Which was better: "Maude"

The Golden Girls was a hundred times better than Maude but Maude's theme song was a thousand times better than the Golden Girls.

"Golden Girls" for sure. "Maude" may have seemed good at the time but it hasn't aged well. I love Bea but I find it hard to sit through an entire episode (I'm an elderghea but still too young to have watched when it was first on). It's so talky and melodramatic; it almost feels more like a '60s TV show. On "GG" by contrast the episodes move along much more briskly and the jokes are constant.

If one were finally to tell the truth, the hard truth that we often seek to avoid facing...they were both shit.

Maude is better remembered as a memory. If you actually watch it, its not that good.

Silly question

Bea is great in both but Golden Girls is far more timeless.

Maude is very shouty and loud.

The Golden Girls is way better.

Maude comes way too close to One Day at a Time for comfort.

You’re right, R5.

Golden Girls was better.

I don’t like Norman Lear shows. It’s just people yelling at each other.

Maude had a few great shows, like when Vivian's dog died or when her aunt was killed in a plane crash and Maude thought she would get the money from insurance (Don't spoil it) or the Henry Fonda for president story arc.

The real problem was only Mrs Naugahyde and Arthur were funny. Florida and Walter were dull. Even when they talked about Maude's ex-husbands they were a hundred times funnier than Arthur. And Adrienne Barbeau was only good to look it.

“…Joan van Ark with the Lord to guide her; there was a sister who really cooked…”

Didn't Donny Hathaway throw himself off a building rather than sing with Robert Flake?

r11

Robert Flake? I think you mean Roberta Flack, unless she's transitioned recently.

Dorothy Zbornak was a much more rounded and developed character than Maude Findlay, who mostly existed like Julia Sugarbaker as a straight-up mouthpiece for whatever the writers wanted to say on a particular current issue.

[quote]Dorothy Zbornak was a much more rounded and developed character than Maude Findlay, who mostly existed like Julia Sugarbaker as a straight-up mouthpiece for whatever the writers wanted to say on a particular current issue.

No, Maude was a much more layered character. She had an interesting backstory of being married several times. She went into different ventures, such as real estate. She had an active sex and social life as well.

Dorothy was tepid in comparison. Rarely went out. Rarely dated. Was the butt of jokes. Had a nagging parent who took cheap shots at her all the time. Not to mention her constant attachment to her loser of an ex husband. It's to Bea's credit as an actress that she made the character as entertaining as she did, because in the hands of a lesser actress, the seams would have showed.

I don’t think that any of Norman Lear’s shows have aged well…the GGs by a country mile.

And then there's Maud!!!

“they were both shit.”

God’ll get you for that, Walter!

Walter the wimp!

Another great Maude was when someone was buried with a barouche of Vivian's and Maude had to get it off the corpse .

I watched a few Maude episodes on YouTube a few years ago when they were all up. I wasn’t born until long after it was on the air but I was cracking up watching it.

Maude was groundbreaking. The Golden Girls was fluff. "Vivians First Funeral" was hysterical. I never saw a GG that made me laugh so hard.

How upscale is Tuckahoe? Is it like Larchmont? Clearly Maude is a class above her cousin Edith.

When Maude was good, it was so much better than The Golden Girls. But, the Maude tended to be inconsistent. GG was more consistent, but zero substance.

I vote Maude by far. I have no interest in seeing Golden Girls currently, but Maude I would watch.

Op, the baby tastes of the bougie OP unwashed will never appreciate Maude for the genius that it is.

Maude should have kept Florida on for longer. The daughter was always a drag too.

They should have also made sure Bea shaved her mustache before tapings.

Maude was a much better show, but the characters were so shrill and unlikeable. GG, while lacking the depth of Maude, is brilliant in its own way and holds up much better. I tend to love the Norman Lear shows. The first four or five seasons of All in the Family are pure brilliance.

[quote]Maude should have kept Florida on for longer.

Esther Rolle wasn't funny, not amusing and barely could act. Even on her own show Bookman was a thousand times funnier.

It's funny how a "facelift" was actually the topic of an entire episode of Maude. Now it isn't given a second thought, much less considered controversial.

Blanche’s facelift episode on TGG is way funnier.

Mrs. Naugatuck was much funnier than Florida. Someone must've loved Esther Rolle to build an entire series around her.

I vote for The Golden Girl. Maude has those horrible 70s fashions and let's face it Bea didn't look as good heavier.

The Golden Girls was better in part because it was so much more lightweight. Those ‘70s feminists rants weren’t funny at the time and don’t hold up now. Maude was whatever Bea Arthur could make of it. It would’ve been totally unwatchable with anyone else.

GG was better but Maude was much more active than Dorothy, who is my favorite anyway.

Carol, with no help from Adrienne Barbeau, brought the show down. Carol was never funny or interesting. Compare her to Sally Struthers on 'AITF' and it's clear what one of 'Maude's big issues was.

Why was Marcia Rodd let go?

Marcia Rodd played Walter's assistant whom he wanted to have a fling with.

Laughing at something doesn't make it automatically unsophisticated. TGG was the smarter show. Maude was the dull hammer, hitting the viewer with issues to produce convenient Emmy-bait speeches for Arthur.

They're not all that far apart timewise now, but one has aged much better than the other.

Maude had several good moments. Vivian's facelift episode is pretty enjoyable.

Bea Arthur was a cunt to Adrienne even telling her she wished Marcia Rudd remained in the role of Carol.

It was better when Dorothy revealed she had gotten her eyes done.

I think both shows have merit and their strengths and weakness but Golden Girls is the superior show for several reasons. Maude was definitely a more "intellectual" show that, like all of Norman Lear's shows, tackled major issues. Golden Girls is a much more "traditional" jokes heavy sitcom. Both shows were daring but in different ways. Maude was written to generate discussion whereas Golden Girls was much more subversive by taking four women of "a certain age" and writing them like "younger" people.

While Maude might be more substantive, its writing style and comedy feel far more dated (its production values are also so cheap looking compared to other shows of its era e.g. MTM). It doesn't translate well into the 2020s. Maude is effectively a nostalgia piece that is really only remembered by people who were alive in the 70s or who discovered they show by virtue of being a fan of the Golden Girls. Maude was a hit during its time because it dared to tackle issues that were not discussed, but have now (with the exception of the abortion show) have been done by virtually every show since.

Golden Girls is a pop cultural phenomenon that is continually being rediscovered. Yes, it might be less intellectual than Maude, but that's why it still holds up over 30 years later. Either by design or brilliant accident, the writers didn't root the show in the 80s and early 90s. Yes, the show is very much a product of that era in terms of its pop culture references, fashion, and story style, but its based in character jokes and that's why it holds up in a way that Maude doesn't....there is a timeless element to the Golden Girls.

Part of the appeal of Golden Girls is that you have fun watching it, you want to be friends with these people. Also the show is huge with the gay community because not only is it about chosen family, each character embodies a gay archetype (the naive country boy who moves to the big city, the slut, the bitter queen, the old queen who doesn't give a shit) Maude doesn't have that. I also think the acting on Golden Girls is higher calibre than on Maude and the characters better defined. It's also consistently better written. Even in the clunker episodes there is always one or two fantastic jokes, whereas Maude was far less consistently funny. Additionally, Golden Girls never had a substantial slip in quality. Yes, the later seasons are more "surreal" with aspects of the plots becoming a bit more ridiculous but that's common in sitcoms because after a few years, the audience has seen it all and the jokes need to get bigger to keep earning laughs. But Maude really begins to fall flat by the fourth season, and the final season is a mess (also you can kind of tell during that final season of Maude, Bea Arthur was a mess and didn't want to be there).

Also, controversial opinion but I actually Bea Arthur was better as Dorothy than Maude.

r39

Vivian's facelift was done because Rue wore a grayish wig and heavy make up at first, when Vivian wasn't a regular character on the show. When Vivian's role was expanded, Rue wanted to look younger so they made up a facelift story to explain why Vivian looked younger than Maude. The two actresses are twelve years apart in real life.

How come they haven't recreated an episode of 'Maude' for that Norman Lear Live show? But who would play Maude??

[quote]But who would play Maude??

That would be hard. Maude only really worked in Bea Arthur's hands. If someone like Bonnie Franklin or Dixie Carter played the role she would've been incredibly unlikable.

Mary Louise Wilson had the misfortune of working with both Bea Arthur and Bonnie Franklin. If only she worked with Linda Lavin, she would have won the triple crown.

Doris Roberts said in a recent Emmy TV Legends interview that she was originally cast as Viv. She said she flew out to the Tandem Productions offices to do a run through for the cast and crew, which started with a bit where Maude and Viv get into a bitchfest over a dress.

At the end of the day Jay Sandrich, who was the director, pulled Doris aside and said, "Honey, I hate to tell you this. But I've made a mistake. You're just as big a bitch as Bea".

And at that point Doris was fired, and she was replaced with Rue McClanahan.

There was a lengthy thread discussing the pilot on One Day at a Time (now removed from YouTube) which had Marcia Rudd as Barbara.

"Three to Get Ready"

I never liked Vivian. Rue was much, much better on TGG.

I'd love to see Vivian's first episode but with Doris Roberts instead.

[quote]Mary Louise Wilson had the misfortune of working with both Bea Arthur and Bonnie Franklin.

Did she ever spill on what working with Bea was like. We know she HATED the Bonster.

Before my parents died (both within 3 months of each other), my siblings and I were their caregivers. Mom was a big fan of GG, but when certain episodes would air, I'd hope that she wasn't paying much attention (i.e., the episode that dealt with senior suicide) because their last years weren't exactly "quality of life".

GG has definitely kept relevance, as there are a lot of senior issues that GG hit on.

Is Tracey Ullman too old to play Maude in a Live TV show?

All the characters on Maude just existed as a foil or sounding board for Maude. Rue was better on TGG because she had an actual character to play.

For the next Norman! Lear! Live! they should do the two-part Aitf where Beverly Lasalle is murdered, followed by the two-part Maude abortion episode. That's sure to cheer everyone up.

Adrienne said she'd love to be Maude on a reboot. She said if not her, Tracey Ullman would be a good Maude

Carroll O'Connor wanted Nancy Walker to play Maude on "All In The Family," but she wasn't available so he said, "get another mouthy actress with a quick wit and a sharp tongue."

Bea was racist, in her "Emmy Legend" interview she says:

[quote]When the interviewer asked Bea what it was like to work with Esther, she said, "Well she's a black actress...and all the baggage that goes along with that".

Oh wow, R56, so Tracey Ullman isn't *so* crazy a suggestion.

What would be the point of rebooting Maude without Bea Arthur? Who on Earth today would play that role? Patricia Arquette? Cynthia Nixon? No thanks.

Mindy Cohn would make a fun Maude.

Bea was really cunty towards both Adrienne and Esther in those Emmy Legend interviews.

Maude never rose above being the inverted AITF it was intended as.

Jennifer Coolidge as Maude

Jennifer Tilly as Carol

"Maude" was much more interesting in its time than "Golden Girls" was in its. The exploration of social issues on "Maude" was complexly handled and many-sided; the exploration of social issues on "GG" was shallow and one-sided.

"GG" has aged better because it was mostly a gag show, and those four women were expert comic actresses above all else. But when you see the episodes when the writers are trying to consider social matters trending at the time (most notoriously, Dorothy's doctor dismissing her chronic fatigue syndrome as being all in her head), it's an embarrassment.

Bea was never an attractive woman. Yikes.

Harvey Fierstein for Maude, with Adrienne Barbeau as Walter.

Maude has a lot of brilliant episodes, but it hasn't aged well at all. I was watching a few on Dailymotion a while back, and when I got to this one...when Walter slaps Florida on the ass at 3:00 in, the cringe factor was too high and I spent much of the rest wondering, "Who acts like this--then or now?"

[quote]Mindy Cohn would make a fun Maude.

OK now I am 99% convinced this is actually Mindy Cohn posting about herself.

[quote]What would be the point of rebooting Maude without Bea Arthur?

Agreed! That is like having a Roseanne reboot with Roseanne Barr.

Roseanne Barr as Maude

John Goodman as Walter

[quote]Tracey Ullman would be a good Maude

Tracey plays a good old lady. The trouble is it wouldn't be Tracey playing Maude, it would be Tracey playing an old lady, who is in turn playing Maude.

Here's the story r47 mentioned. It was Rod Parker who let her go, not Jay Sandrich (who wasn't involved in Maude). Doris and Bea were old friends, so they did a bit that made then seem similar, which made the producers freak out that the characters were too similar. Doris said she never would have done the bit or played it that way if she'd known.

Roseanne as Maude, John Waters as Walter, Mo'Nique as Florida

Everyone looked so old back then. Bill Macey was only in his 40s. He looked a good 20 years older.

I seriously think Roseanne would be great as “Maude” in a one-shot revival, but she’s done in our now-woke world.

Hear me out: Rosie O’Donnell as Maude. Loud, opinionated New Yorkers running roughshod over everyone else in the room.

Laurie Metcalf could be a good Maude for a live tv special.

Rosie O'D. simply IS Maude Findlay. The trouble is she would be unbelievable as a heterosexual. You'd have to turn Maude's husband Walter into Walda (which was the name of Walter Winchell's daughter).

Golden Girls was the better show: it was consistently better written and acted, with much stronger characters and higher production values. In many ways, Golden Girls is the standard bearer for all the [too few] female ensemble shows that followed.

Golden Girls was a copy of Facts of Life

Blanche - Blair Sofia - Jo Dorothy - Mrs Garrett Rose - Tootie

R81 I will not put up with this Natalia erasure

R62 Interestingly Bea and Adrienne Barbeau were close in real life, but Barbeau has said recently that her friendship with Bea actually didn't start until after Maude went off the air.

Rue has said she and Bea were never close.

Bea was a loner.

And heavy drinker

And a slut!

R84 They were never close personal friends but Rue said in her book that they were closer during Maude than on the Golden Girls. Bea was more involved with the cast during Maude, but very distant on the Golden Girls. Bea allegedly never actually enjoyed being on the GGs because it was not her show.

R25 yeah, see, the person who posted this is full of shit. Suddenly I'm a terrible person for saying when Maude was at it's best, it was better than Golden Girls. Golden Girls was very funny. But for me, there were episodes of Maude that played like mini Edward Albee plays.

Both featured Beatrice Arthur's impeccable timing. What's interesting is I find Maude and Dorothy to be very distinct characters. Arthur too acting seriously, and it shows.

I loved both, but GG for sure. Maude is painfully dated, while GG is timeless & fresh!

If I had played Maude, I would've slapped the shit outta Carol.

In terms of clothes, Maude’s 70s fashions looked cooler than Dorothy’s insane shoulder pads, tapered pants and rippling layers. Arthur had a better figure in the 80s but the clothes were awful.

Bea Arthur didn't do disgusting things to dressing rooms in Maude.