I think it’s a very real scenario, but it’s not entertaining or funny. I am critical of Roseanne Barr for shifting from a more feminist position to whatever it is she represents now, but I’m critical of the show for being more depressing than funny and for staying exactly where it left off so many years ago (final lottery winner season excluded).
Did anyone else watch Tuesday’s episode? The one with Estelle Parsons as Beverly and Johnny Galeki as Darlene’s husband David?
It was a hoot and a half, and I thoroughly enjoyed it, beginning to end.
I liked the last episode as well as the one before that. Good emotional stuff between the characters as well as some good punch lines — it’s what Roseanne has always been about.
It was especially nice to see Johnny Galecki again. He looked about as un-Leonard Hofstadter-like as possible, a very believable deadbeat father.
Heck, they even addressed the lack of change in decor! But seriously, this was a good episode.
Yes.
Regards,
Shodan
There was a joke a couple of episodes ago that’s receiving some attention, such as here and here.
As summarized by The New Yorker, “In the third episode of “Roseanne,” on ABC, Roseanne Conner and her husband, Dan, wake up on their iconic sofa, in Lanford, Illinois. ‘It’s eleven o’clock,’ Roseanne says. ‘We slept from “Wheel” to “Kimmel.”’ Dan replies, ‘We missed all the shows about black and Asian families.’ Roseanne squawks, ‘They’re just like us!’ Then, sardonically, ‘There, now you’re all caught up.’”
The reference to shows about black and Asian familes is to black-ish and Fresh Off the Boat, respectively. So is this dismissive, as suggested by some who commented on it?
I took the joke to mean she thought that the shows were the black and asian versions of her show. It was a jab at show biz being lazy. kinda like the jokes about how American Dad and Family Guy are just ripoffs of The Simpsons.
mc
I loved seeing David again, but even if he follows through on moving back to Lanford he still won’t be able to show up much. It would be very expensive to have an actor staring in a show on a rival network play a frequently recurring character. And Bev’s just the same as she ever was; she doesn’t even look that much older.
Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Bev is still alive (i had no idea if the actress was or not, btw)? And she’s straight?
Everything Roseanne talked about in the last episode was false. Bev wasn’t gay, Jackie wasn’t gay, Darlene was with David, Becky was with Mark, and Dan didn’t die.
How did he look so bloated? I haven’t watched BBT lately, but he looks like he weighed 30 pounds more in Roseanne.
I didn’t like how Dan wouldn’t let him see his kids, that was kind of pathetic on David’s part to just submit to that. But the David episode was one of the best episodes of the season.
The worst part was that *Darlene *wanted David to see their kids, but didn’t even try to assert herself.
Watching this show, Darlene is about the only person whose personality changed for the better since the original series (she seems like she transitioned to adulthood fairly well). Everyone else is the same or worse.
Although I’m assuming DJ probably improved, he just hasn’t had any airtime.
I don’t understand why this brief passage upsets so many (liberal) people. It seems to me that it’s an homage to TV becoming more diverse, and to society becoming more accepting of different colors/races/backgrounds. And about the once-hoped for melting pot ideal. Yeah there are sitcoms about non-white people… good for them, they are just like us. I think people are watching this show with too much of a political filter… just like everything else today. Yeah, the show is somewhat political, but it seems to me that it’s all over the board. To be honest, it’s a lot more balanced than most TV shows, which are liberal.
I haven’t watched the latest episode, but I watched the first 4 or 5. I think DJ has had a total of maybe four lines so far. I suspect it might be because the actor just isn’t very good. I think the same thing about the Becky actor. She’s terrible. Watching her and DJ makes me think of a high school play. Looking at IMDB, neither has done a lot of work since the original series run ended in 1996. Of course, Roseanne isn’t a great actor, either, but it’s a little less noticeable, and kind of consistent with her character. Kind of like how Seinfeld was.
Even though I said I wouldn’t watch it, I’ve caught a few minutes over the past few weeks - including this:
It could be because Roseanne is not a good actress (always has been. The show has acting talent and skill, but not from its title character) and she botched the line. She delivered it in a sarcastic, dismissive tone and so if it was meant positively, it didn’t come off that way at all. I agree with the majority of what both the NYT & New Yorker articles say. (It was also really telling to me that they didn’t mention the family with the child with disabilities).
It was supposed to be dismissive, that is the joke. It was mocking the conceit of people learning about other cultures through one joke sitcoms.
Goranson may not be a good actress, but on this show it kinda works. Fishman has been even less active than her and he’s been give so few lines it’s hard to judge, but it’s probably for the better. Maybe they could expand his role if DJ had some kind of traumatic brain injury that mentally froze him as a 16 year old.
I don’r remember when, but Bev gayed out long before the last ep.
Was it before season 9? That seems to be where the canon gets hazy.
Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Well DJ finally got his own tiny subplot.
And the main story was excellent. I love seeing Annmarie and Chuck again, and the new neighbor story was wonderful.
But that grocery cashier would have been overheard by somebody and fired immediately. As a store cashier, that behavior is not tolerated. As my first manager told me “You have a right think it. You do not have a right to say it.”