking.”

Hurwitz said he had lunch with Showtime entertainment chief Bob Greenblatt even though he was leaning against continuing with the show. “He was actually very persuasive in telling me how much he believed in the show. I walked away thinking, ‘Maybe,’ ” Hurwitz said.

Despite word of tension between Hurwitz and 20th, scribe said the studio and its sister net deserve credit for having produced and aired three seasons of the show.

“I can honestly say I’m appreciative. They put a lot of money into this, and I put a lot of my life into this,” he said.

He also hinted that while “Arrested” may have run its course as a TV show as far as he’s concerned, he would be interested in reviving the franchise as a feature film.

Reps for 20th and Showtime declined comment. One person familiar with the studio’s thinking, however, said fans of the show shouldn’t write an obit for “Arrested” just yet, noting 20th is the studio that revived “Family Guy.”

(Denise Martin contributed to this report.)

—
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.

This article is sloppy in its reporting…another of many to try and report the death of the showtime deal, though there is reaon to believe it could still live.

ABC 4 – “Arrested Development” is a No Go on Showtime

Arrested Development creator Mitch Hurwitz says he is exiting the show, which quashes a deal to air the Emmy-winning series on Showtime.

A deal was in the works with 20th Century Fox TV and Imagine Television to air the series on the premium cable network, but it was contingent on Hurwitz coming along, Daily Variety reported Tuesday. …

I’m archiving this article, but the original at E!’s site has a lot of links to articles covering the various developments mentioned in the article.

Unfortunate Development for “Arrested” – Mar 28, 2006 – E! Online News

by Sarah Hall

A new development may keep Arrested Development off the air for good.

Series creator Mitch Hurwitz announced his decision to quit the Emmy-winning comedy Monday, dealing a blow to fans still holding out hope that the canceled Fox show might be revived on another network, Daily Variety reports.

The move by Hurwitz was not entirely unexpected. E! Online’s TV columnist Kristin Veitch reported last month that the executive producer was “hesitant” about sticking with the series, despite a tentative deal in place to move it to Showtime.

Though series producers 20th Century Fox TV and Imagine Television had hammered out an agreement with the cable network, it was forged on the understanding that Hurwitz would be continuing to script the various misadventures of the Bluth family.

However, the writer told Variety he had reached the end of the line as far as Arrested Development was concerned.

“I’ve given everything I can to the show in order to try to live up to [the fans'] expectations,” Hurwitz told the trade. “I finally reached a point where I felt I couldn’t continue to deliver that on a weekly basis.”
“hurwitz”

He said he held off on making a final decision to give 20th Century Fox and Showtime time to reach a potential deal but ultimately had to move on due to a combination of creative and financial concerns.

“Of course, if there was enough money in it, I would have happily abandoned the fans’ need for quality. But as it turns out, there wasn’t,” he said.

Hurwitz said he had briefed most of the show’s cast and writers about his decision. He said executive producer Ron Howard asked him to consider serving as a consultant on the show if 20th Century Fox and Imagine figured out a way to continue it without him.

“I said I’d be happy to do that, but that as showrunner, I’ve gone as far as I can go,” he told Variety.

In a statement, 20th Century Fox offered a teensy bit of hope. “While there are no plans to resume production at this time, we know all too well from our experience with Family Guy…that anything is possible,” the company said, referring to its resurrection of the irreverent ‘toon after the show’s success in reruns and on DVD.

The tragically underrated series about a dysfunctional Orange County, California, family debuted in 2003 to critical acclaim but never registered with viewers, despite winning the Emmy for Outstanding Comedy Series in 2004.

Last month, only 3.3 million viewers tuned in for what Fox billed as a season finale, but what was most likely the series finale for Arrested Development.

Despite his defection from the show, Hurwitz left fans with one final straw to grasp, hinting to Variety that he may still be interested in adapting the series to the big screen.

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.

Arrested Development Creator Quits

March 28, 2006 – In a very depressing bit of news for my fellow Arrested Development fans, series creator Mitch Hurwitz has decided not to return to run the series, despite Showtime’s offer to pick the show up. This move very likely means that the chances of the series continuing are over. For months now there has been a lot of speculation about the negotiations with Showtime for the beloved but ratings challenged series to move to the cable channel from its previous home on Fox. Many reports had also noted that Hurwitz was feeling burnt out and might not want to continue on, and that without him, the possibilities of Arrested continuing were slim.

Hurwitz has now confirmed to Variety his decision to leave the series. There have reportedly been some arguments over money issues between Hurwitz and 20th Century Fox, who produces Arrested, and financial aspects may have played a part in Hurwitz’s decision. However, more than anything, Hurwitz said he simply felt unable to give his all to the series anymore. Commenting on the loyal following the show has, Hurwitz told Variety, “The fans have been so ardent in their devotion and in return I’ve given everything I can to the show in order to try to live up to their expectations. I finally reached a point where I felt I couldn’t continue to deliver that on a weekly basis.”

While the article notes that executive producer/series narrator Ron Howard has asked Hurwitz to remain connected to the show as a consultant should it continue without him, the chances of that happening seem extremely unlikely. Showtime head Bob Greenwalt had previously stated that he would not want the series without Hurwitz. Even more damaging to the show finding another home is executive producer Jim Valleley, who plays a key creative role in the series, saying he wouldn’t continue on the show without Hurwitz remaining too. Sad to say, but it’s likely time to really say goodbye to the Bluth family. While Hurwitz’s decision is an extremely frustrating one for those of us who’d love the show to continue, the idea of it going on without him also seems highly questionable.

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.

Arrested Development is a no-show

With show creator Hurwitz bailing, hopes grow dim that Showtime will pick up acerbic sitcom.

For Arrested Development creator Mitch Hurwitz, the show mustn’t go on.

Hurwitz confirmed Monday that he has decided against continuing on with the series because he feels the show has reached its creative end. Showtime president Robert Greenblatt said previously that the cable channel was interested in picking up the series, but only if Hurwitz was involved as the show runner.

Hurwitz told Variety that he would consider continuing on as a consultant, and that he would be interested in making a feature film of the series.

“I said I’d be happy to do that, but that as show runner, I’ve gone as far as I can go,” he said.
…