This is one of the few shows where later seasons were better than earlier ones. I was so happy when they got rid of Dianne and introduced Rebecca. Shelly Long and the writers were too good at making Dianne annoying...
While i generally agree, because i prefer Kirstie and Woody, but the early seasons have some good jokes and plots too, sometimes it feels more lively because they are all a bit younger and fresher, some of that comes back in the later seasons.
I skip reading the bottom line, because it is usually some lame signature.
A weak season of Cheers is still great to me, it's just I find season 3 a little "off" because of poor Nicholas Colasanto's declining health, and then his absence, and I'm not a big fan of the Sam and Rebecca baby arc in 10. Woody's wedding is one of my absolute favourites though.
Yeah I realized on my last watch-through of the show that I really do enjoy the show more as it went on compared to the earlier years- which are still great.
I think it's debatable which era is better, however for me, there is ZERO debate as to who is the better character. Diane>>>>>>Rebecca. Rebecca just happened to show up on an already great series that got a second life with her arrival, but as a character, she was nothing that special. The show was hilarious more in spite of her, not because of her.
Typically most shows do not "synch" perfectly till Season 3. Usually Seasons 3-4-5 are the highlight seasons (they were for The Mary Tyler Moore Show, Taxi and Seinfeld --pretty much-give or take). And before I get all stomped on for saying this--it's a GENERAL opinion as per the fan bases.
I agree that the later seasons were better. It's very rare for a TV show to get better with age, but like a fine wine, Cheers did just that. I wonder how things would have gone if the show stayed on for two more seasons.