The Governor and JJ
Thomas Yohn
I remember this show (vaguely). And, the woman who played
JJ was really pretty. But, I can't remember who it was.
And, who played the governor?
tom
Robert C. Phelps
>tom
Julie Sommars played Jennifer Jo ("JJ") Drinkwater; the late Dan
Dailey played her dad, the Governor. Julie Sommars later had a
recurring role on "Matlock."
Brian May
>Julie Sommars played Jennifer Jo ("JJ") Drinkwater; the late Dan
>Dailey played her dad, the Governor. Julie Sommars later had a
>recurring role on "Matlock."
I remember "The Governor and JJ" had a nice theme and visuals ... too bad the
series hasn't been seen in syndication? ....
Cheers, Brian.
--
bria...@oncomdis.on.ca / bria...@aol.com
"a cyberspace frequent flyer"
<41r50o$2...@oncomdis.on.ca>
Brian Kane
"The Governor and JJ" was a summer replacement series (back in the good old days when a TV season was 36 weeks and we got all new se=
ries in the summertime), so there are not enough episodes for syndication, but there are probably enough for Nick at Nite (any N-a-N=
employees listening?)
| Brian M. Kane
| bri...@biddeford.com
| bk...@hague.com
| bmk...@aol.com
Trog22
<bri...@biddeford.com> writes:
>"The Governor and JJ" was a summer replacement series (back in the good
old
>days when a TV season was 36 weeks and we got all new se=
>ries in the summertime), so there are not enough episodes for
syndication,
>but there are probably enough for Nick at Nite
I have to disagree--it was new in the fall of the 68-69 season. It only
lasted one season.
TR
Guy Weathersby
>Path: lcpd2!rap.SanDiegoCA.ATTGIS.COM!ncrhub2!ncrgw2.ncr.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
>From: tro...@aol.com (Trog22)
>Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv
>Subject: Re: The Governor and JJ
>Date: 29 Aug 1995 03:55:25 -0400
>Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
>Lines: 14
>Sender: ro...@newsbf02.news.aol.com
>Message-ID: <41uh5d$l...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
>References: <41tjkg$3...@noc1.portland.net>
>NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
>X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader
>TR
As I recall the show was doing fairly well and then another network put on an
awful rip-off (with the President and his daughter, I don't recall the name)
and it seemed to kill both of them.
One of the interesting parts was that most weeks they would have
a real governor on in a bit role. Unfortunately, by the time summer
reruns came around, many of the governors were running for re-election
and their bits had to be cut to avoid the equal time rules which were in
effect back then.
Brian Spollen
>In article <41tjkg$3...@noc1.portland.net>, Brian Kane
><bri...@biddeford.com> writes:
>>"The Governor and JJ" was a summer replacement series (back in the good
>old
>>days when a TV season was 36 weeks and we got all new se=
>>ries in the summertime), so there are not enough episodes for
>syndication,
>>but there are probably enough for Nick at Nite
>I have to disagree--it was new in the fall of the 68-69 season. It only
>lasted one season.
>TR
Didn't watch it myself, but it was aired from the beginning of the
Fall 1969 season until January of 1971 (and again in the summer of
1972 --- perhaps that's why it might be remembered as a "summer
replacement" series). The "standard" television season for many
series at that time was 26 episodes; this was no exception, as
its year-and-a-half span encompassed 39 episodes. This happens to
be the same number of episodes of the original "Honeymooners" (not
counting somewhat more recent "episodes" stitched together from
earlier Jackie Gleason programs) --- and they were effectively
syndicated for *years*.
Of course, I am comparing what's regarded as an absolute comedy
classic to a rather obscure show. Still, I would guess that it
might be viable in a short run (as could any number of 1- or 2-
year original-run comedies).
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brian C. Spollen Internet:b...@sc.harris.com
Harris Electronic Design Automation, Inc. PHONE: 716/924-9303 x210
Fishers, New York 14453 "Taste makes Waist"
Brian Kane
=7F
> Didn't watch it myself, but it was aired from the beginning of the
> Fall 1969 season until January of 1971 (and again in the summer of
> 1972 --- perhaps that's why it might be remembered as a "summer
> replacement" series). The "standard" television season for many
> series at that time was 26 episodes; this was no exception, as
> its year-and-a-half span encompassed 39 episodes. This happens to
> be the same number of episodes of the original "Honeymooners" (not
> counting somewhat more recent "episodes" stitched together from
> earlier Jackie Gleason programs) --- and they were effectively
> syndicated for *years*.
>
I stand corrected about the actual run of the show (my memory is of the
1972 summer run), however there was indeed a time when the "standard"
season was 39 weeks (not 36 as I wrote before). By the late 1960's and
early 70's this had indeed dwindled to 26. These days we are lucky if
the top-rated shows get in 22 episodes.
> Of course, I am comparing what's regarded as an absolute comedy
> classic to a rather obscure show. Still, I would guess that it
> might be viable in a short run (as could any number of 1- or 2-
> year original-run comedies).
>
>
The general rule of thumb regarding syndication is that a series needs
100 episodes at a minimum to be "strippable", that is to say it can be
run five days a week. At 100 episodes in strip, it takes 20 weeks to
run through the series before repeats. Based on my comment above, it
takes a series about five years to amass enough episodes to be a viable
syndication product. Many current series are sold into syndication now
with as few as three years in the can while the show is still on the
network (Murphy Brown, Roseanne, Home Improvement) with the thought that
they will have at least a couple more years on the network to fill up
the schedule. A show as old and as insignificant as "The Governor and
JJ" with perhaps only 39 episodes in total with no chance for any more
is a very unlikely syndication candidate.
=7F
Brian Spollen
>The general rule of thumb regarding syndication is that a series needs
>100 episodes at a minimum to be "strippable", that is to say it can be
>run five days a week. At 100 episodes in strip, it takes 20 weeks to
>run through the series before repeats.
(etc.)
No argument there; that is, that's certainly the common model for
syndication. One the other hand, I don't believe there were nearly
100 episodes made of "Bosom Buddies", yet it was aired within the
past year (somewhere in cable-land), and I'm positive that the presence
of Tom Hanks was the only reason for doing so (i.e. if he hadn't been
in the cast, the show would have remained in some vault somewhere).
So ... why not make some more exceptions to the syndication rules?
Let's proclaim that, say, veteran actor Dan Dailey is reason enough
to break the usual rules. Or, perhaps, the guiding hand of Mel Brooks
is reason enough to warrant some airing of the half-season "When Things
Were Rotten" (I'd watch it again just to catch the sight gag, "hold
your tongues!"). The problems with doing so would, I would imagine,
spring from three sources: whoever owns the rights to these shows is
asking too much for their syndication (is this really likely; where
else are they going to get money for them?); copies of these shows
exist in too few quantities to be worthwhile; it costs too much to
advertise a short-run syndicated program (e.g. the cable network
expects to be able to run a single promotional ad for about a year,
but can't run the actual program because it would repeat too often).
Well, it's nothing that's in my power to change, so all this is just
idle speculation (unless someone at Nick-at-Nite is listening in?).