I was watching the relatively new sitcom Sullivan and Son on TBS the other day. It stars comedian Steve Byrne, not that that matters for the sake of this post. I had it recorded on the DVR so I’m not sure when it originally aired.
If you haven’t seen the show it’s about this guy who was a corporate attorney in New York or something, but decided to move back to his hometown of Pittsburgh and buy his parents’ bar from them. It’s a pretty standard comedy, by any measure. Nothing life altering, but worth occasionally watching.
What really got under my skin though was the complete disregard for researching something that would have taken all of ten seconds. Completely unprofessional if you ask me.
The main character’s name is Steve. There is another guy, Owen, who is a dimwitted friend of Steve’s. Owen doesn’t know who his dad is because his mom rather enjoys sleeping around and makes no qualms about it. Well, Steve’s dad, who happens to be played by Dan Lauria (the dad from The Wonder Years), basically replaced Steve with Owen while Steve was away. The running joke seems to be that Steve abandoned his father when he left, to which he always replies, “I didn’t abandon him. I went to law school!”
Anyway, his dad mentions all the times he took Owen to the zoo to see the pandas. That’s when I hung my head and shook it at the lack of simple research by the script writers.
My beef? The Pittsburgh Zoo has no pandas! How hard is it to pull up a website and see what animals live at any particular zoo? Not very! C’mon, people! Do your research! That single scene made me want to stop watching the show right then. I didn’t, but I wanted to. If they can’t bother to research something that simple, what else did they screw up while writing the script?
Perhaps I’m just being too picky, but it bothered me.
Adam Ickes 
August 9th, 2012 at 8:17 AM
You know even though it seems like a tiny error…it might be costing them a substantial number of viewers…I sure hope they get the info and do better.
August 9th, 2012 at 8:17 PM
The devil is in the details, as they say, whoever “they” is.
August 9th, 2012 at 9:03 AM
It would’ve made it more credible and enjoyable I’m sure. I’d be less likely to watch after that. If it was a book, I’m not sure I’d read that particular author. You can suspend belief to a degree, but when something is based in present day reality, you have to be more careful. A minor point that particular tidbit. Can you still watch even though it bothers you?
August 9th, 2012 at 8:18 PM
I can still watch because I’m not watching for the accurate details, it isn’t like watching something on the history channel. When I watch a sitcom it’s to veg and relax, maybe laugh a little. Minor errors are annoying but don’t normally make me change the channel.
August 9th, 2012 at 2:13 PM
It’s the simple things that often get left behind – you’re quite right a bit of simple online research would have sufficed 🙂
August 9th, 2012 at 8:19 PM
Maybe they thought it would be funnier with pandas, who knows? The bit would have worked with any animal really though.
August 10th, 2012 at 5:10 AM
You are right and there are other, funnier animals which are probably also in the zoo and wouldn’t have caused such a comment from you 🙂
August 9th, 2012 at 2:51 PM
You should be bothered. Those shows are cheap garbage and you shouldn’rt waste you time with them.
August 9th, 2012 at 8:21 PM
Sometimes cheap garbage is a good way to relax and unwind. At least it isn’t reality TV. I haven’t sunk that low yet!
August 10th, 2012 at 12:30 AM
Yeah, sorry if I was harsh. I watch TV too, mostly the ball games, CSPAN. The commercials drive me crazy.