The Conners

[tessaray]

15 minutes ago, janie jones said:

If Roseanne owns the character of Roseanne, does she get money if they mention the character?

I believe the articles have been saying that she has given up any claim to benefit financially from the spin-off, so I'd say no.  (For a nice multi-million payout, most likely.)

The Writers Guild has said the new show will still need to carry her "based on a character created by Roseanne Barr" credit, so she'll still have some presence. 

[Brn2bwild]

11 hours ago, mythoughtis said:

I think a death during knee surgery is suitable. It’s realistic, although not common. They can tie in her existing health issues as being risk factors, etc. They don’t have to dwell on it as they can a have time jump, and they even can do what I suggested a while back. Break the 4th wall.  Have Sara Gilbert do a video stating they removed Roseanne, the actress.  Therefore, they will go forward with Dan as a widower.  The characters cause of death is x, but there will be no big scenes about it. 

 

But don’t do what the comedy that they brought Leah Remini into did.  

It would be really darkly ironic if the cause of death was Roseanne asphyxiating due to eating that huge meal too soon before the operation...

[mythoughtis]

46 minutes ago, Brn2bwild said:

It would be really darkly ironic if the cause of death was Roseanne asphyxiating due to eating that huge meal too soon before the operation...

I really thought scene that was odd. I’ve never heard of anyone being told not to eat after 8pm for a morning surgery, usually it’s midnight.  The one exception being all the stuff you have to go the the day before a colonoscopy. 

Edited June 23, 2018 by mythoughtis

[bigskygirl]

11 minutes ago, mythoughtis said:

I really thought scene that was odd. I’ve never heard of anyone being told not to eat after 8pm for a morning surgery, usually it’s midnight.  The one exception being all the stuff you hqv to go the the day before a colonoscopy. 

I think doctors will tell the patient to eat light and drink certain liquids the day before surgery. What she was eating and how much she was eating might not have been a good idea.

[mythoughtis]

27 minutes ago, bigskygirl said:

I think doctors will tell the patient to eat light and drink certain liquids the day before surgery. What she was eating and how much she was eating might not have been a good idea.

The only time the doctors told me what to eat( as opposed to when to stop) before surgery was for my colonoscopy.  For that, they said eat light two days before surgery, eat only jello type food the day before  surgery. Plus all that nasty tasting drink  you have to drink. 

I will agree that there was enough food on that table for an entire days’ 3 meals for the Conners.

[Rap541]

Quote

I do not accept that Trapper John, MD was a MASH spinoff. It didn't star Wayne Rogers (or Elliot Gould) and had no detectable connection to MASH. Plus, it took place about 30 years later.

You pretty much have to catch the very first episode. There's a scene where  a helicopter is coming to the hospital with a patient. Then a cut inside to a framed photo of Trapper and Hawkeye in front of their tent with the pole that had all the cities in the states. Trapper is sleeping on the couch in his office, and he's clearly dreaming of the war as scenes from Mash are played, and wakes with a start because a nurse wakes him up with the comment that choppers are dumping casualties. He mutters "Hawkeye, Radar.... Where's Hawkeye?" and the nurse is all "its not the war, that was thirty years ago ad I don't have time for your altheimers shit!" OK, I may be making up THAT line but.... Most of the first episode is talk about Korea, and how Gonzo was a surgeon in 'Nam and heard all the stories etc. Then it's never spoken of again but it IS there.

To keep this on Roseanne, ;) , honestly it's really very easy for Roseanne to have died while under. There's a lot of ways surgery can kill you. I will admit, I kind of love the idea of the show starting with everyone coming in from the funeral. I really hope this means we get the wacky Jackie stuff stopped for a bit, or toned down. Like someone else said, I'd like to see Darlene be successful as a writer. I'd also like just a better wrap up for the show.

And I admit.... I kinda want to see Dan/Jackie. 

[Cherpumple]

I think it would be hilarious if they went the Maris from Frasier (or Stan from Will & Grace) route. She's still technically around, but she's always somewhere off-screen: getting groceries, napping, at work, visiting Bev, etc. That way they could avoid all the depressing death storylines that would no doubt dominate the whole season if they killed her. And the writers could really have fun coming up with increasingly ridiculous reasons why she's not around. I don't think they'd really do this, but it would make me laugh.

Edited June 23, 2018 by Cherpumple

[TigerLynx]

I'm not sure if this is true are not:  Supposedly the network had already contracted for the next season (10 episodes), and they were going to have to pay for it whether it was made or not which is one of the reasons they decided to buy Roseanne out.

I think killing off Roseanne while she is having knee surgery is a good idea.  With Darlene and her children living with Dan, I think John Goodman could be featured a lot, and he has tons of fans.  He's also a good comedic and dramatic actor.  My favorite scenes of the original series are when Dan is interacting with Darlene or Becky, or sometimes Jackie and Crystel.

Edited June 23, 2018 by TigerLynx

[snarkylady]

cause of death:  Roseanne fails to inform her anesthesiologist how much Ambien she took the night before surgery, the anesthesia he uses is specifically contraindicated for Ambien

[tessaray]

2 hours ago, TigerLynx said:

I'm not sure if this is true are not:  Supposedly the network had already contracted for the next season (10 episodes), and they were going to have to pay for it whether it was made or not which is one of the reasons they decided to buy Roseanne out.

 

The leads - Roseanne, John Goodman, Laurie Metcalf, and Sara Gilbert were all going to get paid for 10 episodes at 250,000 - 300,000 (the number varies in reports I've seen) no matter what.  If the new show makes any money at all, they made the right choice.  If it tanks, then they've thrown good money after bad. But that's the gamble networks take with shows all the time. 

ETA:  I'm not sure about Roseanne.  They might have been able to get out of paying her if they fired her for cause.  But no doubt it would have ended up in court if they didn't. Whatever they paid to make her go away was probably worth it for a fresh start with the spin-off.  

[Rap541]

Quote

I think it would be hilarious if they went the Maris from Frasier (or Stan from Will & Grace) route. She's still technically around, but she's always somewhere off-screen: getting groceries, napping, at work, visiting Bev, etc. That way they could avoid all the depressing death storylines that would no doubt dominate the whole season if they killed her. And the writers could really have fun coming up with increasingly ridiculous reasons why she's not around. I don't think they'd really do this, but it would make me laugh.

I have to be honest, if they did this, I would stop watching. It was cute on Frasier because Maris wasn't mentioned every episode and because she wasn't actually a character who ever appeared on the show. The big "WHY IS ROSEANNE NO LONGER ON THE SHOW" reason is clearly known - I don't need a fucking lecture from Sara Gilbert to explain it to me at the start of the new season - but "tee hee Roseanne is at the SSN office AGAIN" for an entire season is just stupid and disrespectful to the audience who are all well aware that Roseanne won't be on the show anymore.

[chocolatine]

I hope the writers go with an exit that requires as little mention of Roseanne as possible. If that means she decided to join Jerry on the fishing boat that doesn't allow communication with the outside world, I'm all for it.

[BlossomCulp]

I've long since stopped second guessing what direction writers will take but IMO I don't think they have much choice but to kill off the character.  Divorce makes no sense as Roseanne would still have contact with the family and writing it so she's just continually off-screen would get pretty tedious after awhile.  It's how they choose to handle it that may make or break the show.  I just hope they don't go the Lorre route and have her killed off while doing something gross or despicable.  Give the character of Roseanne a decent burial if nothing else.  Whatever Roseanne Barr the person has done (and I make no defense of her at all) many of us grew up with the character and grew to love her, warts and all.

[WarnerCL45]

11 hours ago, Cherpumple said:

That way they could avoid all the depressing death storylines that would no doubt dominate the whole season if they killed her.

They would kill her off as they did the wife character in "Kevin Can Wait" and then never mention her again.  Of course, the viewers would have their knickers in a twist because they like a tidy ending.

[CherryAmes]

I really hope if they go the death route, and honestly I don't see how else they can handle the loss of such a core character, that they give her a real death and explain what happened.  I don't care if it's just a throwaway line or two and they've picked up say 6 months after the death, but they have to say something.   Well I think they have to anyway!

Edited June 23, 2018 by CherryAmes

[Camera One]

It's a tricky issue because Rosanne's death would be a source of story and emotion, especially for Dan.  But a mourning storyline for Season 2 would mean Rosanne (through her absence) would still ultimately be front and center of the narrative.  A time jump is a good idea since they could focus on the struggles of a widower and who would pick up the slack with all the stuff Rosanne used to do around the house.  

I never watched the original show, but I did watch this season.  I think it was Rosanne's interactions with everyone which was the main draw.  The supporting characters were alright but without knowing their histories, I didn't connect with them too much.  Harris just annoyed me, so an increased focus on her would drive me out.

[Pallas]

The creative team could also do to season 10 what they did to season 9:  

If season 10 is no longer canon, Roseanne (rather than Dan) could have died shortly after Darlene's wedding. Or at any time in the last 22 years. The show could then catch up with the Connors in the fall of 2018. The characters viewers would be spared the immediate grief, or much discussion of Roseanne: who died as the woman we knew. 

[ketose]

14 hours ago, Cherpumple said:

I think it would be hilarious if they went the Maris from Frasier (or Stan from Will & Grace) route. She's still technically around, but she's always somewhere off-screen: getting groceries, napping, at work, visiting Bev, etc. That way they could avoid all the depressing death storylines that would no doubt dominate the whole season if they killed her. And the writers could really have fun coming up with increasingly ridiculous reasons why she's not around. I don't think they'd really do this, but it would make me laugh.

Reminds me of Reba, where Kyra disappeared for chunks of the series.

[Spencer Hastings]

Roseanne will definitely die from surgery complications.  They couldn’t have set that “out” up in a better way. 

They might have an episode or two showing how the family mourns, with the next season beginning post-funeral but I think a time jump would be wise. 10 episodes isn’t enough time to show them mourning and then how they survive.  They’re really going to need to pace themselves. 

[CatsAndMoreCats]

On 6/22/2018 at 4:17 PM, ketose said:

I do not accept that Trapper John, MD was a MASH spinoff. It didn't star Wayne Rogers (or Elliot Gould) and had no detectable connection to MASH. Plus, it took place about 30 years later.

I have a suggestion for a theme song

On 6/22/2018 at 4:17 PM, ketose said:

I do not accept that Trapper John, MD was a MASH spinoff. It didn't star Wayne Rogers (or Elliot Gould) and had no detectable connection to MASH. Plus, it took place about 30 years later.

I have a suggestion for a theme song

Oh thank you for not posting "Go Cubs Go."  I would have needed a barf bucket for that one.

[tessaray]

Opening with a post funeral scene versus opening with a time jump - the former would let us meet Jerry and Andy before they sweep them off screen again.  The latter would probably be a bit more practical for the comedy aspect. 

Honestly, if they don't at least let us know where those 2 are, they haven't been listening to the fans at all. And they won't be able to blame Roseanne for it this time. 

[Bastet]

2 minutes ago, tessaray said:

Honestly, if they don't at least let us know where those 2 are, they haven't been listening to the fans at all.

Wasn't it said they were planning on catching us up with them in the second revival season?  I don't remember if it was a "If we get another season, we'll get into it" or a "Now that we've been renewed for another season, we'll get into it" situation, but I am fairly certain the sentiment was expressed.  If so, they'll probably stick with that plan for this spinoff -- spinoffs need to blend old and new characters, and Jerry and Andy qualify as both.

[Cherpumple]

3 hours ago, Pallas said:

f season 10 is no longer canon, Roseanne (rather than Dan) could have died shortly after Darlene's wedding. Or at any time in the last 22 years. The show could then catch up with the Connors in the fall of 2018. The characters viewers would be spared the immediate grief, or much discussion of Roseanne: who died as the woman we knew. 

This would be a big ask for the audience, but it could be interesting. If they did go this way, I hope the Conners' circumstances aren't quite so grim. One thing that annoyed me about season 10 was how depressing it was. There didn't seem to be a single character who was happy or succeeding at anything.

[CherryAmes]

4 minutes ago, Cherpumple said:

There didn't seem to be a single character who was happy or succeeding at anything.

That's too bad and I agree with you and hope they take a different road with The Connors.  One of the reasons a lot of us tuned into Roseanne - the Original was because the family had believable problems but they could still find happiness in the little things.  If I want sad, grim reality on TV I have places other than a sitcom to go to for that!

[Mmmfloorpie]

On 6/22/2018 at 7:59 PM, Twilight Man said:

Don't forget "The Hogan Family" ---- speaking of which -----

They did make fun of recasting Becky by having the family watching "Bewitched" and complaining about the Two Darrins.

I seriously believe that they would poke fun at themselves once again.

 

I keep complaining to DC Comics --- I totally said that Batman was going to do that. Where's my paycheck??

I knew all along that there was another Power Girl --- are you going to pay me for this???

DON'T HOLD YOUR BREATH!!!  I'M STILL WAITING!!!!!!

Sadly the revival didn't like to discuss to 80s pop culture or even references to the original series much. Doubt there will be a Sandy Duncan reference.

[Jacqs]

I've been watching some of the AfterMASH episodes, and they're a lot better than their reputation. It could easily have been continued, but comparison (and frequent callbacks) to M*A*S*H made it feel less of a show of its own.

W*A*L*T*E*R, on the other hand, ... oh my, it's like an inferior version of a Police Academy film. Glad there was only one episode.

[BW Manilowe]

On 6/22/2018 at 5:17 PM, ketose said:

I do not accept that Trapper John, MD was a MASH spinoff. It didn't star Wayne Rogers (or Elliot Gould) and had no detectable connection to MASH. Plus, it took place about 30 years later.

I have a suggestion for a theme song

 

Wikipedia is connecting Trapper John, M.D. to the movie version of M*A*S*H, somehow, instead of the TV show. I knew it wasn't connected to the TV show; especially since we never heard about Hawkeye (in particular) since they were supposed to have been best friends/at least really close before Wayne Rogers & his version of Trapper was written outta the show & Mike Farrell's BJ Hunnicutt was written in as his replacement. I don't know (shrugs), I feel like it's more of a "standalone" show using 1 of the main characters from M*A*S*H.

[BW Manilowe]

14 hours ago, ketose said:

Reminds me of Reba, where Kyra disappeared for chunks of the series.

The actress who played Kyra was having issues with anorexia, or another eating disorder. That's at least mostly why she disappeared & reappeared the way she did.

[ketose]

1 hour ago, BW Manilowe said:

Wikipedia is connecting Trapper John, M.D. to the movie version of M*A*S*H, somehow, instead of the TV show. I knew it wasn't connected to the TV show; especially since we never heard about Hawkeye (in particular) since they were supposed to have been best friends/at least really close before Wayne Rogers & his version of Trapper was written outta the show & Mike Farrell's BJ Hunnicutt was written in as his replacement. I don't know (shrugs), I feel like it's more of a "standalone" show using 1 of the main characters from M*A*S*H.

I read the same thing. From what I got, the production company for Trapper John also owned the MASH movie. The producers of the TV show MASH sued for royalties and the Production company claimed it was actually a spin-off of the movie. Considering how tenuous the connection is to either, I guess the argument worked. Also, I didn't know it at the time, but the theme for Trapper John was "Suicide is Painless" which was used in both the MASH TV show and movie. The lawsuit does kind of bolster the case that this was not a spin-off, but a way to make a hospital show and draw in audiences with a familiar character.

I don't think AfterMASH was a bad show as much as the expectations were set way too high and the stars were probably making more money than the show could support due to the MASH name. The Connors may be in the same boat.

[Rap541]

Quote

I don't think AfterMASH was a bad show as much as the expectations were set way too high and the stars were probably making more money than the show could support due to the MASH name. The Connors may be in the same boat.

I think part of After MASH's problem is that it was focused on characters that were always secondary - Father Mulcahy, Klinger, and Col. Potter. And my now older eyes wonder how actually amused and tolerant people would have been of Klinger's supposed cross dressing, but the real problem was that Jamie Farr was a bit of a ham actor to begin with. 

If the Connors focused on Crystal, DJ, and Becky, it will have a similar problem. Not to knock those three since I have nothing against them but it would have a similar awkward vibe. That the major players - Goodman, Metcalf and Gilbert, are on board, along with Fishman and Goranson, I think the storyline could hold at least for a "lets wrap this up" season.

[tessaray]

Putting on the mod hat to request more focus on the Conners and less on MASH/history of spinoffs. 

Thanks!

[BlossomCulp]

23 minutes ago, Rap541 said:

That the major players - Goodman, Metcalf and Gilbert, are on board, along with Fishman and Goranson, I think the storyline could hold at least for a "lets wrap this up" season.

As I understand they've committed for another 10 episodes (I may not have this right) if that's the case though If the show clicks, great, if not, I hope they resolve a few things and set the Connors on the path to at least a modicum of happiness.

[Jacqs]

Depends what they do with the show I suppose.

Blake's 7 was fine for 2 more years without Blake.

Two and a Half Men lasted 4 more years without Sheen. 

[ThatsDarling]

I'm interested in the concept, but I do think The Conners will need a new matriarch if the show lasts more than one season. It's not that the supporting actresses are incapable of leading a series (I would watch a one-woman show starring Laurie Metcalf), but I think their characters work best in smaller doses. 

I keep imagining Sally Struthers as Dan's new love interest. She could balance out the remaining cast without being an on-the-nose replacement for Roseanne. 

[peacheslatour]

1 hour ago, ThatsDarling said:

I'm interested in the concept, but I do think The Conners will need a new matriarch if the show lasts more than one season. It's not that the supporting actresses are incapable of leading a series (I would watch a one-woman show starring Laurie Metcalf), but I think their characters work best in smaller doses. 

I keep imagining Sally Struthers as Dan's new love interest. She could balance out the remaining cast without being an on-the-nose replacement for Roseanne. 

In the character of Babette Dell!

[methodwriter85]

Maybe they can say Roseanne got crushed at a massive discount sale at say Rodbell's. That is what killed an ancestor of Twiggy, and it's kind of an offbeat way to go.

[ThatsDarling]

21 hours ago, peacheslatour said:

In the character of Babette Dell!

She can get the Conners into gardening to help them process their emptiness and sense of loss following Roseanne's demise.

“Oh, and just you wait 'til spring, Darlene! You're gonna wake up one morning, walk out, and pow – color coming out of your yin-yang!”

[peacheslatour]

22 minutes ago, ThatsDarling said:

She can get the Conners into gardening to help them process their emptiness and sense of loss following Roseanne's demise.

“Oh, and just you wait 'til spring, Darlene! You're gonna wake up one morning, walk out, and pow – color coming out of your yin-yang!”

God knows the neighbors have enough fertilizer to spread around. ;-)

[WarnerCL45]

On 23/06/2018 at 6:32 PM, Spencer Hastings said:

Roseanne will definitely die from surgery complications.  They couldn’t have set that “out” up in a better way. 

They might have an episode or two showing how the family mourns, with the next season beginning post-funeral but I think a time jump would be wise. 10 episodes isn’t enough time to show them mourning and then how they survive.  They’re really going to need to pace themselves. 

Rather than kill her off, I would like to see her run off to Africa with a person 30 years younger & never be heard from again!

[UYI]

On 6/24/2018 at 11:54 AM, JacquelineAppleton said:

Depends what they do with the show I suppose.

Blake's 7 was fine for 2 more years without Blake.

Two and a Half Men lasted 4 more years without Sheen. 

Someone in the Aftermath thread--I can't remember who now--wondered if killing Roseanne off for this show would hurt the original series in syndication.

To which I have to point out this:

Edith was killed off at the beginning of season two of Archie Bunker's Place, but I think it's safe to say it hasn't hurt the rerun history of All in the Family one iota.

Hell, there were probably a LOT of people who wondered if the lottery season would hurt the original Roseanne's syndication history, and again, I think it's safe to say that didn't happen at all. If anything, as time went on, the show's better earlier years became better appreciated with time (something Roseanne's real life antics probably obscured somewhat even then--at least she wasn't racist then? IDK), with most people finding that important enough to pretend the lottery season never happened.

(Obviously, though, this recent hurdle may be harder for it to overcome. Hopefully not, but we'll see.)

Edited June 25, 2018 by UYI

[iMonrey]

Quote

I believe the articles have been saying that she has given up any claim to benefit financially from the spin-off, so I'd say no.  (For a nice multi-million payout, most likely.)

I just read that Roseanne appeared on a podcast and said she agreed to a buy-out so apparently the network did have to pay her off. That kind of leaves a bad taste in my mouth. She's still profiting in a way that she wouldn't have if they had just let the show die. Maybe she won't get any further profits, but she got some money out of the deal.

Quote

Wasn't it said they were planning on catching us up with them in the second revival season?

(RE: Andy and Jerry) - some of us fans speculated on that but nobody officially connected with the show ever said that. It was generally agreed that for whatever reason they had retconned the existence of Andy altogether. 

[chocolatine]

7 minutes ago, iMonrey said:

She's still profiting in a way that she wouldn't have if they had just let the show die.

My understanding is that she (and Sara Gilbert, John Goodman, and Laurie Metcalf) had to be paid for season 10 either way, whether it's made or not.

[UYI]

1 hour ago, iMonrey said:

(RE: Andy and Jerry) - some of us fans speculated on that but nobody officially connected with the show ever said that. It was generally agreed that for whatever reason they had retconned the existence of Andy altogether. 

No, there was at least one interview where it was said that some of the fans' questions--including where Andy is--would be addressed during season 2. But this was before the final Roseanne kerfuffle occurred, so who knows if this retool of a retooled show will address them/these issues now. 

[Bastet]

30 minutes ago, UYI said:

No, there was at least one interview where it was said that some of the fans' questions--including where Andy is--would be addressed during season 2.

Right.  I just can't remember if it was before the renewal, so they were saying, "If we get another season, we'll get into that," or if it was after, so it was "Now that we have more episodes, yes, definitely, we'll be catching up with the characters we left out initially."  And, of course, now there is no 11th season of Roseanne, but a new spinoff instead. 

Had Roseanne continued, I expected to hear about Jerry and Andy but not see them; I didn't think they'd want to bother casting them, but would go into some detail about what they're up to since fans wound up being far more curious than I think they expected.  But now that it will be The Conners, we may meet them; as I said before, a spinoff needs to be a blend of old and new characters, and Jerry and Andy are in the interesting position of being both, so they're rather tailor made for it.

[SmithW6079]

I'll give the first episode of The Conners a go, if only to see how they get rid of Roseanne. 

[HadleyFields]

Remember when John Ritter passed away near the beginning of season 2 of 8 Simple Rules? They were able to continue as a sitcom for 2 seasons, so it can be done.  Roseanne simply couldn't be extubated after surgery and died. It happens everyday, and it's horrible.  Although, I like the idea of her joining Jerry on the boat with no communication, too.  I'm eager to see where the writers take the Conner's.  It's going to be a long summer... Aaargh! 

[Jacqs]

They did do All in the Family without the family, so it is possible.

[Chit Chat]

13 hours ago, SmithW6079 said:

I'll give the first episode of The Conners a go, if only to see how they get rid of Roseanne. 

I have a feeling this will be the case for a lot of people, then there will be a drop off in viewers.  I only watched a handful of episodes of the original series and tuned into the new season out of curiosity.  I watched all but one episode of it.  As others have stated, many of the character's storylines were depressing and I didn't care for several of them, so I was just meh on the whole thing.  I won't bother watching the new series.  I'll just come on here and see how they explain Roseanne's absence and that will be all I need to know.   

[CherryAmes]

6 hours ago, HadleyFields said:

Remember when John Ritter passed away near the beginning of season 2 of 8 Simple Rules? They were able to continue as a sitcom for 2 seasons, so it can be done. 

I referenced this in another thread, I still recall that first episode when they dealt with "Paul's" death.  Very touching and very well done.  If they approach it properly they could make a very memorable (in a good way) episode.  If it were my choice to make I'd have them open with an interment that is taking place months after the death, something that is very commonly done, and that way they can give her a decent burial, people will be sad, but enough time will have gone by that the first shock and grief have passed and they can get away with moving the storylines along without constant references to Roseanne.  

[UYI]

4 hours ago, JacquelineAppleton said:

They did do All in the Family without the family, so it is possible.

Well..sort of. The last season was just Archie and Edith, yes, but then it was Archie Bunker's Place afterwards...and Edith was a recurring character during the first season, and killed off at the beginning of the second once Jean Stapleton was free to leave.

And really, they are largely seen as separate entities. They're not often run together on the same syndication package at all; there are many younger people (not me, I'm 29 and obsessed with TV history) who probably don't know ABP existed at all.