TV to movie rules to live by

This is getting out of hand.

Fresh off the continued news that Arrested Development is inching closer and closer to becoming a full-fledged big screen movie, plus the success of South Park: Bigger, Longer and Uncut, The Simpsons Movie and even Reno: 911!: Miami, it seems like every show runner and their producer brother is talking about turning their departed TV shows into movies.

First, Eddie Izzard said he wants to make a movie of his 20-episode, freshly canceled con-family drama The Riches. Then Bryan Fuller – seeing the ABC writing on the wall – claimed he would look to make a Pushing Daisies film if the show got canceled. So that time would be now.

And arguably the dumbest – show creators are looking to make a movie out of the failed HBO experiment Rome.

I blame 24, which announced a couple years ago it would be making a theatrical version of the show a couple years down the road. While a 24 movie is a no-brainer — 24 and Lost movies are the two current shows with fans devoted enough to show up for a movie — do any of these others really warrant a movie?

This new batch of TV-to-movie candidates have something in common – they never made it past their second seasons. And Arrested Development only made a curtailed third season. Loosely translated, that means no one cared about them when they were on, so why would anyone care about them in the movies? 

Maybe the time has come for us to assemble some guidelines. Screw that, let’s make these the official qualifications to continue a TV show on the big screen. At least three of these must apply, and we’ll see how they apply to the four shows in question:

–At some point during your run, you must have cracked the top 25 in the Nielsen ratings for a season. DECISION: None of these would apply, but in this age of cable TV shows gathering steam as legit cult hits, it’s not a hard and fast rule. Would we have any problem with a Sopranos movie? Of course not.

–Your cult status must be verified by a panel of reputable TV reviewers, including, but not limited to, Matt Roush of TV Guide, Dalton Ross of Entertainment Weekly and me. DECISION: YES on Arrested Development and Pushing Daisies, NO on Rome and Riches.

–If you really were a critical darling that received no viewer love, you must have received at least two (2) major Emmy awards. DECISION: YES on Arrested Development, NO on Pushing Daisies, Rome and Riches. 

–You must have lasted more than one season. You may still proceed with your movie if you haven’t, but you cannot expect any studio financing. Serenity is the exception, not the rule. That means you, Moonlight fans. DECISION: YES on all four, but just barely on The Riches. Izzard said he isn’t even going for studio backing, though. Smart move.

–You must be off the air for at least five years, just like the Baseball Hall of Fame. It gives everyone a chance to sit back and assess your career. Then you’ll know if people really want to see your movie. DECISION: No on all four.

–You must have some kind of star power. If a certain Oscar winner walked into Paramount tomorrow and said, “I have a script for a Bosom Buddies movie, and I want to make it,” it would be in development today. But if Tony Danza started shopping a script of “Who’s the Boss?” he’d be pretty hard up for a buyer. DECISION: YES on AD because of narrator/producer Ron Howard, who it could be argued would be more important than any on-camera star. KINDA YES on Riches, with Izzard (questionable) and Oscar nominee Minnie Driver (passable). NO on Daisies and Rome.

That’s four YES answers for and a green light for an AD movie, two for Pushing Daisies, one-and-a-half for Riches and one for Rome. No greens for those other three.

If you’re checking, it’s five of six YES answers for a 24 movie, and once it’s gone for five years, it would be the full six.

Just remember these rules when word leaks out about a “Eureka” movie in the works.