The Facts Of Life - General Discussion

[GHScorpiosRule]

Well, Rewind finally aired the movie when the girls go to Australia yesterday, or was it Friday? Anyway, I loved seeing all the Kangaroos, the outback, Opera, Sydney!

But the storyline was so beyond stupid. Like Jo and Blair couldn't have called or gone to the local precinct to verify who was the real cop and who was the thief? Yeah, yeah, then we wouldn't have a movie.

And then Natalie--knowing the "rock" was probably what Jo was talking about, just chucks it?

And I can't remember if Beverly Ann had already adopted Andy by this point--the movie aired in February of season 8, so learning that his "Uncle Bob" financed the trip gave me whiplash. So why was he in foster care? Stupid, idiot writers.

But along with the scenery and a very yummilicious Mario Van Peebles, made watching worth it; even though I didn't get to see any Koala bears!!!!

[Prairie Rose]

On 3/1/2022 at 8:47 AM, bluegirl147 said:

Nancy did comedy well on FOL but I think her best roles were dramatic ones.  She was excellent in the Tracy Thurman story 

She was incredible as Tracey Thurman. 

Spoiler

The scene where she is nearly murdered by her husband in the street, with gaping witnesses and even police who do nothing to help

was nothing short of amazing. 

[Jan Spears]

On 4/3/2022 at 11:07 AM, Prairie Rose said:

Easily the best move they made was eliminating Mr. Bradley. I don't know how the character was received in 1979, but watching today he is downright creepy, misogynistic, skeevy, petty and incompetent. No way would he make it in reality as the head of a prestigious girls school. ICK.

Between the character of Mr. Bradley and the girls running around in short shorts, it makes you wonder just who NBC thought was the audience for this show in the first season.

On 4/3/2022 at 11:53 AM, Prairie Rose said:

It's interesting to note that this special, released in 2020, featured no new interviews with the Main Four. It does have a lot of perspective on S1 and the retooling of S2 since Felice Schachter, Julie Piekarski, Julie Anne Haddock, John Lawlor and Jenny O'Hara were all interviewed. 

There's something about all of these interviews surrounding the reboot that I find odd. I can't quite put my finger on it. It's as if Felice Schachter, Julie Piekarski and Julie Anne Haddock are still living -- and struggling -- with the knowledge that stardom was in their grasp and then eluded them. I do think Molly Ringwald did it the right way. She made one token appearance in Season 2, found it humiliating and then never involved herself with Facts again.

On 4/3/2022 at 11:53 AM, Prairie Rose said:

The other best change from S1 to S2 was revamping the theme song.

While revamping the opening theme was yet another smart move concerning the reboot, I confess to liking Charlotte Rae's "singing" in Season 1. It has a "homely" beauty to it.

[Egg McMuffin]

On 4/6/2022 at 7:34 PM, Jan Spears said:

There's something about all of these interviews surrounding the reboot that I find odd. I can't quite put my finger on it. It's as if Felice Schachter, Julie Piekarski and Julie Anne Haddock are still living -- and struggling -- with the knowledge that stardom was in their grasp and then eluded them. I do think Molly Ringwald did it the right way. She made one token appearance in Season 2, found it humiliating and then never involved herself with Facts again.

Agreed. There’s a little bit of a “we were treated unfairly!” vibe. And a lack of acceptance that the first season was embarrassingly bad (as were some of the performances). I think they could have kept the show set in the dorm if they had changed to the season 2-4 writing team. But they still would have had to change the cast. Blair, Jo, Natalie, and Tootie were memorable characters played by appealing, gifted actresses. The ones they got rid of weren’t in that league. And it was easier to develop those characters if there were fewer to focus on. 8-10 regulars is a lot for a sitcom.

[Jan Spears]

On 4/28/2022 at 10:53 AM, Egg McMuffin said:

8-10 regulars is a lot for a sitcom.

Even after the show wrote out Jenny O'Hara's character, there were still 9 named characters who had to be taken into account before a single line of dialogue was written or guest performers included. The show as structured in the first season was impossible to sustain in a 24-25 minute sitcom.

[Kristi800]

I went to Chiller Theatre in Parsippany, NJ yesterday & Lisa Whelchel & Mindy Cohn were there. I didn't get a selfie with either (a picture with Lisa was $100!) but a friend took this - Lisa with Melissa Gilbert (Laura from Little House). A picture with Melissa was $80! They just happened to be taking a picture together and caught it. One girl at the show was dressed in an Eastland uniform and looked amazing! There was even an Eastland swimsuit for sale for $40! 

Mindy looked amazing, and of course Lisa does. 

Prices have gone up!! Many of the people there were cool about taking their pictures from the edges, but some had a lot of protection. 

Edited May 1, 2022 by Kristi800

[ljenkins782]

On 4/28/2022 at 11:53 AM, Egg McMuffin said:

Quote

 

There's something about all of these interviews surrounding the reboot that I find odd. I can't quite put my finger on it. It's as if Felice Schachter, Julie Piekarski and Julie Anne Haddock are still living -- and struggling -- with the knowledge that stardom was in their grasp and then eluded them. I do think Molly Ringwald did it the right way. She made one token appearance in Season 2, found it humiliating and then never involved herself with Facts again.

 

Agreed. There’s a little bit of a “we were treated unfairly!” vibe. And a lack of acceptance that the first season was embarrassingly bad (as were some of the performances). I think they could have kept the show set in the dorm if they had changed to the season 2-4 writing team. But they still would have had to change the cast. Blair, Jo, Natalie, and Tootie were memorable characters played by appealing, gifted actresses. The ones they got rid of weren’t in that league. And it was easier to develop those characters if there were fewer to focus on. 8-10 regulars is a lot for a sitcom.

Yeah, I can understand their disappointment at feeling like they missed out because the show went on to be a smash, but the critical point is that it wouldn't have been a smash if they'd been left in it. And it probably adds insult to injury that Molly Ringwald ended up hitting it big outside of the show.

As for Jenny O'Hara's character, I wonder who thought that character was necessary to begin with. Mrs. Garrett as housemother made sense and Mr Bradley/Parker as the adversarial authority figure, sure. But this random...what was she, a teacher? Unnecessary.

[Prairie Rose]

On 5/2/2022 at 1:28 PM, ljenkins782 said:

As for Jenny O'Hara's character, I wonder who thought that character was necessary to begin with. Mrs. Garrett as housemother made sense and Mr Bradley/Parker as the adversarial authority figure, sure. But this random...what was she, a teacher? Unnecessary.

She was a teacher - and we never saw her in the classroom!!

[Retroguy]

15 hours ago, Prairie Rose said:

She was a teacher - and we never saw her in the classroom!!

Yes we did: in "IQ".

I don't have a problem with having teachers in "The Facts of Life"; it only makes sense, in fact. And the cast was smaller than that of Head of the Class.

[Prairie Rose]

On 4/28/2022 at 11:53 AM, Egg McMuffin said:

8-10 regulars is a lot for a sitcom.

The only half-hour show I can think of with that many characters that worked was The Brady Bunch.

[ljenkins782]

On 5/10/2022 at 10:24 AM, Retroguy said:

Yes we did: in "IQ".

I don't have a problem with having teachers in "The Facts of Life"; it only makes sense, in fact. And the cast was smaller than that of Head of the Class.

It's just not the focus though, the show was about the kids and Mrs Garrett. Yes, they would have teachers in a school, but we didn't need to see them or have recurring cast members playing them. 

We saw teachers in one-off episodes, like Natalie and the school paper and Jo and some of her teachers here and there, which made sense, but outside of those specific storylines, I didn't care who their teachers were.

Quote

It's interesting to note that this special, released in 2020, featured no new interviews with the Main Four. It does have a lot of perspective on S1 and the retooling of S2 since Felice Schachter, Julie Piekarski, Julie Anne Haddock, John Lawlor and Jenny O'Hara were all interviewed. 

Where did this special air? 

[Prairie Rose]

On 6/10/2022 at 4:01 PM, ljenkins782 said:

Where did this special air? 

The REELZ channel.

[bluegirl147]

On 6/10/2022 at 4:01 PM, ljenkins782 said:

It's just not the focus though, the show was about the kids and Mrs Garrett. Yes, they would have teachers in a school, but we didn't need to see them or have recurring cast members playing them. 

We saw teachers in one-off episodes, like Natalie and the school paper and Jo and some of her teachers here and there, which made sense, but outside of those specific storylines, I didn't care who their teachers were.

Where did this special air? 

[Jan Spears]

I watched the first hour or so of this most recent Facts of Life documentary.

On the plus side, there are interviews with actors John Lawlor and Jenny O'Hara, casting director Eve Brandstein, director Asaad Kelada, and writers Jerry Mayer and Margie Peters. Collectively, they give a lot of insight into the first season and how all concerned were trying to figure out what the show was meant to be. If there's a point of agreement amongst them all, it's the same point that's been made repeatedly on this forum: there were too many characters for a 22-24 minute sitcom.

On the down side, this documentary is heavy on Season 1 behind-the-scenes drama and then the famous reboot itself. In an 88 minute documentary, Nancy McKeon's name doesn't pop up until the 48 minute mark and discussion of the pivotal Season 2 episode "Double Standard," which launched the Blair/Jo friendship as one of the pillars of the show (if not the pillar), doesn't happen until close to the 60 minute mark. (I suppose it's easier to create a documentary about a show that isn't working compared to one that is.)

Another negative is that there are no new interviews with Mindy Cohn, Kim Fields, Nancy McKeon and Lisa Whelchel. The interviews with Felice Schachter, Julie Piekarski and Julie Anne Haddock are OK. But there are no fresh insights from any of them, and it's a bit strange that they still have so much to say about something that happened 40 years ago and only lasted for 13 episodes. If the reboot with McKeon hadn't happened, I doubt that Facts of Life would have made it out of a second season, and it would only be remembered (if at all) as yet another failed show from that dire late-70s/early-80s period in NBC's history when almost nothing worked. In which case, would anyone really care about the cast members' experiences on a failed two-season show? 

Edited June 24, 2022 by Jan Spears

[Egg McMuffin]

It’s kind of an odd special but after so many interviews with the core four, I suppose it’s a fresher take. I find the whole “we were screwed out of being on a hit show” tone from the original cast members to be tough to take, especially since their characters - and in some cases their performances - were a big part of the reason the show wasn’t a hit. Some of them are just divorced from reality. If they thought that anyone wanted to watch Sue Ann or Mr Bradley on a weekly basis, they’re just delusional.

The actress who played Sue Ann was campaigning to get on Dancing With the Stars a number of years ago. I know the “stars” on that show are pretty much C-level at best, but why would they want someone who was fired from Facts of Life after 13 episodes, over 30 years ago?

Edited June 25, 2022 by Egg McMuffin

[GHScorpiosRule]

30 minutes ago, Egg McMuffin said:

The actress who played Sue Ann was campaigning to get on Dancing With the Stars a number of years ago. I know the “stars” on that show are pretty much C-level at best, but why would they want someone who was fired from Facts of Life after 13 episodes, over 30 years ago?

Nostalgia.

[Egg McMuffin]

Nostalgia is the reason you’d have someone like Lisa Whelchel or Kim Fields on DWTS. They were stars of a long running series from 40 years ago. But this person who was on the show for 13 episodes? My guess is that other than the die-hard fans, no one even remembers her.

[RealHousewife]

3 hours ago, Egg McMuffin said:

Nostalgia is the reason you’d have someone like Lisa Whelchel or Kim Fields on DWTS. They were stars of a long running series from 40 years ago. But this person who was on the show for 13 episodes? My guess is that other than the die-hard fans, no one even remembers her.

I hear ya, but for me sometimes it's more interesting to see the person where it was "whatever happened to?" than the huge star you've seen on different shows over the years. I thought Sue Ann was so adorable and I haven't seen her since. I just googled her to see what she looks like now.

DWTS is now on Disney Plus though, so I won't be able to watch anyway. :(

Edited June 25, 2022 by RealHousewife

[Jan Spears]

18 hours ago, Egg McMuffin said:

I find the whole “we were screwed out of being on a hit show” tone from the original cast members to be tough to take, especially since their characters - and in some cases their performances - were a big part of the reason the show wasn’t a hit.

In the documentary, Felice Schacter comes the closest to having moments of insight by discussing how the characters for the 7 girls weren't really fleshed out. As a result, the cast members who brought a high degree of personality in that first season were the ones who made the subsequent cut. The character of Blair wasn't much more developed than the other characters in Season 1 but Lisa Whelchel brought so much dynamism and vivaciousness to the character that it was no question she would continue on with the series. And since the production staff thought there were too many blondes on the show, Whelchel's breakout status in Season 1 proved fatal for the chances of Julie Piekarski and Julie Anne Haddock. (Piekarski's overacting didn't help her cause, either.)

Ultimately, John Lawlor put it best when he said that it bothered him to see some of the girls let go but then added: "That's the business."

[Snow Apple]

In addition to being blondes, Sue Ann and Cindy (I really liked Cindy) were nice girls. Season one was cute but the show can't continue without conflict and growth. Notice most of the serious stories in season one involve Blair. Her mom's "friend," her crush on Mr. Bradley, plagiarizing, realizing her role in Sue Ann's bushes with drugs and eating disorder, attacked by her date, etc. I agree Blair really stood out because she was different from the other girls in her age group. They tried to give serious stories to Sue Ann but Blair (Lisa) was just that much better.

Blair is generally nice too but she was rich and can be a bit out of touch and had a lot to learn about "regular" folks. Along comes Jo who also needed to learn that rich folks are not the enemy. The two characters were gold. It was interesting to learn they were only going to bring back Blair, Tootie, and Natalie until they realized they needed an outsider to mix it up (originally named Foxy. LOL)

Edited June 25, 2022 by Snow Apple

[CeeBeeGee]

4 hours ago, Snow Apple said:

In addition to being blondes, Sue Ann and Cindy (I really liked Cindy) were nice girls.

I loved Cindy. And I loved that the character who was the hardcore tomboy was so beautiful. It's a shame they didn't give her more to do, she was one of the talented ones. There's a cute line in one of the episodes where one of the adults (Mr. Bradley?) is referring (I think) to the grocery delivery boy, played by Greg Bradford (a late '70s/early '80s fox, to use the contemporary lingo), saying "he thinks everyone here is in love with him" and Cindy responds earnestly "we are." Her delivery is so well done, and truly earns a laugh.

I was rewatching the episode where Geri is introduced and the writing is just--so bad. Blair's motivation for avoiding Geri is never explained in a way that makes any sense--is she jealous because Geri gets the attention or does she admire her for "persevering"?  And the cringe factor of the "Tea for Two" number--a WASP like Blair would never ever make a spectacle like that, admitting her feelings in front of an audience. I give them major credit for making Geri a semi-recurring character at all--and some of her later episodes (like when Blair takes over Geri's project in the Langley years--Geri actually loses her temper) are written with more nuance--but that initial introduction--oy.

[ljenkins782]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tyd0ip0SQAg

This was a pretty good watch, not necessarily anything in there that I didn't technically know, but interesting to hear them discuss in detail.

Lisa's segment about the weight issue is pretty awful. The producers call out the wardrobe as part of the camouflage, much like you'd do with a pregnant actress whose character isn't pregnant.

This is probably the most relaxed interview I've ever seen with Kim Fields, she usually comes across a little uptight when talking about FoL. Mindy has a bad spray tan, but she's always a good interviewee.

The only new tidbit I got was that Lisa used to bring books to set and read when the camera wasn't on her and the rest of the cast had to tell her that it was hard for them to act with her sitting there reading, lol.

ETA: actually, there was one more. Felice Schacter related story about an accidental hot mike moment when the girls could hear the producers talking about them and that it was some pervy comments about their outfits and bodies.

Edited June 30, 2022 by ljenkins782

[Katy M]

5 hours ago, patriciahelenkit said:

Is there any American show that started or ran in the 1970s that has its whole main cast still alive?

Probably not. I hate to say it, being born in the '70s, but it was 50 years ago.  So, any show that had a cast member in his/her 40s, they would be in their 90s now, and anyone older would be even older (obviously).  So, unless you can think of a show with an entirely youthful cast, you'll have problems. All the kids on the Waltons are still alive, but besides Olivai, all the older generation is dead (I think).

[Bort]

I think everybody in the Cheers main cast is still alive. That’s pretty good, considering how old that show is.

[Egg McMuffin]

Love Boat was probably the last 70s show with an intact cast, until Gavin McLeod passed away last year.

[dewelar]

15 hours ago, kariyaki said:

I think everybody in the Cheers main cast is still alive. That’s pretty good, considering how old that show is.

Other than, of course, the cast member who died while the show was still airing.

[RealHousewife]

6 hours ago, patriciahelenkit said:

even nineties shows have losses, such as Family Matters (Michelle Thomas) and  Everybody Loves Raymond (Doris Roberts, Peter Boyle)

Yup. My shows were Saved by the Bell and 90210. Dustin Diamond and Luke Perry both died young. 

[Egg McMuffin]

Where should they have gone if they had done another vacation trip movie? The Grand Canyon? Hawaii? Cincinnati?

[CeeBeeGee]

Last week the episode where Blair's mother tells Blair she's pregnant aired (on Logo, I think). I hadn't seen this one in a while--maybe never, honestly. (I am much more hit or miss after Blair and Jo graduated Langley. The implausibility of both Jo and Blair being accepted to this supposedly super-exclusive college that just happens to be right there near their own prep school did something to the show for me and I stopped watching so much.)

Blair is such a f***ing POS in this! She is so disgustingly judgemental about her mother's decision (initially) to have the abortion--it is none of your f***ing business, Blair! JFC, Monica makes some damn good points in this, not least of which is, hello, she's in her 40s! That's a really, really tough time just to bear a child, much less raise it. And honestly, we all know this wasn't Blair at all--like the "oooh, one of the FOL girls gives up the V-card" episode, this was 100% Lisa Whelchel. This episode had her fingerprints all over it--"I won't do this episode unless Monica decides to go through with the pregnancy." I normally quite like Lisa but I was enraged at Blair's snotty, uninformed judgmentalism in this episode.

I will say, a weird line was when Monica apologized for missing Blair's debut. (It was all part of a thing wherein Monica was apologizing for not being a great mother.) This is way off--I can see Monica missing, say, an art show of Blair's, but she's generally shown to be involved in her daughter's life for the important things and Blair's debut would be pretty darn important. I can see Blair's dad missing it, but not her mother.

[GHScorpiosRule]

8 hours ago, CeeBeeGee said:

Last week the episode where Blair's mother tells Blair she's pregnant aired (on Logo, I think). I hadn't seen this one in a while--maybe never, honestly. (I am much more hit or miss after Blair and Jo graduated Langley. The implausibility of both Jo and Blair being accepted to this supposedly super-exclusive college that just happens to be right there near their own prep school did something to the show for me and I stopped watching so much.)

Blair is such a f***ing POS in this! She is so disgustingly judgemental about her mother's decision (initially) to have the abortion--it is none of your f***ing business, Blair! JFC, Monica makes some damn good points in this, not least of which is, hello, she's in her 40s! That's a really, really tough time just to bear a child, much less raise it. And honestly, we all know this wasn't Blair at all--like the "oooh, one of the FOL girls gives up the V-card" episode, this was 100% Lisa Whelchel. This episode had her fingerprints all over it--"I won't do this episode unless Monica decides to go through with the pregnancy." I normally quite like Lisa but I was enraged at Blair's snotty, uninformed judgmentalism in this episode.

I will say, a weird line was when Monica apologized for missing Blair's debut. (It was all part of a thing wherein Monica was apologizing for not being a great mother.) This is way off--I can see Monica missing, say, an art show of Blair's, but she's generally shown to be involved in her daughter's life for the important things and Blair's debut would be pretty darn important. I can see Blair's dad missing it, but not her mother.

PREACH!!!!!! So many of the episodes that dealt with pregnancy and sex that only had one point of view-that abortion and premarital sex wuz EEEWWVIL, had Lisa’s stamp all over it. It was infuriating.

56 minutes ago, patriciahelenkit said:

Lisa was often harmful BTS to FOL as Kirk Cameron was to GP but Lisa seems to gets less than a quarter of the general retrospective dislike.

But Lisa didn’t try to force her beliefs on anyone else. Or get anyone fired because of the decisions or choices they made. Like that asshat Kirk did.

[Snow Apple]

If I remember correctly, there was an episode with Natalie writing a school article and she made up a fake student having an abortion. Then it turned out a real student thought the article was about her. I guess they had the guts when it comes to a random student, but not a semi-regular like Monica. If Lisa had a hand in this, I wonder why they didn't just scrap the storyline.

I think that was the subject of Natalie's article. correct me if I'm mis-remembering.

[GHScorpiosRule]

2 minutes ago, Snow Apple said:

If I remember correctly, there was an episode with Natalie writing a school article and she made up a fake student having an abortion. Then it turned out a real student thought the article was about her. I guess they had the guts when it comes to a random student, but not a semi-regular like Monica. If Lisa had a hand in this, I wonder why they didn't just scrap the storyline.

I think that was the subject of Natalie's article. correct me if I'm mis-remembering.

No, you’re correct. I posted how it irritates me that the girl who got the abortion would have to be expelled because parents were calling screaming bloody murder. Because this was NEW YORK!

[CeeBeeGee]

Another reason that episode pisses me off--because whenever a TV character is pregnant and there's even a possibility this situation isn't ideal, they think it over and always, always end up having the baby anyway. They never go through with the abortion--I think I have actually watched, in nearly 40 years of TV going back to the '80s, one episode in all that time where someone actually goes through with it. (It was an episode in the late '80s of DeGrassi High.) So, on the whole, TV never actually shows both sides of the abortion debate--they pay lip service to the idea of a debate. It's merely a pretense when over and over, one point of view always wins out. And the effect of this is to render abortion not really an option, and to subtly attach shame to it. 

[CeeBeeGee]

9 hours ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

PREACH!!!!!! So many of the episodes that dealt with pregnancy and sex that only had one point of view-that abortion and premarital sex wuz EEEWWVIL, had Lisa’s stamp all over it. It was infuriating.

But Lisa didn’t try to force her beliefs on anyone else. Or get anyone fired because of the decisions or choices they made. Like that asshat Kirk did.

F***ING KIRK CAMERON. Such an insufferable POS--his bullying the producers, calling them p*rnographers, was bad enough but throwing his weight around to get Julie McCullough fired was just cruel. She was a up-and-coming young actor, he didn't have to torpedo her career--and his throwing a temper tantrum just because she'd--gasped--appeared in Playboy had exactly that effect. Just so unbelievably cruel.

[GHScorpiosRule]

25 minutes ago, CeeBeeGee said:

Another reason that episode pisses me off--because whenever a TV character is pregnant and there's even a possibility this situation isn't ideal, they think it over and always, always end up having the baby anyway. They never go through with the abortion--I think I have actually watched, in nearly 40 years of TV going back to the '80s, one episode in all that time where someone actually goes through with it. (It was an episode in the late '80s of DeGrassi High.) So, on the whole, TV never actually shows both sides of the abortion debate--they pay lip service to the idea of a debate. It's merely a pretense when over and over, one point of view always wins out. And the effect of this is to render abortion not really an option, and to subtly attach shame to it. 

You’re forgetting Maude. She actually went through and had the abortion. But then, it was a Norman Lear show.

[Jan Spears]

10 hours ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

PREACH!!!!!! So many of the episodes that dealt with pregnancy and sex that only had one point of view-that abortion and premarital sex wuz EEEWWVIL, had Lisa’s stamp all over it. It was infuriating.

But Lisa didn’t try to force her beliefs on anyone else. Or get anyone fired because of the decisions or choices they made. Like that asshat Kirk did.

Was it really Lisa or was it just the general climate on a mainstream network like NBC? Maybe Lisa had a say in storylines but I'm more inclined to believe that the network brass took a very conservative tack with the show because of its audience (primarily teenage girls and younger twentysomethings). Even if Lisa's personal beliefs weren't what they were (and are), I suspect the network would have taken the same approach toward these issues. They just didn't want the inevitable hassle from advertisers and certain segments of the viewing public. (It wasn't just NBC either. Over on ABC, they would 'ungay' or 'regay' Steven Carrington on Dynasty depending on how much blowback they were getting at any given time.)

1 hour ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

You’re forgetting Maude. She actually went through and had the abortion. But then, it was a Norman Lear show.

The Facts of Life emerged from Norman Lear's production company so, technically, it started out life as a Norman Lear show.

[Kristi800]

9 hours ago, Snow Apple said:

f I remember correctly, there was an episode with Natalie writing a school article and she made up a fake student having an abortion. Then it turned out a real student thought the article was about her. I guess they had the guts when it comes to a random student, but not a semi-regular like Monica. If Lisa had a hand in this, I wonder why they didn't just scrap the storyline.

I feel like this is always the case. It's always the friend who does it not the person who is being affected at the time, like in Sex and the City when Miranda thought about having an abortion and Carrie said she'd had one and then Miranda decided to have the baby. 

Maude is an outlier when the main character actually had the abortion; however, Bea Arthur was already 50 when the show started so it really didn't make sense for her to have it (my grandmother had a baby at 45 in 1966 & my mother-in-law had my husband at 43 in 1968, so I'm not judging people by their age, just that she was older than usual).

I find it hard to believe that Blair's mother would have missed her debut, 

[RealHousewife]

51 minutes ago, CeeBeeGee said:

F***ING KIRK CAMERON. Such an insufferable POS--his bullying the producers, calling them p*rnographers, was bad enough but throwing his weight around to get Julie McCullough fired was just cruel. She was a up-and-coming young actor, he didn't have to torpedo her career--and his throwing a temper tantrum just because she'd--gasped--appeared in Playboy had exactly that effect. Just so unbelievably cruel.

I get folks who don't like Playboy, especially after the documentary. But if an actress showing boobs enrages you to the point you want them fired, you don't belong in Hollywood.

[GHScorpiosRule]

45 minutes ago, Kristi800 said:

Maude is an outlier when the main character actually had the abortion; however, Bea Arthur was already 50 when the show started so it really didn't make sense for her to have it

Bea may have been 50, but the character was 47. Still, I also agree, didn’t make sense for her to have it, but the show actually discussed it and the audience could see what a difficult decision it was.

[CeeBeeGee]

2 hours ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

You’re forgetting Maude. She actually went through and had the abortion. But then, it was a Norman Lear show.

I have never actually watched that episode (Maude was a little beyond me as a young child). You are right of course, I have heard of the episode even if I never watched it.

[GHScorpiosRule]

13 minutes ago, CeeBeeGee said:

I have never actually watched that episode (Maude was a little beyond me as a young child). You are right of course, I have heard of the episode even if I never watched it.

It’s a two parter and really good. I was also wee when it aired and caught it in syndication. I think it airs on Antenna? And maybe on freevee, which used to be IMDb TV.

[Kristi800]

9 hours ago, patriciahelenkit said:

What I hate about the "greed is good" eighties and its media is how a rich character (like Blair) is meant to be liked or at least to be respected. I know of children whose parents could only afford to serve their cornflakes with water. My husband’s father was a dairy farmer and he always sent a pail of fresh milk every morning to a neighboring family living in such poverty.

Is she? She puts herself on a pedestal and is mostly taken down a lot of pegs in just about every situation. Jo is always mocking her and a lesson is learned. Mrs. Garrett is always fixing one of her "brilliant ideas". She's vain, a snob, a snot, rude, mean, but I think the character grew a lot during the run of the show. 

[RealHousewife]

My impression of Blair was she's your mostly lovable friend who can be a little full of herself. She had a good heart, but she had some growing up to do, which is typical of a teen. I agree that she matured as she got older. 

[ljenkins782]

4 hours ago, patriciahelenkit said:

Nothing was more mean than when Blair implied Cindy was a lesbian.

We see Blair's sadistic side in this to be honest. She knows perfectly well what would happen to Cindy if Blair went to the adults and said that Cindy "plays for the other team" even though Cindy is het and not a lesbian. Before someone says "it's New York", this is 1979, where just over the border in Ontario, You Can't Do That on Television has that very year played for huge laughs the idea of teenage same sex couples being allowed to attend a disco dance.

The Blair of season 1 was much more of the straight up villain, rich bitch stereotype. Her bullying of Sue Ann in the episode where Sue Ann goes on that starvation diet is another example of Season 1 Blair being evil. The character definitely evolved in the reboot.

[JAYJAY1979]

On 7/17/2022 at 11:44 AM, patriciahelenkit said:

What I hate about the "greed is good" eighties and its media is how a rich character (like Blair) is meant to be liked or at least to be respected. I know of children whose parents could only afford to serve their cornflakes with water. My husband’s father was a dairy farmer and he always sent a pail of fresh milk every morning to a neighboring family living in such poverty.

I don't agree with that.

Blair and Jo both get taken down a peg..and I think the show did a good job of showing how one shouldn't judge a book by its cover.

[Mrs. Landingham]

I was in Paris a few weeks ago for vacation. Thanks to FOL reruns still airing every single day and me still watching them nearly every single day as I’m working, I actually had scenes from The FOL Goes To Paris in my head when I was there, like Blair sketching Sacre Couer, the girls making a run for it at the Notre Dame, and Natalie and Tootie racing around the city with the author, G.K.. I think I watch this show too much! :) 

[Prairie Rose]

On 7/13/2022 at 9:31 PM, GHScorpiosRule said:

It’s a two parter and really good. I was also wee when it aired and caught it in syndication. I think it airs on Antenna? And maybe on freevee, which used to be IMDb TV.

Maude reruns also air on the retro FETV (Family Entertainment Television).

[Jan Spears]

On 7/21/2022 at 8:52 PM, JAYJAY1979 said:

  On 7/17/2022 at 10:44 AM, patriciahelenkit said:

What I hate about the "greed is good" eighties and its media is how a rich character (like Blair) is meant to be liked or at least to be respected.

On 7/21/2022 at 8:52 PM, JAYJAY1979 said:

I don't agree with that.

Blair and Jo both get taken down a peg..and I think the show did a good job of showing how one shouldn't judge a book by its cover.

I wouldn't agree with that either.

One of the best things to come out of the reboot was the Blair-Jo friendship, which forced each character to reevaluate her beliefs based on close contact with the other. Blair evolved out of her narrow world of wealth and privilege by living and working side-by-side with someone like Jo. And Jo also became more tolerant of those who were more affluent than she was due to constant interaction with Blair. The Season 3 episode, New York, New York, hammers home this point because, by episode's end, both characters have realized that they have changed and they no longer fit quite so well in their old worlds.

Edited August 23, 2022 by Jan Spears

[RealHousewife]

Just now, Jan Spears said:

I wouldn't agree with that either.

One of the best things to come out of the reboot was the Blair-Jo friendship, which forced each character to reevaluate her beliefs based on close contact with the other. Blair evolved out of her narrow world of wealth and privilege by living and working side-by-side with someone like Jo. And Jo also became more tolerant of those who were more affluent that she was due to constant interaction with Blair. The Season 3 episode, New York, New York, hammers home this point because, by episode's end, both characters have realized that they have changed and they no longer fit quite so well in their old worlds.

Agree. Some of the friendships that mean the most to me are those with people who come from different walks of life. You tend to learn more, and sometimes you realize you have so much more in common than you thought, despite the differences. 

[Egg McMuffin]

The evolving Jo/Blair friendship is one of the best parts of the series. It gets to the point where Jo casually introduces Blair as “my best friend” in passing and they don’t make a big deal of it, because she’s just stating what has been growing for years. I don’t think the final showrunner, Irma Kalish, really understood that though, because in the last season or two they were just insulting each other for laughs without the deeper context.

Both Blair and Jo comment on their friendship in “The Interview Show,” the last episode of season 6 where an off-camera interviewer questions the girls (and Mrs. Garrett) separately about their years at Eastland. They each talk about how much they value each other’s friendship. There are some nice moments in that episode. I wonder if that was written as a possible series finale, because Mrs. Garrett also comments about how she knows the girls are almost grown and will soon leave her.