Franklin and Bash vs. Wilfred: Which is More Ridiculous?

To me, summer television programs on basic cable always seem like the equivalent to Hollywood B movies: there's usually less attention about them, the quality is usually at a mediocre level, and almost always there's a strong cult following.  For example, I am a die-hard fan of USA's Psych and Royal Pains, two programs which take typical major-network staples (crime drama and medical drama, respectively) and put a fun and unique twist to them.  The premises behind the two aforementioned shows appear silly at first: A man with a photographic memory pretends to be a psychic detective, and a successful ER doctor gets fired and decides to do house calls for rich people in the Hamptons instead. Upon closer inspection, however, it becomes obvious that a lot of heart is put into them.  You feel as if you're watching stories that close friends came up with and truly enjoyed putting time and effort into them. Perhaps it is due to this carefree, fun-loving approach to television that they don't get the "privilege" of running during the peak television months, but sometimes the reasons are obvious.  Take TNT's Franklin and Bash and FX's Wilfred, for example.  By no means would these shows premiere in early September, but for very separate reasons.  First, Franklin and Bash:

Yeahhhhhh.... Law and Order this is not. Did Breckin Meyer really just say, "Our job is not to follow the law, it's to make the law"? Surely this show must take place in an alternate dimension, because nothing these two main characters do would ever qualify as acceptable behavior in a courtroom.  

I've watched the first few episodes to give F&B a chance, and there's no denying it is entertaining and has a certain charm.  However, its overwhelming flaws prevent F&B from elevating itself to a show of true substance.  Firstly, despite the title, when I watch the show I never remember which eponymous character is which.  Not that it matters, because their personalities and gags are completely identical. A much bigger issue, however, is the premise.  As the promo above reveals, the show's conceit revolves around the two leads' attempts every week to cause a scene in the courtroom to make their case.  Too bad none of them would fly in reality.  

For example, in one episode, Franklin (or was it Bash?) defends an old friend with a drunk driving charge.  He attempts to prove that one is not nearly as intoxicated immediately following consumption as opposed to an elapsed period of time.  In order to showcase this scientific evidence, whichever lawyer is played by Meyer proceeds to whip out a 6 pack of cheap beer, pop one open and chug it down.  Before the inevitable objection can be sustained, he quickly shotguns another one, right after bantering with his partner and making a joke about said character's tolerance.  Now, I'm not in law school, nor do I have any intention to become a lawyer, but I'm fairly certain that they would be out on their asses stripped of their licenses before you can even say "TNT: We know drama."   I have about a million questions about that episode (FYI: they win the case, of course), but ultimately, because it's a summer show, the morals of the story are, "Who cares? It's just a TV show!" and "Who cares? It's just a TV show on TNT in the middle of July!" 

In contrast, take a look at Wilfred, a remake of an Australian show:

Admittedly, that doesn't reveal much about the premise, but it's difficult to summarize the show in a quick promo.  Basically, Wilfred tells the tale of Ryan (a very non-Frodo Elijah Wood), a suicidal ex-lawyer who, in his eyes, sees his neighbor's dog as an Australian man in a dog outfit who's a fan of swearing and cannibus.  At first, it seems more absurd than F&B, but offers much, much more.  I'd like to first say that I have NOT seen an episode of the original Australian version, so it may be a bit unfair to be commentating on the US import.  However, what I can say is that it is undeniably witty, very smart and extremely refreshing.  Taking an inane premise like this one and molding it into an intricate character study and perhaps close analysis of the highs and lows of friendship makes for no easy task.  Sure they go for the easy "he's a dog, so he's a man who does things like a dog" gag, but they're not overwhelming. Despite its dark and pessimistic tone, I really like Wilfred and would love to see it thrive, though I predict because of its unconventionality, it won't last more than three seasons.  Maybe its too smart for its time or too bizarre a conceit for most people to grasp onto and hold on, but if you like weird humor you're in for a treat (no pun intended, I swear).

The point is though, there's a certain style, tone, and formula for shows that exist on major networks from early September to late May.  Characters are pretty much locked in to act a certain way and end up with other characters, and for the most part, happy endings will always triumph. That's why although they often go unrecognized, summer series have less limitations and sometimes take more chances.  The above two new series prove that, and also demonstrate how that freedom can work or internally collapse.   Either way, definitely check out these two shows if you want some laughs- however intentional or unintentional they may be rendered.