It’s been a while since I got this excited over a show on network – rather than basic cable – television. Right now, cable is where it’s at for most of the intelligent, intriguing drama on TV. There’s one rather glaring exception, though, among the new series of 2007-2008 – and of course, it would have its head on the chopping block right about now…
To understand why this is such a shame, we’ve got to travel back in time, to see…
NBC: Replaying Past Mistakes
NBC is not known for having a great track record with classic television science fiction, and understanding the value of its audience numbers. (You could argue its inability to capitalize on smart SF goes back to its radio days, where “Dragnet,” which was great, was given more of a build-up than the equally excellent and standard-setting “Dimension X” and “X Minus One”.)
NBC’s most famous mistake has to be “Star Trek”, and its misunderstanding of how valuable that show’s fans would be to advertisers. Some other stumbles include following the allegorical and vastly entertaining miniseries “V” with a subpar regular series, and the cancellation of “Quark,” “Dark Skies” and “Eerie, Indiana,” acclaimed SF series that were still finding their footing. But, if NBC ever goes off the air, you can bet that its inability to capitalize on “Star Trek” will be part of its epitaph.
In fact, the fascinating book “Inside Star Trek,” by former producers Herb Solow and Robert Justman, argued that NBC might have primarily kept it on the air because its visuals were popular with those who owned color TVs – and because a consortium of independent stations had made the unusual decision to pay for early syndication rights. Funny that NBC missed out on so much more that “Trek” had to offer.
Maybe “Journeyman” isn’t another “Star Trek” — but why risk it?
After more than 30 years and a wildly successful franchise of syndicated series and movies — NBC apparently hasn’t learned any of “Star Trek’s” major lessons:
a) Overall, intelligent and well-written shows need time to develop, but attract dedicated viewers from the beginning, and just need a season to get their “sea legs” and gain word of mouth. They won’t be flash in the pans, but their long term growth may dwarf the first season starters. “Cheers”, “Golden Girls,” “Law and Order,” “The Office” and “Seinfeld” are all excellent examples of well-loved, long-running shows that took time to develop their fanbase, and do terrific business in reruns.
b) Intelligent and well-written shows bring prestige that sticks to the network. (Interestingly, an argument used by Amanda Peet’s network executive on “Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip,” the show that died in “Journeyman”‘s time slot last year, despite being the top “time-shifted” [TIVO, digital video recorded] show on the air). In 50 years, NBC prestige shows like “Rockford Files,” “Hill Street Blues,” “St. Elsewhere,” “Homicide”, “The West Wing,” “I’ll Fly Away”, and yes, “Journeyman,” will still be worth watching. “Citizen Kane” and “It’s a Wonderful Life” weren’t big boffo hits when they first came out in the movie theaters, but they’ve stood the test of time — which is to the benefit of the companies selling the films.
c) These shows attract intelligent, savvy viewers from all walks of life — who in turn will work hard to promote the series amongst their friends, neighbors and strangers on the internet. (How can any broadcast network, in these tough times, turn down free publicity?)
d) These shows also are more likely to sell in boxed DVD sets, because they are worth viewing again and again – unlike most reality shows, which are cheap to make, but wear their welcome out fast. Martha Stewart’s “Apprentice”, anyone?
e) Women, not only men, enjoy well-written SF shows… and since women often do the bulk of household buying, and are involved in a greater percentage of household purchases overall, a TV show that appeals as much to women as to men — ideally a science fiction/relationship-driven drama like “Star Trek” and “Journeyman” — is very valuable to advertisers, indeed.
“Journeyman” — in a nutshell
Scottish actor Kevin McKidd plays Dan, a reporter and recovering gambler-turned-family man. The show’s title is apt — Dan is not a “Hero” looking for glory, but an everyday guy who’s trying to figure out why he’s travelling through time.
McKidd’s costars Gretchen Egolf (“Katie”) and Moon Bloodgood (“Livia”) also give intelligent, thoughtful performances — and the writing for their characters doesn’t limit them to damsel-in-distress, pestering wife or moony oracle stereotypes. The same old, hoary love triangle, where one woman typically plays a temptress and another plays a good girl, is missing from “Journeyman” – halfway through, viewers learn Katie and Livia are actually struggling with the same issues, sixty years apart in time.
My family got hooked after a few weeks — much more interested in each episode than the ballyhooed “Heroes” episode shown beforehand — and hoped that it would catch on and become a sleeper hit, as the post-apocalyptic “Jericho” did in 2006.
It’s more adult than “Heroes,” in the truest sense of that word – with better writing, more sophisticated and thoughtful character development and themes. There are consequences for Dan, and Livia, travelling through time. Many of the more recent serials on TV have dragged out their plot points and love triangles – but not “Journeyman,” which is steady in developing its characters and explaining its mysteries. Viewers did not have to wait through 5 episodes for the main character to convince his wife he’s a time traveler; there are no histronics, and no serial killers wearing out their welcome.
The biggest surprise? Reed Diamond, who often plays heels, shows he is a solid and underrated character actor. His role as Dan’s brother, romantic rival, and sometime antagonist is more complex than what Diamond has played in the past. For possibly the first time since “Memphis Belle,” when he played a naifish WWII bomber crewman, Diamond gets to play someone who is flawed, but actually… somewhat likable. (Anyone who watched the critically acclaimed ’90s show “Homicide”, where he also played a police officer, probably knows what I’m talking about.)
Saving “Journeyman”
“Journeyman” is in a crappy time slot without the benefit of crosspromotion or reairing on NBC-Universal’s other networks. Worse, from the beginning of the season, the network did nothing to show how different “Journeyman” is from its previous time travel drama, “Quantum Leap”, and that probably scared off viewers who are only now catching on to how good the show is. Much as I enjoyed “Leap” for entirely different reasons (“warm fuzzies”), the only thing the two series have in common is the idea of changing history – which, come to think of it, is the theory behind every time travel story, from Ray Bradbury’s “A Sound of Thunder” to “The 4400″.
“Journeyman” is one of the only shows on TV today that is interesting enough to become a classic… and not just with the crowd that usually enjoys science fiction shows, but with those who enjoy family and relationship driven drama like “ER,” “Brothers and Sisters,” “House,” and “Grey’s Anatomy”. The word needs to spread, to a broader number of people who probably gave the show a miss, thinking it was a “Leap” clone, or who think science fiction’s not usually their cup of tea.
If you’ve not yet given “Journeyman” a try, this is the time to do it, while episodes still remain available online. If you like it, visit SaveJourneyman.net — as there’s a movement to send NBC Rice a Roni (the timeless “San Francisco treat”, get it?) boxes to encourage it to return for another season. As of now, NBC has not ordered additional episodes, so Wednesday’s airing of “Journeyman” may be its last. Then again – “Jericho” is in the works to return, despite the excrable and exploitative reality series “Kids Town” being put in its timeslot. You never know…
- Patience
