Why did they bother to say that Edna walked out on Frank if they knew the series was to be cancelled anyway? This happened about a few episodes from the last one. It was totally needless.
During the last two season they kept her off-camera and it worked. This was really a horrible idea, as they left a bad ending for Frank.
I don't much care for the idea of Edna leaving Frank either. It kind of taints the earlier episodes when you see them falling in love, knowing what comes ahead. With that said, I think they went in this direction since they had to give Phil Foster (Frank) some screen time, and there was little that they could do with his character without Edna present. It just would've seemed odd, inconsistent or weird.
Of the two choices they had to pick from (1. Edna dies, leaving Frank a widower AGAIN or 2. Edna leaves Frank for husband #6), I think they felt this was the safest and least cruel thing to do. It also gave the actor, Phil Foster, some drama to play with.
It's a fine line between trying to make the audience happy and keeping the actors interested by having them actually ACT. I think they thought this was the best option for them since Betty Garrett had already committed to a Broadway show, thinking the previous season was the show's last.
-Ed
reply
share