I'm going to go out on a limb here and make a bold statement. Without "Newhart," "Seinfeld" doesn't happen. Now, I'm not saying the shows were identical by any means, but they share a lot more than you would think at first glance.
Certainly "Seinfeld" had the urban setting of New York City, but if you can imagine it happening at a Vermont Bed & Breakfast, with a slightly older fellow in the title role, you can see how the parallels do exist: A world-weary, humorous guy at the center of a bunch of wacky characters that entangle themselves in his life. Which show am I talking about? Exactly.
Now, "Newhart" had a lot more going for it than "Seinfeld" did when they started. Audiences knew Bob from his Grammy winning comedy album, guest appearances on every variety show of the day and his two sitcoms: the first being a standard gentle comedy from the early sixties and the more famous and beloved one from the 1970s filled with winking innuendo, and was pretty racy by television standards, even though Dr. Robert Hartley and his beautiful wife Emily were married. It seemed like a look into a "real" relationship, with the ups the downs and the charm, and it was genuinely laughable and lovable.
"Newhart" was different, and it was supposed to be. Even so, many unfairly compared the actresses who played Mr. Newhart's wives on these two programs: Mary Frann's Joanna to Suzanne Pleshette's Emily, throughout the run. Really, the characters were never meant to be compared in that way. It was a different era, for television, for the nation, and even for the star. On "Newhart," Joanna's role was as a pillar of strength for Innkeeper Dick to hang onto when everything was going crazy, while Emily and Dr. Bob took turns skewering each other and their friends and situations with devilish 70s glee.
When "Newhart" began, it was shot on videotape and had more of a "soap opera lighting" look to it. The visuals are odd in relation to the rest of the series. Also, the characters that first season were more pedestrian and the alternating heartwarming/difficult story lines flip-flopped between borderline 1950s trite or 1980s mean! But when they switched to film and they added the talented Peter Scolari and Julia Duffy, things took off! Some of the wittiest dialogue and funniest moments in a sitcom of... just about any era. Brilliant writing, and well played performances, even with the stock characters Larry, Darryl and Darryl.
Let's get to the famed final episode, which is arguably the greatest "last episode" of any television show ever created. But the question is, why is it so great? You need to know a couple of facts.
There were two other programs of the era that utilized a similar plot twist device around the time of "Newhart's" end: NBC's medical drama, "St. Elsewhere" (from the same production company as "Newhart" - MTM) and CBS's own nighttime soap, "Dallas," which had an important storyline involving Patrick Duffy's character, Bobby Ewing.
Without going into specific detail about any of what these other show's plots were about (in case you haven't seen those programs), I can say that if the "St. Elsewhere" and "Dallas" plot points were not played out the way they had, "Newhart's" ending, though still funny, wouldn't have had the incredible explosive impact it had. It was a joke with an exponential punch line: you're not just laughing about the concept, you are laughing about the context of the concept in history. In other words, you were laughing not only at the moment within the show, but it was a big fat joke on all of television, itself!
Really, this was one brilliant, brilliant last laugh. It is so breathtakingly unexpected, yet perfectly fitted, it's almost impossible to think that it wasn't somehow planned from the first episode! That only makes it that much funnier!
Perhaps best of all, they did it before anyone conceived the notion of a program sentimentally "paying tribute to itself," or having "celebrity commentary," and they managed to stick to their thirty minute format, not "expanding" the program to milk it.
Genius.
Certainly "Seinfeld" had the urban setting of New York City, but if you can imagine it happening at a Vermont Bed & Breakfast, with a slightly older fellow in the title role, you can see how the parallels do exist: A world-weary, humorous guy at the center of a bunch of wacky characters that entangle themselves in his life. Which show am I talking about? Exactly.
Now, "Newhart" had a lot more going for it than "Seinfeld" did when they started. Audiences knew Bob from his Grammy winning comedy album, guest appearances on every variety show of the day and his two sitcoms: the first being a standard gentle comedy from the early sixties and the more famous and beloved one from the 1970s filled with winking innuendo, and was pretty racy by television standards, even though Dr. Robert Hartley and his beautiful wife Emily were married. It seemed like a look into a "real" relationship, with the ups the downs and the charm, and it was genuinely laughable and lovable.
"Newhart" was different, and it was supposed to be. Even so, many unfairly compared the actresses who played Mr. Newhart's wives on these two programs: Mary Frann's Joanna to Suzanne Pleshette's Emily, throughout the run. Really, the characters were never meant to be compared in that way. It was a different era, for television, for the nation, and even for the star. On "Newhart," Joanna's role was as a pillar of strength for Innkeeper Dick to hang onto when everything was going crazy, while Emily and Dr. Bob took turns skewering each other and their friends and situations with devilish 70s glee.
When "Newhart" began, it was shot on videotape and had more of a "soap opera lighting" look to it. The visuals are odd in relation to the rest of the series. Also, the characters that first season were more pedestrian and the alternating heartwarming/difficult story lines flip-flopped between borderline 1950s trite or 1980s mean! But when they switched to film and they added the talented Peter Scolari and Julia Duffy, things took off! Some of the wittiest dialogue and funniest moments in a sitcom of... just about any era. Brilliant writing, and well played performances, even with the stock characters Larry, Darryl and Darryl.
Let's get to the famed final episode, which is arguably the greatest "last episode" of any television show ever created. But the question is, why is it so great? You need to know a couple of facts.
There were two other programs of the era that utilized a similar plot twist device around the time of "Newhart's" end: NBC's medical drama, "St. Elsewhere" (from the same production company as "Newhart" - MTM) and CBS's own nighttime soap, "Dallas," which had an important storyline involving Patrick Duffy's character, Bobby Ewing.
Without going into specific detail about any of what these other show's plots were about (in case you haven't seen those programs), I can say that if the "St. Elsewhere" and "Dallas" plot points were not played out the way they had, "Newhart's" ending, though still funny, wouldn't have had the incredible explosive impact it had. It was a joke with an exponential punch line: you're not just laughing about the concept, you are laughing about the context of the concept in history. In other words, you were laughing not only at the moment within the show, but it was a big fat joke on all of television, itself!
Really, this was one brilliant, brilliant last laugh. It is so breathtakingly unexpected, yet perfectly fitted, it's almost impossible to think that it wasn't somehow planned from the first episode! That only makes it that much funnier!
Perhaps best of all, they did it before anyone conceived the notion of a program sentimentally "paying tribute to itself," or having "celebrity commentary," and they managed to stick to their thirty minute format, not "expanding" the program to milk it.
Genius.