Never watched Abbot specifically, but I am familiar with the mockumentary format you’re referring to. I’d assume, like with any other fictional work, there’s suspension of disbelief. The formula a series like Abbot follow most likely isn’t a factor of enjoyment as long it’s entertaining. It’s both the writers and actors’ job to make the journey to the punchline effective. The Office, Parks and Rec, and Abbot, are all shows that emulate how regular people may act when placed in absurd situations, and specifically in the workplace where the expectation is to be professional. The humor lies in the dichotomy of how their fictional world functions juxtaposed to real-life norms and expectations, which the latter is rarely met in this style of comedy. I’d also suspect this is part of its overall appeal. In the most extreme, it is plausible, unlikely to happen, but unexpected when it does. And as the audience, we assume the role of a spectator to the spectacle. To sum it all, I don’t think it’s easy, since it still would need to follow effective structural plot even in a non-conventional format like the mockumentary.

@phvros I'm not talking about just being entertained. Does realizing the simplicity of the formula impact you once you notice it? It did for me. I still like those shows, but I don't think they are as complex as people give them credit for. It clearly works but I think it's because people don't notice how formulaic it is. The average viewer isn't going to be thinking about story beats and narrative formulas and and repetitive formats. It's very basic. I don't mean to say the writers and actors don't try. Just that they don't have to try AS hard as other shows with more complexity in their forms. I understand why workplace comedies are funny and how semi real people reaction to absurdity makes for entertaining television. But it's like "it worked with the office. We can do it with other jobs too!" I never even said anything about suspension of disbelief. That doesn't even relate to what I'm talking about, actually. I don't get why you mentioned it tbh. I never said I can't suspend my disbelief. Are you just throwing out random terms lol? I'm just teasing. Basically I'm saying it's easy to write a knock knock joke because the formula is already there. It's tried and true. And I'm starting to find knock knock jokes a bit trite. Abbott seems like a combination of several different shows and tropes wrapped in a mockumentary-esque format? All the things i see of it are things something another show already did. My question remains. Do people think about that? Do they care? Does creative integrity or freshness mean anything to the general audience or is it something only other creatives obsess over? I'm not saying it's bad to like it or that people shouldn't watch because it is a bit bankrupt. I'm just curious if people notice lol I overthink this stuff a lot and when I bring it up to others, most people just don't care about creative shit like this.

I think I understand where you’re coming from. Or at least try to. Fans of the show probably don’t think twice about it. Unless, they’re also fans of the office and some of the actors who star in Abbot. At that point, it’s as simple as tuning in for them and nothing more. The fourth-wall breaking, looking straight at the camera followed by an eye roll is something that’ll never get old for people who love mockumentary comedy. Might be unrelated, but I’d even go on a limb and say the style is formulaic (in essence) to something like found-footage horror. From Blair Witch, Cloverfield to Paranormal Activity. It’s all quite similar with the only exception being its story and execution. Those kinds of movies keep being made time and time again, it’s just a matter of *how* that keeps it fresh. For me, I don’t think about it unless it’s brought up for discussion. I’m unfamiliar with what Abbot is about, having seen few clip, gauging only its presentation, but if it received mostly negative reception, then I would think some of its criticisms would focus on the formula and the repetitious style you’re describing. It’s possible we’re conflating a lot of different ideas 😅 And not sure if it means anything but both Abbott and The Office share same the same cinematographer (Randall Einhorn). Abbott could’ve been produced differently, but I think Quinta Brunson (and everyone @ ABC) figured this was the best way to deliver the show. And so to answer your question, realizing the formula doesn’t impact me that much. But I will say that my expectations going into a show like Abbott would be different compared to FX’s Atlanta.

Conceptually, season 3 was still everything “Atlanta.” It only threw me off because it was unlike the seasons before it. In hindsight, it’s actually solid.

2:33