Did Anyone See Jackie Smack Darlene in “The Connors”

Finally, the show is interesting.

Jackie is the new Ann Romano!

This scene reminds me how good Laurie Metcalf can be when she's not playing Jackie cartoonishly.

And that didn't look like a stage slap, but the real thing.

Darlene and Becky never got slapped but DJ did.

This is still on?

That scene was amazing, and well acted. Although I have a sneaking suspicion that there was a little truth mixed in there. Especially with Jackie saying that Darlene just assumed Roseanne's place without giving a thought to anybody else.

But the show is so fucking depressing and so many loose plot points.

1.) If Jackie is so destitute for money, where the fuck is her kid to help her out?

2.) And if Beverly never gave up ownership of the Lunch Box, then why was Leon even working there? And Beverly is supposed to be living with them, but she's not there at Thanksgiving?

Poor Katey Sagal looks like she'd rather be anywhere else than there.

I always thought Jackie treated Bev like crap and acted like she was a martyr.

boomer-on-genx violence

That slap was real. It was so real I felt the sting myself.

Slap her, Willona!

What was the point of making Darlene a wanton woman for an arc?

Talking smack.

[quote]1.) If Jackie is so destitute for money, where the fuck is her kid to help her out?

There is no kid. That was retconned.

On youtube.

The first season of this show felt stilted (like the original "Roseanne" revival) but it's really hit it's stride lately. The last couple of episodes have been really, really good.

Sara took one for the team in that scene.

Amateurs.

I see Laurie still isn't over losing that Oscar to Janney.

haha

Why was the Jackie character acting all shocked and aghast after she slapped Darlene?

[quote]The last couple of episodes have been really, really good.

I disagree. It's become the modern day Archie Bunker's Place. Everyone's miserable and they look haggard. The only exception is Lecy, who's doing some first rate acting and comedy. She deserves a better career. Maybe things will improve with revitalizing the Lunch Box, but it's just not funny.

Also, as trashy as the house was in the older show, it had a sense warmth and coziness to it. The house now just looks so cold and dark.

Jackie had no problem with taking Bev' money to invest in "The Lunchbox" despite how much she loathes her. The woman is in her nineties and she is still resentful.

Grow the hell up, Jackie!

I think it's time to start a thread with great slapping scenes. Soap operas will probably loom large.

R19 What I always liked about the original show was that it seemed real and not sitcom-y; so it makes sense to me that the tone has become darker after Roseanne's death. It brings a new element that was missing from the 2018 "Roseanne." I do agree that John Goodman and Sara Gilbert both look distractingly old and haggard, though.

They need to fix the lighting on this show.

In the original Roseanne, Jackie acted appalled when Roseanne spanked DJ for misbehaving, and it led to a rather dark episode about how their father beat them as kids.

Emmy bait

Not a fan and not watching, but Metcalf is a damned good actress. In the clip, Gilbert tries to match her and comes close. Goodman is another fine actor.

Metcalf nails the moment when someone in a nasty argument loses all control and says the thing they know will hurt the most.

The show is better since Roseanne died.

The show has hit a new stride. They were practically reading it off the page when Roseanne was there. Dan Connor was so diminished. He still looks like hell, but the great John Goodman is back in the game. It's too bad that Estelle Parsons is so old. She doesn't appear much. Becky's daughters friend is hilarious. And the boy in a skirt has grown on me. DJ's daughter can't act either! The apple/tree. Becky and Darlene work the hell out of their characters. Yeah it's dark and depressing and sometimes their actions seem a bit out of character. But maybe not. Darlene is pretty disillusioned and bitter and would fuck with two men? It's really gotten better. It's barely a sitcom though. Lecy Goranson is either a great or terrible actress, I can't make up my mind. But she's delightful to watch. The Jackie and Darlene exchange had the darkest ring of truth to it. It was very ballsy. Classic Roseanne.

Lecy is the best thing on it. She is hilarious.

Harris was a preemie when they were millionaires and Dan cheated on Rosie before he sort of died.

I just watched this episode today. Very affecting and well-acted. I agree the show has hit its stride.

I just came on board with the reboot, watching all of the current season in the past week.

I think it’s excellent, unlike The Will & Grace reboot, which felt covered in mothballs.

I agree that the tone of the show is less warm and certainly more harsh than the early seasons of the first iteration of Roseanne. This is the zeitgeist. They have it down in a way that early Roseanne did. The characters have evolved but are consistent with who they were 30 years ago.

I’m enjoying it immensely, though I didn’t watch the first season with Roseanne, primarily because I had a hard timé stomaching her outside of the show.

Since I am late to the show, I missed the last season, which is not streaming on Hulu, as well as that first one which they are trying to bury after firing and killing off Roseanne.

What are the main points to get from those two seasons? What is the misfortune that happened to Jackie?

I thought it was a comedy?? That was a glimpse of hell!

Peggy Bundy, you set the world on fire🔥! But, you can’t save this crap!!

Sara Gilbert now looks exactly like Roseanne.

[quote]Metcalf nails the moment when someone in a nasty argument loses all control and says the thing they know will hurt the most.

Sometimes it's not done from a loss of control.

It’s notable that Roseanne is the top rated sitcom currently, if I’m not mistaken. I’m enjoying it myself and just one of the few show I still watch in network tv.

Jackie made contact, they added slap sound, Darlene reacted like she's been hit by Rocky Balboa. Big wop.

WHY is everyone on that show yelling their lines?

I'm glad to see this show's success and that it proved that Roseanne, the rightwing witch version, was only a distraction.

R40, I think what will be interesting, if the show returns next season (which I expect it will), will be to see how they address the election. One of the main plot points of the relaunched "Roseanne" last year was the revelation that Dan and Roseanne had voted for Trump, but now that Roseanne is long gone (as I imagine most of the Trump-supporting viewers who made the reboot such a hit in the beginning), I can't imagine that they will allow Dan Conner to once again say he voted for the orange criminal. I just think it would be too alienating to the remainder of the show's viewers, though of course that remains to be seen.

^ I disagree. I think Dan would be a Trump voter. He’s the alienated one: a white-working class older man whose fortunes have been sliding for decades. (But I think Roseanne would have been a more likely Sanders supporter in 2016, at least the Roseanne from 1989).

If the show wants to continue in its current vein of frustration and rage, it’s not out of character for him at all, though it might be more of a challenge for much of the audience, who are used to sanitized sitcoms.

this is still a show?

They need to get rid of the subplot with Darlene and the magazine publisher. There's no way he would be into her.

[quote]If the show wants to continue in its current vein of frustration and rage, it’s not out of character for him at all, though it might be more of a challenge for much of the audience, who are used to sanitized sitcoms.

R42, this is really the point I was trying to make -- I'm not saying Dan Conner wouldn't continue to support Trump in real life (I've no doubt he would). I just mean in terms of the producers/ABC and whether they would want to "go there" again now that Roseanne is out of the picture. (I guess there's also the question of what John Goodman may want for the character -- that is, if he has any say about it or not.)

Sara looks so skeletal. She needs to eat something.

They never revealed who Dan supported in the 2016 election, actually. I guess people assumed he voted for Trump but I like to think he was a closet Hillary supporter. Of course had to hide it from psycho bitch Roseanne.

I wish they'd have an episode with last 30 seconds being 2 midwestern millenial guys just talking about how their families forgot about them while they sit on a couch with an afghan on the back surrounded by a pile of smashed beer cans. I think they mentioned Jerry Conner being away somewhere but I don't think Andy was ever mentioned again. At least give some acknowledgement of the characters. They certainly have no room for any others. They can't manage to give DJ more than a line every 2 or 3 episodes.

[quote]They can't manage to give DJ more than a line every 2 or 3 episodes.

This is what I continue to find so bizarre. Why they relegate him to the sidelines the way they do instead of having him front and center in all the family drama with Darlene and Becky as the three kids from the original series I will never know.

And I too want to add my voice to those saying Lecy Goransen is something of a revelation on this show -- never would I have thought that she'd be capable of giving such a funny and poignant performance, particularly since it didn't appear she cared all that much about sticking with acting after the original show. Talk about a nice surprise.

R49, I think it's because the guy who plays DJ is a not-so-great actor. I'm glad he's getting work though.

[quote]Emmy bait

Perhaps but I think the biggest obstacle the show will face with regards to any awards recognition will be the fact that (a) it's still essentially a reboot, even if it is now called "The Conners" and not "Roseanne" and (b) it's on broadcast television, which no longer carries any clout. If it was on cable or streaming -- even if it was a lesser show -- it would automatically be assigned that "cool" factor necessary nowadays to garner both attention and nominations. (In a similar vein, I think "Brooklyn Nine Nine" is one of the best comedies on TV but feel it's routinely ignored during awards season in favor of programs on Netflix and Amazon for the exact same reason.)

I think if anything, just because of her revered status as a Tony-winning and Oscar-nominated actress, Laurie Metcalf may manage to break through with a supporting actress nod but that would be it.

Goranson is great, but they could be doing so much more with her character. It would be far more believable if she had been the one caught up in a love triangle with two men. An attractive single woman struggling to make ends meet would be much more of a catch than someone with two teenage kids who's living at her parents home and taking care of them. And let's be honest, Sara has never really been able to convincingly play straight no matter how hard she tries.

There are times when it seems like Gilbert wants to be the Roseanne and Jackie character meshed into one, and it's not working. And I agree, DJ getting sidelined just speaks to a lack of ideas more than anything else. The dynamic needs to be better. And less focus on Darlene's kids. Very one dimensional storylines.

What was the update on Andy?

I agree that the Mad Men guy would not be into Darlene, but I do believe David would.

And I really liked the scene in the therapist’s office where he broke up with her using the same trick she’d planned to use on him. She looked convincingly hurt and all the more selfish when he beat her to the punch.

I think Darlene is far more Roseanne than Jackie, but she always was closer to her in dry retorts and general lower-class weariness.

Lecy Goranson really has come into her own. She has an energy that offsets the aforementioned weariness that Dan also shares, but also has a desperation about her in trying to keep sober and her head above water.

I actually like Gilbert's performance and think it's consistent with the original series. Darlene was, just like her mother, a smart-ass with the fast quips, so to say she's just trying to be like Roseanne -- especially since she was just like her when she was a teenager -- actually just kind of makes sense to me. To have Darlene now as an adult be some kind of warm, tender human being would not be character continuity in my opinion. Perhaps, if Roseanne was still there to go toe-to-toe with her like in the old days, people wouldn't notice it so much? Just a guess.

Is anyone’s CHARACTER ever allowed to be gay??

R54, you beat me to it and I like your assessment of the characters better than mine. Well said.

Yeah, R44. Why would an extremely unattractive person be paired on TV with a beautiful person?

R44, why wouldn't he be into her. He seems like a liberal creative guy stuck in Lanford. Darlene might be his only female counterpart in Lanford, and she's the same age, and she happens to be in the same office as him everyday. Should he instead go after some blonde with big boobs whom he has nothing in common with?

Is he in Lanford? They show shots of the el train in Chicago for transitions to their office, right?

How did Darlene get that large apartment with 2 beds when she went to art school? What a sweet deal she had back then.

She was really cunty back in those days too, sleeping with David and Jimmy at the same time and callously rubbing David's nose in it.

R61, Darlene illustrated artwork that went beyond hardcore XXX porn. DJ got in trouble for bringing her "artwork" to school, which the principal considered filth, and Dan got called to school because of it.

I always wondered what the hell she illustrated that was so hardcore..

There was no porn in the comic book, it was violence and cannibalism.

How do you people think Lecy Goranson is a good actress? She has Becky's attitude and personality down but her line delivery is AWFUL! I've kind of accepted it (like I used to during the original run) and don't mind her but she is not a good actress. I was really thinking she turned the corner when she slayed her Boy's Don't Cry role. She was great in that movie. That kid that plays Darlene's son? He's ever worse than Lecy. With him, though, his character is annoying too.

Would any of you except a DJ recast?

[quote]Would any of you except a DJ recast?

No. It works because it doesn't work. In the original I think the writers began to play to Michael Fishman's lack of talent to make DJ into a weirder and weirder little kid, the way Mad Men's writer's made Betty Draper into an inert ice queen due to January Jones.

I don't think DJ's acting is that bad. It is weird that he only gets one line per episode, and sometimes none. But that's not necessarily a reflection on his acting. I think the show is very female-centric, and there's not a lot of room for male-centered storylines. (Dan is the exception). What made Roseanne different from all the family sitcoms in the late 80s, besides the realism, was that the show delivered two sitcoms in one. It was the story of a struggling family, but it was also the story of two sisters whose big-sister-little-sister dynamic stayed the same even as they grew older.

In the "slap" scene, Darlene's words hit really hard, because in the 80s, the Roseanne character was always trying to save the Jackie character from herself. Jackie had a lot of bad luck, but she also made some bad choices, and Roseanne's role was to try to steer her in the right direction and help her clean up the mess. Roseanne was probably too overbearing as a sister. It was a fascinating relationship (until the show turned Jackie into a neurotic dingbat), and the current writers are trying to foster a similar relationship with Becky/Darlene. But they just don't have the chemistry that Barr and Metcalfe had, though.

Today's show isn't quite as good as it was back in the 80s/90s, but it's still better than nearly any other sitcom on the air today.

Fishman's acting is no good. There's also a tendency for him to have one line and then the implied stage direction of "DJ leaves mid-laughter." He tears out of a scene and he seems to be smiling a bit irrespective of what his character said. Very annoying.

Lecy: I don't get the praise. Her only emotion is exasperation. Remember when they were younger and Darlene was going through her black clothes, lying around phase? Becky was tearing around the house doing laundry, picking up around the living room, and she told Darlene that her antics got her out of chores and Becky's left doing everything. In that scene--and no other scene--that level of exasperation was perfect.

Goodman's staring off in the wrong direction. Is he reading cue cards or something?

But Metcalf is a dream so I'm keep watching.

I loved the show when I was growing up because it was working class and not conservative. That was a revelation.

Another one here who doesn't get the praise for Goranson. As a teenager, she was a wonderful and very natural actress who didn't deserve to be overshadowed just because Sara Gilbert got all the good one-liners. But now she delivers her lines like she recently suffered a stroke and is struggling to get words out.

OP. It is "The Conners" not "The Connors".

[quote] Another one here who doesn't get the praise for Goranson.

I am one of those above who praised her as the best part of the show. That isn't to say I think she is a "great actress". I just think she is hilarious on this particular show.

I also praised her upthread. As another poster pointed out, she is immensely watchable. I think she has an energy different from her 1989 incarnation, who held the family’s hope of breaking out of the struggling working class. She failed, and in place of the book smarts she had then, she has a drive to do better for her child rooted in immediate reality. She has the positive energy in the family, despite the uncertain sobriety and mounting debt, or maybe because of it.

I grew up in an Illinois factory town that has now cratered with a loss of jobs and hope for the future. I absolutely got Roseanne when it first appeared, as r68 stated, because it presented working class white people as full characters, not cartoons written by people who’d never come close to that life.

It really saddened me when they lost that in the series after the first five or so seasons, but I feel they’ve got it back and are swimming in the harsher, uglier time that we live in 30 years after it’s start.

^ And yes, grammar gays, they taught correct use of the possessive apostrophe in school, but they didn’t prepare me for autocorrect turning its into it’s every fucking time.

And let's take a moment to recognize how next to impossible it is to successfully reboot a series 20 years later, not to mention losing the namesake character!

Harris is so humorless unlike her prototype Darlene.

Slap her, M'Lynn! Hit her!

Tonight's episode had a bizarre dream sequence. When it started, it was really cheesy. But Metcalf's reaction to the vision was pretty amazing. It was a continuation of a 30-year storyline about Jackie's relationship with her mother.

Since the scene was made with special effects, the show was smart not to add canned laughter to the parts of the scene that were kind of funny.

R74 Losing Roseanne was the best thing that could've happened for the show IMO. The reason most reboots don't do well is because the nostalgia wears off after the first few episodes and then it's just the same old show. Taking the old characters and shifting the dynamics creates something that can stand on it's own.

You're right about Harris. She ain't got it. Reminds me of what was so incredible about Darlene as a teenager. She was the most realistic teen I'd ever seen on TV.

I wonder why the children, for the most part, don't have developed characters and don't come across as compelling. Partly it's that Darlene having kids just doesn't ring true for me. She was all set to get the fuck out of Lanford and no, I don't belive she'd have the kid instead of an abortion. She was outta there. So that storyline felt untrue to what they'd built up over the years.

Why was Darlene so against letting Jackie and Becky reopen the restaurant if it's just sitting there empty?

^ They could find a new renter after the Chinese restaurant cleared out.

Re-opening The Lunchbox would eliminate whatever cash stream (or trickle, as it’s Lanford) brought in and at the same time require all the up front costs in opening a new business.

They would, however, still have the deed to the property unless they borrowed heavily against the equity and couldn’t pay off the debt.

They should have had Darlene have a Becky type daughter to play off of Humorless Harris.

She almost does, r82.

I still think this show is bad.

Is Odessa Becky like though?

If anyone slapped me as an adult I would shoot them in the leg.

I read they're going to introduce 'LIttle Ed' later on in the season, Dan's half brother who is the son of Crystal and Ed. Little Ed is going to resent Dan for not helping their father, kind of like Dan resented Ed for not helping their mother.

Please let them cast someone at least semi good-looking ^^^

Unlike the original series, this is so hollow... an Ivy League graduate's imagine of how poor people act/talk.

I don't understand why they don't at least cast Jackie's son. And yes, they definitely should hire more attractive people. This has to be one of the homeliest casts in the history of tv.

There's something still off about the show to me. It lacks authenticity - it's too sitcommy.

Watching last night's episode I recalled where Roseanne, Jackie and Nancy go searching for a loan. That was authentic. Real, but funny. This show isn't quite there yet.

It also often feels like poverty porn where the overarching joke is what a bunch of losers this family is. The original was never about that. Even at their worst, there was always a sense that the characters still had their dignity. That's missing here. It feels more like Married With Children than Roseanne.

They absolutely should not, r90. Roseanne was always resolute about not casting pretty people. There's a behind the scenes somewhere on line about the episode where she played Santa. She personally vetoed all the blonde haired California looking kids in favor of those looking more plain. That's the authenticity.

I like it now. Hated with that fat pig woman on.

Darlene’s boss/bf needs to return but only in white briefs.

[quote] Even at their worst, there was always a sense that the characters still had their dignity.

That's the difference between the '90s and today. It really captures the desperation of some -- the zeitgeist.

I like the show, but have to admit it lacks the authenticity of the original. I also feel as if they've taken the 'character' Jackie and turned her into a caricature. My favorite by far is Lecy. I even kind of like the actress playing Harris - I don't like her on Shameless, but I like her here.

R88 R90 Why does everyone on television have to be attractive? They look like a real family.

"Why does everyone on television have to be attractive? They look like a real family."

They look like a really rough, haggard, unwell "real family." No kidding, this cast of actors all look BAD. All of them look like shit. It's hard to watch this show for that reason alone. As for the slap...well, Darlene had it coming. Actually, a good beating is all she deserves. She's always been snarky, selfish, nasty, uncaring, abusive to David. She's a horrible person. And even when young she was unattractive, to it's pretty ludicrous to see men wanting to fuck her. Oh why or why was Darlene not made a lesbian? That would have made so much more sense, considering Sara Gilbert has never had any chemistry with with any male she's been paired with. Whenever she kisses a guy her lack of enthusiasm is palatable. It's like she's kissing a block of wood.

Dan Conner's little brother is making a comeback.

Did Lonnie, Crystal's other son, disappear as well?

[quote]. And even when young she was unattractive, to it's pretty ludicrous to see men wanting to fuck her. Oh why or why was Darlene not made a lesbian? That would have made so much more sense, considering Sara Gilbert has never had any chemistry with with any male she's been paired with. Whenever she kisses a guy her lack of enthusiasm is palatable. It's like she's kissing a block of wood.

Why are you idiots going on about attractive people on this show? Do you think it would better if they recast everyone with actors from “Riverdale”? JESUS. Yeah, let's cast this size 0, waspy looking chick to play Jackie. It'll be great! And for Darlene, let's get Megan Fox!

FOH

Unappealing, unattractive actors are hard to stomach. I never understood the appeal of "Roseanne", much less "The Connors." All the characters were not only fat/ugly but had awful personalities, too. But I guess that was considered part of the show's "charm.", showing what a "real" working class looks like. Well, I think there were probably LOTS of working class families out there who are a hell of a lot more attractive than that bunch and are not nearly as pathologically dysfunctional.

I can look past natural aging when watching talents like Metcalf and Goodman in their element. Then again, I'm not shallow.

Why are they hard to stomach, r102? You need to examine your own biases.

Metcalfe actually looks better than Leci or Sara. I don't mind Goodman either. However, it's hard to believe there isn't one semi-attractive younger person in the whole family. As for Sara/Darlene, I don't understand why they couldn't give her a lesbian relationship. Even as a child, she pinged. Leci sort of does as well.

R101, nobody is saying they need to recast the entire show, but it wouldn't kill them to cast one half way decent looking actor.

Laurie Metcalf is an attractive woman, though the way she is styled on this show does her no favors.

[quote] I also feel as if they've taken the 'character' Jackie and turned her into a caricature.

Which, to be fair, happened at the end of the original run.

I thought Jackie, of all people, might actually find that her sister's death allowed her space to grow and become her own person. THAT is the interesting story to me....that she finds out who she is and feels guilty because she's flourishing in the wake of her sister's death.

R102, perhaps you should stick to reruns of BH90210 and Melrose Place. Those shows are garbage, but at least they have pretty men and women. Are you trolling, or will you seriously not watch a show unless you think the actors are physically attractive?

The actors actually look authentically mid-western and lower class, except Katy Segal who stands out like a sore thumb.

"Are you trolling, or will you seriously not watch a show unless you think the actors are physically attractive?"

The actors on "Roseanne" and "The Connors" were always REALLY unattractive and the characters they played were always REALLY fucked up. Why watch something like that? I tried watching "Roseanne" and "The Connors" to see what the big deal was, but both shows grated on my nerves for precisely those reasons: ugly actors playing unlikable, unsympathetic, fucked up people.

so, yep, a troll...

Nope, not a troll. Just somebody who doesn't like looking at or hearing ugly, fucked up people.

R112, so you don't shop at Walmart...or even go out in public at all?

I want to see pretty people play Roseanne and the Conner family?? All over again from the start. Kind of a stupid argument. The appeal isn't that they're ugly. They were cast to look like a family. And nobody knows how someone will look 30 years later. It's too much like real life for some posters I suspect. Doesn't matter how attractive they are - the cast is worn and changed and still visibly the same people. Scares the fuck out of y'all. Ain't a facelift in the group and only Jackie with fillers and botox. Makes her look like a clown she has to work so hard to make a big goofy expression. There is a reason she stopped winning awards. Roseanne was much better looking than Laurie Metcalf, anyways. Funny. Darlene gives off a burnt sexual energy too. I believe that men want to fuck her. David out of his inability to grow up and the fat comic book publisher because he's no prize himself and he and Darlene are both sardonic and dirty in the sack. Becky is the one time drunk fuck. Darlene is the woman who if a man is into - he's really into. Dan....well no thanks. But he's 65 years old and they aren't making him sexy. The show is pretty smart and the characters are just as smart. Dan and Roseanne sex scenes were always funny and real. Unattractive married people have sex.

"So you don't shop at Walmart...or even go out in public at all?"

No, I just don't find ugly, fucked up people a source of entertainment.

"The show is pretty smart and the characters are just as smart."

They're NOT smart! They're STUPID. They keep making the dumbest decisions, the dumbest mistakes. They're clods.

The point is...criticizing a show that was created as the anthesis of the Norman Rockwell ideal family for having actors that are too ugly is a fucking waste of OUR time because it's so ridiculous.

[quote]They're NOT smart! They're STUPID. They keep making the dumbest decisions, the dumbest mistakes. They're clods.

I mean...you do understand that the smart reference is about the writers and their ability to really capture the process of poor people making bad decisions, right?

Petition to keep the cast ugly.

Mark and younger David of Roseanne were both very good looking. Younger Becky and Darlene were cute. Btw why did the actor playing mark commited suicide?

Heroine overdose R119:

Glenn Quinn, who died in 2002 of a heroin overdose, played Becky Conner’s boyfriend Mark in the series’ original run. Quinn joined the cast in season 3 and remained a recurring character until the end of the show’s nine-season run, with Mark and Becky eventually getting married.

Jackie was beautiful in that black wig in a Halloween episode even standing next to a young George Clooney. Most of the time they played against her natural good looks perhaps in deference to Roseanne.

Why don't we get to see the new baby? Why don't they bring back Leon? He was great on the show.

Leon was on a show that got canned last year, R121, so maybe he'll be available now.

The only good looking cast member on Roseanne, the only good looking one EVER, was Glenn Quinn. He really stuck out like a sore thumb on that show. His handsomeness was so jarring in the midst of all that plainness and ugliness.

Roseanne wasn't terrible looking after about 1991. Of course she had full body plastic surgery and came out looking Native American for a few years.

Mariel Hemingway, George Clooney, Traci Lords, Glenn Quinn and Sally Kirkland weren't hideous when they were featured on the show.

Ahem.

White trash problems.

[quote] Heroine overdose [R119]:

Merciful Minerva!

Agreed, R119

I had a huge crush on David when I was about 15. He was soulful and sweet looking. Cute.

"Mark and younger David of Roseanne were both very good looking. Younger Becky and Darlene were cute."

Well, Mark was. David, not so much. He was what you would call plain. Becky? Ordinary, at best. Darlene? Always funny looking. There was an attempt to glamorize her by giving her wild, unruly curly hair (a perm, obviously). But it couldn't disguise her homely face. The Connors were an unattractive, white trash family, no question about it.

Mark was the recessive looking one. He had no chin. David was very cute. A small guy. Adorable. Still cute as an older man. Mark was just a shock of hair and some nicely set eyes. But he had no lower half to his face. Gay men are weird. They have the mentality of Becky - a teenage girl who thought Mark was super hot. Enough to throw her life away. Dude had a nice moment in time, but he was more white trash looking than anyone else on the show.

Not hot. Just a dude with a recessed lower face.

Not much without the hair attitude. Five head and the truth.

Done being hot by 21. Hillbilly face syndrome.

Ordinary unemployed actor face.

Keep posting photos of Glenn Quinn, troll. You're only reinforcing how much better looking he was than Johnny Galecki, who was as plain as a boiled potato. Galecki had/has a real "loser" look about him.

[quote]Unappealing, unattractive actors are hard to stomach. I never understood the appeal of "Roseanne", much less "The Connors." All the characters were not only fat/ugly but had awful personalities, too. But I guess that was considered part of the show's "charm.", showing what a "real" working class looks like. Well, I think there were probably LOTS of working class families out there who are a hell of a lot more attractive than that bunch and are not nearly as pathologically dysfunctional.

^ Judging by your many posts here R136, I would guess that YOU'RE a troll. Disturbed even. People can judge for themselves who is or isn't attractive. You seem to hate the show for offending your eyes. Don't watch. Try that. I don't even know the name Glenn Quinn. But I've seen the reruns. It's not hard to find pictures of him. He died when he was 32 and he looked like an ordinary balding guy with a weak chin. I guess you whacked off to him a lot R136? Some of us only know the original show from reruns. Maybe he was hot in 1988. To you. And Becky. His greasy elvis bad boy persona was supposed to be a bit of a hormonal joke. Like Becky ruined her life for that loser? I was just a kid in 1988. You must have been fapping hard.

Girls, [bold]girls, GIRLS!!![/bold]

You're letting the comparative attractiveness of the former boyfriends of the Connor sisters tear you apart!

I guess YOU'RE whacking off to Roseanne reruns featuring Johnny Galecki a lot, R137. And that shows just how disturbed YOU are. And blind. I've seen photos of Quinn in his thirties and he was NOT "balding with a weak chin." He was no doubt a lot better looking than any guy you've ever done. And you.

Darlene should be slapped on every episode.

r140=Sarah Chalke

Sarah Chalke was too pretty to be a believable Conner.

Sarah Chalkes' "acting" on that show made Lecy Goranson look like Lucille Ball and Meryl Streep rolled into one.

Johnny Galecki became really cute once he grew his hair out, and I lost interest in Mark after he changed his hair and they turned him into an idiot.

[quote] Sarah Chalkes' "acting" on that show made Lecy Goranson look like Lucille Ball and Meryl Streep rolled into one.

She was pretty lame when they brought her on to replace Lecy during the show’s original run. However, I thought she outshone the rest of the cast when they brought her back as a new character for the revival.

Martin Mull would be an unlikely return, only because he was mostly a foil for Roseanne, and with her gone, why bother?

His character also wouldn't make any sense now given how they've retconned it so Beverly never gave up her share of the diner.

R145 Her cameo last season was great. Becky has just found out she's pregnant, and Andrea comes into the restaurant to complain to her about how much motherhood sucks. Becky accidentally sips a margarita and then quickly spits it out. Andrea realizes what's going on and says "You're gonna...LOVE being a mom!"

Jackie just did what the rest of America has been wanting to do for years.

I always thought Darlene was the least attractive, least likeable character on "Roseanne" and "The Connors." And the way she treated David! She treated him like shit. It's a measure of how disturbed HE was that he would want to be in relationship with a person who treated him like that. Sheer co-dependence.

Did you see the break-up in therapy?

A lot of that came home to her. It was as good a scene as the slap in terms of a character reaching an end point with Darlene. Sara Gilbert isn’t shying away From it either. There’s an unpleasant dimension to her character that they’re spotlighting through other characters this season.

The character of Darlene was written as a tomboy. And the actress was cast with that in mind. She was never meant to be "hawt". Did you miss "the poem" episode?

Darlene's abuse of David was one of the things I didn't like about the original series and I think it developed out of the writers' not being able to figure out how the most lesbian character this side of Jo Polniaczek could have chemistry with David. I guess anger and meanness substituted for attraction. Darlene would absolutely be with a woman by now. That would be a good storyline.

Lecy's gay too, right?

R145, Her very first appearance on the Roseanne revival shows, right away, how much her acting improved, And she had become just naturally funny.

Probably years of being on Scrubs is what really helped improve her acting and comedic skills.

That was the other one, R154. Sarah Chalke was on Scrubs. She's excellent.

Lecy's good, but I wish she'd take it down one notch. Maybe it's her very expressive face. It goes a long way. For example in the last episode, when Becky has the idea to keep the bar open late to catch all the late night partiers who need one more drink, she flirts with a woman and it's finally subtle, and it works. More of that, Lecy.

What happened to Peg Bundy's face??

R155, This is just a guess, but I think the reason why Lecy has been over acting in past episodes is because she's been a stage actress for years, and that's the reason why she probably talks so loud in some of the episodes.

Sarah chalke has been very self-critical about her time on Roseanne. she said that she was 16 years old when she took the role, and it was her first major one. She was surrounded by pros, and by her own admission, did not stand up to them. She certainly took those lessons and did well with them.

R157, I didn't know Lecy was a stage actress. Good point and that makes sense.

Brings me back to my Metcalf appreciation. I saw her in Doll House Part 2. She is one of the most captivating actresses around. I would watch her in anything. I'd love to see Metcalf in a scene with someone who reminds me of her, Nicola Walker.

If you love Laurie Metcalf, make sure to catch the HBO show Moving On. It's only about 18 episodes, but stars her, Niecy Nash and Alex Borstein.

I thought the thing about this show was that they were struggling financially, but they were fun and loved their kids. Now, they are modelling physical violence. Not cool.

It’s not cool that more impressional families might end up copying them.

Did Sarah Chalke appear this season?

I don't know if my eyes can roll back any further in my head, R162.

So you’re advocating violence, R164?

It hardly advocated violence. Anyone with a brain who watched the episode knows that.

Was there a warning in front of this episode of disturbing content?

What disturbing content would that be, R167?

Nudity, violence, language, drug use.

R169, don't melt over it, snowflake.

I never thought the original "Roseanne" had any authenticity, if for no other reason than everyone was so obviously acting, including Roseanne and Sara Gilbert who both went around with amateurish grins on their faces, sometimes even in scenes where they were supposed to be angry or sad. This seems more authentic than the original ever was.

And Darlene was always written as completely and irretrievably insufferable, and as so many others mentioned, she was actively abusive and it was (and sort of still is) played off as a joke. Which is common enough in sitcoms I guess, but watching Darlene was always like hearing nails on a chalkboard to me. Bad actress, horrible voice, poorly written, ugly, self-satisfied, hypocritical, it's always unpleasant to watch her and no amount of "oh it's sooo authentic" makes up for that.

But this punch kind of does. No idea what happened in the show as far as fallout goes but that punch was a long time coming, and well deserved.

Yes, Sara Gilbert always had an annoying, slurred way of speaking. Both she and Roseanne had awful voices.

Jay R Ferguson is a shoe-in for an Emmy for almost convincing us he is into Sara Gilbert!

I haven't watched any of the new series. I have seen clips here and there. From what I've seen, Lecy is still painful to watch and no, I don't think it's because she's a stage actress and it's not translating. She's just off.

It's something I noticed in the first run of the show. She was fine prior to when she took off but when she came back, it was as though she had never acted a day in her life. I can't explain it but it's like she came back... slow.

And Darlene trying to say that Roseanne spent her whole life trying to "fix," Jackie.... as though that was a good thing? Like anyone asked her to take on that responsibility?

Roseanne didn't spend her life just trying to "fix" Jackie.. she spent her entire life trying to control Jackie.... and everyone else around her. It said more about her than it did anyone she was trying to, "fix."

Wow, what a stupid bunch of commenters. R174 hasn't watched the show, but has so many opinions? And posts??

And R175 is so wrong about everything. People try to help and control and fix the ones they love. That is pretty much family. Jackie and Roseanne grew up in abuse. Rosanne was older and made her own family and found some mild stability there. Jackie had her own life but found her stability in The Conner's house. Roseanne DID spend her whole life trying to fix Jackie - from DARLENE'S perspective. Truthful. Fixing and controlling are not much different. R175 is nuts. Roseanne was a great human character and still the crux of everything on this show so many years later. It's kind of amazing. Don't doubt it for a second. Nothing is really fixable. Just like in a real family. It was a drunk angry battle that most people can relate to. There was all the grief of missing her mom, and all of Jackie being a fool who has no real place there or anywhere. No food. Tequila. Failures in life still have a hierarchy. Roseanne made Jackie her most important friend and she was the least hostile relationship in her life. But Jackie needed help and fixing and support and money. All the time. Her sister. It was a brilliant scene. The slap. Yeah it was written and acted - but we felt the truth of 30 years in that moment. Fantastic. Darlene said to Jackie what Roseanne never would.

R176 shouldn't be calling anyone nuts. Darling, you write like a psycho.

Huh? So you don't like being called out old white dude @ R177? Take your seat and stop making a mess all over this place. You've posted enough contradictory stuff. Projecting your problems onto TV characters is pretty sad. Don't call me darling gramps. How the fuck old are you? I saw the Roseanne show in reruns, as a teen. You must have been 45 years old - thirty years ago? I don't write like anything but my own style. I'm not a psycho darling. You sound like an old woman R177. That's the unhappiest thing an old white fag can become. Pointless and powerless. Lacking in peace and understanding. God Bless You.

Thanks for proving the point, Darling.

Someone's an unhinged baby with reading comprehension issues if it couldn't understand R174 does not require watching the new episodes.

But its history obviously shows its a troll. Probably one wearing shitty shoes!

R178 = Missy Gilbert

Miss Warwick is still banned I hope? He's that scat troll and ancient racist white fag from Missouri. Make it gone please. Shoo. Again.

Babs Healy!

I would’ve love to smack a few of you . Hahahaha

Darlene can press charges. Have Jackie go to jail for assault and battery.

Jackie can use the defense that it is learned behavior from when Fisher use to beat her ass.

Press charges? I guess it's a sign of how much damage being abused does that I read that and thought it was nuts that anyone would call the police on a relative for a smack. But I still think that's nuts. A one-off smack is terrible but I wouldn't bring in the POlice about it.

Oh, look at R182, the homeless "I'm the only authentic black man at the DL and I want to cut the throats of every racist white guy here" jabberer.

Damont told me about him. He smells and calls other people scatters for noticing it. Should have one of those perfume trees hanging around his neck, but since he can't drive he's never been to a car wash to steal one.

Re wore three of them. Dear Re. I wonder if anyone misses her.

Now fuck off. Keep talking about that white people's show where they kicked THEIR crazy person off. Like this place should.

Oh. Anyone got Diane's (Miss Ross to you) new cell number? I like calling her at 7 pm to wake her up.

Bev sold her shares to Leon. Why was she involved in the first place?

Did she? Where is Leon?

Darlene is back with hunky Ben!

R182 Please fuck yourself with a rusty lead pipe. No need for anyone to police who posts where or what we read. Thanks.

"Darlene is back with hunky Ben!"

How did THAT happen? After the way she deceived him he's back with her again? Is he as passive and co-dependent as David? Anyway, the Ben/Darlene relationship is ludicrous. He's a reasonably attractive (not my type, though) guy and seems to be well-adjusted. And he "falls in love" with an unattractive, sarcastic, snarky, controlling she-beast who is now the matriarch of her totally insane family? Doesn't make much sense, does it?

They were drunk, and then he decided to forgive Darlene after a motel fuck.

The clip, again.

It's back tonight! Becky's got a new man!

What's all this fuss about now?

They are doing a live episode in February.

When is Roseanne coming back

In case you didn't hear, "The Conners LIVE" is coming up and ANYTHING COULD HAPPEN!!!!!!!!!!

DJ could actually have some actual dialogue!

Too bad he'll botch it. He's not a good actor.

Who is DJ?

Meh live episode, so meh that nobody has commented here how meh it was.

R204 I thought it was ok. It was really cool and meta to hear about Yang dropping out through the Conners watching the live updates.

I think the kid who plays Darlene's son, Mark, is very talented. Definitely has the "it" factor and hope he goes far.

I really want to catch up on this

The Conners is really not doing it for me. It kind of reminds me of The Drew Carey show, which makes sense because the showrunner of that has the reigns here. Funny, but not really funny. Acting decent, but bordering on poor. Characters rooted in some sort of reality, but too broad and cartoonish to be relatable.

What the show is really missing is Roseanne Barr. It is just not the same without her. And even though her acting was piss-poor during season 10, her presence made it feel like the original. This feels nothing like the original. There's no heart, no bite, nothing. On the original run, the characters were never the butt of the joke. Here, the family is made up to be such a bunch of losers that we are expected to laugh at them, not with them. I don't like it.

R208 That original "Roseanne" reboot did feel more like the original, but to me it felt like the last few years when Roseanne was given full control and everything was a mess. This show is very different, and flawed in it's own ways, but at least I can relax watching it and not worry that Roseanne is going to drive it off the rails again. The performances are improving (due to the slightly better but still bad scripts) and I think the only character we're supposed to be laughing AT is Jackie, though she was always like that. I'm rooting for the show, mostly because I think we need more mindlessly enjoyable sitcoms on TV.

It's over. If they want to do a show about Jackie finally moving away somewhere, that could work. Maybe Beverly shows up and they live together miserably. That's it. Maybe the nephew, Mark, visits.

This will be TV's highest-rated comedy once "Modern Family" goes off the air. It's not going anywhere until John, Laurie, and Sara's salaries get too high to justify the continuation of the show.

R211 Or if the ratings plummet. There's always that.

Laurie Metcalf is wasted on this. I’ve only seen a few episodes, but the writing and direction for Jackie was way over the top. I get that she enjoys the character and the show is easy money, but from a creative standpoint she is capable of so much more.

I wish she would use the time she isn’t on Broadway to pursue independent films like Lady Bird and the higher quality TV shows she was doing pre-Roseanne reboot/The Conners, like Getting On and Horace & Pete.

The fact is Roseanne and Laurie Metcalf both did their best work playing off each other. They were like Lucille Ball/Vivian Vance.

I disagree, r214.

"why wouldn't he be into her."

She's unattractive, has an unpleasant personality and has an insane family. Those are some reasons why. Oh yeah, he found out she was screwing around with David while she was with him and in fact was married to David (she neglected to tell him that). Those some some plenty good reasons why he shouldn't be "into her."

It's weird. Roseanne got better and better as an actress as the original run wore on, while Metcalf declined into cartoonishness. They met in the middle somewhere around seasons 5 and 6.

Grossss .. This show is an abomination. They swiftly kick out the creator and namesake of the show for being racist, which was ridiculous and not true and nowhere close to as bad as what your own president is doing, and then that slimy cunt Darlene slithered to the executives and pitches this Frankenstein of a show. You can love her or hate her but what this case did to Roseanne is soooo trashy.. they’re all just a bunch of ghouls who should remember who made them famous in the first place. Then for Katey to join this idiotic snow must have been a kick in the face to Roseanne. Don’t you have enough money Katey?

What this cast* did ...

Can someone please slap Sara Gilbert every episode. Then when not filming can a grip or stagehand be sent to her house to slap her there?

Is there anyone out there watching who truly is into the "romance" between Darlene and Stan from Mad Men? Gilbert needs to get over herself and have her love interest be more believable.

I'm curious to watch this show. I sort of liked where the reboot was heading before it got canned, but I didn't think it would be worthwhile without Roseanne, even though there were moments I wasn't sure she really wanted to be there. The inclusion of Katey Sagal seems like a smart choice on paper, as Married With Children and Roseanne shared a lot of similarities back in the day.

Don't get too attached to Katey, she has a pilot for a new show next fall.

It’s fascinating how differently people see things. I think Sara Gilbert is *really* good now and I see her as the anchor of the show characterwise. To me, Darlene has very believably (painfully) inherited Roseanne‘S (the character) burdens: she is cynical and sardonic, nevertheless a dedicated mother, too smart to do the work she is paid to do but too limited in options not to do it, saddled with responsibility for everyone else, beaten down but still driven by some ambition. And I think Gilbert is a very good actor in this character, entirely on par with Goodman and (you’ll hate this) better than Metcalf is as Jackie since Jackie is so cartoonish nowadays, which just does not fit the pained realism of this particular sitcom.

Lecy Goranson on the other hand...honestly, I think it’s her manner of speaking/line delivery, but she just always comes across to me as an Afterschool Special-level talent. It’s all I can see when she is onscreen, but I accept that some people think she’s giving the best performances on the series. I think she was a much better teen actor than Gilbert was, and I think she is much better than she was when Roseanne was first rebooted. But she’s still super stiff to me, and her flat delivery just comes across as awkward to me. I have almost always thought the same about Leonardo DiCaprio, and obviously most people think he’s a legendary talent. Hearing him recite Shakespeare as a teenager almost made me cry. He reminded me of a skater kid from high school forced to read out loud in English class. I hear the same when Goranson plays Becky nowadays—although I do think she is getting steadily better.

I wonder what everyone thinks of the little boy’s acting? If he is actually gay, I think he’s a pretty good kid actor. If he’s not really gay, then he’s really very good in the role because I’m pretty well convinced he’s playing himself.

Interesting how subjective such things are.

R222 It is worth watching. After Roseanne died, it was appropriately dark and melancholic. My one criticism is how infrequently the family mentions her; after a couple of episodes, they just got on with life. (My mother died two years ago and my father and sister and I are still mourning her and we always, always talk about her when we are together.) But it gets better and better as it goes on. I feel like the writers became aware that not mentioning Roseanne was not quite working and have dealt with it brilliantly. There’s the tension of Goodman’s resistance to getting too close to Sagal’s character because he is still in love with his wife. This was unspoken for a long time before finally surfacing, which I think is uncommonly sophisticated for a sitcom. There’s Becky becoming an alcoholic after Roseanne died. (Too easily solved, but still an interesting implied effect of the loss.) There’s Darlene having to become a primary breadwinner for her old father and her irresponsible sister Becky (an echo of Aunt Jackie) in addition to the kids, and acting out in her own way by deceiving two men she cares about. And there’s the way that all that tension suddenly snaps sometimes, as with the slap that started this thread. To me, The Conners is on the level of Curb Your Enthusiasm as an heir and reflection of a great 90s sitcom that has a very similar and smart sensibility but its own personality.

The Sagal casting is a misfire in my opinion, or at least the writing is. The show is a comedy and her character as written really isn't all that "funny". On a side note, the writers should consider an episode where Dan becomes infatuated with someone more like Rosanne, fat and loud-mouthed.

R226 That’s fair, all things being subjective. I like the character a lot and the way Sagal plays it. She is so sincere and gentle and patient, but she has those big strange features that match well with Goodman. She looks like she fits into the Lanford world but she isn’t a replacement Roseanne. Darlene is a replacement Roseanne.

R224, I'm not a fan of the little boy's acting on the show. He's not terrible per se, but he has that cutesy, precious way of speaking and acting that I can't stand in child actors. It's very sitcom-y and unnatural.

I watch this reboot purely out of nostalgia for the original "Roseanne" - nothing more, nothing less. There are moments when I chuckle at a line or two, but I don't think this show captures a fraction of the brilliance, intelligence and hilarity of the original. I can't tell if these new writers are lazy, untalented or a combination of the two, because so much of the continuity from the original is lost in this reboot and so many plot holes are never explained.

Looking at him now, I think how interesting it would have been if they had made DJ gay as Roseanne had proposed at one time during the show’s original run.

Calling Jackie a loser was a low blow and a real insult to the character. Jackie was far from a loser at the beginning of the original series. Jackie got the job at the police department and was making a nice salary, and was helping Roseanne out financially at one point. She was the one who had the idea of the Lunch Box in the first place and had to convince Roseanne to become a partner. She bought that house to keep Roseanne and her family from losing theirs. (even though she used Bev's money for the down payment). Jackie was flighty, but she was smart and dependable when she needed to be.

Making her out to be such a pitiful creature who needed Roseanne's help 24/7 shows a gross misunderstanding of the dynamics the original series. And I do believe if Roseanne was still on the show, that scene wouldn't have been done.

OMG that was my family, only with more money, when I was growing up....it WAS a downer

Exactly R230. This new iteration of the show might feature the same characters, but the spirit and history of those characters is not being captured here. Jackie was far from a loser and if anything, Roseanne was the codependent one in their sister relationship, not Jackie. Jackie was always trying to break free from her sister's and mother's influence. I wish "The Conners" would say true to the original dynamics, especially since the audience for this are mostly people who watched the original and know these characters really well from having watched re-runs the last twenty years.

R232 I didn’t see it that way. Roseanne sucked it up and did what she had to do to support her family. Jackie was flighty, always changing jobs, she slept around with losers, drank a lot, half-heartedly did community theatre as she looked for meaning in life. She always ran to Roseanne for support and Roseanne always supported her. They supported one another, really, but Jackie was always in arrested development and at best played growup when she was a cop, but she even flaked out on that. I always saw Roseanne and Dan and the kids as being seriously depressed but functionally so, and I saw Jackie as having bipolar type two or a more serious destabilizing emotional disorder that would have gotten her in real trouble without Roseanne’s interventions.

But she wasn’t as kooky-crazy as she is in the new show, just highly depressive with manic or hypomanic periods.

Jackie needed Roseanne. All her life choices were poor, like Becky’s are. Becky is a Jackie and Darlene is a Roseanne.

Jackie was always reckless.

On the first series, they gave Vicki Lawrence a bit part playing an old girlfriend of Dan's. I think they should invite her back The kids will hate her, as will the actors from all I've heard about how she acts behind the scenes. The tension could work well.

Jackie trying out a new look:

I was busy shitting

The whole Connor family were all losers. That's part of their "charm."

The writing on the show is just so fucking bad. Dan blowing up a car? He would never have done that on the original. No matter how much he hated his father, he would have sold it to pay off bills. Him blowing it up was cartoonish levels of sitcom fuckery.

Please just cancel this abortion. It's ruining the original for me.

On the original show, Jackie and Roseanne had an interesting relationship. Roseanne was the classic responsible older sister, and Jackie was the stereotypical younger sister. Jackie was a free spirit. Her relationships with men were bad. She married Fred, who was a really nice guy, but she just didn't love him. She changed jobs a lot. Roseanne was always hovering over Jackie, anticipating Jackie's problems and ready to "save" Jackie. This annoyed Jackie, even though she benefitted from it. Roseanne had the more conventional life, and at times, she expressed regret that she hadn't chased her dreams. Each sister was probably slightly envious of the other's lifestyle.

In the earlier years, Jackie was a very realistic character. She had problems, but she bounced back, and was overall a positive, likable character. But at some point, the writers turned her into a neurotic person prone to mini breakdowns. Kind of like Barney Fife. And they made her unlikeable.

I love this show, but if Darlene actually goes through with this pregnancy I may lose interest. They can't come up with any other ideas?

R242 But introducing a pregnancy and a new baby is a reliable, time-proven way to reinvigorate a stale sitcom!

Agree, R242, it's the ultimate shark jumping moment. Last season, they already did it with Becky who supposedly had bad eggs because of her age (as we learned in Season 1 of the reboot). And now Darlene, too? Writers, come up with something new.

It's interesting that people think Jackie was a "free spirit". I never saw her that way. I always thought she and Roseanne were co-dependent, but that Jackie was also just plain flighty, maybe slightly lost, and most definitely a basket case. I see "free spirits" as not giving a fuck, which wasn't Jackie.