ladyfreckles
Acrobat
I thought this was an interesting perspective (from a former showrunner):
By Ken Levine: Dan Harmon's firing: My take
Shows tend to survive without the original creative force. Even WEST WING when Aaron Sorkin was sacked. Even MASH when Larry Gelbart quit. MASH is a perfect example. If they could replace the genius of Larry Gelbart with a couple of knuckleheads like me and my partner and the show still survived, then you know it’s pretty bulletproof.
...
For a network to fire a showrunner, his behavior had to be pretty unruly. The network weighs the value of his contribution with the nightmare of dealing with him and must decide if he’s worth it. Dan Harmon apparently wasn’t worth it.
Me, I think Harmon needs to get over himself a bit. But I'm not head-over-heels about the show like a lot of the show's fans are. I think the first two seasons were great, and then less so after that. Some brilliant episodes, some so-so episodes. My favorite episodes tend to be the high-concept ones, and I don't have a lot invested in the characters, so don't tend to care so much about episodes that show character growth or watching their relationships develop.
I wouldn't go so far as Chevy Chase to call the show mediocre, but it's not the second coming of Jesus, and neither is Harmon (okay, I don't think he's THAT arrogant. But he comes across as pretty damned arrogant).
All that being said, I'm glad it's coming back next year, even for just 13 episodes. Curious to see if/how it changes without Harmon.
Edit, because I'm finding the different perspectives interesting: I have an acquaintance who works in TV and often has a lot of "inside baseball" stuff to say about TV stuff. She's not a fan of Community, but she had some good things to say in the line of "this is how it works in TV."
While I don't agree with her about the show itself, I thought this kind of summed it up. It's just the way TV works on the big networks:
For those who thought Harmon made the show he wanted to make - that's fine. You get to make the show you want to make when you're Jerry Seinfeld and Seinfeld is TV's top show in the late 1990's. You get to make the show you want to make when you're Anthony Zuiker and all three CSI are top 10 shows in the mid 2000's. You get to make the show you want to make Shonda Rhimes and Grey's Anatomy knocked Zuiker's CSI to second place on Thursdays at 9PM. When you're lower rated than every program on the competition on Thursday night, you get to make the show Sony and NBC want you to make or they'll get someone else to make the show.
Community easily lands on my lits of "Favorite Shows of All-Time". The third season is where things started to get really hit and miss for me. I'm not exactly the best judge on what is a quality show because I can't stand a lot of the most popular shows on television (Seinfeld, Lost, Arrested Development etc), but I am very choosy with what I do watch. I think there was a lot of turmoil behind-the-scenes during the third season and that's what resulted in the washed out episodes.
Community has always been really good at having overarching plots and themes that carry throughout entire seasons. It's subtle, but still there. The third season felt more like a children's cartoon where there was very little character development from episode to episode and storylines were being picked up and dropped quicker than a game of hot potato. It bothered me. That kind of stuff doesn't happen unless the writers have been changed or there's behind-the-scenes trouble. Don't get me wrong, S3 had some great episodes, but I did not enjoy it on the same level that I did with S1 and S2.
I'm not sure what's going to happen with season 4, or how I feel about Dan Harmon. It could turn into Arrested Development where the writers just stop caring about ratings and do a bunch of crap just because they feel like it. I really hope that isn't the case.