Roseanne Revival

[Not4Me]

2 hours ago, lexytheblasian said:

Kind of off topic but has anyone ever glanced over Roseanne's twitter page? I never really paid much attention but happened across it recently and I'm kind of - well, I'll just say disturbed. She was a controversial figure back in the day and considering the current climate, I wonder what kind of show we'll be seeing...

Still, I'll hold my judgement because I'm super excited.

I read them via DListed and already I’m cringing. I was originally against the whole revival because she lost her damn mind and it would be hard for me to separate that, then warmed up to it over time, now I’m cringing more than ever. It’s going to be difficult to watch it if she keeps ranting like a lunatic and alienating the fans who loved the show.

At this point I kind of welcome a Tom Arnold-cameo because he appears to have been the sane one all along.

Edited December 29, 2017 by Not4Me

[lexytheblasian]

1 hour ago, Not4Me said:

I read them via DListed and already I’m cringing. I was originally against the whole revival because she lost her damn mind and it would be hard for me to separate that, then warmed up to it over time, now I’m cringing more than ever. It’s going to be difficult to watch it if she keeps ranting like a lunatic and alienating the fans who loved the show.

At this point I kind of welcome a Tom Arnold-cameo because he appears to have been the sane one all along.

I agree with everything you said! Whatever the case, it’s kind of making me question my excitement. I mean some of the stuff she says/retweets on twitter is bat-shit crazy and has been debunked. I hope she’s okay and not just doing this for publicity and to promote the show.

Omg haha I was thinking the same thing about Tom Arnold - LOL!

Edited December 29, 2017 by lexytheblasian

[tessaray]

This is just a reminder that Roseanne's personal politics are off-topic.  If you have questions about PTV and politics, see this post.  

[Neptune]

[Neptune]

[AgentRXS]

On 12/29/2017 at 5:38 PM, Not4Me said:

. I was originally against the whole revival because she lost her damn mind and it would be hard for me to separate that, then warmed up to it over time, now I’m cringing more than ever. It’s going to be difficult to watch it if she keeps ranting like a lunatic and alienating the fans who loved the show.

 

On 12/29/2017 at 6:38 PM, lexytheblasian said:

I mean some of the stuff she says/retweets on twitter is bat-shit crazy and has been debunked. I hope she’s okay and not just doing this for publicity and to promote the show

Now, I love Roseanne for being one of the creators of this show. I will forever adore her for creating a sitcom that reflected real lower-middle-class life.

That being said, Roseanne has always had a BSC side to her. If Twitter had been around in the '90s, I could just imagine all the crazy shit that would be going down on her page.  She lives to say BSC things and then backtrack. Sometimes its difficult, but I refuse to let Roseanne Barr get in the way of my love for Roseanne Conner.  I can't wait for the revival!

[2727]

14 hours ago, AgentRXS said:

She lives to say BSC things and then backtrack. Sometimes its difficult, but I refuse to let Roseanne Barr get in the way of my love for Roseanne Conner. I can't wait for the revival!

I'm still not sure how I feel. Negative press put me off the show when it originally aired and all the backstage dirt came out about Roseanne's temper and vindictiveness towards the writers and producers. 

On the other hand, the cast are all adults who signed on with full knowledge of Roseanne's past behavior, so maybe I should trust their feelings instead of tabloid gossip.

[Pallas]

We now have one thread for all Media by/about the show and Roseanne, and another for discussion about Roseanne the character/creator. Please have at 'em!

[UYI]

1 hour ago, Mmmfloorpie said:

Season 3 & 4.

You know, right after I posted that, I wondered if they had actually been there during season 3, but was too lazy to look it up. You're right. Thanks! 

[VCRTracking]

I just want them to address the Trump thing once in the first episode and move on. It was never a political show like All in the Family. I don't remember ever hearing Reagan, Bush Sr., or either Bill or Hillary's name mentioned on the original show.

Also looking forward to seeing both Beckys onscreen together!

Edited January 10, 2018 by VCRTracking

[GreatKazu]

10 hours ago, VCRTracking said:

I just want them to address the Trump thing once in the first episode and move on. It was never a political show like All in the Family. I don't remember ever hearing Reagan, Bush Sr., or either Bill or Hillary's name mentioned on the original show.

Also looking forward to seeing both Beckys onscreen together!

She might be back-tracking or her other personality has taken over: https://www.dailydot.com/upstream/roseanne-new-season-trump/?fb=ss&prtnr=someecards

"Barr feels the need to reflect the real America."

Roseanne didn't seem to feel that way during the original show.  

[JAYJAY1979]

44 minutes ago, GreatKazu said:

She might be back-tracking or her other personality has taken over: https://www.dailydot.com/upstream/roseanne-new-season-trump/?fb=ss&prtnr=someecards

"Barr feels the need to reflect the real America."

Roseanne didn't seem to feel that way during the original show.  

The county that the show originally took place in (Fulton County, Illinois) was democratic in their voting, especially for president until the 2016 election where over 60 percent voted for Trump for president... given the blue collar nature of the show.. it makes sense to have them vote for Trump over Hilary.  

[JayInChicago]

That County is wayyyy too West in the state to be where Landford was supposed to be. I generally imagined it either in DeKalb or McHenry County.

And they mentioned places like DeKalb/Sycamore, Rockford, Elgin etc 

[JAYJAY1979]

Just now, JayInChicago said:

That County is wayyyy too West in the state to be where Landford was supposed to be. I generally imagined it either in DeKalb or McHenry County.

And they mentioned places like DeKalb/Sycamore, Rockford, Elgin etc 

In season 1.. they mentioned they were in Fulton county..but Mchenry County (where I grew up) also voted more for Trump then Hilary.. and in Dekalb County.. Hilary barely got more votes then Trump.  

[JayInChicago]

That said, I see the Fulton co reference comes from the tornado episode. 

I lived in DeKalb for three years and it was pretty Landfordy lol

It definitely makes sense that someone(s) in the family voted Trump. It just seems weird it would be Roseanne, always so whipsmart about sexism/feminism/unions/etc

[ruby24]

It's just that Roseanne was SO overtly feminist. And pro-LGBT. But especially with the misogyny, I mean, with Jackie being abused and everything? And their experiences with their father and what Bev went through with him? It feels like a betrayal of what she stood for and a personal betrayal of her own sister.

The Roseanne of the episode where she gets Jackie out of Fisher's house, I just... I cannot believe that that woman would become this. Ever. I mean, Jackie was the one who was the apologist for their dad and then for Fisher at first... if anything, Jackie wouldn't be like this if it hadn't been for Roseanne pushing her in the other direction, right?

And if they're not going to take it seriously, just brush it all off as a joke...I just can't accept it because of how well I know those old episodes. And how well I knew HER from those episodes. I know who she was, she told us all the time. She meant what she said. Or at least, I believed her then. The show meant a lot to me, because of how much I believed in its authenticity (in those early years anyway).

Edited January 11, 2018 by ruby24

[JayInChicago]

I don’t know where to put this comment but I just had a thought—I’d be so much more into this if Roseanne the 2018 human was not involved ?

it’s her show though I suppose 

[tessaray]

Just a reminder - there is a Media thread now for posting articles on the show/cast/etc.  There is also a thread for Roseanne Barr/Roseanne Conner. 

[GreatKazu]

1 hour ago, JayInChicago said:

That said, I see the Fulton co reference comes from the tornado episode. 

I lived in DeKalb for three years and it was pretty Landfordy lol

It definitely makes sense that someone(s) in the family voted Trump. It just seems weird it would be Roseanne, always so whipsmart about sexism/feminism/unions/etc

The thing is, the original show avoided touching upon such topics. It is not about who anyone would vote for or what party they affiliate with. I thought the revival show would avoid such a topic.

[JAYJAY1979]

12 hours ago, GreatKazu said:

The thing is, the original show avoided touching upon such topics. It is not about who anyone would vote for or what party they affiliate with. I thought the revival show would avoid such a topic.

Normally I'd agrew...but it's been over 20 years...and the landscape is so different nowadays.  Politics has divided the country in a way that it didn't back in the late 80s/early 90s...and since her show was fairly reflective of the times...it has to be brought up.  I

My family is fractured because of the 2016 election...so if they touch on that...with a little humor thrown in.  I'll be happy.  I hope the show looks at will and grace to see what to do and not to do.

It's being paired with the Middle....an awesome pairing..imho

Edited January 11, 2018 by JAYJAY1979

[Mmmfloorpie]

1 hour ago, JAYJAY1979 said:

Normally I'd agrew...but it's been over 20 years...and the landscape is so different nowadays.  Politics has divided the country in a way that it didn't back in the late 80s/early 90s...and since her show was fairly reflective of the times...it has to be brought up.  I

My family is fractured because of the 2016 election...so if they touch on that...with a little humor thrown in.  I'll be happy.  I hope the show looks at will and grace to see what to do and not to do.

It's being paired with the Middle....an awesome pairing..imho

I really believe the election thing is just to explain that Jackie and Roseanne haven't spoken in a year. It's a hook for the premiere.

Once that first episode is under their belts, I don't think Trump and the election are going to be a recurring theme.

[FairyDusted]

And see I think Roseanne did reflect the times in her area. Lower middle class neighborhoods getting by and dealing with school, moods, sex, drugs and abuse. And excellent B stories for levity.  

[GreatKazu]

15 minutes ago, FairyDusted said:

And see I think Roseanne did reflect the times in her area. Lower middle class neighborhoods getting by and dealing with school, moods, sex, drugs and abuse. And excellent B stories for levity.  

Right. 

She did touch upon so many topics that needed to be addressed. I was a huge fan of One Day at A Time. Those topics were pretty heavy on that show, and just like Roseanne, she brought them to the forefront and did so without having to mention political figures who were prominent at the time. 

I suppose Roseanne Barr has a different prospective going in this time, and it is certainly her right to do so, I just don't want it to be the forefront of the show the way it was at times with All in the Family. Maybe I am assuming too much at this stage and fearing something that won't end up happening. 

[FairyDusted]

Totally agree @GreatKazu. Talking about the election was news to me. I hadn't come across that yet. Let it be one line and move on.  I'd rather have expanded profiles on all the characters.

[StaceyNotStacie]

3 hours ago, Mmmfloorpie said:

I really believe the election thing is just to explain that Jackie and Roseanne haven't spoken in a year. It's a hook for the premiere.

Once that first episode is under their belts, I don't think Trump and the election are going to be a recurring theme.

Even though they live somewhat similar lifestyles, I could see why Roseanne and Jackie differ in their political views. Their demographics are slightly different. Jackie is most likely a divorced single parent almost completely supporting herself and Roseanne is married, most likely with multiple generations living under her roof struggling financially. I can see Jackie being more of a feminist while Roseanne being more low/middle class married woman supporting an extended family, burnt out by current government and hopeful by what a popular, somewhat successful businessperson has to offer. 

I wonder what the status of the diner is. Did they end up giving it to Nancy and Leon like they did in the last season, did it go under or are some of them still working there?

[ruby24]

5 hours ago, Stacey1014 said:

Even though they live somewhat similar lifestyles, I could see why Roseanne and Jackie differ in their political views. Their demographics are slightly different. Jackie is most likely a divorced single parent almost completely supporting herself and Roseanne is married, most likely with multiple generations living under her roof struggling financially. I can see Jackie being more of a feminist while Roseanne being more low/middle class married woman supporting an extended family, burnt out by current government and hopeful by what a popular, somewhat successful businessperson has to offer. 

I wonder what the status of the diner is. Did they end up giving it to Nancy and Leon like they did in the last season, did it go under or are some of them still working there?

This would be plausible if Roseanne on the old show wasn't the complete opposite of what you're saying. She WAS an aggressive feminist. She said so, constantly. If anything, Jackie was the one who was an apologist for their abusive father and Fisher, etc. (although I can see an argument for her own evolution over the course of the original series, given what she went through). I could even see Bev being the Trump supporter, she would be the one I could buy the most, actually.

But NOT Roseanne. She was a feminist, she was pro-LGBT and she also was smarter than rich people who try to con the working class, as she explicitly explained ON THE SHOW. This really doesn't make any sense, unless she has become a completely different person, which I guess she has in real life and that's why they're doing this. But that's real life. if they want us to think this is the same Roseanne Conner minus the last couple seasons or whatever, this just doesn't fly. At all. It's not believable.

[llewis823]

11 hours ago, Stacey1014 said:

I wonder what the status of the diner is. Did they end up giving it to Nancy and Leon like they did in the last season, did it go under or are some of them still working there?

Good question. I had not even thought of that.

[Mmmfloorpie]

18 hours ago, GreatKazu said:

Right. 

She did touch upon so many topics that needed to be addressed. I was a huge fan of One Day at A Time. Those topics were pretty heavy on that show, and just like Roseanne, she brought them to the forefront and did so without having to mention political figures who were prominent at the time. 

I suppose Roseanne Barr has a different prospective going in this time, and it is certainly her right to do so, I just don't want it to be the forefront of the show the way it was at times with All in the Family. Maybe I am assuming too much at this stage and fearing something that won't end up happening. 

I'm with you on politics not being at the forefront. I'm hoping it's like the Will and Grace revival. The first ep might be political but then that's it.

When DJs daughter was first revealed I got worried because I don't want the show to be overtly political. If DJ has a black/mixed daughter great, I have no issue with that.

What I will have an issue with is if there's constant reference to how difficult it is for her to grow up in Lanford or how difficult it was for her mother and DJ to have a relationship and they overcame the bigotry against all odds.

More recently, we found out that Mark will be "gender bending". Again, no issues with that but I don't want to lose an entire episode or more on how he has to deal with it in small town Lanford; or have to listen to a slew of Kaitlyn Jenner jokes.

We only get 9 episodes and I just want them to be light hearted and FUNNY. 

The thing people forget is that Roseanne was a political show but politics were different then. Politics now is left vs right and us against them.

Back in the 80s, it was political to have a show where mother knew best and father knows squat. It was political to show a "dysfunctional" family on TV. Remember George Bush saying there should be more families like The Waltons and less of The Simpsons?

Now politics on a tv show means bashing the "other side". It means taking a position on one of the extreme ends of the political spectrum. You have to pick a side. Either you are a chicken shirt wearing Trump supporter, or a pussyhat wearing Hillary voter.

-------------

Spoiler

RE: The Diner, spoiler alert, people who have attended tapings of the show have said The Lunchbox is no more and it's just mentioned in a throwaway line having had a humorous demise.

[VCRTracking]

It'd be funny if DJ's wife was that girl he didn't want to kiss in a play.

[peacheslatour]

On 1/12/2018 at 6:55 PM, VCRTracking said:

It'd be funny if DJ's wife was that girl he didn't want to kiss in a play.

Her name was Gina. Let's see what his wife's name is. Roseanne had a run in with her dad, holiday dinners should be interesting.

Edited January 14, 2018 by peacheslatour

[CherryAmes]

One big problem I can see if they make too many references to current politics is while that might work for now - 2018 - it's going to age the show really fast when it comes to the real moneymaker - eternal reruns.  There are a few shows that I loved watching back in the day but are pretty hard to relate to now because they were so much a product of their time.  Trump, whether you're a fan of his or not, will eventually not be president anymore, if the show spends too much time dealing with him and the issues arising out of and around his presidency that's going to be a giant yawn for viewers 10 years from now.  Hopefully the people behind this show are smart enough to show that.  Hopefully.

[readster]

19 minutes ago, peacheslatour said:

He name was Gina. Let's see what his wife's name is. Roseanne had a run in with her dad, holiday dinners should be interesting.

Something that bothered me the most of that appearance was that Gina's dad comes in basically going: "Open up!" Instead of: "Hi, I'm Gina's father." Roseanne: "Oh, come on in." Of course they wanted to show that deep down people are racial, never liked that message. At least why DJ didn't want to kiss Gina was because of various things. I could flash forward years later and DJ went: "You know what, you are attractive and I was a young teen guy, what did I know at the time. Stupid hormones." 

[peacheslatour]

Quote

eternal reruns. 

There are only going to be what, ten episodes? I don't think they need to worry about syndication.

[CherryAmes]

14 minutes ago, peacheslatour said:

There are only going to be what, ten episodes? I don't think they need to worry about syndication.

I missed that completely!  I had thought it was going to be a regular series where they hoped to go on as long as they possibly could.  A limited series is, of course, a different proposition entirely.  

[VCRTracking]

1 hour ago, readster said:

Something that bothered me the most of that appearance was that Gina's dad comes in basically going: "Open up!" Instead of: "Hi, I'm Gina's father." Roseanne: "Oh, come on in." Of course they wanted to show that deep down people are racial, never liked that message. At least why DJ didn't want to kiss Gina was because of various things. I could flash forward years later and DJ went: "You know what, you are attractive and I was a young teen guy, what did I know at the time. Stupid hormones." 

That episode just bugged me because Roseanne just assumed he got it from Dan because his dad was supposedly racist even though I never saw that side of Ned Beatty whenever he showed up and Dan was estranged from him and never wanted to be like him. I know it was just so they could turn it around on Roseanne but it was still annoying.

I did like it when DJ was interested in religion and Dan was horrified because apparently his side of the family is VERY Christian!

[readster]

4 minutes ago, VCRTracking said:

That episode just bugged me because Roseanne just assumed he got it from Dan because his dad was supposedly racist even though I never saw that side of Ned Beatty whenever he showed up and Dan was estranged from him and never wanted to be like him. I know it was just so they could turn it around on Roseanne but it was still annoying.

I did like it when DJ was interested in religion and Dan was horrified because apparently his side of the family is VERY Christian!

Even more on Dan because he didn't want to have things so "forced" on him as things were and it worked better because DJ made the decision and curosity more natural. Unlike say on the Good Wife where the daughter wanted to be all religion and Julian Margeles's character was: "Religion, bad!" However, racism in the episode I mentioned felt so forced. 

[Mmmfloorpie]

11 hours ago, VCRTracking said:

That episode just bugged me because Roseanne just assumed he got it from Dan because his dad was supposedly racist even though I never saw that side of Ned Beatty whenever he showed up and Dan was estranged from him and never wanted to be like him. I know it was just so they could turn it around on Roseanne but it was still annoying.

I did like it when DJ was interested in religion and Dan was horrified because apparently his side of the family is VERY Christian!

They were good about not making it seem like Ed was a total bigot. Roseanne just cites the example of "he always says he has no issues with the coloureds". I think we all know people from a certain age range who say that lol.

 

13 hours ago, peacheslatour said:

He name was Gina. Let's see what his wife's name is. Roseanne had a run in with her dad, holiday dinners should be interesting.

People who went to tapings said his wife IS named Gina and she is overseas in the military.

[peacheslatour]

Quote

People who went to tapings said his wife IS named Gina and she is overseas in the military.

Awesome!

[qtpye]

Do you think we will ever find out what happened to Ziggy, the original bad boy biker?  It was him leaving them 20K that started the whole bike shop arc.

[SparklesBitch]

On 1/11/2018 at 0:59 AM, ruby24 said:

It's just that Roseanne was SO overtly feminist. And pro-LGBT. But especially with the misogyny, I mean, with Jackie being abused and everything? And their experiences with their father and what Bev went through with him? It feels like a betrayal of what she stood for and a personal betrayal of her own sister.

The Roseanne of the episode where she gets Jackie out of Fisher's house, I just... I cannot believe that that woman would become this. Ever. I mean, Jackie was the one who was the apologist for their dad and then for Fisher at first... if anything, Jackie wouldn't be like this if it hadn't been for Roseanne pushing her in the other direction, right?

And if they're not going to take it seriously, just brush it all off as a joke...I just can't accept it because of how well I know those old episodes. And how well I knew HER from those episodes. I know who she was, she told us all the time. She meant what she said. Or at least, I believed her then. The show meant a lot to me, because of how much I believed in its authenticity (in those early years anyway).

You’ve taken all my thoughts and wrote them out so much more eloquently than I could. I completely agree with all of this! 

On 1/12/2018 at 9:42 AM, Mmmfloorpie said:

or have to listen to a slew of Kaitlyn Jenner jokes.

We only get 9 episodes and I just want them to be light hearted and FUNNY. 

Oh god, I didn’t even think of that. I hope there’s none of those jokes. Ugh. 

Also, yes! That’s what I want too. Lighthearted and funny and just a visit back to the family we all fell in love with in the beginning. 

[VCRTracking]

11 hours ago, qtpye said:

Do you think we will ever find out what happened to Ziggy, the original bad boy biker?  It was him leaving them 20K that started the whole bike shop arc.

I rewatched JFK a couple of years ago and realized that actor along with Laurie Metcalf were part of Jim Garrison's team.

I love when he catches Becky talking about him on the phone with her friend. She gets embarrassed and leaves.

Ziggy:That was fun.

Roseanne: Don't be too cocky. Becky's real easy to humiliate.

Ziggy: She digs my eyes, man.

Roseanne: Well, red is her favorite color.

That's what I loved most about the character and Roseanne, that dry snark and I hope the reboot has lots of it.

[CandysWrapRoom]

On 1/13/2018 at 11:32 PM, Mmmfloorpie said:

People who went to tapings said his wife IS named Gina and she is overseas in the military.

Excellent continuity.  Love it.

[2727]

Laurie Metcalf was on Marc Maron's podcast this week and talked about the revival for a few minutes. FWIW, she said Jackie's political differences with Roseanne are only discussed in the first episode and are intended to frame the fractures in their relationship that have been building for 40+ years. She said the show is, as always, about family and not politics.

She said the cast were all very excited to be back and spend time together, that they got along wonderfully, easily fell back into their old roles, and that they'd definitely do another season if asked.

Maybe PR, maybe even true. ;-)

[DB in CMH]

Did Chuck and Ann Marie have a daughter? Could Gina be retconned as being their daughter? That would tie the two families together. 

[chocolatine]

15 minutes ago, DB in CMH said:

Did Chuck and Ann Marie have a daughter? Could Gina be retconned as being their daughter? That would tie the two families together. 

They had a son, I think his name was Chuck Jr. But if the revival is going to retcon major events like Dan's death (and possibly pretend that Jerry was never born) I'm sure they'll have no problem turning Chuck Jr. into Gina.

[Bastet]

35 minutes ago, DB in CMH said:

Did Chuck and Ann Marie have a daughter? Could Gina be retconned as being their daughter? That would tie the two families together. 

We saw the father of Gina - the Gina D.J. didn't want to kiss in the play - and he was not Chuck.  We saw and otherwise heard about Chuck and Anne Marie's son, Chuck Jr., with no indication he had any siblings. 

So for the Gina with whom D.J. had Mary (or to whom D.J. is married and had Mary; it's not clear from what I've read) to be the Mitchells's daughter, she would have to be a different Gina than the one D.J. refused to kiss, and a child of Chuck and Anne Marie that they didn't have, or roundly ignored, at the time of the original series.

Of course, picking and choosing what's true and what's not from the "it's all a book" ending does give more continuity leeway than normal, but to make her Gina Mitchell would normally be quite a leap.

[chocolatine]

15 hours ago, Bastet said:

We saw the father of Gina - the Gina D.J. didn't want to kiss in the play - and he was not Chuck.  We saw and otherwise heard about Chuck and Anne Marie's son, Chuck Jr., with no indication he had any siblings.

I remember that, but if the revival is going to pretend that the lottery win never happened, Dan didn't die, and, possibly, that the youngest Conner child never existed, they'll have no trouble changing the family structure of some minor characters. 

[Bastet]

14 minutes ago, chocolatine said:

I remember that, but if the revival is going to pretend that the lottery win never happened, Dan didn't die, and, possibly, that the youngest Conner child never existed, they'll have no trouble changing the family structure of some minor characters. 

That's why I said it would normally be a leap, but the "it's all a book" ending to begin with and the fact they're now apparently picking and choosing what parts of that to go with mean there's more continuity leeway than normal.

I just wouldn't like it because it would mean the Gina he wouldn't kiss in the play and the Gina he wound up having a kid with are two different Ginas, and I really like the callback that the Gina he wouldn't kiss winds up being the woman he has a kid with years down the road.  (That's assuming, of course, they would be going the "Oh, yeah, Chuck and Anne Marie had this other kid we knew nothing about" route.  The only way to make them current Gina's parents and have her be the same Gina from before is to pretend we never saw some other guy, whom Roseanne had never met, be her father.  And, yeah, when you're already asking me to pretend a main character who died didn't, that shouldn't be the thing that bugs me, but it would.)

It's the sort of thing that would bug me on most shows, for the woman he ends up with to be a character we already knew of, since characters only ever having the same handful of people in their life doesn't mirror most people's reality, but I would like it on here since it fits right in with the small-town, people never get out of here, "what is this, Mayberry?" vibe the show always had.

Edited January 18, 2018 by Bastet

[methodwriter85]

On 1/18/2018 at 5:16 PM, chocolatine said:

I remember that, but if the revival is going to pretend that the lottery win never happened, Dan didn't die, and, possibly, that the youngest Conner child never existed, they'll have no trouble changing the family structure of some minor characters. 

I really don't want to lose Andy, though. Jackie having been a single mother feels like way too important for her character to just retcon all of that away.The storyline of her and Fred, two people who slowly realize they have nothing in common but a shared vessel of their DNA was pretty realistic.

[TheGreenKnight]

I've loved the Will & Grace revival so far, but everything about this sounds like a complete trainwreck so far. I love Laurie Metcalfe and John Goodman, but I don't even think they can get me to endure modern-day Roseanne Barr. I'm glad it's only going to have 10 eps and then go away again.