Hacker Cinema
Ellen
1994 · TV series · 22 min episodes · 5 seasons
Created by Neal Marlens, Ellen DeGeneres, Carol Black
Ellen works in a Los Angeles bookstore called Buy the Book and hangs around with her friends discussing lovers, work and family.
4 neutralfrom 4 commenters
Where to watch
No streaming data for this title.
4 comments on Hacker News
> Joe Rogan as recently as last week said the vaccine is mostly safe
- "How Joe Rogan Became a Cheerleader for Ivermectin" [1]
- "Fact-Checking Joe Rogan’s Interview With Robert Malone That Caused an Uproar" [2]
- "What the Joe Rogan podcast controversy says about the online misinformation ecosystem" [3]
> But his main disagreement is pretending that it’s okay that biological males vs biological females is fair.
Sports isn't fair, period. It's why there's no "under 6 foot" NBA league. It's only with trans people that people suddenly (pretend to) care.
> And to correct you further, the 90s were the period where gay rights went mainstream
- "ABC shelves Ellen" (1998) [4]
- "Why Laura Dern Didn't Work For A Year, Despite Jurassic Park's Success" [5]
- "How ‘homophobia’ denied Sharon Bottoms custody of her son in the 1990s" [6]
Examples here are legion. Homophobia permeated popular culture (eg TV and box office movies). There was progress made, sure, but homophobia was so normalized at the time. I have to wonder if you lived through this era (as I did) or just read about it.
I mean, homophobia was still weaponized into the 2000s. Many credit Karl Rove with weaponizing state ballot measures on gay marriage to win the 2004 presidential election [7].
> Dawson’s Creek
technically the coming out storyline was 1999-2000 I believe and was controversial. Roseanne [8] is probably a better example. Picket Fences ended up censoring a kiss scene in 1993 [9] and caused quite a lot of controversy at the time.
[1]: https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/joe-rogan-covid19-misinformation-ivermectin-spotify-podcast-1219976/
[2]: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/08/arts/music/fact-check-joe-rogan-robert-malone.html
[3]: https://www.npr.org/2022/01/21/1074442185/joe-rogan-doctor-covid-podcast-spotify-misinformation
[4]: https://money.cnn.com/1998/04/24/bizbuzz/ellen/
[5]: https://www.cinemablend.com/news/2485962/why-laura-dern-didnt-work-for-a-year-despite-jurassic-parks-success
[6]: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/how-homophobia-denied-sharon-bottoms-custody-of-her-son-in-the-1990s
[7]: https://abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=230634&page=1
[8]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don%27t_Ask,_Don%27t_Tell_(Roseanne)
[9]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sugar_%26_Spice_(Picket_Fences)
Yes! This was especially obvious to me as a kid watching all the popular 90s sitcoms with my mom every evening.
ABC shows (oddly with the exception of Roseanne, now that you mention, that set really balanced it out) always had a bright, almost washed out look, eg Ellen, Boy Meets World, Drew Carey Show. NBC shows always looked more cozy and lived-in regardless of story location, eg Just Shoot Me, Friends, Seinfeld.
What "unregulated media" do you feel was responsible for "acceptance's first step"? I'm not an expert on this by any stretch, but I've studied both media history and LGBT issues, and the shows that get cites most often for doing a shocking amount of work in shifting American attitudes toward LGBT folk were, well, regulated media. Specifically, the network sitcoms "Ellen" and "Will & Grace," with earlier tentative steps in "L.A. Law" and, in the late 1970s, "Soap."
While "unregulated media" may have become leading edge in LGBT presentation in the years since, it's also become leading edge in reactionary backlash, from Fox to internet media to the right-wing propaganda pushed by Sinclair Broadcasting to their local TV stations -- which in many markets they wouldn't have been able to own if local TV markets were still more tightly regulated.
I'm not suggesting regulation is a failsafe panacea by any stretch -- I'm just suggesting that deregulation isn't, either. There is probably a balance to be struck, and it is not at all clear to me that the balance we have now is correct.
“Cheers,” which ran for 11 seasons on NBC, starting in 1982, was the first great hangout show: neutralizing the depiction of class and removing the pressures of work. Life is hard enough, “Cheers” said; let’s just make TV. Ever since, television started taking it easier on us. Bill Clinton was in the White House, and the economy had improved. On “Seinfeld,” “Living Single,” “Friends,” “Ellen,” “It’s Like, You Know,” “Sex and the City,” “Girlfriends” and, much later, “Happy Endings” and “New Girl,” the commingling, childless men and women might have had jobs, but almost none had consequential careers. How many jobs did Elaine and George have on “Seinfeld”? And in how many fields? And Kramer — how was he paying to live across the hall from Jerry? Hangout shows placed friendship above family, obviating the typical economic ecosystem. Belonging to a family of friends probably means you only have to support yourself.
TV became — and still is — a medium struggling to understand “average,” “ordinary,” “normal.”
Why would you go into any of these shows expecting anything resembling reality. They are all clearly entertainment in the form of light drama and inconsequential, whitewashed sexual tension. To expect anything else is to set yourself up for failure.
Deeper shows exist - The Wire, Breaking Bad, House of Cards - but headlining TV shows are not created to address issues anymore. The shows reflect the main demographics of TV watchers, because that's what keeps them watching, and that's what generates ad revenue. So I'm not too concerned with the state of TV - it's an echo chamber for older, more conservative folk.