Jump to content

Punky Brewster


Recommended Posts

  • Members

I could be wrong, but I think "Strokes" started out fairly popular (then again, when everything else on NBC was in the basement ...)

 

Anyway, I agree with your distinction between the first and second waves. I always think of the second wave as being dominated by Miller-Boyett's shows, but you'd also get a show or two like "Blossom." (Somewhere to the left, closer to the "adult shows," would be a "Wonder Years" or a "Doogie Howser")

 

Seems like the kid-favoring shows fell out of favor at the basic networks, moving onto Nickelodeon and Disney. After all these years, TV must be onto, like, the seventh wave?

 

And to not stray too far from the topic, I got a kick out of Soleil and Cherie on TODAY last week, even if Soleil was tripling down on being excited/adorable after all these years.

Edited by Franko
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 41
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Members

 

Exactly.

 

I put 1987 as the line of demarcation between the first wave and the second (which, like you say, was dominated by Miller-Boyett's output).  It isn't an EXACT line.  "Valerie"/"Valerie's Family"/"The Hogans"/"The Hogan Family" (which is a strange animal in this genre: a Miller/Boyett show that began as a star vehicle for adult Valerie Harper, then morphed into a showcase for Jason Bateman, Jeremy Licht and Danny Ponce once she was fired) premiered the year before; and "Growing Pains," a wolf-in-sheep's-clothing family show that was ostensibly about Alan Thicke and Joanna Kerns' characters but really wasn't, the year before that.  But, '87 is a good place to set down the marker, as that's the year FH, arguably the most successful and influential series from the second wave, premiered on ABC.

 

I'd also agree that "The Wonder Years" and "Doogie Howser, M.D." were closer to the "adult shows" than they were to the kid ones.  Kids and young adults watched them, but they weren't necessarily written and produced FOR them.  Same goes for "Family Ties," "Gimme a Break!" and "Who's the Boss?".  On each series, there was a balance of story and airtime between the kids and their adult counterparts (although, in "Gimme a Break!"'s case, you could certainly argue that every other character was just a prop for Nell Carter to lug around on set).

 

 

Pretty much.  For all intents and purposes, the end of "TGIF" on ABC's Friday night lineup was the end of all kid-centered sitcoms on the major networks.  After that, if you wanted that kind of show, you had to go to cable.

 

 

Exactly, lol.  By any measure, "Strokes" and "Facts of Life" were, at best, middling successes.  In fact, it's telling that Norman Lear never had his name associated with either series, even though his production companies, Tandem and T.A.T./Embassy, produced them both, and he had always put his name somewhere on new series in the past.  However, "Strokes" and FoL benefited from being on NBC at a time when even a middling success was better than no success at all.

Edited by Khan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Speaking of Norman Lear, I keep forgetting that he apparently had some (minimal) early involvement with Who's the Boss? (as the Soaps Of Yesterday blog recently reminded me). I think the case was WTB? was originally an Embassy show, which meant the columnists were cool with associating Norman's name with it.

 

ETA: I've never watched "Perfect Strangers" all the way through, but it seems to have had a reverse. Starting out for adults/families, then softening for kid appeal. I have watched "Mr. Belvedere" all the way through and that definitely evolved from family show with a slight edge (like Wesley thinking Heather's birth control was a handheld game) to adopting more of the "TGIF ethos."

Edited by Franko
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
 

tvratings_small.gif

TV Ratings: 1980-1981

[ TV Ratings Index ]     Jump to a Year: 1980, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90.

> 1980 - 1981    (Households with TV: 79,900,000)
RANK SHOW NETWORK

ESTIMATED AUDIENCE

1. Dallas

CBS

27,565,500

2. The Dukes of Hazzard CBS 21,812,700
3. 60 Minutes CBS 21,573,000
4. M*A*S*H CBS 20,534,300
5. The Love Boat ABC 19,415,700

6.

The Jeffersons CBS 18,776,500

7.

Alice CBS 18,297,100

8.

House Calls CBS 17,897,600

9.

Three's Company ABC 17,897,600

10.

Little House on the Prairie NBC 17,657,900

11.

One Day at a Time CBS 17,578,000

12.

Real People NBC 17,178,500
13. Archie Bunker's Place CBS 17,098,600
14. Magnum, P.I. CBS 16,779,000
15. Happy Days ABC 16,619,200
16. Too Close for Comfort ABC 16,619,200
17. Fantasy Island ABC 16,539,300
18. Trapper John, M.D. CBS 16,539,300
19. Diff'rent Strokes NBC 16,539,300

20.

Monday Night Football ABC 16,459,400

21.

Laverne & Shirley ABC 16,459,400

22.

That's Incredible ABC 16,379,500

23.

Hart to Hart ABC 15,900,100

24.

ABC Sunday Night Movie ABC 15,500,600

25.

CHiPS NBC 15,500,600

26.

The Facts of Life NBC 15,420,700

27.

Lou Grant CBS 15,260,900

28.

Knots Landing CBS 15,181,000

29.

NBC Monday Night Movie NBC 15,021,200

30.

The Waltons CBS 14,861,400


[ TV Ratings Index ]  [ ClassicTVHits.com Main Page ]


 

 

 
 

Privacy Statement | Disclaimer | Contact Us | © Copyright - ClassicTVHits.com.  All Rights Reserved.

 

,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Punky Brewster was also scheduled on Sunday nights.. usually against the popular CBS shows.

 

In fact, anytime baseball and/or any sports would run over... the show would air a 10 to 15 minute episode so that the younger viewers wouldnt be deprived of a new episode.. nor come in mid-way through it.

 

The revivial was way better than the new Saved by the Bell.  It was cute, charming, and finally resolved the one plot thread from the original.  It was a good final episode of the season (and I'm hoping to see more follow up on this if there is a season 2.).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

I think so, too.  For sure, WTB? wasn't Lear's kind of sitcom.  He preferred his shows to have an edge.  WTB?'s creators, Martin Cohan and Blake Hunter, believed they were making some sort of feminist statement.  Beyond the series' initial premise, however, it was a fairly standard family show/romantic comedy.

 

DEFINITELY agree about "Perfect Strangers" and "Mr. Belvedere."  The latter show's producers, Frank Dungan and Jeff Stein, have gone on-record with their ambivalence about their association with the show.  For one thing, it was 20th Century Fox Television who approached Dungan and Stein with the "Belvedere" character, which they owned the rights to, rather than the other way around.  Dungan and Stein were just wrapping up "Barney Miller" when they signed a development deal with 20th, and every other series they had pitched hadn't sold, so they were more-or-less compelled to develop "Belvedere," despite their hesitation toward working on a "family show."  Moreover, they LOATHED doing Very Special Episodes, like the one about the camp counselor who was molesting Wesley and his friends (or something).  However, VSE's always attracted attention from the media; and as Stein said in an interview about the release of the complete "Barney Miller" on DVD, they thought it'd be cool to see a "Belvedere" episode highlighted in that week's TV Guide.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Am I the only one who wanted to not have this plot resolved? It was an unsolved mystery which I felt should have been left unsolved. Life is sometimes sh*tty like that, and we don't always get what we want.

 

Please register in order to view this content

 

On the other hand, I can see why the producers felt the need to address this plot point in the revival. It presumably has gotten people to tune in. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Very interesting discussion that has been going on in this thread! It got me thinking about a number of things (my astonishment at the fact that Full House began in the 1980s, I always associate it with the 90s, Candace Cameron and I are in the same age group??) like the vagaries of the bygone era of Sunday evening sitcoms and family programming (Punky Brewster and Rags To Riches), which I guess might have been started by Disney and the Wonderful World Of Disney Sunday night programming, if I am not mistaken.

 

About the show. Last night, I watched the final two episodes of Season 1 and my first impression was that the show leans heavily into 80s nostalgia, but I don't mind it. It's syrupy at times but there were some genuinely earned poignant moments throughout.

The kids are well-cast. I can see why they wanted to make the two boys adoptees, to show how Punky, an adoptee herself would be open to adopting and fostering kids but honestly, I was perfectly fine with the aspect of the two boys being her and her ex-husband's biological sons, especially since the show is already leaning into Travis' Latinx heritage. Caribbean families (Puerto Rican and Dominican included) often have diverse skin hues and hair textures, between siblings, even with the same parents. They could simply have shown that Travis has a parent that looks similar to the two boys. Aside drom that, I would have preferred that the kids statuses be revealed in the second or third episode, rather than in the pilot episode, where it felt as if a LOT of expository details were being squeezed into the first episode.

 

I can see both perspectives on the revelation of the identity of Punky's bio-mother. The story arc was interesting to follow over the course of the season, on one hand and it embued the show with a sense of gravitas that maybe distinguished the show from only having light content. OTOH, I think the "mystery could have been extended, at least to cliffhanger at the season's end. There might be room in season 2 for reversals though, as it is well established that Punky's mother is prone to acts of disappearance.

As the episodes went by, you could notice improvement in the writing and cast interaction. It will be interesting to see how, with greater access to COVID-19 vaccines, there might be less tension in set, in regards to strict virus-mitigating protocols (the sanitization should be permanent though) and how the cast might be able to focus on acting and interacting and how that might affect the end product and what viewers see. It couldn't have been easy to film during these times, especially with such a predominantly young cast.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...
  • 2 weeks later...

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