8 minutes ago, Vee said:

I assume that no matter what, they'd have to pay her off at the beginning.

 

Which is still allowing her to benefit, IMO.  Plus, if Roseanne follows through on her threats to fight back, at the very least, she'll probably demand a ridiculously high amount just to keep them from going through with it.

 

Maybe I'm being petty, but I'd rather see them move on than allow her to make one more nickel off her show.

 

Two other points:

 

I'm glad that Michael Fishman is focusing his energies on other, more positive things right now.  Whenever life throws you curveballs (HA!), you need to surround yourself with the things that can recharge you both physically and mentally.

 

And yes, Roseanne is falling apart; and no, I have no [!@#$%^&*] to give her.  The Khan of the mid-1990's, in fact, is kind of glad to see her receive her comeuppance after all the tabloid hell that she and Tom Arnold subjected everyone to.  Shalom, girlfriend, and kick rocks.

Edited June 3, 20187 yr by Khan

@Khan, you and I are almost exactly the same age. I too remember all the drama Roseanne subjected the public to the first time around, especially when she was married to Tom. It was everywhere, and I can only imagine how worse it would have been if social media had been around back then. 

 

I suspect that even if the show goes on without her, she'll still be watching and tweeting nonstop. She's a drama queen who needs to stay off social media, period. (P.S. So does Nancy Lee Grahn, whose politics are on the complete opposite side of the spectrum than Roseanne's.)

5 hours ago, amybrickwallace said:

@Khan, you and I are almost exactly the same age. I too remember all the drama Roseanne subjected the public to the first time around, especially when she was married to Tom. It was everywhere, and I can only imagine how worse it would have been if social media had been around back then. 

 

Between the national anthem debacle (to think that there was a time when we would have labelled THAT as un-American), the abuse allegations toward her parent (which fractured her relationship with her sister for awhile, but she has since recanted), the multiple personality claims (that I've NEVER believed), the sudden fascination with all things Iowa and loose meat (that found their way into the show's storylines), the presumed menage a trois with her and Tom's personal assistant (which, not surprisingly, proved to be their marriage's undoing), the ongoing struggles with her show's writers and producers, and all the other, crazy s**t that I'm overlooking...yeah, if the Internet had been around back then, I think it would've committed suicide.

Sara is talking about the Roseanne stuff on The Talk now.

Sara said she agrees with ABC. No talk on spin-offs but today is supposedly the day of pitches to ABC

 

Links, people.

 

 

She made her brief statement and kept it moving. There’s a part of me that wished for more of a juicy discussion (à la when the ladies of “The View” are embroiled in off-camera news), but I suppose that’s all she really could say given that talks of a spinoff are still ongoing with ABC.

 

Slightly off-topic, but Sara seems constantly irritated with Sheryl. 

Edited June 4, 20187 yr by Faulkner

http://www.tmz.com/2018/06/04/abc-roseanne-reboot-announcement-imminent/

22 minutes ago, victoria foxton said:

http://www.tmz.com/2018/06/04/abc-roseanne-reboot-announcement-imminent/

 

Ugh, they should just let it die.

it could work well without roseanne and 200 peopleshouldnt lose a gig because of her ignorant attitude

I hope Wanda Sykes will agree to return, along with the existing writers past and present.

 

The Deadline version of basically the same info suggests all of the cast would be back and are willing, which would be good. The THR version says the writers (Bruce Helford, etc.) would most likely all return.

Edited June 5, 20187 yr by Vee

I have mixed feelings on the idea to continue the show. On one hand, it would be great to see storylines already planned come to fruition (I think they were going to delve more into DJ's family situation, Becky and addressing how Mark had died, maybe even have Jerry and/or Andy on), and for the crew and others to keep their jobs. Killing off Roseanne Conner would give the writers a lot of possibilities and ideas to work with.

 

On the other hand, you have people like John Goodman, Laurie Metcalf, Sara Gilbert and Johnny Galecki who really don't need this show. They were coming from steady gigs on TV and/or the stage. (Heck, John's voiceover gig for all those Dunkin Donuts commercials alone would have him set for life.) Plus, Roseanne's BTS antics not just from this show but from the original series just might put a taint on the brand that may be almost impossible to overcome. Even if the show goes on and she's not there, she never really WON'T be gone, if that makes any sense.

 

Still, the show created buzz for some positive reasons as well. I'm sure that casting people will be on the lookout for the actors who haven't had the careers the others I've mentioned have (Michael Fishman, Lecy Goranson) or are relative newcomers (the kids). I just feel bad that Roseanne put the cast AND crew in such an awkward position.

I say have Roseanne the character die from complications from her surgery or from the opioids she was taking. 

I don't suppose they could recast with Rosie O'Donnell?  

4 hours ago, Gray Bunny said:

I don't suppose they could recast with Rosie O'Donnell?  

 

Hush!!!! Don't even kid about something like that. 😉

 

However, I would watch a show of Roseanne and Rosie as Rock 'Em Sock 'Em robots. That would be much more entertaining. 😉😂