Roseanne Revival

[BBHN]

Quote

The later seasons became overtly political and were crap.

I don't think the later seasons being crap had to do with the politics...they were crap because the quality of the writing deteriorated.

[TheLastKidPicked]

On 5/22/2017 at 6:30 PM, Kromm said:

To compare... why is the Will & Grace revival a total shit idea? Because the world has moved on. Merry Manhattanites living the life those people represent resonates with very few people now, except as nostalgia. 

 

On 5/28/2017 at 2:40 PM, Bastet said:

I’m just so thankful to Roseanne Barr for this show.  To the other actors who helped bring it to life and to the writers who wove her stories into such wonderful episodes, too, but primarily to her.  She had a vision, she stuck with it, and she made sure that for nine years we had a show on American television told from a feminist, blue collar viewpoint.  A nine-year exploration of class in America; with the popular narrative being that the so-called American Dream (work hard and you can pull yourself up the socio-economic ladder) is the norm, here was someone pointing out that the reality is if you are born poor, you are most likely going to die poor.  Nine years of speaking truth to power, exploring issues often misrepresented, shallowly addressed or ignored altogether, and showing us the lives of people often disregarded.   Done through comedy that is - far more often than not - intelligent, honest, and downright hilar

Both very insightful and well thought out posts.  And you draw attention to one thing a revival simply cannot recreate-- the events going on in 1988.  How many of you remember the events surrounding us when Roseanne made it's debut?

 

The number one shows on TV were sugary-sweet family shows, such as Cosby, Full House, and Mr. Belvedere.   Shows where perfect parents lived in perfect neighborhoods with perfect kids. 

Remember that historically, family comedies were even made to "Improve on Reality" and to provide "Moral Instruction" to us.

And along comes Roseanne, who wants to give a voice for people where jobs aren't perfect, parents aren't perfect, and kids aren't perfect.  But they love each other and get through it with grace and humor.  It ran against the theme of all the hit family shows at the time.

No matter how good the revival might be, they can never recreate the background of when the show debut in 1988.  Those of you old enough to remember know what a big event it was at the time.

Edited July 5, 2017 by TheLastKidPicked

[peacheslatour]

1 hour ago, TheLastKidPicked said:

 

Both very insightful and well thought out posts.  And you draw attention to one thing a revival simply cannot recreate-- the events going on in 1988.  How many of you remember the events surrounding us when Roseanne made it's debut?

 

The number one shows on TV were sugary-sweet family shows, such as Cosby, Full House, and Mr. Belvedere.   Shows where perfect parents lived in perfect neighborhoods with perfect kids. 

Remember that historically, family comedies were even made to "Improve on Reality" and to provide "Moral Instruction" to us.

And along comes Roseanne, who wants to give a voice for people where jobs aren't perfect, parents aren't perfect, and kids aren't perfect.  But they love each other and get through it with grace and humor.  It ran against the theme of all the hit family shows at the time.

No matter how good the revival might be, they can never recreate the background of when the show debut in 1988.  Those of you old enough to remember know what a big event it was at the time.

I also remember her being called a loud mouthed, screeching bitch by the same people who laughed uproariously at every stupid thing that came out of Al Bundy's mouth. 

[Maharincess]

On 7/5/2017 at 1:26 PM, peacheslatour said:

I also remember her being called a loud mouthed, screeching bitch by the same people who laughed uproariously at every stupid thing that came out of Al Bundy's mouth. 

I also laughed my ass off at everything Al Bundy said but I totally understand your point. Men like Roseanne are called powerful and strong while women are called loud mouth bitches.  

[peacheslatour]

48 minutes ago, Maharincess said:

I also laughed my ass off at everything Al Bundy said but I totally understand your point. Men like Roseanne are called powerful and strong while women are called loud mouth bitches.  

Yep. Either way she was revolutionary.

[readster]

It's funny even given current times in Illinois now, Roseanne might still find a place in this day and age. We will see, but I also agree, Roseanne showed a family that I could completely related too, even now. Differences was, I tried to be more peace keeper than hold onto old grudges. Something that I hope is shown on the revival is that Darlene accomplished Roseanne's dream of being a writer and that Becky  most likely fell into the same life that she constantly complained she didn't want. Also, I was a big Al Bundy fan myself.

[Kromm]

On 7/5/2017 at 4:26 PM, peacheslatour said:

I also remember her being called a loud mouthed, screeching bitch by the same people who laughed uproariously at every stupid thing that came out of Al Bundy's mouth. 

I don't think we need to rewrite reality though. Roseanne could be loud and screetchy. But it was to a point, not just random--at least on the show. But during the height of her success there were a lot of truly cringeworthy moments from her outside of the show (often at the side of icky Tom Arnold). So I always understood why some people were just plain irritated by or scornful of her. But at the same time, most of those people weren't watching the show anyway and so didn't have input into the fact that she's clever and funny as well as loud-mouthed.

These days many of the people stuck on her being a "loudmouth" are possibly coming more at it from a political direction. She's made her views on things pretty clear in the years since the show, and we live in a country where 38% of the people seem to outright hate the things she represents. But neither her views, nor the direction of that part of society, were nearly as clear back in the 90s.

Edited July 8, 2017 by Kromm

[Automne]

On 7/7/2017 at 8:16 AM, readster said:

Something that I hope is shown on the revival is that Darlene accomplished Roseanne's dream of being a writer and that Becky most likely fell into the same life that she constantly complained she didn't want.

 

I was coming here to say this exact thing. I want to see Becky unhappily married to Mark with a few children living a similarly impoverished life in which she grew up and a teenage daughter as bratty, self-absorbed, and spoiled as she was. Becky was somebody bound and determined to throw away all her potential for Mark. Darlene was a crap student, but she had drive once she found something she was passionate about. Becky was a straight-A student and could've worked her way into college via academic and financial hardship scholarships supplemented by loans (and this was before college cost six figures for just a bachelor's). But as soon as Mark came into the picture, she was willing to stay in a dead town so he could attempt to work his way up instead of both of them realizing that his skills can be transplanted anywhere and it's more important Becky goes to college. By the end of the show, they were living in a trailer expecting a baby.

Though, let's be real, Darlene and David probably wouldn't be that much better off. What people tend to overlook (or outright ignore) about Roseanne is that part of their impoverished life can be attributed to having children way too early. Doing the math, Becky was born when Roseanne was 19/20 years old and before she and Dan could establish themselves financially. Becky and Darlene have repeated that cycle and times only got harder for those in poverty. While Roseanne and Dan managed to somehow buy a house and keep up with the mortgage, that's going to be harder (if not impossible) for Becky and Darlene, even in a town an hour or two away from Chicago. And Darlene's daughter may likely be special needs; Harris managed to miraculously not die, but there could be lasting effects.

Edited July 16, 2017 by Automne

[Bastet]

47 minutes ago, Automne said:

Doing the math, Becky was born when Roseanne was 19/20 years old

When Becky is 14, Roseanne is 36 (and a half, heh -- per the exchange between Becky and Roseanne in the episode where Becky and Dana get drunk), so that would put her around 22 when Becky was born.  And I'm actually impressed they waited that long, since they got married pretty much right out of high school.  But some other references to how long they'd been married, might contradict that if we compared it to Becky's age at the time, and indicate them as being younger when she was born; that's just the reference to Roseanne's age and Becky's in the same breath that springs to mind.  Even if 22, though, that's still young, and, indeed, having kids young is one of the many reasons the economic cycle continues. 

Interesting that Darlene was even younger when she gave birth, and Becky about the same age (assuming the pregnancy referred to in the finale did, indeed, result in a child).  I was friends in high school with a girl whose mom had been 17 when she had her, and her grandma had been 15 when she had her mom.  Following the pattern perfectly, she had a kid when she was 19. 

[Automne]

Yeah, I think I got my numbers from how long the show said Dan and Roseanne were married and compared that to Becky's age at the time.

And going back to where Becky would be present-day, now that I think about it, unless they changed the actor, Becky would be a widow. Glenn Quinn (Mark) died back in 2002. If they wrote that in, Becky is now a single mom to at least one child. Single parenthood is another factor for poverty.  I mean, it's not always the case, my mother was widowed when I was still a kid, but we lived comfortably middle class. But that was because my mother had a Ph.D, got married after receiving her degree, and didn't have her first child until she was 30. When you're already living uncomfortably close to the poverty line, one of the worst things that could happen to you is losing the person who provides financial and emotional support and can take care of the kids while you're at work and vice versa.

[Maharincess]

Darlene wouldn't necessarily be living in poverty. She was offered a high paying job while she was still in school so maybe she ended up being a success. Having a baby young doesn't mean she can't land a great job. I see David as more of a primary caregiver to their kids than Darlene, I could see him being a stay at home dad.  I can't wait for this thing to air, has anybody heard when it will be on? 

I'm laying here on the couch watching a Roseanne marathon on TV Land. No matter how many times I've seen these episodes, I still watch it every time it's on. 

Edited July 22, 2017 by Maharincess

[peacheslatour]

On 7/22/2017 at 0:16 AM, Maharincess said:

Darlene wouldn't necessarily be living in poverty. She was offered a high paying job while she was still in school so maybe she ended up being a success. Having a baby young doesn't mean she can't land a great job. I see David as more of a primary caregiver to their kids than Darlene, I could see him being a stay at home dad.  I can't wait for this thing to air, has anybody heard when it will be on? 

I'm laying here on the couch watching a Roseanne marathon on TV Land. No matter how many times I've seen these episodes, I still watch it every time it's on. 

Me too. Except for the one where they all quit their jobs at Wellman. I couldn't stand the Fred Thompson character.

[UYI]

Never mind! That's what you get when you reply to something before you read every post. -_-

Edited July 27, 2017 by UYI

[peacheslatour]

Well Estelle Parsons is 89 and Shelly Winters is deceased. Roseanne herself is 65 as is John Goodman. How funny that Roseanne is now older than her mother was in the series.

[AgentRXS]

Quote

Well Estelle Parsons is 89 and Shelly Winters is deceased. Roseanne herself is 65 as is John Goodman.

Wow. I knew Roseanne and John were getting up there, but I didn't realize they were 65 already. Not that its terribly old.....but damn, time really does fly.  The older I get, the more I can relate to Roseanne's chat with Bev about getting older. In my mind, I sometimes feel like  a teenager trapped in a 30-somethings body....until I'm actually around today's youth LOL.

Edited July 28, 2017 by AgentRXS

[StaceyNotStacie]

10 hours ago, AgentRXS said:

Wow. I knew Roseanne and John were getting up there, but I didn't realize they were 65 already. Not that its terribly old.....but damn, time really does fly.  The older I get, the more I can relate to Roseanne's chat with Bev about getting older. In my mind, I'm sometimes feel like  a teenager trapped in a 30-somethings body....until I'm actually around today's youth LOL.

I wonder how their ages will affect the dynamics of the show. Will they still be the leads or will it be more like Fuller House where the kids and grandkids are the main characters and they're more like the grandparents in the background. I know the show is still called Roseanne, but I wonder if they'll still have the majority of the focus, especially if all of the "kids" have families of their own. 

[Lava VaVoom]

This might clear up a thing or two.

http://www.showbiz411.com/2017/07/31/exclusive-roseanne-revival-will-feature-gender-creative-9-year-old-son-of-darlene-and-david

[Mmmfloorpie]

15 hours ago, Lava VaVoom said:

This might clear up a thing or two.

http://www.showbiz411.com/2017/07/31/exclusive-roseanne-revival-will-feature-gender-creative-9-year-old-son-of-darlene-and-david

Ugh.

We love Roseanne for the authenticity of the stories and the impeccable writing. Not because the first lesbian kiss or whatever.

Any article that mentions Roseanne being groundbreaking because of the gay issues or abortion issues it tackled has lost me.

It was groundbreaking because it showed a working class family struggling in a tough economy with realistic people. Not the Cleavers living in a perfect world where father knows best.

[readster]

2 minutes ago, Mmmfloorpie said:

Ugh.

We love Roseanne for the authenticity of the stories and the impeccable writing. Not because the first lesbian kiss or whatever.

Any article that mentions Roseanne being groundbreaking because of the gay issues or abortion issues it tackled has lost me.

It was groundbreaking because it showed a working class family struggling in a tough economy with realistic people. Not the Cleavers living in a perfect world where father knows best.

How very true, and as much as they want to throw in: "gay, abortion, ect" as ground breaking. The real ground breaking was the portrayal of struggling working class family who had to deal with world issues like everyone else. I mean, the way they reacted to Leon being gay was very: "Well, you hear it and now we know someone who is." Even Dan's reaction to Nancy wanting to get pregnant was very normal reaction or how they had to deal with Darlene's depression or abuse from other family and even if you are the bigger person, doesn't mean people won't throw it back in their face. Despite how much I hated The Connors' neighbors over the years it was well written and acted. 

[StaceyNotStacie]

2 hours ago, readster said:

How very true, and as much as they want to throw in: "gay, abortion, ect" as ground breaking. The real ground breaking was the portrayal of struggling working class family who had to deal with world issues like everyone else. I mean, the way they reacted to Leon being gay was very: "Well, you hear it and now we know someone who is." Even Dan's reaction to Nancy wanting to get pregnant was very normal reaction or how they had to deal with Darlene's depression or abuse from other family and even if you are the bigger person, doesn't mean people won't throw it back in their face. Despite how much I hated The Connors' neighbors over the years it was well written and acted. 

That's what I loved about the show. They acted like Leon being gay was no big deal and treated him and his husband like members of the family. I have no problem with the way they portray the son as long as they just go with it and don't make it a large focus of the show. Now that I know that the boy's name will be Mark, I wonder how they'll explain the absence of the original Mark (I'm assuming that the character has died tragically and they named their son after him to honor his memory). 

[Bastet]

The show was its usual outstanding, realistic self with how it presented the difference in Dan's reaction to Darlene engaging in activities traditionally defined as masculine versus his reaction to D.J. showing an interest in those traditionally defined as feminine. 

Darlene and David would be a great pair of parents to raise a gender creative child, so I'm interested to see how this is played.

I'm also curious what they'll write as Mark's cause of death. 

[Mmmfloorpie]

1 hour ago, Bastet said:

 

I'm also curious what they'll write as Mark's cause of death. 

I hope it is a somber reason and not a joke reason. Roseanne used to say he was killed in Iraq. That is a joke reason.

Quinn's death should be treated with respect. The fact they are naming Darlene and David's son Mark is a good sign of respect I think.

In the penultimate episode of the series they say Becky is expecting. So will their child be apart of the show?

Also, Quinn died in 2002 but that doesn't mean the character of Mark did too.

Might be cliche but it could be a good reason to get Becky to move back to 714 Delaware due to Mark's recent death. 

Make Darlene be chronically unemployed because she became a famous tv writer but was laid off during the reality tv craze of the 00s and ever since she's gone back to being the "daughter of death". They live with Dan and Roseanne too while David still works at the Pizza King.

Estelle Parsons lives with them too because she eventually did manage to alienate everyone at the retirement home so they kicked her out.

It practically writes itself.

Edited August 2, 2017 by Mmmfloorpie

[StaceyNotStacie]

7 minutes ago, Mmmfloorpie said:

I hope it is a somber reason and not a joke reason. Roseanne used to say he was killed in Iraq. That is a joke reason.

Quinn's death should be treated with respect. The fact they are naming Darlene and David's son Mark is a good sign of respect I think.

In the penultimate episode of the series they say Becky is expecting. So will their child be apart of the show?

Also, Quinn died in 2002 but that doesn't mean the character of Mark did too.

Might be cliche but it could be a good reason to get Becky to move back to 714 Delaware due to Mark's recent death. 

Make Darlene be chronically unemployed because she became a famous tv writer but was laid off during the reality tv craze of the 00s and ever since she's gone back to being the "daughter of death". They live with Dan and Roseanne too while David still works at the Pizza King.

Estelle Parsons lives with them too because she eventually did manage to alienate everyone at the retirement home so they kicked her out.

It practically writes itself.

Maybe one of the kids end up buying the house next door. It's been up for rent/sale so many times that I'm surprised Roseanne didn't buy the house after winning the lottery so that Becky and Mark could live there instead of the trailer park. 

[peacheslatour]

3 hours ago, Mmmfloorpie said:

I hope it is a somber reason and not a joke reason. Roseanne used to say he was killed in Iraq. That is a joke reason.

Quinn's death should be treated with respect. The fact they are naming Darlene and David's son Mark is a good sign of respect I think.

In the penultimate episode of the series they say Becky is expecting. So will their child be apart of the show?

Also, Quinn died in 2002 but that doesn't mean the character of Mark did too.

Might be cliche but it could be a good reason to get Becky to move back to 714 Delaware due to Mark's recent death. 

Make Darlene be chronically unemployed because she became a famous tv writer but was laid off during the reality tv craze of the 00s and ever since she's gone back to being the "daughter of death". They live with Dan and Roseanne too while David still works at the Pizza King.

Estelle Parsons lives with them too because she eventually did manage to alienate everyone at the retirement home so they kicked her out.

It practically writes itself.

Geez, how many bedrooms does that house have?

[StaceyNotStacie]

8 minutes ago, peacheslatour said:

Geez, how many bedrooms does that house have?

I think two upstairs, the master downstairs and the basement. 

[peacheslatour]

Just now, Stacey1014 said:

I think two upstairs, the master downstairs and the basement. 

That's what I thought. I was always kind of amazed at the way they talked about that house as if it were some kind of a hovel. I mean they have 3 bedrooms, 2 full baths, a finished basement and a detached garage. I would kill for a house like that.

[Bastet]

Yes, the girls' room (that became Becky and Mark's), D.J.'s room, the master bedroom, and the converted basement.  Of course, Dan's a contractor, so he could have added on; maybe a garage apartment.

I don't want everyone to be living together in the revival, though; it's such a sitcom cliché that adult kids inevitably stay in/quickly return to the nest (although less of one here, since this family is more likely than most on TV to have economic circumstances force them into multi-generational living).  Especially in a limited-run series, there's no need to put everyone under the same roof to explain most of the action taking place in one home.  I'd like to see David, Darlene, and their kids with their own place, D.J. living someplace we never see (maybe he and Andy have an apartment) so we just see him when he comes over to the house, and Becky and her kid living with Dan and Roseanne since Mark died.  Darlene and family would be over plenty without needing to live there in order to have their frequent presence make sense.

Oh, shit, I forgot Jerry.  Well, he's in his early 20s, so he can be off at college somewhere.

Bev could be living with Jackie, heh, if they don't want her to still be in that "this is your room until you croak, then we shuffle in the next old person" place.  In fact, I think I'd like Bev to be temporarily staying with Jackie for some reason as the revival opens or gets going; that's guaranteed comedy, and temporarily staying together isn't unprecedented for them.

[StaceyNotStacie]

I'm kind of hoping that they stick to the lottery storyline. I wouldn't be surprised if they blew through their money or lost it in a Ponzi scheme and they're back to where they started. 

[peacheslatour]

2 minutes ago, Stacey1014 said:

I'm kind of hoping that they stick to the lottery storyline. I wouldn't be surprised if they blew through their money or lost it in a Ponzi scheme and they're back to where they started. 

Roesanne said at the end of Into That Good Night Part 2 that they never won the lottery and that she made it up for the book. It would be dishonest to ignore that.

[Mmmfloorpie]

15 hours ago, Bastet said:

Yes, the girls' room (that became Becky and Mark's), D.J.'s room, the master bedroom, and the converted basement.  Of course, Dan's a contractor, so he could have added on; maybe a garage apartment.

I don't want everyone to be living together in the revival, though; it's such a sitcom cliché that adult kids inevitably stay in/quickly return to the nest (although less of one here, since this family is more likely than most on TV to have economic circumstances force them into multi-generational living).  Especially in a limited-run series, there's no need to put everyone under the same roof to explain most of the action taking place in one home.  I'd like to see David, Darlene, and their kids with their own place, D.J. living someplace we never see (maybe he and Andy have an apartment) so we just see him when he comes over to the house, and Becky and her kid living with Dan and Roseanne since Mark died.  Darlene and family would be over plenty without needing to live there in order to have their frequent presence make sense.

Oh, shit, I forgot Jerry.  Well, he's in his early 20s, so he can be off at college somewhere.

Bev could be living with Jackie, heh, if they don't want her to still be in that "this is your room until you croak, then we shuffle in the next old person" place.  In fact, I think I'd like Bev to be temporarily staying with Jackie for some reason as the revival opens or gets going; that's guaranteed comedy, and temporarily staying together isn't unprecedented for them.

I know it's cliche and it's a limited run series, but I think they have to put them in close quarters for the revival to work.

The thing I hated about Fuller House was that most of the original cast just had cameos and it focused on DJs kids. I don't give a flying turd about DJs kids, I want to see the original cast in similar situations as the original series.

The reason there is a Fuller House is the nostalgia effect from the people who grew up on the original. Nobody would care if it was a standalone series.

I don't want to see the same with Roseanne. I don't want the revival to be about Darlene's kids while the original cast only appears in the first episode. "Situation comedies" are premised on putting colourful characters in comedic situations. If they all have their own places then concocting reasons to get them together would sap a lot of the creative energy of the show. In reality, Darlene and David would be living in Chicago and if the show is going to revolve around their kids, then it wouldn't be set in Lanford/at 714 Delaware.

Therefore, there has to be some reason everyone goes back to Lanford. It won't work if they are all off leading their own lives. Them all being happy, successfully adults would be the Cleaver approach to a revival. This is Roseanne and it has to be gritty.

15 hours ago, peacheslatour said:

Roesanne said at the end of Into That Good Night Part 2 that they never won the lottery and that she made it up for the book. It would be dishonest to ignore that.

As dishonest as saying the entire run of the show didn't really exist and it was just a story Roseanne wrote? Lol.

Edited August 3, 2017 by Mmmfloorpie

[peacheslatour]

Quote

As dishonest as saying the entire run of the show didn't really exist and it was just a story Roseanne wrote? Lol.

They never said the entire run of the show didn't exist, just that they never won the lottery, that Dan had died and she switched some of the couples around. Basically trying to justify the horrible last season of the show.

Edited August 3, 2017 by peacheslatour

[Mmmfloorpie]

5 minutes ago, peacheslatour said:

They never said the entire run of the show didn't exist, just that they never won the lottery, that Dan had died and she switched some of the couples around. Basically trying to justify the horrible last season of the show.

Wasn't the first episode Mark appeared in in season 2? Lol. 

If she switched the couples it would have gone all the way back to his first appearance.

Edited August 3, 2017 by Mmmfloorpie

[peacheslatour]

Well then I guess nothing ever happened, there was no show and I don't know what the hell we're talking about.

[Mmmfloorpie]

12 hours ago, peacheslatour said:

Well then I guess nothing ever happened, there was no show and I don't know what the hell we're talking about.

That's why people got so mad about the finale... It wasn't just that season 9 was fake, it was that the whole series was.

[Lava VaVoom]

Please explain to me:  if Dan died in the series, how will they bring the character back into the family for the revival?

[DXD526]

I was wondering about Dan, as well. Is he dead or not? What's canon and what isn't at this point? That article talks about Darlene and David's kids, when the final episode switched mates for Darlene and Becky, and Darlene was married to Mark. So Darlene and David still being a couple goes against what Roseanne said in the final ep. It looks like this reboot might be all over the map. Expect just about anything.

[Bastet]

With Dan alive, Darlene married to David, and Becky having been married to Mark, it seems clear they are ignoring the finale's revelations.  No one has said yet (at least that I've seen), though, how they're going to handle that discrepancy.

Perhaps just ignore it, although this is a series with a history of poking fun at its obvious inconsistencies (e.g. the two Beckys), so I doubt that.  Maybe the whole final season will be said to have been a dream -- Roseanne dreamed that Dan died, and baby Harris nearly died, and she dealt with it all by writing a book about her life, in which she got to make people do what she wanted plus do crazy things like win the lottery.

Hopefully something more clever and original. 

But whatever they do to explain away the finale's revelations, I think it will be quick -- make the joke and move on.

[peacheslatour]

As far as I'm concerned the whole last season never happened.

[legaleagle53]

On 8/4/2017 at 4:17 PM, Bastet said:

With Dan alive, Darlene married to David, and Becky having been married to Mark, it seems clear they are ignoring the finale's revelations.  No one has said yet (at least that I've seen), though, how they're going to handle that discrepancy.

Perhaps just ignore it, although this is a series with a history of poking fun at its obvious inconsistencies (e.g. the two Beckys), so I doubt that.  Maybe the whole final season will be said to have been a dream -- Roseanne dreamed that Dan died, and baby Harris nearly died, and she dealt with it all by writing a book about her life, in which she got to make people do what she wanted plus do crazy things like win the lottery.

Hopefully something more clever and original. 

But whatever they do to explain away the finale's revelations, I think it will be quick -- make the joke and move on.

Here's your explanation.  They're ignoring the finale.

[Bastet]

1 hour ago, legaleagle53 said:

Here's your explanation.  They're ignoring the finale.

Oh, I know the finale revelations will be dismissed; as I said, with Dan alive, Darlene married to David, and Becky having been married to Mark, that's clear.  What remains to be seen is if they address that discrepancy in any way in these revival episodes, or just act as if the finale never existed.  This quote from that article makes me think they might do as I suspect, which is to make a joke about it (I think they might ignore the husband switch discrepancy altogether, but I definitely expect a joke about Dan):

Quote

“I don’t want to talk too specifically, but I wouldn’t say we’ll ignore the events of the finale,” ABC Entertainment President Channing Dungey told reporters Sunday in Beverly Hills, Calif. “Dan is definitely still alive.”

[legaleagle53]

2 minutes ago, Bastet said:

Oh, I know the finale revelations will be dismissed; as I said, with Dan alive, Darlene married to David, and Becky having been married to Mark, that's clear.  What remains to be seen is if they address that discrepancy in any way in these revival episodes, or just act as if the finale never existed.  This quote from that article makes me think they might do as I suspect, which is to make a joke about it (I think they might ignore the husband switch discrepancy altogether, but I definitely expect a joke about Dan):

He can't have it both ways.  Either Dan never died and the finale played out as it did before the "twist" at the end revealed that Roseanne had made the whole thing up, or Dan is dead and that's the reality that they're stuck with. He can't logically say that Dan is still alive while claiming that "we're not ignoring the finale." Such a statement would be ludicrous on its face if it didn't so blatantly insult everyone's intelligence.

[Bastet]

Because of the way he said it - basically, a "Welllll, we're not ignoring it entirely, but Dan is alive" - I think they're going to make a joke about it and move on.  Viewers will either call bullshit and tune out, or just be happy Dan is alive and the daughters were married to the right guys, and accept that the "it was all a book" revelation has to be hand-waved away for that to be true, and settle in to watch.  I'm going to be in the latter camp.

[Mmmfloorpie]

2 hours ago, legaleagle53 said:

He can't have it both ways.  Either Dan never died and the finale played out as it did before the "twist" at the end revealed that Roseanne had made the whole thing up, or Dan is dead and that's the reality that they're stuck with. He can't logically say that Dan is still alive while claiming that "we're not ignoring the finale." Such a statement would be ludicrous on its face if it didn't so blatantly insult everyone's intelligence.

Why can't they have it both ways? In the season 8 Halloween episode Sarah Chalke played a mother trick or treating with her kids while Lecy was Becky.

I suspect all of season 9 will be disregarded and no one will complain.

[legaleagle53]

1 hour ago, Mmmfloorpie said:

Why can't they have it both ways? In the season 8 Halloween episode Sarah Chalke played a mother trick or treating with her kids while Lecy was Becky.

I suspect all of season 9 will be disregarded and no one will complain.

Again, logic. Sarah and Lecy weren't both playing Becky at the same time in that episode. It was more of a inside joke/Easter egg than a deliberate intelligence-insulting retcon.

[peacheslatour]

We were talking about this at a BBQ last night last night and here is what we came up with. We see Roseanne sitting at her typewriter, writing the end of her book. Then we hear Dan calling "Rosie, Roseanne are you coming to bed?"  She re-reads what she has written and goes "Aw this is crap". She then tosses it in the trash and turns to go upstairs to bed.

[UYI]

On 8/3/2017 at 3:32 PM, peacheslatour said:

They never said the entire run of the show didn't exist, just that they never won the lottery, that Dan had died and she switched some of the couples around. Basically trying to justify the horrible last season of the show.

I think the show from Season 3 onward, according to the finale, was supposed to be the book. Or at least the episode in season 3 where Roseanne gets the writing room for her birthday. Which, on its own, is even MORE complicated than just going ahead and saying the entire series was a book. 

[StaceyNotStacie]

If they're ignoring the final episode/season, I wonder what will happen with Jackie and Bev. Will either one be a lesbian since Bev outed herself on Thanksgiving and she said that Jackie was actually the one who was gay. 

I hope that they write that Jackie has had a nice life since the finale. I just watched the episode last night where Fred became interesting and she seemed kind of stuck because she was taking care of Andy. I hope that she found a new husband/wife/partner and maybe had another child or two. I also hope that she's more like the earlier seasons and not the wacky Jackie that she was towards the end. 

[readster]

15 hours ago, Stacey1014 said:

If they're ignoring the final episode/season, I wonder what will happen with Jackie and Bev. Will either one be a lesbian since Bev outed herself on Thanksgiving and she said that Jackie was actually the one who was gay. 

I hope that they write that Jackie has had a nice life since the finale. I just watched the episode last night where Fred became interesting and she seemed kind of stuck because she was taking care of Andy. I hope that she found a new husband/wife/partner and maybe had another child or two. I also hope that she's more like the earlier seasons and not the wacky Jackie that she was towards the end. 

I always liked George O'Keef, and he went on to do Working after Roseanne. I didn't have a major problem with how their marriage ended. I mean, they were both different people, if it wouldn't have been for Andy, they probably would have just moved on in their lives. Plus, Fred was a more lay back guy at home type, Jackie wasn't. The final scene with them at dinner and Jackie says its over and Fred agrees and will pack his things. It's very heartbreaking and well acted. 

[Mmmfloorpie]

18 hours ago, peacheslatour said:

We were talking about this at a BBQ last night last night and here is what we came up with. We see Roseanne sitting at her typewriter, writing the end of her book. Then we hear Dan calling "Rosie, Roseanne are you coming to bed?"  She re-reads what she has written and goes "Aw this is crap". She then tosses it in the trash and turns to go upstairs to bed.

That's awesome! How do you like a post? I just clicked the heart and it only tells me who already liked it...

[peacheslatour]

2 hours ago, Mmmfloorpie said:

That's awesome! How do you like a post? I just clicked the heart and it only tells me who already liked it...

Click directly on the heart. Lol, sometimes I get a message that tells me "you are not allowed to like this user" or some shit. Does anybody else ever get that?