Saul AusterlitzRezensionen

Yes. I just read a book about Friends. No, it wasn't a book of substance. No, it won't win a Pulitzer. But I found myself engaged reading about a TV show I enjoy. (I'm also one of those fans who is a generation AFTER it aired on NBC. Netflix has been awesome in enabling binge watching.It's also the perfect sitcom to watch as I fall asleep. Even Scott likes the show.)

It did feel like I was reading episodes almost word for word. I wouldn't say I learned anything new. BUT it was cool to learn about how the cast members felt that not one of them was over the other--so they fought for the same salary. That makes me really happy.

And I still hate Ross.

It’s a bit hard to peg this one. Some bits of this book were really, really well-done. Others, though, were decidedly less so.

There were some interesting peeks into the production and writer’s rooms. Yet a large amount of time was dedicated to basic episode recaps with no real further commentary. Other recaps were accompanied by opinionated commentary presented as gospel fact. There were some episodes and arcs curiously missing. Others were ever-so-briefly touched upon but never really explored. The author had an almost unnatural way of speaking: odd turns of phrase (used more than once), always going for the million dollar word when a fifty cent word would have sufficed. This is not me lamenting the use of big words- it is of using the biggest, most obscure word every single time.

It would have been nice had the cast been in on the book as well as the production team. Even some of the supporting cast would have had some interesting stories to add. There was one instance where the addition of Tate Donovan to the show was mentioned. Based on the preamble seemed certain that a story or two of his would follow. It all build up to... a couple of sentences about the cast groaning at his nervous lack of reaction to a practical joke.

The end of the book, the last chapter in particular, was a bit of a slog. All-in-all this was a decent but flawed trip back in time.

A breathtaking wholly original look at a story you've heard or heard of 1000 times before. This book makes it matter now rather than 50 years ago. Read it if you're only dimly aware of what "Altamont" means in the history of popular culture. Read it if you think you know all too well. Either way, it's miraculous.

Smooth, effortless writing, exquisitely researched. You're lost if you don't care about movies or comedy. If you do, you've got a lot of watching (and laughing) ahead of you.

Austerlitz explores the sitcom as a form by focusing for one chapter on one significant episode of each of the twenty-four sitcoms he thinks are the most important. He includes some discussion of related sitcoms in each chapter as well, so many shows that don't get a chapter treatment are still mentioned. I enjoyed this thoroughly when I was at least somewhat familiar with the sitcom he was discussing and almost not at all when I wasn't. Which, look--it's hard to explain humor, so I don't necessarily hold Austerlitz strictly to blame for this, but I feel like if you're going to write a book on sitcoms, you ought to be able to describe what makes a show or episode or bit work to someone who hasn't seen it? And mostly he just didn't. The book certainly wasn't a waste of time (I've seen a lot of what he discusses, and when I had, the discussion ranged from fine to great), and I learned some stuff even when I couldn't fully follow him. YMMV, I suppose, especially since Austerlitz is clearly biased (of course he is--how could you not be?) and he and I don't really agree on what's funny. He thinks Seinfeld is amazepants (I know, I know, a lot of people do), and I... so very do not. (I'd be really curious to see whether sitcoms line up in any way with people's Hogwarts houses--do any Puffs like Seinfeld?) The book also already feels dated (it was published in 2014) for what it necessarily leaves out. I mean, shows have premiered, had enviously long runs, and finished since this came out.

I’ve been a die-hard Friends fan from day one – which was twenty-five years ago! When I heard about this book, I knew I had to have it. Saul Austerlitz starts from the very beginning – how the creators came up with the concept for the show, the casting process, and the network machinations to get the show on the air. There was quite a bit that I didn’t know.

Instead of moving through the show episode by episode, he covers plotlines – like Ross and Rachel, Monica and Chandler, on so-on. He discusses the writers’ processes and offers some editorializing too. He seems to think none of us liked the Rachel/Joey pairing but I did! I was not a huge fan of Ross and Rachel – mainly because of Ross. But I digress – I could write a whole other post on my feelings about Ross and Rachel.

This is truly a book about the show, not the actors. He does cover their famous all for one, one for all philosophy concerning contract negotiations and other aspects of their professional lives but you won’t find much behind the scenes personal dirt on any of the stars. And that’s the way it should be for this type of book.

I really wish I would have read this book before Friends stopped streaming on Netflix. There are several episodes I want to rewatch. Even though I’ve seen each episode multiple times, Austerlitz managed to include tidbits about some of them that I didn’t notice. I do have all 10 seasons on DVD packed away somewhere around here. Time to dig them out! This book is a must read for Friends fans everywhere.

This was a fascinating and entertaining look at the history of sitcoms, focusing on some of the best sitcoms in history. There are a ton of references to other sitcoms that were left out of the main group, which was really nice to see. For example, Golden Girls is referenced many times in the chapter about Sex & the City. I'd highly recommend this book to any fan of TV!