Jump to content

"The Conners" Discussion Thread


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

  • Members

I think there has to be a middle ground. The show itself hits that target for me.  The way Roseanne and Dan reacted to Mark wasn't politically correct.  On many shows, they would immediately be the bad guys for not getting him right away.  They weren't politically correct on surrogacy either, but I think a lot of people relate to how they see it.

 

Real Roseanne is someone I've written off in a sense.  I think she deserves compassion for what she's been through, but I can't take her seriously. I also think it's unfortunate that she has the twitter megaphone that she does.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I don't think that'll happen, but I do think the focus on Darlene and her kids is deliberate and smart. I also do hold out hope for the cast bringing her back from the brink - she has gone from constantly offensive to sheepish and on the defensive in recent months, with only occasional horrible flashes of really terrible. For Roseanne Barr that is sadly a promising forecast.

Edited by Vee
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

It's not gonna happen.

 

It didn't when the producers tried to float it in '88 (after the episode where Jackie and Dan ran the house together while Roseanne was away) and Laurie Metcalf and John Goodman both went straight to Roseanne about it, and it will never happen now. If the cast stood in solidarity with her through all her insanity for a decade on the air, they'll do so again today.

Edited by Vee
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

^ Yeah, the people there know who she is and they made the choice to come back.  Plus Roseanne does have charisma.  I'm sure there is some line she could cross that would make ABC pull the plug completely, but I hope it doesn't happen.  It wouldn't be the same show without her.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Exactly. Give them a false sense of security, having one of "their kind" as the leading lady... and then that same leading lady will be shown openly embracing progressive topics and people with different backgrounds [as it is, episodes 2 through 9 will have no Trump mention, but instead showcase gender identity, biracial kids, interracial marriage, surrogacy (i.e. non-traditional conceptions), the opioid epidemic, etc.].

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • Absolutely! Brad should've simply moved on from Lunacy. There's no point of freeing her, if you're not going to at least make an attempt at redemption or incorporating her into the fold. It happened with Quinn, who committed quite a few felonies before become the Forrester Matriarch.  Heck, keep Lunacy in prison and have Poppy/Finn discover that she gave birth to twins - 'Sunny' could've come on with a clean slate and still had Sheila/Finn and all the other drama. It certainly couldn't have been worse than what we've witnessed with the destruction of $B.    
    • I would enjoy it if Swan popped up on BTG as an old one time friend/mentor of Anita’s for a cameo. This is just

      Please register in order to view this content

    • I had totally forgotten that Courtney story. I see Burton was already phoning it in by that point.
    • omg I completely missed that, but now when I see it typed here in your post, it's obvious icky cringe. So now I just checked and Tomas said that -- on May 27 that he likes the author Carl Ivati.  He said it with sort of an accent, so I didn't catch the stupid joke or think about the spelling.   I remember when that aired, that I actually said to myself at the time, "I wonder if that's a Latin American author, and I will have to google him later." And now I see your post, and I see. Well that's cringe, and I feel stupid to have fallen for it.

      Please register in order to view this content

         
    • There's a lot you don't need if you have the writing.  You don't even need large casts!  You could make do with a cast of 12-18 actors if the writing is there.
    • Thank you. There’s absolutely nothing wrong with sleeping around if your spouse actually knows about it. She’s just a cheating slut.
    • OMG...Robert Mandan! And Donna Mills is a child. I keep hoping for more of early Ross/Vanessa.
    • I get your point, but I also know that if the roles were reversed -- if a man were screwing around on a woman this way -- everyone would be all "All with his head!" When I say Vanessa needs therapy, I'm actually being kind, because I could begin and end with the fact that she's a cheating slut.
    • Is nobody going to mention the cringefest that is 'Carl Ivati'?
    • I've accepted we'll probably never see any of the Roger/Holly 1976-1978 storyline. Whenever any of Roger/Holly 1979 and 1980 storylines surface, those are must watch as they set in motion everything we saw a decade later.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy