'The Office' spawns a spinoff: How to make it more like 'Frasier' and less like 'Joey

[Brian Damage]

Most TV insiders thought it would be impossible to create a worthwhile American version of the award-winning British comedy "The Office."

Now they’re wondering whether executive producer Greg Daniels, the talented writer who pulled off that difficult feat, will be able to deliver an “Office” spinoff that will please both desperate NBC executives and discerning “Office” fans.

Daniels’ high-profile comedy series finally returns from a strike-induced break at 8 p.m. Thursday on WMAQ-Ch. 5. In Thursday’s episode of “The Office,” Jan (Melora Hardin) and Michael (Steve Carell) throw a disastrous dinner party for several Dunder Mifflin employees. (There's more on that episode here and here.)

Even as Daniels wraps up the show’s current season, his mind is probably on his new project, an “Office” spinoff that NBC plans to debut after the Super Bowl in 2009. Though “The Office” is a success, it isn’t a mega-hit when it comes to ratings. But it’s close enough for a struggling NBC, a network so desperate that it’s taking a big gamble with one of its most beloved shows.

And talk about a blank slate: The April 2 news release announcing the project had zero details about the new show. So far, it has no title, no concept and no cast.

Spinoffs from successful shows are inherently dangerous propositions, since the audience will expect great things from the outset. Ken Levine, a writer and director who has worked on “M*A*S*H,” “Cheers” and “Frasier,” knows that all too well: He also wrote for a show called “AfterM*A*S*H.”

“I’m a huge fan of Greg Daniels,” Levine said. “If anyone can pull this off, he can. My feeling is, though, that there are a lot of dangers and pitfalls to doing a spinoff.” (See this sidebar on notable spinoff successes and failures.)

For one thing, managing viewer expectations will be tough. “The Office” sneaked on to the schedule as a mid-season replacement in 2005 and had a chance to find its voice before attracting a lot of attention. Now the show is a pop-culture darling.

The spinoff will have no opportunity for a quiet debut: The hype for a show premiering after the Super Bowl will be intense, and “Office” fans will be let down — and possibly scathing — if the new comedy is not excellent right away.

“We all know what we love about ‘The Office.’ We want to see that again,” said Laverne McKinnnon, who is no stranger to spinoffs. She was senior vice president of drama development at CBS when the network created two new “CSIs.” “If we don’t get that, it’s a big ouch.”

McKinnon and Levine talked about the factors that can make a spinoff a success rather than a high-profile failure:

*Base a spinoff on a concrete idea that is carefully thought through.

A desperate, greedy, more-of-the-same premise often results in flops like a flop such as “Joey” springing from hugely popular hits like the hugely popular “Friends.”

“It sounds to me like this is a [development] less based on a creative decision and more based on network needs,” Levine said of the “Office” spinoff. “You have to make it about something, as opposed to putting people in a similar setting and just doing more of the same"

*If the new “Office” show is built around characters from Scranton, make sure they’re the right ones.

“People that you loved in a certain context may not be able to carry a show on their own,” Levine said. “The most perfect example of that is ‘AfterM*A*S*H,’” which featured three second-banana characters.

For years, NBC executives bugged Levine and his writing partner David Isaacs to make a “Cheers” spinoff featuring Norm and Cliff, but Levine said, “We learned our lesson with ‘AfterM*A*S*H.’ Norm and Cliff can’t carry a show. Kelsey Grammer [who went on to star in ‘Frasier’] could carry a show.”

*If an existing character is spun off, play to his or her strengths.

“What was great about ‘Rhoda’ [built around the character created by actress Valerie Harper on ‘The Mary Tyler Moore Show’] was that it brilliantly exploited that character’s quirks,” said McKinnon, who is president of television for the entertainment firm 50 Cannon.

*Taking away a key character from the main show is risky.



“Breakout characters” are the logical candidates for their own shows, but removing Jim or Pam, for example, from the Dunder Mifflin mothership could be a mistake. “There’s a risk that you could end up ruining both shows,” Levine said.

*Don’t necessarily ape every aspect of the old show, but give the audience what they want.

With new versions of “CSI,” audiences expected and got a strong procedural element, McKinnon said. When it comes to “The Office,” the setting and the stories on the new show don’t matter as much as “capturing the right tone,” she said.

As Levine noted, “The Office’s” deadpan, ironic tone is “fragile”: “The humor is really based on reactions. You need just the right touch.”

*Change the setting and the dynamics enough to give the new show its own identity.

“‘Frasier’ was primarily a family show, and it was set as far away from ‘Cheers’ as possible, and Frasier had a different kind of job,” Levine said.

*Casting is key.

“They lucked out when they cast David Hyde Pierce” as Frasier’s fussy brother, Niles, Levine said “I thought ‘The Office’ was cast incredibly well. [Daniels] really understood the idea of casting the funniest people that are out there,” as opposed to shoehorning in “names” or actors that the network is pushing.

“It has to be the best actor for the role. So many sitcoms have failed when they are created for particular actors,” McKinnon said.

*Don’t kill the golden goose.

Daniels will also be working on 28 “Office” episodes next season. It makes sense to wonder whether “the quality of ‘The Office’ will be damaged because Greg Daniels is working on the spinoff,” McKinnon said. As Levine noted, one danger of a spinoff is “diluting the franchise.”


http://featuresblogs.chicagotribune....fice-spaw.html