ROSEANNE reboot — what are your thoughts? (1 Viewer)

[Malcolm R]

They could continue to write about her, but have her become an unseen character, like Norm's wife on Cheers or Maris on Frasier.

 

[Tommy R]

I liked the new Roseanne and am kind of bummed that so much real-life baggage will be plaguing it's continuation. I'll watch it though, and hope to enjoy it for however long it'll last. I just feel like I've become good at just enjoying things without worrying about who these people are in real like. Mel Gibson for one is worse than Roseanne Barr at face value if you ask me, but nothing is going to stop me from enjoying Lethal Weapon and Ransom when I hear them calling. I mean, seriously, if we were to boycott everything that has a despicable person making money off of, there would literally nothing on tv. Plus, for every bad person making money off of something we like, there are probably dozens more who are honest hard working people who make a living off the entertainment industry.

 

[Jake Lipson]

I liked the new Roseanne and am kind of bummed that so much real-life baggage will be plaguing it's continuation.

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 perpetuated by their own inability to behave properly with regard to others.

Even if it ends up being terrible, the show moving forward and making an attempt to redefine itself while saving 200 jobs is better than it not moving forward at all.

 

[MishaLauenstein]

And due to all the legal stuff BTS with Roseanne, it's important to note this is a spin-off. This is a separate series.

It may not be a spin-off. Who knows what the actors' contracts are like? If it's a NEW show, their contracts may not carry over and they'd have to be paid twice. It may well be that this new show has to be considered a renaming of the same show. Remember what happened with Game of Thrones. The actors were contracted for 10 episodes and when the producers stretched the last season out to 12, they had to make sure that no character appeared in more than 10 episodes.

 

[Jake Lipson]

It may not be a spin-off. Who knows what the actors' contracts are like? If it's a NEW show, their contracts may not carry over and they'd have to be paid twice. It may well be that this new show has to be considered a renaming of the same show.

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 Deadline, the actors negotiated new deals for the spinoff to replace the ones thy had made for season 11, so ABC won't be paying them twice. But they're making the same per-episode fees they would have on season 11.

 

[TJPC]

I liked the new Roseanne and am kind of bummed that so much real-life baggage will be plaguing it's continuation. I'll watch it though, and hope to enjoy it for however long it'll last. I just feel like I've become good at just enjoying things without worrying about who these people are in real like. Mel Gibson for one is worse than Roseanne Barr at face value if you ask me, but nothing is going to stop me from enjoying Lethal Weapon and Ransom when I hear them calling. I mean, seriously, if we were to boycott everything that has a despicable person making money off of, there would literally nothing on tv. Plus, for every bad person making money off of something we like, there are probably dozens more who are honest hard working people who make a living off the entertainment industry.

I try to divorce the real person from the actor. How many times have I seen an actor on a talk show reveal they are a complete dork, and yet I still enjoy their acting?

 

[Xphile620]

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 Deadline, the actors negotiated new deals for the spinoff to replace the ones thy had made for season 11, so ABC won't be paying them twice. But they're making the same per-episode fees they would have on season 11.

True. Roseanne still benefits financially from the original series (as she should) but in order for the show to continue, it had to be a spin-off.

 

[Jake Lipson]

Roseanne's first interview since the cancellation:

https://tvline.com/2018/06/24/roseanne-barr-apology-first-interview-racist-tweet-controversy/

 

[MatthewA]

Whoever joked about Christopher Plummer taking over the role, so did he:

https://www.theguardian.com/film/2018/jun/20/christopher-plummer-interview-roseanne-boundaries

 

[Stan]

I liked the new Roseanne and am kind of bummed that so much real-life baggage will be plaguing it's continuation. I'll watch it though, and hope to enjoy it for however long it'll last. I just feel like I've become good at just enjoying things without worrying about who these people are in real like. Mel Gibson for one is worse than Roseanne Barr at face value if you ask me, but nothing is going to stop me from enjoying Lethal Weapon and Ransom when I hear them calling. I mean, seriously, if we were to boycott everything that has a despicable person making money off of, there would literally nothing on tv. Plus, for every bad person making money off of something we like, there are probably dozens more who are honest hard working people who make a living off the entertainment industry.

Completely childish, I know, but I no longer watch Gibson's movies. Certain things a celebrity does completely destroy their past work.

There are others I don't watch simply because because I don't like them, they're still good, talented people.

An actor being a dork on a talk show is different. They know when not to go to far and get into insult territory.

 

[Dheiner]

I'm not sure I buy the whole "saving jobs" aspect of this.

I mean, I get it, the people that were working on the show get to continue working, but the "jobs" would still exist, if another show took the time slot. It would just be different people filling the jobs.

Let's stop acting like "jobs" are being saved here.

 

[Malcolm R]

Well the crew working on Roseanne thought they had at least one more year of guaranteed work, and likely made plans and purchases accordingly. Then they had that year's salary abruptly taken away.

Yes, they may be able to get another job on another show, but there's no guarantee it would happen immediately or at the same salary level. It could have put many of them in a bad spot financially. These are not the actors who have millions in the bank to fall back on; most of these crew members are likely middle class and depend on a regular paycheck.

 

[Dheiner]

Well the crew working on Roseanne thought they had at least one more year of guaranteed work, and likely made plans and purchases accordingly. Then they had that year's salary abruptly taken away.

Yes, they may be able to get another job on another show, but there's no guarantee it would happen immediately or at the same salary level. It could have put many of them in a bad spot financially. These are not the actors who have millions in the bank to fall back on; most of these crew members are likely middle class and depend on a regular paycheck.

I understand that. But, someone else would get work, who was probably out of work. They still have to fill a time slot.

 

[Jake Lipson]

I understand that. But, someone else would get work, who was probably out of work. They still have to fill a time slot.

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 levvel of security and expectation that they would continue to be employed that is not there when you are dealing with a genuinely new pilot. To be handed a season pickup, and then have that suddenly taken away, after most other series for that year have already been staffed up, is a tough break. So it's good that these people get to maintain their jobs after all.

 

[Johnny Angell]

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/

I liked number 3 the best.

We’re there unbroadcast episodes when Rosanne was canceled? What will become of them?

 

[Jake Lipson]

We’re there unbroadcast episodes when Rosanne was canceled? What will become of them?

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

 

[MatthewA]

If this is a success, do you think they'd even try The Huxtables without Bill Cosby? NBC wanted Cosby himself for a new, unrelated show when the rape allegations arose.

 

[Malcolm R]

If this is a success, do you think they'd even try The Huxtables without Bill Cosby? NBC wanted Cosby himself for a new, unrelated show when the rape allegations arose.

Like ABC with Roseanne, NBC would have to convince Bill Cosby to sign away his rights to the characters without compensation. Given his recent appearances in public as bitter, spiteful, and unapologetic, I don't see that happening.

 

[MatthewA]

The difference is that Bill Cosby is going to jail and Roseanne is just a pariah. And also that Disney never had anything to do with The Cosby Show despite employing its cast members on side projects every now and then. I still think that's when things changed for this show. They enabled the last season to turn out the way it did because they knew it was the end, that she'd fight them every step of the way for anything she wanted badly enough, and they were probably focusing more on the hype around Ellen's coming out.

 

[Dave Lawrence]

Speaking of Cosby, I see this evening that cable network TV One has started showing reruns of The Cosby Show again. They, like other channels, took the reruns off after the verdict. They must have started this week because they're showing Season 1 episodes. It looks like they're going all in on this show because I see that tomorrow they have a 3-hour afternoon block and a 2 hour evening block of episodes scheduled.

I wonder which channel will be the 1st to bring back reruns of the original Roseanne series. I'm sure it'll happen eventually, after the Roseanne-less Sara Gilbert project dies and the general public moves on to its next distraction.