Disney Channel Original Series: An analysis

[Jules]

Keep in mind I'm only 12.

I'm assuming you're talking about your age there. Shouldn't you be 13 to join the forum?

[schoollover]

Keep in mind I'm only 12.

I'm assuming you're talking about your age there. Shouldn't you be 13 to join the forum?

sorry i meant to type in 14

[PeterPanfan]

I'm assuming you're talking about your age there. Shouldn't you be 13 to join the forum?

sorry i meant to type in 14

12 and 14 are a little ways apart...

[Escapay]

The thing about Disney and Nickelodeon shows is that they're intentionally written to be larger than life, where the main tween characters can do no wrong, the adults are buffoons, and stereotypes and cliches run amok. They're made that way to appeal to the tweens and kids that they're targeted at. Kids would rather watch kids their age in situations they could only fantasize about, and see them put one or two over whatever adult is around. Sure, there is some strange appeal that draw in older viewers (hell, I admit to enjoying the occasional "Hannah Montana" even if the show is a dreadful waste of film stock.), but for the most part, these shows are primarily aimed at people with single-digit ages or people who are approaching puberty.

Oh, and "iCarly" and "Ned's Declassified School Survival Guide" are awesome.

albert

[blackcauldron85]

The thing about Disney and Nickelodeon shows is that they're intentionally written to be larger than life, where the main tween characters can do no wrong, the adults are buffoons

While often this is true, I don't think it's as true for Disney shows. I mean, I love iCarly, and I like Spencer, but compare Spencer to some Disney guardians, be it Raven's parents, Lizzie's parents, or the Russo parents. I wouldn't call them buffoons.

[Escapay]

The thing about Disney and Nickelodeon shows is that they're intentionally written to be larger than life, where the main tween characters can do no wrong, the adults are buffoons

While often this is true, I don't think it's as true for Disney shows. I mean, I love iCarly, and I like Spencer, but compare Spencer to some Disney guardians, be it Raven's parents, Lizzie's parents, or the Russo parents. I wouldn't call them buffoons.

I meant in general, the adults are just there to either prop up the main characters or to be tricked by them. Even if Ma & Pa Baxter/McGuire/Russo are normal, they still get tricked by their kids and function more as a responsible adult only when it's necessary to the story. But for the most part, virtually any adult role in any Disney/Nick tweencom is made to be a caricature and exaggeration of what an adult really is. It skews viewers minds that adults in general are buffoons, while a mischievous brat like Drake or Zack or Sam or Cory is the near-flawless hero(ine).

albert

[blackcauldron85]

near-flawless hero(ine).

Well, the kids do get in trouble and there often is a moral lesson to be learned...

[Escapay]

near-flawless hero(ine).

Well, the kids do get in trouble and there often is a moral lesson to be learned...

Hence why I said near-flawless.

They get in trouble, yes, but most of the time it seems shoe-horned in just to give the episode a lesson. For the most part, most of the characters learn nothing even if it appears they do. For example, Alex in "Wizards of Waverly Place" has time and again learned when and when not to use magic, yet it seems like episode features her using magic for the wrong reasons.

albert

[blackcauldron85]

See, I said "there often is a moral lesson to be learned", not "there always is a lesson definitely learned". I agree with what you wrote, about the lesson "seems shoe-horned in just to give the episode a lesson". Well, duh. At least they make an effort, though?

[Escapay]

They make the effort, yes, but it's essentially futile since the characters never learn. And unfortunately, that's necessary for tweencoms (characters not really "learning" the lesson), because the writers rely on repetitive/recurring plot ideas. There's little room for character growth.

albert

[milojthatch]

It is interesting I think, to compare the Disney shows of today vs the ones back when Disney Chanel first came out (Kids Incorporated, New Mickey Mouse Club) or heck, even going all the way back to the original Mickey Mouse Club! Things have changed a lot for sure!

So far as the shows of this decade go, "Even Stevens" is my fav. Past that, no much of a fan.

[Kram Nebuer]

Sorry to bump an old discussion, but rather than start a new topic, I decided to attach this to here.

I found this on a blog which got it off of YouTube!

The blogger wrote that it brought back memories, but I didn't understand why until I watched the whole thing.
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/OOcHDSxjGbQ&hl ... ram><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/OOcHDSxjGbQ&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

The blogger was right, there were quite a few that I haven't seen in a while since their shows no longer air! I had no idea that the Lizzie McGuire kids did some of these or maybe it's just been so long, that I don't remember! I was wondering why the Mowry's said their old shows and not "Twitches" for the sisters and "Kim Possible" for Tahj. Also, it was nice to see some of the stars from the Disney movies make them (Race to Witch Mountain, Narnia, HSM3). Too bad for the new HSM3 kids though since they aren't being carried over to the 4th movie.

It's funny how many of them can't really trace a Mickey that well, but I guess it depends on the camera angle or something. At least Mickey Mouse got it spot on!

[blackcauldron85]

Disney Channel Claims its Most-Watched March Ever in Total Day in Total Viewers, Kids 6-11 and Tweens 9-14
http://tvbythenumbers.com/2010/03/30/di ... 9-14/46716
(via animationguildblog.blogspot.com)