Roseanne: Aftermath

[HadleyFields]

Spoiler

 

On 5/30/2018 at 1:00 AM, Court said:

I

[Picture It. Sicily]

2 hours ago, chocolatine said:

If there's a spinoff with Roseanne being gone, I don't want Dan to get together with either Crystal or Jackie. Both of those pairings would squick me out - Crystal is the mother of his siblings, and Jackie has been like a sister to him for over 40 years. Maybe Marge Dolman, the redhead who worked at the hardware store and who Dan had sex dreams about in the original series, is still available. ;)

The best part about that is that actress played Roseanne in one of the tv movies about her! How hilarious would that be if she replaced her in Dan's heart?

[HadleyFields]

I've been a big proponent of continuing the show without her, I was about to suggest she could donate her earnings to charities. Then I thought of something someone had said here, that Roseanne should've thought about who the President of ABC is before she sent her tweet. I had to Google to find out and, Oh, sweet Mother of Poetic Justice!  There won't be a continuation of the series. 

Edited June 1, 2018 by HadleyFields

[break21]

3 hours ago, 2727 said:

Right! Roseanne (and maybe Matt Williams?) owns these characters. They cannot be resurrected as the same people in another show without paying her. Even putting the cast in a new family comedy with different names would probably result in a lawsuit.

Roseanne, Goodman, Metcalf and Gilbert will be paid for a 2nd season even though it won't be produced.  They will be paid millions for doing nothing.

[Crs97]

Please tell me Roseanne had some sort of morality clause that would negate a paycheck for the nonexistent second season.  Keeping my fingers crossed that she tweeted herself out of those millions.

[mythoughtis]

3 hours ago, chocolatine said:

If there's a spinoff with Roseanne being gone, I don't want Dan to get together with either Crystal or Jackie. Both of those pairings would squick me out - Crystal is the mother of his siblings, and Jackie has been like a sister to him for over 40 years. Maybe Marge Dolman, the redhead who worked at the hardware store and who Dan had sex dreams about in the original series, is still available. ;)

 

Widowed men have often married their sister- in-laws. It happened in my Dads family( one of his brothers)  in the late 1940s. A woman at work married her dead sisters husband and raised her own niece. 

I think Dan and Jackie would be a great couple.  Those two characters would actually have a very happy marriage. 

Edited June 1, 2018 by mythoughtis

[jsbt]

I know one of ABC's specific concerns about the spinoff idea is making sure she can't be compensated during its run (beyond what would likely have to be an initial 'fuck off' payment). I wonder if that's possible. I have my doubts.

Since people are talking about it, if they were to do a, say, "The Conners" spinoff, Dan should not have a love interest of any kind for at least a season or two. The shadow of the big R (as Goodman calls her) is too strong.

[bigskygirl]

 I do not think a marriage between Dan and Jackie would work out. I cannot imagine anyone wanting to be married to Jackie. She seem to be too high maintenance for him.

[CherryAmes]

I know this is all totally hypothetical but I'll play :) given that Dan is 65 (?) and not in the best of health I don't see why they'd even need to bring in a love interest.   Just let him enjoy the peace and quiet!

[SparklesBitch]

19 minutes ago, jsbt said:

Since people are talking about it, if they were to do a, say, "The Conners" spinoff, Dan should not have a love interest of any kind for at least a season or two. The shadow of the big R (as Goodman calls her) is too strong.

I agree. Speaking as someone who loved the episode An Officer and a Gentlemen, I would watch the crap out of “The Conners” if it was a show lead by John, Laurie and Sara. If they could get Michael and Lecy back, even better. Actually, the more I think about this, the more I like the idea. Dan could be healing for the first season or two, and Jackie (if they tone down Wacky Jackie and bring her personality back to circa seasons 1-2) could function as a support system for him while patching up her own life outside of Roseanne’s influence. They’d make great friends, I think, as the two adults who were closest to  Roseanne. I don’t think it should ever be romantic between them, though. 

Then Darlene and Becky and D.J. could each have their own paths with more focus on their jobs and relationships and some grieving for their Mom mixed in there. 

Personally, I never liked Crystal, so they can skip her for all I care, but bring back Chuck and Anne Marie, etc to fill out the cast. That might be fun!! 

Edited June 1, 2018 by SparklesBitch
More thoughts...

[HadleyFields]

25 minutes ago, SparklesBitch said:

 Dan could be healing for the first season or two, and Jackie (if they tone down Wacky Jackie and bring her personality back to circa seasons 1-2) could function as a support system for him while patching up her own life outside of Roseanne’s influence. They’d make great friends, I think, as the two adults who were closest to  Roseanne. I don’t think it should ever be romantic between them, though.

I got sucked right back into the spin-off fantasy!  SparklesBitch, you got me started on a daydream of Dan and Jackie having a slow, drawn out, will they or won't they, relationship like Sam and Diane, Niles and Daphne, and Ross and Rachel did. I love those. I want to see Sarah and John play off of each other in their new roles, too. There's so much potential in this show, I need to have it in my life!

[howiveaddict]

Somewhere Matt Williams , creator of the show, is laughing his head off.  

http://articles.latimes.com/1989-01-26/entertainment/ca-1949_1_hit-show

I only knew all this occured because he is from my home town.  The outside photos , used on the show, are all from here.

[Bastet]

I don't know why a widower would need to have a love interest at all within the one or two half-seasons this hypothetical series would run, but if Dan did, I certainly wouldn't want it to be his stepmom or his sister-in-law.  Crystal marrying Ed was creepy (and stupid) enough, to turn around and get with Dan would be even worse - and that's before I add in how fucking annoying Crystal is.  Jackie and Dan's relationship is fantastic, and I can't see either one being comfortable getting romantically involved even if their shared grief sparked any feelings in that direction - plus the kids would be quite rightly disturbed.

Edited June 1, 2018 by Bastet

[jsbt]

I loved the infamous Dan/Jackie are-they-into-each-other ep from Season 2 which led to Laurie and John Goodman putting their foot down with the network and siding with Roseanne, don't get me wrong. But I think it'd be totally wrong to actually do it, then or now.

[qtpye]

9 hours ago, SparklesBitch said:

I agree. Speaking as someone who loved the episode An Officer and a Gentlemen, I would watch the crap out of “The Conners” if it was a show lead by John, Laurie and Sara. If they could get Michael and Lecy back, even better. Actually, the more I think about this, the more I like the idea. Dan could be healing for the first season or two, and Jackie (if they tone down Wacky Jackie and bring her personality back to circa seasons 1-2) could function as a support system for him while patching up her own life outside of Roseanne’s influence. They’d make great friends, I think, as the two adults who were closest to  Roseanne. I don’t think it should ever be romantic between them, though. 

Then Darlene and Becky and D.J. could each have their own paths with more focus on their jobs and relationships and some grieving for their Mom mixed in there. 

Personally, I never liked Crystal, so they can skip her for all I care, but bring back Chuck and Anne Marie, etc to fill out the cast. That might be fun!! 

The 2nd generation Connors was the most interesting thing about the reboot. I do not need to see that Dan and Roseanne are still making the same mistakes for over 40 years. I would watch a show about Becky, Darlene, and DJ in a heartbeat.

[bigskygirl]

I do not think Darlene's storyline is all that interesting. Darlene is a younger version of Roseanne. I would rather see more of Becky and DJ in the episodes. Bring back the way the character were in the original Seasons One and Two.

Edited June 1, 2018 by bigskygirl

[iMonrey]

Quote

Somewhere Matt Williams , creator of the show, is laughing his head off.  

Maybe, but Roseanne was right back then. The first season of the show just wasn't very good. They didn't know how to write for someone like Roseanne, they were used to writing for housewives like Carol Brady and June Cleaver. That's the only role they knew for women back then.

 

Quote

I do not think Darlene's storyline is all that interesting.

I think the "agenda" for this reboot was a little too bleak considering what we know about these characters. Becky and Darlene were both very smart and capable women. Becky never even had any children so it's hard for me to believe she wound up working as a waitress in her 40s. She could have gone back to school, even community college, and gotten a better job. Nothing was tying her down to Lanford. I realize Dan and Roseanne had more limited opportunities because of their education and responsibilities to their children but that wasn't the case for Darlene or Becky. 

The show was just trying too hard portray the downtrodden without connecting the dots. I just don't understand how Becky and Darlene wound up where they were.

[break21]

One question, if they want to move forward without Roseanne is would Goodman and Metcalf be willing to work without her.  When ABC wanted to fire Roseanne in the original run, they refused to do the show without her.   Now they are more famous, rich and don't need the work.  I can't see Roseanne giving her blessing for the show going on without her and out of loyalty to Roseanne, I can see where they would refuse to do it.  Especially with the writing turnover, I can see a scenario where it just doesn't come together rather than they are able to get everyone on board.

[Neko]

3 hours ago, iMonrey said:

Maybe, but Roseanne was right back then. The first season of the show just wasn't very good. They didn't know how to write for someone like Roseanne, they were used to writing for housewives like Carol Brady and June Cleaver. That's the only role they knew for women back then.

 

I think the "agenda" for this reboot was a little too bleak considering what we know about these characters. Becky and Darlene were both very smart and capable women. Becky never even had any children so it's hard for me to believe she wound up working as a waitress in her 40s. She could have gone back to school, even community college, and gotten a better job. Nothing was tying her down to Lanford. I realize Dan and Roseanne had more limited opportunities because of their education and responsibilities to their children but that wasn't the case for Darlene or Becky. 

The show was just trying too hard portray the downtrodden without connecting the dots. I just don't understand how Becky and Darlene wound up where they were.

I'm 36, childless by choice, reasonably smart and capable, and while I would never describe myself as "downtrodden", I work as a cook.  It happens.

Edited June 1, 2018 by Sweet Summer Child

[Colorado David]

I would love seeing a show with Darlene as a teacher (college would likely be best, more material to work with.) You could have Goodman and Metcalf as teachers as well, and wahtever guest stars would like to come on.

[bigskygirl]

Dan and Jackie would need some college degree before they could be teachers, and with Jackie's personality, I could not see her as a teacher. I also do not see Darlene as a teacher after seeing her poor attitude in her waitress scenes. She is too much like Roseanne to be one.

[LIMOM]

This picture ran with an article in New York Newsday. It is illustrative of the three actors imho.

[qtpye]

Metcalf, Goodman, Becky, Darlene, and DJ with their families would be great. Baby boomers having to get used to life without Roseanne, who has been a giant part of their existence, Gen X kids realizing that they did not do better, but still could build happy lives, and Gen Z trying to find hope in a dying town. It could be good.

[Stiggs]

11 minutes ago, Gigglepuff said:

Yes! And may I add Florida Evans from "Good Times" as a working class TV mom? Not to take away from the original's success and impact, but there were definitely other women who broke the 50's mold before Roseanne came along. 

One Day At a Time is another example, and Alice - they were the working poor. I think the thing that Roseanne did that was great was it didn't solve problems. Sometimes life is hard and it sucks and you still have a happy Christmas anyway. That's life. 

I feel like a show without Roseanne would never work, and a show with her would never work. There are just some things you say or do that have a permanent stank you can't get rid of no matter what, and Roseanne has that stank now. Of all the shit she's pulled over the years, this is her stank. It's such a shame.  

[HoboClayton]

I think this guy got it. And, it's really the only logical way to bring it back. Haha!

 

 

[TheOtherOne]

Now TV Line says ABC is seriously considering a Darlene spinoff.

Roseanne Lives? Sara Gilbert-Fronted Darlene Spinoff Eyed at ABC

Ah, looks like they got it from TMZ, who had it first:

'Roseanne' Reboot Discussions Centered Around Sara Gilbert

Edited June 1, 2018 by TheOtherOne

[willowk]

On 5/31/2018 at 10:34 AM, IDFfm0870 said:

Tom Arnold on Roseanne's tweet and cancellation

Some interesting insight from Roseanne's ex husband.

Thanks for posting -this was great. He mentions that part of her may have wanted the show to be cancelled -self-sabotaging. I had wondered if she might be doing that.

Edited June 1, 2018 by willowk
addition to thoughts

[willowk]

On Hank Stuever's chat (Washington Post) yesterday, someone suggested they add Margo Martindale to the cast if they go on without Roseanne. She could be a cousin or something. I agree with those who said if they do go on, don't have a love interest for Goodman, at least not right away. Heck the Connors just celebrated their 45th wedding anniversary.  However I will note that I have known recent widows /widowers who move on quickly -they don't like being alone. Doesn't mean they didn't love their spouse.

[HoboClayton]

Margo Martindale? So they'll just pick another chubby, brash lady to take her place? That's not going to happen. I love Margo by the way. But, come on. And honestly, I'm not too interested in seeing a sitcom revolved around Sara. They just need to move on. 

[AntiBeeSpray]

36 minutes ago, HoboClayton said:

Margo Martindale? So they'll just pick another chubby, brash lady to take her place? That's not going to happen. I love Margo by the way. But, come on. And honestly, I'm not too interested in seeing a sitcom revolved around Sara. They just need to move on. 

Speaking of a sitcom around Sara: https://www.msn.com/en-us/tv/news/roseanne-reboot-centered-around-sara-gilbert-being-considered-report/ar-AAy7Fa2?li=BBnb7Kx (via TMZ -- so take it with a grain of salt).

I can see what you mean there about moving on, yet I'm a bit interested.

[Fellaway]

Roseanne Without Roseanne? Why ABC Couldn't Fire Roseanne Barr Without Scrapping the Series

[tessaray]

Where Roseanne ranks in the history of sitcoms is interesting - but off-topic for this thread.  You can take it to this new thread:

http://forums.previously.tv/topic/70796-roseanne-in-pop-culture/

Update:  I've moved a bunch of posts there.  If I missed any, let me know.

[babyhouseman]

9 hours ago, iMonrey said:

 

 I just don't understand how Becky and Darlene wound up where they were.

You're right they didn't explain enough. I always thought maybe Becky went off the rails after Mark died and couldn't get herself together. She seemed to be drinking too much.

[bigskygirl]

Yuck! The thought of Darlene getting her own show. Will not be watching a spin off show of her. To me, she is not interesting enough to warrant one.

[Fellaway]

1 hour ago, bigskygirl said:

Yuck! The thought of Darlene getting her own show. Will not be watching a spin off show of her. To me, she is not interesting enough to warrant one.

Yeah, I don't think SG is a good enough actress to carry a show.  Of course, Roseanne was perfectly dreadful as an actress, herself, when her show first started (She did get better.), but she was lucky enough to have John Goodman and Laurie Metcalf to help carry the load from the get, plus chemistry to burn with JG.  Unless SG has that kind of support, too, I don't make such a show lasting long.

Hey, maybe Johnny Galecki could come over when Big Bang ends.  I always liked David way more than Darlene.

[CelticBlackCat]

A show centered around Darlene and her kids?  The character of Harris was terrible and it's hard to believe she's only 15.  The actress who played Harris is a lot older and looks it.  She was an unlikable character.  Mark the fluid-gender boy who wants to wear skirts, kilts and sparkly things?  I don't think America wants to tune in to his antics on a weekly basis.  It was okay as a side-show of the main Connors family, but Darlene will always be connected to the missing David Healy, played by Johnny Galecki, who is in contract with The Big Bang Theory.  I don't think it would really work.

[HadleyFields]

Don't sitcoms usually have up to 6 main actors carrying a show?  John, Laurie, Sarah and Lecy are the 4 adults, maybe the kids could be secondary (like they were in Everybody Loves Raymond), leaving room for additional adult characters. I love the next door neighbors, Darlene could obtain a work friend or two, an old high school acquaintance could enter, and Oh My God! I forgot DJ! His family is so important! Well, there you have it, the cast can be fleshed out beautifully with some more members.

[SpiritSong]

http://money.cnn.com/2018/06/01/media/roseanne-reboot-without-roseanne-barr/index.html

This article mentions that Carsey-Werner would have to buy out Roseanne's financial interest in the show. Might be a good solution.

[bigskygirl]

11 hours ago, Fellaway said:

Yeah, I don't think SG is a good enough actress to carry a show.  Of course, Roseanne was perfectly dreadful as an actress, herself, when her show first started (She did get better.), but she was lucky enough to have John Goodman and Laurie Metcalf to help carry the load from the get, plus chemistry to burn with JG.  Unless SG has that kind of support, too, I don't make such a show lasting long.

Hey, maybe Johnny Galecki could come over when Big Bang ends.  I always liked David way more than Darlene.

I cannot stand David either. I love the one scene when Dan called David out when he made remarks about Mark. Dan told David Mark was a hard working family man who cares about Becky and is trying to make a good life for the both of them while David sat on his whiny behind judging others.

[WarnerCL45]

NO, to ANY kind of reboot.  Just let the show and characters die already.

[CherryAmes]

I can see though that people who were following the reboot would want some closure!  I don't know how they could do that without rebooting the reboot.  From what I've been reading ending the show now leaves viewers wondering more about "what happened next" then it did when the show originally ended.   But that said I don't know if that's a good enough reason to keep the show going.  And of course if they reboot the reboot and it bombs then Roseanne and her apologists are going to be laughing up their sleeves and taking a lot of satisfaction out of that!  Ugh.

Edited June 2, 2018 by CherryAmes

[break21]

But Rosanne was the meal-ticket.  I honestly can't see  any of those actors carrying this show.  She was the draw and everything revolved around her.  It won't work.  IMO - they will get a lot of back-lash for trying to do it without her.  Everyone just needs to move on IMO.  For all of her faults, it's not Rosanne without Rosanne and they can't just kill her off.

[mythoughtis]

With Roseanne gone, the show would naturally gravitate to the others living in the house- Darlene being one of them.  She’s at the similar age in her life that Roseanne was in  the first season of the original. Except she’s divorced.   I’d not be surprised if Darlene’s life became the sort of focus. That doesn’t mean that Dan or Jackie would be any less featured than they are now. With one exception- we wouldn’t be seeing scenes set in Dan’s bedroom.  Dan and Jackie have always been featured in terms of their relationship with Roseanne. Now it would move to their relationship with Darlene. In fact, it might end up being more of an ensemble show. Sara Gilbert does have other things going on and she might prefer it. 

[HadleyFields]

Ensemble Show, that's the ticket!  

[bigskygirl]

1 hour ago, mythoughtis said:

With Roseanne gone, the show would naturally gravitate to the others living in the house- Darlene being one of them.  She’s at the similar age in her life that Roseanne was in  the first season of the original. Except she’s divorced.   I’d not be surprised if Darlene’s life became the sort of focus. That doesn’t mean that Dan or Jackie would be any less featured than they are now. With one exception- we wouldn’t be seeing scenes set in Dan’s bedroom.  Dan and Jackie have always been featured in terms of their relationship with Roseanne. Now it would move to their relationship with Darlene. In fact, it might end up being more of an ensemble show. Sara Gilbert does have other things going on and she might prefer it. 

Sorry but a show about Darlene and her two kids would not be all that great in my opinion. Now if Darlene followed DJ and joined the military or had a job where she has to travel a lot and Dan stepped in to take care of her kids, it might have a chance, a small one at least. I cannot stand Harris at all, and Mark is okay in small doses. I would rather see how DJ tries to adjust to his post military life with his wife still in a dangerous country, and he is raising his daughter. I think that would make a much better story line than Darlene struggling to be a single parent, and the fact is they will probably have David in the story line more, and I cannot stand Darlene and David as a couple.

Edited June 2, 2018 by bigskygirl

[Pete Martell]

On 5/31/2018 at 7:01 PM, chocolatine said:

If there's a spinoff with Roseanne being gone, I don't want Dan to get together with either Crystal or Jackie. Both of those pairings would squick me out - Crystal is the mother of his siblings, and Jackie has been like a sister to him for over 40 years. Maybe Marge Dolman, the redhead who worked at the hardware store and who Dan had sex dreams about in the original series, is still available. ;)

Patrika Darbo was on Bold and the Beautiful a year or two ago, so she's still acting. 

Speaking as someone who couldn't watch the revival due to the Trump stuff and Roseanne Barr herself (I did watch some clips, hypocrite that I am), I'd be willing to try a show that focuses on Darlene, Becky, and DJ and the rest of the supporting cast. I don't have a ton of interest in Dan or Jackie (for me Jackie was destroyed in the last 2-3 years of the original and I just got tired of Dan and what seemed like endless scenes slamming the kitchen door), although I wouldn't be upset if they were also there. I liked what I saw of Sara Gilbert's work (it was a lot like Darlene before she became so needlessly sour in the last 2-3 years of the original) and I was really impressed by Lecy.

I doubt it will happen though. I think the left and the right are too pissed off and Roseanne Barr will still hang over the show, whether Roseanne Conner exists or not.

[Chaos Theory]

I am sorry but the only storyline for a spinoff that makes sense is Darlene and her family.  Regardless of what your feelings for Harris are all the show needs to do is tone down her personality a little and she would be fine.  Add Becky and you have a parallel to Roseanne and Jackie.  Two sisters supporting each other and being each other’s worst enemy.    

[Chit Chat]

2 hours ago, break21 said:

But Rosanne was the meal-ticket.  I honestly can't see  any of those actors carrying this show.  She was the draw and everything revolved around her.  It won't work.  IMO - they will get a lot of back-lash for trying to do it without her.  Everyone just needs to move on IMO.  For all of her faults, it's not Rosanne without Rosanne and they can't just kill her off.

I agree.  Roseanne is the central character that the other characters play off of.  They love her, they get mad at her, they makeup, and in the end, they know that the character Roseanne loves them, no matter what twisted way she went about disciplining and taking care of them.  IMO, it doesn't work without her.  On a personal note, I do not condone what she said nor do I apologize for her, but some in the media want to practically burn her at the stake.  It's getting to be a little much, IMO.  Maybe those in the media can take a cue from Valerie Jarrett and try to handle this as gracefully as she did.   Kudos to her for her cool head in a difficult situation. 

[Neiman]

19 hours ago, bigskygirl said:

Yuck! The thought of Darlene getting her own show. Will not be watching a spin off show of her. To me, she is not interesting enough to warrant one.

I agree!  This whole season I kept thinking that the parts with Darlene (and her daughter and son) were my least favorite. I certainly won't be tuning in if this happens.

I realize there were creators of the series, but they based a lot of the character on Roseanne's stand-up routine.  Then Roseanne eventually became executive producer and provided behind-the-scenes input.  I wonder if she has any ownership rights to the characters or show.  

[TattleTeeny]

5 hours ago, bigskygirl said:

Sorry but a show about Darlene and her two kids would not be all that great in my opinion. Now if Darlene followed DJ and joined the military or had a job where she has to travel a lot and Dan stepped in to take care of her kids, it might have a chance, a small one at least. I cannot stand Harris at all, and Mark is okay in small doses. I would rather see how DJ tries to adjust to his post military life with his wife still in a dangerous country, and he is raising his daughter. I think that would make a much better story line than Darlene struggling to be a single parent, and the fact is they will probably have David in the story line more, and I cannot stand Darlene and David as a couple.

 

That has become clear. While I think there is definitely more to the Conners than just Darlene (I'm partial to Becky and Dan) and don't see why a hypothetical show would need to revolve around her when there are so many other strong actors in the cast, I personally have no problem with her being the linchpin of it. Of course, opinions do vary as evidenced by the fact that some of us don't have deep-rooted problems with Darlene. Either way, judging from how many of us here wish we knew what's happened over the intervening years, everyone involved could have a story line or at least an episode in which he or she is the focus.

Edited June 2, 2018 by TattleTeeny