The new ABC situation comedy Samantha Who?, starring Christina Applegate (Married with Children, Anchorman), initially seems likely to collapse under the weight of one of those most cliched sitcom situations: amnesia.
The program, however, has a nice twist, and even more appealing is the fact that it has some interesting moral siginificance.
Applegate plays the title character, who wakes up in hospital after nine days in a coma as a result of an automobile crash, and finds that she doesn’t recognize anyone or remember anything from her life prior to the accident.
That’s the cliched part, of course.
Soon, however, as she meets her family, live-in boyfriend, and only female friend, it becomes increasingly clear to both her and the audience that she was a really terrible person throughout her life before her accident. She was cheating on her boyfriend, was an alcoholic, lied habitually, snubbed people who needed her help and friendship, was blase toward her family, and in general was an all-around bitch, as she puts it herself.
This knowlege of what she is really like appalls Samantha and inspires her to want to turn her life around. The amnesia has ironically given her a chance to see herself anew and start her life over with a sort of new moral beginning. The fact that she really does want to be good is a positive thing, and it suggests that her rottnenness is a matter of weakness, not what she necessarily must be.
It implies that she has in the past given in to the ways of a wicked world but really wants and needs to reconnect with moral principles she knows to be true.
Moral responsibility, the Golden Rule, and the possibility of redemption are all implicit in the program’s concept, and the performances and jokes carry the story well. Applegate does a good job as Samantha, and the supporting cast is mostly quite competent.
If I were in the habit of watching sitcoms, I might just watch this one. It has some very interesting and edifying ideas behind it.
Thanks for your astute observations, Pascal. It is important to remember, however, that classical romantic comedies also deal with the consequences of past actions. Consider a more modern example of the form, Howard Hawks’s Bringing Up Baby. David’s past obsession with his work, to the exclusion of his personal life, makes him initially oblivious to—and throughout the story, immensely vulnerable to—Susan’s efforts to manipulate him into a romance with her. The poor choice of men available to Susan hitherto in her wealthy environment—exemplified by her aunt’s suitor, Col. Applegate—strongly motivates Susan’s pursuit of David, who is manly, intelligent, and fundamentally decent.
Hence, Samantha Who? could surely make comedy out of its basic material. It’s just a matter of executing the mission.
I suppose it has possibilities were it to tread on the consequences of her past actions. But that is the traditional definition of tragedy is it not? Fitting that into the confines of a sitcom seems far too unlikely given the track record of the industry. Hey, that echoes the situation I am talking about.
Sorry, but I suspect that the protagonist, especially since she is female (harking back to your observations about shows centering on males this year) is gonna be let off the hook.
Still, I endorse your if only wistfulness.