Tyler Perry's 'Haves and Have Nots' on OWN

[EricMontreal22]

I admit, despite all my bitching I find this show oddly hypnotic--like early Passions... I haven't seen episode three because torrents aren't up yet (it just aired didn't it? Vanguardian you prob will hear more discussion later...) What killed me direction wise in episode two especially was all the two-header scenes where we'd get a close up of one person talking right into the camera, then an awkward beat, then a close up of the other person replying, another awkward beat, etc. I dunno if this is typical of Perry (I still don't buy he's writing and directing everything that he's credited as doing) or not...

[P.J.]

The dialogue is beyond atrocious. I guess this is how Perry thinks he's pulling some Downton Abbey vibe...when his characters deliver their lines in the same tone of voice, no matter what?

Note to set designers---just because you stage x number of seating areas in a space, it does not make the stage look bigger.

[Eric83]

LOL! This is so true.

I enjoyed tonight's episode.

[EricMontreal22]

I only finally clued in that the reason the one maid reminded me so much of Pilar on Passions... is it's the same actress.

[P.J.]

And she wasn't even on last night, to my recollection.

The main thing that disturbs me is that I don't get any feeling of family in the Cryers. Yes, I understand there's dysfunction....but even naked boy and dumb-wanna-be-fashionista girl don't act like they ever liked one another.

I kind of snickered when the daughter warned in her most determined Barbie-doll voice---"you know what happens when I feel bad". Like her head's gonna start twisting around and vomiting like Linda Blair in The Exorcist.

[ChitHappens]

I really liked last night's eppy! It was good, but I agree with PJ. First off, I have a difficult time believing the mother gave birth to either of those kids, and no one in this family seems to genuinely like one another. Amanda s/b daddy's little girl. Really? Amanda and Wyatt are supposed to be really tight, but if they dont' say it, I'm not seeing it. The Cryers needs some work for sure!

Tika bring this show to life!!!!!

[NothinButAttitude]

But that's what make the "haves" truly the "have nots." They have wealth, material goods, and scandalous deeds that bound them together but they don't have that familial bond that many people aspire to have. I think how TP has devised this family is genius. I've known people in high school that come from wealthy families and they mirror behaviors displayed on this show. The kids that I went to school with act out. The parents are wrapped up in their careers/social scene that they forget about their children--it's normal, true, and kind of refreshing to see on a drama. Having all that money at one's disposal can be the root of destruction.

I'm sorry I'm in the minority but I'm LOVING this show. Yes, Tyler can tighten up on the dialogue (he should consider hiring either the numerous aspiring recently graduated English/creative writers here throughout GA that need a job right about now, myself included, or snag some of the experience script writers from daytime that are out of work), and he needs to tighten up on the story beats but for a show coming out of the gate, it's good. Tyler just needs to devise the right team of writers and the show would have IT.

[P.J.]

I get that---but that's hardly exclusively a "rich person" problem. Plenty of poor folk don't give a crap about family and only look out for themselves. There doesn't seem to be much difference between the "haves" and "have nots". Hannah speaks to one of her children, and the kids have some kind of loyalty to each other it seems.

Problem is there's nothing in the Cryers that make them the least bit likeable. Or more importantly, interesting. Two self-destructive idiot children and two self-serving viper parents. I'm not seeing anything unique.

And considering how wealthy and privileged the Cryers are supposed to be, this show feels positively claustrophobic.

[ReddFoxx]

I like how Candace refuses to back down no matter how much Jim threatens her.

Good character development of Katheryn and her relationship with Jim in this episode, it was made clear she is no idiot and is quite tough.

[KMan101]

Skipped the latest episode comments to talk about the first two episodes (though my memory is fuzzy because it's been a week and I watch a good amount of television). I enjoyed them. It's definitely a Tyler Perry show though LOL. The stiff actors (though very nice to look at). Thankfully Jim, Hanna and Candace made up for the rest. It has a lot of potential though, I think they did an OK job at setting things up (the severely messed up kids, the non-existent Jim/Kathryn marriage, Hanna/Candace). Hope to see more of Benny, he wasn't given much.

Does feel very 90s/Passions-esque, agreed with everyone there. I'll keep watching.

There's also a website out there that has links to episodes of hundreds of shows/episodes. I can PM the link/name if anyone's interested.

Edited June 5, 2013 by KMan101

[YRBB]

Yes, absolutely! It's really like a once-a-week, primetime version of Passions! (minus the OTT ridiculousness but that can't be too far off, and I welcome it!)

[All My Shadows]

I get the Passions vibe, too, and I think part of the reason why I enjoy it is because it does fill the void that only PSNS could.

I have to say, though, that I hope TP doesn't get too full of himself off of this show. It's not very revolutionary -- he did not create the concept of "haves and have-nots." It's been done on soapy TV for decades. If he really wanted to put a different tint to it, he would have made the "haves" black and the "have nots" white, but Lawda mercy can you imagine the mess if black Jim Cryer cheated on black Katheryn with white Candace...

But anyway, TP's trademarks are all over this. The passive-aggressive "you need to get yo butt in church" moment between Hanna and Benny, fine young men in various states of undress (but Tyler know God!), wigs, a full-figured woman who takes no one's sh!t, the "uppity" black woman, the sinful little bitch who will get hers (I betcha when Hanna finds out about Candice and Jim, she's gonna lecture her about "what's done in the dark...").

I hope the Jeffery thing doesn't turn into Jeffery doing something psychotic to get Wyatt. If anything, Jeffery should get Wyatt off the stuff, and a relationship blooms from that, but we know TP ain't going there.

The weakest character, for me, is the daughter Amanda. Everyone else seems to be a part of something or doing something, but she's just a talk-to.

Edited June 5, 2013 by All My Shadows

[Vanguardian]

Oh please send me a link to that website. I'm the odd man out around here with nothing to discuss pertaining to this show. LOL. I'd appreciate it. Thanks!

Edited June 5, 2013 by Vanguardian

[London]

I'd like a PM too

[EricMontreal22]

This is a big part of my problem too. THe chracters still feel very much like character types--which is why it almost feels like a parody of soap archetypes to me. Yeah, soaps often work on archetypes and often their basic motivations are spelled out earlyon, but Perry is excessively lazy about it.

They really do need some more settings--I felt like the PP soaps felt clausterphobic or current DAYS, but so far after three episodes, the poor maid's house and then endless similar looking rooms in the mansion get old.

But maybe my thoughts will change after the third episode--I still can't find a torrent. I hope whoever (sorry "tyler Perry") is directing stops that odd disembodied head technique.