Television writers walk a fine line when they have leads with chemistry. The banter flows with ease and what’s not spoken can be a joy to behold. But what should they do with all that sexual tension? On one hand, fans continuously clamor for the duo to get together. On the other, the audience has no reason to tune in after they do.
Fans say that the couple deserves to live happily-ever-after but the truth is a little more complex. They really don’t want the fairy tale; they want to want it. It’s the interrupted kiss that generates the water cooler talk and the jealous brooding when one partner finds out the other has an unexpected date that really gets the internet humming.
With that in mind, let’s look at five returning shows whose leads leave the audience wanting more.
***
1. Olivia Dunham and Peter Bishop, Fringe. This out-of-this-world good guy didn’t make a move on his FBI partner this year, giving her time to get her former fiance out of her head. Peter and Olivia have great chemistry but fans have the benefit of knowing that even if they don’t get together this time, there is always the next reality.
There are some surefire ways to douse a smoldering romance. Here are four of them.
No-No #1. Let them become a couple. Nothing kills a show faster than putting the leads together romantically. Daytime dramas have made an industry out of star-crossed lovers. And half a century of prime time television experience verifies it.
Criminal lawyer Perry Mason and his secretary Della Street kept things strictly legal in this long-running 60’s show, but audiences were always left wondering about the briefs. If Dr. Benjamin Franklin Hawkeye Pierce and nurse Margaret “Hot Lips” Houlihan had broken military fraternization rules, M*A*S*H’s run would have been as short as the actual Korean War instead of lasting for 11 seasons and dominating the 70’s.
This rule was forgotten in the 80’s, which was littered with romantic disasters. The sun quickly set on Moonlighting once bickering detectives David Addison and Maddie Hayes hit the sheets, and it was case closed for Remington Steele after Laura Holt and the man himself tied the knot. We wanted to believe in Fox Mulder and Dana Scully and the X-Files in the 90’s but lost interest once the truth of their relationship was out there.
At the beginning of the new millennium, television took a turn towards procedural shows where men and women often worked together in law enforcement but did not have any kind of personal history or interaction to draw on. As the decade shifts to a close, there has been a shift back to real partnerships.
***
2. Michael Westen and Fiona Glenanne, Burn Notice. When this spy got burned, one of his few allies was his explosive ex-girlfriend. But between their volatile history and his uncertain future, rekindling their romance could be playing with fire
No-No # 2. And baby makes three. What was more fun – witnessing the craziness of Ross and Rachel on a break, or watching the Friends try to find a sitter for baby Emma?
Pre-sex couples are all about getting down to the good stuff in the bedroom. Post-baby couples only want to spend some time far away from the nursery. Once the deed is done and the baby arrives, the urgency is lost… and so is viewer interest.
Unless it’s a “who’s your daddy” soap opera storyline, babies are a nightmare. Even a show without a romantic angle like the 90’s Murphy Brown quickly learned that infants in onesies should be neither seen nor heard. When executives noticed that ratings dropped when the baby appeared, the story line was relegated to a back-burner as quickly as they could.
The audience already has children, which with any luck are already in bed by the time the shows start so the grown-ups can have some adult time. Babies on screen defeat the purpose of primetime.
***
3. Leonard Hofstadter and Penny, The Big Bang Theory. This geek has a better chance of winning a Nobel Prize than he does of scoring with his neighbour. Fans have to wait and see if four months in the arctic have put this potential romance on ic
No-No #3. The Other Woman (or Man). The audience may be willing to wait for a recalcitrant partner to come to his or her senses but they will not tolerate a placeholder. The leads belong together and any serious relationship with an interloper is a guaranteed way to draw the viewers’ wrath.
It’s fine if the scarlett character lasts for a handful of episodes but a long-term relationship breaks all kinds of unspoken promises. JAG‘s Harm Rabb and Sarah “Mac” Mackenzie didn’t take the leap until the series finale but Sarah’s long engagement to an Australian naval lawyer left fans waiting impatiently for the storyline to end. A character who finds love in all the wrong places can leave the audience feeling as betrayed as the cheater’s partner.
***
4. Kate Beckett and Rick Castle, Castle. She’s not about to take a world-famous flirt seriously but this best-selling mystery writer knows it’s all about the chase until the final chapter.
No-No #4. Trips to Fantasy Island. This has less to do with the writing on a show than it does with publicity and marketing. The most famous case of “we fooled you” has to be the showering Bobby Ewing’s return in Dallas back in the 80’s, but as poorly as that revelation was received, it was at least a shock for the audience.
Viewers have become jaded after too many fake-outs, often within the same series. Promising fans a lip-lock during sweeps and then airing a CPR episode is a nasty cheat. A commercial showing the female lead in a wedding dress inevitably means she’ll be walking down a fashion show runway and not a church aisle. The biggest twist these days would be a show that actually delivered what was promised in the previews.
***
With returning shows already in production and new series gearing up for their fall premiers, viewers can look forward to another year of sexy double ententres, longing glances and agonizing unrequited love. And they will eat it up and come back for more.
Here’s to hoping that television writers remember that the path to true love never did run easy on primetime. Honestly, we really wouldn’t want it any other way.
***
5. Special Agent Seeley Booth and Dr. Temperance Brennan, Bones. They have been crime-fighting partners for four years but if the anvils on the wall last season are any indication, the clues for Season 5 will lead to M-A-R-R-I-A-G-E and B-A-B-Y.
Follow Us
Just had to comment that Mad About You is another show where, after the baby arrived, just wasn't interesting enough anymore.
Just had to comment that Mad About You is another show where, after the baby arrived, just wasn’t interesting enough anymore.
I forgot about "Mad About You."nbsp; Yes, that is pretty much when I stopped watching as well.nbsp; That show had a good cast too.
I forgot about “Mad About You.”nbsp; Yes, that is pretty much when I stopped watching as well.nbsp; That show had a good cast too.
Hello, y Canadian buddy and comrade in arms ;)
Great article, and an absolutely stunning picture of Bones and Booth.
You know me, all about wanting certain couples to get together…Fringe's Peter and Olivia, Booth and Bones (as a couple, not as a "here is the container, we have placed magazines and xxx dvd's in the room should you need some enticement" sort of thing ;)
I am loving the chemistry between Pete and Myka on Warehouse 13- but I think as a couple they are doomed to fail.
(Besides, I want Pete for myself)
Hello, y Canadian buddy and comrade in arms ;)
Great article, and an absolutely stunning picture of Bones and Booth.
You know me, all about wanting certain couples to get together…Fringe’s Peter and Olivia, Booth and Bones (as a couple, not as a “here is the container, we have placed magazines and xxx dvd’s in the room should you need some enticement” sort of thing ;)
I am loving the chemistry between Pete and Myka on Warehouse 13- but I think as a couple they are doomed to fail.
(Besides, I want Pete for myself)
Thanks, Pixie. Isn't that a fab photo? I grabbed it as soon as I found it.
Do you really want them to actually be together and be lovey-dovey and all smoochy for 60 minutes a week? Or do you want to watch the tension and the angst and be able to moan and grumble about how they should be together and come back next time for more? Personally, I think the grumbling is oodles more fun.
Thanks, Pixie. Isn’t that a fab photo? I grabbed it as soon as I found it.
Do you really want them to actually be together and be lovey-dovey and all smoochy for 60 minutes a week? Or do you want to watch the tension and the angst and be able to moan and grumble about how they should be together and come back next time for more? Personally, I think the grumbling is oodles more fun.
Very nice! The writers definitely need a deft touch when handling these things. As you might have guessed, I think the writers of "Bones" could take a lesson (or 300) from the writers of "Burn Notice."
Precisely. We want them to get together. They want to get together. But they don't get together and we keep watching. No wonder BN got renewed again.
Very nice! The writers definitely need a deft touch when handling these things. As you might have guessed, I think the writers of “Bones” could take a lesson (or 300) from the writers of “Burn Notice.”
Precisely. We want them to get together. They want to get together. But they don’t get together and we keep watching. No wonder BN got renewed again.
Is it always true that the couples can't work? Yeah the tension keeps you coming back but can't there be another thing too, please? The slow dance of attraction is great, realization and valuing of one's compatibility in the non-couple pursuits such as work and play, then could be the slow courting, then the decision to be friends or something else, with real discussion about how they are feeling without silly soap distractions…I want to see trust and love people! and then the slow savor of passion; these could take years. Smoldering is so much better than wham.
Or can the excellent working relationship develop into friends of such depth that the audience comes back for that; true character stuff.
In short, I want tv to be my escape, and to show me how to be better at relating to other people… now I am going to wave my wand fix that pesky world hunger problem.
Couples can't work and be happy. It's a rule, sorry :)
I completely agree on the smoldering vs wham.
Is it always true that the couples can’t work? Yeah the tension keeps you coming back but can’t there be another thing too, please? The slow dance of attraction is great, realization and valuing of one’s compatibility in the non-couple pursuits such as work and play, then could be the slow courting, then the decision to be friends or something else, with real discussion about how they are feeling without silly soap distractions…I want to see trust and love people! and then the slow savor of passion; these could take years. Smoldering is so much better than wham.
Or can the excellent working relationship develop into friends of such depth that the audience comes back for that; true character stuff.
In short, I want tv to be my escape, and to show me how to be better at relating to other people… now I am going to wave my wand fix that pesky world hunger problem.
Couples can’t work and be happy. It’s a rule, sorry :)
I completely agree on the smoldering vs wham.
I liked Fi and Michael the first two seasons but now they're boring, putting them together would be a total bust.
Bones and Booth are so hawt there's no way they'll get together and not still remain popular and they'll keep the sexual chemistry.
I don't think Bones and Booth are going to get married but if they have a baby that'll be totally awesome.
I liked Fi and Michael the first two seasons but now they’re boring, putting them together would be a total bust.
Bones and Booth are so hawt there’s no way they’ll get together and not still remain popular and they’ll keep the sexual chemistry.
I don’t think Bones and Booth are going to get married but if they have a baby that’ll be totally awesome.