I imagine Sisters was dismissed as a the t.v. version of the "chick lit" insult. T.v. critics and the Emmys tend not to reward shows like Sisters. I remember the snide U.S.A. today critic predicting the Lead Actress category (the year Ward won) and saying Angela Lanbsury should finally win since the emmy voters had decided (gasp!) to put two Sisters actresses in the category.

Most of the time the Emmys do not recognise female-centred dramatic shows. Are Handmaid's Tale and  Cagney and Lacey the only ones?

 

On 9/1/2024 at 10:43 AM, Chris 2 said:

Now, why Sisters wasn’t critically acclaimed is another question. I thought it was similar in tone to thirtysomething which was a big critics darling. Maybe a little more whimsical, but I don’t see a huge difference in the quality of the two shows.

With all due respect, @chrisml, I'd have to disagree.  I loved both "Sisters" and "thirtysomething," but as far as the writing goes, I never thought "Sisters" was in the same class as "thirtysomething" (or "My So-Called Life" or "Once and Again").

To me, it's like the difference between "Family" and early KL.  Again, I loved both shows, but I don't think early KL was on the same level as "Family."

2 hours ago, Khan said:

With all due respect, @chrisml, I'd have to disagree.  I loved both "Sisters" and "thirtysomething," but as far as the writing goes, I never thought "Sisters" was in the same class as "thirtysomething" (or "My So-Called Life" or "Once and Again").

To me, it's like the difference between "Family" and early KL.  Again, I loved both shows, but I don't think early KL was on the same level as "Family."

Sisters was better then 'Thirtysomething'.  All they did on Thirtysomething was whine and complain all the time while Sisters had a lot more variety in their storytelling.

Just to be clear. I'm not the Chris who was comparing Sisters to Thirtysomething. That's Chris2. 

I do think Sisters was an underrated show, and that it was dismissed because it was a female-centred programme. 

2 hours ago, chrisml said:

Just to be clear. I'm not the Chris who was comparing Sisters to Thirtysomething. That's Chris2. 

My apologies, @chrisml.  I think AutoFill is to blame here, lol.

20 minutes ago, Khan said:

My apologies, @chrisml.  I think AutoFill is to blame here, lol.

No worries.

I do think Sisters did not get the acclaim it deserved. For all the talk about the best dramas around the time of Sisters, it's "Murder She Wrote" that lasted the test of time and is still the most popular today. That show was written off as fluff from the beginning. I'm certainly not comparing it to other shows, but it's interesting that "Murder She Wrote" and "Golden Girls" never went out of fashion. I remember years ago when NEtflix stopped streaming MSW, and all hell broke loose. It got so bad that customer service reps would ask, "Is this about Murder, She Wrote" when you'd call up on Netflix customer service about anything.

I'm almost afraid to go back and revisit Sisters because I wonder if it's as good as I remember (pre-Falconer dying/Georgie's fatal attraction nonsense). 

As far as NBC interference goes well I see Willard Scott made into the 100th episode and Season 6 premiere as himself 🤣

 

That said now after rewatching the 6th season again in full, despite my admiration and love for Sheila Kelley on LA Law as I mentioned in the LA Law thread @DRW50 @Khan she just doesn’t work here as a recast Charley. She looks like she could fit as new character as like a step-sister or sister in law and she does decent with Wes,  but it still feels way off. I forgot how much natural rawness and toughness the original actress brought to the role of Charley and Kelley unfortunately doesn’t have any of that edge here.

I don’t know what happened to Jo Anderson and I do wonder if someone at NBC owned Kelley a favor given how LA Law wrote out her out.

Someone mentioned earlier about Cowen & Lipman’s going of the rails in the same manner a decade later at QAF and I totally get the comparison now. Yikes!

7 minutes ago, soapfan770 said:

That said now after rewatching the 6th season again in full, despite my admiration and love for Sheila Kelley on LA Law as I mentioned in the LA Law thread @DRW50 @Khan she just doesn’t work here as a recast Charley. She looks like she could fit as new character as like a step-sister or sister in law and she does decent with Wes,  but it still feels way off. I forgot how much natural rawness and toughness the original actress brought to the role of Charley and Kelley unfortunately doesn’t have any of that edge here.

I don’t know what happened to Jo Anderson and I do wonder if someone at NBC owned Kelley a favor given how LA Law wrote out her out.

Someone mentioned earlier about Cowen & Lipman’s going of the rails in the same manner a decade later at QAF and I totally get the comparison now. Yikes!

I had pretty much stopped Sisters by the time they brought Kelley in but what I saw did not have any of the strengths Anderson brought to the part - she had a subtlety and quiet strength the show needed by that point. 

I haven't watched QAF in a long time but for me it was the opposite of Sisters in that I thought the beginning of the show was rough as hell and weird and it improved from that point on, other than the stories for the lesbians, which were never good.

(I still remember the odd choice to have Justin, in between chasing every older man in every toilet stall he could, being way way too eager to help his BFF lose her virginity, which I refuse to believe happens in real life)

On 9/3/2024 at 1:40 PM, chrisml said:

I remember years ago when NEtflix stopped streaming MSW, and all hell broke loose. It got so bad that customer service reps would ask, "Is this about Murder, She Wrote" when you'd call up on Netflix customer service about anything.

That is hysterical.

12 hours ago, Vee said:

That is hysterical.

Listen, when it comes to us MSW fans, you learn real quick not to mess with the bull if you don't want the horns!

On 9/5/2024 at 10:47 PM, DRW50 said:

I had pretty much stopped Sisters by the time they brought Kelley in but what I saw did not have any of the strengths Anderson brought to the part - she had a subtlety and quiet strength the show needed by that point. 

I haven't watched QAF in a long time but for me it was the opposite of Sisters in that I thought the beginning of the show was rough as hell and weird and it improved from that point on, other than the stories for the lesbians, which were never good.

(I still remember the odd choice to have Justin, in between chasing every older man in every toilet stall he could, being way way too eager to help his BFF lose her virginity, which I refuse to believe happens in real life)

The original concept of Charley was that she was put up for adoption by her real mom and didn't grow up with a family.  I think she was even in foster care so she had to rely on herself in order to survive.

So when she came onto the show, she was guarded and unwilling to open herself up to these half-sisters.  And over time she did grow to accept them and even develop a bond with them.  Her part in the Georgie therapy story was the best part of that horrible story.. and I liked the stories she had in season 5 with finding out her real father did love her, and her realizing that working in a high end hospital doesn't matter if people can't utilize those resources.

Then she was recast with Kelley.. and it was almost like a completely different character.  She was bubbly, hung out with the sisters at Sweet Sixteen, and you would have assumed she had been raised by the family since birth.   It was too jarring of a change..imho

2 hours ago, Soaplovers said:

The original concept of Charley was that she was put up for adoption by her real mom and didn't grow up with a family.  I think she was even in foster care so she had to rely on herself in order to survive.

So when she came onto the show, she was guarded and unwilling to open herself up to these half-sisters.  And over time she did grow to accept them and even develop a bond with them.  Her part in the Georgie therapy story was the best part of that horrible story.. and I liked the stories she had in season 5 with finding out her real father did love her, and her realizing that working in a high end hospital doesn't matter if people can't utilize those resources.

Then she was recast with Kelley.. and it was almost like a completely different character.  She was bubbly, hung out with the sisters at Sweet Sixteen, and you would have assumed she had been raised by the family since birth.   It was too jarring of a change..imho

I totally agree with this fair analysis as well. Not to mention Bea had left Charley as the executor of her will which was…odd lol. 
 

Maybe if Sheila Kelley had came in as something like a new character who was revealed to be their only fam or cousin or a step sister via Truman it could’ve worked better or something idk. Season 5 really did a lot of damage to the show. 

The show notably also recast Reed for the final season and it also destroyed Reed’s character as well inexplicably, which also made zero complete sense after finally getting Kirby ready to be a dad. 

Edited September 9, 20241 yr by soapfan770
Autocorrect issue

6 minutes ago, soapfan770 said:

The show notably also recast Reed for the final season and it also destroyed Reed’s character as well inexplicably, which also made zero complete sense after finally getting Rory ready to be a dad. 

Yeah, I didn't understand Reed's sudden regression to being a spoiled rich girl who couldn't hack it in Hollywood as a struggling filmmaker's wife.  That didn't make any sense to me, given how differently Ashley Judd had played the role.

34 minutes ago, Khan said:

Yeah, I didn't understand Reed's sudden regression to being a spoiled rich girl who couldn't hack it in Hollywood as a struggling filmmaker's wife.  That didn't make any sense to me, given how differently Ashley Judd had played the role.

Neither do I, and the actress who was the recast Reed was AWFUL just as her storyline was. It’s as if Cowen and Lipman learned nothing with the Georgie story.

@DRW50 A reason why I fell out with QAF because of their work during the last season because Brian & Justin rehashing everything again before ending on a whimper while the Babylon bombing quickly turned into the equivalent of Melrose Place getting bombed.
 

Apologies I just realized my iPad autocorrected a young Paul Rudd’s Kirby into Rory for some strange reason back in my post. Don’t ask me why. 

Edited September 9, 20241 yr by soapfan770

1 hour ago, soapfan770 said:

 

The show notably also recast Reed for the final season and it also destroyed Reed’s character as well inexplicably, which also made zero complete sense after finally getting Kirby ready to be a dad. 

Reed, as played by Ashley Judd, had her moments where she was rebellious.. but she generally loved both of her parents.  In fact, her version of Reed was a good contrast to Alex where Alex would be more over the top while Reed had a more low key dry wit when interacting with her mom.

The final Reed, who was famous for playing Amy Fisher in one of the tv movies that came out, was a completely different character.  Not only did she not act anything like the Reed of past... but there was a rewrite on her relationship with Alex.. as well as with her cousin Cat.