The Conners- Page 2

[ArtMan]

Posted: 10/24/18 at 9:27am

I must have watched a different episode.  I didn't laugh once.

[ArtMan]

Posted: 10/24/18 at 9:27am

I must have watched a different episode.  I didn't laugh once.

[henrikegerman]

Posted: 10/24/18 at 10:48am

I can't fault the villainization of Roseanne Barr.

It's the villainization of the revived Roseanne  for simply showing two sisters with very different positions about Trump's America and Trump's election that was bizarre.   It seemed that people were pissed off at the return of Roseanne either because of Roseann's provocation and stupidity (and she is provocative and sometimes ridiculously stupid in her provocations) or because the show dared to show us a character we always "liked" (most of us) espousing politics critics of the show abhor.  And showing her engaging with another character we always "liked" (who doesn't love Metcalf's Jackie?) with politics much like those same critics'.

To me, that was an important and great thing for the show to do.

Updated On: 10/25/18 at 10:48 AM

[ArtMan]

Posted: 10/24/18 at 11:54am

I also found the writing too lazy and irresponsible.  Here you have a husband and father whose wife just died from an opioid  overdose  and he learns that his daughter is an alcoholic.  His attitude, in the writing, came across "oh well" and blase.  It was totally unrealistic.  Even for a dramedy.

Updated On: 10/24/18 at 11:54 AM

[east side story]

Posted: 10/24/18 at 12:20pm

ArtMan said: "I must have watched a different episode. I didn't laugh once."

So stop watching. I'm sure you can find something else to do with those empty twenty-two minutes of your day. 

In other news: I think the last two episodes were stronger and much better than anything the revival had to offer last season. Last season was truly a mixed bag, and that's being generous. 

 

[ArtMan]

Posted: 10/24/18 at 12:49pm

east side story said: "ArtMan said: "I must have watched a different episode. I didn't laugh once."

So stop watching. I'm sure you can find something else to do with those empty twenty-two minutes of your day.

In other news: I think the last two episodes were stronger and much better than anything the revival had to offer last season. Last season was truly a mixed bag, and that's being generous.

"

Aren't you the same person who sent me a pm asking for my help and didn't even say thank you when it was given?   Your opinion means nothing to me, especially when it comes to what I should do during my day.

[ArtMan]

Posted: 10/24/18 at 12:49pm

double post



 

Updated On: 10/24/18 at 12:49 PM

[artscallion]

Posted: 10/24/18 at 12:56pm

To summarize:

- east side story gives ArtMan a slap for complaining about the show, then proceeds to complain about the show.

[carnzee]

Posted: 10/24/18 at 1:57pm

Henrik, at the time of the reboot premier last spring, critics of the show took issue with the way Jackie was portrayed as an over the top caricature of a Clinton voter(with the **** hat, her stridency, etc.) I wish I could give you a link, and it's been months since I read it, but I read a thoughtful critique that said the problem with the Jackie/Roseanne political argument was that it reduced important political debate to just a family squabble or game that got cleared up in thirty minutes. The critique argued that many adversely effected by Trump's policies don't have the luxury of treating the current climate as a mere family disagreement.

[east side story]

Posted: 10/24/18 at 2:36pm

artscallion said: "To summarize:

- east side story gives ArtMan a slap for complaining about the show, then proceeds to complain about the show."

HA!

 

[Luscious]

Posted: 10/25/18 at 4:15am

I thought this week's episode was much weaker than last week's premiere. I didn't find it very funny. Apparently, it's not going to be as easy for The Conners to move on without Roseanne as initially thought. I kept waiting for Roseanne to walk into the room (scene) to deliver some much needed laughs. Note to producers: change the opening credits. Such a bummer not hearing Roseanne's cackle at the end of the scene, and a sad reminder of who and what is missing from the show. Not the best way to start a comedy series every week.

[henrikegerman]

Posted: 10/25/18 at 11:12am

carnzee said: "Henrik, at the time of the reboot premier last spring, critics of the show took issue with the way Jackie was portrayed as an over the top caricature of a Clinton voter(with the **** hat, her stridency, etc.) I wish I could give you a link, and it's been months since I read it, but I read a thoughtful critique that said the problem with the Jackie/Roseanne political argument was that it reduced important political debate to just a family squabble or game that got cleared up in thirty minutes. The critique argued that many adversely effected by Trump's policies don't have the luxury of treating the current climate as a mere family disagreement.
"

Carnzee, I would like to see that link.

Your description of it suggests to me that I would likely disagree with those critics.

I didn't see Jackie as being over the top in the reboot.  I didn't see her as strident at all.  I don't see #$%^ hats as over the top.  I didn't see the script at all suggesting that Roseanne was sensible and marginalizing Jackie.  

I see no problem with portraying family squabbles along this divide.  Family squabbles along this divide are going on all over the country.  And between friends, some of them close ones.  

And, unless I missed a relevant episode, which I might have, I saw no quick 30 min. resolutions for Roseanne and Jackie's political debates.