Search results

And it was roughly on par with the audience size that Roseanne had in its season-turned-series finale that aired back in May. Of course it was going to be down from the mega-opener that the revival had; it would have been down from that anyway even if Roseanne had not been fired and this was...

Showrunner Bruce Helford wrote a column for The Hollywood Reporter about why they handled Roseanne's death in the way that they did. https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/conners-showrunner-why-he-killed-roseanne-guest-column-1152545

That's not a 180 flip because it's not the same executives. Channing Dungey is the one who made the ultimate call to cancel the show and she has always maintained her stance that it was the right thing to do. If other executives under her are nervous, that's their stance.

No. Her tweet was a week after the season finale had already aired.

The difference is that people who worked on new pilots that didn't go to series knew that not being picked up was a distinct possibility. It's unfortunate but that's how the business works. The crew of Roseanne were on the #1 series on television last season, which seemed to afford them a...

Roseanne's first interview since the cancellation: https://tvline.com/2018/06/24/roseanne-barr-apology-first-interview-racist-tweet-controversy/

It is a spinoff; if it was considered the same show, Roseanne would have to be compensated. She waived her rights to the spinoff, not to the original show. Any hypothetical future revival of "Roseanne" would still include her financial involvement. "The Connors" does not. According to...

i get that...but from ABC's perspective there's no way it could have continued in the form that it was after Barr's racist comments. There is no one to blame for her ouster but herself. Like Bill Cosby (albeit for a very different reason), It's a sad end to a remarkable television legacy...

Some comedy from TV Line about how she may be written out: https://tvline.com/2018/06/23/roseanne-dies-the-conners-spinoff-leaving-exit-explained/

Which is why there probably won't be any further spinoffs. Also, I do believe she genuinely felt sorry for causing people to lose their jobs. I don't believe she intended that, and all the other people who worked on her show are people that she knows. So for us to say "200 people lost their...

Yes. What I read is that she signed an agreement waiving her rights to the spinoff . She retains the rights to the Roseanne Connor character, who won't be used in the spinoff, and retains rights to any hypothetical future revival of Roseanne proper (although that won't happen now anyway.) She...

The final episode of the revival season had her going under the knife for some kind of surgery the next day. "She died during surgery." Done. It's almost too easy to believe.

How else would you propose they explain her absence? It seems like they have to either kill her or turn her into an absentee parent/spouse who bailed on her family. Between the two, it would seem killing her is easier.

Since they were on the hook to pay the stars for the scrapped Season 11 anyway, they might as well try this and see what happens. Obviously, it will get a huge premiere sampling out of curiosity to see how they move forward. I'll be interested to see where it settles in in about week four or...

Good. Everyone else still has a job now.

They have nothing to lose. If the show works, great. It will at the very least have a huge premiere out of curiosity. If it doesn't work out, they would have had to pay the cast for the new season anyway, since their options were picked up before the original was cancelled. They might as...

It looks like that's exactly what's happening according to the link Gary just posted. She'll get a one-time payment from Casey-Werner (not ABC) in order to waive her rights to the spinoff, and then they can proceed. If she's agreeing to this, that should settle their attempts to subvert her...

I wasn't suggesting we should see Dan Bonner, etc. I think they should genuinely, actually, do a new show in a different situation with the same cast members actually playing new roles. If it's something new, then Roseanne won't (and shouldn't) get credit. If it's a spinoff of Roseanne...

ABC's argument would be, "Not if she didn't create the original show." Anyway, I think the solution is obvious: make it not the same show. If they actually create a new show and cast the stars of Roseanne in it as new characters, then it's not the same show. Like how Kevin Can Wait wasn't...

I agree with your point....but..the counterargument to that is, if she hadn't gotten fired, they wouldn't be doing a spinoff since there would be no need for one; the show would have continued on as it was. It sounds like the new show is basically Roseanne minus Roseanne and with a new name, so...

Deadline has a kind of non-update update on the state of a spinoff. Basically, it sounds like ABC would like to do one, if the lawyers can figure out how to let them without cutting in Roseanne on profits...

Coincidentally, the last episode of the revival had the Roseanne character preparing to have some sort of surgery the next morning. (I didn't watch the whole episode but caught this in the last minute or so because I turned the TV on for The Middle, which was after.) They can just say she died...

On another note...one of Deadline's articles earlier this week said to expect a decision by Friday about how Roseanne's cancellation will impact the ABC schedule. If they did make one, it hasn't been announced yet. But it will probably have to be soon, because ABC is in the process of its...

Here's more from Deadline about the potential Roseanne-less revival and the legal hurdles involved. She *is* a creator and executive producer on the original and is entitled to a piece of its financial backend...

Because Roseanne is a creator on her show, it would follow that she would be due a cut of the profits on a spinoff. So it will be interesting to see if they can go forward and figure out a way to cut her out.

Darlene? http://tvline.com/2018/06/01/roseanne-spinoff-darlene-sara-gilbert-abc-renewed/

That's really funny. Unfortunately, it's probably not as easy as that, since she would have a financial claim in a spinoff situation as a result of being a creator on the original show. I think it would have to be a totally new show for her to be decisively out. While I'm sure ABC would love...

Didn't the revival end with Roseanne about to undergo some sort of surgery the next day? (I saw the last minute or so of it when I turned ABC on for The Middle.) Theoretically, they could just kill her character off by saying she died in surgery. But if it's a spinoff, she would likely be due...

That article assumes that there is a show to save. I doubt the other cast members, who have condemned her comments, would be willing to appear with her again. And yes, her name is in the title, but it's still a family sitcom, so she needs to have a family around her in it.