Why the Teen Dramas Aren't Taken Seriously

Here’s one take on the teen dramas I think we all can agree on: They aren’t taken seriously.

Not by Hollywood at large. Not by the A-list. Not by critics. And not by award shows.

I did a totally unscientific Google search and found 5,450,000 results for “teen dramas guilty pleasure” while only getting 2,960,000 results for “teen dramas awards.” I don’t know about you, but the teen dramas have never been guilty pleasures for me. They have been life-saving. And they have been filled with impactful storylines brought to life by talented writers, directors, and actors. Yet the teen drama genre remains one of television’s most dismissed.

Reviews were less than favorable when “Beverly Hills, 90210” premiered in 1990, and even when the show defied the odds and went on to last for a whopping 10 years, people marveled at its longevity — but never its quality. “Beverly Hills, 90210” was nominated for four Golden Globes between 1992 and 1995 (two for Best TV Series - Drama and two for Jason Priestley (Brandon) in the category of Best Performance by an Actor in a TV Series - Drama), but its lone Emmy nomination was for Outstanding Guest Actor in a Drama Series when Milton Berle appeared in a single episode.

“Beverly Hills, 90210” executive producer Charles Rosin even suggested on “9-OH! News” in February that the show’s Golden Globe nominations were less due to genuine esteem for the show and more due to the fact that Priestley and Luke Perry (Dylan) were offered up to the Hollywood Foreign Press Association at an exclusive press conference also attended by TV icon Aaron Spelling and “Beverly Hills, 90210” creator Darren Star. All these years’ later, the HFPA’s nomination decisions for the Golden Globes are still under scrutiny (and Star actually found himself in the middle of this year’s controversy).

To be fair, most award shows in Hollywood are submission-based. That is, a television show merely airing doesn’t automatically mean it will be in contention for awards. Typically, a show (or its writers, directors, actors, etc.) needs to be submitted for consideration. And this usually costs money. In fact, Rosin revealed on the “Beverly Hills 90210 Show” podcast in January that one of the few times Spelling cared to put together an episode screener — which is one of the key components of a “for your consideration” package — was for season 3’s “The Child is Father to the Man,” which featured a standout, emotional performance from Perry. Alas, he wasn’t nominated.

In 2012, I remember being quite surprised when “One Tree Hill” stars Sophia Bush (Brooke) and Bethany Joy Lenz (Haley) were submitted for Emmy consideration — not because they didn’t have award-worthy performances, but because they didn’t have a snowball’s chance in hell at scoring a nomination. And I wasn’t alone in feeling that way. Vulture mentioned both actresses’ submissions in a piece bluntly titled, “This Year’s Most Surprising Attempts at Getting an Emmy Nomination.”

Why was the notion so ridiculous? Bias, mostly. Just the fact that “One Tree Hill” aired on The CW pretty much ensured it wouldn’t get Emmy attention. The network has been so unloved by the Television Academy, outlets like TV Guide have written articles over the years with titles like “What Will It Take for The CW to Win at the Emmys?” In its 15 years of existence, The CW has rarely been taken seriously as a network and therefore its shows aren’t taken seriously either.

It’s a stigma that sometimes sticks to the stars of these series even after their teen dramas end. Stephen Colletti, who recurred on “One Tree Hill” before becoming a series regular, has more than once told the story of going to an audition and overhearing the casting director lament, “Ah, another one of those ‘One Tree Hill’ whores coming in.” There’s no real reason to look down upon actors who have appeared on teen dramas — some of the biggest stars had itty-bitty parts on “Beverly Hills, 90210,” for example, before becoming household names — but both the shows and its stars are often seen as “lesser than.”

I think some of the blame can be placed if not necessarily on television critics themselves, then on the overwhelming amount of TV they have to keep up with. When a new series premieres, a critic is likely to watch the first episode (possibly the first couple, if they are provided with additional episodes to review) and then tune out if the show doesn’t take off as a critical or cultural success. Sure, “Games of Thrones” would score reviews for each season’s premiere, but it was a juggernaut in terms of both ratings and acclaim. When a show like “One Tree Hill” premieres, gets middling reviews, and then barely makes a dent in the ratings (and airs on The WB / The CW), critics usually aren’t going to take the time to give the show another chance. As a result, they miss out on seeing how these series develop after finding their footing. They miss out on incredible hours like the school shooting episode and how it had ramifications for years to come.

And then instead of being admired for its depth, a show like “One Tree Hill” gets mocked for a viral scene in which a dog eats a heart. The show becomes a punching bag and is remembered more for a single “out there” moment instead of all the moments grounded in heartbreaking realism. The “time a dog ate a heart on ‘One Tree Hill’” gets an oral history, but the then-unprecedented decision to jump several years into the future is something the series never gets credit for, even as show after show copies that move today. (I’m lookin’ at you, “Riverdale.”)

But those who discount the impact of the teen dramas are making a mistake. They are discounting the purchase power of thousands and thousands of people worldwide who still shell out their hard-earned cash and flock to fan conventions (you know, when we could still gather in person) for shows that ended years ago. They are dismissing studies that prove these series can be “powerful health tools,” as I highlighted in a recent “Teen Drama Links.” And they are diminishing the hard work of hundreds of people — from actors to directors, key grips to editors — who spend long hours week after week creating something out of nothing. You may not view it as high art, but it is still art nonetheless.

I take the teen drama genre seriously enough to have a newsletter devoted to it. But I think if more people took the time to really give these shows a chance, they’d take the teen dramas seriously too — and they wouldn’t feel guilty about it at all.

Reminder: Your premium subscription to TeenDramaWhore includes perks like exclusive content (including essays like this), fan interviews, trivia parties, and Zoom chats with the genre’s key players. Pretty cool, right? Help TDW grow and spread the word!