Do the show without her! - Roseanne (1988) Discussion

[–] SammyJackson (24) 6 years ago

[deleted]

[–] modica (4169) 6 years ago

Why should the fans be denied seeing the Conners also. We can enjoy the show without Rosanne. It may get even bigger ratings without her.

reply

[–] SammyJackson (24) 6 years ago

[deleted]

[–] brux (14724) 6 years ago

I agree, but ... what kind of jest could that even be. It is a vicious, cruel, immature and ugly thing to do, and to call it a joke is an insult to jokes. Something just wrong with Roseanne. I am not sure what to do about the show. It's sad and unfair that the other actors and support staff are out of a job because of a clueless Trump supporter doing what Trump supporters do, but I'd guess continuing a show under circumstances like that would just be too much uncertainty and to close to the edge for ABC, or anyone else to risk.

reply

[–] SammyJackson (24) 6 years ago

[deleted]

[–] TandyMan (11096) 6 years ago

Shows back then were launched on the strength of a comedians name and following. Just how it was.

reply

[–] fishpan (544) 6 years ago

There is a plot way to do it - have her die in the knee surgery and have it the Conners can't sue due to Roseanne's addiction to pills.

reply

[–] modica (4169) 6 years ago

ABC is stupid to cancel the show. The show not only got great ratings, but it lifted the rest of the Tuesday schedule out of the doldrums.

reply

[–] fishpan (544) 6 years ago

ABC would be stupid to keep it on as they have a star of a show openly making racist tweets and people still watch - well what does that tell the left in an already divided America especially when they fired Jemele Hill?

Would be good if they could save the other characters though if there is no legal ramifications from Roseanne herself. She may legally own the rights or something. Personally wouldn't mind it continuing without her, Rosie's storylines were why I tuned in after the first episode.

reply

[–] modica (4169) 6 years ago

She may own the rights, but if she doesn't, do the show without her.

reply

[–] Aphrodite (110) 6 years ago

I’ve only seen the first episode of the reboot, mostly out of curiosity. Not a fan of Roseanne herself. I used to watch the old show when it was on.

After the news broke of the cancellation, I saw an article about the showrunner talking about season 2. I think it could still work, along with the plot you described. Have Roseanne die in surgery and then have Dan not only struggle with supporting the family, but struggle with the loss of her. It could work. It would take the show in a completely different direction. Especially seeing Dan start dating again after a certain amount of time, and how the kids would deal with that. Maybe have Jackie move in to help the family. It could work. They just need to rename the show The Conners or something else. I wonder if any talks will happen in regards to this. It wasn’t just Roseanne who made the show, it was everyone else too. I’d watch the show if Roseanne wasn’t on it.

reply

[–] fishpan (544) 6 years ago

I agree it could work and bring Dan more into it and not only that give DJ more to do as you can have father supporting son finding his place after getting out of the military as well as a son supporting his father as he grieves for his wife while being swamped by the women of the family who are just trying to help.

That to me would be an interesting story seeing how we get the family didn't work very well when Mark died considering Becky kind of went off the rails and stayed off them and David ran off to save the world rather than raise his kids.

Also it could be interesting to see more of Dan's side of the family as we have seen Crystal so Dan's half brother and sister should be around to. It would be interesting to see how they felt about Roseanne and the core Conners

reply

[–] jasonmovieguy (182) 6 years ago

Roseanne made a racist comment and showed her true colors. She deserved to have the show cancelled.

That being said, on an artistic side - NO. The series doesn't work without her. She is literally the meat of the story. She also is the funniest. It's easy to pretend she isn't, to lie and say "Oh I only watched because of John Goodman and Laurie Metcalf", but in truth- nope. The original series was outstanding, and Roseanne was a riot. So were her costars, but again- she was the best in show. It would be like redoing I Love Lucy without Lucille Ball. Now, take a series like Orange is the New Black (Netflix). SPOILER- Piper is the original character at the beginning, but as the storylines progressed she now is just one of the girls. And frankly, not as memorable. So it could work without her. But Roseanne is ROSEANNE. Point blank.

reply

[–] pioneergrrrl (2408) 6 years ago

The Hogan Family was horrible without Valerie Harper. It was mediocre to begin with but killing her off--and the next season everybody just moves on w/out counseling grief etc is just too unreal.

The only thing good about that was Josh Taylor and Jason Bateman....should have also killed off the two young guys and had father and eldest son run around town getting women

reply

[–] pioneergrrrl (2408) 6 years ago

That would have been FUN

reply

[–] CupidDeLocke (277) 6 years ago

Roseanne was the star in the original but she has been the weak link in the reboot. She delivers her lines as if reading from a script. The rest of the cast could carry the show on their own, but then they’d have to kill off the Roseanne character and that would just be too heavy even for this show. It’d be nice if they could carry on like she never existed, but the show was always known for its realism. I was hoping to see more David and Bev. :-(

reply

[–] earl237 (1106) 6 years ago

I agree, Dan and Jackie could become the lead characters. Why should the whole cast lose their jobs because Roseanne is an idiot?

reply

[–] prometheus1816 (1060) 6 years ago

They can't do the show without her. She owns the show. She could technically shop it around, but I doubt anyone would buy it now. It's too tainted a property.

reply

[–] NotoriousRio (12927) 6 years ago

I'd watch a Becky spin off, featuring both Becky's of course!

reply

[–] SammyJackson (24) 6 years ago

[deleted]

[–] modica (4169) 6 years ago

Becky was my favorite character in the reboot. I'd like to see that.

reply

[–] lordbishop34 (1442) 6 years ago

Because the show's characters revolve around Roseanne, she is what makes it all work. I was never a fan of the show but this was very obvious about it when it was on before and a reason why it was called Roseanne as opposed to The Conners.

reply

[–] SammyJackson (24) 6 years ago

[deleted]

[–] lordbishop34 (1442) 6 years ago

There would be no point, she is the show. People watched the show primarily for the Roseanne character. Not for the rest of the cast. I am not hating on them I am just saying they are not the reason a vast majority have loved the show, it was her character and their interaction with that character, that is the show. There are shows that are ensemble cast and there are shows that have a clear focal point character. Roseanne is the latter type of show.

reply

[–] SammyJackson (24) 6 years ago

[deleted]

[–] TJLamb0518 (3316) 6 years ago

Won't happen. In one fell swoop, Roseanne made the environment toxic. MAYBE Fox would go this route and pick up the show but given their reputation as an alt-right outlet, I doubt you'd get many of the stars to sign up to potentially repeat their mistakes.

reply