Commander in Chief was one of the most neglected shows to ever grace the glass screen. Neglected by its creators. Neglected by the networks. Neglected by the viewers.

Anyone who has a memory (functioning one, that is) will recall the plugs, the hype, the anticipation created for a Channel 7 buy; Commander In Chief. It was hot from the States, it was supposed to be a Holy Grail for fans of political dramas and 'alternate' realities. And, indeed, it was most of that. It certainly did begin as something that us politic-fans could sink into. And it did offer many what-if scenarios for the people who like to think after they have tuned off their T.V.s.

But it was canned. Purely and simply, the right-wing powers that be (and its millions of sheep that all sing the same song) declared it (at the best) Democrat propaganda and (at the worst) a secret plot by Hillary Clinton to begin her presidential campaign early, desensitise the public to having a female president and win the 2008 Presidential Elections. Thus it was dropped, at 16 or so episodes (I would check for you, my loyal reader, but my Internet appears to have, as the Tasmanians call it, fucked itself). In America it was off the airs before even a plausible ending could be filmed, edited and put to show. In Australia, it just disappeared. Seriously, Yahoo7.com, the website for the (now) greatest free-to-air channel we have, removed any link, any reference, any image associated with the show. My friends and I were dismayed: what had happened to this show? We knew it had been canceled in the States, but shouldn't they at least show us the owing seven episodes?

Well, cut a long story short (because the show seemed to disappear from our conversations as well after this), it was back on, last night, at the wonderful (advertised) time slot of 11:00 p.m. (though actually came on at 11:30, such was the overlap of the Melbourne Cup). Anyone who has read some of my beginning and middle blog posts will know that, for some strange reason, all my favourite shows manage to find themselves included in the Red-Eye hours, or late night time slots. Arrested Development, The Office, Scrubs, Survivor (which has been pushed back as of late), Boston Legal, and now Commander In Chief. If anyone out there enjoys watching Lost, The O.C. and Criminal Minds (to name but a few shows) at decent hours, fear the fact that I too enjoy them, and be prepared to stay up late if the current trend stays the same.

Ok, enough about time slots. What I intended to do was critique the show, and I will ... now. I loved this show. I still enjoy it, but I don't love it. It began (note the began) as a serious (in as much a T.V. show can be) political/drama show. Now, looking back, I realise two things:

1) It tapered off of the real politics and began to focus on (attempted) mini-cliffhangers (which only spanned the single episode) and drama, without any needed reason (i.e. the characters had been built up already, back stories had been adequately explained, etc.);
2) I didn't notice that my main interest in this show, the backstage, closed door, knife-in-back politics had, in fact, taken a backseat to teenagers throwing parties in the White House, marital problems between the President and the First Man and the like.

Now, taking that into account, for a drama to survive, it really needs something to put it head-and-shoulders above every other drama out there. Now a setting of the White House, yeah, I'll give it that. But we return to the done-and-dusted drama plot of a troubled family going through the procedures to reconcile by the end of every episode. The setting is the only thing that separates this from a show like The O.C. (which, in itself, is disappointing, as that is another formerly fantastic show headed downhill).

So what did Commander in Chief need to do to keep its life? More politics. It needed the down-and-dirty, the always new, always interesting, always intriguing politics that we, the public, aren't privy to. See, the show needed to (well, what the producers thought the show needed to do) present the audience with a new scenario for the President every week, lest it become (shock and awe) another boring drama. This, in itself, made it subject to ridicule and boredom in that we, the audience, were having reality presented back to us! People watch T.V. as an escape from the fucked-up world that we live in. Why, then, would we want to (literally) watch fictional characters acting out real life scenarios? Believable scenarios at that! 24 is so unbelievable that it makes for a great watch, regardless of the fact that Jack Bauer is in a scenario that could be real. (So-called) Reality T.V. throws people into ridiculous and unbelievable situations too. So why would a show like Commander in Chief, with the real (and beneficial) option of showing a side of, and spinning, politics unlike any other show, bother with the over-the-top drama that it adopted in its remaining episodes?

Neglect. The producers, writers and directors watched it walk in to #1 on its night in the States. Then they watched as it was beat by shows that attracted the audience they were after (ignoring the politics fans for a moment, as they would form a minority). It was beat by a crime show (Criminal Minds) and a medical drama (House). One assumes that the creators of Commander in Chief saw that they would have to appeal on a different level to get the audience back. So, instead of promoting the politics that stands it out from crime and medicine genres (which are two topics that absolutely flood T.V.s these days, especially crime), they decided to compete on a drama level. And it was destined to fail in this regard, because not only do the people watching it for the politics switch off, but then you have to compete against the abundance of good dramas out there, like House, which burst onto the scene with force. Such was the neglect by those behind the camera.

The neglect by the networks is easy to see: stuffing around with its time slot, having it disappear from T.V. for, what?, three months? This certainly didn't help in:

a) Attracting new viewers
b) Keeping the old viewers

So it lost more and more momentum. Rather than putting the moderate show up in a spot where it stood a chance or, on the reverse of the coin, would fight in a hotly contested ratings slot, they, the networks, stuffed around, lost the show's viewers, then canceled it. Networks generally are to blame for hit shows becoming flops, and they are not exempt from this fine show biting the dust.

The viewer, however, have the least to own up to. How can you expect a viewer to:

1) Keep track of an ever-moving T.V. show
2) Keep track of an ever-moving T.V. show that isn't really doing much to keep you interested
3) Keep track of an ever-moving T.V. show that isn't really doing much to keep you interested and is competing against other shows that do snag your interest
4) Keep track of an ever-moving T.V. show that isn't really doing much to keep you interested and is competing against other shows that do snag your interest, which then goes on a break for three months

The viewer is kept in the dark! And as a result, us, the fans, miss out. It's like Arrested Development: a fantastic show: now dead (this case, though, is distinct, in as much as the people behind the camera did the best job out of the three: the network killed the show, and the fan is left crying, well, at least I was). The only saving grace for fans of Commander in Chief (unlike most other shows that get canceled with a fan-base) is the telemovie that is being produced for mid-07. Perhaps, as I hope, if this scores massively with the ratings, it could become a semi-permanent thing (a once a month movie perhaps? The returning of the series?).

So hold out, Commander in Chief fans, hold out for a new day and for a new year. Hold out that the telemovie will answer the millions of questions we were left with when this unique and fantastic show was canceled so abruptly, and lost its way on the path so early. Hold out that the politics will return to this political show. And hold out that, well, it doesn't all suck.

Thomas.