Jump to content

The Conners: Speculation

Your topic to discuss the new ABC comedy starring Sara Gilbert, John Goodman and Laurie Metcalf.

0

Share Post


Link to post

My speculation is that they kill Roseanne during the surgery in her knee. 

5

Share Post


Link to post

My speculation is a tweet will be sent that gets this cancelled as well :p

22 minutes ago, Whimsy said:

My speculation is that they kill Roseanne during the surgery in her knee. 

I wonder if they are even allowed to say her name.

2

Share Post


Link to post

I have a feeling this is going to be a low budget affair. Maybe I'll get lucky and they'll ditch the casino set to save money.  (Sara Gilbert in that cocktail waitress uniform looked so uncomfortable.) 

1

Share Post


Link to post

My speculation is nobody will watch this mess and it will be canned after a few showings.   Roseanne was the draw, not Darlene. 

11

Share Post


Link to post

My speculation is they bring in Sandy Duncan, as the Conner children's aunt, to be the matriarch of the family.

16

Share Post


Link to post

They could bring in Sandy Duncan, Leah Remini, etc. as “replacement “ housekeepers interviewing for a job. Anyone else they could bring in that was a replacement on their show? They could use Sarah Chalke again! Not that the Connor’s can afford a housekeeper...

1

Share Post


Link to post

My speculation is that the pregnancy alluded to in the series description is Darlene, because she and David never quite stopped messing around.

1

Share Post


Link to post

Becky wouldn't be the first woman told that she had little to no chance of getting pregnant and ending up that way.  For me that would be much better than Darlene, especially if David isn't around.  Gina would be awkward, as long as she's half a world away. And just no to it being Harris.  At least Becky or Gina might be happy about it.  Can't see that with either Darlene or Harris. 

The writers really need to step back from the never-ending misery. 

1

Share Post


Link to post
4 hours ago, anna0852 said:

My speculation is that the pregnancy alluded to in the series description is Darlene, because she and David never quite stopped messing around.

But it would be interesting if the pregnancy were DJs’ wife.....stationed half a world away from him....

1

Share Post


Link to post

I think just like Dan dying was a dream now it will be the reverse. Roseanne died back when Dan supposedly did and BOTH the end of the original Roseanne show AND the reboot were fantasies. Thus they won't have to deal with Roseanne's death being fresh, because in actuality it would have happened far in the past in this third continuity. 

4

Share Post


Link to post
18 minutes ago, Kromm said:

I think just like Dan dying was a dream now it will be the reverse.

Maybe Bobby Ewing comes out of the shower...

13

Share Post


Link to post

It'll probably be something simple, like Dan divorced from Roseanne, whom moved out.

1

Share Post


Link to post
22 hours ago, chitowngirl said:

They could bring in Sandy Duncan, Leah Remini, etc. as “replacement “ housekeepers interviewing for a job.

Or what would be really funny would be to have Valerie Harper replace Roseanne.

6

Share Post


Link to post

I would rather see a series with all the above "ghosted" sit-com characters living in some suburban utopia a la "Pleasantville" rather than watch Doomsday Darlene, Boozy-Floozy Becky & Sad Sack Dan Conner.  

3

Share Post


Link to post

Whatever they decide to do it won't be much of an investment, as a viewer. They're only signed up for what, 10 episodes? No big deal. 

The way they treated (or rather, did not treat) Andy and Jerry and Ed and some other characters in the reboot, it wouldn't particularly surprise me if they simply never mention Roseanne and carry on as though she never existed. It might also be somewhat amusing if they took that route. Certainly more so than killing her.

Edited by iMonrey.
0

Share Post


Link to post

I watched the original show, but began to dislike it around the time that Rosanne added a new baby (who barely got mentioned ever), and stacked the cast with her personal friends (Sandra Bernhardt, Tom Arnold, etc) and the last 2 seasons were horrible.  I also stopped liking Darlene when she got with David on the original show.  It changed her character way too much and I found nothing likeable about her anymore, whereas I appreciated her tomboy-ish character and her off-beat sense of humor before.  We watched the reboot because I was curious to see how they'd explain away a lot of things (they didn't), and I found myself not only still disliking Darlene, but severely disliking her daughter (her son is OK).  So I'm not sure if I'll try to watch this re-re-boot or not.

8

Share Post


Link to post

I thought the reboot sucked so I prob won’t be watching this. Especially if the focus is on Darlene and her kids. Really disliked Harris.

7

Share Post


Link to post
3 hours ago, funky-rat said:

I watched the original show, but began to dislike it around the time that Rosanne added a new baby (who barely got mentioned ever), and stacked the cast with her personal friends (Sandra Bernhardt, Tom Arnold, etc) and the last 2 seasons were horrible.  I also stopped liking Darlene when she got with David on the original show.  It changed her character way too much and I found nothing likeable about her anymore, whereas I appreciated her tomboy-ish character and her off-beat sense of humor before.  We watched the reboot because I was curious to see how they'd explain away a lot of things (they didn't), and I found myself not only still disliking Darlene, but severely disliking her daughter (her son is OK).  So I'm not sure if I'll try to watch this re-re-boot or not.

I felt the same way. I liked it early on when it was about the working-class Conners, but liked it less and less as it morphed into the proudly white trash Roseanne Arnold show and started mirroring her real life.

5

Share Post


Link to post

I’m hopeful that without the distractions of the Roseanne character, this might be more of what the first few seasons of the original were (more family and work centered without the zaniness of the later seasons). 

I wonder if they’ll be able to use the original theme song for the spinoff and if they’ll have a similar opening segment with the family at the dinner table (the entire family should be laughing at the end instead of just one character). 

3

Share Post


Link to post
On 7/6/2018 at 4:05 PM, Marley said:

I thought the reboot sucked so I prob won’t be watching this. Especially if the focus is on Darlene and her kids. Really disliked Harris.

This is where my mother and I fall, and we were feeling like we were the only ones. We still may be in the minority, but it just wasn't enjoyable and Darlene and Harris were major fails for us. Becky was a miss, too, and Roseanne was an annoyance and no where as funny as she thought she was. I just don't think the snarkiness landed on the show.

On 7/6/2018 at 7:18 PM, Jordan61 said:

I felt the same way. I liked it early on when it was about the working-class Conners, but liked it less and less as it morphed into the proudly white trash Roseanne Arnold show and started mirroring her real life.

The working-class Conners living in middle America and undergoing the challenges of your average Americans was what made the show for me. Those old episodes still hold up but I have no desire to see repeats of the current episodes. Maybe with the time to regroup they will read reviews and adjust for The Conners, but it probably won't help my issues since I seem to be an outlier.

0

Share Post


Link to post
10 hours ago, Christina said:

This is where my mother and I fall, and we were feeling like we were the only ones. We still may be in the minority, but it just wasn't enjoyable and Darlene and Harris were major fails for us. Becky was a miss, too, and Roseanne was an annoyance and no where as funny as she thought she was. I just don't think the snarkiness landed on the show.

The working-class Conners living in middle America and undergoing the challenges of your average Americans was what made the show for me. Those old episodes still hold up but I have no desire to see repeats of the current episodes. Maybe with the time to regroup they will read reviews and adjust for The Conners, but it probably won't help my issues since I seem to be an outlier.

I actually liked what they did with Becky's character - she was one of the few on the show I did like, along with the cameos from some of the old time characters (Crystal, etc).  I felt it was the most "honest" likely outcome for her character.  Same for the brief time we saw David.  With his home life and the examples he had growing up, that was an honest outcome for his character.  Harris was horrible.  It was like they took every cliché they could think of and threw them at the wall, and saw if they stuck.  So you're not alone.  

3

Share Post


Link to post

I think a lot of us saw Roseanne Season 10/the Revival as kind of a shakedown cruise and were looking forward to what they would come up with once that was out of the way.  No one expected to get The Conners but life is like that. 

I personally feel like it would be a mistake if they go the route of focusing on Darlene.  I want to see the whole Conner family pulling together. 

3

Share Post


Link to post

I think the idea to center the new show around Darlene stems from the likelihood that neither John Goodman nor Laurie Metcalf will sign on for more than these 10 new episodes, so if there is any hope of longevity for this spin-off it will have to be about an actor willing to commit to something more long-term. Sara Gilbert is probably more willing to do that since she sort of got the ball rolling on the reboot in the first place and doesn't have a big movie career like Goodman and Metcalf do. Understandably, Goodman and Metcalf (or their characters) are the bigger draw for most of the audience, but they're only doing this spin-off because they were under contract to do 10 more episodes before all the crap with Roseanne went down. So now they basically have to do it. I don't think they would have ever signed on for a spin-off show if that's how the whole thing had started.

4

Share Post


Link to post

I think Darlene is the ideal example of why it’s nearly impossible to write long term storylines for children.  They grow up.  Tom boys become young women.  Young women have first loves.  Sometimes the kid you see the first couple seasons is completely different then the young adult they are when the show ends five or six seasons later.    Roseanne’s original run was 9 seasons so that is 9 years of character growth from a tomboy kid to a surly teen  to a woman who became sure of herself.  It was actually a decently written storyline because it made sense mostly.    Not everyone stays a tomboy and Sarah Gilbert was not ready to come out so giving Darlene a girlfriend would have been cruel. Except for her depression storyline which I thought was heavy handed and not really well thought out I thought her entire story arc was well done.

2

Share Post


Link to post

A great example of Tomboy > Young Woman is Valerie Bertinelli on One Day at a Time. A cute tomboy at the begininning, but puberty kicked in and it would have been a stretch to keep Barbara a tomboy.

1

Share Post


Link to post
On 7/8/2018 at 10:38 PM, Christina said:

 

The working-class Conners living in middle America and undergoing the challenges of your average Americans was what made the show for me. Those old episodes still hold up but I have no desire to see repeats of the current episodes. Maybe with the time to regroup they will read reviews and adjust for The Conners, but it probably won't help my issues since I seem to be an outlier.

I think one of the huge problems is thT it focused too much on politics.  With Real Roseanne being a Trump supporter conservatives came in thinking this would be a show they could watch with their kids with their belief system but then Harris and Little Mark are nothing like children written for conservative minded shows.  The actress who plays Harris is on Showtimes Shameless and she is actually playing a similar roll so it’s hard to say if it’s bad acting or just a badly written character that just needs to be mellowed out a little.  Honestly I have no issue with Darlene fronting a shown with Becky playing the sister roll that Jackie plays now.  I think it would be an interesting show.  

2

Share Post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Chaos Theory said:

I think one of the huge problems is thT it focused too much on politics.  With Real Roseanne being a Trump supporter conservatives came in thinking this would be a show they could watch with their kids with their belief system but then Harris and Little Mark are nothing like children written for conservative minded shows.  The actress who plays Harris is on Showtimes Shameless and she is actually playing a similar roll so it’s hard to say if it’s bad acting or just a badly written character that just needs to be mellowed out a little.  Honestly I have no issue with Darlene fronting a shown with Becky playing the sister roll that Jackie plays now.  I think it would be an interesting show.  

That's a really interesting idea. I hope that's what it will be, with Dan and Jackie popping in and out like Bev and Ed did.

Edited by peacheslatour.
0

Share Post


Link to post

I’m pretty much in this for Dan and Jackie. 

 

If they develop the others better than they were able to last season, I’ll probably stay for them.

 

I really hope there are no heavy-handed meta potshots at Roseanne Barr the way Fuller House did the Olsen twins in their first episode. I hope they quickly deal with Roseanne’s absence (I’m hoping for death by knee surgery, which was beautifully set up last season) and move on.

2

Share Post


Link to post
On 7/15/2018 at 6:13 PM, katie9918 said:

 

I really hope there are no heavy-handed meta potshots at Roseanne Barr the way Fuller House did the Olsen twins in their first episode. I hope they quickly deal with Roseanne’s absence (I’m hoping for death by knee surgery, which was beautifully set up last season) and move on.

That pisses me off to this day. They were NINE MONTHS OLD when they were cast as Michelle. They have NO IDEA what it's like to not be famous. LET THEM BE!

*ahem*

I know everyone's posting joke speculation here, so I'll spoil the mood by going into sincerity mode:

I'll be happy if this season just leads to a proper ending for this show and its 30 year-legacy. Hell, I'd even be fine with one additional season if they need that for it to truly work. But I don't need this to run a very long time. I just want it to end on a high note. 

3

Share Post


Link to post
7 hours ago, UYI said:

I'll be happy if this season just leads to a proper ending for this show and its 30 year-legacy. Hell, I'd even be fine with one additional season if they need that for it to truly work. But I don't need this to run a very long time. I just want it to end on a high note. 

I think Roseanne's behavior and actions have tarnished the show's legacy. Still, it'll be interesting to see how it concludes. 

0

Share Post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now