Party of One: Unpopular TV Opinions

[Browncoat]

Heroes should have stopped with one season.

[Jaded]

24 minutes ago, Browncoat said:

Heroes should have stopped with one season.

I've always thought that too. I wish I had stopped watching after that first season. I know I didn't make it through to the end of the series. I think I stopped after watching an episode where Hiro kept going back in time to save a girl from dying.

[DrSpaceman]

On ‎3‎/‎4‎/‎2019 at 10:42 PM, kiddo82 said:

I've said it before and I'll say it again, in hindsight, the place to "break" the Ross and Rachel coupling would have been when she flew to London to stop his wedding to Emily then couldn't bring herself to do and congratulated him instead.  (one of my all time favorite non-comedic moments of the series.)  It actually would have provided a nice bit of closure to the relationship.  ("and that, my friend, is what they call, 'closure.'")  He was moving on and she was ready to accept it.  He still could have said her name at the alter, they still could have gotten married in Vegas, and they still could have had Emma since being in love is not necessarily a prerequisite to any of those things.  The only difference would have been no more will they/wont they for the rest of the series since they both would have realized they were donzo with the whole thing.  

I don't think it was that long between the time they lost touch and when she showed up in the coffee shop in the pilot. 

All indications are while Ross/Chandler are in college they still kept in contact as there were a few episodes where Monica and Rachel show up

And I don't think it was that long after college that the pilot occurs.  Based on the episode when Rachel turns 30 several years into the show, its less than 5 years removed from college.

A long time?  Yes, but not a huge amount where he would forget her.  ANd I don't think he necessarily held a crush on her the entire time that he was still crazy over her.  She just showed back up, he was vulnerable with the divorce and all the old feelings from his pre-marriage days likely come flooding back. 

My question has always been, and I wish they would have addressed this in the later years with an episode or two rather than some of the filler stuff they did instead, why Rachel and Monica fell so out of touch so quickly that Monica was not invited to her wedding.  They seemed so close, best friends in high school and likely college, so what happened?  It was never explained that I recall. 

I don't know if it is an unpopular opinion, but I always give the writers huge credit for that Ross/Rachel "we were on a break" storyline just because it was so debatable.  I always fall on the side of Ross.  Rachel is the one that told him they were on a break and not only that, Ross calls here afterwards and the coworker he is jealous of answers the phone at Rachel's place.  So she tells him they are on a break, invites over the guy she knows Ross is jealous of, Ross finds out, then she is surprised and mad at home over sleeping with some girl that night?  Rachel always seemed to want everything on her terms.  Its like "we are on a break.....but don't do anything in case I change my mind, put your life on hold".  Sorry selfish Rachel, doesn't work that way. 

But anyway, like I said, it was a brilliant plot idea, so much so we are still talking about it 20 years later and everyone knows what "We were on a break!" means in that show. 

[Enigma X]

3 hours ago, Browncoat said:

Heroes should have stopped with one season.

Considering how good season one was and how messed up the rest of the seasons were, I am not sure if that was an unpopular opinion. 

Edited March 6, 2019 by Enigma X

[ganesh]

Oh, Fast Forward was one season. It was all over the place and then really hit a good groove. 

I seem to remember maybe it was 2007 ish or 09 that the broadcast networks did these limited summer series. They were all actually quite good. 

[Enigma X]

I think my liking A Million Little Things is an unpopular opinion in itself. I will take that some steps further. Although I like James Roday, I hate his character Gary and find his acting a bit hammy. I like Eddie and Katherine. My biggest UO for the show is that I like Delilah too.

[slf]

4 hours ago, DrSpaceman said:

I don't know if it is an unpopular opinion, but I always give the writers huge credit for that Ross/Rachel "we were on a break" storyline just because it was so debatable.  I always fall on the side of Ross.  Rachel is the one that told him they were on a break and not only that, Ross calls here afterwards and the coworker he is jealous of answers the phone at Rachel's place.  So she tells him they are on a break, invites over the guy she knows Ross is jealous of, Ross finds out, then she is surprised and mad at home over sleeping with some girl that night?  Rachel always seemed to want everything on her terms.  Its like "we are on a break.....but don't do anything in case I change my mind, put your life on hold".  Sorry selfish Rachel, doesn't work that way. 

But anyway, like I said, it was a brilliant plot idea, so much so we are still talking about it 20 years later and everyone knows what "We were on a break!" means in that show. 

I always took them being on a break to mean just that: they took a break. When people end a relationship they don't say they're "on a break", which is how both Rachel and Ross describe that period, they say they "broke up". "On a break" implies something different; that you aren't in a relationship per se but that you aren't exactly free to have sex with or date someone else either. Similar to how a married couple might separate while they decide if their relationship can be saved or if they should divorce, Ross and Rachel were on a break. I've always thought that was a slightly childish concept but then so was their whole relationship so it kind of fit them.

I agree that it was very debatable and probably one of the best known storylines from that show. Even people who never watched Friends know about it.

Edited March 6, 2019 by slf

[Katy M]

4 hours ago, DrSpaceman said:

I don't know if it is an unpopular opinion, but I always give the writers huge credit for that Ross/Rachel "we were on a break" storyline just because it was so debatable.  I always fall on the side of Ross. 

I actually tend to fall a bit more on the Rachel side, but I'm more of the opinion that it just doesn't matter.  They weren't married so they hadnt' made a long-term commitment to each other.  Rachel is right to not trust him simply because he won't admit that he did anything wrong and she thinks he did.  They have become (if they weren't already) incompatible.  

But, if you go back to the original fight they were already having serious problems.  Rachel had been cancelling plans for weeks, I think, and couldn't even take the night off for their anniversary.  And Ross was insanely jealous of Mark.  Even if Ross hadn't had sex that night, they probably wouldn't have lasted much longer anyway, due to the fact that Ross was getting extremely needy and clingy and Rachel wasn't prioritizing their relationship at all.

[DrSpaceman]

33 minutes ago, slf said:

I always took them being on a break to mean just that: they took a break. When people end a relationship they don't say they're "on a break", which is how both Rachel and Ross describe that period, they say they "broke up". "On a break" implies something different; that you aren't in a relationship per se but that you aren't exactly free to have sex with or date someone else either. Similar to how a married couple might separate while they decide if their relationship can be saved or if they should divorce, Ross and Rachel were on a break. I've always thought that was a slightly childish concept but then so was their whole relationship so it kind of fit them.

I agree that it was very debatable and probably one of the best known storylines from that show. Even people who never watched Friends know about it.

Ross specifically says he wasn't real clear on what she meant and says for all he knew it meant they were "broken up".  And then as mentioned he finds out Mark is at her apartment a few hours later, so I can see how he would conclude things were over.  Also when he was talking to Joey and Chandler about it I think he specifically says ".....We broke up.....". 

[slf]

56 minutes ago, DrSpaceman said:

Ross specifically says he wasn't real clear on what she meant and says for all he knew it meant they were "broken up".  And then as mentioned he finds out Mark is at her apartment a few hours later, so I can see how he would conclude things were over.  Also when he was talking to Joey and Chandler about it I think he specifically says ".....We broke up.....". 

That's what I mean, tho. Ross saying that he wasn't clear means he understood it was a gray area. He says "for all I knew that could go on forever". And while in all discussions/fights with Rachel he maintains he thought they were broken up so he didn't cheat, he talks about it differently with others in subsequent seasons. And always says "on a break". Not "we were broken up". He understood. He was just pitying himself over what happened and then when he realized Mark was over at her place, well, he'd be damned if he sat around miserable while she hooked up with Mark so he hooked up with Chloe. They don't break up until the next episode; "This can't be it." "So how come it is?"

But either way, if being on a break was a break up then what did it matter if Mark was over at Rachel's? And why did Ross try so hard to hide that he'd slept with someone, agree with Jasmine when she said she did a bad thing, etc?

Geez, they were so childish.

Edited March 6, 2019 by slf

[DrSpaceman]

26 minutes ago, slf said:

That's what I mean, tho. Ross saying that he wasn't clear means he understood it was a gray area. He says "for all I knew that could go on forever". And while in all discussions/fights with Rachel he maintains he thought they were broken up so he didn't cheat, he talks about it differently with others in subsequent seasons. And always says "on a break". Not "we were broken up". He understood. He was just pitying himself over what happened and then when he realized Mark was over at her place, well, he'd be damned if he sat around miserable while she hooked up with Mark so he hooked up with Chloe. They don't break up until the next episode; "This can't be it." "So how come it is?"

But either way, if being on a break was a break up then what did it matter if Mark was over at Rachel's? And why did Ross try so hard to hide that he'd slept with someone, agree with Jasmine when she said she did a bad thing, etc?

Geez, they were so childish.

I don't think he understood.  The fact Mark was over there when he tried to call matters because that reinforced to him that Rachel seemed to be moving on and they were done, which means they were broken up.  "On a break" to him meant "broken up". 

He tried to hide what happened because he then realized "on a break" did not mean "broken up" to her.  And she seemed to retrospectively just want to ignore what she had said and imagine the fight never happened, blame it all on him. 

And then later that is all she cares about before getting back together with him, him admitting she was right and he was wrong, in her 19 or so page letter. 

Agreed though it was all childish on both sides. 

[slf]

2 minutes ago, DrSpaceman said:

I don't think he understood.  The fact Mark was over there when he tried to call matters because that reinforced to him that Rachel seemed to be moving on and they were done, which means they were broken up.  "On a break" to him meant "broken up". 

He tried to hide what happened because he then realized "on a break" did not mean "broken up" to her.  And she seemed to retrospectively just want to ignore what she had said and imagine the fight never happened, blame it all on him. 

And then later that is all she cares about before getting back together with him, him admitting she was right and he was wrong, in her 19 or so page letter. 

Agreed though it was all childish on both sides. 

Agree to disagree. I think "for all I knew that could go on forever" really highlights that he knew "on a break" isn't the same as broken up. He had just thought he was right after all about her and Mark only to find out he was wrong as hell and had torpedoed the relationship.

I can't believe this has endured for more than twenty years, lol.

[Katy M]

1 minute ago, slf said:

Agree to disagree. I think "for all I knew that could go on forever" really highlights that he knew "on a break" isn't the same as broken up. He had just thought he was right after all about her and Mark only to find out he was wrong as hell and had torpedoed the relationship.

I can't believe this has endured for more than twenty years, lol.

Colleges probably have entire philosophy/relationship courses dedicated just to this debate:)

[Bastet]

I've only seen it once (I don't like Friends, but it's surprisingly hard to avoid), and it was in syndication, but I thought the phone call - that came between "maybe we need a break" and him sleeping with someone else - involved both of them saying they regretted how the fight ended and wanted to work things out.  Then he heard Mark in the background and turned into his usual selfish, jealous self, jumping to the wrong conclusion, not listening to her, and hanging up (and promptly trotting off to fuck someone else).

Everyone always parses her language at the end of the fight, when to me what's important is what happened during the phone call.  So, yeah, Team Rachel -- I don't give a shit whether it was cheating or not, it was a jerk move.  Which makes sense, because Ross is a jerk boyfriend.  That the series ends with Rachel giving up her dream job in Paris to accommodate his whiny ass, and people - including a friend of mine - swoon over this makes me angry just hearing about it.  I can't even imagine the hypertension incident that would have ensued had I watched it.

[Miss Dee]

On a break or broken up: any guy who can stick his dick in another woman 24 hours later is not someone who screams "long-term partner potential", to me.

[DrSpaceman]

Yes I know its all getting off topic and the debate never ends about "on a break".  So will leave it there. 

And there were many reasons Rachel should have broken up with Ross besides just this storyline. 

Reminds me though that How I Met Your Mother did a similar storyline.  Ted knows his girlfried overseas is going to break up with him and goes back to Robin's apartment with her, allowing her to believe they had already broken up, gets caught in the process lying. 

[Wiendish Fitch]

31 minutes ago, Miss Dee said:

On a break or broken up: any guy who can stick his dick in another woman 24 hours later is not someone who screams "long-term partner potential", to me.

Bingo. Screwing someone else mere hours after one lousy argument should be a giant, blinding red flag to anyone in a relationship.

58 minutes ago, Bastet said:

Everyone always parses her language at the end of the fight, when to me what's important is what happened during the phone call.  So, yeah, Team Rachel -- I don't give a shit whether it was cheating or not, it was a jerk move.  Which makes sense, because Ross is a jerk boyfriend.  That the series ends with Rachel giving up her dream job in Paris to accommodate his whiny ass, and people - including a friend of mine - swoon over this makes me angry just hearing about it.  I can't even imagine the hypertension incident that would have ensued had I watched it.

God, me too. Hell, I actually can't stand Rachel, but she was absolutely right in regards to the break-up, and was an idiot to give up her dream job. 

I think Ross was a crap boyfriend, a mean older brother, and a giant loser who didn't deserve to be with anybody.

[FormerMod-a1]

I thought they were broken up because when Rachael said "we need a break" and Ross said something it being a good idea, they needed a break from this, she clarified "Not a break from this, a break from us".  Sure sounds like a break up to me.  That doesn't mean Ross should have slept with someone else right away, of course, or that Rachael should take him back, just that they were broken up.  

[roamyn]

Wow, I guess mine really is an UO.  IMHO Rachel was the main problem.  She wasn’t clear what she expected.  He thought they were broken up.  She was whiny, spoiled and slept around.  He was whiny, too, but he didn’t sleep around.

[Irlandesa]

12 minutes ago, roamyn said:

Wow, I guess mine really is an UO.  IMHO Rachel was the main problem.  She wasn’t clear what she expected.  He thought they were broken up.  She was whiny, spoiled and slept around.  He was whiny, too, but he didn’t sleep around.

Ha.  I'd go even further.  For all their problems, I ship(ped) them which may not be unpopular in a general sense but sure feels that way online.

Ross and Rachel weren't married.  A 'break' isn't like a separation (and marrieds often date during those as well). There is no 'in between' when you're dating.   There's either being together and exclusive or together and non-exclusive. There's no such thing as apart and exclusive.

Oh, another UO about Friends, I preferred Monica and Richard and Monica and Pete to Monica and Chandler.

[Silver Raven]

12 hours ago, Browncoat said:

Heroes should have stopped with one season.

Heroes was ruined by the writers' strike.

[festivus]

I think the true unpopular opinion is mine. I don't care about Ross and Rachel and they both suck. I doubt I'll ever watch the show again because of how much that relationship got on my nerves.

[biakbiak]

The only person I felt sorry for in the Ross and Rachel thing was the copy girl and hope that she knew it was just a drunken one night thing where he was using her to feel better about himself.

[andromeda331]

3 hours ago, Miss Dee said:

On a break or broken up: any guy who can stick his dick in another woman 24 hours later is not someone who screams "long-term partner potential", to me.

That and then trying to hide it from Rachel. 

[Katy M]

55 minutes ago, biakbiak said:

The only person I felt sorry for in the Ross and Rachel thing was the copy girl and hope that she knew it was just a drunken one night thing where he was using her to feel better about himself.

I'm pretty sure that anyone who has sex on a first non-date isn't expecting any kind of commitment.

[Katy M]

2 minutes ago, andromeda331 said:

That and then trying to hide it from Rachel. 

I've already stated that they had bigger problems and probably would have broken up anyway, but if I were Rachel,, I would have been much more understanding if Ross had just been up front with me to begin with.  And, I don't care if Joey and chandler talked him out of it. Ross is responsible for his own decisions.  

I don't have much of a problem with him hiding Zoe (or Chloe, I can never remember her name) from her in his apartment.  That would have been awkward.  But at any point later that day, he should have told her.

[biakbiak]

1 minute ago, Katy M said:

I'm pretty sure that anyone who has sex on a first non-date isn't expecting any kind of commitment.

There’s a difference between expecting a commitment and being used to make someone else felt better. She apparently was interested before the hookup so she might have thought it would lead to something more than just a one night thing.

[Katy M]

4 minutes ago, biakbiak said:

There’s a difference between expecting a commitment and being used to make someone else felt better. She apparently was interested before the hookup so she might have thought it would lead to something more than just a one night thing.

Well, her mistake then.  If you want more than a one-night stand, you shouldn't make that one night your opening gambit.

[biakbiak]

4 minutes ago, Katy M said:

Well, her mistake then.  If you want more than a one-night stand, you shouldn't make that one night your opening gambit.

She might not have thought it was a mistake, my point is we have no idea what he told her and I hope he was honest with her. Having worked at a bar “I just broke up with my girlfriend/boyfriend and I want to hook up” is a remarkably successful hookup strategy.

[Bort]

Copy girl stole Ross’s watch, I think she was fine.

[slf]

13 hours ago, roamyn said:

Wow, I guess mine really is an UO.  IMHO Rachel was the main problem.  She wasn’t clear what she expected.  He thought they were broken up.  She was whiny, spoiled and slept around.  He was whiny, too, but he didn’t sleep around.

I don't recall Rachel sleeping around more than any of the guys, including Mr. Three Divorces, or understand how if she did that's a mark against her, tbh.

They were one of the most popular couples of the past thirty years so I know this will be unpopular but Ross was the worst of the main six characters and I don't know why Rachel ever wanted him. She was way out of his league. He was such a loser.

Edited March 7, 2019 by slf

[FormerMod-a1]

New UO - I like the idols and islands and other "twists" in Survivor.

[Domestic Assassin]

5 hours ago, DrSpaceman said:

And there were many reasons Rachel should have broken up with Ross besides just this storyline. 

This. The thing that annoys me most about all the "we were on a break" bs is that it overshadows all Ross's controlling red-flag behavior before this incident so that all anyone focuses on is the debate over the "break".

[Kel Varnsen]

On 3/4/2019 at 2:31 PM, andromeda331 said:

I'm sill amazed that no one took what worked from the show and learned from the mistakes to make a really awesome show.

To an extent that show is The Good Place. Before that show came out Mike Schur spent a bunch of time talking to the Lost showrunners about season/series plotting and super natural afterlife type plots and what worked and what didn't.

[Anela]

1 hour ago, aquarian1 said:

New UO - I like the idols and islands and other "twists" in Survivor.

I don't know what this means, but my unpopular opinion in the past, was that I hated this show, and all shows like it. I watched a bit of The Apprentice, too, and didn't like how friendships would be made, only for people to turn on each other, to win something. I don't like the "I'm not here to make friends" attitude. 

[Irlandesa]

4 hours ago, Silver Raven said:

Heroes was ruined by the writers' strike.

I think it was Pushing Daisies and Tim Kring.  Fuller left after the first season and Ti Kring was in charge with no real plans for a season 2.  There probably were good Season 2 ideas but splitting everyone up after bringing them together wasn't it.

[slf]

13 hours ago, Domestic Assassin said:

This. The thing that annoys me most about all the "we were on a break" bs is that it overshadows all Ross's controlling red-flag behavior before this incident so that all anyone focuses on is the debate over the "break".

Yeah, the show tried to play it as Ross being understandably jealous or insecure, but he crossed so many lines during their relationship. Trying to undermine her attempts to get a job because he didn't like that it was a man who was helping her, flooding her office with gifts and a singing telegram (IIRC) to basically mark his territory, insisting she take him with her to a work function he had no interest in (and then rudely fell asleep during) because he didn't want her going with a male coworker, showing up at her office during a late night disaster with a picnic basket (he turned a grinder on while she was handling a business call and ended up setting her desk on fire), and calling her job "just a job" because he felt she wasn't prioritizing him. That last one always particularly bothered me for a couple of reasons. There's no such thing as "just a job"; that's how she pays bills and eats! And to call it "just a job" after he once called her "just a waitress" on the pro/con list he made to decide between her and Julie? Ross never respected her. And what did he think, that she'd have as much free time for him once she had an office job (that she was very passionate about) as she did when she was kind of a slacker waitress and he'd hang out at the coffee shop all day? She was damned no matter what she did.

Edited March 7, 2019 by slf

[Haleth]

20 hours ago, ganesh said:

Oh, Fast Forward was one season. It was all over the place and then really hit a good groove. 

I seem to remember maybe it was 2007 ish or 09 that the broadcast networks did these limited summer series. They were all actually quite good. 

Another victim of the writer's strike.

[ganesh]

I don't think it needed to go on longer than that though. 

[Drogo]

21 hours ago, ganesh said:

Oh, Fast Forward was one season. It was all over the place and then really hit a good groove. 

Flash Forward with Joseph Fiennes?  I really liked that show. 

[Wiendish Fitch]

Yeah, the show tried to play it as Ross being understandably jealous or insecure, but he crossed so many line during their relationship. Tring to undermine her attempts to get a job because he didn't like that it was a man who was helping her, flooding her office with gifts and a singing telegram (IIRC) to basically mark his territory, insisting she take him with her to a work function he had no interest in (and then rudely fell asleep during) because he didn't want her going with a male coworker, showing up at her office during a late night disaster with a picnic basket (he turned a grinder on while she was handling a business call and ended up setting her desk on fire), and calling her job "just a job" because he felt she wasn't prioritizing him. That last one always particularly bothered me for a couple of reasons. There's no such thing as "just a job"; that's how she pays bills and eats! And to call it "just a job" after he once called her "just a waitress" on the pro/con list he made to decide between her and Julie? Ross never respected her. And what did he think, that she'd had as much free time for him once she had an office job (that she was very passionate about) as she did when she was kind of a slacker waitress and he'd hang out at the coffee shop all day? She was damned no matter what she did.

Big fat "YEE-UP!" to all of this. What if Rachel had bitched at Ross for spending too much time at the museum? She'd be framed as a short-sighted, clingy bitch, and rightly so, because sometimes work comes first! It's absolutely horrid that Ross looked down his nose at her professions; just because someone doesn't have a doctorate, it doesn't make their job any less important! No one should EVER dismiss any job, period. Think of it this way: it ain't the doctors or nurses keeping the hospitals clean and sparkling, it's the janitors, so you give them the respect they deserve. My husband has a more glamorous, lucrative job than I have, but he has never once made me feel "less than" because it. He doesn't care what I do for a living, as long as I'm happy (same goes for him).

And for the record, I never liked Ross or Rachel as characters, but Ross should have been happy for Rachel for landing the job she really wanted.

Edited March 7, 2019 by Wiendish Fitch

[Katy M]

16 minutes ago, Wiendish Fitch said:

Big fat "YEE-UP!" to all of this. What if Rachel had bitched at Ross for spending too much time at the museum? She'd be framed as a short-sighted, clingy bitch, and rightly so, because sometimes work comes first!

I don't think that would have happened.  Let's not forget that when Ross had to work he brought Rachel to work with him and had sex with her there.  Super-professional.  So, while he did look down on her profession, I think the one thing we can give him is that he's not a hypocrite.  He only brought her a picnic lunch to her work. He had sex with her at his.

[ganesh]

2 hours ago, Drogo said:

Flash Forward with Joseph Fiennes?  I really liked that show. 

Yeah, with Mosaic. There was a flash that Fiennes was going to relapse and get drunk. 

[Enigma X]

I was also a fan of Flash Forward. 

I cannot remember all the shows that had their first seasons during the writer's strike. I do remember liking many of them and them not being as good after.

[Katy M]

26 minutes ago, Enigma X said:

I was also a fan of Flash Forward. 

I cannot remember all the shows that had their first seasons during the writer's strike. I do remember liking many of them and them not being as good after.

The writer's strike was in the 2007-2008 TV season.  Flash Forward ran two years later 2009-2010.

[Enigma X]

13 minutes ago, Katy M said:

The writer's strike was in the 2007-2008 TV season.  Flash Forward ran two years later 2009-2010.

Apparently I remember less than I thought. Thanks for the correction.

[DearEvette]

14 hours ago, Anela said:

I don't know what this means, but my unpopular opinion in the past, was that I hated this show, and all shows like it. I watched a bit of The Apprentice, too, and didn't like how friendships would be made, only for people to turn on each other, to win something. I don't like the "I'm not here to make friends" attitude. 

I really liked Survivor at first.  It just felt so interesting and different at the time.

But I have to agree that it created a type of template that other reality competition shows and  competitors emulated.  Richard the first winner was a basic asshole but after he won, his duplicity and manipulation was praised and offered up as something cool and inevitable.  You could tell that other shows that came after actively sought that sort of ethic.  And because it seemed like it was rewarded in winning and audience admiration, backstabbing behavior became the norm and became somewhat of a self fulfilling prophecy in that you couldn't seem to win without lying in some way,  I feel like this was something egged on and encouraged by production as well.

This is one of the reasons of all the competitive reality shows, I liked The Amazing Race the best.  I thought it was the one show where you had to rely more on ability, your own strategy and just plain luck over something like and alliance or lies in order to prevail.

[Katy M]

The only reality competition show I ever really liked was The Amazing Race.  I think the main reason is I love to travel but can't really afford to do all that much, so it's fun to see the different traditions put into the form of a challenge.  Plus, it's just a race.  There's no real need for the lying and backstabbing.

I watched one season of Survivor.  My mom happened to be having a mastectomy the same day the men versus women season premiered.  I wanted my best friend to come over to wait for news with me because my dad was supposed to call that night.  Before I get yelled at, I wasn't told until 2 days beforehand and I live far away.  So, anyway, another friend of ours was supposed to go over to her place and they were going to watch Survivor.  I was like, come over here instead.  This was before I had a cell phone, so I had to be home.  I was all like, this isn't fair the guys are going to win everything.  So, I kind of got pulled in when the girls won the first competition. My mom came through fine, by the way. Now my dad has leukemia.  Maybe I should watch Survivor this season.  Maybe that's a good luck charm.

I kind of liked the Apprentice. (not Celebrity apprentice, though). But, sometimes Donald Trump's and/or the producers' decision of who to fire, seemed weird.  I remember watching one time and they were down to two teams of two.  They had to create a brochure for something.  He flat out didn't like the first team's brochure.  I don't remember what was wrong with it.  Boring, maybe.  Anyway, the other team would have won hands down, but they had put a wrong phone number in. OK, I get it.  The phone number was important.  So, he decided to fire one person from each team.  Fair enough.  So, the brochure that he liked, but with the wrong phone number, one of the team members literally didn't do anything. So, that's the one he kept.  Because, hey, at least she didn't get the phone number wrong. 

[Wiendish Fitch]

20 hours ago, Irlandesa said:

Oh, another UO about Friends, I preferred Monica and Richard and Monica and Pete to Monica and Chandler.

I loved Monica and Richard's relationship... unfortunately, it was too perfect to last. 

And I never found the age difference creepy, either: Monica was over 21, and it's not like Richard was some gross lech who only chased hot young tail. Hell, I think theirs was one of the better May/December TV relationships.

This leads me to another UO: I was never bothered by Drew and Celia's relationship on The Drew Carey Show. I thought they were kind of cute together. No, I'm not saying they had to be together forever, but it was nice while it lasted. 

Edited March 7, 2019 by Wiendish Fitch

[Katy M]

33 minutes ago, Wiendish Fitch said:

And I never found the age difference creepy, either: Monica was over 21, and it's not like Richard was some gross lech who only chased hot young tail. Hell, I think theirs was one of the better May/December TV relationships.

 I never found the age difference creepy, and they were a good couple.  But, I've always loved Chandler and Monica, so I'm glad that happened.  I also thought all (or at least most) of Monica's breakups were the most mature and realistic.  She broke up with Richard because she wanted babies and he didn't.  Even when he begrudgingly offered to have kids, she knew that wouldn't work, and they ended it there instead of dragging on a relationship she knew would never work.  OK, yeah, she and Richard had a little fling later, but they realized fairly quickly again that they couldn't work.She also knew she couldn't stand by and watch Pete kill himself.  She was honest up front, not trying to manipulate him and walked away. In both cases, there was no yelling and screaming.  No playing the blame game.  No cheating.   Ross and Rachel should have taken a lesson from her.  The only one where I would say there were any extra dramatics was with the poet guy.  But, that wasn't that bad and he was being a jerk.