Watching it now on Sci-Fi (oops, I mean Syfy). I was kind of impressed (considering the time period it was made).
Why did only last only one season?
It provided eye candy (the lead and his secretary are hot!) and it had Kato!
Why only one season? I found it much more mature than Batman (not that I'm knocking the campy Batman series).
Despite Van Williams' oft-cited claims to the contrary, the ratings sucked. Cinefantastique magazine's February 1994 issue stated that it was frequently in the Nielsen bottom 20. It was up against the second season of CBS' major hit The Wild Wild West, which had to hurt TGH's numbers.
The GREEN HORNET Strikes Again!
Oh! No wonder!
If it was up against Wild, Wild, West, it didn't stand a chance. (Robert Conrad in a Bolero Jacket and tight pants plus Dr. Loveless... no show stood a chance).
Too bad, I was actaully surprised by the series and thought it had a lot going for it.
[deleted]
[deleted]
About the opening title sequence:
I don't really know for a fact, but given the history of the Green Hornet franchise I tend to suspect that the opening of the TV show was purposely done in a way that brought to mind the opening of the long running radio show (just with some pictures added).
It may be worth pointing out that the few other shows that you mentioned needed no conceptual introduction. 5-0 was conceptually a pretty straight forward cop show. UNCLE was a straight up spy show (during the height of the Bond inspired glut of Cold War spies in movies and TV). Mission Impossible always spent their first few dialog minutes specifically explaining all about the mission for this episode. Whenever something about the setup of a series was the least bit less obvious, the convention of the time was to do an introduction / explanation of the concept during the opening credits (whether in the lyrics to a song or in a voice over). Because of the tendencies of syndication, most people remember these explanatory openings more for sitcoms (Gilligan's Island & Green Acres & The Beverly Hillbillies & The Brady Bunch etc.). However, it also applied to action / drama series such as Star Trek.
[deleted]
I don't think that the announcer's voice is inherently corny. I think that people who spent their whole childhood hearing that voice in constant Batman reruns (and *only* on Batman) have the voice associated with the camp level of that show, but that isn't intrinsic in the voice. At the time, when Batman wasn't yet a long time institution and when I believe Dozier was doing a lot of VO / announcing work for a lot of different things (which further reduces any audience tendency to associate the voice with any one thing), I don't think that the choice of announcer was a big problem. (At the very least, it's not the level of problem that can be blamed for not getting a second season.)
I also think that the Herb Alpert "Flight of the Bumblebee" score was a terrific choice for the show. It's probably second only to "Peter Gunn" for recognizeability of an instrumental theme of a 1960s American TV show. (Side note: I've discovered that Retro-TV is showing old Peter Gunn episodes at 12:30 AM EST.)
I will agree that the slide-show-of-stills visuals could have used a fair amount of work.
"Flight of the Bumblebee" was used as the theme for the original radio series, and was picked up by Universal for its two Saturday matinee GH serials, so comparisons to Henry Mancini's Peter Gunn theme (or any other TV series' brand-new signature tune) are flawed. Or do you mean the specific recording used for this program with Al Hirt's lead trumpet? It was, after all, composed with the violin in mind.
The GREEN HORNET Strikes Again!
Yeah, I was thinking about the specific arrangement and recording. (Sorry about coming up with the wrong trumpet player's name in the previous post.)
Had they used a standard violin version it would have come across as "just another 'Flight of the Bumblebee'", and not been nearly as memorable. Plus, the periodic few beats of rhythm section work gave it a bit more of a contemporary jazzy feel.
I still think that jazz trumpet Bumblebee was as distinctive and memorable as any TV credit sequence instrumental piece up to that time, with the possible exception of "Peter Gunn". (I think that Hawaii 5-0 was still a couple years or so in the future.)
(Assume that "TV" actually means "American TV". I'm not familiar enough with the breadth of other country's TV offerings to make any statements about them one way or the other.)
[deleted]
I think the opening here is preferable to that of, say, The Six Million Dollar Man or The Incredible Hulk. It gets the somewhat unusual premise summarized about as quickly as it could be and remain clear. What we have here is in fact quite similar to what's used by contemporaneous series such as The Fugitive (seasons 2-4) and Run For Your Life. I agree with PillowRock about the narration. Dozier's delivery is restrained compared to his work on Batman, but only in that way. It is still overdone enough to be inappropriate.
BTW, the Cinefantastique coverage describes Dozier's getting that job in terms similar to how producer/writer Bill Scott became the regular voice actor for Bullwinkle the Moose. He read that part during some presentation before the role had been cast and afterwards was told to stop looking for someone else because he was perfect. You're already on the record here to that effect, and I concur.
The GREEN HORNET Strikes Again!
I just watched the show for the first time ever on Friday night on my DVR (I managed to record a few episodes from SyFy)... and I was verily disappointed by the graphics in the show's intro... very much Saturday morning fair, if you ask me. However, Al Hirt's rendition of Flight of the Bumblebee gives me chills. I first heard it on the Kill Bill soundtrack and was blown away... I recalled hearing the same piece years ago played on a tuba (Flight of the Tuba Bee... Canadian Brass - google it and check it out)... regardless of the instrument, piles of talent to pull off! (Many hours spent running through Arban's, I'm sure... but I digress)
So, yes... agreed, the show would have done heaps better if only it had a slicker intro, another 30 minutes, and not been programmed opposite one of the single most awesome westerns in the history of mankind.
-Dag
[deleted]
ABC made a major blunder by scheduling it against WWW. They apparently hadn't learned a rule of scheduling that should have been obvious since NBC tried scheduling Cimmaron City against Gunsmoke: When trying to compete directly against a major hit on another network, NEVER do so with a series too similar to the one you're competing with, or one which appeals to the same audience. Green Hornet clearly appealed to a similar demographic as WWW. Those who had already become big fans of WWW the year before were willing to check out the Green Hornet, but not at the expense of their show. I know, I was one who felt that way. I'd have been glad to watch GH had WWW not been on.
When competing directly against a hit show on another network, go with a show that appeals to a DIFFERENT audience altogether. A good example where this worked well---when NBC scheduled Emergency against All In The Family. Emergency was a hit without taking away from AITF's audience, as viewers of one generally had little interest in the other. Two totally different types of viewers. Another very early example---Bishop Fulton Sheen's "Life Is Worth Living" against Milton Berle.
Had Green Hornet been scheduled against a very different type of show, it would probably have been a hit.
Excellent points rbecker28!
shareI loved the show when I was a kid. I was taking Karate lessons at the time and knew who Bruce Lee was. In 1966 Karate was just beginning to come into the American consciousness, and Bruce Lee was as yet unknown.
The show only lasted one season because ratings were too low. The show suffered from two major weaknesses:
One--the fact that it was only a half-hour long. Stories for a drama don't have enough time to properly unfold in that time frame, and simply come off as rushed and unfulfilled. The exceptions are anthology series like "The Twilght Zone", "Alfred Hitchcock Presents" or more recently "Amazing Stories".
Two--the budget for special effects was so low that many of the gadgets and stunts look cheesy, not to mention the sets look like the backlot of a studio or sound-stage.
Still, I loved the show and have all the episodes in my collection today.
I agree with you regarding how a 30-minute format hurt the show. That did not allow for proper development of a plot,guest stars characters,or the show's cast.
Have to disagree with you regarding the look of the show.I thought the sets all worked well overall,especially the fireplace that doubled as a secret passageway.
The Black Beauty was incredible in look as well as the weapons it had on it.
The Hornet Sting remains one of my favorite TV weapons.Right up there with Star Trek's phasers.And the Hornet Gas Gun was nifty too.
No,the show was not flawless but for its era & budget they did an outstanding job.
I have heard that William Dozier who was executive producer of the Batman tv show, wanted to do The Green Hornet like Batman, with cliff hanger endings one night, and concluding the second night. ABC wouldn't give Dozier an hour for The Green Hornet, so he pulled the plug after one season.
shareThe 1966-67 Green Hornet is simply not a good television show. Many factors contributed:
a) 25-minute ep length is more compatible with comedy than drama
b) no backstory (in either the pilot or via flashbacks in later eps)
c) no personality in any of the principle characters
d) no sense of humor (even if they didn't want to go full camp)
e) no credibility when they claim that The City is under threat from the villain du jour (there are never any cars on the street other than the Black Beauty & the villain's; i.e. The City that the Daily Sentinel reports on is as dead as Elvis)
I suspect the whole series was rushed into production to cash in on the Batman phenomena. Since Batman debuted mid-season around January 1966, and Hollywood's pilot season is usually in February/March, it's completely plausible that GH66 didn't have the development time & budget -- or first crack at the better TV writers -- that it deserved.
Worth point out that Dozier was developing TGH as an hour show BEFORE BATMAN (This was around the time he was producing THE LONER and The planned NUMBER ONE SON fell through) and "Beautiful Dreamer" was actually written as THE ORIGINAL 1-hour pilot.
shareThe 1966-67 Green Hornet is simply not a good television show. Many factors contributed:
a) 25-minute ep length is more compatible with comedy than drama
b) no backstory (in either the pilot or via flashbacks in later eps)
c) no personality in any of the principle characters
d) no sense of humor (even if they didn't want to go full camp)
e) no credibility when they claim that The City is under threat from the villain du jour (there are never any cars on the street other than the Black Beauty & the villain's; i.e. The City that the Daily Sentinel reports on is as dead as Elvis)
I suspect the whole series was rushed into production to cash in on the Batman phenomena. Since Batman debuted mid-season around January 1966, and Hollywood's pilot season is usually in February/March, it's completely plausible that GH66 didn't have the development time & budget -- or first crack at the better TV writers -- that it deserved.
I loved GREEN HORNET. While BATMAN was fun, THE GREEN HORNET was majorly cool, and had a much more ominous tone.
To be fair, in the '60s, even the "successful" shows didn't tend to last very long ... including BATMAN.
They just burned out so fast back then.
--
http://i103.photobucket.com/albums/m127/tubesteak69/Divas_Who_Drink-1.jpg
True and 26 (28 if you count the Batman crossover) is close to two seasons of modern shows. Plenty to enjoy still
shareAlso, production staffs tended to be much smaller back then in the '60s and '70s -- which is why you had so many One Season Wonders (which became unwatchable by season three but sometimes ran five years).
Today, all series have a sea of producers who brainstorm over every aspect of every episode.
But back then you had maybe a line producer and a story editor (and even they were working several episodes ahead in pre-production) and that week's episodic director. So there was a lot more responsibility on a lot fewer shoulders, and shows tended to burn out much faster.
GREEN HORNET, of course, just had a bad time slot. But even if it had been a hit, it likely would have been cancelled by its third year, like BATMAN.
--
LBJ's mistress on JFK:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WcXeutDmuRA
Also, production staffs tended to be much smaller back then in the '60s and '70s -- which is why you had so many One Season Wonders (which became unwatchable by season three but sometimes ran five years).
Today, all series have a sea of producers who brainstorm over every aspect of every episode.
But back then you had maybe a line producer and a story editor (and even they were working several episodes ahead in pre-production) and that week's episodic director. So there was a lot more responsibility on a lot fewer shoulders, and shows tended to burn out much faster.
GREEN HORNET, of course, just had a bad time slot.
But even if it had been a hit, it likely would have been cancelled by its third year, like BATMAN.