Jump to content

"The Conners" Discussion Thread


Recommended Posts

  • Members

Wow. I'm surprised and pleased by ABC's admirable resolve in the face of ratings (which, despite falling, were still pretty solid).

 

I hadn't had much time to reflect this morning on what Roseanne did beyond utter disgust. I got busy and turned away from the news, but all I had time to think was "how can I possibly continue to support this?" And obviously I wasn't the only one. It's clear most of the cast and crew were far more furious.

 

I feel awful for Sara Gilbert especially, for whom the revival was a personal and professional triumph. She and everyone else worked so hard and they took it from every side in the media while trying to manage Roseanne. I haven't finished the season (and I do intend to), but I was mostly pleased with what I saw. I thought there was a lot of good there. But now far more than ever before, Roseanne is her own worst enemy. I admit I thought she was getting better; I was wrong. She's probably alienated a lot of this cast - people who stuck by her for years through impossible behavior - for a good long time. I hope that gives her some pause. I'd like to think so. But she bought and paid for this.

 

It's a shame, but it was absolutely necessary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

  • Members

The Valerie Harper and The Hogans analogy is not an accurate one, IMO.  

 

While Valerie Harper may have had a reputation for being difficult, she was never known for having racist tirades.  Her firing had to do with a salary dispute, not for spewing conspiracy theories and racist epithets.

Not comparable.

Edited by DramatistDreamer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

It has nothing to do with what one said and the other didn't….it's that they were both fired….although only Valerie…..and the show moved on without her. I personally think the show could go on without Roseanne but with Roseanne having part ownership of the show as someone stated above then the show is done. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

The structural change is similar, yeah, but that's where it ends. Miller-Boyett simply sniped Valerie to turn her show into proto-Full House.

 

I don't know that any of them would do the show without her, even now. For one, Roseanne owns it and I can't see her giving it up. For another I imagine they're all probably just utterly done with this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

This is definitely an unfortunate situation. I feel bad for all of the cast and crew who lost their jobs over Roseanne's awful comments. It's a shame. I thought that the Reboot was really good and I will miss it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I think most of us who watched will. For me, there was a lot to enjoy. But there's not much to be done about it. I can't see the cast wanting to go back to that situation in any way right now, and I doubt Roseanne would allow it (I'm assuming she has a stake in the entire IP).

 

ETA: LOL - guess I'll catch the last few eps on Dailymotion! Prospect Park's backups lasted longer.

 

In amusing news, the alt right is now attempting to target Bill Maher on Twitter for firing as retaliation. My response, in one tweet (not mine):

 

 

 

Oh, OK, a few more:

 

 

Edited by Vee
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Yes, they won for the timeslot but the number of viewers had fallen 50 percent

 

This is what the woman who canceled the show today had to say a while back: https://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/wireStory/abc-roseanne-concentrate-family-politics-55180493

 

 

 

Look no farther than YouTube.

Edited by marceline
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

    • I appreciate your POV and ideas here. I don't, however, trust Josh Griffith to make this anything like a good story. My guess is that much of it will be off-camera and that we'll have to be happy with Mariah retelling the nightmare in bits and pieces. Meanwhile, Tessa will still be strumming her damn guitar with Daniel. Ugh. I know I'm negative about this show. I am hate watching with every fiber of my being, and there's nothing about it that's working for me. I never recall Y&R being worse.
    • A batch of photos from Episode #67 which aired Thursday June 5 in USA. Some are scene pictures, and some are behind-the-scenes. https://www.paramountpressexpress.com/cbs-entertainment/shows/beyond-the-gates/photos?episode=25710 Posting because there's a pic of director Michael V. Pomarico; and a pic of director Steven Williford whose photo caption says "J. Steven Williford".
    • Please register in order to view this content

       
    • I think the gross ickiness is Josh Griffith's intention. At birth, Ian Ward stole Mariah from Sharon, so that Sharon knew only of the Cassie twin and not the Mariah twin.  Sharon gave up Cassie for adoption at birth, never knowing that Mariah existed. When Ian Ward stole baby Mariah, he had her be raised by a woman member of his cult. She grew up in his cult. Years later, after Mariah was an adult in Genoa City and had left him, he tried to kidnap her to marry him himself, I sort of remember some icky scenes where he had arranged a wedding, but she escaped or was rescued -- it was so gross that I chose to forget it, and I don't want to look up the details. Mariah is feeling traumatized/triggered by Ian Ward being in Genoa City several months ago, because he was obsessed with her, and he terrorized her loved ones, interacted with Tessa, and drugged Sharon, which ultimately resulted in the death of Heather -- causing the grief of Daniel and Lucy. None of that was Mariah's fault. But she was so horrified by what happened, that she feels she did something wrong that caused this hateful villain to continue to obsess about her.   Based on small comments that Mariah made recently, I think she feels completely worthless. I gather that when she was away on the business trip a month or two ago, all of what happened with Ian Ward and Heather's death just hit her all at once and she was mentally/emotionally collapsing, and just felt unable to call for help.  During the business trip she sat in her hotel room and spiraled more, feeling more and more worthless and afraid. Finally she started drinking at a bar, and that's when the creepy old man approached her.  By that point, she wasn't in her right mind, and started interacting with the guy.  Either she thought he was Ian, or she thought he was someone like Ian, and she would be *required* to flirt with him in a role play, and do what he commanded, almost like old programming being reactivated.  Or perhaps just simple self-loathing playing out. I don't know if the guy actually knew Ian or Jordan, or if he was a random stranger.  But Mariah's fear/loathing/subconscious chaos kicked in. And then... well that's as far as her flashbacks have aired so far. She can't bear to face the rest of whatever it was.  I gather that in the coming episodes, we'll (eventually) find out what happened next as we see more of the icky flashbacks. --------------- The rest of this post is only my speculation: I think that she felt like she was supposed to have sex with him but didn't want to, and may have tried to kill him instead. Or he r*ped her.  Or they didn't have sex at all, but it's all convoluted in her mind.  Something horrible happened but I don't think it was her fault.  If the man died, maybe she covered it up?  I really don't know, I'm just speculating ideas. At any rate, I'm totally convinced that this is NOT a conventional "cheating storyline" where someone willingly has sex outside their relationship. ----------------- This is basically Josh Griffith's obsession with dark storylines, creepy villains, and terrible writing of "mental health issues".
    • The most we ever saw was on the "Roger years" tape.

      Please register in order to view this content

       
    • Right. Literally for decades, soaps mesmerized their audiences with tales of romance, family conflict, class struggles, and recognizable interpersonal-relationship sagas. We didn't need relentless, heavy violence. We didn't need clones, mad scientists, extra-terrestrials and demon possessions. We didn't need gaggles of plastic himbos and bimbos pushing beloved vets off-screen. We only needed to see people whom we cared about, and the intelligent, moving progression of their lives. Flashy sets, gaudy gimmicks, and high-falutin' hairdos be damned. The characters and the words were important.
    • 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.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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