10 Forgotten 2000s Shows That Have Aged Like Milk

1 hour ago 17

Matthew Perry as Matt Albie in 'Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip'

Published Aug 12, 2026, 6:03 PM EDT

Michael Block is a 14 time GLAM Award nominated writer, producer, and host of the podcast Block Talk. Throughout his time in the entertainment industry, he has worked on and off Broadway as a stage manager, written several produced plays, critiqued hundreds of theatrical performances, drag and cabaret shows, and has produced events randing from drag competitoons to variety concerts!
On Block Talk, he interviews nightlife personalities, covers the wide world of entertainment through features, ranking episodes, and recaps ALL of Drag Race, as well as Dragula and Survivor. He has interviewed hundreds of RuGirls that span the globe at DragCon NYC, DragCon LA, and DragCon UK.
In his free time, he makes one-of-a-kind jewelry and gift baskets with his mom. He is a proud member of the LGBTQ+ community.

The 21st century has given the world some of the greatest television shows of all time across all genres. The Office defined how single-camera comedies were the new frontier. Lost redefined science fiction mystery box television forever. And then there was Survivor, which put reality television on the map as one of the most popular genres of all time. But in order to be the greatest, they had to have some pretty awful competition. These are those.

The 2000s played host to some truly spoiled television shows. From ill-timed dramas that wasted today's stars to truly horrific reality television show concepts that could never be made today, these shows are not only forgotten, but they have also aged quite poorly. We do have to commend them for trying something bold and daring! Though the risk was absolutely not worth the reward.

'The Street' (2000)

The world has certainly changed and evolved since 2000. At the turn of the century, television was toeing the line between familiarity and new concepts. When it came to the Fos series The Street, which sometimes was stylized with a $ in place of the S, Darren Star brought the dramatic, relationship-focused familiarity from his hits like Sex and the City and Beverly Hills 90210, and dropped it into the high-stakes world of corporate finance. Was that what audiences sought out? Nope. Co-created with Jeff Rake, the short-lived drama followed a high-pressure group of young stockbrokers, analysts, and executives at Balmont Stevens Inc., a boutique Wall Street firm in New York City, as they navigated fast-paced finance, office backstabbing, and personal relationships. The Street was essentially Melrose Place on Wall Street, becoming a derivative, sleazy nighttime soap with forced financial jargon tossed in for good measure.

Though a reflection on the industry, The Street was a cringy workplace drama. The office interactions, featuring casual sexism, toxic alpha-male posturing, and women frequently sidelined or objectified, read with secondhand embarrassment. The series did, however, boast a solid lineup of stars by today's standards—Tom Everett Scott, Adam Goldberg, Jennifer Connelly, Giancarlo Esposito, and even Bradley Cooper in a recurring role. The show aired in late 2000, right in time for the collapse of the dot-com bubble and a massive stock market downturn. So, watching the antics of hyper-sexualized, arrogant finance bros as real-world investors lost their savings didn't necessarily bode well. Public intolerance caused a downtick in ratings, as the show was all about 20-somethings bragging about IPOs, making millions, and treating finance like a high-stakes playground. It was so tone-deaf, only seven of the 12 produced episodes aired. The scary thing about The Street through a modern lens is it could lift finance-bro dialogue for crypto, and it would be the same tragic series.

'Who Wants to Marry a Multi-Millionaire?' (2000)

Darva Conger and Rick Rockwell get wed on the spot of 'Who Wants to Marry a Multi-Millionaire.'

As a reality television historian of sorts, I continue to be fascinated by the spaghetti that was thrown against the wall during the rise of the genre. Network executives tried everything. Literally, as you'll see. Before the big boom of long-form dating reality shows, Fox attempted to marry an infamous game show title with a pageant format for one of the most deeply offensive, scandal-ridden nightmares in reality history. Who Wants to Marry a Multi-Millionaire? was a controversial 2000 special in which 50 women competed in a beauty pageant-style contest to marry a wealthy man they had never met, culminating in a real wedding ceremony at the end of the broadcast. Created by Mike Fleiss, who would recalibrate to create The Bachelor, Who Wants to Marry a Multi-Millionaire? saw the groom, Rick Rockwell, evaluate the contestants while they marched on stage in swimwear and evening gowns, ultimately selecting Darva Conger as his bride-to-be. The concept seemed like a fine idea as beauty pageants continued to have a strong presence in American pop culture. The hook, obviously, was the prize of marriage to a wealthy individual, which essentially treated marriage as a superficial game show prize. But the truth was it was a cattle call for an anonymous man, creating a blatant, sexist caricature.

Using the success of Who Wants to Be a Millionaire as a gimmick, it attempted to minimize that game show's massive success on its competitor. Perhaps the most shocking part about the entire ordeal was the aftermath. There was a catastrophic vetting failure as it was revealed that Rockwell had an alleged 1991 restraining order that stated he had physically abused and threatened a former fiancée. Conger then realized that the situation was unviable almost immediately, refusing to share a room on the honeymoon, and quickly filing for an annulment. In the process, Conger was the one to be publicly attacked, through immense slut-shaming. Who Wants to Marry a Multi-Millionaire? is an integral part of reality television history as it highlights the cruel and exploitative nature of early products of the time. Pageant-style reality television would end with Who Wants to Marry a Multi-Millionaire? The more egregious and superficial The Swan followed, which we remember for all the wrong reasons.

'Butt-Ugly Martians' (2001–2003)

The trio of B-Bop A-Luna, 2T Fru-T, and Do-Wah Diddy on 'Butt-Ugly Martians.'

Children's cartoons often used hand-drawn, two-dimensional animation as it was the standard format in the 20th century. But in the late '90s, computer-generated animation became the new frontier, and everyone tried their hand at it. Not everyone, though, would succeed. Case in point: CITV and Nickelodeon's appropriately titled Butt-Ugly Martians. The computer-animated series followed three friendly alien scouts named B-Bop A-Luna (Charlie Schlatter), 2T Fru-T (Rob Paulsen), and Do-Wah Diddy (Jess Harnell), sent to conquer Earth by the evil Emperor Bog. Instead, they fall in love with human culture, befriend three kids, Mike (Paulsen), Angela (Kath Soucie), and Cedric (Ogie Banks), and fake their invasion progress reports to hide on Earth. A classic fish-out-of-water scenario, Butt-Ugly Martians relied on primitive, unpolished CGI, cheap toilet humor, and aggressive 2001 corporate trend-chasing meant to quickly cash in on a short-lived fad.

Butt-Ugly Martians was purely silly fun, as the trio, also referred to as B.U.M., found a love for hamburgers and video games, while using hoverboards alongside a robotic companion dog named "Dog." Butt-Ugly Martians was anything but creative. In some ways, it was a sanitized version of Earth Girls Are Easy without the smartly written camp. The series was a clumsy experiment. The textures looked muddy, the characters were stiff, and the overall aesthetic, by modern high-definition standards, felt blurry and out of focus. Though they had an out with the show's title, the characters were simply hideous by design. The series was a product of hyper-dated commercialism as the show was over-marketed with turn-of-the-millennium trends. Butt-Ugly Martians operates as a time capsule of the 2000s corporate pandering. To some, it's so bad, it's good. Examining the leaps and bounds CGI has made since, "abysmal" is a kind descriptor for the show.

'Baby Bob' (2002–2003)

Joely Fisher as Lizzy Collins Spencer and Adam Arkin as Walter Spencer in 'Baby Bob.'

The evolution of a commercial bit to a long-form television series is quite wild. Ted Lasso may not be the hit show that it is; flops like Baby Bob and Cavemen informed the creatives what not to do. Cavemen is remembered for how bad it was. Baby Bob has comparatively fallen into obscurity. Created by Michael Saltzman and based on the defunct FreeInternet.com commercials, the CBS mid-season replacement told the story of first-time parents Walter and Lizzy Spencer (Adam Arkin and Joely Fisher) who discover that their six-month-old baby, Bob (Ken Hudson Campbell), can talk like an adult with the voice of a grown man. While Walter wants to keep Bob's ability a secret to avoid a media circus, Lizzy is desperate to show him off, especially to her boastful mother, Madeline (Holland Taylor). With a singular, grueling gimmick, Baby Bob was an early example of 2000s uncanny-valley CGI that wore out its welcome quite quickly.

Hoping to replicate the magic of the Look Who's Talking franchise, Baby Bob was already dated upon arrival. The truck-driver talking-baby idea may have worked for a quick sketch, but somehow extended itself through two seasons. Even with a strong cast that also included Elliott Gould, the material was bogged down by poor writing and terrible CGI. The digital mouth movements came across as cheap and unconvincing. As we take a step back with more time removed, Baby Bob looks even more jarring and terrible. And yet, the talking baby conceit did not end here. It's just been reworked and improved over time. Baby Bob proved that not all novel ideas can move across different mediums. Some must remain as 30-second bits. Though the show was canceled, the character did reappear for some Quiznos commercials.

Collider Exclusive · Universe Personality Quiz Which Iconic Universe Do You Belong in the Most? Star Wars · Lord of the Rings · Harry Potter · Game of Thrones · Star Trek

Five legendary universes. Five completely different visions of what the world could be — or already was. One of them is the world your instincts, your values, and your particular way of existing were built for. Eight questions will tell you which one.

🚀Star Wars

💍Lord of the Rings

🧙Harry Potter

👑Game of Thrones

🖖Star Trek

FIND YOUR UNIVERSE →

What gives your life its deepest sense of meaning? Every universe is built around a different answer to this question.

ABeing part of something larger than myself — a cause, a rebellion, a fight for freedom that outlasts me. BThe journey itself — the places I'll go, the companions beside me, the world I'll discover on the way. CLearning — unlocking what I'm capable of, understanding the world's hidden mechanics, growing into something more. DLegacy — the name I leave behind, the power I build, the mark I make before the world moves on without me. EUnderstanding — exploring what exists beyond the horizon and asking what it means to be alive in a universe this vast.

NEXT QUESTION →

Which kind of world do you most want to inhabit? The environment shapes who you become. Choose carefully.

AA galaxy of planets, each with its own culture — connected by conflict, trade, and the Force. BAncient lands of breathtaking beauty, deep history, and a creeping darkness at the edges. CA world hidden inside our own — full of wonder, community, and magic waiting to be learned. DA brutal, beautiful continent where power is everything and every alliance is a calculation. EA future where humanity has reached the stars — and must decide what kind of species it wants to be.

NEXT QUESTION →

How do you prefer your conflicts resolved? The shape of a world's conflicts tells you everything about its soul.

AThrough sacrifice and courage — someone has to make the impossible choice so others don't have to. BThrough fellowship — the impossible becomes possible when the right people walk the same road. CThrough growth — confronting what you fear, understanding what you lack, and becoming equal to the challenge. DThrough strategy — outthinking, outmaneuvering, positioning yourself so the outcome was never in doubt. EThrough dialogue — finding the third option, the peaceful resolution, the answer that doesn't require a body count.

NEXT QUESTION →

Who do you want beside you when things get difficult? Your ideal companions reveal the world you were made for.

AA small crew — a pilot, a rogue, a warrior — each broken in their own way, unbeatable together. BA fellowship of different kinds of people, bound by purpose and deepened by the long road. CFriends who grew up alongside me — who knew me before I knew myself, and stayed anyway. DAllies whose loyalty I've earned — and tested — and whose ambitions align with mine, for now. EA crew of brilliant, curious, principled people from every corner of known space.

NEXT QUESTION →

What is your relationship with power? How you seek, wield, or resist power is the map of who you are.

AI want to use it to protect — and I'm terrified of what I might become if I'm not careful. BI distrust it. The most important power in this story is the courage to give it up. CI want to earn it — through knowledge, through effort, through becoming someone worthy of it. DI want to wield it. Preferably before someone else decides to wield it against me. EI want to understand it — its structures, its limits, its ethical dimensions. Power without accountability is the real threat.

NEXT QUESTION →

How does your universe treat good and evil? A world's moral architecture tells you more about it than any map.

AThere is a dark side and a light side — and the choice between them is always present, always personal. BEvil is real and ancient and patient — and goodness, however small, is the only thing that can undo it. CGood and evil are real, but they live inside people — and people are complicated, always capable of both. DGood and evil are mostly a matter of perspective and proximity. Power is the only honest currency. EEvil is usually the result of ignorance, fear, or broken systems — and understanding it is the first step to solving it.

NEXT QUESTION →

What role would you naturally fall into? Every universe has archetypes. Which one fits you without trying?

AThe reluctant hero — ordinary origins, extraordinary moment, changed forever by the choice to act. BThe unlikely carrier — the one nobody expected to matter most, quietly bearing the weight of everything. CThe student — not yet who I'll become, learning through every mistake, growing into something the world needs. DThe player — sharp enough to see the game for what it is, ambitious enough to try to win it. EThe explorer — drawn to the unknown, driven by curiosity, most alive when standing somewhere no one has stood before.

NEXT QUESTION →

What do you ultimately believe about the future? The answer to this is the clearest window into which universe already lives inside you.

AThat hope is real — that even in the darkest galaxy, a new hope is always possible. CThat even the smallest person can change the course of the future, if they have the courage to try. CThat love and friendship and doing what's right will matter in the end, even when everything says otherwise. DThat the wheel keeps turning — that power shifts, winters end, and what endures is those willing to fight for it. EThat humanity — or whatever we become — is capable of extraordinary things, if we choose to be.

REVEAL MY UNIVERSE →

Your Universe Has Been Chosen You Belong In…

Your answers point to the iconic universe your values, your instincts, and your particular way of seeing the world were built for. This is where you would find your people — and your purpose.

Star Wars

You believe in the cause — in the idea that freedom is worth fighting for even when the odds are impossible and the empire is vast.

You are drawn to the moral clarity of a universe where hope itself is a form of resistance.
You'd find your people in the Rebellion — a ragtag coalition of true believers held together by conviction more than resources.
Star Wars is fundamentally a story about ordinary people choosing to matter in an extraordinary conflict — and that is exactly your kind of story.
The Force may or may not be with you. But the will to use it for something larger than yourself certainly is.

Lord of the Rings

You understand, in the deepest part of yourself, that the journey matters as much as the destination — and that the world's beauty is worth protecting even at great cost.

Middle-earth is a world of ancient wonder, deep friendship, and a darkness that only retreats when enough small acts of courage accumulate.
You would thrive here because you value the fellowship more than the glory — the road more than the arrival.
Tolkien's universe rewards patience, loyalty, and the willingness to carry something heavy across a very long distance.
Those are not burdens to you. They are simply how you move through the world.

Harry Potter

You believe that love, loyalty, and doing what's right are not naive sentiments — they are the most powerful forces in any world, magical or otherwise.

The Wizarding World is a place of wonder hidden in plain sight, where learning is transformative and the bonds you form at school follow you into every battle.
You would flourish here because you take both the magic and the friendships seriously — and you understand that one without the other is incomplete.
Harry Potter's universe ultimately rewards those who choose to stand for something even when standing is terrifying.
That choice — made quietly, without guarantee — is something you understand completely.

Game of Thrones

You see the world clearly — its power structures, its hypocrisies, its brutal arithmetic — and you are not paralysed by that clarity. You use it.

Westeros is a world that rewards intelligence, adaptability, and the willingness to understand that every alliance is also a negotiation.
You would survive here — possibly thrive here — because you don't confuse the world as it is with the world as you'd like it to be.
Game of Thrones is a story about what happens when the idealists and the realists collide. You are sharp enough to know which one lasts longer.
Winter always comes. You are already prepared.

Star Trek

You believe the future is worth building — that curiosity, cooperation, and the expansion of understanding are not just ideals but the most practical path forward for any civilisation.

Star Trek is a universe where the questions matter as much as the answers, and where encountering something utterly alien is cause for wonder rather than fear.
You would belong here because you are fundamentally optimistic about what intelligence and decency can achieve — while being honest about how hard that achievement is.
The Federation is the universe's most ambitious thought experiment: what if we actually got better?
You don't just hope that's possible. You think it's the only thing worth working toward.

↻ RETAKE THE QUIZ

'Are You Hot?: The Search for America's Sexiest People' (2003)

A contestant on 'Are You Hot? The Search for America's Sexiest People.'

Attractiveness is subjective. Also, commenting on an individual's attractiveness goes a very fine line nowadays. And yet, back in 2003, we used hotness as a metric for competition. Are You Hot? The Search for America's Sexiest People watched as contestants competed solely on physical attractiveness, face, body, and sex appeal. Talent, personality, and brains were completely ignored. The country was split into different geographic "hot zones" where local hopefuls were evaluated. A celebrity panel consisting of supermodel Rachel Hunter, fashion designer Randolph Duke, and actor Lorenzo Lamas scored contestants on a scale of 1 to 10. It was then up to the viewers at home to vote on top scorers via the web, leading to a single winning man and woman who received $50,000 and a trip to Tahiti. Panned for its extreme superficiality, Are You Hot? was a dark mark on the genre, proving not everything should be turned into a competition.

Are You Hot? was a completely degrading process. As contestants stood on stage, a neon sign flashed "HOT" or "NOT." The judges graded people up to a score of 10 on their face, body, and sex appeal. In doing so, the judges openly scrutinized bodies and physical features in swimwear, famously using a laser pointer to highlight physical flaws. At the time, the conceit seemed like a typical early 2000s faire, but the appetite for watching people get publicly humiliated for their genetics has drastically declined. Especially in the format in which it was presented. The series was marred with controversy. At the time, many male contestants appearing bare-chested were censored at times due to lower body hair being exposed. Meanwhile, Howard Stern and his production company claimed that the premise for the show was lifted from his radio show's regular segment called "The Evaluators." The winners of the lone season were David Maxwell from San Diego and Chantille Boudousque from New Orleans. Though through social media we still seem to judge one another’s appearance, the days of doing so through a reality show are so yesterday.

'There's Something About Miriam' (2004)

Miriam Rivera on 'There's Something About Miriam.'

There have been quite a few controversial reality shows in the first decade of the 21st century, but none were as blasphemous as There's Something About Miriam. The Sky1 series, presented by Tim Vincent and set in Ibiza, Spain, followed six men competing in physical challenges and dates to win the affections of 21-year-old Mexican model Miriam Rivera and a £10,000 cash prize. At the end of the competition, Miriam chose Tom Rooke. And then, the central twist was revealed. Hidden from the contestants the entire time: Miriam was a transgender woman. She revealed she had not yet undergone gender-affirming surgery. The revelation brought immense shock from the contestants, and ultimately received widespread criticism for transphobia, deception, and exploiting both Miriam and the contestants, leading to a lawsuit against the production company for emotional distress. The lawsuit was settled out of court with financial compensation paid to the men. The real harm came to the titular bachelorette.

The British TV series hoped to capitalize on the appeal of dating shows with its own twist. The result was a dreadfully executed blunder. Producers framed her identity as a grotesque "reveal" rather than a normal facet of human life, using slurs and crude innuendos in voiceovers. The show even brought on a doctor in the first episode to anatomically verify her body for the audience, stripping her of basic human dignity. The series boldly used someone's identity as a punchline while simultaneously unfortunately painting transgender individuals as liars or deceitful. Tabloid media at the time turned Miriam into the butt of a joke. She struggled in the fallout of the program before her tragic death by suicide in 2019 at age 38. Cultural shifts over the last two decades have changed significantly, moving toward recognizing that trans women are women. It reframed the series from cheap 2000s trash TV into a disturbing document of media cruelty.

'Beauty and the Geek' (2005–2008)

If you watched Beauty and the Geek, you were "punk'd" into believing love was in fact blind. Created by Ashton Kutcher himself, the WB turned CW series united a reality and social experiment together in which physically attractive, outgoing people, usually women called "beauties," who lack academic depth, are paired with highly intelligent, socially awkward people, usually men called "geeks," to compete as teams for a cash prize. The series was meant to be a learning experience where the geeks teach the beauties about academics, science, and general knowledge, while the beauties teach the geeks social skills, fashion, and confidence. Challenge winners are safe and choose rival teams to face off in a trivia quiz showdown, where the losing pair is eliminated from the competition until a winning duo remains to claim the grand prize. Throughout the competition, the teams would face off in challenges that pushed them into unfamiliar territory, such as geeks trying out social or athletic tasks, and beauties tackling complex science or logic tests, usually for the sake of a joke. A series that reinforced rigid, insulting stereotypes, Beauty and the Geek enjoyed a healthy five-season run, with global iterations, before the premise wore entirely thin.

Though there would certainly be teaching moments along the way, the premise treated women as if their only value was physical attractiveness and lack of intelligence, and men as socially inept objects meant to be pitied or dramatically transformed. Additionally, the series would feature signature "geek makeovers," as if it were a cheap '80s rom-com. They were treated to a new haircut, contact lenses, and trendy clothes as a magical cure-all for deep-seated confidence and social anxiety issues. The reveals heavily implied that a person's worth or chance at romance was entirely dependent on conforming to mainstream standards of physical attractiveness. Geek culture has since been redefined since the run of the series, as it has become widely accepted as a part of mainstream pop culture. Gone are the reality TV show concepts that rely on laughing at participants rather than fostering genuine, supportive personal growth. Unless it's celebrity reality, which we still relish in laughing at.

'Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip' (2006–2007)

Matthew Perry in Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip

Timing is everything. Especially in comedy. So when two shows are released in the same season with similar premises on the same network, only one is likely to prevail. That’s essentially what happened on NBC in the fall of 2006. The Peacock network famously debuted two different television series about the behind-the-scenes chaos of a late-night sketch comedy show: Tina Fey's fast-paced comedy 30 Rock and Aaron Sorkin's high-minded drama Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip. Obviously, we fondly remember the former as the latter fell into obscurity as Sorkin's only massive flop. Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip starts after the executive producer of a late-night sketch comedy show sparks a media frenzy when he has an on-air meltdown during a live broadcast. New network president Jordan McDeere (Amanda Peet) hires former creative team Matt Albie (Matthew Perry) and Danny Tripp (Bradley Whitford) to take over the failing show and restore its integrity. Each episode covers the high-pressure, fast-paced environment of mounting a weekly live broadcast while battling network executives, corporate politics, and personal demons. Evoking the typical Sorkin style, Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip may have survived at any other time on any other network. It was just competing against a comedy juggernaut. It didn't matter how extraordinary the cast and creative team were. It was no match for 30 Rock.

Despite having an extraordinary ensemble, which also included Sarah Paulson, D.L. Hughley, Nate Corddry, and Steven Weber, it had an uphill battle to succeed. Lasting only a season before cancellation, it hasn't held up well in retrospect. Sorkin loves to infuse the backstage story into his stories, but Studio 60 had a self-important tone, a smug "writer-as-savior" complex, and heavy-handed moralizing that felt out of touch. It treated sketch comedy with the solemn gravity of global geopolitics, which was completely disconnected from reality. Especially compared to the juxtaposition of the sharper, self-aware satire of its contemporary counterpart. A complete structural flaw was that for a show about brilliant comedy writers, the actual sketches shown on screen were largely uninspired or heavy-handed. Instead of believable, messy late-night humor, the sketches leaned into clunky, overly academic satire. Though it did track for a Sorkin-backed project. When it knew it couldn't defeat 30 Rock, the show shifted to focus on melodramatic personal baggage and unearned romance. Did audiences learn of Sorkin's real-life relationship with Kristin Chenoweth through its not-so-hidden plotlines? They sure did! By the end of its single season, the show devolved into bizarre subplots, including trying to broker deals with Afghan militants, which completely shattered any grounded workplace dynamic.

'Kid Nation' (2007)

Though we often neglect the sheer brilliance of Bug Juice in the late '90s, reality shows tended to be geared towards adults. There were some kid-centric shows like Moolah Beach and Endurance, but they were relegated to weekend time slots. It wasn't until Kid Nation that a primetime kid-centric show debuted. And a controversial one at that. The CBS reality series placed 40 children aged 8 to 15 alone in Bonanza City, a historic desert ghost town in New Mexico, for 40 days to build their own functioning society without parental supervision. The result was revelatory, shocking, and somewhat expected as an elected town council passed laws and set bedtimes. There was an out, though. Participants could quit at any time during town meetings by raising their hands. Through harsh conditions and ethical backlash, Kid Nation put a dark cloud over reality television forever as it essentially hoped to replicate Lord of the Flies in a ghost town.

Kid Nation was not for the faint of heart. Participants faced tough physical labor, and real safety incidents occurred, including a child accidentally drinking bleach and another getting burned by grease. And all these hardships were not shielded for public consumption. Staunch critics of the series were hyper-attuned to the legitimacy of the series, questioning the legality, child labor laws, and psychological toll on minors. Looking back at it, as much of a fascinating social experiment as it was, it was deeply disturbing child exploitation at the cost of entertainment. Young children were left to operate heavy machinery, chop wood, and handle fires without adequate physical safeguards. Yet, parents signed massive 22-page liability waivers that effectively exempted the production company from responsibility for illness, injury, or even death. Though the majority of participants trickled through until the bitter end, some left due to severe homesickness and feeling overwhelmed by the environment. We should praise their bravery for leaving. The series recently came back into pop culture as part of the Vice docuseries Dark Side of Reality.

'Viva Laughlin' (2007)

Hugh Jackman as Nicky Fontana in 'Viva Laughlin'

If you ever see a clip of Hugh Jackman singing The Rolling Stones, no, it's not a fever dream. It was an actual moment from the abysmal musical drama Viva Laughlin. The high-concept series adapted from the British series Viva Blackpool follows Ripley Holden (Lloyd Owen), an ambitious businessman trying to open a luxury casino in Laughlin, Nevada. As his funding falls through and plans go sideways, his ex-business partner is found dead at the casino site, dragging Ripley into a messy murder investigation. He faces pressure from a wealthy rival casino owner named Nicky Fontana (Jackman), alongside mounting stress from his wife, Natalie (Mädchen Amick), and kids, Cheyenne and Jack (Ellen Woglom and Carter Jenkins). Right from the beginning, Viva Laughlin was critically panned. As much as audiences love crime thrillers today, Viva Laughlin was a complete misfire.

Arriving just shy of Glee's debut, the premise didn’t resonate with audiences, no matter how flashy it was. Instead, it was reminiscent of Cop Rock, the 1990 flop. The show ground its murder mystery plot completely to a halt, so characters could awkwardly lip-sync and croon pop hits from Bachman-Turner Overdrive and Blondie. As some American remakes do, it was terribly lost in translation. It was a sanitized, confused American remake of the clever British original series that ultimately stripped away the original's charm. If the musical story didn't get you, maybe the subplots like Ripley's college-age daughter dating a 42-year-old professor. Despite major star power, including Melanie Griffith and executive producer Jackman, the show was canceled after two episodes.

Read Entire Article