Jump to content

"The Conners" Discussion Thread


Recommended Posts

  • Members

They never used him anyway, which is a massive shame.

 

I still hate they ignore Andy. I can kind of understand it from a packed canvas type of deal but they're missing beats that could realistically have been played. I'd rather they ignore Jerry (which they seem to anyway). It's a bizarre choice. One hand understands it, the other doesn't.

 

I agree with John that Andy could have died (but they had to deal with Mark Sr.'s death as well as Roseanne's, to be fair) and Jackie 'erased' him.

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

Watching this old Roseanne interview (or what was there of it, anyway) I'm reminded of why she was so popular in those early years, in spite of all the endless tabloid publicity. It's a powerful interview. I'm so sorry about where she ended up. 

Please register in order to view this content

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Apparently he's going to go visit his wife on her tour of duty overseas (who I guess guested last season).

They've indicated they'll still weave him in for guest spots but he was basically recurring anyway, and I haven't watched regularly in several seasons - I do intend to catch up someday, but Disney/Hulu makes it hard when they remove past seasons. It's pretty wild it's had what seems to be a strong, long run. It is nice if jolting to see Dan and Louise/Katey Sagal, Darlene and Ben (who I always liked) and Jackie and her new beau who I'm unfamiliar with all married. And I think Becky back to college.

Edited by Vee
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I miss the cool character of Jackie. I forgot which season she started acting all "bafoony". I was hoping we'd get the ol' Jackie back for the reprisal, but nope. Then there was an episode where Jackie was imitating herself to be a bird to get some whipped cream. Oy! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Yeah, to me, the character of Jackie was a very relatable character. I still watch 'The Conners', but it's missing something. It's missing a leading actress and Sara Gilbert (as much as I like her) ain't it. Jackie used to be a cool aunt, and in a way, she kind of guided Roseanne's kids to a certain extent. Instead, it's like Roseanne's kids look at her as a dope. That's not who Jackie was, or at least, that's not how I remember her. I think I started "tuning out" of Roseanne when they all went to Disneyworld. I think post-trip Disneyworld, I wasn't as invested in the show.

As far as the 'The Conners', I like their take on current social issues, but sometimes, it's too much to cram into a 30-minute comedy. And I don't like how everything is about Darlene. Do I want Roseanne Barr back? No. That woman is absolutely insane in the membrane. Has nothing to do with politics at all. It's all about being a decent human being.

Edited by Noel
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'm going to respond to you about this show. I've been accused of hating on it for some reason or another. But as a 53-year-old black man I do not hate this show at all. It heavily represents people like me, but I want it to be treated well and not just pushed with half-assedness, which is what I feel has happened on several occasions so far. Bad editing, bad cliffhangers, or no cliffhangers at all, disappearing characters with dropped storylines, etc. I can understand shows no longer wanting certain characters or  storylines, but why the "Judy Winslow" effect?
    • I love many things about BTG very much. For me, it's greatest strength is how the family relationships are so beautifully written. The deep love between family members while acknowledging each other's flaws--it's SO GOOD.  The best of the best is the two sister relationships: loving but very different sisters Dani and Nicole and adversarial sisters Kat and Eva. These two relationships can anchor the show for many years to come, in my opinion. (The one caveat is that the young and very talented Colby and Ambyr may want to leave the show sooner rather than later, but that's to be expected). My biggest problem with this show is this: Where are the romantic love stories? Where are the star-crossed lovers? Almost every character on this show is married, or in a committed relationship, or just fooling around. Right now the only potential for this are in the Ashley/Andre/Derek and Kat/Tomas/Eva situations. Like a lot of people, I feel the sooner they ditch Ashley and Derek, the better. I hate picking on actors, but the characters are so blah and bland it's like they're a parody of soap characters. I like Andre, and there's some indication they might have him become more serious about Dani, but I don't see that becoming a big love story. I could be wrong. Kat and Eva fighting over a man would be amazing. Over Tomas? No.  I've noticed on social media some people are starting to ship Kat and Jacob. I think that shows how much viewers long for a messy love story. There is much I enjoy about BTG and I have no intention of bailing on it. But over all my many years of watching soap operas, the thing that always got me the most excited about them was the question: "When are those two finally going to get together?"
    • FROM THE VAULT: WEEKLY DAYTIME NIELSEN RATINGS: WEEKS OF 11/26/73-11/30/73 & 12/3/73-12/7/73:

      Please register in order to view this content

    • Please register in order to view this content

        Some initial thoughts.   1) a Who's who back in the day with an assortment of well known performers. 2) Surprised Debra Messing would agree to play a conservative character 3) Not surprised a network didn't pick this up because showing a conservative that is human/likable is a no no in Hollywood LOL
    • Yes from when they went on Let’s Make a Deal too. Pam stole Forrester designs for Jackie M. Of course a month later we saw Nick, Lesley, Owen, and Bridget all exit in the same episode.
    • Great pairing that seemed to come out of the blue! Around that time, it felt like Sheffer/Goutman didn’t really know what to do with Emily or Hal. And KM and BH had surprisingly great chemistry. It was good for Emily especially because she was coming off those unsympathetic years with the Tom affair and then running the Intruder and essentially just being a busybody.
    • I think the issue with Lulu is less the character (which was the issue in the Julie Berman days under Guza II) and more the lack of nuance. The current GH team rarely writes nuance for any character or at least can't sustain it for long, or they reserve it for a favored few. I also think the rooting interest at GH BTS often remains on preferred characters or actors - BLQ/Setton - vs. Laura's kids. So it's easy to make Lulu the heavy if you think Brook Lynn and Chase are the money on this show. I don't, but I think FV does. And that's not to say I think Amanda Setton is bad in the role, or that I would get rid of BLQ. I don't trend towards either (though I do think that if Setton's personal beliefs keep getting in the way of material I would reluctantly recast). I think Brook Lynn is essential to use as a lead presently. But I don't think it needs to be the black and white dichotomy of suffering young matriarch BLQ and aggressor Lulu. While it's good that unlike in the Guza years they can recognize that Lulu can be obnoxious and rash, can be her own worst enemy and that that is part of the character, it can be toned down or given more layers than it has of late. There's nothing wrong there the writing can't fix.
    • 1999: I just watched it. It felt so primetime. La Lucci is making history. Aretha's daydreaming segment. @Contessa Donatella Thank you, my love. So helpful and informative as always. adding them to my queue.
    • I know this isn’t a usual or anywhere near universal take, but I loved the relatively brief Hal/Emily relationship/marriage more than I ever thought I would have with KMH/BH.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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