Planespotting From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 3547 posts, RR: 5 Posted (8 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 5006 times:
For most of this week, Nick@Nite has been running a Roseanne marathon starting at 9 or so, and I've been watching a lot of it.
I grew up in the late 80s and early 90s, which was the time of what I'll call the "ultra family sitcom" - like Full House, Family Matters, Step by Step, Home Improvement, etc...
While these shows were great, and I enjoyed way too many hours of my childhood watching them (and still like them today) - they were always so predictable, and everything would work out in the end like you knew it would. Roseanne was on in the same era, and while it was also in the family sitcom genre, it was markedly different than the ones mentioned above. Story lines were fairly true to life, mainly in that unexpected things happened and there wasn't always a silver lining.
Also, this was one of the first family sitcoms ever where the main character (and dominant character) was a women. Yes, the character Roseanne was acidic, loud, obnoxious, and not always the best mom/wife - but she was also smart and assertive, and played more of a patriarchal role in the family than her husband Dan, in an era where the majority of all sitcom wives were either secondary characters (Family Matters, Full House, Fresh Prince, Cosby Show) or at most the same level as the husband (Step by Step).
I think I appreciate it much more now as an adult than I did as a child, because over the past few years it has probably been my favorite re-run to watch (even moreso than Fresh Prince!).
But anywho, how do others feel about the show? I think the final season was way too easy, almost a cop out - the Conners win the lottery and get rich. Read more about the show here:
AsstChiefMark From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (8 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 4980 times:
I used to think it was a shitty show.
Then I saw an episode of "The Nanny." Would someone please tell me who that show's target audience was? I've NEVER met ANYONE who liked it or even watched it out of sheer boredom. You'd think someone in New York or Flushing or wherever would have had the balls to flatten Fran Drecsher under their car's tires and put her out of her whiny misery.
Aloha73G From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 2406 posts, RR: 4
Reply 4, posted (8 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 4968 times:
Never watched Roseanne when it was on originally...but now I love it. It up there for me with Friends, Seinfeld and Everybody Loves Raymond.
Roseanne was great because it was REAL and wasn't the glossed over happy family. The fact that it was different made it great....in the same way Raymond works because its about the grandparents rather than the kids.
Aloha Airlines - The Spirit Moves Us. Gone but NEVER Forgotten. Aloha, A Hui Hou!
MTV used to be good. Now 95% of the stuff on MTV/The N/and dare I say it, yes I will, comedy central (all owned by Viacom) is crap. Little Bush, Next, The sarah silverman project, those stupid dating shows, and those pre-teen sterotypical dramas such as degrassi or whatever that one is with the word star or the stupid surf shows. Point is, Viacom sucks. They f**d up Nickelodian too, old school nicked rocked, then it spun off everything and produced stupid shows like the fairly odd parents. I used to love Comedy Central. Now I only find myself watching scrubs, south park, dailyshow/colbert and stand up on an ocasional basis. MTV is music television, not date shows galore for the shallow/sweet sixteen whatever.
F**king Viacom sold out
Blindly following anything is bad, unless of course your blind and your following a guide dog.
Copaair737 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (8 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 4940 times:
Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 9):
Are you kidding me?? Ever since MTV started doing shows like that and reducing the showing of music videos, they SUCK! You barely see music videos on MTV anymore. It defies the point nowadays!
That's the biggest mystery to me. "Friends" is the lamest show ever to have such a huge following. Everyone loved that steaming pile of crap and I cannot figure out why. It was beyond cheesy and the writing was so tired that you could see the punchlines coming long before they had even been set up. It was utter garbage and the whole world sucked it up like it was the best thing ever. There was nothing clever or entertaining about it and I hated it. I'm so glad it's not being filmed anymore because I couldn't stand when people would talk about it at work.
"Reality has a well-known liberal bias." --Stephen Colbert
ZANL188 From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 3895 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (8 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 4892 times:
Quoting Planespotting (Thread starter): Also, this was one of the first family sitcoms ever where the main character (and dominant character) was a women.
Women have been main/dominant characters in sitcoms since TV has been around... "I Love Lucy" (and all the other Lucy shows), "Maude", "Good Times", "The Doris Day Show", "The Mary Tyler Moore Show", etc...
"Roseanne" has an edgey quality too it that I appreciate more now that it's in reruns....
Legal considerations provided by: Dewey, Cheatum, and Howe
: That's true, but if you actually watch those shows, many times the women were still being subjugated by their men - not in a terrible way, but like w
: Have you ever watched "Maude" or "Good Times"? The female lead characters in those shows had their hubbies by the gonads. "I Love Lucy" was a pair of
: You are right about Maude (i've never seen good times), it could be considered even edgier than Roseanne, especially since it was on in the 1970s. Ho