What's new

Better Then or Better Now: Make the call on classic favorites (1 Viewer)

Dave Scarpa

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Apr 8, 1999
Messages
5,765
Real Name
David Scarpa

Geez the Lear Bashing here is getting kinda thick. Anyhow Apples and Oranges you cannot compare shows from two decidedly different era's and I'm "Liberal" enough to think there is room for both the talking horse and the menopausal woman.
 

Theodore J. Mooney

Supporting Actor
Joined
Dec 31, 2007
Messages
534
Real Name
Mike
BETTER THEN:
Full House
Family Ties
Cheers
Baby Talk
Doogie Howser, M.D.
A Different World
The Facts of Life
Mork and Mindy
Maude
Designing Women
Murphy Brown
The Nanny
Silver Spoons
Who's the Boss?
Taxi
Benson
Joanie Loves Chachi (wasn't good to begin with)
Night Court
Small Wonder (this was the one with that Robot girl)
She's the Sheriff
227
Clarissa Explains It All

BETTER THEN AND NOW:
Perfect Strangers
Family Matters (except for those later years ... those were just terrible)
Step By Step
Dinosaurs
Saved By the Bell
The Golden Girls
Diff'rent Strokes
The Wonder Years
Three's Company
The Jeffersons
ALF
Married ... with Children
Salute Your Shorts

BETTER NOW:
Roseanne
Newhart
Growing Pains
The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air
 

Joe Lugoff

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 4, 2005
Messages
2,238
Real Name
Joe
My feeling was that menopause, abortions, rape, etc. are much better dealt with in dramatic shows. I have no problems with them there. I said Lear took the fun out of sitcoms. I feel the same way about M*A*S*H, because to me, fundamentally, the Korean War is nothing to laugh about. (And, yes, I understand the point that war is insane, so one must laugh, blah blah blah. Whatever.)
 

Flashgear

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2007
Messages
2,783
Location
Alberta Canada
Real Name
Randall
I agree with so much that's been said here...with syndication, home video and especially the advent of TV on dvd we've all had these disapointments and re-afirmations concerning our childhood or young adult shows...with drama, I tend to be harsher in my re-evaluations, more forgiving with juvenile comedies...

There's only one old show that I actually feared revisiting...and that was COMBAT!...loved it of course as a kid...but as an old man who's done a lot of living since, I was worried that I would rediscover it as phony and worse...especially as it was born and aired during part of the Vietnam era...I was afraid I'd find it shameful and dishonorable to the veterans of WW2 and later wars...and the truth of war that I discovered for myself...I of course found it to be one of the all time great shows, much better than I could have ever appreciated as a 10 year old...I ask the fans of this show on HTF...what other TV show of that era ever had episodes where the leads, at one time or another, broken down by their suffering and loss, cried? A Powerful, genuine and truthful depiction of combat...You just come to love this show on so many levels!
 

Jeff Flugel

Premium
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jan 7, 1999
Messages
3,850
Location
Osaka, Japan
Real Name
Jeff Flugel
Boy, you guys are singing my song when it comes to those 70s Lear comedies. Didn't like 'em then and can't stand 'em now. I don't have a problem with these shows tackling serious issues in a comedy format...I just never could stomach the shrill, unlikeable characters. Not to say shows like ALL IN THE FAMILY and THE JEFFERSONS weren't well-written and performed...they were, and are, just 100% not my cup o' tea.

I agree with whoever it was who commented that the comedies that wear better are the ones that somehow transcend their particular time period to become "timeless." Or that can somehow turn their period look and values to their favor, into something charming and nostalgic. This is of course a subjective thing that changes depending on one's personal taste (and as stated before, sitcoms have never been my favorite genre). For me, the "corny" sitcoms of the 50s and 60s seem more pleasant to spend time with, than those of the 70s and 80s (with a few exceptions).

On the other hand, I'm definitely not an all-or-nothing TV viewer. Some of my favorite shows are from recent decades: RED DWARF, BLACKADDER, ROME, DEADWOOD, DEXTER, BUFFY, ANGEL, FIREFLY, FRIENDS, LOST and many others (particularly from the other side of the Pond) are extremely well-made and entertaining shows, in my book. And many of those above-listed shows I think WILL be remembered avidly in 20 years.

I like cherry-picking from all TV eras.

But I must confess, I find little wheat amongst the chaff of 80s American TV. Again, no offense to those who cherish that era.
 

Tim Tucker

Screenwriter
Joined
Jun 10, 2006
Messages
1,023
Real Name
Tim Tucker
Yes, it was a Nickelodeon sitcom set in a summer camp. Never did anything for me. I prefered The Adventures of Pete & Pete. :D

Playing the devil's advocate here, I do recognize that Norman Lear pushed the envelope of the sitcom form, which by the end of the '60s needed to be done. I just don't think it was a successful experiment. M*A*S*H and the MTM sitcoms have aged much better IMHO.
 

Rob_Ray

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2004
Messages
2,141
Location
Southern California
Real Name
Rob Ray
I could understand that the Norman Lear shows brought about a change to television that was inevitable (there were too many comedies aimed squarely at kids and there was such anger in the culture that wasn't being addressed or acknowledged in any way) but I resented the fact that they instantly made shows filled with nothing but charm seem forever quaint. There was no going back to the warmth of "Family Affair" and "Petticoat Junction."

It was clear even then that the Norman Lear shows and several that followed were products of their time and made no attempt to be "timeless." Thus, they seem so dated today but do offer a better snapshot of their era then, say, Green Acres, which could have taken place in any decade.

As an example of the lack of timelessness in the post-Lear era comedies, I remember watching an episode of "The Golden Girls" around 1986 or so when Coca Cola was all over the news with its notoriously failed attempt at offering "New Coke." Blanche was crying over some failed romance or another and Rose says something like, "You're upset because you're boyfriend dumped you, aren't you?" And Dorothy comes back with, "No, Rose... She's upset because they keep changing the taste of Coke!" I remember thinking at the time that older shows such as Dick Van Dyke would never have gone with a joke like that because it was much too topical. I wonder if the line made it into syndication prints.

The Lear shows brought a badly needed breath of fresh air and sophistication to TV comedy, but at too high a price for my taste. Last night, we watched "Petticoat Junction" at my house. We'll probably look at "Burke's Law" tonight. I'm just grateful that we have these options because I gave up on current-era programming after Frasier went off the air.
 

MatthewA

BANNED
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Apr 19, 2000
Messages
9,727
Location
Salinas, CA
Real Name
Matthew
The problem with comedies, IMO, is that the more times you hear a joke (and rewatch the same telling of it), the less impact it has each time. You can never recapture the first time you heard a joke. Most shows are about the same to me (I never did a 180 on a show I absolutely loved even if its flaws became more evident), and the fact that I had found ways to be exposed to many of them before the DVDs came out so I knew what to expect.

I also find that most shows (and especially cartoons, whether theatrical or TV) just aren't meant for marathon viewing, because that's not how they were meant to be seen. They were meant to be watched one (or at most two or three) at a time, and they work best that way.

BETTER THEN:
95% of TV animation: Considering the fact that I have outgrown the intended age group of children's TV, and with the easy availability of actually good animation from all eras, most of the Saturday Morning fare strikes me as visually unappealing and dramatically empty. There are some exceptions from all eras, however, and as an adult I can now see just what set theatrical animation by Disney and Warner Bros. apart from the sausage machines of Hanna-Barbera (although they made some watchable shows) and Filmation (which produced nothing of value to me other than Fat Albert).

BETTER NOW:
Dallas: I never watched it when it was on (perhaps the label of "soap opera" scared me off), but after SoapNet brought it back I saw instantly what made it a hit with audiences 30 years ago: the relentlessly compelling stories and characters.
Knots Landing: Ditto.
The Nanny: I ignored this show when it was on, assuming it was a rehash of other sitcoms about domestics. But then I actually watched it and I fell in love with the cast's chemistry and comic timing. This is one of the only post-1990 sitcoms I can tolerate.

BETTER THEN AND NOW:
The Golden Girls: The use of topical references do not mar the show, because they don't overwhelm the overall quality of the writing and acting, which is among the best of the last 25 years (not like they've had much competition lately, though).
Green Acres: It's like what would happen if Paul Henning asked Lewis Carroll to write a rural themed sitcom.
King of the Hill: The original intent of The Simpsons was to make you look at the characters as people and not cartoon characters. This show is better at that than The Simpsons ever was.

The Simpsons has been on too long and varied too much in quality to systematically lump into either of these categories.

I also don't see the problem with topical humor, other than the fact that it relies on knowledge of the era. I can appreciate both the "timeless" qualities of some shows and looking into a window of what people thought and acted like before.
 

Ron68

Supporting Actor
Joined
Oct 26, 2006
Messages
509
Real Name
Ron
Better Then:

Little House on the Prairie (watched this way too much growing up, I can't watch it anymore)
Brady Bunch
Leave It To Beaver
Super Friends (enjoy this for entirely different reasons now)
All of the Filmation DC Superhero releases (these were my into to Superheroes and hold a strong feeling of nostalgia but they don't hold yup very well)
The Monkees
Gilligan's Island (still enjoy it but not as much as when I was younger, the slap stick and absurdity of the show appeals to me less now)
V: the Series
CHiPs (still like it a lot, just liked it more when I was younger)

Better Now:

Mission: Impossible
UFO
Adventures of Superman (I appreciate the simplicity and the fun of the series more now)
Sledge Hammer!
Square Pegs
Get Smart
Addams Family

Just as good now as then:

I Dream of Jeannie (hilarious)
Battlestar Galactica (original)
Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea (love it for different reasons now)
Jonny Quest (wish more shows were like this)
Benny Hill
Space: 1999
Land of the Lost
M*A*S*H
Doogie Howser, MD
 

ScottRichard

Second Unit
Joined
Oct 14, 2003
Messages
254
Location
Michigan
Real Name
Scott
This is a great topic!

Better Then:

Gilligan's Island: I still like it a lot but not nearly as much as when I was a kid. Like most of the classic 60s sitcoms, the cast makes it work in spite of itself!

The Munsters: Again, I still like it a lot but just don't find it to be really consistently funny.

I Dream Of Jeannie: Now this show I do find to be pretty consistently funny, but certain things about the show always strike me as lazy now like the way so many episodes just end with no resolution, and the show also seems to have a lot more plot inconsistencies even for a 60s sitcom where continuity wasn't a big concern. I do still like it though and, of course, love the cast!

The Six Million Dollar Man: I bought the UK sets of Seasons 1 and 2 and terrible picture quality notwithstanding just overall found the show to be on the boring side now. It was still enjoyable, but I really thought I'd love it just as much now. It ultimately just seemed like a lot of running in slow motion!

Charlie's Angels: Now this was another huge favorite growing up! Again, like most of the shows on this list, it was enjoyable but just not nearly as much as when I was 10.

Dynasty: I thought I would still love this but just didn't find it to be very compelling. I lost interest before I even finished the second season. I may give it another shot in the future, but for now it just didn't grab me.

Better Now:

The Addams Family: I hadn't seen a lot of reruns through the years but remembered liking it a lot as a kid. Having watched it again now, it was way better than I would have imagined! The twisted and morbid wit would have went over my head as a kid, but I found it to be brilliant now, and the cast was so perfect, from John Astin's manic exuberance to Carolyn Jones' iconic Morticia to Jackie Coogan's insane Uncle Fester, and Ted Cassidy steals the show for me as Lurch!

The Flying Nun: Another show I had fond though dim memories of and had to check out on DVD. This was a pleasant surprise and another show that was so much better than I would have thought. As someone else in this thread said, much better than it had any right to be! Another sparkling cast and again as someone else mentioned some surprisingly heartfelt scripts! I really hope the final season is released one day!

The Partridge Family: A huge favorite as a kid but hadn't seen it much as an adult. Well I've now become a huge fan again of both the show and the music! I find the show funny and with sometimes surprising depth. Also, it seems to get compared to The Brady Bunch a lot, and I've found it to be infinitely funnier, better written, and to cover topics the Brady's never would have, although you will find The Brady Bunch in the next category!

All In The Family: This was pretty much lost on me when I was really young, but I find it to be one of the all-time greats now. A brilliant cast, and instead of the series seeming dated, I actually find much of it to be quite relevant to the times, which is pretty sad in many ways. I continue to find it amazing at how the show made so many serious topics absolutely hilarious!

The Waltons: We watched this at my house when I was growing up but not as much as we watched Little House On The Prairie. I remember thinking it was boring. I decided to give it a try a few years ago, and it's now ended up very high on my list of all-time favorites. This show just makes me feel good! Yes, it takes place during some very tough times, but it's not depressing and not nearly as tragic as Little House! Instead I find it a really rich, heartfelt, and ultimately uplifting series that I know I'll be watching for years to come!

Better Then And Now:

Bewitched: My favorite series as a kid and my favorite now! It's just a sparkling show with a lot more imagination, wit, and sophistication than many probably suspect even now and with one of the greatest casts in TV history, in my opinion. I do feel the show lost something without Dick York, who I find to be one of the most underrated actors of the 60s and even a little underrated as to his importance to the show, but there's still a lot to love in the final years, and overall the show remains a timeless masterpiece in my eyes!

Family Affair: Again a show I remembered loving as a kid but hadn't seen a single episode of in decades before the DVD releases. Like someone else said, this show is what would be called a dramedy now. A gentle show that does employ a lot of humor but also explores a lot of really serious subjects! I love Brian Keith and Sebastian Cabot in this and find all three of the younger actors to be incredibly talented. A real treat to rediscover this and find it even better now!

The Brady Bunch: This show just is what it is and I'm sure I see it through a heavier haze of nostalgia than anything else, but I'll just always love it! It's the ultimate TV comfort food for me! I find it relentlessly corny and often funny for all the wrong reasons but love it for exactly those qualities! Now on the other hand, I do think the show was well made, very heartfelt at times, and another show blessed with a great cast!

Magnum P.I.: I liked this show a lot growing up but like it even more now. This one is TV comfort food for me too though not in the same way as The Brady Bunch! It's more that I can always count on it being a great show, not earth shattering but just really good. It's a great combination of light stories with some surprisingly dark and dramatic stories thrown in throughout. Tom Selleck deservedly became a huge TV star and has continued to be one of the most enduring stars from that era, and I love the rest of the supporting cast too, especially the wonderful John Hillerman! A real classic, in my book.

Dallas: A staple of Friday night viewing in my house growing up and for me this show has withstood the test of time beautifully. It's just everything a soap opera or a great drama should be-exciting, dramatic, compelling, and absolutely addictive. I never did get to see the entire series and don't hear many good things about it's last seasons but am looking forward to seeing them for myself.
 

Hollywoodaholic

Edge of Glory?
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2007
Messages
3,287
Location
Somewhere in Florida
Real Name
Wayne
Yikes. This reviewer has some choice things to say about the '60s Irwin shows in his review of the fourth season DVD release of Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea that make many critiques on this thread seem tame.

Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea - Season Four, Volume One : DVD Talk Review of the DVD Video

He pinpoints the main deficiency, which has always been my bone to pick:

"And there lies the biggest problem with all of Allen's shows: the writing. Star Trek's Gene Roddenberry and Twilight Zone's Rod Serling had their limitations, but as TV scribes themselves they knew the value of a good story and three-dimensional characters - and the importance of re-writing and polishing and fine-tuning a script. Voyage plays like the show had no story editor at all, and that producer Allen devoted all his attention to selling his programs via extravagant, showy production values. (Though Allen had a strong tendency to shoot his wad on the first couple of episodes each season.) It's difficult to imagine Allen ever offering anything like intelligent advice to his writers."

He goes on to decry the decline of the show after the first seasosn with this ...

"Significantly, after Woodfield and Balter left for greener pastures and, eventually, long careers in television on a variety of projects, Allen created his own stock company of hack writers (William Welch, Peter Packer, Barney Slater) and traffic cop directors (Sobey Martin, Jerry Hopper, Nathan Juran), who worked almost exclusively with Allen from the mid-'60s on. Though some episodes admittedly are still a lot of fun, the sum of their efforts rank among the most intellectually vacuous programing ever done for network television, making the contemporaneous Gerry and Sylvia Anderson Supermarionation shows (Thunderbirds, Stingray, etc.) seem like Masterpiece Theater."

Ouch. Harsh. But he does give props to the first season of the show and to the great image of the DVD release ....

"Allen's Voyage, Time Tunnel, and Land of the Giants all look spectacular, but MTM shows owned by Fox generally look pretty bad. And where Fox now has nearly Allen's entire crummy oeuvre out on DVD, they've been quick to abandon the far-superior MTM shows they also own (Mary Tyler Moore, St. Elsewhere, etc.)."
 

MattPeriolat

Supporting Actor
Joined
Jul 20, 2004
Messages
755
Location
Richmond, KY
Real Name
Matthew
I don't really get the dislike for Allen. Given I've only been exposed to Time Tunnel, I know the writing isn't exactly Chekov (the writer, not the helmsman) but I enjoy it enough where the fiance and I have made the Tunnel a regular one episode a night show until we're done. Almost finished with Vol. 1 actually.

Back on topic for a moment, it's funny, but I'm actually almost afraid to go back and watch shows I used to watch in the 80s when I was a kid because I'm afraid they won't hold up. Plus the history major in me wants to see all the old classics that I "missed" as a kid. Could also blame classic Nick at Night and the marathons of Lucy and Twilight Zone from when I was a kid.

Come to think of it...

Better Now: I Love Lucy and Twilight Zone. Keep in mind, I saw best-ofs in the marathons and as a kid, I didn't get a lot of the jokes or the subtle things. Lucy is just so much FUN to watch, which I honestly had forgotten. Even the non-classic episodes hold up pretty well, although by season 2, you do wonder how much longer they can keep it up.

As for the Zone, the marathons have a horrible habit of repeating the same batch of episodes over and over so there are a LOT that I have never seen. Zone can be very hit and miss at times, but the good is VERY good while the bad is... what were they trying to do here?

My opinions.
 

Joe Tor1

Second Unit
Joined
Mar 27, 2008
Messages
424
Real Name
Joe Torcivia

I, too, wondered about the excessive vitriol. Allen's shows were and ARE fun, despite their faults.

But the quoted paragraph exposes the reviewer's TRUE AGENDA, and now it makes sense. Such self-interested commentary should never be a part of any professional review. The writer and the site itself, should be ashamed of such activity.
 

Gary OS

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2004
Messages
5,995
Location
Florida
Real Name
Gary


That site allowed the wrong person to review this product. I know of another reviewer on that site that would have done much better. I bet most of us here know who I'm thinking of.

Gary "that review was way over the top" O.
 

Professor Echo

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2008
Messages
2,003
Location
Los Angeles
Real Name
Glen

Well said, Jeff. We are in complete agreement on this, though I would extend your farming of the 80's to read from the 80's to the present. Being selective is the key when approaching the last 30 years of television history, whereas I am much more inclined to arbitrarily indulge myself in sampling earlier eras.
 

Jeff Flugel

Premium
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jan 7, 1999
Messages
3,850
Location
Osaka, Japan
Real Name
Jeff Flugel


I see what you're saying, Gary...but to be fair, I think even Paul Mavis would have a hard time finding much value in season 4 of VOYAGE.

And I know the critic in question, Stuart Galbraith IV, is a big fan of VTTBOTS season one.

Personally, I'd much rather watch even the dire "The Terrible Leprechaun" than any given episode of THE MARY TYLER MOORE SHOW, but that's just me.
 

Gary OS

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2004
Messages
5,995
Location
Florida
Real Name
Gary

My frustration with the review wasn't whether or not Stuart liked the 4th season of the show. Heck, I don't like it all that much when I compare it with that incredible 1st season. It was the quote from the review that Wayne highlighted that bothered me. There's no need, IMHO, when you are reviewing a dvd set to mention another show that you think should have been released because it is "far superior" to the "crummy" stuff you are now critiquing. I just don't care for that type of personal vitriol inserted into a review. Judge the set on it's own merits, not on how it compares to other shows a studio hasn't released yet.

Gary "hope that clarifies my position" O.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest Articles

Forum statistics

Threads
356,810
Messages
5,123,551
Members
144,184
Latest member
H-508
Recent bookmarks
0
Top