S01.E11: We Continue to Truck

[tessaray]

Air date: January 22, 2019

Quote

As Darlene grapples with a life-changing offer from Ben, an unexpected conversation with David turns her world even more upside down; relationship problems lead Jackie to the bottom of the bottle; Dan delivers alarming news.

[Keywestclubkid]

Good god acknowledge Andy already stop making her life so miserable..... I mean if you are gonna bring back the lunchbox she was pregnant and had a child then.... but lol with the whole  they serve Chinese food now line. Poor Becky could something go right for these people already? 

Edited January 23, 2019 by Keywestclubkid

[greekmom]

Oh please! I knew Peter was cheating on her from the first 20 seconds.

David coming back would be perfect seeing how BBT is ending. Johnny can transition to the Connors.  LunchBox turned into a Chinese Restaurant.  Poor Jackie.

Man. Poor Becky. Girl just can’t get a break.

Not bad for an ending.

[Annber03]

Dang. Rough time for Jackie and Becky here. Becky's face as she listened to that phone call at the end was heartbreaking. Everything with Dan and Darlene helping Jackie was good, though, and I'm glad Jackie finally kicked Peter to the curb at long last. Hopefully things will start looking up for both of them next season. 

[theredhead77]

Wow. That was so frelling good. So much to process.

Ben totally knows something is up with Darlene not wanting to move. I really like him with her - he's someone who doesn't take her crap and challenges her.
Jackie finally processing her sister's death. I hope she seeks real therapy to cope with everything including her repeating pattern of poor choices in men. Peter is a horrible person! I'm glad Jackie didn't fall for his gaslighting (again).

I knew Emilio was going to end up in an ICE raid but damn. Poor Becky.

I laughed, I cried. I can't wait for the next season (renewal sounds promising with strong ratings https://tvline.com/2019/01/22/the-conners-renewed-abc-season-2-sara-gilbert/ )

[mythoughtis]

My recording  cut off as just as Harris was describing her article about Langford... what was the finishing line? 

So finally Peter is gone?  But no Andy? No Jerry? 

Gina’s line about Harris attending school was funny. 

We all knew David was coming back  and Darlene wasn’t going anywhere. 

[tessaray]

1 minute ago, mythoughtis said:

My recording  cut off as just as Harris was describing her article about Langford... what was the finishing line? 

 

Darlene grabs her by the shoulders (to sit her down) and said they had to talk.

[TigerLynx]

Don't be a fool Darlene.  Stay with Ben.  He is a great guy.  David is the same pathetic loser he's always been who can't take charge of his own life.  You already have two children.  You don't need David the man-child, and his instability.  Shallow Note:  Johnny Galecki looks horrible.

Poor Dan.  He's got to deal with Jackie and her craziness, Becky and the baby, Emilio being deported, and Darlene leaving except not leaving and possibly giving up a great guy for a guy who has already proven he's a worthless idiot.  Why do TV shows do this?  Women have been known to move on from a relationship that didn't work the first time around.  It happens all the time.

It's hilarious, DJ turned out to be the smart one.  He's got a great wife, who really loves him, a beautiful daughter, and he knows and appreciates it.

Edited January 23, 2019 by TigerLynx

[Jul 68]

3 minutes ago, TigerLynx said:

Shallow Note:  Johnny Galecki looks horrible.

 

I'm sure that was intentional. 

[BeachDays]

1 minute ago, TigerLynx said:

Don't be a fool Darlene.  Stay with Ben.  He is a great guy.  David is the same pathetic loser he's always been who can't take charge of his own life.  You already have two children.  You don't need David the man-child, and his instability.  Shallow Note:  Johnny Galecki looks horrible.

Poor Dan.  He's got to deal with Jackie and her craziness, Becky and the baby, Emilio being deported, and Darlene leaving except not leaving and possibly giving up a great guy for a guy who has already proven he's a worthless idiot.  Why do TV shows do this?  Women have been known to move on from a relationship that didn't work the first time around.  It happens all the time.

 

I haven’t seen the episode yet (haha I always start my new ep posts like that), but Sara and Johnny have always been a team, bffs, partners in crime, whatever.   Sara is incredibly invested in the relationship between Darlene and David-  she has said in interviews she thinks about them and literally cries.   So this relationship between the characters will never go away-  at least not as long as Sara has a say.   With Big Bang Theory ending this season, it’s an opportunity to bring back David on the show as a regular.   I might be completely wrong but I think the idea of them being permanently separated is not one that was ever truly the goal.   More like buying their time until they could be back together again.   

[StaceyNotStacie]

They packed a lot of stuff into this episode. It was well done and it was nice to see the old Lunch Box set. 

Mead I the only one who expected Harris and Mark have some sort of response to Darlene about David wanting to get back together since they were in the kitchen while David and Darlene were talking?

[ams1001]

28 minutes ago, Stacey1014 said:

Mead I the only one who expected Harris and Mark have some sort of response to Darlene about David wanting to get back together since they were in the kitchen while David and Darlene were talking?

No. I was thinking, "how are they not hearing this conversation from the kitchen when there's a huge open walkway between them and Darlene's, like, two feet away from it. This house apparently has some strange acoustics going on."

[chitowngirl]

Man, Becky’s face when she listened to her message! She was just beginning to have some hope and it was yanked away. 

I give Johnny Galecki all kinds of credit. It would be easy to see the characters of David and Leonard meshed in Johnny’s performance, but he really sells them as two different characters.

[Ottis]

Good god, people. Chicago is an hour away. You are unhealthily emeshed in each other’s lives. Move already. 

What is the point of Peter? I guess he is a stand in for self absorbed males? Waste of time, and it was clear from the start. And now we are supposed to care that Jackie was cheated on? While she overreacts?

Ah, I see. David is example #2 of self absorbed male. 

One of the positives about this show was that the reactions were within reason to the incident, stoic almost. Suddenly everyone is hysterical. 

And now the inevitable deportation.

This show is becoming less relevant to me. 

[mythoughtis]

Jackie’s reaction was as much about Roseanne as it was Peter. That’s why she went back to the Lunch Box.   Every other crisis in her life has been solved, made better, or at least comforted by Roseanne.  

This show should not have taken David’s character into the gutter with the child abandonment and deadbeat dad scenario. We all knew Darlene and David would get beck together.  They overplayed their hand when they could have  just sent David on a extended volunteer stint overseas without  the divorce and without him having been gone all of Mark’s life. Now we all have to suffer while his character is somehow redeemed.

the deportation was inevitable.  

[SHD]

1 hour ago, mythoughtis said:

My recording  cut off as just as Harris was describing her article about Langford... what was the finishing line? 

Someone gave you the last line but I'm not sure how far you saw. Harris talked about how her article basically called their town a dead end town for losers and then she said something like  "I'm so glad we're moving because I burned a LOT of bridges..." That's when they sat her down and said "We have to talk..."

[UYI]

I'm still confused as to why the first time Jackie kicked Peter wasn't when their relationship actually ended, but whatever. At least it's over now.

I think the last season very strongly implied that they had lost the Lunchbox around the same time they nearly lost their house, so even though it's sad they don't have it anymore, at least we know what became of the building afterward now.

I was so hoping for Jackie to mention getting in touch with Andy during her breakdown, but of course she didn't. Quelle surprise.

I hope that Becky DOESN'T move back in with Dan, for both their sakes. I can see her wanting to hang on to her apartment and her own space, and since she was single for so long, that might actually be possible money wise.

I've seen two deportations in the span of one prime time season now--one on Murphy Brown, and now here. Yikes.

Also, I know Harris and Mark were excited about moving back to Chicago, but I expected SOME push back on the idea of moving in with Ben; come on now! 

Still opposed to David and Darlene, sorry not sorry. 

[Melina22]

Well, that was intense. Best episode so far for me. The scene with Jackie's breakdown in the diner was incredible. It really got to me. Award winning. 

Agreed that Johnny looked horrible. Grubby and puffy and not even remotely like Leonard. Acting? 

I still think Darlene and Becky are great characters, or rather the actresses are really bringing them to life. 

So many family dramas, lots of great acting (except from Matthew B) and really, none of the storylines were unrealistic. 

I'll definitely tune in next season. 

[methodwriter85]

18 minutes ago, mythoughtis said:

Jackie’s reaction was as much about Roseanne as it was Peter. That’s why she went back to the Lunch Box.   Every other crisis in her life has been solved, made better, or at least comforted by Roseanne.  

I had a really good friend who died of an overdose when he was 27, I went back and outside his dorm from when we were in college and cried several times through the first year he was dead. I totally felt Jackie going back to the Lunch Box because that was Roseanne's dream of an independent life and it didn't last. (Coincidentally his dorm closed down about 2 years ago and it's covered by a chain fence now.)

I thought this was a great episode!

I also kind of loved the revelation that Harris had written some kind depresso small town dead end article about Lanford. Articles like that are pretty buzzworthy.

[breezy424]

I guess I'm over at the other side of the pool on this episode.  It fell flat for me because it was so predictable.  The only thing that moved me was at the end when Becky listened to the voice message.  That was so sad in so many ways.

Overall I've enjoyed the season and look forward to next season.

[mythoughtis]

17 minutes ago, SHD said:

Someone gave you the last line but I'm not sure how far you saw. Harris talked about how her article basically called their town a dead end town for losers and then she said something like  "I'm so glad we're moving because I burned a LOT of bridges..." That's when they sat her down and said "We have to talk..."

Yes, I missed most of it.Harris had just got the first couple of lines aloud about Lanford when the DVR recording stopped. It is so annoying.  If it’s smart enough to know what time the episode comes on, it ought to be smart enough to know what time it stops. 

[Bronzedog]

14 minutes ago, UYI said:

I'm still confused as to why the first time Jackie kicked Peter wasn't when their relationship actually ended, but whatever. At least it's over now.

I think the last season very strongly implied that they had lost the Lun

I've seen two deportations in the span of one prime time season now--one on Murphy Brown, and now here. Yikes.

 

I immediately thought of Murphy Brown.  But, I knew when the character on Murphy Brown was introduced, and then when the character on this show was introduced, they'd both be deported.  Pretty predictable.  Sigh.

[Ottis]

19 minutes ago, Melina22 said:

Well, that was intense. Best episode so far for me. The scene with Jackie's breakdown in the diner was incredible. It really got to me. Award winning. 

Agreed that Johnny looked horrible. Grubby and puffy and not even remotely like Leonard. Acting? 

I still think Darlene and Becky are great characters, or rather the actresses are really bringing them to life. 

So many family dramas, lots of great acting (except from Matthew B) and really, none of the storylines were unrealistic. 

I'll definitely tune in next season. 

I guess none of the storylines were unrealistic if you are an emotional mess with a long history of poor decisions (not you, of course, I mean the characters). It was all very predictable, right down to Jackie going from drunken laughter to crying in one take. I wish just one of these characters would made a good choice and leave to pursue a dream, instead of allowing the rest of the family to drag them down. 

[Bastet]

Undoubtedly the fact they only had a dozen episodes, and don’t know for sure they’re getting more, had an effect on storyline trajectory, but Becky suddenly wanting Emilio doesn’t work for me any better than Darlene considering moving to Chicago with Ben.  I guess they kept it pretty low key, though - she wasn't wanting to, oh, I don't know, move in with the guy, just open to seeing what happened.  And I like that two of the few shows I’ve watched this season (this and Murphy Brown) tackled the effects of deportation. 

I’d love to see Darlene send both Ben and David packing, as I don’t like either relationship (or like either individual all that much).  But as long as she’s not packing, whatever.  I knew she wouldn’t move, but it’s still a relief; it’s not like good shows haven’t let me down before with women’s choices about men.  Speaking of:  David has the audacity to utter the words, “There’s no reason we shouldn’t be together," and the reason Darlene comes up with is Ben?!  And the kids wanting to move back to Chicago so badly they have not a peep to say about it being by way of living with some guy they barely know?  Come on, show.

When I read a semi-spoilery article about filming of the finale, I really liked the notion of exploring how the absence of Roseanne’s usual input on Jackie’s relationships affects Jackie falling into and lingering in old patterns with Peter.  Last week I was quite annoyed he was back around after she’d stood up for herself, but this week I feel it was worth it for the scene at The Lunch Box.  (And I love what they did with the old Lunch Box space, combining the old and new fixtures/décor).  And the kitchen scene with Jackie and Darlene.

“I’ve got a life coach client in 20 minutes and I’ve got puke in my hair" and “Oh my god, it’s the ghost of children past” both made me laugh out loud.

But, holy crap, was that tuna casserole cold?!

[AgentRXS]

The only thing good about this episode for me was seeing the old Lunch Box set. I liked that it looked similar enough to be recognizable, but also realistically updated. Jackie's reaction to Peter too over the top for me. It was too pathetic for her age, even for her. 

Yeah, that ICE raid was telegraphed from the beginning of the episode. 🙄 I do hope they lighten up next season....

[tessaray]

15 minutes ago, Bastet said:

Undoubtedly the fact they only had a dozen episodes, and don’t know for sure they’re getting more, had an effect on storyline trajectory, but Becky suddenly wanting Emilio doesn’t work for me any better than Darlene considering moving to Chicago with Ben.  I guess they kept it pretty low key, though - she wasn't wanting to, oh, I don't know, move in with the guy, just open to seeing what happened.  And I like that two of the few shows I’ve watched this season (this and Murphy Brown) tackled the effects of deportation. 

I think the Becky/Emilio thing worked for me because it was spread out. She went from not wanting anything to do with him, to unbending a little due to the idea of child support, to starting to be seduced a little by the way he tried to take such good care of her and the baby.  And Lecy did a wonderful job just radiating when he was doing things for her.  She's been on her own for so long.  

Dang.  Becky isn't the only one falling for him a little.  :-)  (And I really didn't like Gus on Major Crimes, so good job RR.) 

[janie jones]

2 hours ago, Stacey1014 said:

Mead I the only one who expected Harris and Mark have some sort of response to Darlene about David wanting to get back together since they were in the kitchen while David and Darlene were talking?

Well and as if he's not going to say anything to the kids directly once Darlene and Dan left.

[rmontro]

I really wanted to like Peter, because I like Matthew Broderick, but they've been hinting all along that he was a bad guy so I'm not surprised.

More good acting by Laurie Metcalf, they sure make her earn her money on this show.

Interesting to hear the audience squeal a little when they raised the possibility of David and Darlene getting back together - which I wonder about, since Big Bang Theory is wrapping up this season.  If Galecki wants a job, I expect he's got one (albeit for a big pay cut, I'm sure).

Strong episode to finish on.  I'm surprised at how much I am engaged in this old retread of a show!

[UYI]

44 minutes ago, Bastet said:

But, holy crap, was that tuna casserole cold?!

I was too distracted by the idea of it having potato chips on top of it. Yuck. 

[Emily Thrace]

22 minutes ago, UYI said:

I was too distracted by the idea of it having potato chips on top of it. Yuck. 

I laughed at that I remember Roseanne making that in the original show.

[methodwriter85]

According to the book Gone Girl, making casseroles with chips is very Mid-Western thing because it stretches out the food yield.

[BeachDays]

I remember that too!  Or was it cereal in meatloaf?  Probably both.  

[Bastet]

Yes, she added cornflakes to meatloaf -- "How else do you think we're going to turn two pounds of ground beef into 11 pounds of mouth-watering meat loaf?"  ("And the leftovers stay crunchy in milk.")

[tessaray]

2 hours ago, methodwriter85 said:

According to the book Gone Girl, making casseroles with chips is very Mid-Western thing because it stretches out the food yield.

Crushed potato chips on top of a casserole is meant to mimic bread crumb topping, au gratin style. 

My Midwestern family used bread crumbs or oats in meatloaf to stretch it. Potato chips would be too expensive by the time you added enough.  (And who would waste perfectly good chips in meatloaf? lol.) 

[Mu Shu]

7 hours ago, SirFilligryFlirt said:

Oh Darlene you have so many reasons. David is such a sniveling, sack of pathetic. Wish he was out on that boat with Jerry. That guy can only play pathetic.  Ohhh look. Emilio got deported. He was just trying to live a better life!! He was there illegally Darlene!  And don't worry he'll come back. But, of course they can't make it illegally again. He'll be a yankee doodle in no time flat. I wish Jackie would have held Peter's head under some water until the bubbles stopped. I think I'm out.. 

The Peter character is unbearable.

So, Emilio gets deported.  David comes back to fuck up Darlene’ life just when she had a break and a guy she likes.  Jackie’s boyfriend person is a fucking abusive gaslighter.  Did anything that didn’t totally suck happen?  What’s next?  I’m sure Becky will end up on welfare an a season opener amuse bouche.

This has become painful to watch.   

[readster]

10 hours ago, mythoughtis said:

Jackie’s reaction was as much about Roseanne as it was Peter. That’s why she went back to the Lunch Box.   Every other crisis in her life has been solved, made better, or at least comforted by Roseanne.  

This show should not have taken David’s character into the gutter with the child abandonment and deadbeat dad scenario. We all knew Darlene and David would get beck together.  They overplayed their hand when they could have  just sent David on a extended volunteer stint overseas without  the divorce and without him having been gone all of Mark’s life. Now we all have to suffer while his character is somehow redeemed.

the deportation was inevitable.  

Yeah, I feel like with David they just spun him out of control and didn't stop for one second to go: "You know, that's too much even for him." I think it would have worked better if David spun out more from his brother, Mark dying. That seeing his own son, Mark growing up started upsetting him more or the fact he didn't know how to deal with a teenage daughter with Harris and just had a break down. Turning him into: "I'm a man-child who can't deal with crap because I grew up in hell." was too much. Even throwing him with Blue, who was even a more off the wall character and I felt a waste of Juliet Lewis's acting ability because she was a caricature "new age" 40 something character that NO ONE cared about.

  Yes, Jackie broke down and it was so well done by Laurie Metcalf, but they sadly pointed out the main problem with Jackie. She continues to spin in the same problems that have dictated her life. She leans on someone else to get her out of her problems or deal with emotion issues. Instead of you know going; "I don't need a man to make things better" or how about: "Yes, I have a son, why don't I take the first step and start mending things up." Oh no, it's back to: heavy drinking/break down, "oh I have money, let's blow it on some big gamble instead of going over investments or something." Wash, rinse repeat. I know they want to stay in tune that The Conners have always made on the fly decisions and never take a step back to think things through. However, at their ages, it gets to a point where: "I'm getting to old to think like this anymore." 

[Ottis]

Here's the good and bad of The Connors in a nutshell: The show itself has much promise, and at times has been the closest we have come to All in the Family in decades. in terms of honesty and reality. The *specific plots* are screwing it up, because they repeatedly feature these characters making stupid decisions based on ... them being stupid? So, tough to have much sympathy.

Example One: Darlene can't move ONE HOUR AWAY to be with a new (apparently really good and adult) guy, in a place her kids want? An hour? 

Example Two: Jackie picks a clear loser, apparent from the moment he appeared on screen, and he uses her. Surprise, I guess?

Example Three: Becky gets pregnant without knowing who the dad is, at an advanced age for pregnancy, and has many issues. Well, duh?

If the show would feature the characters facing challenges that weren't the result of their own ignorance, I could identify more. I loved the comedy Arrested Development, but that could also be the title of this show because none of these people seem able to progress beyond the same stage they are in. If the writers could create situations that were more about the world around them, and the impact it has on this family, and less on their own poor choices, this show would be fantastic.

UPDATE: I was thinking maybe some examples of these kinds of issues might take this further beyond simply arguing about character actions, so here are a few:

- This one they already touched on, though barely scratched the surface: How the failure of the US medical system makes people do dangerous things. In an earlier episode, they briefly showed people sharing medications. Run with that. 

- They've mentioned the union a few times. How about a plot point based on the declining power of unions, and how that had made unions more aggressive, even to their own members?

- The US job market has lost most jobs not because of free trade, etc., but because of the march forward of technology and greater expectations of workers at all levels for technical ability. How about a family member get caught up in that?

- Back to the gender identify issue with Mark ... there are a bunch of ways they could go with that they aren't the cliched "everyone is special" route.

These plots don't rely on character stupidity. They might be impacted by it, but their cause isn't ignorance. It's the real world.

Edited January 23, 2019 by Ottis

[Melina22]

I think that one of the reasons people always loved watching Roseanne is that for once there was a show that portrayed people with messed-up, funny, stressful lives, like the lives of most of the viewers. For once we were watching, not life as we wish it were (big, immaculate houses, mothers with dancer's bodies, all problems resolved in 30 minutes) but life as it actually is. 

I'm in the minority perhaps, but the reason I'm enjoying this season is that people just do their best, and try hard to improve their lives in small ways, but basically they stay the same. People continue to make some bad choices or struggle with addiction, money is always an issue, family members annoy each other. It's real life, but funnier. 

[Keywestclubkid]

9 minutes ago, Melina22 said:

I think that one of the reasons people always loved watching Roseanne is that for once there was a show that portrayed people with messed-up, funny, stressful lives, like the lives of most of the viewers. For once we were watching, not life as we wish it were (big, immaculate houses, mothers with dancer's bodies, all problems resolved in 30 minutes) but life as it actually is. 

I'm in the minority perhaps, but the reason I'm enjoying this season is that people just do their best, and try hard to improve their lives in small ways, but basically they stay the same. People continue to make some bad choices or struggle with addiction, money is always an issue, family members annoy each other. It's real life, but funnier. 

I see your point but NOTHING with these people seem to go right tho its all bad stuff bad stuff bad stuff I mean even in the old show bad stuff happened but it also had some wins in it for them. This season just seemed to be nothing but them being beatn down with no hope in sight and thats just uber depressing ... we watch tv to escape not to be reminded how horrible life is constantly if you get what I'm saying.... Jackie was beatin down so much this season and ended on a low note even for her why they wont just give her Andy back (pretty much the only good thing in her life in the old show with the lunchbox gone)  you gotta have some kinda win somewhere......

Edited January 23, 2019 by Keywestclubkid

[readster]

5 minutes ago, Ottis said:

Here's the good and bad of The Connors in a nutshell: The show itself has much promise, and at times has been the closest we have come to All in the Family in decades. in terms of honesty and reality. The *specific plots* are screwing it up, because they repeatedly feature these characters making stupid decisions based on ... them being stupid? So, tough to have much sympathy.

Example One: Darlene can't move ONE HOUR AWAY to be with a new (apparently really good and adult) guy, in a place her kids want? An hour? 

Example Two: Jackie picks a clear loser, apparent from the moment he appeared on screen, and he uses her. Surprise, I guess?

Example Three: Becky gets pregnant without knowing who the dad is, at an advanced age for pregnancy, and has many issues. Well, duh?

If the show would feature the characters facing challenges that weren't the result of their own ignorance, I could identify more. I loved the comedy Arrested Development, but that could also be the title of this show because none of these people seem able to progress beyond the same stage they are in. If the writers could create situations that were more about the world around them, and the impact it has on this family, and less on their own poor choices, this show would be fantastic.

You pointed out pretty much what I was saying in my post. They have the characters making stupid decisions because they are being stupid. I pointed out with David, they could have had it that he walked out because he had a break down that built from an abusive home, having constant unemployment, having his brother die, and seeing he couldn't be a good father because he didn't have a great home life. Instead: "I'm a man-child who keeps saying 'I love you' " to a woman who he has constantly screwed up time and time again. Jackie new this guy was  loser, everyone pointed it out to her, yet she keeps letting him do this. Or she forces the family to "want" her around because she feels that with Rosanne dead no one wants her around? Umm... huh? As for Becky she put herself on that road when she couldn't bare the thought of her boyfriend leaving and her parents couldn't "pay" for the school she wanted to go to. Yeah, we get it, the Connors don't think things through, they just jump and do it. Like how last season when Chuck and Dan got into the argument about how they aren't retired because of making bad decisions. All Dan had to tell Chuck way back when that as great as it would be, he finally had a job he could do and retire from one day. Then he the fact it was : "Hey, some extra money, what a great idea, goodbye Civil Service job!" 

[Ottis]

33 minutes ago, Melina22 said:

I think that one of the reasons people always loved watching Roseanne is that for once there was a show that portrayed people with messed-up, funny, stressful lives, like the lives of most of the viewers. For once we were watching, not life as we wish it were (big, immaculate houses, mothers with dancer's bodies, all problems resolved in 30 minutes) but life as it actually is. 

I'm in the minority perhaps, but the reason I'm enjoying this season is that people just do their best, and try hard to improve their lives in small ways, but basically they stay the same. People continue to make some bad choices or struggle with addiction, money is always an issue, family members annoy each other. It's real life, but funnier. 

Totally get this, and yes, the original Roseanne in the 80s/90s was touted as "the anti-Cosby Show" for those reasons. No doctors, lawyers and big houses here. So you're right re: Roseanne generally. The issue now is that, while many people struggle, The Connors keep creating their own problems. 

Your comment gets to another question I wonder - does the show want us to feel sympathy *because* these people are stupid? Is that what we've come to? We no longer look toward people we want to aspire to be, with education, common sense, hard work, ambition, etc., because that makes us feel bad. So watching ignorance is better? That scares the crap out of me. What does that say about America today? They need to introduce *someone* in this family who has been successful beyond a subsistence level.

Edited January 23, 2019 by Ottis

[Snow Apple]

9 hours ago, AgentRXS said:

The only thing good about this episode for me was seeing the old Lunch Box set. I liked that it looked similar enough to be recognizable, but also realistically updated. Jackie's reaction to Peter too over the top for me. It was too pathetic for her age, even for her. 

Jackie's meltdown wasn't just about that loser Peter. There was a reason it happened in the place Jackie lost.

To reveal my own personal story, I lost my sister almost two years ago. We were a lot like Rosanne and Jackie. She was the one who took care of everything. And then things kept snowballing including medical and financial stuff. Although I never got drunk and threw a bottle, that scene spoke to me. 

[Melina22]

13 minutes ago, Ottis said:

does the show want us to feel sympathy *because* these people are stupid? I

I don't feel sympathy because they're stupid, but because they're human. Intelligent people make bad choices all the time. Good people get hit by bad things. I think we see this show through the lens of our own experience. 

I do enjoy positive, inspirational shows a lot, particularly real life documentaries. But I also sometimes enjoy watching shows with dark humour, that echoes the humour I needed to survive a very difficult childhood, watching intelligent adults make terrible choices. 

So I fully understand what you're saying. At the same time, I think we use different shows for different things, and for me, there's something cathartic about shows like last night's episode. 

Edited January 23, 2019 by Melina22

[blondiec0332]

I chuckled when Dan talked about being at the mall and listing the stores that closed.  Sears. Radio Shack.  Spencer's Gifts.  All stores that have closed at my local mall.

[Ottis]

20 minutes ago, Melina22 said:

I don't feel sympathy because they're stupid, but because they're human. Intelligent people make bad choices all the time. Good people get hit by bad things. I think we see this show through the lens of our own experience. 

I get where you are coming from, and respect it and agree with it. Intelligent people make poor choices, but often, they were the best choices they could make at the time. The Connors are not those choices. Having a baby in your mid-40s and not knowing who the father is while you work as a waitress as a dead end job is not a series of decisions an intelligent person makes. Refusing to move only 60 minutes away from your family with a man who seems to appreciate and love you to a place both your kids would flourish (most probably) because ... you can't leave your adult, working dad alone? That's not intelligent. Dating Peter? Etc.

[ChicksDigScars]

11 hours ago, Bastet said:

“I’ve got a life coach client in 20 minutes and I’ve got puke in my hair" and “Oh my god, it’s the ghost of children past” both made me laugh out loud.

But, holy crap, was that tuna casserole cold?!

Dan to Darlene: "...for when Becky and the baby move in...because your KNOW that's happening." (I forgot the first half of the line!)

 

Once again, I am bothered by the dumbing down of Becky. The whole conversation about "Chihuahua is a dog, not a state in Mexico" was prime example. Becky was the smart kid. She would have known that. 

 

But, oh, how I loved seeing the Lunchbox set again! Sniff....

Edited January 23, 2019 by ChicksDigScars

[blondiec0332]

1 minute ago, Ottis said:

I get where you are coming from, and respect it and agree with it. Intelligent people make poor choices, but often, they were the best choices they could make at the time. The Connors are not those choices. Having a baby in your mid-40s and not knowing who the father is while you work as a waitress as a dead end job is not a series of decisions an intelligent person makes. Refusing to move only 60 minutes away from your family with a man who seems to appreciate and love you to a place both your kids would flourish (most probably) because ... you can't leave your adult, working dad alone? That's not intelligent. Dating Peter? Etc.

They aren't intelligent choices but not all life choices are intelligent.  Sometimes life choices are based on emotion.  Becky found herself pregnant and after being alone for so long I can totally believe she would want that baby because it would be someone she could love and would love her back.  Darlene wanting to stay and keep an eye on her dad is totally believable to me.  He had been married for so long and to suddenly be without his life partner would absolutely break his heart and make him off balance (figurately speaking).  And Jackie has a pattern of choosing less than favorable boyfriends so that totally rang true to me.

[mythoughtis]

Darlene is not staying for Dan. She’s staying for David.  She’s just not telling Ben that.  

She even used David’s comment about ‘having to move back two months later’. 

[abourgeois]

4 minutes ago, mythoughtis said:

Darlene is not staying for Dan. She’s staying for David.  She’s just not telling Ben that.  

She even used David’s comment about ‘having to move back two months later’. 

YES. It would've been so much better if Darlene had wanted to stay BEFORE David's little visit. If she didn't want to leave her dad and her pregnant sister and her aunt, I would've felt that on her. Also, as someone else said Chicago is ONE HOUR away. To me that is a decent drive time for frequent visits and if not,  I'm no geography expert but I'm sure there are towns IN BETWEEN Lanford and Chicago, yes? Why couldn't Darlene and Ben compromise and move somewhere in the middle? Half hour each way is nothing. 

I about died at Emilio's face when he tasted the tuna casserole. SAME, dude.

My heart broke for Jackie and Becky. Sniff. 

[tribeca]

Exactly how long have Ben and Darlene been dating ?   I can’t believe no one thought iit was not a great idea for her to move in her kids with a guy she barely knows.