Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
As long as they're a bunch of Trump supporting knuckleheads, all the goobers and droolers will still tune in to watch.
They never really had that anyway, but I can’t imagine this show will do well. I don’t think the dynamic is going to be good. Are they going to kill Roseanne off? This is going to tank in the ratings.
I didn't watch the reboot (given that I never watched the original--Roseanne Barr just doesn't appeal to me), but I have to acknowledge that she was the draw of both shows, so I'm wondering how on earth CBS thinks this is going to succeed without her.
(Unless they're not 'killing off' her character, and thinking after the furor blows over, backdoor her back in?)
I imagine Ms. Barr will file suit to stop production. I believe, if I recall correctly, that she actually owns all or part of the show, and, if so, I bet she included rights to spin-offs (she is old enough, and smart enough, to recall the 1970s shows and how they would have spin-offs).
Of course, it could be that she simply reserved the right to MONEY from any spin-offs, and not the right to halt production. We shall see. My wife did like the re-booted Roseanne show.
Actually, the article I read she agreed to give up all financial stake in order to save some 200 jobs. Seems like She cares more about the employees than ABC.
Actually, the article I read she agreed to give up all financial stake in order to save some 200 jobs. Seems like She cares more about the employees than ABC.
Barr is a whack job. Has been for decades. I would not trust any word that came out of her mouth. In this case I would want to see the contract.
Barr is a whack job. Has been for decades. I would not trust any word that came out of her mouth. In this case I would want to see the contract.
Quote:
Originally Posted by VLWH
Actually, the article I read she agreed to give up all financial stake in order to save some 200 jobs. Seems like She cares more about the employees than ABC.
I really can't imagine a way that happens with the current batch of leftovers.
A spin-off needs two things:
1. a strong character to justify interest in the new show.
2. a reason to find the character(s) entertaining in the absence of the character(s) they were spun-off from.
Think George and Weezie Jefferson/Maude without Archie Bunker; or Mork/Lavern and Shirley without Richie Cunningham.
Their reason for being wasn't predicated on another character, even if it was in the original series, and they all had a unique, compelling story to tell.
Dan Conner has always been Roseanne's sidekick - that won't change.
Darlene Conner is interesting as long as someone is doing something to make her interesting.
Jackie Harris...yawn!
The Roseanne show, like many other sitcoms, was developed around the established comedy material of a stand-up comedian (see Tim Allen, Kevin James, Jerry Seinfeld, etc.) and cannot ever be separated from the original stand-up material.
By removing the actor that conveys and personifies that material, the show loses everything that made it entertaining in the first place.
Yeah, I'll have to pass. I thought the show had some potential. It seemed like Jackie may have been suffering from early onset dementia and they may have been planning to go somewhere with that. Or maybe she was secretly addicted to opioids and that explained her mental fugue and emotional instability. Golden girls meets Two and a Half Men with constant put downs. But without Roseanne's acid wit and barbed tongue, forget it. Darlene is like a younger Roseanne to an extent, but more pretentious and self absorbed.
Man, pair Roseanne up with Charlie Sheen on Youtube or Netflix.
As long as they're a bunch of Trump supporting knuckleheads, all the goobers and droolers will still tune in to watch.
Aren't half the characters gay, babies out of marriage, and boys wearing dresses?
Isn't this a show for liberals?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
