Jack's Television Show

[Roman]

My wife recently bought me a DVD of 5 of Jack's television shows from the 1950s. I found them interesting and entertaining but, still, somewhat disappointing. For me, the gold standard for 1950s comedies are I Love Lucy, The Honeymooners and the Burns & Allen Show. Jack's shows were just not up to that standard.

While I'll concede that it may not be fair to judge Jack by just five shows, these shows were markedly inferior to I Love Lucy, The Honeymooners, and Burns and Allen in just about every measure, except, perhaps, for their budgets. Three of the five Benny shows were almost verbatim rehashes of earlier radio shows with every joke repeated in the exact way as it had been done on the radio. And the other two shows were an odd mishmash of skits very loosely tied together with a couple of monologues from Jack standing before a curtain.

I think Jack's TV shows, at least if these five were representative, suffered from two major flaws. First, Jack clearly missed the presence of his radio cast. I realize that Dennis and Mary appeared on a few episodes, but their absences, along with the irreplaceable Phil Harris, radically changed the chemistry of the show. Only Rochester was around to prick Jack's pretensions and vanities, and, without Mary, Phil and Dennis joining him, Jack's persona seemed less lovable and more pathetic, even with all the guest star appearances. The second flaw was Jack's failure to seriously retool his show for television. What worked on radio did not automatically translate to TV. A perfect example is an elaborate visual gag on one show where Rochester was seen churning butter, sewing Jack's clothes and pushing Jack in his hammock with the aid of a Rube Goldberg-type contraption. Putting aside the uncomfortable image of Jack resting while ordering Rochester to do all this work, on the radio this would have been done as a quick throwaway gag that would have gotten a laugh because of the ridiculousness and impossibility of the description. Indeed, often as not, Jack would have answered Rochester's description of this with a "Oh, don't exaggerate Rochester." But seeing it acted out on TV took away the impossibility of the description and made it very real - and much less funny.

Both I Love Lucy and Burns & Allen had their roots in radio and both occasionally recycled old radio scripts, but both shows were sharply retooled for the new medium. In I Love Lucy's case, this was necessitated by the wholesale change of cast, especially the addition of Desi Arnaz, and the recognition of Lucille Ball's talent for physical comedy. Burns & Allen did not have the same extensive cast changes and neither George nor Gracie were particularly physical comedians, but the B&A producers quickly recognized that they needed to make some major changes to the radio format for it to work on television. Thus, they inserted the plot device of having George watch the events on his television and comment on the action. More significantly, they changed George's character from one who was frequently annoyed by Gracie's illogic to one who was bemused and took it all as a matter of course. This had the effect of making both George and Gracie more funny and more likeable. On TV, you could understand why George loved Gracie; on radio it was not always so clear.

Now, I'm not saying that Jack's TV shows were terrible by any means. There were plenty of laughs and it was certainly better than most comedies of the 1950s and 60s, such as the dreadful Donna Reed Show, Hazel and Dennis the Menace. But as someone who has greatly enjoyed Jack's radio shows, I just did not find the television shows to be anywhere near as good.

[Roman]

I must admit though that I did enjoy an early show in which Dorothy Shays guested. Jack seemed to have more energy than many of the other shows I saw (I loved the way he would do his sort of power walk as he entered the stage). And I noticed again what a wonderful intimate way Jack had with an audience as he did his opening monologue. There's a very funny visual gag where Jack starts to tell a story and Bob Crosby walks on stage oblivious to Jack and starts right into a song. Throughout Bob's song, Jack looks out at the audience with this pitiable incredulous expression. As soon as Bob finishes his song, bows, and walks off stage, Jack picks up right where he had left off on his joke. The whole show, guests and musical numbers included, was fresh and funny. And, unlike many of the other shows I saw, this one was conceived with television in mind (none of the gags on this show would have worked on radio) and was not a rehash of an old radio script.

[Maxwell]

I think you've gone just a little bit too far in dumping on Jack's TV shows. First of all, that's where my generation first came in contact with Jack, on the Sunday CBS telecasts. I don't remember ever hearing him on radio while he was still broadcasting.

Also, Jack's show was not a sitcom in the same sense as the shows you mentioned. He had a combination comedy-variety-sitcom. It was much like the radio show: one week might be something at "Jack's house." The next might be banter with a guess and a during the last half of the show. For example in the past couple of weeks here in Chicago, they've shown the Bobby Rydell episode (half Rydell and Jack, half Dennis Day stalking Jack) and the golf show with Eric Monti, straight sitcom. This might have had something to do with the number of writers Jack needed to employ.

Here are a few notes about the shows you described in your second post.

Dick Van Dyke Show: Carl Reiner wrote most of the first season. After that most of the writing was done by either Bill Persky and Sam Denoff or Garry Marshall and Jerry Belson. Other writers contributed various episodes during the run of the show. The show was on the air for five years.

I love Lucy used a total of five or six writers during it's six year run.

The Honeymooners filmed episodes were on the air for all of one year. IIRC Jackie Gleason burned through writers on his variety series like a forest fire in a drought.

As for I Dream of Jeannie, a quick seach turned up around 30 writers who contributed to at least one episode during that series 5-year run.

Jack was on for fifteen years.

[Yhtapmys]

I think you've gone just a little bit too far in dumping on Jack's TV shows. First of all, that's where my generation first came in contact with Jack, on the Sunday CBS telecasts. I don't remember ever hearing him on radio while he was still broadcasting.

Also, Jack's show was not a sitcom in the same sense as the shows you mentioned. He had a combination comedy-variety-sitcom. It was much like the radio show: one week might be something at "Jack's house." The next might be banter with a guess and a during the last half of the show. For example in the past couple of weeks here in Chicago, they've shown the Bobby Rydell episode (half Rydell and Jack, half Dennis Day stalking Jack) and the golf show with Eric Monti, straight sitcom. This might have had something to do with the number of writers Jack needed to employ.

My first experiences with Jack's programme are also from television; in fact, when I heard the radio broadcasts much later, I was confused as to who Phil Harris was.

Obviously, Jack's TV show worked because it was on the air for so long - it outlasted top sitcoms and variety shows. And, realistically, Jack's format was so well-known from radio, his audience may not have accepted anything too much of a departure (such as a straight sitcom format). So he didn't really change a lot.

Unfortunately, I don't think some episodes of the show hold up very well. I still love the Christmas show with Mel Blanc, but some of the later ones featuring interviews of musical guests strike me as too talky, with obvious, predictable jokes and an annoying laugh track. I agree if Mary and Phil had been on the show weekly, that would have added something.

It's interesting to see how differently Lucy and Jack used visual comedy when they came to TV. Jack did calm takes while Lucy went the opposite way. Their choices worked for each.

Yhtapmys
"Drive Your Blues Away!"

[Roman]

Maxwell, I think you miss the point of my post. I'm neither denying Jack's television success nor arguing that his TV show was awful. Indeed, I stated:

[quote]I'm not saying that Jack's TV shows were terrible by any means. There were plenty of laughs and it was certainly better than most comedies of the 1950s and 60s, such as the dreadful Donna Reed Show, Hazel and Dennis the Menace.[/quote]

My point was that, at least for me, the TV show was just not as funny as the radio show. The fact that the TV show lasted so long attests to Jack's popularity and showmanship. Today, if a series lasts for 7 or 8 years, it's considered a huge success. Jack's show ran for a dozen years (15 years, if you count his TV specials that ran in the early 1950s). That's an incredible run by any measure.

But to say that Jack's show was exceedingly popular and that it had more than its share of laughs, does not mean that it is improper or wrong to say that, at least for me, the radio show was funnier. After all, while Jack's TV tenure was remarkable, so too was his radio tenure. And it was his long-lasting radio popularity, as high in 1950 as in 1936, that landed Jack his TV show in the first place. Just as Lucille Ball's longevity and high ratings with several television shows from the 1950s through 70s does not prevent me from finding I Love Lucy to be the funniest of her several shows, so too it is legitimate to conclude that Jack's very popular radio show was funnier than his equally popular television show.

[Maxwell]

It's interesting to see how differently Lucy and Jack used visual comedy when they came to TV. Jack did calm takes while Lucy went the opposite way. Their choices worked for each.

Yhtapmys
"Drive Your Blues Away!"

There were a couple of reasons for this. First of all, when Lucille Ball was a contract player at MGM she spent a whole lot of time hanging out with Buster Keaton. A lot of what they discussed rubbed off on her. Jack had no such background. The second reason is that by the time Jack was on TV he was nearly 60 years old. Lucille Ball was about 40.

[shimp scrampi]

This is one of those perennial Jack Benny debates... for me, I think of the entirety of the "Jack Benny Program" as one big phenomenon spanning two different media. Was Jack better on radio than on TV? Sure, if you compare the Lucky Strike era radio series to Jack's 1964-1965 TV season. But what if you compare those comparatively creaky early '30s radio shows to some of Jack's magnificent 1950s TV broadcasts? TV beats them by a mile. But you can also compare different eras of the radio show, and, depending on your tastes, one will come out ahead of the other. And, there are a good handful of "clunker" radio episodes that maybe we tend to overlook in nostalgia as well.

I've never known the radio show without a good sense of what Jack would look like doing those famous pauses and frustrated outbursts, which I learned from TV. I wonder sometimes if the radio show would be the same if I only knew the classic Jack visuals from photos and a handful of his movies. Moreover, when a twenty-year old running radio gag turns up on the TV show, it makes it all that much funnier. For me, each era of Jack's show complements the other.

[Roman]

Maxwell makes an interesting point about Lucille Ball's MGM experience observing Buster Keaton. I've always thought that Red Skelton too must have been a major influence on Lucy. I haven't seen Skelton's movies but many of the characters from his TV show have a close resemblance to Lucy's physical style of comedy. A lot of what made Lucy's comedy work were her facial expressions. Buster Keaton always had such a stoical expression, no matter what was occurring. Red Skelton was probably the master of the elastic, often exaggerated, facial expressions and his bums and hobos were certainly an inspiration for Lucy. I'm sure there were other influences too, perhaps of performers we no longer remember today, but Buster Keaton and Red Skelton were sure two great ones to learn how to do physical comedy.

[Maxwell]

Maxwell, I think you miss the point of my post. I'm neither denying Jack's television success nor arguing that his TV show was awful. Indeed, I stated:

I'm not saying that Jack's TV shows were terrible by any means. There were plenty of laughs and it was certainly better than most comedies of the 1950s and 60s, such as the dreadful Donna Reed Show, Hazel and Dennis the Menace.

My point was that, at least for me, the TV show was just not as funny as the radio show. The fact that the TV show lasted so long attests to Jack's popularity and showmanship. Today, if a series lasts for 7 or 8 years, it's considered a huge success. Jack's show ran for a dozen years (15 years, if you count his TV specials that ran in the early 1950s). That's an incredible run by any measure.

But to say that Jack's show was exceedingly popular and that it had more than its share of laughs, does not mean that it is improper or wrong to say that, at least for me, the radio show was funnier. After all, while Jack's TV tenure was remarkable, so too was his radio tenure. And it was his long-lasting radio popularity, as high in 1950 as in 1936, that landed Jack his TV show in the first place. Just as Lucille Ball's longevity and high ratings with several television shows from the 1950s through 70s does not prevent me from finding I Love Lucy to be the funniest of her several shows, so too it is legitimate to conclude that Jack's very popular radio show was funnier than his equally popular television show.

As far as the number of writers is concerned, I'm still struck by the fact that men like Carl Reiner, Buck Henry, and Sidney Sheldon could write a full half hour comedy, week after week, by themselves, even if, as Maxwell points out, they only did this for the first few seasons. In Reiner's case, if I'm not mistaken, he also directed many of those early shows as well. That's certainly an impressive accomplishment, particularly when you look at the quality of The Dick Van Dyke Show.

None of those people wrote a half-hour show singlehandedly week after week for any period of years. I have to leave in a few minutes, so I only had time to research the Dick Van Dyke Show and Carl Reiner's writing/directorial contributions. There were 158 episodes of that show produced over 5 years. Of those Carl Reiner wrote 33 episodes, and co-wrote 5. Of those He wrote 39 and co-wrote one episode during the first two years, and wrote none of the episodes the final year.

As for the number of episodes that Reiner both wrote and directed: that turns out to be none. Most of Reiner's episodes were directed by John Rich. In fact I can't find one example of a Van Dyke show that Reinder directed.

I did a really quick look at Sidney Sheldon. Number of episodes written in five years: 38. These guys weren't supermen.

[Roman]

Agreed, Reiner and Sheldon weren't supermen. But, nevertheless, writing 38 or 39 episodes solo is still a pretty impressive accomplishment by any measure, especially when you consider that they were also their shows' creators and executive producers (even if they didn't direct any episodes).

[Gerry O.]

It's strange how Jack's TV shows effect me.....Even if I watch several back-to-back episodes in a row, I don't think of it as a "series" due to its lack of format continuity.

Jack's show was very different from half-hour sitcoms like "I Love Lucy", "Burns & Allen" and "The Honeymooners"....and it was also very different from hour-long variety shows like "The Red Skelton Hour" which had the same basic format from week to week (monologue, musical number, guest-star sketch, another musical number, and then the "Silent Spot" pantomime sketch).

Jack's show was never quite the same from episode to episode, so I look at his TV shows more like "mini-specials" rather than a continuous series.
Somehow if I watch each episode on an individual basis and look at it as a separate "one-shot" entity, it makes the shows more enjoyable rather than trying to make each episode "fit" into a series mold.

[Maxwell]

It's strange how Jack's TV shows effect me.....Even if I watch several back-to-back episodes in a row, I don't think of it as a "series" due to its lack of format continuity.

Jack's show was very different from half-hour sitcoms like "I Love Lucy", "Burns & Allen" and "The Honeymooners"....and it was also very different from hour-long variety shows like "The Red Skelton Hour" which had the same basic format from week to week (monologue, musical number, guest-star sketch, another musical number, and then the "Silent Spot" pantomime sketch).

Jack's show was never quite the same from episode to episode, so I look at his TV shows more like "mini-specials" rather than a continuous series.
Somehow if I watch each episode on an individual basis and look at it as a separate "one-shot" entity, it makes the shows more enjoyable rather than trying to make each episode "fit" into a series mold.

That's a good way of looking at it. I've been trying to figure out someone's show to compare it to, even things like the monthly shows Bob Hope did for so many years on NBC television, and none of them is anything like Jack's shows.

They've been rerunning shows here from 1961 and 1962, and the shows don't fit any mold. One week, it's Jack interacting with guest star followed by a sketch. Sometime that sketch is with the guest star (e.g. Jane Morgan), and sometimes not (e.g. Mills Brothers, Bobby Rydell). Sometimes it starts in Jack's house and ends up with the guest star in the sketch (e.g. Raymond Burr). Sometimes it's just a half-hour "sitcom" (e.g. Jack cleaning his attic leading to Rochester imagining if Jack had become a surgeon). That's just a handful of shows taken from the middle of a couple of seasons.

To me that makes the show fresh. I haven't seen most of these since CBN was showing them several years ago, and before that, I probably last saw them when they were first run.

Yeah, the gang is not on most of them with the exception of Dennis Day, who still appears in a few episodes that late in the run, Don Wilson, and Rochester, but if you take the shows for what they are, they were a lot better than most of what was on TV then. (I know because I lived through it.) Maybe that's why Jack's show, although it fluctuated in the ratings more than on radio, still was high in the Nielsen's until just before he went off the air.

[LLeff]

Been meaning to jump into this, but my weeks have been extremely busy. So to address the question of the number of writers Jack had, remember how they divided up the show writing efforts. On radio, two writers would take the first half and two would take the second half. Whether George and Sam or Milt and Tack took the first half varied from week to week. Then the pairs would write together and they'd bring the show together over the first few days of the week.

Hal and Al were brought in when Jack went into television, and were doing a lot of piecing together late radio shows based on prior radio scripts while the other four were writing the television shows. Thus readers of 39 Forever can see how I've often noted that a particular exchange or skit was "heavily borrowed from" some previous date--that's Hal and Al's handiwork.

George, Sam, Milt and Tack started with Jack in the fall of 1943. Hal and Al started in the early 50s. They all, more or less, worked with Jack through at least the mid 60s, and some all the way to Jack's death. George worked with Jack into the very early 70s. Milt worked with Lucille Ball, but still contributed material to Jack. Tack died in the 60s and never worked for anyone else after starting with Jack. Hal and Al are credited with a lot of material during the specials (I just watched "Carnival Nights" from March 1968 a few nights ago, and they're listed as the main writers on that). Hilliard Marks is also listed as a writer on that special, and he did contribute some material, but I don't think of him as a writer so much because of his varying other capacities with Jack (including brother-in-law). There were a few others (e.g., Wedlock and Snyder), but their level of involvement would be considered "rare" compared to the volume from other writers.

So while it is an amazing effort to have one person writing a full half hour, or even 30 of them, I think it's just as amazing to have basically 6 people generating comedy for 30 years for three different media (radio, TV, and stage).