Movie Review: Scales: Mermaids Are Real

 *screams horribly while dying in a way that not only is physically impossible but doesn't even make any sense even in the most absurd of sci-fi or fantasy conventions*

What is it? a 92-minute on-the-dot movie...I suspect it's a Direct-to-video movie? But I'm not entirely sure (more on that in the review proper)

Where did it air? I saw it on Netflix but it has since expired off that platform and I wouldn't necessarily know where it jumped to - although it looks like it's almost exclusively on Prime and AppleTV now. Almost, as you can apparently also watch it completely for free, without subscription, on Tubi (and...review spoiler alert, although the opening quote should've been enough of a hint, that's about the absolute most you want to pay for it DO NOT MAKE THE MISTAKE SEVERAL PEOPLE HAVE MADE AS INDICATED ON AMAZON USER REVIEWS  AND ACTUALLY SPEND MONEY TO GET THIS MOVIE ON A PHYSICAL STORAGE MEDIUM)

Who stars in it? Apparently the kid from some movie or TV show or other who says this is the worst film he's ever done (more review spoiler alert) and let's face it, a bunch of no names. Oh, and Morgan Fairchild...let's face it, it really speaks about where she is in her career to really be in a movie like this. Oh, and Nikki Hahn, who you might recognize from the DCOM Adventures in Babysitting! You know, the "100th" DCOM (yes quotes there are relevant)? Oh, and Elizabeth Rohm! From Angel! You're old enough to remember Angel, right? You're old enough to remember the WB Network, right?

Why are we reviewing this? Well it's within our children/teen media mandate-thingie and...also this is some sort of especial writing disaster that deserves comment on (more on this...pretty dang soon, actually)

This movie was written and directed by Kevan Peterson.

I'm bringing that up specifically because, while he's actually a pretty competent director, all things considered...Good Lord he can't write to save his life.

If you're wondering where I've been, it's to....I know I say this literally every massive break like this (which, yes, is a lot) but I've been focusing on my writing career, and also because it was 2020, trying to hide under a rock, but also, the relevant point as to why I bring this up now, listening to this guy on YouTube who calls himself Lorerunner. He calls himself that because in addition to his passion for speedrunning, he also "lore-runs" video games where he pauses and explains all the details of the lore behind the story and setting of the game and even behind-the-scenes details (you know the literal exact opposite of speedrunning, but trust me, it's really good in a nerdy sort of way, which I totally unapologetically unironically dig). He's since expanded this "lore-running" into movies and TV shows where he...well, basically just does exactly what this very blog does just in video format, which granted is also what a ton upon a ton of other YouTube channels do. Hell, although he's mostly known for "lore-running" the various Star Trek shows and movies now to the point where he openly acknowledges that's what the YouTube stats are actively telling him what most of his audience is interested in, he's not even the first to do that by far, openly acknowledging Chuck Sonnenberg's SciFi Debris' influence (and I just want to take this opportunity to brag I knew Chuck from way back in the day, way, way before YouTube was even a thing, thank you very much). But what really sets Lorerunner apart, and what really impresses me about him, is the thoroughness and attention to detail he puts in his reviews. Seriously, he watches the thing, sometimes rewatches it, and writes down any relevant thoughts that pops up, and on top of that, he actually goes and than scours not just the Internet but even any print media he can find not only on that movie or TV show but even on that individual specific episode, to the point where his official policy is to wait years until he bothers to even watch a show so he can make sure that whatever behind-the-scenes accounts of that show are ever going to be available do become available by that time. 

Ok, so what? Well, remember where I passively mention that he's most well-known for his Star Trek reviews? I managed to complete all his Next Generation reviews (good stuff BTW, you'll learn lots about the utter shitshow that show had to start out as which pretty much explains why the first two seasons were so, so bad) and just started his Voyager reviews a couple of weeks ago. Ok, so what to that then? 

The point I'm making is, if you go back and especially watch the first episodes of Lorerunner's lore-run of the corresponding first episodes of Voyager, you'll realize that Scales: Mermaids are Real is basically constructed exactly like a very, very early episode of Star Trek: Voyager.

That is in no way a good thing.

This movie is one of the most disjointed, discombobulated things I've ever seen that's still trying for an actually coherent plot (and failing miserably at it). One of the reasons why is that it feels like almost every other scene at least just feels like outright padding and time-filler. These scenes add nothing to plot progression or character development and in fact for the most part nothing is exactly what happens. The worst offender I can think of off the top of my head is when the main character, Siren, is invited to a desalinization plant (yes really) by the adult mermaids for what's basically her mermaid bat mitzvah (yes really) and said adult mermaids wail (yes really) for what seems like several minutes. There's an especially extended scene where Siren's mom, best friend, and best friend's mother play a game of hot-potato who's-gonna-tell-Siren?-roulette that strikes me as being straight out of a script you ask someone the age of Siren herself to write. There's also quite a bit of outright dead space - inordinate long shots of characters walking in groups in order to confront groups of other characters, for instance, or equally inordinately long shots of mermaids swimming in the ocean - mermaid characters that in one particular actually should-be-important case don't even appear elsewhere in the movie, aside from these long-ass glorified establishing shots. 

There's also, I swear, plot details that are just simply out of order entirely. Siren gets explanations to random new abilities or details well after said details have ceased being relevant for the rest of the movie. There are obvious setups for scenes that have already occurred a good while ago. There's an odd throwaway line about the "Hunters," the wholly-human antagonists of the film, in relation to mermen, and that's the only time the subject of mermen is brought up in the entirety of the movie, save for one part that you probably missed because you've simply quit the movie by then, no really (I'll get into that part a little more, too).  I'm seriously wondering if a bunch of scenes were just scooped right off the editing room floor after being erroneously cut and then randomly spliced back into the reel (or, rather, I guess, if said scenes were just bunched together from the iMovie trash bin after being erroneously cut and then randomly dumped back into the main video track). 

And then there's the ultimate show-don't-tell cardinal sin: not just telling instead of showing, but literally telling us twice. There's a scene where Siren's adoptive mom Tiffany introduces her to two mermaid characters, and then literally the very next piece of dialogue is for those same characters to introduce themselves, again. There's a part at the climax where Tiffany goes into the ocean to rescue Siren - except she pauses in order to turn to the camera to tell the camera she's going off to rescue Siren. 

Without these glaring marks of amateur hour...I'm not sure if the film would be serviceable at that point or if it's actually taking what would be an extremely, perhaps even painfully, straightforward, unimaginative, cookie-cutter and even outright boring mermaid coming-of-age story and actually making it entertaining by swinging it all the way into...not so bad it's good, but so bad it's fascinating that someone can make so many basic mistakes in something that isn't The Room. If there is one good thing that I can say about it, it's that it actually has some crazy good picture quality to it. The film itself has a very sharp contrast and field-depth to it that is outright impressive, really, to a degree that I don't see in most actual theatrical releases, even ones that are high-budget blatant Oscar-bait. I'm really wondering how they pulled that off and what kind of crazy-good camera they ended up getting for something that otherwise would probably feel like your average DisneyXD production.

...on that note, it actually did kinda feel like the distaff-counterpart of Mech-X4 (remember that show?) at first before it, well...started feeling like an especially mediocre episode of very early Star Trek: Voyager.

As for special effects, well...probably the wisest thing they did with the special effects is that they really only have like, seriously, half a dozen SFX shots in the entire movie, practical, digital or otherwise. And most of those are just generic "ooooooh glowing orb!" effects or the practical effect of Siren's growing mermaid tail (unless you want to count that under costuming, which is really all it is). The one time - the ONE time - were we do see both a serious effort at a digital effect and a practical effect is literally the absolute climax of the movie itself where...actually, that right there is a real good example of all the sins I just listed this movie committed, combined into a single mega-example.

The...I guess secondary main villain of the movie, the one TVTropes would call The Dragon, Brodie (which come to think about it...is about as subtle as you'd expect from this movie) attempts to kidnap Siren's best friend Crystal (the one played by Nikki Hahn) to...I'm not kidding, basically press out all her mermaid blood to make into medicinal remedies, and by "kidnap" I really mean "grab her and let her squirm in your arms as you just wiggle in place while surrounded by mermaids who have every motherly incentive to take their daughter back but also do absolutely nothing other than to also stand in place while they outnumber you seven-to-one and you're also completely unarmed" until Siren's birth mother shows up (oh spoiler, Siren's birth mother is literally the Queen of All Mermaids) and stands on the shore and...shows off her powers by making the waves really tall, and then receding them, and making them tall again, and just repeat for a good while. The special effect itself is about what you'd expect from a DCOM from early last decade, and it's literally just scene filler as after she makes a big show of her wave-making magic, she just continues to stand there like everyone else. And then Siren herself confronts Brodie who, understanably, isn't impressed with the wow you can make really big waves! trick, until Siren explains that the human body is two-thirds water.

And then proceeds to use her water-controlling powers to literally melt Brodie into nothing.

There's quite a bit to unpack here, but the first thing I want to address is the one thing I find most commonly brought up on user reviews whether they be on Amazon, Common Sense Media, what have you, and that is how they all found how utterly ghastly and horrific is this  outright murder that 12-year-old Siren just committed, justified or not. Honestly, I wasn't bothered by how ghastly or how evidently torturously painful poor Brodie's demise was (other than Crystal asking Siren if she can teach her that trick which...ummm...is legitimately disturbing) as I was mostly just sitting there and saying to myself....

image from...Chukichi? WTF?

Yeah, first of all, water don't work like that. It's demonstrated, or at least heavily implied, that Siren can only manipulate pure water, or at least mostly seawater, and most of the "water" that exists in the human body does so mostly in solution with other fluids such as blood. Furthermore...well, in order to delve into that I really need to get into the practical effect itself which is...dumping a ton of water onto Brodie's actor and telling him, ok, now act like you're dying the most painful death imaginable! Great, but, uh, can you ham it up just a little bit? Ok a lot more. Ok pretend your Tim Curry in the full-motion video cutscenes of Red Alert 3. Perfect! And then he literally goes poof! until only his clothes and a pair of goggles that really come right out of nowhere are left in a tiny neat little pile right there on the beach.

Yeah...please reference the image macro above.

I mean, I don't think I even need to explain it any further. Again, manipulating or suddenly removing all the water (as much as it is in solution) out of a human's body completely doesn't outright melt them Wicked Witch of the West-style.

You know...this whole goddamn movie...S. M. H.

...oh, and before I conclude this review I gotta mention the other part where mermen are referenced. The reason why I said you'll probably quit the movie before then is because it's a post-credits stinger scene where Siren and her birth-mom are in the ocean staring at a merman for like a split second right in between the conclusion of the credits roll and when the movie quits proper. Really you can almost miss it entirely by blinking. I would've had no idea if I didn't insist on watching through the entirety of the credits specifically to jot down production information (that I could've just as easily gotten off IMDb) specifically for the sake of this review. 

Ok, now where was I? Oh, yeah, right.

...this whole goddamn movie...S. M. H.

Movie Grade:  ...I actually had to refer back to my handy-dandy Grade Rating System Explainer that I wrote...wow, over three years ago to pinpoint and figure this one out and I've settled on...a solid D+, or as I call it in said Explainer, "the real Gentleman's F". Really, there came a point where the only reason why I finished watching it was to satisfy some morbid curiosity (or perhaps, I had hope that it would actually turn around and be good.

Nope.).

Movie MVP: ...or should I reward an LVP here? Nobody stands out at all, not even the actor behind Siren herself. I would be tempted to reward it to myself for sitting through it, but I do feel like that's only genuinely warranted for F grade movies (even if my own past actions contradict that, whatevs). Likewise, a proper LVP also necessitates a F range grade. A mere "Gentleman's F" isn't gonna cut it for this. So I guess I'll just..."throws dart at IMDb listing".... congratulations actual "professional mermaid" Hannah Mermaid (yes really) for winning this blog's award for this movie's MVP!

Extra Thoughts:

 - ...this whole godddamn movie. S. M. H.

 - yes, Hannah Mermaid, "professional mermaid." Well, what she really is is a glorified professional cosplayer just...cosplaying as a mermaid. Underwater.

 - fun fact I actually had an opportunity to meet some "professional mermaids" a while back but logistical issues got in the way. Would really, really still like to meet one one day.

 - on that note, and I really should've mentioned it in the main review (and I'm pretty certain I mentioned it in previous reviews), is that I absolutely totes love mermaid lore and culture. As in, I'm legitimately obsessed with it. Almost to Brodie-I'm Melting! MEEELLLTING! levels, really. I think a lot of it comes from the Tom Hanks-Daryl Hannah rom-com Splash being one of the first movies I ever saw (...no, not in theaters, that movie actually did come out before I was even born for once) and really reaffirmed when I saw Aquamarine on Nickelodeon right when I started getting into all this kiddie crap as a grown-ass adult ....children's and teen media....that I had explained what's now years ago in this post (warning: pretty heavy stuff there, consider this a legitimate trigger warning even) and even in this review (our first A++ score, in fact!) and even in this review. And I guess given that (on top of all the other stuff, which is referred to in all those previous linked posts) it's only natural I gravitate towards all this kiddie crap as a grown-ass adult as most mermaid media ends up being...well, kiddie crap stuff. Even to this day any mermaid lore or culture book I find at a used bookstore or a garage/yard sale/swap meet is an instant must-buy.

 - ...that said...this whole goddamn movie. S. M. H.

Netflix Carmen Sandiego reviewed: "Seasons" 1-5

 She did not protect the face!

What is it? Standard 24-minute drama-ish cartoon show

Where did it air? Netflix original, baby!

Who stars in it? Gina Rodriguez of Jane the Virgin fame as the title role, Abby Trott and Michael Hawley as Zack and Ivy, and Dawnn Lewis (of A Different World fame, if you're old enough to remember that, if you remember the dad from K.C. Undercover also being in it...if you're old enough to even remember K.C. Undercover at this point, wow....) and of course an assortment of other actors.

Why did we review it? I dunno I just wanted to start this year off on a good note for once and oh look it's May....

Being a product of my generation, I (General Bison from the Street Fighter live-action movie) of course! watched both the game-show format live-action show and the animated drama-ish (for a cartoon) cartoon show, both from the 90s (in fact I recall significant overlap, which must've made the Borderbund or whatever people happy). It was in fact a pretty influential part of my childhood storytelling imagination, aside from yelling OMG how can you NOT know where Mexico is you friggin' idiot! So when this Carmen Sandiego reboot hit Netflix, I was both interested and curious, although truth be told Netflix has a...spotty record when it comes to 90s nostalgia cartoons from that era. The Inspector Gadget CGI cartoon (which is not a reboot, it's actually a direct sequel/continuation to the 80s-90s cartoon, and incidentally is also aminated by the same studio that did the Garfield CGI cartoon that premiered on Cartoon Network a few years ago, also available on Netflix) is about as textbook mediocre as you can get and frankly not worth reviewing, while the Stretch Armstrong, er, "2D" "traditional" cartoon (have to use quotes there because everything animated is CGI nowadays, including flat "traditional"-looking animation) is...well, I could only end up standing about 11 minutes of the first episode before I deleted it off my list (quick aside, as far as I'm aware this is actually the first time there's been a Stretch Armstrong cartoon, prior to this it's really only been a line of dolls stretchable action figures). I haven't even bothered to see the Reboot...er, reboot yet (yes I've seen pretty much most of the original cartoon at least - and as an aside to that, live-action? Really, Netflix?) But, the previews looked promising with Carmen Sandiego.

At least in this case, the previews do not lie.

In fact, I do not hesitate one bit to call Carmen Sandiego the best original on the platform right now. I'm completely serious. If Inspector Gadget is a textbook example on how to do a reboot/sequel in a very mediocre manner, and if....er, let's take the 2009 Star Trek "reboot" as a textbook example of how to completely bungle a reboot with ever-shrinking returns to prove it, then Carmen Sandiego is a textbook example on how to do a reboot friggin' right for once.

image from something called Startattle, apparently? Man I need to stop sourcing my images from Hollywood Life wannabes

The absolute most drastic and indeed lore-changing, er, change that they made in the reboot is, if anything, the outright most brilliant and inspired move to make. In all past iterations of the franchise, the actual main/viewpoint character was all over the place inherently due to the simple nature of what the franchise really was in the first place. Starting out as a series of computer games, the main character was...well, you, the player (more on that specifically, actually) as you played an Acme Agency detective to try to catch world-renowned thief Carmen Sandiego and her gang of thieves. In the game show version the main character was...well, you, the player, again, again playing an Acme Agency detective to try to catch Carmen blah blah blah, given its game show nature. It was if anything a pretty straightforward, if not equally brilliant and inspired, way to translate a video game to live-action recorded game show format (although that's a story for another time, one that's been told far, far better than I ever will). In the "original" 90s cartoon, the first example in the franchise to actually follow a scripted format, the main characters were Zack and Ivy, two teen junior Acme Agency detectives ordered about and around by a...well, we'll just call him for what he is, a Power Rangers Zordon ripoff but made way, way nerdier. We're talking Urkel levels of nerdier here, I mean it. Oh, and we'll also get back to Zack and Ivy too.

But what makes the Netflix version truly inspired is that, for the first time ever, the star of Carmen Sandiego actually gets to be Carmen Sandiego, you know, the woman the show and whole franchise is named after to begin with. Except she's not a woman quite yet - officially 18-19-20 throughout the run of the show and certainly meant to be relatable with teenagers (or even tweens), and we're first introduced to her for an episode or two when she's just 12 or so. Oh, and she's definitely one of the good guys...er, girls?, this time around, although not exactly on Acme's good side either, pulling a "steal from the bad guys and give back to the good guys" modus operandi. But the point is, it does allow for some amazing character growth, and really some of the best I've ever seen in a show, kiddie cartoon or not.

this is straight from NBC News, apparently! Go figure!

Really, it's hard to articulate all the awesomeness in one concentrated go, but the brilliance of the series isn't just limited to the reimagining of Carmen's character - which wouldn't have been nearly enough to make it this awesome on its own. There was ample opportunity to completely bungle it - again, see previously mentioned reboots - but they somehow managed to throw this together seamlessly and, dare I say, perfectly. Very solid writing, amazing character and world-building, exciting plots, compelling mysteries and cliffhangers all around. To keep up with the J.J. Abrams comparisons I guess, maybe think less Carmen Sandiego and think more a kid-friendly version of Alias that happens to borrow Carmen Sandiego's skin (ewww, that sounds creepy, especially since this involves a teenaged girl...you know what just forget I said that actually)

Actually, on that note, it's not just an example of how to do a reboot right, it's an example on how to do darker and edgier right, especially for a kid-friendly property. The world isn't some apocalyptic hellhole, everybody isn't washed over with perfect morality grey that you can use in turn to justify doing whatever you feel like to them - there are people with clear motivations, it's just that while they're clear to the viewers they're not clear to each other. That's what creates the tension without having it spill over into dorkier and edgier (than bismuth, now that's what I call Le Edgy).

 im

image from CBR

And, yeah, there's cute references to previous incarnations, too. We've got...wait for it - Player!, yes the character's actual name, who's basically Carmen's omnipresent tech support (think...well, pretty much exactly like Wade from Kim Possible, down to being short and never ever leaving his room until forced to do so). And Zack and Ivy are effectively Carmen's sidekicks. We even have a sweet ensemble rendition of Rockapella's iconic theme song from the game show! 

No I'm not going to post it here, you have to do what I did and earn it Saving Private Ryan-style by playing the interactive, um, show thingie. Which you totally should, it's super good. I stumbled into the perfect ending first go-around by accident! 

If there's any flaws, it's that if anything this show was cut down before its prime with something like 38 episodes total. Yes, 38, making it by far the shortest of the Carman Sandiego shows even if also the best by just as much. That's how the Netfix beast goes I guess, when binging habits make total episode counts become much more meaningless than they did back in the old broadcasting days (for example, Stranger Things has something like 50-60 episodes total, a pretty miniscule amount for such a massive break-out series as it would compare to even basic cable let alone broadcast, and BoJack Horseman - another show I should review, actually - has even less, somewhere in the ballpark between that and Carmen Sandiego). And while I wouldn't call it a flaw at all per se, it's...not nearly trying to push the "edu-tainment" angle of its predecessors, although in fairness this reboot never once advertised itself as much and if anything...yeah it's probably all the better for it.

Anyway, that's really as far as I can go without analyzing each and every individual episode. 

Series Grade: ...this seems controversial even to me, but I stand by my statement that this is the best thing on the entirety of the Netflix platform right now, so A++, the highest grade this blog bothers to give out. I don't think even Gravity Falls (which I suppose was the previous "greatest cartoon of all time") even got that high, albeit not by much with it's more conventional A+ score.

Series MVP: Oof, this is a toughie. Conventional wisdom would probably say Gina Rodriguez and...you know what let's just go with that. Carmen herself really is the linchpin of why I love this series so much.

Extra Thoughts:

 - welcome to the slightly-less-of-a-hellhole-and-steadily-improving that is 2021. Whee.

 - Yes I know it's already May.

 - One of the most controversial things that I can possibly think of when it comes to any animated work (or written work for that matter - in fact any work not involving the portrayal of live actors or character depictions based directly upon real people) up to and including, yes, animated porn and hentai (and that really gives away what I'm getting at right there) is designing or depicting any character, but especially women, and let's face it, especially girls as being at the very least very and particularly attractive - and I think it's a safe bet to say Carmen definitely falls into this. This subject isn't worth it's own blog post or even book, it's worth it's own graduate-level gender studies course. I mean it, and in fact I wish there was such a course and if there is, sign me up, literally (I'm looking for graduate credits anyway pls halp) so I won't get into it too much, but it's something as a creative myself that I'm really forced to think about and give consideration to, beyond even my own fascination about this subject. In fact in a couple of the Young Adult books I'm writing, this very subject is the whole core theme of the story (and actually, this iteration of Carmen is almost exactly a dead-ringer for the protog in one of them). On the one hand, I don't think I even need to explain why this point is considered controversial at this point in time, given how more and more mainstream consideration is given to body and sex positivity while also balancing fighting back outright objectification into all of that. On the other hand, beyond just the old adage of "sex sells" (I mean, we are still talking a kiddie show here), audiences do respond to pretty characters. Again, I don't want to bother to go into detail about it here, but I do sincerely think it's fair not only to the show but to the character Carmen herself, yes as if she were an actual person, to bring it up at least.

 - As for the Netflix reboot of Stretch Armstrong...I gave up all interest when it became clear it was just following the exact same old 80s and 90s cartoon tropes that all the cartoons of those eras follows. Cookie cutter bad guys with cookie cutter motivations, cookie cutter Truth and Justice good guys, and just a heavy retro feel in a really bad way especially since this is, what, a friggin' 2019 cartoon? There, that's the series review, that's all the review I feel its really worthy of. Still more than what I can ever conceive the Netflix version of Inspector Gadget is worth.

 

The iCarly reboot: What's really going on?

https://www.cnn.com/2020/12/10/entertainment/icarly-reboot-trnd/index.html

This is old news at this point, but yes, iCarly is another show in a long line of shows over the past number of months to get cleared for a reboot. It will begin airing on Paramount+ next year, with Miranda Cosgrove, Nathan Kress, and Jerry Trainor reprising their roles. Jay Kogen (former Simpsons writer, but has since went on to work for a variety of shows) will serve as a producer.

When I first found out about this reboot, I really didn't know what to say. But I can tell you that I wasn't happy or excited or interested. I was confused and irritated more than anything else. I felt like this was another show that didn't need to come back, because I don't know what else you can do with the iCarly characters that the original show didn't touch on. From Kogen's tweet, it looks like the show will be for an older audience, which is the only way that a reboot like this can sustain itself. But considering all the other shows that have been rebooted already, and the shows that are going to return in the months to come, this isn't something I have high expectations for. Or any expectations, really.

Let me put this in perspective: Last month, the Animaniacs reboot began airing on Hulu, and the Saved by the Bell reboot started airing on Peacock. Since the announcement of the iCarly reboot, I've read about a Firefly reboot, a Night Court reboot, and a Behind the Music reboot. There is a remake of Revenge of the Nerds on the slate, it was mentioned by Flex Alexander that he has written a script for a potential One on One reboot, and that doesn't even go into the reboots that have been in the works for a while like Rugrats and Frasier. We're living in an era of entertainment where the current trend is to take something popular from the past, and bring it back in a different form which is almost guaranteed to pale in comparison to the original version. This is the era of the reboot, and it shows no signs of slowing down.

I'm just trying to understand why this trend exploded the way it did. This is really only something that started picking up steam in the late 2010s. Before that, I don't think Hollywood was so eager to bring back existing properties like this. Think about the shows that could have returned years ago, but the pitches were shot down because networks were uninterested in digging up the past. Then an actor from one of those old shows dies, usually an actor that was part of the main cast and an integral part of the show's success. Fast forward a decade or so later, and the show gets a reboot without that particular actor, so you're not even getting the show you remember. You're automatically getting an inferior version before you even see a trailer. Then the show has to learn how to navigate through our current era, despite the fact that a lot of the show's success and quality came from the specific era it came from. It has to modernize itself enough to not alienate new viewers, but also cannot be unrecognizable from the old show because the target audience is people who grew up with the original. It's like that joke in the first episode of the Animaniacs reboot where they have to really think about what their first lines should be, except it's every show that has to think about it now. Over and over and over again.

Back in 2012/2013, I remember hearing about the idea of Girl Meets World. I thought it was really interesting that a show from the past was going to return in a completely new form. Of course, Girl Meets World was an entirely different show, not just Boy Meets World coming back with more episodes. Still, it was one of the shows that was part of the trend in the beginning. Then I remember hearing about Fuller House, which was a huge deal at the time. I grew up watching Full House constantly, and the reboot was something that gained a lot of attention (mostly negative, but still). It definitely felt like Fuller House was a reboot that the world in general was anticipating, not just a niche audience. And it made sense to do it because Full House was doing great numbers on Nick at Nite. This was also around the time of The X-Files returning to Fox as a revival, which I remember being a big deal as well.

Four years later, the novelty's worn off and these reboots no longer have that must-see appeal. Which means that you have to make more, at a time when people are starting to get sick of them so you can run them into the ground and move on to something else, preferably in the late 2020s.

It might sound like I hate the idea of reboots, but I don't. Some of the shows that are part of this trend are shows that I care about, like The Boondocks. I always hated the way season four turned out and I'm genuinely curious to see if the HBO Max reboot can redeem the original show's ending. There are some shows that were mistreated in their first run, and didn't get the opportunity to continue because of low ratings or constantly changing time slots. It makes sense for a show like Firefly to get a reboot, because of its huge cult following. And then there are shows like Girlfriends, which didn't even get a proper series finale because after the 2007-2008 Writers Guild of America strike, CW decided to cut its losses and end the show early, before it could finish its eighth season. If it was announced that Girlfriends was coming back for a one-off finale or even a limited season of episodes, I would have no problem with that.

The issue I have is with the abundance of reboots. At this point, it's hard to even know which ones are genuine creative attempts and which ones are just encouraged by executives to make money. It's almost like your show is really unappealing if it hasn't been green-lit for a reboot yet. There must be something wrong with the people behind that show if they haven't gotten the call to come back for another run. 

That's why I can at least respect the creators and cast of Friends because they have no interest in making a reboot, at least at this current point in time. It's simply because they don't see the need to come back. The original show was about six young adults going through life, and a reboot would go against that idea of what the show was about. The pressure and expectations for a Friends reboot would be massive, and the people behind the show know that whatever they make will be scrutinized and picked apart for years to come. A lot of money will be invested into the project, and the cast would likely be paid at least $2 million just for one episode. As much hype as a Friends reboot would generate, everybody involved knows that it's not worth doing something that won't warrant that kind of hype.

I've said all that without even getting to my feelings about the iCarly reboot specifically. Is it going to work in 2021? I honestly don't know. My view is that the original show ended perfectly, and by 2012, it had already said everything it needed to say. You can even see it in the actors' performances that they were ready to move on. It won't even feel like the original show since Jennette McCurdy won't be a part of it. I understand that she's not in a place mentally where she can even consider doing the reboot, but that's the reason this is automatically going to be a lesser version of the iCarly we grew up with. Sam was a very important part of the dynamic, and without her, you need someone that can pick up her slack comedically. I don't know if this reboot will have anyone like that.

Regardless, I hope the reboot turns out well and doesn't affect the legacy of the original series. I may or may not watch it, but I will say this: I never thought I would be living in a world full of remakes of shows I grew up with. Makes me feel like I need some adult diapers and a cup of applesauce. 

Shows of the decade: 2011-2014 (the slow decline)

What good is a dynasty if it doesn't fall?

Seeing as how Ray had an interesting concept with his post about shows from 2009-2011, I wanted to carry it on and see where else I could go with it. Although, this will be from my personal perspective more because that's the only way it will be any fun for me. Plus, this actually gives me the opportunity to talk about something I've been putting off for a long time now. But we'll get to that later.

2011 was an interesting time for Nickelodeon and Disney Channel. Both networks were going strong with entertaining shows, and I was still a fan of both at the time, but there was a notable difference from the previous era. The elements that made up that time period were slowly disappearing or being erased entirely. This is more on the Disney Channel side of things, because Nickelodeon was still running on the same engine as before. By this time, a new generation of shows were being introduced to Disney. In just that one year, A.N.T. Farm, Jessie, and Austin & Ally all made their debuts, and they all ran for multiple seasons. Hannah Montana and The Suite Life on Deck both ended their runs, closing out a six-year period of episodes if you count The Suite Life of Zack and Cody. Demi Lovato decided not to return for the third season of Sonny with a Chance, which led to the show being retooled as So Random! and getting a 26-episode run before being cancelled. Wizards of Waverly Place was on its way out as well, with the series finale airing in early 2012.

Disney Channel was making a lot of moves during this period. It was getting rid of the past and preparing for the future by going for an almost entirely new lineup. For a while, the network was defined by its stars. Demi, Selena Gomez, Miley Cyrus, the Jonas Brothers. By the beginning of 2012, they were all gone from the network, and Disney Channel no longer had crossover appeal. The kind of appeal that meant that shows like Family Guy and South Park were taking notice of them. Slowly but surely, the network started to decay, because some of these new shows were decent, but not as entertaining as previous shows. The acting across the board became less charming, the writing became more simplified, brighter colors were emphasized more. By the end of this period, Good Luck Charlie was the only show with any genuine humanity, and it was closing its doors also. Disney Channel was smart enough to know when to change their brand and eliminate the "superstar" mentality it had from 2009-2011, but their new mentality meant their new stars (and by extension, their new shows) wouldn't get as much traction.

Meanwhile, things looked like they were never going to get any better for Nick. iCarly, Victorious, and Big Time Rush were all huge successes, and the anchors of the network during this period. Unlike Disney Channel, which embraced change as soon as the 2010s hit, Nickelodeon didn't have the same urgency. The only new scripted shows that came out in 2011 were Bucket & Skinner's Epic Adventures, House of Anubis, and Supah Ninjas. Only House of Anubis really had much of a run worth talking about, and if you asked people who grew up with 2010s Nickelodeon what the other two shows were, they would most likely tell you they didn't even know they existed.

For a long time, Nickelodeon never had to worry about the future in terms of live-action programming. Whenever an old, long-running show closed its doors, a new show took its place. This is the same network that once had Drake & Josh, Zoey 101, Ned's Declassified School Survival Guide, and Unfabulous all running at the same time, all of which became successes. 2011 was another year where Nickelodeon was riding high off the strength of three shows that were not only ratings hits, but instantly memorable and entertaining in their own ways. Big Time Rush never got anywhere near the success of the Jonas Brothers or other Disney acts, but they were Nickelodeon's first real attempt to make a musical sensation, and they did a respectable job. Also, as quiet as it's kept, their music was really damn good. You don't realize it until you play back Elevate one day and you're wondering why you never cared about songs like "Show Me" and "Invisible" until now.

The point is, Nickelodeon was embracing the art of having crossover appeal when Disney Channel was beginning to abandon it, whether it was by design or not. It really seemed like the network was just going to continue having more success as the 2010s rolled on.

But then 2012 happened.

That was the year iCarly ended its run and Victorious was unceremoniously cancelled. Honestly, I don't think Nickelodeon ever recovered from losing both shows like that. While iCarly was growing stale and needed to end at some point, Victorious most likely had one or two more seasons left in it. The reasons for the show ending are still unclear. While it was Nick's decision, many theories have been put forth since 2012. The show reached the end of its required run and was never going to get more episodes to begin with. The show was appealing to teenagers and adults, but the key demographic (children) wasn't tuning in enough. Victoria Justice was trying to branch out and in the process, put the cast and crew of Victorious in a bad spot. The show was becoming more expensive to produce. I don't know the reason Nickelodeon decided to pull the plug, but they're paying for it to this day because Victorious has gained a second life on Netflix. People are watching the show like it's still running today, and it's being hailed as one of Nick's best programs.

I don't subscribe to that belief. While I've always been a fan of Victorious, and still think the first season is fantastic, the show fell off as soon as season two. There were some legitimately bad episodes in that season ("Tori Gets Stuck," "Prom Wrecker," "Tori Tortures Teacher") which makes them stick out even worse when you compare them to the good episodes ("Ice Cream for Ke$ha," "Jade Gets Crushed," "Terror on Cupcake Street," "Blooptorious"). As the show went on, it kept fluctuating between really good and really bad, and with the way season four turned out, it makes me wonder how much worse Victorious would have gotten if Nickelodeon let it continue.

Victorious was the last Dan Schneider show that was capable of being good. Before that, his track record was flawless. iCarly was a legitimately funny show for a while, which is something even I forget about. But the fact that Schneider was working on both shows at the same time led to neither of them getting the attention they really needed. It worked in the mid-2000s, but lightning didn't strike twice. The humor became broader and more shallow, scenes started dragging on, the acting performances became more exaggerated, and stories began descending into nonsensical territory. Could you imagine an episode like "Josh is Done" even being attempted in 2013? It wouldn't have, and if it had been, it would have been slowed down by corny, awkward jokes that killed the mood.

In 2013, not only did Victorious air its last episode, but so did Big Time Rush. At least that show got a proper finale. How to Rock began airing in 2012 and ended that same year, which is a shame because that show was at least decent and never got the chance to become better. Marvin Marvin had a short run also, and since Victorious was a consistent disappointment at the time, that show stood out as being infinitely better. Not even joking, I genuinely liked Marvin Marvin. I know everybody hated it, but it was nothing but ridiculous fuckery every week and I lived for it. Would I watch it now? I don't really know, but at least it gave Lucas Cruikshank something to do besides scream everything he says in a high-pitched voice.

Disney Channel wasn't in a great place in 2013, but at least it knew what it was trying to do and had an actual direction. Nickelodeon had the direction of a broken compass being used by a crack addict. I believe Ray has referred to this as the Kidocalypse. I remember shows being cancelled left and right, whether it was deserved or not. Nickelodeon was hitting the panic button more times than necessary, constantly transitioning and rebuilding. The perfect structure from 2010/2011 had crumbled completely, and in less than three years, the crossover appeal was gone completely. Nickelodeon and Disney Channel were no longer cool. They were just there for background noise.

By the end of 2013, Nick had three live-action shows holding things down: Sam & Cat, which put two characters with no chemistry together and carried none of the elements that made the original shows good. The Haunted Hathaways, which was a respectable show and at least had somewhat of a run before it got cancelled. And lastly, The Thundermans, which lasted much longer than the other two shows and was actually decent, having a little bit of that old Nickelodeon charm. A new generation was forced to come to Nick, but you have to wonder what that generation would have looked like if some of the shows were allowed to crawl before they could walk.

In 2014, Disney Channel introduced one of its most memorable shows in the last decade, and the one show that constantly tested my patience as a fan and a reviewer: Girl Meets World. As much as I talked about the many problems this show had, it was usually interesting and gave me a consistent source of material, good and bad. But I don't want to get ahead of myself here. This is for the next write-up. That same year, Nickelodeon introduced the newest member of the Schneider's Bakery family, Henry Danger. This show was interesting because it represented many things. First of all, it was a superhero show, not just a sitcom. So at least it had some unique element to it. Second, it was made entirely from scratch. What I mean is the show starred people that had never worked with Dan Schneider before. iCarly and Victorious weren't spinoffs, but they starred actresses who had already been on other Schneider shows. Even Drake & Josh had the built-in Schneider connection. So, for the first time ever, Henry Danger was a Schneider's Bakery show with no lineage to anything that came before it. Sam & Cat also ended this year (coming up short of its 40-episode order), bringing an official end to an era that had started seven years ago with iCarly.

2014 also brought us the debut of Nicky, Ricky, Dicky, & Dawn. It's okay if you don't remember that this show existed, or that it ran for four years. Sometimes, I have trouble remembering too.

The question now is, what happens in the next couple years for Nickelodeon and Disney Channel? I don't know if I want to find out, maybe Ray can do it for me.

And yeah, I know this blog literally started in 2015, but even then, I wasn't paying nearly as much attention to Nick and Disney as I did five years ago.

Are we just all stories? (and what are stories anyway?)

Happy The Year of Barbara Walters 2020s! The Year of Coronavirus and the Death of Decency, any Reason, Justification and Will to Even be Bothered to Keep on Living and the Human Race Itself Anyway so Why Bother?

This wasn't exactly the "first post of the decade" that I really had in mind. Really, I just wanted to continue with evaluating the shows of the past decade (which if I really wanted to get off my ass would've been done before the year was over) but Mike is actually working on the 2011-14 section and, spoiler alert, what he's done is brilliant and I really want him to finish up with that because he's really spot-on with that. I've also wanted to move into more Netflix reviews, since Netflix is (was?) a hotbed of tween/teen entertainment right now, not to mention Insatiable and (me completely dead set on binging) Bojack Horseman, but I didn't just want to open up a whole new decade on just another review, especially since we just got done closing out arguably the most important decade in all of human history as far as tween and teen entertainment is concerned.

Then again since I had intended to finish my lookback at the 2010s last year I guess I really don't know what kind of post I had been intending in the first place. I guess I'll go with yet another post on why this type of storytelling matters, and a general look at least as far as why the last decade wasn't just so important but the most important (beyond just television, since the lookback series is covering that in more detail).

But as to why this particular decade is the most important...let's look back at the very beginning of tween/teen entertainment....

...which is more recent than you think.

The concept of tweens/teens didn't even exist until last century at the latest, and really "tween" as a concept wasn't invented until this one, more as a response to describe just what the hell Disney Channel and Nickelodeon were marketing in the first place, incidentally. The concept of a "teenager" really grew out of a rapidly growing middle class at the beginning of the 20th century and even then, really referred to a particularly privileged type of teenager (the concept of a middle class itself was pretty brand-new and...it's hard to really define within strictly the cultural context of that particular time period and divorced from its context now. Basically, it meant your kids were actually going to school instead of demonstrating why this era also gave birth to child labor laws). Many of the things we associate as being teen and even tween entertainment - fairy tales; Dickens, Twain, Alcott and the Bronte sisters; hell even cartoons - were strictly for adults up to that time. Hell literacy among the adult population was still in at best a plurality, let alone for teens. The "Downton Abbey era" was the first where you actually did have books published specifically for teens and tweens and...well, it's more of a fucked-up era than you realize because these books were the direct immediate ancestor for the "Tijuana Bibles" of the 20s and 30s (yes the back-then equivalent of 50 Shades of Grey actually was one of the first books intended specifically for tweens. We're very literally talking about tween smut here. True story, folks). Needless to say these operations tended to be quite underground. 

And tween and teen entertainment would for the large part continue to be underground and...shockingly smutty...until the late 30s and really the end of WWII. Sure, you did have a few books written for literate (and highly privileged) teens, and yes you had children's books, but for the most part entertainment and culture as a whole existed almost exclusively in an adult world. Between child and adult, again that really wasn't a concept. Television made for an explosion of children's programming (which was still live-action - cartoons at best or worst depending on how you look at it were still about a 50/50 split adult/kid) but still, nothing tween or teen-specific. Yes, you still had adult-specific shows - I don't think The Honeymooners can really be called "family entertainment" under any real context regardless what decade it is and I think we've all seen Fred Flintstone and Barney Rubble hock cigarettes by now. Really at best you had "family shows" that tweens and teens can watch along with the rest of the family.

You really have to go all the way to the 1980s to find teens (or tweens, although they really weren't marketed to as such) as an actual demo, and even then it would be a pretty slow trickle for years. In the 60s you started to have some entertainment marketed towards teens including a few books (well, one book - The Outsiders - and arguably to the close of that decade S.E. Hinton would be one of the few authors writing to teens, with her mixing it up with a good number of very much adult-demo books in the process - and really not until the mid 70s with Robert Cormier's The Chocolate War which, trust me, is way way more cynical than The Outsiders) and especially movies (Bonnie and Clyde being almost the ur-example with "New Hollywood," up to and very much including everything pre-Star Wars George Lucas did, especially American Graffiti which if anything one-upped The Outsiders). 

But nope, other than that not really anything. Aside from movies which, again, really were the vanguard of defining teens as a demo on their own - The Outsiders and The Chocolate War being adapted into movies, The Wave on TV and really an entire artistic movement, that aforementioned "New Hollywood" which again includes at least very early George Lucas. But most books were, well...pretty kiddie, to put it one way, and TV was dominated by family sitcoms and dramas outside of Saturday morning and afterschool. Even The Wonder Years...well, that was as much feeding off adult nostalgia as it was appealing to viewers the actual age of the characters (trust me I know a thing or two about adult nostalgia). In 1985 racist homophobic asshole Orson Scott Card (yes I will keep referring to him quite specifically as this until something comes along to show me he's changed) came out with Ender's Game - today it would be so totally a YA novel and even its movie adaptation(s) have been marketed as such, but back then it was just another pulp sci-fi book. 

And then Britney and N*SYNC happened.

Really, even moreso than movies, it was the music industry that was rapidly defining the teen marketing demo. Families were now giving their children, particularly tweens and teens, enough allowance to let them make regular purchases, or even just giving into their purchasing demands outright. Now all of a sudden kids 11-17 were a group that was worth bothering to market too. And I'd be remiss to forget video games, which largely pushed tweens and teens as a demo for boys. 

But I'd be equally remiss in not mentioning Nickelodeon's and Disney Channel's direct role in all this. After all, Nickelodeon started pushing kids TV "upmarket" back in the 90s and even 80s with Clarissa Explains it All, Salute Your Shorts and Hey Dude for live action and Ren and Stimpy and Rocko's Modern Life in animation. And as I mentioned, it was Disney Channel that practically invented the concept of "tween" in the first place with their blatantly obvious Clarissa Explains it All ripoff except way more boring with Lizzie McGuire and later That's So Raven and The Suite Life of Zack and Cody.

But the tween and teen demos really blew up last decade, and we have the rest of media and the industry trying to inevitably play catch-up with Nickelodeon and especially Disney Channel to thank for that. Well, and Twilight and Hunger Games but not quite to the degree I think people give credit for (remember, I went to graduate school for this so I'm an expert!) Those books gave greater attention to an already defined demo and showed that it wasn't all just what had been narrowly defined up to that point (although ironically coming to dominate so thoroughly it merely changed what that narrow definition was instead of expanding upon it) but from a wider cultural standpoint it really was Nickelodeon and Disney Channel that did the heavy lifting in the 2000s, and it just leaking more into the wider culture in the 2010s.

I guess this kinda contradicts my point about the 2010s being the most important decade in tween and teen entertainment, but there is a huge distinction between doing the heavy lifting and when the fruits of that heavy lifting actually bear out, especially when much of that fruit is just a lot of people playing catch-up or just trying to join in on the cashing in. Towards the very beginning of the 2010s (or the very end of the 2000s, when Twilight and Hunger Games came out) the young adult genre really exploded as a major, dominant genre - if not the major dominant book genre. YA/teen and tween movies weren't just a niche thing that existed or even pushed for but, again, was a pretty dominant genre filling the whole spectrum of budgets and studios aside from the absolute stratosphere a superhero or major franchise sci-fi movie dictates (and even then, you can argue the MCU Spider-Man movies are pretty dang YA-ish, to say nothing of Into the Spider-Verse. Hell you had what's basically a half-assed attempt at a YA Star Wars movie with Solo). You had everything from major studios to independents pumping out YA/teen movies - some being more successful than others (to put it one way, a whole bunch just come off like the directors and/or producers were listening to Nirvana desperately trying to recapture their own teen years way too hard, way too many times). And of course Nickelodeon and Disney Channel were at their height - sure, Hannah Montana hung up her mic for the last time and High School Musical may have been so 2000s but their influence was still a major presence through the 2010s.

And that is why, through volume and numbers if nothing else, the 2010s were the most important decade for teen and tween entertainment.

Other Thoughts

 - I know I promised I'd talk about why stories matter and, umm...I definitely dropped the ball on that. I've just been watching a lot of Bojack Horseman (a lot of Bojack Horseman) and I'm just struck by what Princess Caroline says about people being just a collection of stories, or something more. But moreover, I think stories are important for conveying and capturing something that's hard to do in a single sentence, paragraph, or even entire conversation, and the show itself does a great job doing that.

And umm...I've got nothing beyond that. Which is why it's just being shoved into a paragraph in what's essentially the afterthought section.

 - speaking of which, Bojack Horseman is pretty freakin' incredible and probably the best show on Netflix period so far. I'll be writing a review of it soon but...it's not exactly perfect either God I hate Todd but it's absolutely fantastic in the exact messages and emotions it wants to convey.

 - I've also been watching Insatiable which got recently canceled and...Good God this might be the worst show on Netflix so far. Ugh. Just...wall-to-wall awful. Considering this and Sing It! I just really don't think Debby has what it takes to stay on television post-Jessie, sorry.

Shows of the decade: 2009-2011 (the peak)

So it’s that time where we don’t just reflect on the fact that it’s near the end of the year but that it’s 2019 which means next year three whole digits on the calendar change and people reflect their best of decade lists, even though the decade technically ends after 11:59 pm Dec 31 2020 so....

Also this is my first long post on phone, it’s the only practical way I’m gonna have the time and energy to do this anymore. But some features are gonna be limited because Blogspot/Blogger is hot garbage (like this weird bug that, if you try to apply text edits or formatting it defaults to the freakin' title bar) so...so now the like three of you know....

I’m starting the “decade” by rolling it back to 2009 since that’s a pretty important year for both networks (if you check out NickAndMore on Twitter - which I hope you do - the Google search metrics suggest 2009-2011 was the peak for both networks). This was also a good three years before I actually started watching either network so this is going to entirely be second hand info, or shows I watched as reruns after-the-fact (with the exceptions of shows still premiering when I watched of course, , but even those episodes were different from the first seasons for a few technical and creative reasons). Speaking of which, a big technical reason was HD - 2009 was when both networks more or less totally switched to 1080p.

But 2009-2011 was a huge watershed period for both networks - but let’s talk about what shows had been running up to that point first.

Disney Channel and Nickelodeon shows were very different, true, but I think more similar than people might realize. Phil of the Future, That’s So Raven and Cory in the House, along with Drake and Josh and Amanda Show has already left being solidly on the Dubya era, as great as most those shows still are today. Hannah Montana, Suite Life on Deck, Wizards of Waverly Place, and iCarly were such long-runners they started well in the era prior to HD and the latter two would even extend beyond the era covered here, albeit just barely.

I don’t think it’s easy to overstate how immensely important these shows were to the networks or even tween pop culture in general at the time, and to their credit I think few people do. But it’s important to realize how these shows changed, and how the shows that came after differed (and how those shows were influenced by newer shows of this era) but how they’re still influential today, maybe even more so.

But the fact is, these shows were solidly in the tween demo, smack dab in middle school. In fact I don’t think Hannah Montana and SLoD made any effort to grow from there at all - but we’re jumping ahead a bit. I’m not saying a 7th grade tweener show can’t be great - I’m literally talking about some now - but they’re very hard to take seriously from a “this culturally matters” standpoint. They were culturally *relevant* but relevance is fleeting. To *matter* is to be enduring, and endearing.

And HM can’t help but come off as cynical towards its tweener demo. Very much after school special plotlines, very white bread lessons on schoolyard crushes that deep down the afflicted lovers know has the permanence of a gnat - I’m sorry but while I do find the show legitimately entertaining and even good, I can’t blame people for giving this show such a cynically harsh reputation as it has. Likewise JONAS which was more or less a single cam gender swap version but...again a little ahead of ourselves.

And SLoD was...well.... It’s early episodes carried over a charm that ZaC had, particularly Monster Mash(?) and International Date Line are ones that stick out. But in the final season they went all A.N.T.Farm and doubled down on tweener lowest common denominator humor.

WoWP and iCarly on the other hand grew with their audiences and screwed real street cred in the process. I’m not saying actual *teen* shows had it any easier getting “does this culturally matter” recognition, but these two shows made it seem like it. I mean, Emma Stone at the height of Emma Stone. Just showing up randomly more or less just to claim she’s on iCarly. And just to be clear this wasn’t a stunt *Emma Stone legit just wanted to be on iCarly.* And Shakira on WoWP, along with Jeff Garlin (including not just with Shakira but as it turns out actually as Shakira), Rob Reiner, I want to say Dwayne Johnson maybe? All of this from a show apparently on the bubble right after its first season and derided as just cashing in on Harry Potter mania.

Because both those shows bothered to grow, in more ways than one. They transitioned from mid tweener at best to late tweener/early high school and even into teens and saw major success and are fondly remembered to this day a decade later. And this would be hugely influential on shows just coming out this period and into the next, although I don’t know if you can really say which had influence over what.

But it was clear Disney Channel and Nickelodeon were gonna go upmarket and up-age.

For Disney Channel it was hedging bets to still have massive middle tweener appeal and split the difference with more overall family appeal too. Sonny With a Chance (the network’s first multi cam show to be shot and aired in HD from the first episode) was still very much a tweener show at heart and because of circumstance didn’t get an opportunity to grow. Shake it Up likewise - but it *did* have a Chance (that’s intentional capitalization because I’m calling back to Sonny...oh nevermind). Plus it’s very premise - not so much the song and dance but the two stars as friends, and the diverse, hip ensemble built around them even up to Caroline “wtf that’s actually her name/wtf she actually works for Trump now” Sunshine - has massive growth potential in terms of demo age. But also not without controversy - even from Demi Lovato who had just barely left the network at that point.

Good Luck Charlie would have no trouble avoiding that controversy, practically by design. An immensely charming and endearing show, it remains to this day one of my most favorite shows period, and even most important. Arguably more of a throwback to the family programs that defined ABC’s TGIF block and Wednesday night in the 90s, the show had solid writing to appeal to all ages and compared to practically all else was well-grounded almost to the point of, again, charm. GLC was a celebration of family and just being a normal teenage girl - a multi cam Lizzie McGuire almost a decade later, or an updated Disney Channel Clarissa Knows Best some two decades later. It was almost groundbreaking for how relatable it was - and while it doesn’t have the diversity sensibilities of today it still stands true (and while we do have similar shows with better representation we’re still lacking that age and maturity Bridgit Mendler brought to her role, exuding not only that relatability but that whole, I’m Really A Cool Girl vibe - but we’re jumping *way* ahead into the decade now with Sydney to the Max and a return to going “young-market”).

Nickelodeon, on the other hand, wasn’t going to waste time with super-broad appeal. They dominated  in the two decades prior by being super focused towards boys - but moreover by appealing to their inflated sense of maturity - and at the start of the 2010s they were determined to repeat history with being the go-to network for older tween and teen girls with iCarly’s Dan Schneider showing the way.

Dan Schneider - for all his faults, and not the least of which the allegations against him, something that as my long time readers (all three of you) know I insist on making a big deal of - well, you have to say, he had an insanely uncanny knack of understanding cool at this time. I mean, he outright *mastered* it. iCarly was leading the way after all - but it paled in comparison to the distaff counterpart to his own Drake and Josh, Zoey 101. Now mostly remembered for controversies specific to Jamie Lynn Spears which today are painfully unfair and unwarranted, this was Nickelodeon’s perfect answer to Good Luck Charlie even before Good Luck Charlie. Removing the parents entirely, the show concentrated on “relatability through coolness.” Zoey was relatable because despite being forced to endure through such antics not so much zany as outright insane, and even being socially disadvantaged, Zoey managed to do so while being just so damn cool.

Schneider doubled down on this with his next show as Zoey 101 bowed out near the beginning of this era, with what could arguably be considered his crown jewel - a show with its title stylized as VicTORious. Practically a John Hughes flick perfectly updated for 2010 as a multi cam comedy on basic cable, the show utterly oozed cool. Tori Vega is probably one of the most relatable characters in the history of either network for the same reasons Zoey had been, but supercharged - the plots were zanier and sometimes the whole world was against her, and rarely did she ever totally win, but even drenched in rain, trapped in a parade float or dragged by dogs she and her diverse entourage of friends always came off as the coolest teens on the planet. Schneider just got it.

Not just Schneider, it turns out. True Jackson, VP (a show I just literally started watching) - the show that launched Keke Palmer’s career - also exuded and oozed cool effortlessly. Effectively a mini-me-ized version of the late 90s/early 2000s solidly adult sitcom Just Shoot Me (incidentally a fave of mine back in the day - man I’m old) but with a diverse cast of teens, it leveraged its actors and setting to make the world seem much, much cooler than it actually is.

And of course you can't forget about animation - although Phineas and Ferb (premiered back in 2007) and SpongeBob Squarepants (which dates back to the prior millennium) had dominated Disney Channel and Nickelodeon, respectively, as far as animation goes - something that P&F would continue to do so well beyond this era and SpongeBob...well, quite possibly forever, practically. That said I cannot underemphasize their impact on both networks or the wider pop culture - there's a reason why SpongeBob has lasted so long, with at least three theatrical movies and a freakin' musical. And Phineas and Ferb ended up being a big reason why I even ended up watching either network in the first place, so I owe it quite a hefty piece of personal nostalgia. We also can't forget Nickelodeon's Avatar: The Last Airbender - arguably something that should've been more influential than it already had been. Unfortunately I ended up missing The Last Airbender boat - but don't worry, I'll have more things to say in the next era to be covered.

When examining the shows from Disney Channel and Nickelodeon from this era, there’s a lot to consider - especially since this is arguably the most influential era of either network’s entire histories, or at least in relevance to today’s live-action programming. Hannah Montana has raw popularity to be a cultural force, WoWP, SiU and GLC carried a lot of force deep into the decade and iCarly showed that these networks can be cool even to an older demo - much, much older in fact - and again we can't forget the raw popularity and brilliance of Phineas and Ferb and, yes, SpongeBob (and at least for cartoons P&F far away takes my vote for this era)...but if we’re determining the greatest of this era, and possibly the whole decade, I think it’s going to have to be VicTORious. Being a sort of middle child, and by the end of its run being seen as something of an already bygone era with some behind the scenes issues that have only now come to light, it wasn’t as influential as iCarly or the shows at the crosstown rival, but to this day it still feels the coolest, the freshest and even the most relatable. A very close second, and taking first for Disney Channel is Good Luck Charlie, but I can’t understate how huge almost any of these shows were back then - or even today.

Next time we’ll look at 2011-2014 and both networks’ extended foray into an expanded, older demographic (while still being tween-friendly, if not relapsing into focus) with A.N.T. Farm, JESSIE, Austin & Ally, Dog With a Blog, and Liv and Maddie on Disney Channel and, let's face it, the network's first real serious cartoon of the decade, Gravity Falls. And on Nickelodeon we'll be looking at the short-lived School of Rock, Sam & Cat...well, 2011-2014 ended up being a very rocky period for Nickelodeon for reasons arguably largely self-inflicted (if you're wondering why people had a problem with Cyma...). As well as their few standout huge successes, namely TMNT, Korra, Big Time Rush...umm, that's pretty much it. And we'll be looking at DisneyXD for the first time with Kickin' It, Pair of Kings and Lab Rats.

All-In-One Roundup of Disappointing Shows Too Disappointing for Me to Watch (Big City Greens; Pup Academy; Hunter Street S3; the literal entirety of whatever Marvel shows they're showing on Disney XD but Spider-Man especially; Finding Dory)

In lieu of pulling a quote from any episode of any of these shows/movies, I think it'd be more appropriate and illustrative if I leave a certain image here instead....

It's mid-late evening in early October, on a Sunday no less; I am cold, I am bored, Disney Channel is showing endless reruns, I have a huge migraine and in a misguided effort to self-cure said migraine, I am drunk.

So it's time to do a mass run-down of shows I find disappointing!

Big City Greens
What is it? The most obnoxious show on mainline Disney Channel right now. Pretty much their version of Spongebob
Where did it air? Umm...Disney Channel.
Who stars in it? Some voice actors? I dunno I have a headache and I am drunk.
Why are we reviewing this? I dunno, I have a headache and I am drunk.

So Spongey444, the man behind the excellent blog (except when he reviews Big City Greens), apparently likes this show.

After what has to be well into its second season now...yeah I've come to the conclusion that I can't stand it.

People Watching is the only episode of the entire series I like, probably because it speaks directly to my writing instincts. Other than that...it's about a insufferable brat and some periphery of his other family (who also have a tendency to act like brats, adults included if not especially), and that's it, as far as I'm concerned.

When I say that this is Disney Channel's Spongebob, I really mean it. For starters it totally dominates the schedule; you turn on your TV, especially during daytime hours and there's a damn good chance Disney Channel will have BCG. But it also seems to have basically the same style of humor. I can't really get into Spongebob - more than anything I honestly find it extremely boring. And honestly, all the brattiness of the main characters aside, I also find BCG to be...fundamentally boring.

Yet at the same time this show is clearly popular, and there's no doubt about Spongebob's popularity. It has a Broadway musical show, for crying out loud, something I actually want to see (and just a bit of trivia, it has Thunderman's Mrs. Wong as...is it Karen? Eh I don't remember which character she plays whatever. But I feel Karen is a damn good guess. She just strikes me as the type of person you'd cast as Karen if you're gonna cast her in a Spongebob musical). But...I just can't get into it. 

That isn't to say there aren't episodes I don't like. I actually really liked the Spongebob anniversary special, at least the parts above water (the party planning parts felt unnecessary and tacked on just to make the episode an extended special). In fact there's a ton of episodes I like. I don't think I watched a boat driving episode with Mrs. Pufferfish I didn't like, that's when the show shows its strengths. And Mr. Krabs-centric episodes, probably because IRL my personality has a dangerously close resemblance to Mr. Krabs (greed is a hellava sin, yo). But say...6 times out of 10, I just find myself being bored and really regretting, at the very least, not watching another network.

Fortunately for Nickelodeon, chances are Disney Channel's counter-programming is probably BCG which if you don't get it by now, I think is even worse. It's going to boil down to a personal taste thing, and clearly I am in an extreme minority here - and because of that it's hard for me to quantify any objective reasons why I don't like it - but I'm just going to have to say, I don't like it. 9 times out of 10, if I do have it on, it's just to act as background noise when I'm doing something and I just don't want a completely quiet house, and at least I can rely on Disney Channel to be inoffensive as background noise, BCG included (and during the hours when I want this, it's almost always a toss-up between this and Spongebob, and BCG usually wins if only because, only being in its second season, it does come off as fresher).

Series Grade: C-. Keep in mind this is extremely subjective and, very clearly, I'm in a slim minority here.
Series MVP: *shrug* I dunno, I don't care. H Jon Benjamin, because H Jon Benjamin (and I'm claiming this as legitimate because I swear he's in the Cricket Calls shorts, uncredited.

BTW I actually love the Cricket Calls shorts. Go figure).

Hunter Street
What is it? Single-Cam 24-minute format KidCom with some drama trappings, produced as English-language programming with largely native English speakers (either American or British, for the most part) but by a Dutch studio, on location in the Netherlands. Go figure.
Where did it air? Haha, that's actually the interesting part. But the simple answer is Nickelodeon (the Dutch studio that produces it in the first place literally is Nickelodeon Netherlands). But although it was originally scheduled to air on mainline Nickelodeon...it got booted to TeenNick (which is available in HD in select parts of Burbank near where most Nickelodeon's live-action shows are produced and...absolutely nowhere else) even before the scheduled season premiere (which means for 99.98% of all viewers it's possible to view it in HD only through Nickelodeon's super-annoying app). 

And after going through this experience, I can see why.
Who stars in it? Although most of the actors are actually American citizens with a few select British ones (like Jake's actor, most notably)...well let's face it you're not going to get many recognizable names in a production like this, even by typical Nickelodeon/Disney Channel KidCom standards.S3

So yeah. Hunter Street wasn't exactly perfect to begin with but at least it was passable entertainment. I gave S1 a C+. S2 was...worse in some areas, but better than others (the addition of Jake was a pretty good plus, he's a legit good actor), evening out to the same C+ score.

S3 was...a great big A.N.T. Farm S3/Jessie S4-style crash straight into the ground leaving nothing recognizable but a giant smoking impact crater. 

It starts off agonizingly slow, with the Hunters stuck in a B&B in the middle of the forest for way, way too many episodes (it's not even haunted, despite how much the show wants to fake out how it is). Way too many of these episodes are too focused on the Hunters going around in circles over the same damn clues culminating into far too few mysteries. And an ending way too freakin' pat and predictable, to the point where I haven't even seen the last two or three episodes and guess what, I'm not ever bother going to.

See above image for reference. Except instead of just not understanding WTF is going on...there's nothing going on.

As I understand it it was basically down to whether or not to renew this show or I Am Frankie for S3 - it was an either-or choice as mandated by the parent network, much like what happened pretty much exactly 6 years ago between The Thundermans and The Haunted Hathaways. And unlike that time - after seeing some S2 Hathaways episodes and...yeah I think they made the right call choosing Thundermans, they so didn't make the right call this time. I Am Frankie will be sorely missed and this was a stinker of a season.

Season Grade: A flat D. I'm pretty much obliged to give this grade if I can't even finish out the freakin' season.
Season MVP: ...so this is going to be very awkward and controversial, especially since the vast, vast majority of my professional writing outside of this blog is very specifically and explicitly pro-feminist and pro-#MeToo. Hell I go out of my way to incorporate pro-feminist and pro-#MeToo material on this freakin' blog, all the time, and not the least of which using this very blog as a means of publicly coming out as transgender. 

...and yet that said I use the Episode MVP award all the time to give it to actresses for no other reason than I just find them extremely pretty. Usually because, honestly, there's nothing provided in the actual acting, or at least overall quality, of the show to award it legitimately. But I'm forced to recognize that awarding Episode MVP on the basis of who happens to be the hottest...isn't exactly the most feminist. 

On the other hand I have met people who have told me that there's nothing wrong with awarding MVP along these lines. That, yes, acknowledging a woman's beauty can be feminist. I just wish I had a definitive answer or - let's face it, what I'm really looking for is a means to rationalize objectifying women while still claiming some (false) legitimacy to a feminist card. But I'd really like to know what my readership thinks.

You know, all three of you.

But anyway, Season MVP goes to Sarah Nauta (Jasmyn) because (and you can see this coming from all my rambling) OMG she's freakin' gorgeous.

She is by far the best looking of the main cast across any of the seasons. Although I might be biased because she really does look like a girl I had a major crush on back in high school (you know, because I didn't make this creepy enough as it is). Also she's 21, so yeah, legitimately, no pedo (ewww, just saying that gives me the creeps though.

And yet, I still did it.)

Honestly some mention of MVP should go to Wilson Radjou-Puljante since I think he's the most legitimately talented, or at least I enjoyed his screen presence the most (aside from creepy eye-candy factor). But it seemed like the show went out of its way to boot him off which...is definitely contributing to its D score.

Also I want to mention Thirsa van Til (Rex Legend's assistant) because...yeah she's also super-pretty. And the makeup artist that did Erik's makeup (in-show, so an actual actress not literally a makeup artist although for all I know she's the show's actual makeup artist, she didn't have any speaking lines) because she's even prettier than Sarah and Thirsa. Combined, even.

And the really pretty redhead that got beat up by Frankie, Andrew and what's her face at the very last episode of I Am Frankie because she's really pretty, and also she got beat up by three androids so I have to show some props or appreciation for putting up with that. And I miss I Am Frankie. And cute redheads.

Yeah that's enough creepiness perviness for this writeup.

Pup Academy
What is it? 24-minute live-action single-cam kidcom. With talking animals. Yup, it can only be from Air Bud productions!
Where did it air? Disney Channel 
Who stars in it? Ummm, a bunch of talking dogs? Oh and some humans too. But seriously I don't know who and I'm too lazy to look it up. 

This...is just too damn kiddie for me. Hard pass.

Series Grade: C-
Series MVP: Meh

Finding Dory
What is it? It's...Finding Dory, I'm pretty sure you know the particulars of this one.

...you know what, I'm just going to say it got hit with massive sequelitis.

Movie Grade: eh