In its series finale, Modern Family isn't what it used to be, but maybe that's okay
TV Reviews Recap
It’s difficult to unpack Modern Family’s legacy. You certainly can’t trust the ABC-created narrative, where the show was a lone example of progressive representation when it first premiered in 2009, because plenty of other shows were handling more complex issues. But was Modern Family progressive in terms of the sitcom? You could make that case a little more easily, especially considering that the show premiered near the end of the Charlie Sheen era of the massively popular Two And A Half Men and only two years after the rather reductive The Big Bang Theory first graced our TVs with jokes about nerds; Chuck Lorre was certainly putting his stamp on things.
Modern Family might not have been the brilliant, progressive stand it’s often marketed as, but there is something to be said for the way it normalized the type of family you didn’t typically see on TV. The show tackled social issues here and there in its early days, and did so under the rather strict format of the sitcom; remember when every episode used to end with a saccharine monologue and that acoustic guitar soundtracking the outro? But its greatest flaw was also its greatest strength: it was incredibly funny, and therefore didn’t need to be political, though perhaps it should have been more political, but also isn’t there something mildly radical about just being the show it was? Like I said above, it’s difficult to unpack the legacy in retrospect.
It’s difficult because these things move in increments, something that Apple TV’s Visible: Out On Television recently did a great job of underlining. True change in the media landscape takes time for a number of reasons, some more sinister than others, and as much as I always wanted more out of Modern Family, there’s no denying that its mere presence and its massive popularity as measured by ratings and awards had a net positive impact. And again, those first five seasons or so are genuinely hilarious.
If anything, it’s the beautiful march of progress that came to swallow up Modern Family. Like a formerly progressive text that’s now dated and slightly problematic, Modern Family helped to usher in shows that simply surpassed its own stab at diversity and progressive values. As the jokes and storylines dried up—there are some highlights every season, but most seasons after Cam and Mitchell’s wedding are largely made up of misses—other shows came to occupy and expand the space the show once held. Look no further than One Day At A Time, a sitcom that feels fresh and contemporary while rolling out episodes that are heartfelt, political, and nuanced.
Modern Family didn’t solely pave the way for more diversity on the screen, but its fading into the background can be somewhat attributed to the roster of diverse shows that came in its wake. Once the show hit that emotional crescendo of Cam and Mitchell’s wedding, it struggled to come up with new, challenging storylines. So, like so many sitcoms before it, Modern Family fell into a formula. The characters became one-note, the conflicts more exaggerated and cliche, and the once overly sentimental tone was replaced by a nastiness that too often steered the characters into cruel confrontations that made the show truly unpleasant to watch.
The final season didn’t exactly redeem the show, but it did settle into a more comfortable groove. It was as if the writers and actors could see the end coming, and decided it was time to adopt the easygoing nature of a show on its way out. There were still some truly disastrous arcs this season, but for the most part you could define this final season as “perfectly fine.” Perhaps that’s damning with faint praise, but it feels like an apt description. There were a few highs, more than a few lows, and then a whole lot of stuff that just fell in the middle. This is a “B/B-” season if you’ve ever seen one.
Which brings us to the show’s final two episodes. In a lot of ways, the show went out exactly as this season intended it too. There’s nothing too showy, nothing that can really be described as shocking. Essentially, it’s a finale that’s all about change and just how difficult that is. Cam ends up getting that offer to move back to Missouri and coach the college football team; Phil and Claire decide that their house is too full and one of the kids has to move out; Jay and Gloria cope with Manny leaving in different ways.
There’s a lot of predictable comedy in here, but there’s also something that’s satisfying in just how low-key it is. The finale doesn’t necessarily shoot for outsized emotions. Instead, it makes things personal. We watch as Haley, Alex, and Luke reckon with what it means to be finally all living on their own. We see Mitchell step up to support Cam and take on a big move. We feel the conflicted emotions of Phil and Claire as they move from wanting one of their kids to move out, to lamenting their empty nest. None of this is remarkable, but I think that’s okay. It’s a finale that suits Modern Family as it is in 2020; a show that’s settled into old age.
Modern Family doesn’t have a next chapter, but these characters do, in their own way, and we can imagine what that looks like. This is a finale that’s both tidy and unfinished, and that feels just right.
Stray observations
- I spent five seasons on the review beat, and despite my general grumpiness about a lot of the show during this period, I’ll say this: it’s been consistently delightful to talk with readers, mostly on Twitter, about this show. You guys have shown up each and every year, and you’ve chastised me for looking for too much in the episodes and praised me for my consistent hatred of Manny as a character. It’s really, truly been great. So, we should probably bow out with Jay’s wonderful words. “Not everybody gets to have what we have.” That’s a good thing to remember as we move through our tumultuous times.
145 Comments
I’ve been rewatching the early seasons and remembering how funny and sweet this show could be at its peak. It’s also been a reminder of how very good members of this cast could be, with my particular favorites being Stonestreet and Burrell. I think it’s been a long time since this was consistently very good and it hasn’t always treated its characters well (Hyland is legitimately funny when given a chance, dammit, but they have almost ignored her for awhile). On the other hand, there isn’t a season I regret watching. I don’t know that this was a very satisfying finale – it seemed like a mad scramble to get the characters to new places – but it had its moments. I liked the Dunphy children’s sudden realization of how much they will miss each other.
with my particular favorites being Stonestreet and Burrell.I kept watching too long out of habit, and these past two seasons were the only ones I didn’t watch. But even when I found it extremely boring and unfunny, there was always some good Phil spots.
Phil has the most depth. He’s a dork who married up, and has learned to live his life with a certain degree of obliviousness. The moments when he is forced to acknowledge certain realities are fantastic.
Just dismiss the misogynistic troll that impersonates me.
Jesus, can the admins do nothing about this?
They have banned dozens, maybe hundreds of his accounts, but they don’t have IP blocking so he can keep doing it till he gets bored and finds a new hobby.
I agree to some extent. I think the show was hampered by economics, ABC didn’t have as much of a power house in its place, so they needed to keep the show running even if itwasn’t at its peak but you can see quality writing at all points of the show
I agree that you could always rely on Phil, Ty Burrell always seemed to be wholly committed to the character. Also agree on Hyland, thought she had some masterful moments in the ep where she’s trying desperately to manage the thanksgiving dinner, keeping Alex from insulting the obnoxious chef, and especially her dismissals of self-pitying Manny.
I’m a bit of an outlier in that I don’t think the first 5 seasons are all that much better than what followed. Certainly things got stale, but if you started watching at (say) season 6 I’m not sure you’d find it less funny than if you started in season 2.The story lines in MF were never particularly compelling. The show worked so well for 2 reasons – a great cast, and some really funny joke writers. Plotting and characterization were never the show’s strengths, but that’s fine.
I dont think i’m alone here when I say that I prefer when shows step away from politics, I watch comedies to escape the reality of the cruelness in the world. I think Modern Family in its early years did an amazing thing, it gave everyone no matter what background you came from something to look at and see yourself in at least one of the characters shoes. It was a show that BOTH Barack Obama and Mitt Romney enjoyed!! I think that in and of itself speaks on the impact Modern Family had in its early years. In summary, Modern Family didn’t need to be political and i’m very glad it (mostly) wasn’t
I know time is a bit weird right now, but again I’ll point out that this show feels like it has been ending for at least two years now. It feels like other shows came and went during this last season.
Just dismiss the troll that impersonates me.
I honestly don’t remember when I stopped watching this show. I started a few years behind and loved it, but I don’t when I lost interest in a re-watch.Watching having missed probably a good 90% of I’ll say seasons 5 to now, this felt very low-key.
So those two guys were gay the whole time?
This is a joke…. right?
Doesn’t seem like it. They don’t seem to have much affection for each other. I bet they were roommates.
Maybe cousins.
or one of them was secretly straight…
Yah, but eventually Claire and Gloria will figure it out, too, I’m sure.
I’ve read those scripts on the internet. Don’t remember them being aired.
It was subtle, but they peppered in some clues all along.
In the early 21st century, given contemporary social mores, a lot of things had to be what we call “coded.” For instance, Mitchell had red hair and preferred a “cardigan or two.”
I love it when a show rewards careful watching.
Joking aside, I wonder how well Eric Stonestreet’s performance as Cam will age, considering he’s hetero, and played Cam as so swishy he practically needed braces to keep his wrist from going limp.
It’s funny to me how things like this seem to get almost grandfathered in a lot of the time, with most people generally accepting that it came from an earlier era (all the way back in the dark ages of 2009), like they did with the Simpsons character for 20 years before people finally complained enough. With this show and Will & Grace both ending a few weeks from each other, his and Sean Hayes’s character both feel like ones that wouldn’t make it past the writing stage now. On the other hand, you could probably ask any gay guy in America, and most would say they know someone who, at minimum, bares a resemblance to Eric Stonestreet’s character.ETA: If people start complaining about straight actors playing gay roles, I’m done with films and television. Russian novels only.
I suppose for me, in the future looking back on this show, the most problematic aspect is the fact that it’s a hetero guy playing Cam. It would be different entirely if Cam’s actor was gay, and was basing the performance upon deep personal experience. But the fact that it isn’t, that Stonestreet is hetero, and he’s playing such a swishy, fey character doesn’t come off as truthful, so much as broad and basic and, I’ll be frank, like minstrelsy. It’s an example of the limits of acting. I reject this idea that some take for axiomatic, that acting by its very nature entitles anyone to play any role they wish (Scar Jo I’m looking at you). There are some roles that ought not to be played by some people, and I think Stonestreet’s performance as Cam is one of those that will ultimately be looked upon as sadly dated and ultimately, an embarrassment.
Not sure I agree, it’s not as if “swishy and fey” is unheard-of in the gay community. Plus, Cam defies gay stereotypes in other ways, and the fact that he was a star athlete and is a great football coach while being obviously queer is a plus, not a minus. It sends the message you don’t have to code as straight to be effective in those traditionally hyper-masculine roles.
Personally, I think the thing that has already aged the show the worst is how the relationship between Cam and Mitch is painfully, obviously lacking in physical affection. I’m betting if you added up every (chaste, closed-mouth) kiss over eleven seasons you could count them on your fingers. So characters can be gay, and act gay, and get married and everything, as long as they don’t, like, kiss or make out or do any gross gay stuff.
Well, that and Cam and Mitch are written as just awful, awful human beings. Cam’s penchant for being incredibly skin-thinned and petty is a larger mark against the character than Stonestreet’s performance, in my opinion.
On top of the lack of physical affection (which was only addressed after the show was called out on it repeatedly, and to the mildest imaginable extent), most of their plots revolve around them being incredibly horrible towards each other. It don’t know if it’s intentional or not, but they really lean into the “bitchy gay guys” stereotype quite a bit.
most of their plots revolve around them being incredibly horrible towards each other.Yeah, to me that’s a much bigger indictment than Stonestreet’s casting or his performance.
As did all of their friends. When they got together with the other middle-aged gays, it was just a bitchfest.
I knew somebody had a complaint against can the same way I did, I thought cam was consistently the worst character in the show and I didn’t want to say it was Eric because he’s been great in everything else I’ve seen him in
It starts with the writing, not with the actor; all of the worst of Cam is in the script. (For that matter, everything about the gay friends is pretty terrible also.)
Everyone has to make their own decision on that, I guess, but if you’re basing it on the principle of not feeling true to a lived experience…should a gay male actor play a guy obsessed with chasing women (Rock Hudson played like 5 of these roles)? To go back to the last example, should the straight actor who plays Will on Will & Grace also not have played the role, even if he doesn’t play it as over-the-top as Eric Stonestreet?
I just think one has to be damn careful about it. Rock Hudson works because in a sense it was a lived in experience as a closeted person. He was playing a role on screen that reflected to an extent the life he lived (as least, the one outside his home). And there is always the factor to be considered as to the type of role. I have less of a problem with a queer actor playing an ostensibly heteronormative role. I think the issue is more bothersome when reversed, because then you have a role being taken from an LGBT actor, who encounters far more adversity even now, than a heteronormative actor will. There remains the stigma of the “other” involved, so you’ll seldom see a queer actor praised for playing a straight character, but you’ll see lots of plaudits for the “bravery” of the straight actor playing queer. Ultimately, I do believe there is a difference, one that is crucial, to a character’s portrayal, even if that character is portrayed in the same fashion, by two different people. It is very different, when a queer actor plays a queer character in a familiarly “swishy” fashion, than it is for a straight actor to do so, just as it is totally different for someone who is African American saying the N-word, than it is for a white person to say so. It reflects very different power dynamics and personal experiences, just as a queer and straight actor’s portrayal of a queer character reflect different values and meanings. One portrayal can be truthful, while the other inherently mocking.
I’ve only seen the first 3-ish seasons of Modern Family, but I figured they were setting up Luke to be gay to create inter-generational conflict/comedy/sitcom-learning between him and his swishy uncles on the “right” way to be gay.
Luke got weird. They were still hinting at him being gay this season! At least twice! And in between he dated a 50-year-old woman.
Phil and Manny? Yes.
Tiny callback to a joke from the pilot: on the plane with their newly adopted baby, there are once again…creampuffs.
Another callback was when Renaldo offered Phil a quiche, which he interpreted as “kiss.” On the first episode when Gloria walked in, she said “Hello, Phil,” and Phil thought she was saying “feel.”
So glad you said this; I completely forgot about that and didn’t understand that last scene of them at all.
Criminal Minds and Hawaii Five-O had truly awful finales. Arrow and Modern Family did well. So 2 for 4 for series finales for me this year
I tapped out at some point in S2…but the first season was legitimately great.
I liked the quiche line.
I remember really loving the first two season -then each season after that got a little worse – and I bailed sometime around season 5 or 6. Sitcoms just aren’t mean to go for 11 seasons. I feel like seven seasons should be the max for a sitcom. I can’t think of any offhand that didn’t go longer and have some real dud seasons and end on low to midpoint.
Let dramas (with rotating casts) go for the marathons. Sitcoms should aim for a nice tight five and only go a season or two past that if a) they are still really killing and at or near the creative peak b) the have a strong plan and compelling reason for an additional season or two.
“I feel like seven seasons should be the max for a sitcom.”That’s a good rule Any sitcom that I can think of that maintained quality for longer than seven years was/is either animated or did/does shorter seasons with 13 or fewer episodes. Brooklyn Nine Nine is in its seventh season right now and I’m hoping the next season will be the last. It’s still really funny, but there are cracks in that foundation.
I thought that I was the only one having issues with Brooklyn Nine Nine. It just doesn’t feel the way it used to for me. I thought maybe it was the change of networks but I didn’t realize that its been on for seven seasons. You’re right. It’s time to wrap it up.
I don’t think it’s the network switch. For me things started trending somewhat downward through the latter half of season five. There are some great episodes during that run, but that’s when I think it started to feel less consistent.
Brooklyn Nine Nine’s saving grace is the the last two seasons has been less than 22/23 episodes. And I miss Gina. I hope it wraps up with season 8.
I agree. I LOVE B99 – but the NBC years haven’t quite been up to par with the Fox years – so I’d be OK if they wrapped it up next season and went out on top (or near it).
I don’t think it’s quite that clear of a delineation. You can kind of see things start to trend somewhat downward through the back half of their last season on Fox (even though there are also some great episodes during that stretch). I just don’t think the majority of network comedies need to last longer than 100-120 episodes.
I still love Brooklyn 99 but it feels like they’re just having fun with it until they get cut. I don’t want to say they’re phoning it in, but you can tell there’s no hunger to come out on top.
Simpsons has entered the chat.
It’s hard even to get through five or six without a lull in the middle years, and “Modern Family” can be commended for that. Those early years were good — and not just as a zeitgeisty thing with a best-by date; they’re quite rewatchable.Financially, I do understand that as long as a show remains popular, there’s a lot of pressure to ride that gravy train all the way to the end of the line. I think either Chuck Lorre himself or Jon Cryer mentioned an aspect of that after Charlie Sheen got canned from “Two and a Half Men”: besides the actors and financial backers and networks, they were all very conscious of how a hit TV show is carrying a lot of wage workers behind the scenes. Winding it down just because you’re creatively enervated or off in the weeds (assuming you have that realization at all…) is not a simple thing.There’s a long line of comedies that occasionally made me think, “Is that still on?” years after they’d lost me. But presumably, if their ratings were still good and commercial spots were still selling, other people stuck with the show, or else its changed character found a new audience…
Kinda reminds me of how long things like Yes, Dear or According to Jim lasted. I don’t think either one of those were anyone’s favorites or were pop-culture phenemonenans, yet they just kept coming back each season.
Kinda helps they had so little quality to lose.
That’s mostly because it felt too artificial to keep all the kids at home.
Big Bang Theory actually holds up rather decently in syndication and I can appreciate the syndication of Modern Family.
This is why I think The Simpsons deserves a little more credit for how long its “golden age” lasted, even if it eventually had a decline. That decline didn’t start or become truly apparent till its TENTH or ELEVENTH season! The fact that the show went a near decade remaining consistently funny and finding new ways to reinvent itself is nothing short of astonishing.In terms of live action, It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia has had an incredibly consistent run for almost fifteen years. Maybe it’s because those lead characters aren’t supposed to change or mature at all, but the formula works.
id say sunny after season 6 had a definite lull for 4 or 5 seasons (thats not to say it didnt have its moments), but the last 2 have definitely seen a resurgence.
My personal “huh the Simpsons is getting kinda crappy” is when they went to New York – which I think was season 9. But to your broader point – you have to take into account that the first two seasons of the Simpsons are pretty bad too (was all catchphrases and none of the voices were quite right yet) so IMO it sticks pretty good to the 7 season rule.
It’s Always Sunny is a better exception – but even then I remember feeling like a few years ago that it was kinda floundering (though it has recovered in later seasons IMO- but I haven’t seen the most recent one yet)
It’s always sunny also only has half the number of episodes of a network sitcom, which is a pretty big suggestion of what networks should be doing.
I haven’t seen a new episode in its first airing in a few years, and every time I’d see an ad for the show wondered what contrivances they were using to keep all of the Dunphy kids in the house. Letting them move on and become role players would have been a good idea.
It’s easy to forget how incredibly good those first few seasons were. Almost every episode was just really elegantly constructed, with a bunch of little jokes and a few running gags that piled up on top of each other and culminated in a BIG payoff by the end of the episode.
You could almost feel the writers running out of steam a couple of seasons in and giving up on even trying that sort of carefully constructed interlocking-jokes style.
Hit sitcoms produce such huge syndication deals it’s hard to convince anyone to stop before it gets completely stinky.
I’ll put in a vote for Cheers as an outlier with 11 seasons. Even if you view the Diane years as stronger than the Rebecca years, it’s hard to deny how strong the show was (with no outright “dud” seasons) until the – perfect – end.
I’ll second your vote for Cheers. I personally couldn’t stand Diane, so I enjoyed S6-11 more than S1-5, even while admitting that the overall quality of writing was superior in the first five seasons. (Diane Chambers was the worst).
And I actually think Rebecca Howe was a really good character for her first three seasons or so. She did get really ridiculous at the end, but that’s all right.
And the last episode of Cheers – with everyone hanging out for a quiet night at the bar, down to the final scenes when it’s just Norm and Sam, and then Sam all alone… still chokes me up a bit.
Also, I second the vote for B99. Last season was still pretty good, but not as good as S2-5. And this season is just okay. I wish they’d actually make the effort to do some police work, because it’s turning into just an office comedy, and it’s really not that interesting.
Married With Children went 11 seasons. I don’t remember when it went down.
Same here, but I gave up after season 3. I think a sitcom can go on for 11 years (look at “It’s Always Sunny), but the trade off needs to be fewer episodes. 10 episodes seems to be about optimal. 21-22 is just way too much and leaves you with a lot of filler and they run out of ideas pretty quickly.
I think one of the problems of sit-coms is that characters and people age and it becomes increasingly difficult to come up with reasons why the characters stay without having them devolve into idiots/who they were before.For example, Modern Family had the classic problem where Alex had to go to college. However, because they wrote her to be a genius (and Jay to be rich), they couldn’t have her stay at a local community college. So they had to come up with all sorts of haph-hazard reasons why she keeps staying or visiting. For those that opt for character growth (such as Jake in Brooklyn 99), it becomes hard to keep coming up with storylines because he already had a character arc….so are we going to have him keep growing (how?) or have him devolve and then come back as his same self?
Actually, some of my favorite dramas were 2 or 3 seasons. Looking at stuff I recently watched:
Especially the fast-burning ones. Homeland is running too long now. Orphan Black should have been 3-4 seasons, not five. I just finished Lodge 49 and thought 2 seasons was ideal. Daredevil at 3 was solid. Even Russian Doll and Dead to Me will have some trouble getting meaningful reasons to continue in S2. 13 Reasons Why dragged a bit in S3.
You can tell how long a successful sitcom’s been on the air by the haircuts. Once the cast all have $1000 haircuts, the sitcom is ready to be cancelled.
I tried to like this show, but I couldn’t get past the whole convenient documentary-style they’d adopt…it just stank of lazy writing and….Eh…that’s enough negativity for me today
Not an original concept, sure, but I’d take issue with the lazy writing. The first seasons were fantastically written, well constructed, and really, really funny.
I haven’t watched consistently in a while, but even the later episodes I caught were still full of funny observations and gags that kept it entertaining.
Oh it’s a total ripoff of “Waiting For Guffman”, “A Mighty Wind”, and “Best In Show”, but those are incredibly funny movies for how dry and mockumentary style they are. If you haven’t watched any of them now is the time to.
Might as well go back to “Spinal Tap“ if you’re going that route. As I said, not an original concept, especially considering “The Office” was around as well.
It was more of a style than actual practice. The creators have said there isn’t actually anyone filming them.
Then why the “talking head” segments?
Just a way for the characters to break the fourth wall. Like I said, they’re adopting the style, not the conceit.
Exactly when did they stop doing that?
This endless dissection of pop culture has long surpassed the point of being painful.
It’s a fucking sitcom. It never struck me as being particularly progressive. We’ve had gay characters being commonplace on TV for 25 years. Inter-racial couples for a couple decades more, extended families being the result of second, or third marriages for 30 some years. Strong ambitious mother’s trying to have it all, and bumbling but well meaning fathers. These have been sitcom cliches for decades at this point, the only change was throwing them all together in one messy package as they acknowledged that the 1950’s have been over for….well who even knows how calender’s or time work. We’ll say “awhile”
I don’t get what this fascination people have with the idea that they will ever be represented on television, or that it’s somehow going to be a positive influence in your life or society at large. At the point things start getting shown on TV, they’ve already been largely accepted by anyone that is going to accept them, whatever special little hat they happen to wear. Almost as a rule, you (whomever you happen to be) are not attractive, funny, smart, or interesting enough to come close to being in the same league as even the most painful of TV characters. You aren’t supposed to.
They’re make believe. Stretching the limits of believability while keeping some loose foundation that makes the average viewer feel some misplaced sense of connection allowing them to live vicariously through the lives of people that could never exist. That’s the allure. Entertainment is entertaining for the simple fact that it shows people living the kind of lives, exhibiting the kind of behavior that most people can only dream of, wistfully while they wipe cheeto dust on their shirt and ponder whether or not they’re about to fart, or shit themselves, even if it the answer won’t cause them to muster the energy to get off their fucking couch.
Married with children was more groundbreaking 22 years before.
So I saw this series finale tonight along with its hour documentary. After having seen Schitt’s Creek’s series finale and hour documentary yesterday, it really struck me how differently these shows were made. For me at least, Schitt’s Creek came off as actually caring about its characters, and the connections between the actors seemed real, while Modern Family really seemed like a corporate product. MF’s documentary came off so fake and forced, like everything was in service of a corporate strategy of emotional manipulation in service of advertisers – saccharine can be okay, but it has to seem earned. SC appeared to be more about a few people’s vision of a good show. One of the things that always bothered me about MF is that character only exists there as a vehicle to a joke, which meant lack of real development, and at times oversimplifying or ignoring character when a cheap joke could be made. This really contrasted with SC’s focus on characters developing and changing with each other, not to set the stage for stories, but as a natural consequence of them.MF’s emotional end rang incredibly hollow for me, while SC’s really resonated. I’m sure MF brought in a ton more money, but SC managed to actually create something valuable.
Well, the co-creators of Modern Family hate each other and traded off being in charge every other episode. Notice in the documentary that the two of them were never on screen at the same time. That has to cause strains on a show.
Oh wow, yeah that would do it. No wonder the “we’re all a big happy family” vibe given off in the documentary seemed so fake and forced.
It seems to me I remember some talk a couple of years ago about spinning off Cam and Mitch, and the last few episodes seem to lay the groundwork for a show if they decide to go for it. I don’t see a gay Green Acres working, but the setup is there.
Network TV sitcoms are crap and always have been. There are no exceptions. This is what the mouth breather crowd does to pass the time because they have nothing to think about. The final death of network style tv will be one of the best things to happen in entertainment in a long time.
I think you might be trolling, but I have to say it… The Middle was absolutely an exception.
As are Seinfeld, Cheers, Mary Tyler Moore and literally any great network sitcom of the last 70 years.
An under appreciated gem of a show. I still want that Sue Heck spin off.
https://blog.csdn.net/tiankong_/article/details/81163831 kevin
So to put this in perspective I have watched new episodes of the Simpsons live for twenty years. Modern Family was my Wednesday treat to watch. Now I have during the week on B99 to look forward to on Thursdays.
I have watched the Simpsons since they were on Tracy Ullman and I sat through it just for the hilarious cartoon that came on before and after commercials. I doubt I have missed more than 5 or 6 episodes.Is it still at its creative peak? Look, nothing like that lasts forever. But is it still a fun 22 minutes every week? Absolutely.
At least the folks behind Seinfeld now longer have the most disappointing finale. This wasn’t as good as an average episode of theirs.
Soooo, who exactly were they talking to in the confessionals?
The audience.
I know that, but for me the whole mockumentary thing doesn’t work when people stop to give a confessional to no one.
11 years and 250 episodes says differently.
Oh, it’s longevity forms my opinion for me?
Who was dead all along!
I was so relieved they didn’t do The Office thing.
The original concept was that the show was meant to be a mockumentary.
The audience, yes. The creators have said there isn’t really a documentary crew following them; it’s just a style they’re employing.
That’s just really pointless then.
Ted Mosby’s kids.
How did YOU know that Joe was my favourite Full House character?
comment of the week!
Bernie Mac’s former producers.
damn you for reminding me he’s gone 🙁
Same people who the characters from Parks and Rec were talking to.
Still, the (mostly impossible) camera crew is addressed directly in a few instances of Parks and Rec. I remember Tom doing it, for instance. They’re followed around in moments when they realistically shouldn’t, but the idea of a documentary about the people running the government of a small town makes sense.
“Modern Family helped to usher in shows that simply surpassed its own stab at diversity and progressive values.”the show did really feel unique as a show to sit down with the family when it was introduced, and I remember being young and gay and in the closet and feeling relieve at my parents not even batting an eye at the intro of Mitch and Cam (however problematic or not problematic people want to view that queer relationship).
I’d say it was somewhat progressive in that their relationship just was from the moment the show started. The families were beyond the points of confusion or denial. Even if Jay liked to throw out the occasional zinger at Mitch and Cam, he treated everyone that way and obviously didn’t try to exclude them from any corner of family life.
very great way to look at it 🙂
It’s almost a shame it’s gone on for so long, because most people don’t remember, or have never seen the first few seasons, which were really, really, unapoligetically funny.
I was sort of hoping to have the final episode have a sort of “Wizard of Oz”-style reveal where the “documentarians” reveal their intentions – or just had them leave with their gear, and finally leave the families. Given the show spent almost no time talking about economic hardships, it quickly became a fantasy show, especially with the Will and Grace-style guest star appearances. Even though it was great to see an LGBT family in the center of the show, I tended to favor The Middle’s more middle class/lower middle class story lines.
And somehow Haley and what’s-his-name can afford to buy Mitchell and Cam’s new house. WTF
I think they were renting it. At a steep discount, I’m sure.
Didn’t Cam and Mitch just move last episode? Now they’re moving again?!
Yes. That was the point 🙂
I haven’t watched for years but out of my enjoyment of the first couple of seasons, I thought I’d watch the finale. It really only reminded me why I stopped watching in the first place. The jokes had become so telegraphed that I felt like a psychic. Who DIDN’T know Cam and Mitch’s friends were going to LOVE Jay’s gift? Don’t get me started on the stereotypical gay friends. All the annoyingly too-grown-up-for-his-age lines that Manny used to deliver that drove me nuts are now being uttered by an even younger kid in Joe. And they really overdid it with the stop/starts of Cam and Mitch leaving. What should have been a emotional moment became a “God, just leave already!” with the third flight delay.
My ultra conservative parents love this show, and that to me is its whole legacy in a nutshell.
My favorite part of the show was when Lily ran around explaining she had two dad’s that were gay, & that she was a lesbian! Lol
I was also a bit disappointed by this finale; it didn’t help that it came one day after the finale of Schitt’s Creek, which I think struck the perfect balance of being a satisfying and emotional ending, while also being a very funny episode, just like those that came before it.It also would have been nice if they had addressed the documentary format, what that was supposed to be about. Not saying they should have said it was a documentary, but could have just passed it off as filming they were doing for Manny all along, or something like that, since he ended up being a filmmaker and was always a weird kid.
I think the most surprising turn is not that doofus Luke actually got into a college (though that is a shock unto itself) but that he will be paying out-of-state tuition on top of all that. He should have shot for more local.
For all the drama of Luke going to college, you know he’s going to drop out and come home.
It was satisfying. Not as funny as it used to be, but still a nice ending to a show i’ve enjoyed over the years.
I have noticed in the comments that some folks are saying that as the show went on this family became increasingly mean to each other but I would say that this was evident from the fist season. Jay and Phil’s combative relationship with each other, Claire calling Gloria a gold-digger (which was one of the better episodes in fact), the sniping of the kids towards each other (when Alex and Haley would go back/forth dissing each other it was funny but still mean).
Mitch and Cam from the get go always seemed like a miss-matched pair but their relationship worked in a opposites attract kind of way. Early seasons certainly had a bit more gravitas to them (Alex letting slip that Haley is having sex as a teenager while in the car w/her sister and dad), Claire trying to enact change in her neighborhood by running for a seat on the City Council, and other moments that were not just played for laughs.
I would say that around Season 5 the show did peak and I think Season 4 or 5 had that great episode where Luke takes care of business interspersed w/a child being baptized that has a great re-enactment of some scenes from The Godfather (or The Godfather II, I forget which one). I googled, it was Season 4 and the ep is called Fulgencio and is one of my faves.
Also, considering who Lily’s parents are I am amazed that she did not turn into a complete basket-case by her teen years. Her character never got under my skin like it did for some folks. I also did not “hate” Manny but agree that the writers never quite seemed to know what to do with his character. He would be given some great lines/quips, and there were the eps where we got a glimpse of his struggles to connect with the opposite sex, but it just feels like they gave up on his character in the later seasons.I know that Haley was ill for a bit so they placed her character in the background of the show for quite some time but I thought she was great the past couple of seasons having to deal with being pregnant and having twins. She is gorgeous and can really sell some very funny lines of dialogue (such as when she would speak to the camera explaining how she always knew what to say to manipulate her parents) so it was probably just as frustrating to the writers of the show that for health related reasons it was best not give her much to do on the show when she was sick so she could focus on getting well.With a sharp writers room I would watch a spin-off focusing on Haley’s family but I also fear that any spin-offs of this show will end up being as good as After Mash, that is to say not very good at all.
Finally, the show still brought the funny in the last episodes…the kids cottoning on to the fact that their parents were living in the RV due to the smell of bacon was not a sophisticated comedic set-up but one that still worked.
“it ty burrell was incredibly funny.” there, fixed it for ya.
I haven’t watched the show in probably six years. Can someone give a brief reason why Manny sucks now?
He was always a one-note character, but when it was a 10 year old acting ridiculously metrosexual* it was funny, as a 20 year old he’s just insufferable. *only calling him that for lack of a better word, since he’s portrayed pretty stereotypically I’m not sure there’s a less loaded term to use here.
And they ramped it up! As the character entered high school and then college, he got more and more pretentious with absolutely no reason for him to be that way (other than the undying support of his mom?)
When did Manny not suck? I guess he was cuter in the beginning, but he hasn’t changed in any way other than getting bigger.
Re the headline: no it’s not ok. I’ll just blame on the “we’re only here for the money” mentality.That said, still a pretty good run.
And it hit its peak with the Vegas episode. Great writing, great acting, great directing, great guest stars. The Halloween and Thanksgiving episodes really cranked up the quality as well.
Does anyone really believe Alex can’t convert meters to feet? Or at least know she can do it on her phone instead of asking her dim siblings?
I’m all here for the spin off of Mitch, Cam and Lily in Mizzoruh. Like Gay Green Acres.
Yeah, after Mitch and Cam got married, the show went downhill. But there are other shows I gave up on when they went on their slide to mediocrity whereas I never did with this one. I basically enjoyed the last half of the series as a watchable but mediocre one. In that sense, the series finale is a solid one.
While I could easily agree that the show was losing its touch after all these years, I don’t believe it was due to keeping up with diversity or politics, rather the opposite. Everything is becoming too politicized and diversity has hit unrealistic levels. It’s sad that I seemingly feel so different than the average critic, and that I strongly feel like I’m a better judge than they are. I can’t stand politics and unrealistic diversity forced into entertainment. It feels like a social trend and I hate social trends. I remember the days when railing against conformity was a big deal, and now it’s conform or pay the price. Incidentally, it should never have to be either/or.
Nice
https://www.worldteachesus.com/2020/04/michael-dell-founder-of-dell-computers.html
This was a show that I enjoyed all 11 season off, made me laugh out loud all 11 seasons. Yes, it was better in the early seasons but still was pretty good in the later ones. I got no issues with shows going 10 or 11 seasons as long as the fans still enjoy them (as we see by the ratings).
Not a proper Modern Family episode. Lily and Luke showed up.
Modern Family was exactly what it needed to be in order to further the normalization of homosexual relationships. It absolutely shouldn’t have been more “political,” because once you get political, you turn off the majority of people that could potentially be reached. If you shove a message in the face of someone with a different point of view, it isn’t going to be received kindly. You’re just going to lose that member of the audience. Modern Family never got preachy or holier-than-thou about Mitch and Cam’s relationship. Especially with Cam’s rural upbringing, there must have been the temptation to run an “angry rednecks don’t approve of teh gays” story line, but they didn’t do it. They occasionally went into Jay’s difficulty with accepting Mitch’s homosexuality, but it was never done with the message that “Jay is ignorant.” It was always done with the message that “Mitch is hurt.” They just depicted their relationship as normal, as something that nobody could possibly object to. And as a result, I think a lot of people who objected to gay marriage started to think, “Why are we so scared or threatened by this?” TL;DR – I don’t think we have legal gay marriage in this country without Modern Family, and they deserve any amount of praise they get.
For a show that I have watched for ten years, I felt zero emotions during these last two episodes.they felt rushed and lazy at the same time.
this was must watch TV for me for 7 seasons—I still remember gasping/laughing at Phil’s line in the first show about Lily’s name (“won’t she have a hard time saying that?”) and realizing I was hooked—but the last 2-3 seasons seemed to be about them struggling with a bunch of first world problems that I assumed the whole cast was having as they became more and more rich (e.g. the house boat on Lake Tahoe to watch an eclipse comes to mind) and I slowly dropped out. Having said that, the clearest picture I was left with from the last show was, I suspect they won’t have nearly as hard a time getting these guys together for a reunion show as they did with Friends.
Eleven seasons and the comments board hasn’t reached 100 yet. Do you recall the good old days when comments would regularly pass 200 on the most trivial of articles? Its not just AV Club (or Kinja), I’m seeing this as a trend across the board. Maybe the novelty has worn off. We’ve expressed our opinions on everything under the sun and now there’s nothing left to say. You’d think being trapped home during a pandemic would bring out commenters desperate for a little ‘social interaction’.
“those first five seasons or so are genuinely hilarious” You misspelled “two”.
Oof, this show. What a strange legacy. The first two seasons were probably some of the funniest on TV at that time – I remember binging the first season with my now husband and us laughing our asses off. And I think it was probably the first “family” sitcom that had a gay couple as one of its main focuses, and that is important. But after season 3 it got less funny, after season 5 it just got awful and I started to feel like I was watching a bunch of trapped circus performers signaling for help with every new episode.I will say – someone I think who never really got their due was the actor who played Luke. Even as a child he managed to mimic Ty Burell almost seamlessly at times (or maybe Ty Burell built Phil on how the actor who played Luke acted, but that would be a dangerous gamble on his part). And even when he had nothing to do (like for the last six years) he could still make me chuckle.Anyway, it was nice that Ed O’Neill has an iconic character for this generation like he had for mine. I guess my family will switch to watching Extreme Home Makeover to get our weekly Jesse Tyler Ferguson fix?