Replies

It was OK. Hokey on viewing it now. But who really made the show was Vic Tayback and Polly Holliday. It was meant as a vehicle for Linda Lavin, but I thought she was the weak spot on the show (an odd choice to take over from the film version’s Ellen Burstyn). Beth Howland was oddly endearing (you always wanted to give the poor girl a hug).

As what happens frequently, Lavin was badly outshone by Tayback and especially Holliday, who became an instant star. Lavin apparently really hated Holliday stealing her thunder, and was happy when they gave her a spin-off show, which (unfortunately like “Checking In” and “The Ropers”) was a fiasco, although it did get her an Emmy nomination. They didn’t bring her back (though curiously they did bring in Diane Ladd, who originated Flo in the film, but she played a different character. She didn’t prove as popular, though). Although Polly Holliday has continued to work, she never quite had that stardom again.

Not particularly interested in these remakes. Hollyweird needs to do something original for a change.

BTW, I see they had the premiere of the Roseanne backstabbers show. Refused to watch it for obvious reasons. There’s something to be said for loyalty. Another FReeper said if any of them tried to quit, they’d have been sued by ABC lawyers. I said all they had to do was say they agreed with Roseanne (or that she had the right to air her opinion)
and they’d have been fired. They all should’ve stood together and done that. Other than for Goodman, most of the cast would never have been heard of were it not for her.

Hollywood has gone remake crazy, a really pathetic example being they are remaking Charlie's Angels AGAIN after just remaking it in 2011 AND 2000. This time they will have "Sir Patrick Stewart as Bosley". Someone please explain to these numbskulls that the original premise wasn't even that good and the only reason people watched it was to ogle Farrah Fawcett.

On the plus side, Hollywood FINALLY announced a remake I can get behind. They're doing a faithful adaptation of "The Voyages of Doctor Doolittle" with Robert Downey Jr. in the title role. Neither of the previous "adaptations" (the 1967 Rex Harrison musical or the goofy 1998 Eddie Murphy comedy) had much in common with the source material aside from the "Doctor who has the ability to talk to animals" premise. The original book series has about twelve novels. If this movie is decent they could presumably start a whole franchise. Like the 2005 adaptation of Casino Royale (which was awesome IN SPITE OF Daniel Craig in the title role), I guess third time's the charm.

Now someone just needs to kill the Charlie's Angels remake and replace it with a live action reboot of Little Orphan Annie that's actually faithful to creator's Harold Gray premise of teaching kids conservative-libertarian ideas through a lighthearted comic format (and has nothing in common with the 70s broadway musical Annie that is associated with the character now, though if they forced me I'd find a way to work the song 'Hard Knock Life' into the movie). Wouldn't THAT be refreshing?