Chuck Watch: Domo Arigato

So I'll get this out of the way - the NBC site is listing Chuck vs the Wedding as the Series Finale.
.
I'll admit I'm only a peripheral Chuck watcher. I like it, but I've never taped/DVR'd an episode. I'm not really sure why though. I think for me, it came down to having to choose shows and Chuck just lost out. I invested in Heroes & 24 (wishing I could have that choice to do again) instead, relegating Chuck to the 'I'll catch it if I'm home' pile. I got caught-up in the Heroes hype (comic book nerd here) and thought the show was going to be cool. Little did I know we'd go to the apocalyptic future every week, and not bother to flesh out characters. It probably didn't help that my lovely wife wasn't interested in Chuck and I teach Monday nights which guarantees I'll have to tape and watch later.

I'm hoping that Chuck's spy-prowess will be like his Intersect knowledge... there and not-there. If they make him a superspy all of the time, it will hurt the character, but if they give him "flashes" of skill when appropriate and take it away from him when he needs to most to keep things humorous, I think it will only serve to keep things fresh in the long-term.

I'm just hoping that Season Three (thinking positively) doesn't entirely dispose of the supporting cast. We need Ellie and Awesome (and hopefully Morgan) at the very least to keep Chuck grounded. IN any case, /when/ it comes back, I'll be watching.

Save Chuck!

I guess you can blame scheduling or promotion, but my usual mantra when a series I love is on the verge of cancellation is the same one I go to when my preferred candidate for political office loses: People are idiots.
.
OK, maybe that's harsh. But Chuck is almost like an HBO series (Flight of the Conchords comes to mind) because there are so many references to previous episodes and pop culture that just aren't as funny if you aren't in on the joke. I don't know if Jeff telling the cellist to "watch me for the changes" is funny for people who didn't watch Back to the Future 35 times as a child. Zachary Levi's perfect delivery of the season's (series'?) final line might not leave you doubled over with laughter if you didn't spend way too much of high school getting stoned and watching The Matrix in your friend's basement. For the average network TV viewer, it's just a lot easier to turn your brain off and laugh at Big Bang Theory's innuendo and stereotypes (plus the laugh track tells me when to laugh!)
.
It just seems like the network show's that make it big these days -- reality competitions, The Mentalist, Two and a Half Jokes, er, Men -- are so formulaic. Maybe people looking for high-concept series like Chuck just automatically turn to cable, and the networks have given up on even trying to appeal to them. I love Breaking Bad, In Treatment and It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia, but I miss the cultural resonance of a great network series like Lost or early ER and West Wing. It's kind of sad that prime time apparently has room for five hours of Jay Leno every week, but no room for Pushing Daisies or Chuck.

Alan Sepinwall has an interview with Chris Fedak, talking about the show and next season and stuff. He doesn't really say much, but it does imply that Chuck's kung fu won't always be there.
`
I'm not sure what to think of nbc.com calling it the series finale... I suspect that's something that's going to be announced fairly shortly after it's decided, so they wouldn't have a chance to put it online before they announced it. (Maybe "hope" is a better word than "suspect")
`
Why isn't Chuck more popular? People are afraid to just jump into a show in the middle. We don't know the characters, so why turn away from any of the other 5 things they could be watching? And for the record, I know a good handful of people who watch DWTS who would absolutely love Chuck. Mrs. Dave and I are recruiting people to catch up on Chuck on Netflix, so hopefully the audience grows for next year.

I agree with beerbaron's theories about Chuck's ho-hum viewer reaction: inside-joke pop culture references are a tightrope walk that few shows can pull off expertly, and the highly subtle references used in Chuck (compared to, say, How I Met Your Mother, which all but employs title cards to announce its wink-wink content), while enormously rewarding to fans who catch on, are likely too alienating to viewers even a hairsbreadth outside of the target demographic.
.
So I'm doubtful that it will come back, but if it does the cliffhanger game-changer doesn't worry me too much. I recall very early on making comparisons between this show and The Greatest American Hero, that campy (and, possibly like Chuck, short-lived) comedy-adventure series from the early '80s, and this new wrinkle seems tailor-made to follow even more closely along the trail blazed by that show. Remember, last night we saw Chuck involuntarily flash into his newly acquired muscle memory. That key word suggests that our reluctant hero won't be able to summon his powers at will (and might even find them arriving when they're not welcome). He'll still be a goofy savant, but now a physical as well as mental one.
.
Of course, that's only if he comes back at all. Sigh.

I think part of the problem was (err, is?) actually the 80s nostalgia - I'm not sure anyone outside the narrow range of 35-45 year olds will catch even half the references. (I'm younger than that, and referencing character names from Gotcha! goes right over my head. I'd totally dig a Henry Thomas/Dabney Coleman Cloak & Dagger reunion though.)
-
Aside from that, I think that the "all things to all people" approach may not work anymore in the demographically targeted TV landscape. Take the similar Reaper - it gets nearly equal ratings between men & women, and between 18-34 & 35-49 - the problem being that those ratings are low. Not to mention promotional difficulties - how do you build an ad campaign on a show designed to appeal to everyone a little bit.

NBC is confusing itself - it has Chuck vs. The Ring listed in one place as "series" finale and another as "season." Still a bad sign.
-
I think it would do just fine opposite Idol, since to me it would be targeting two completely different audiences (and there isn't anything else opposite Idol). Maybe that's me, since Chuck is my second favorite show and I despise Idol. With the dearth of programming on NBC these days I can't imagine why they wouldn't give it a shot. But I've given up trying to figure the networks out.

NBC being NBC, they probably let the web producers make the decisions. They can't do any worse.

Wait, there was a Gotcha! reference? How'd I miss that? (Yes, I'm 41.)

I'll be honest... I miss TONS of the 80's references. The obvious ones I catch ("Watch me for the changes!"), but a lot of times I'll read through Sepinwall's blog and be like, "That was an 80's reference? Really?" It's quite educating, to be honest.

I want a jeffster t-shirt. Mr. Roboto. Brilliant. I agree that if there is not a catch with Chucks new "kung fu grip action" than it will have left the whole premise that made the show. It was cool to see it but I know and I too believe they know he can't be the super spy. Yeah I think that the reason Chuck hasn't taken off is that it's not original enough for people, even though I think its a breath of fresh air. While shows try to be the next 24, Lost, or CSI. There is Chuck. Its just plain fun and I think you said it, viewers and perhaps critics don't see enough action/sex/humor. Its too much of a hybrid and they cant handle it. I agree that at times the Buy More story arc sometimes slows down the over arching story but trying to balance the everyday man in a life of spy-dom and keep the viewer interested is difficult at best.
The real question is this a new group who are not fulcrum? Because when they were asked at the end the response was "we just spy's" or something. So it almost leads me to believe that its something worse than Fulcrum. Yes perhaps they killed Roarke to keep him from talking but I kind of like the idea it is someone else because frankly I am tired of the reactionary attitude when it came the villains. The villains do something and heroes react. Rarely do the heroes take the initiative to hunt down the villains first.

I was born in 80. grew up watching all 80's movies you can think of and watching MTV when it was good with my older sister. I have been catching the majority of the references, 80's, nerd-esque, cult movies, save for the gotcha names in this past episode. I dont remeber the names but remeber the movie very well.
What were the names? I am looking them up.
If you want serious 80's refernces watch Psych.
@kardiac I think you and others are on too something that the "kung fu" will have similar conditions as his flashes. One can only hope because his geeky common man is what makes the show and what makes the romance between him and sarah work.

I have to agree with antilles13 -- why is EVERYONE terrified of American Idol?
.
I mean, I get it -- it WILL have the largest audience of the night, and be the #1 show in that time slot, and probably give a big boost to the show that follows it on FOX. But a show like Chuck (pulling a 3.6/6 in the Nielsens on Monday nights) would be a HUGE win getting second against Idol on Tuesday (where NBC has Biggest Loser pulling a 5.4/9 against Idol), particularly with all its product placement.
.
And I do think Monday matters -- the nerd/80's referenced humor audience for Chuck probably gets eroded a bit by Big Bang Theory and HIMYM (which do both as well), and there are people that just prefer to watch a show like DWTS live. And that's not even mentioning House and GG (the latter which is another Josh Schwartz show, even). In the end, I think there's enough pull from those shows as many people's #1 choice in that timeslot to drag down Chuck, which could be/is (based on DVR/Hulu/download views, which Chuck does well in) many peoples' #2 choice for the timeslot.
.
But still....what an amazing (AWESOME!) season finale. "Chuck me" indeed....

I want to call it an all-caps awesome episode, but I don't think that covers it. I really want this show to continue, but I agree with James, I don't think cancellation will make me break things - if last night was intentionally the final episode, I would have LOVED how they did that (same thing with the Office - if they ended with season 3 it would have been stellar (but I'm happy they didn't because this season's been great)). But as is, they were promising (expecting?) more, so I want more. Lots more.
.
I don't think Neo-Chuck will (not "would"!) take the show in a completely different direction. The Kung Fu was from a flash, and once he got out of it, he was very freaked out. And I'm sure he'll lose that power (or something like it) eventually.
.
Also, why do traitors ALWAYS knock out the guy who saves their life, even though any reasonable person would know he's just gonna go after them (or watch his nerdy friend (yes, friend - they hugged!) kick their asses).

In case anyone is curious, tvbythenumbers.com released Chuck's numbers from last night (if they haven't crashed from traffic yet... apparently I'm not the only Chuck follower to be watching the site). At first glimpse, the numbers are on par with recent weeks. We'll see how the DVR numbers affect that.

I wonder if there's any chance that NBC would shift Chuck over to USA like the did with L&O Criminal Intent? Chuck seems like a natural fit with the whole character theme that USA does. And who wouldn't want to see a Burn Notice & Chuck crossover?
.
I find myself very irritated with NBC. If I knew for sure that this show was renewed, I would still be giggling about the whole "I know kung fu." line and trying to figure out all the new ways they can use a Kung Fu Grip Chuck next season. Instead, my first thought was, "Oh crap. What if I never get to see what happens next?"
.
Chuck me, indeed.

Non-Chuck watcher here, thought i'd weigh in on the why people dont watch question.
Personally i think this: " My guess is that people look at it and see a spy show that's not hardcore enough to be impressive, a drama that's too frothy to seem high-stakes, and a comedy that's too dramatic to be a sitcom." is dead on. And then you add that to the fact that it looks serialized and it always just looked too light weight for the kind of dedication that that type of show requires.
@beerbarron & van68- you might be right about the references but that's my type of show and i still never tuned in, plus that line of thinking feels a little self congratulatory to me.

@Carlos -- I think you should tune in. While I love the depth of Lost, or the realism/drama of the Wire, or the zany comedy of 30 Rock, I think Chuck just works as pure fun that doesn't require too much from the viewer, but not in a pandering sense. I mean, the humor and references ARE really well done and deep, and part of the fun is teasing out the hidden allusions to 80s pop culture, or character names that are actually names of ex-sports stars, or hidden Lebowski lines. But even if you're not looking for that, no other show on TV lets me just sit back and enjoy it (with laughs, applause, thrills, and even tears) quite like Chuck.

[...] Read the full article … [...]

[...] finally, James Poniewozik of TIME offers an insightful bit of speculation regarding something we’ve all been wondering: why the [...]

@Kemper: Yeah I've thought of it too. SciFi channel resurrected Sliders and Stargate, then why can't USA take on Chuck if the network wants to chuck it. With the supposed new format that the SyFy, formally the SciFi, channel is attempting by branching out into films and shows that are pseudo-science fiction/fantasy etc... Chuck could end up on SciFi, I mean SyFy, and it wouldn't matter. Chuck me if nothing happens and the show is canceled. First the fun and zany Pushing Daises and then Chuck. Kemper, Chuck Burn Notice Cross over? Intriguing. Thankfully I have new seasons of Burn Notice, Psych, and the last Season of Monk to tie me over until the networks seasons start up again.
@Chaddogg: Agreed. The references are there for those who love them and are looking for them, like me, and for those who can just enjoy plain fun on a Monday night, like me. Everyone hates Mondays and what better balm to the soul than an hour of Chuck.

@carlos - Chad hit it right on the head. I've wondered many times over the past two seasons why exactly I love Chuck so much. There are usually plot holes every week big enough to hide a time-shifting Island. A lot of the humor is corny and the nerd stuff feels pretty scripted. Most of the characters are just crazy. The spy stuff is super cheesy. So why do I hold so tightly to the show? Like Chad said, Chuck just works as pure fun. As crazy as the characters are, we love them.

@carlos - the serialization element - that's kind of along the lines of what I was thinking about yesterday (while rewatching the finale twice...). While most of the response from critics and viewers was amazingly joyful in response to the finale, I was picking up on a few concerns in various places along the lines of "this is going to change what this show is all about. this show is supposed to be a comedy about a nerdy, awkward guy who has no mad physical skilz who gets roped into the spy world and has to have two trained spies to protect him." And I was totally surprised to hear those (few and far between) comments because I had never thought of the show as a pure procedural, with static dynamics and characters that don't evolve and change. For me, this show has always been "the story of a smart, good guy whose life is in a holding pattern, who is given resources and abilities that help him grow into he person he is meant to be, and how his new path affects him and the people around him. With hot chicks and spy stuff." And that's why I got so sucked in, because everything has been steadily building toward something (the running jokes, the character development, the gradually evolving relationships, the mythology/conspiracy), rather than just being some procedural with a cute gimmick, an adorable nerd, and a hot girl where its the same thing every week. It doesn't fit neatly into any particular box. I (and I'm assuming others) wouldn't have gotten nearly as attached to this show if there wasn't this wonderful substance underneath, but I think that it also does make it harder for new viewers to pick up in the middle, because a lot of the satisfying, subtle, slow-building dynamics wouldn't be readily apparent, and because people might be expecting something that fits neatly into one box or another, or whatever. But, if that is the case, does that mean that the elements that make the show great are exactly what is going to limit its mass appeal?
.
I think that most people who give it a chance and watch it from the beginning will wind up loving it, because the whole Not-Fitting-In-A-Box-Thing really means (in the glass half full approach) that there's something for everyone. Most folks I know do watch it, and absolutely adore it to pieces. I mentioned to my aunt and cousins that the show was in danger, and my aunt nearly cried, she said that this is their household's single favorite show, and one of the best shows for families to watch together. Her quote was "but that show means so much to me and the kids. It can't just get cancelled."

[...] as James Poniewozik of TIME said: Maybe it’s heresy, but I don’t think our hope is to convert these people [who [...]