Jump to content

Facts of life Reboot


John

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 124
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Members

For anyone interested, both Mindy Cohn and Kim Fields have posted part of their eulogies at Charlotte Rae's funeral to their respective Instagram accounts. They wanted to capture the words for the many lives Charlotte touched.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Yep just watched

 

I felt bad for Felice (Nancy) but she sounds naive. Never believe Hollywood when they promise you the moon. Plau along but remain skeptical and on your toes

 

Also in 1983 NBC was toying spinning Jo & Blair off to a langley college themed show. That may have beem a reason they hired Heather McAdam for the final four episodes of 1982-83 season as Alex. Maybe as a replacement 

Edited by John
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

It would have made more sense to spin off Jo and Blair than to keep them on FOL and stretch credibility in the process.  (No way would the four girls and Mrs. G. have continued living together, especially w/ two of them now out of Eastland.)

Edited by Khan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

It's just too dangerous to spin off your two leads, and I'd have worried about what bringing in two new girls would've done for the show and if Kim and Mindy, in particular, would've suffered. I actually thought it was cozy and believable that this created family would stick together as long as they did. When Natalie moved out, it felt like a natural progression that I didn't anticipate or feel was overdue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members


ITA. Blair moving into a dorm and living the college life, I'd believe, but Jo really had no reason to move on campus. If they ever really wanted to go with a Blair/Jo spin-off, the most logical point for me would have been when CR left after the seventh season. End the original series and continue on with the two older girls sharing a (near-)campus apartment and interacting with neighbors and classmates. I don't think Kim Fields or Mindy Cohn were strong enough to carry a show at that time at all ("at that time," because Kim obviously ran sh!t on Living Single in the next decade).

I always did like the vibe of the last two seasons with the girls being women and living adult lives, and maybe just continuing with the four on their own could have worked, but Cloris Leachman really wasn't needed, and the add-on kids really dragged down the show's burgeoning maturity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

I do agree that cloris leachman wasnt needed.  I would have ended the show with Mrs. G marrying and leaving...or had the 4 girls sharing the house and getting into more adult stuff...living and learning the facts of life without their rock Mrs. G around.

 

And I think had the show spun blair/jo off after the left Eastland..we would have been robbed of the Edna's edible era..and there were some great episodes during that era.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I loved the Edna's Edibles era (looking at the fire that destroyed it, I get wanting a change but it sort of felt like the end to Edna's real mark on the show, like "we're done with you Charlotte"). I'm not too fond of the Over Our Heads era or the last two seasons. Charlotte Rae had the right idea leaving when she did, it was time (not to mention she was practically a guest star most of the time on her own show or just comic relief). But I think the real problem I had was that Cloris Leachman wasn't necessary. I love Leachman but the girls didn't need a mother figure. It would have been more interesting to have them on their own, still together. But I get why they did it. But it felt like while they wrote to the girls aging, they still had them as "young girls" in their minds, if that makes sense? I think the show actually regressed a bit. I also had some issues with the reunion of the 'lost girls'. It just felt "too sitcomy". And Jo being an outsider felt like something that should have played out in Season 2 not in 1986. I guess the writers forgot Jo was around Sue Ann, Cindy and Nancy. Not that they ever seemed to interact from what I recall but they were around. It felt a little forced to me and sort of shallow.

 

And personally I didn't love Jo in the later years. Nancy was so much more natural and happy earlier on. It felt like she was over it for a long time. IDK. I know why they had Jo acting the way she did but it often felt "all about Jo". Jo from earlier and Jo from later feel like such different characters to me. No one else felt that drastically different. It's hard to explain, I guess.

 

I didn't hate Andy but he wasn't necessary either. But that was the times. Everyone had to have some obnoxious child that "steals the spotlight" with a witty line. I would have much more enjoyed watching Mrs. G adopt him than flighty Beverly Ann, but it was actually the one part I enjoyed with her and Andy. So I'm torn on them.

 

Mrs. G didn't even need to move away. Just go on a long extended honeymoon and convince Charlotte Rae to come back for visits, but looking back I appreciate her wanting to "be done" so to speak. I actually feel badly for her. She was almost forced out of her own show, IMHO.

 

This.

 

But I wasn't fond of the last two seasons. On it's own, I suppose, it wasn't bad but I never really got on board with the Over Our Head seasons. Beverly Ann wasn't needed.

 

I agree that it dragged down the show's "burgeoning maturity". I had said it felt almost like they were 'regressing' but overall the same point.

 

Kim and Mindy were supporting for a reason. Kim absolutely OWNED Living Single years later but she was often very green as Tootie, even though she really nailed the timing as a kid. 

Edited by KMan101
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Y'all make some good, strong arguments.  Nevertheless, I believe that Blair and Jo's graduation from Eastland was the most natural and logical way to close FOL as we knew it.  Now, maybe a FOL w/o the two wouldn't have worked; and if I had been in Brandon Tartikoff's shoes, let's say, I might have been inclined to spin off Blair and Jo and cancel the former series.  But, Blair and Jo in college was a different world (sorry) from Natalie and Tootie in Eastland; and I don't think the two worlds meshing together under Edna's Edibles made sense.  As it was, it seems as if the Edna's Edibles-era episodes focus more on Blair and Jo's exploits at Langley than they do on anything Eastland-related.

 

 

"Family Matters" would be another example, even though Harriet Winslow was only recast, not written off entirely.

 

Didn't I read somewhere that Bill Cosby once considered killing off Clair Huxtable and having "The Cosby Show" revolve him raising the kids singlehandedly when there was some BTS issue w/ Phyllicia Rashad?

 

Agree.

 

As I saw it, Over Our Heads was a natural progression for the girls' maturity.  They were older, and not working anymore for Mrs. Garrett (at her bougie gourmet shop).  Now, they would be equal partners in this new venture.  (Plus, I think running a novelty store allowed new show runners Deidre Fay and Stuart Wolpert to indulge in their fondness for visual/gag humor.)

 

But you're right, KMan: it did seem as if Mrs. G. was being marginalized, in retrospect.  Perhaps they could have kept the theme of running a gourmet shop and catering business, but updated to fit the girls' emerging personalities better?

Edited by Khan
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
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.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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