Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 79
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

  • Members
Posted (edited)

Recently, I watched an episode of "Dark Side of Comedy" on VICE that featured the BTS issues at "Family Matters."  Specifically, it covered the troubles that Jaimee Foxworth (a.k.a. "Judy Winslow") and her mother encountered with TPTB as Jaimee's role on the show was reduced and then erased altogether.  It broke my heart to hear their story.

The thing is, those producers were used to ignoring or dropping characters from shows.  (See: Chuck Cunningham).  But they didn't understand that FM wasn't just another show, especially not to African-Americans.  I don't think they understood why viewers and even cast members like Jo Marie Payton (OG Harriette Winslow) would be upset about a little black girl who is simply forgotten by her own family members with no explanation whatsoever.

At the very least, they could have explained on-air that Judy went to live with extended relatives out-of-town so she could attend a private school or something.

Edited by Khan
  • Members
Posted

Depending on what you read or who you talk to, the rest of the FM cast either welcomed Jaleel/Urkel, as his addition lifted the show's ratings; or they resented him, because he took the focus away from the others (and from Jaimee Foxworth/Judy in particular) and allowed the show's producers to take what had been a fairly grounded family show and turn it into a very broad and silly one.

JW himself has talked in the past about how Reginald VelJohnson and Jo Marie Payton took him to task for agreeing to play "Myrtle Urkel," saying that it reinforced stereotypes about putting black men in women's clothes as a way of emasculating them and making them less threatening to white audiences.  If what he said is true, then the people to take up the issue with were the producers, not a 12-13 year old kid.

  • Members
Posted (edited)

@Khan Thank you for the info re Family Matters. I have read/heard about some backstage drama in recent years re JW vs. RVJ/JMP.

Edited by kalbir
  • 6 months later...
  • Members
Posted (edited)

That's a shame, though I dunno how well any revival would've done after the recent streaming crash vs. maybe 5-10 years ago when it was all the rage. She says you can suss out the castmember checking who she's still tight with on IG, but she still follows all the other girls AFAIK and I can't see any of them in any recent posts (I also didn't know she was on Palm Royale, good for her).

Edited by Vee
  • Members
Posted

Some who looked mentioned that she has not been as active with Kim Fields since 2022, but was with Nancy and Lisa more recently.

I agree it wouldn't have done well. Even seemingly well-received reboots like the new Saved by the Bell only ran two seasons. I'm just sorry that greed destroyed longtime friendships.

It seems like everybody was on Palm Royale. 

  • Members
Posted

I am thinking its Blair. 

Luke and Shannen re-connected when she was diagnosed with Cancer. His death was the reason she did BH90210. She wanted to celebrate Luke. 

  • Members
Posted (edited)

Nah, I can't see Lisa Whelchel being that greedy.  I think she knows Blair (and she) would be nothing without the other "girls," and that a Blair-centric spinoff would be DOA before the first episode even begins.

If anything, I think she and Nancy McKeon are the ones who can't get past the betrayal.  (Mindy Cohn appears to be fine either way).

Of course, we all could be wrong and it turns out to be Nancy, lol.

The thing is, if someone were to do an FOL reboot/revival series that followed the ladies' lives today, what would it even be about?  Would you have them move back in with each other and do some weird FOL/"Golden Girls" mashup?  Would the show be all about their running Eastland today, with Blair as headmistress, Natalie as journalism advisor, Tootie as the drama teacher and Jo teaching history or English or some crap?  To me, that latter idea smacks too much of "AfterM*A*S*H," lol.

I say, go back to the beginning (well, back to season two) and do a pure reboot set in the present, with a new Edna Garrett, a new Blair, a new Jo and so on.

Edited by Khan
  • Members
Posted (edited)

It sounds like it's Lisa to me from other people's snooping, but that could be my own bias. Lisa and her evangelical family got up to some wild shít in the public eye in the 2000s.

Edited by Vee
  • Members
Posted

There was so much going around about Lisa and her views at that time I am still surprised she managed a semi-comeback, but she handled her Survivor run very smartly. 

She now hosts Collector Call, and she does a decent job, so she's the main one I actually see of any of the four these days. Maybe that could have given her a bit of an ego. Not sure.

In another thread I posted an interview with Mindy - I think she mentioned Nancy and Kim, but I can't remember if she mentioned Lisa.

I could see them having each of them with a daughter and they meet up at a new Eastland. Maybe Jo, Blair, Tootie and Natalie just show up a few times a season.

  • Members
Posted (edited)

Always felt bad for Nancy McKeon’s adult career just never taking off. She had that hit Can’t Buy Me Love show in the 90’s and successful crossover with the Nanny but for whatever reason CBS cancelled it despite being a top 30 show one of the very few hits they had at time. 
 

I’m sorry but the rest of it sounds so washed up and fan fiction. These ladies are now in their late 50’s and 60’s and still clinging onto and fighting over something that happened 40 years ago.

Lisa Welchel is about as irrelevant as Phillip McKeon is at this point in time

Please register in order to view this content

Edited by soapfan770
  • Members
Posted

If it was Lisa Whelchel - and I won't say it couldn't have been Lisa - then she is one stupid lady. 

Blair Warner worked as a character because you had Tootie, Natalie and especially Jo there to serve as contrasts.  The bulk of Blair's humor came from her "stuck-up rich girl" sensibilities clashing with their relatively more down-to-earth ones.  Take that away, set Blair off in her own little world and you have a character and a show that would get very irritating and fast.

Frankly, I'm surprised Kim Fields went along at all with the others' plans to reboot/revive the show, given how hard she has tried over the years to distance herself from the character of Tootie.  She must've needed the money desperately, lol.

I think the closest Nancy McKeon ever came to having success outside of FOL was on "The Division," the police drama series that aired for several seasons on Lifetime and also starred Jon Hamm and Taraji P. Henson.  Aside from that series and her TV movies, however, it does seem as if she never could escape from Jo's shadow.

They wouldn't need to have a daughter each, though, since Eastland went co-ed at the end of the old series.

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 did not care, just clarifying that was the discussion point. If there are ice cream bars in Statesville I am sure there is a full spa
    • Seeing Peter Bergman (Jack) and Melody Thomas Scott (Nikki) act opposite each other really makes me mad that their short-lived reunion in 2012 was just that... short-lived. I've always loved the Jack/Nikki pairing.
    • No.  I recall there was also a mention about how distracting it was EOB's Gwen wasn't wearing nail polish as well.  That it was someone's pet peeve. And, yes, the fact characters can have a manicure in prison is the wildest continuity issue here.
    • Can anyone remember Mary Ellen Stuart's run as Jenny? I'm trying to fill in the cracks for missing stuff that we overlooked.  Bulletpoints:  * Dated Ross * Rusty's police partner * Directly responsible for Dinah coming forward about George Stewart (Cam's father)
    • But that's not weird... nail polish is allowed in prisons via commissary. Same with general makeup, haircuts, and hair colouring products.
    • This is DAYS, the show that said you could brainwash anyone with simple kitchen appliances.  An actor's nail polish or lack thereof should be the least of our concerns, lol.
    • It was not that she wasn't wearing nail polish, it is that she managed to get a manicure in prison
    • "We're Knot Done Yet": the name of this lovely podcast AND what JVA tells her plastic surgeon at every appointment. In other news, Michele Lee is reminding me more and more of my old music teacher from elementary school, and I couldn't STAND that bitch.
    • I apologize if this has been covered already, but does anyone know whether Douglas Marland was HW'ing by that point?  If he was, then I see what he meant when he said (in so many words) that he had inherited a mess when he started at GH.  Aside from Alan and Monica, none of that material seems very promising.  The story with Mark Dante and the Corbins is the wrong kind of predictable (y'know, the kind where you know what's going to happen, but you just don't give a crap?), the stuff with Scotty and Laura is cute but toothless, I don't know WHAT the hell Gina and Steve Carlson's character are arguing about and Rick Webber has to be the dumbest man alive not to see David Hamilton twirling his invisible moustache over how to make a killing off Lamont Corbin's declining health.  (By the way, "LAMONT CORBIN"?  What is this, "The Shadow"?  And "Corbin Limited" sounds like some jive I'd hear over on Y&R.) In a way, it's kind of like watching today's GH, right down to the dialogue that's serviceable and pushes plot along but says nothing about the characters' inner lives.
    • It absolutely was; the narrative was there, and they followed it promptly. Maybe that's back when women had babies at young ages?!?!?
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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