Did the author just randomly pick 100 shows? There is a lot f suckage in there. Not only that, but the didn't list Bonanza, one of the longest running and most popular shows of all time.

This is nothing more than filler.

I don't remember a show called "The Beavis and Butthead Show." I remember a show called "Beavis and Butthead" though.

Good to see MST3K on there.

Where's Kings or Rome?

oh well, at least they got West Wing and Deadwood

What the smeg is this?

Just a conservation starter and a chance to talk about good TV.

Way too many old shows on there though. Rome has to make that list.

DamnYankees: Just a conservation starter and a chance to talk about good TV.

Way too many old shows on there though. Rome has to make that list.

Well, since its 100 best shows of "all time" i would imagine there would be a lot of old shows on there.

but yes, I too am pissed that Rome didn't make the cut

somedude210: Well, since its 100 best shows of "all time" i would imagine there would be a lot of old shows on there.

Well that assumes TV has been equally good for all time. Which is really hasn't been. Can anyone think of an actual good drama on TV before ER came on the air? Stuff like Hill Street Blues is a prototype, but it really doesn't come close to matching modern stuff.

What, no Mitzi Gaynor?!?! THIS LIST IS BULLSHIATE!

This list is a massive piece of fail.

/DNRTFA

Rome didn't finish well.

Okay, I RTFA now. Yep, it's fail. He doesn't even Happy Days on there.

I call bullshiat on stuff like The Super Bowl and MTV. Those aren't shows. They might deserve some other kind of category, but as it is, they're just taking up space actual shows could've been listed in.


/not a Firefly fan.

Copperbelly watersnake: Babylon 5 never gets any respect even though it completely changed TV sci-fi from being dominated by the Star Trek weekly serial format to running plot lines being the norm.

It didn't change anything. Talk about overhyping some random, tiny show's influence.

Gunny Highway: whatshisname: Best American TV shows ever. Which really narrows the field.

20. Monty Python's Flying Circus

3. The Office [British]

LeroyBourne: No Night rider?

Thankfully, no.

DamnYankees: Copperbelly watersnake: Babylon 5 never gets any respect even though it completely changed TV sci-fi from being dominated by the Star Trek weekly serial format to running plot lines being the norm.

It didn't change anything. Talk about overhyping some random, tiny show's influence.

A show that ran five year is tiny by you? A show that had, for it's day, some ground-breaking fx? A show that brought the sci fi from being a mission of the week format to a serialized, character driven one?

Yeah...random and tiny. Kinda like your wang.

/NERD FIGHT ON!

PizzaJedi81: A show that ran five year is tiny by you? A show that had, for it's day, some ground-breaking fx? A show that brought the sci fi from being a mission of the week format to a serialized, character driven one?

Tiny in viewership, yes. That show was mostly crap.

icy_one: Also the first space-based science fiction show to last longer than 2 years that wasn't called "Star Trek" if memory serves.

Maybe. Not sure if thats really meaningfull.

But we also shouldn't forget Homeboys in Outer Space.

DamnYankees: PizzaJedi81: A show that ran five year is tiny by you? A show that had, for it's day, some ground-breaking fx? A show that brought the sci fi from being a mission of the week format to a serialized, character driven one?

Tiny in viewership, yes. That show was mostly crap.

What, to you, specifically, was crap?

PizzaJedi81: DamnYankees: PizzaJedi81: A show that ran five year is tiny by you? A show that had, for it's day, some ground-breaking fx? A show that brought the sci fi from being a mission of the week format to a serialized, character driven one?

Tiny in viewership, yes. That show was mostly crap.

What, to you, specifically, was crap?

The acting, production values, and writing. The overall story arc was pretty much the only good thing in it.

Felicity was better than Oz? Huh.

... 2007 ...

/Poniewozik. Spell it like it sounds.

swahnhennessy: FTFA: Lists are incredibly important: they are how we define what matters to us, what we want entertainment and art to do, what we expect of our culture.

Oh, shut up.

Yea - and critics wonder why they get no respect.

DamnYankees: PizzaJedi81: DamnYankees: PizzaJedi81: A show that ran five year is tiny by you? A show that had, for it's day, some ground-breaking fx? A show that brought the sci fi from being a mission of the week format to a serialized, character driven one?

Tiny in viewership, yes. That show was mostly crap.

What, to you, specifically, was crap?

The acting, production values, and writing. The overall story arc was pretty much the only good thing in it.

The acting: watch just about any G'kar episode, any of the later Londo episodes...tell me the acting is crap. Yes, it has cheesy moments...but any given episode of any given season of any given Star Trek show has just the same level. Honestly, though, Bruce Bowleitner had the best single episode: "Intersections in Real Time"

Production values: Look here. (new window) $90mil for 110 episodes? The Bat-calculator puts that at just shy of 82000 per episode. (Okay, 818181.81 recurring.) I think, for what they had, they did the best job possible. Yeah, some of the stuff doesn't hold up...but then there's episodes like "Z'Ha'Dum."

Writing: JMS wrote 92 of 110 episodes, allowing him to keep the story going the direction he wanted, instead of allowing the "suits" to derail it. (LOST, I'm looking at you.) So, yeah, there's clunkers. But there's a lot more gold than dirt in the series. Season 3, awesome, season 4, pretty darn good. My personal favorite: And the Rock Cried Out, No Hiding Place.

Oh, and if JMS HADN'T written the entirity (Minus one.) of the last three seasons, that overall arc wouldn't be there.

PizzaJedi81: DamnYankees: PizzaJedi81: A show that ran five year is tiny by you? A show that had, for it's day, some ground-breaking fx? A show that brought the sci fi from being a mission of the week format to a serialized, character driven one?

Tiny in viewership, yes. That show was mostly crap.

What, to you, specifically, was crap?

You had to pay attention to plots and characters. Some ideas were left unspoken but understood by the audience. The series used Newtonian physics, which is very rare most places.

And here is the lifechanging event. (Copypasta ahoy)

During the run of the show, the show's creator, J. Michael Straczynski, was contacted by NASA officials who asked if they could borrow the design of the show's fighters - the StarFuries - for use on the International Space Station. NASA wanted to use the ships as a combination tug and forklift, adding, "Your design is the most practical we've seen." Straczynski replied that it was fine with him, but that NASA had to call them StarFuries. NASA agreed.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0105946/trivia

/Yeah, that show sucked and had no impact.