I chose to do my supplemental screening on Hannah Montana. I watched the pilot episode, “Lilly, Do You Want to Know a Secret?” to gain an understanding of what the shows goals are and the most recent episode, “Miley Says Goodbye? (Part 2)” to compare how the series had developed since the premiere. I also watched a random episode: “Promma Mia” (season 3, episode 14).

It is obvious that “Hannah Montana” appeals to (pre)teens. Right away the show jumps into the story with energy. This energy is depicted in actors moving around the set after every other line and when stationary, they are slightly bent at the knees as if to portray a constrained, explosive, energy. The energy in “Hannah Montana” relates to the energy in most teenagers; they don’t know where to focus it and how to interpret it so they often act sporadically and without reservation.

The style of the show embodies a sitcom with slapstick humor as the characters exchange overly dramatic reactions that are reinforced by the laugh track. I suspect that it must keep a relatively simple narrative to maintain accessibility to younger viewers. If it were as complex as “Glee,” perhaps much younger viewers would be confused.

Following commercial breaks in the pilot, scenes from Montana’s signing performances reignite viewers with a glamorous performance. In these scenes Hannah is depicted as being older than she actually is, a common occurrence of the music industry. One of the most applicable elements of the show is the plot. Most, if not all young girls idolize the pop star life, full of glitz and glamour, fame and fortune. This commonality among young girls acts as the pull, to consume / fantasize Hannah’s life.
The other side of the plot proves appealing as well. In the first episode, Hannah lives a double life and has to alter her appearance before her friend Lilly arrives. Not only does Miley Cyrus, the actress, get to express / commentate on this plot in relation to her own life as a singer and a ‘real’ person, but it also appeals to a wide audience of teens, who at that age experience confusion about their own identity.
In the most recent episode the actors have matured significantly and so has the content, but their antics have remained immature. This dichotomy is the result of a problem that actors encounter with getting older while trying to maintain the same fan base. By adjusting the content to slightly more adult scenarios, the viewers that have ‘grown up with the show,’ are still able to relate to the show, while keeping it entertaining for younger viewers.

The show addresses reality in a variety of ways as well. One of the stereotypes that the show portrays in the first episode is a flamboyant male clothing designer. Younger teens most likely don’t comprehend homosexuality, its stereotypes, or place within society, but the character is highly animated and thus, amusing.
The show’s ‘reality’ is interesting because it is half reality television and half documentary. The characters use their names from real life and their reputations are carried over as well, in the case of Billy Ray Cyrus, father of Miley and famous musician.
Though there are some unrealistic, or at least uncommon occurrences deriving from a famous singer lifestyle, the majority of the scenarios are true at heart. That is to say, a show’s believability can be maintained by sometimes replacing reality with the genuine. The main theme that transcends the episodes I watched was the importance of friendship and family – universally good values.

The relationships portrayed in “Hannah Montana” offer another node in which teens can relate. One plot element revealed in the premiere is that Hannah’s family does not have a mother. This arching story is a place where the show relies on a serious nature to ground it from its relentless lofty humor. The absence of a mother figure in the show dictates how Hannah interacts with her father and the role he plays in the family. Billy Cyrus is portrayed as a voice of reason, providing guidance throughout his kids’ experiences. Among the extensive developmental changes that his kids undergo, Ray struggles to adjust to household and child raising responsibilities.
Though this show is directed toward young girls, the relationship that Hannah’s brother and father share is one of aspiring toward manhood. It seems that the majority of the shows intended audience would not be interested in the development in this relationship.
By season three, the show is more comfortable addressing relationship’s sexual themes. Oliver, the third wheel of the Hannah and Lilly, is a geeky, prepubescent who in earlier episodes is desexualized. In later episodes he is dating Lilly (a story that strongly mirrors the developments between Harry Potter, Ron, and Hermione) and the responsibilities of individuals in a relationship are revealed.

With regard to issues of race, “Hannah Montana” could be criticized for keeping its cast culturally uniform. When Hannah and Lilly go to sit next to Hannah’s love interest two other students, one Asian and one African American, steal the seats before them (did someone say, ‘cue diversity’) signifying a cultural hierarchy. The seat stealers are portrayed as close cohorts, which unifies the show’s definition of diversity as ‘non-white.’ Though the portrayal of ethnically diverse cast members may have changed throughout the series, it was a bold move to characterize them that way in the pilot episode.

At first I was hesitant to watch Hannah Montana because of how awful I thought her feature film was. (Yes, I saw it. It was unavoidable. I was on a plane.) After watching these episodes I developed an appreciation for the teen television genre. I can see now, after having critically analyzed the show, that Hannah Montana is an effective teen series that exercises calculated production choices. Sure – its not what I would choose to watch in my free time, but I am 22. I can remember watching “Lizzie Mcguire” with my sister as a kid and kind of liked it. It is easy to see how Hannah Montana succeeds.

As an aside, I noticed that the show displayed some cliché scenarios, which provoked a few questions. The pilot’s story continues in her middle school, where she displays nervous behavior when talking to a guy. Lilly encourages Miley to approach the guy, fulfilling the role of the ‘supportive friend’. The role of these clichés in a show designed for teens is questionable. Where does the impulse to call these experiences displayed on television cliché? Are they implemented to reflect real occurrences or do they exist as a token? Why are clichés important to us? Is it simply a label we use to strip things of their originality or something more? What makes something cliché?
Watch the first few minutes of the pilot and compare it to a later episode in relation to my comments.

Pilot:

Season 3, Episode 30: