Last night's episode managed a weak 13.7, good for only third on the night. This episode, which had suggested R&R tension in promotions leading up to the show, was the second lowest rated new episode of the season, only behind the Thanksgiving airing with Brad Pitt. (And that shouldn't really count since Thanksgiving night traditionally is the least-watched night of the year)
Maybe the producers will get the hint.
Just curious about exactly how ratings are calculated. I thought volunteers agreed to have some machine installed on their TV sets that kept track of programs watched automatically. What happens if somebody watches a few minutes, and then switches to another channel?
Apart from whatever happens to be on competing channels, I would have thought the quality of an episode would be reflected in the ratings for subsequent weeks.
"Anonymous" wrote in message news:[email]...
"If I may present an opposing point of view in a way that merely discusses different perspectives on this question rather than anybody's character..."
"There is a textbook which I had to read in Graduate School called "How to Lie With Statistics". It explains how people can use slanted or biased analysis of statistical data to prove any point they want, whether the data actually is truly indicative of a certain trend or not. (Please note that I do not intend to call YOU a liar."
Ok.
"This was a holiday weekend with major religious observances for two different religions. It had exactly the same kind of problem they encounter on Thanksgiving day, for the same reason. The ratings for nearly all the shows were way down - it appears people were watching less television of any kind at all."
That argument would hold a lot of weight of course, just like Thanksgiving night, if fewer viewers were watching shows all night long. The fact is that ER actually had a higher rating than their last new episode, and a new CSI episode was down either .1 or .2 rating since the last episode before March Madness.
:-)
Friends dropped 5 million viewers between episodes. There can't be THAT MANY people who dislike Alec Baldwin. ;)
(Besides, the worst this guy has said that he would have left the country if Bush was elected, and that was 2 years ago.)
"Now, if the trend were to continue all the way through the end of May sweeps, I'd say these observations had some merit. It is one statistical sample. All studies usually have lots of samples, and the more they have, the more accurate they usually end up being. Right now, there are so many variables involved nobody who actually has their job on the line is going to jump to any conclusion. And most of the programming folks have substantial backgrounds in legitimate statistical theory. It's their bottom line."
But as the writers and BKC are polishing off the season finale script, if they see this kind of drop once Ross and Rachel tension is suggested, even at that initial point under the gun they may make a quick decision to get the ratings back on track. Of course, 819-822 are already in the can, so there's nothing they can do now about those.
"Also of note in considering these statistics; while the ratings were lower than they have been the last coupld of weeks, the ratings for a Friends episode in the last week of March is still up 30% from last year. Most statisticians would demand a larger sample to account for variables before they drew a final conclusion on this."
I would be interested to see the ratings for this week on Friends for all 8 seasons. Maybe that would give us a good sample.
"It's an interesting topic, but the jury's still out. The important statistics for this will hit in May. Now, if R&R tanks in May, there will be reason for the writers to change their plans. However, we will have to determine also what the NBC brass actually considers bad ratings."
You also have to consider what night this is. This is the biggest night on TV, viewership wise. 22 million viewers on Sunday, Monday, Tuesday, Friday, and Saturday would be super-smash hits, but it's only mediocre for this show AND on this night.
"The ratings analysis I read proclaimed NBC the winner of the evening, Friends the winner of it's time slot, and generally thought NBC kind of mopped up the floor with everybody else that evening."
You read an NBC release. Did you honestly expect them to insult or play down their shows? They were finding ways to credit Friends shows as successes last year when they were getting annihilated by Survivor.
"Well, we'll see. Now, next week's episode is a clip show with Joey as the primary narrator. If the ratings are at 13.5 for that, will it mean people avoid clip shows, or hate Joey? :-) Or will it mean 13.5 is actually still very good ratings?"
I would think around 80% of the viewers at some point during the week either read the preview in TV Guide for the upcoming show, or see a promo on NBC. If they run a promo which suggests some heavy Joey and Rachel interaction, which I highly doubt, and the ratings are bad on that one, then yes it will tend to validate this past show's ratings as just seasonably low ratings.
But I'm sure the promo department won't be pushing Joey & Rachel interaction for next week's episode. It is clear from the last episode the writers did a 180 on us, insulting our intelligence to think we could instantly forget about one storyline and suddenly embrace another one.
I'm always a Friends fan, but at this point I am very disappointed, not in the R&R interaction necessarily, but how they are going about doing it. And apparently, I'm not the only one.
[email] (Charles Blair) wrote in message news:...
There is some information/faq on the ratings at Nielsen Research that you might find helpful. Here's the URL: http://www.nielsenmedia.com/FAQ/index.htm
Yes. Its one of the factors that programmers take into consideration as there is no sure way of knowing or anticipating public reaction to that eppy in particular without taking future eppies into consideration.
Ganesan
[email] (NARAG) wrote in message news:...
Left out the l in html. The URL should be :
"NARAG" wrote in message news:[email]...
news:...
news:...
happens if
Hmmm. My browser works with either link. Does anyone know if there is a setting that allows that? (I use MS Internet Explorer version 6.0.)
"Anonymous" wrote in message news:[email]...
If I may present an opposing point of view in a way that merely discusses different perspectives on this question rather than anybody's character...
There is a textbook which I had to read in Graduate School called "How to Lie With Statistics". It explains how people can use slanted or biased analysis of statistical data to prove any point they want, whether the data actually is truly indicative of a certain trend or not. (Please note that I do not intend to call YOU a liar. You are an enthusiastic R&J fan who saw a genuine statistic that looked helpful. The crucial thing of note is that even accurate statistics can be misleading. That just happened to be the name of the book, and you can probably check it on Amazon.com.) One thing that anybody who has studied statistics knows is that any meaningful analysis must take all variables into account.
This was a holiday weekend with major religious observances for two different religions. It had exactly the same kind of problem they encounter on Thanksgiving day, for the same reason. The ratings for nearly all the shows were way down - it appears people were watching less television of any kind at all.
And, of course, there's also the potential Anti-Baldwin backlash. :-)
Now, if the trend were to continue all the way through the end of May sweeps, I'd say these observations had some merit. It is one statistical sample. All studies usually have lots of samples, and the more they have, the more accurate they usually end up being. Right now, there are so many variables involved nobody who actually has their job on the line is going to jump to any conclusion. And most of the programming folks have substantial backgrounds in legitimate statistical theory. It's their bottom line.
Also of note in considering these statistics; while the ratings were lower than they have been the last coupld of weeks, the ratings for a Friends episode in the last week of March is still up 30% from last year. Most statisticians would demand a larger sample to account for variables before they drew a final conclusion on this.
It's an interesting topic, but the jury's still out. The important statistics for this will hit in May. Now, if R&R tanks in May, there will be reason for the writers to change their plans. However, we will have to determine also what the NBC brass actually considers bad ratings. The ratings analysis I read proclaimed NBC the winner of the evening, Friends the winner of it's time slot, and generally thought NBC kind of mopped up the floor with everybody else that evening.
Well, we'll see. Now, next week's episode is a clip show with Joey as the primary narrator. If the ratings are at 13.5 for that, will it mean people avoid clip shows, or hate Joey? :-) Or will it mean 13.5 is actually still very good ratings?
"Anonymous" wrote in message news:[email]...
IMO, the poor ratings had more to do with holiday activities early in the evening, and the recent reruns, than with a disdain for the subject matter. I would be curious to see how the first new ep after a set of reruns typically does for Friends, and for other shows as well. I'd be surprised if there wasn't a drop off.
"David Buehrle" wrote in message news:...
I had another look at the eppy and looked at this tabloid styled subject title in that context. And this from a guy who recently said tabloids were full of crap!
Firstly 22/23 million viewers is light years away from atrocious ratings AND the r/r moment was light hearted, there was no tension unless you consider that 30 sec scene back at the apartment when Rachel asks about the proposal, tension. Mostly it was about Rachel building castles in the air about her fake wedding.
Ganesan
[email] (NARAG) wrote in message news:...
Wow, could you be more tacky calling this thread tabloidish?
22 million viewers isn't bad normally, but when episodes right before it had 29.2, 28.6, 28.6, 27.5, 26.7 million viewers, a drop of nearly 5 million viewers is incredibly bad. Maundy Thursday did not affect the viewing habits of other shows, so you can't lay down that excuse. Survivor had the same rating as last week, ER's rating was higher, and CSI held steady.
And they did put the promo for the show that there would be R&R tension, which was aired a lot by the way, and the show bled viewers.
Next week's promo doesn't look to attract many viewers either, as it just shows a brief clip of Joey being interviewed by a soap magazine interviewer, with the following:
Interviewer: "So how does it feel to have a huge gay fanbase?"
Joey: "Wow, I don't even know any huge gay people."
If that's the best of the episode that this promo can show, chances are it's going to be another waste of time like 818 decidedly was, and people probably won't be inspired to tune in.
"David Buehrle" wrote in message news:O1ep8.33229$[email]...
matter.
I almost forgot to watch the episode, since I was thinking "rerun hell." Another program I watch is in reruns until late April, so I had gotten into a no-new-eps-for-a-while mindset.
Belphoebe
"Anonymous" wrote in message news:[email]...
I don't know if it has ever been mentioned during this whole "J&R are good for the ratings" dispute, but am I the only one to think that maybe some of those extra viewers tuned in not because they want to see Joey and Rachel get together but rather because they wanted to see what Ross would do in such a situation? I mean they beat us to death with Ross & Rachel cliffhangers and stories - up until lets say mid S6 - and now that she's even pregnant with Ross' child, Joey falls in love with her? That's not my opinion, it's just what probably some of the viewers that just tune in and see whats happening might be thinking.
Andre
What is up with you guys? It still attracted 22 million viewers after weeks of being on reruns and survivor 3 which was able to build even more of a following being on Wed for the past two weeks is something to be wreckoned with.
I don't think more or less people watched because of the storyline, I think most people didn't know it was not a rerun.
WE don't need to spread that the ratings dropped -- that is bad publicity and not really looking at all the factors.
"Anonymous" wrote in message news:[email]...
Maybe it was because 816 and 817 were crap.
Owen
It seems to me that the number of viewers tuning into a current episode has more to do with what they thought of the previous episode, more so than what they think of the current one.. Afterall, they have not seen the current one to know if it's any good, so they can only base their decision on what they've seen before.
And considering that Friends has been on rerun for the past couple of weeks, it doesn't seem at all unlikely that many viewers simply thought that this week's episode would also be a rerun, and didn't bother to tune in. I know my sister almost didn't... She asked me about 5 minutes before 8 if Friends would be a rerun or not (me being the biggest Friends fan in the house)--If I hadn't been around, she would have assumed it was a rerun, and not bothered watching.
As for your suggestion of promos being the major factor in the results of the ratings... I don't buy it. Basically, because I didn't see ANY promos for Friends, and certainly hadn't heard anything about R&R in the episode. I do remember reading in Entertainment Weekly something about Alec Baldwin being in it, and Monica trying to outdo Ross' toast (neither seemed very appealing). Nothing about R&R, though. So, given that, I think it's entirely possible that at least a good number of the viewers also didn't see the promo you're talking about. And since we have no idea who saw the promo and who didn't, I think it would be too presumptuous of you to conclude that it must have been the promo of R&R that led to the lowered ratings of this week's episode.
I do, however, remember seeing numerous promos for ER, talking about the episode where "everyone finds out" about Dr. Greene's condition.
"Dr. Briefs" wrote in message news:...
That just goes to further my point of how the drop in ratings can be attributed to them dropping the J&R storyline and rapidly picking up the R&R storyline.
By 817, as most R&R fans have said here, it was clear that they weren't going to do much with Joey and Rachel right now, and so it's quite possible viewers knew nothing big was going to happen for awhile, so they went ahead and tuned out.
And don't sit there and honestly tell me that promos do not have some impact on the ratings. What the hell is the point of them then? They are there solely for the purpose to catch the eye of viewers of another show who may tune into Friends. If they like what they see in the promo, they'll tune into it. If they don't, they won't.
The majority of Friends promos last week ran that awful tension scene between Ross and Rachel at the end. If the masses of the public are just giant R&R fans, don't you think they would have turned out in mass numbers to see this? The fact is they didn't, and I highly doubt many people care anymore to root fot these two as a couple, especially now that they have been exposed to other ideas.
TOW Joey Dates Rachel got great ratings facing off against the Survivor finale. Do you think it was all because of that classic episode that came before it, TOW Ross's Step Forward?
"Anonymous" wrote in message news:[email]...
news:...
First of all...you cannot assume that EVERYONE or even HALF of all Friends watchers or other ppl. actually saw the promo. I did not. Secondly, I do believe whoever said that there was nothing in the promo showing RnR tension.
They
It was not the situation that caused the bad ratings...it is the fact that its Passover(almost forgot didn't ya)/Easter and it is because many ppl. did not know that it was not a re-run. I almost did not watch because I thought it was a re-run. Turned on the tv at 7:58!
What we can see from you posts is that you are NOT a RnR fan.
Sofya
"Sofya" wrote in message news:...
If you didn't see the promo, then what possible logic do you have to believe the person said there was no R&R tension suggested? I'm afraid it's the truth.
Read the other posts in this thread, and you will see the ratings for all the other Thursday shows held at their normal viewership for the season, in some cases even higher, while Friends was off 3 million viewers of it's season average, which includes reruns, with a *new* episode.
And damn proud of it. ;-)
Or, maybe, the viewers just didn't want to see another episode of Joey moping over Rachel. As not every viewer is a R&R fan, they probably didn't look for "closure" as much as R&R fans did. I certainly didn't know if they were going to continue Joey's moping or not, even though it was clear that Rachel didn't feel that way about Joey.
You're missing the point. The point is not whether or not the promos had any effect on the ratings, but rather that the promos is not, and should not be considered as the ONLY factor in the ratings. To claim that R&R is the reason for the lower ratings of 818 would be assuming that it is.
If any of them actually saw any of the promos. Shows like ER and Survivor had similar ratings as they did the week before, but were they in reruns the week before? I saw many promos for ER, while not one promo on NBC about Friends, and boom--ER has more viewers this week. Wouldn't it also be possible that ER got higher ratings because they had been promoting it more heavily than Friends?
Considering that they pretty much butchered Ross' character in the past few years, I wouldn't be surprised that many of the new viewers wouldn't like to see Ross with Rachel. Still, your claim remains unscientific and completely un-objective, as you are clearly a J&R fan who likes to spew statistics to your own advantage.
I think the more and more of the viewer public are finally getting tired of the whole Survivor nonsense.
"Dr. Briefs" wrote in message news:[email]...
Don't you mean J & R fans looking for closure? Anyway, saying the ratings were a direct result of people disgusted about R&R is a conclusion you made as a hopeful R&J fan, of course. I can't say I blame you. As a long-time R&R fan, I've hoped and wished and have looked at any signs. I may like a different coupling on this show but we don't actually feel a lot different about "our" couple. The only difference that I can see if that R&R fans have waited and waited for years, and I mean YEARS, hoping and wishing. If we seem a little resentful, maybe it's because, in part, that we can see a light at the end of the tunnel for "our" couple and we don't want to see Joey at the end of it. Make no mistake, I really love Joey as a character, he has saved the show for me time after time when I've been really disgusted with it. So many times I have thought he was the only thing funny about this show. Yes, I'm going to admit that I want R&R together but aside from that, I don't want Joey to change from the funniest to the romantic lead. And if Ross and Rachel do find eachother again, I see a somewhat of a saving of the Ross character in the end. He seems to be a little less "mental" when he has the good scenes with Rachel. I don't know how the writers will handle all of this but I can only say how I feel.
Anyway, I can really understand how you want to "fight" for your couple. This is the thing that got me hooked to Friends. I found a lot of comedies funny but this show is really the only one where I felt like I really cared about the characters.
Just MHO. :)
No. I mean R&R fans. As R&R fans are the most likely fans who would like to see the end of any J&R material, they are the ones who are most likely to look for closure in the J&R scenerio.
I didn't make such an assumption. Or perhaps you meant "you" in a general sense. Or perhaps you misread what I typed. Or perhaps you should be quoting someone else, instead of me, because what I'm saying is that the "lower" rating is NOT a result of people not wanting to see R&R action.
What I'm saying is that while the R&R story may have been a factor, it is but one of many, and there is insufficient data from all fronts to make any such assumptions.
"Dr. Briefs" wrote in message
made
No, she was talking to Paul.
"abrahammy" wrote in message news:fMQp8.5899$[email]...
Yes, I was. Sorry for the confusion.
Now Narag, there's no need to be self-deprecating on this board...lol.
It's amazing though how you think you know what the statistics really mean, while you feel I'm just clueless about them. I think it's fair to say you are far more biased for your couple than I am of mine, so I think I'm in a little more objective state to explain the implications of a show's results than you are.
And even though abrahammy is an R&R fan, she is a little less biased in the couples, so I think she can make a more objective point about this. Though, if we start blaming a ratings drop solely on Ross, forget about her offering an objective point about it.
[email] (Anonymous) wrote in message news:...
All I've been saying is this; it is ridiculous to pin the drop in ratings on a subplot like r/r. Not that I know what the statistics or analysis really are or how other factors may have contributed to a drop except that there are certainly other more weighted factors. Sure a few r/j fans will have turned off the tube in disgust but there will also be r/j fans sticking around to see what happens next. This is just but one consideration amongst many others. You on the other hand insist that it's the r/r "tension" that is **solely** responsible for the drop in ratings.
Are you going to admit that other factors could have contributed to the drop in ratings?
Really? :-) Just look at the subject title of this thread. So much for all that bias and objectivity.
So in other words, you are saying that Claire will not be objective if you scapegoat Ross for the fall in ratings instead. Yes?
Ganesan
[email] (NARAG) wrote in message news:...
If the viewership totals across the board for the night were down, then I wouldn't have even started this thread. No one makes a big deal about low ratings for Friends on Thanksgiving because viewership is low all night long, AND Friends usually still wins for the night.
The fact is, viewership totals remained the same or went up for all programming except Friends, and naturally Leap of Faith afterwards. In addition, Friends was 3rd on the night for the first time this season, and for that matter, it was a distant 3rd.
It could be that there are that many people out there who despise Alec Baldwin, but I haven't seen such sentiment.
I didn't say I was UNBIASED, I said I was less biased than you.
Well that's a totally different situation then if I tried to use a character as a scapegoat. Fortunately, that's not the case here. ;)
"Anonymous" wrote in message news:[email]...
Well, let me put it this way.
A spinoff featuring just David Schwimmer as Ross? Bad idea. Won't last a month. He can't carry it off. It will tank. A spinoff featuring LeBlanc as Joey? Yeah, that *might* work.
"Laurie" wrote in message news:...
Maybe I need to elaborate, because it seems people are missing what I was getting at. The implication of R&R tension in the promo by itself is not what I believe made the ratings drop sharply, it was the implication of R&R tension IMMEDIATELY after a long succesion of episodes of the idea of J&R is what turned people off.
I see a lot of R&R fans saying in this thread that this sudden dropping of one storyline in favor for another is something we should be used to, and that R&R fans have had to suffer through the same thing.
This is just my opinion, but the comparison of dropping of storylines in the show's history to this one is not relevant. In the past, a dropping of a storyline took place in favor of a guest star over a main character, or vice versa. In either situation, those invested in the couple knew in the back of their mind that said guest star would be out of the picture at some point down the road, so R&R fans could assure themselves that the dropping of the storyline would only be temporary.
This situation is totally different. This is dropping the storyline of one main character in favor of another. And the fact that it occurs not one episode removed from the dropping of the first storyline kind of reduces the dropped storyline to nothing but filler in the grand scheme of things. Ross has never, and I mean NEVER, had his feelings absolutely trashed aside like this, to the point where in the next episode a woman he fell for has already taken interest in someone else, and he carries on like nothing has happened. Not only does that insult the intelligence of viewers to expect us to completely forget about the last few episodes like they never happened, it's also unrealistic that some rapid love shift like this would take place in real life.
That, in a nutshell, is what people may be tuned off by. Not that R&R were suggested, but that they were suggested at this point.
I can't say I blame you. As a long-time
I don't care if you've waited weeks or years, each side has more than enough legitimate right to root for the couple they want, and expect the writers to follow through on what they have started.
If we seem a little resentful, maybe it's because, in part,
Well then, that makes it ok to be resentful...
Make no mistake, I really love Joey
But Matt LeBlanc has been the star this season with Jennifer Aniston, and frankly he deserves it after playing second fiddle for 7 seasons. The only way a person steps to the forefront on this show is being in an inter-Friend romantic pairing, because those are always the most captivating to watch.
And if Ross and
Ross's character has been fine this season. Yes, he may be the most unpopular character on the show, but that doesn't mean the writers will feel inspired to change that. It's going to take a monumental task for the writers to get people to root for Ross as somehow *deserving* to get Rachel in the end, whereas since Joey is one of the more, if not most, popular characters on the show right now, the writers wouldn't have to work as hard to get people to want to see Joey have Rachel.
Frankly, I think too many J&R fans are going to throw in the towel too easily, just so they don't get disappointed by the predictable R&R ending. But I'm keeping the flame up on this board as long as there is still a chance.
"Anonymous" wrote in message news:[email]...
news:...
Since my original post has disappeared into cyberspace somewhere, I'm going to repost this and hope for the best.
Listen, I don't expect you to care how long we have waited. I don't ask you to care about anything.
don't
Seems like you are resentful of how the show appears to be handling "your" storyline, too. Welcome to the club. This is how it goes with this show. Maybe they're planning on a big season finale that deals more with Joey.
Good point. However, I find Joey most captivating to watch when he is funny. There's no replacing that. When Chandler became a romantic lead, the show lost some of its humor so Joey filled that gap. When the "soap" elements got too heavy, Joey has been there to get us to laugh.
Joey is popular and he has been the funniest for me. But he has not been free of flaws or more deserving of anyone. If Ross is so undeserving and unpopular, I would *like* the writers to redeem him as it is under their control. Getting people to root for Ross may be a "monumental task" in your eyes but having some well written storylines would accomplish a lot. And I like Joey to be funny. Not romantic, but funny! I happen to be a fan of *all* the characters on this show and I don't want to see any of them "trashed". And did I say that I like Joey when he's funny?
There's no reason for people to give up on J&R. If R&R fans can wait for 5 years...well you get what I'm saying.
"Anonymous" wrote in message news:[email]...
news:...
I don't think the bread and butter fans really care that much either way. Most folks aren't as extremist and easily offended as any of us here on either side. I'd say folks didn't watch this episode because it promised to be the filler material it was on an inconvenient night.
I was one of the people who explained that R&R fans have been manipulated and hung out to dry in the same way you were. The example I cited is not well explained away by your argument. Here is what I wrote:
Rachel decide she was back in love with Ross after insulting him most of the year. She suddenly lost all focus on the cute guy she'd been pursuing because she couldn't stand that Ross was getting married. She maxed out all her credit cards to follow him across the ocean to break up a wedding she had announced she did not want to attend. Once there, she did actually disrupt his wedding indirectly, and fallout from his lingering feelings for her resulted in the end of his marriage to Emily. During that time, she said repeatedly that she was still in love with him, she told him so, and the idea that she might have to lose contact with him was a huge trauma.
The very instant Emily was out of the picture, the writers had Monica ask her if she intended to go after Ross, and she replied blithely and carelessly that she just couldn't be bothered because of the baggage.
And that was the end of that. After all that. Rachel being in love with Ross at that time wasn't so much a real narrative direction as it was a sweeps stunt.<<<<
You say:
Well, the example I cited was dropping a storyline of one main character to focus almost exclusively on Chandler and Monica as Ross slowly went completely crazy, his life absolutely ruined. I'd say the analogy was at least fair.
Oh, that's not fair. I think it was an interesting, well written subplot that had us on our toes and gave LeBlanc a real chance to shine. It was compelling television. It was a better version of the Joey/Chandler conflict from season four. Remember, this show is basically mean to entertain, and it did that very well.
Ross has never, and I mean NEVER, had his feelings
Oh, sure he has. Remember TOW Russ?! Except, you're right. Ross was still upset about it. However, Ross has had his feelings absolutely trashed on a regular basis for years.
Look, your point is that it was annoying that they dropped this story so abruptly. I think the problem was this; they put Joey in a very emotional story that was touching and a little sad. . Then, in 817, when they decided to write closure for him, they went for a silly, superficial and farcical script that was played for laughs. The tone did not match and for people who cared about the story, it seemed like a slap in the face. It appeared as if Joey was more concerned about looking silly than about how much he still hurt, and it trivialized the deep emotions he had displayed before.
You are right. That was sloppy. Now, if he waits until the finale and throws a tantrum, he's going to look awfully childish to impose his pain during a very crucial moment in the life of others. I'd rather they dealt with this now - and I am hoping that 819 does it.
SPOILER SPACE
SPOILER SPACE
SPOILER SPACE
It is, (as far as I know,)Joey's last episode this season as a lead and he will be interacting heavily with Rachel. That's all I know about it. Let us hope that they will come up with a scene a little more satisfying than the half - hearted "Hey! I don't feel awkward any more! Wait, yes I do" scene that we saw earlier.
Not only does that
That's true. For both your example and mine. Annoying, isn't it?
"abrahammy" wrote in message news:...
Bread and butter or not, I don't think people are going to greet warmly not only a major storyline being dropped instantly, but another one starting immediately in its place that contradicts it.
Do you really think the average person is going to open with welcome arms what they saw in 818, just after they saw 812-817?
But at some point you KNEW they would come back to Ross and Rachel eventually. There's no guarantee of that here in this case. They may suddenly impose finality in the Ross/Rachel storyline at the end of this season, and we may never see that Joey/Rachel pairing tossed around for so many episodes coming to fruition.
But I know these writers are very cunning, so this upcoming R&R storyline is I feel just to a.) leave the outcome in doubt, b.) throw people off the trail of J&R so that if something happens in the season finale, they will be surprised by it.
How did it entertain exactly? We saw Joey suffer for several episodes while dealing with his feelings, and then we saw Joey get rejected. Where's the payoff the character and the viewers get in a storyline like that?
Name me one example where Ross's love for someone was completely ignored in the following episode.
If anything happens in the finale, it will probably be of the same degree as what Joey did for Rachel and Ross while he harbored his feelings. I'm sure if Joey is still hurt by the R&R closeness, he won't let them know about it, and it won't register with anyone else until the little cliffhanger comes.
Actually, from the promo, it doesn't look like Rachel will have more of a role than anyone else does. It will be interesting to see though, since part of the clip show will be Joey talking about his friendships with each character. If they run the Joey/Rachel clips in a very light-hearted manner, that's probably a sign by the writers that they never took this potential romantic pairing seriously.
However, if it does show Joey talking about Rachel like he still holds some kind of feeling for her, then that could be an excellent sign for the season finale.
Like they've done before though, I'm sure they'll pull through on this one.
"Anonymous" wrote in message news:[email]...
news:...
way.
promised to
As a rather average guy who watched all of 812-817, I'm giving 818 one big hug right now. How's that?
[remainder snipped as I have no comments for that part]
"David Buehrle" wrote in message news:...
I think you full well knew that I meant average on the scale of favoring Ross and Rachel or Joey and Rachel together. You are clearly an R&R fan in this case, and not an average guy.
So tell me, were you just playing dumb, or did you seriously think "average" meant something else in this case? Because abrahammy and I were clearly discussing it in regards to people who were fans of each couple.
"David Buehrle" wrote in message news:...
Ok, looking at some of your posts, you are not a diehard R&R fan, but you do prefer them nonetheless...
"Don't get me wrong, I'm still leaning toward Ross & Rachel, but I can take it either way. I just don't see Ross with Phoebe, but I can see Joey with her. Maybe Phoebe will take more time with Joey to help him get over Rachel until he falls in love with her."
I was referring to people who don't care about couples necessarily, but rather in seeing events played out on this show in a believable, realistic manner. Having the events in 818 after 812-817 is just not that realistic, UNLESS you seriously want R&R together.
"Anonymous" schrieb im Newsbeitrag
What happened in 818 was quite realistic (except Phoebe's boyfriend), the things being unrealistic were those not happening, i.e. anything regarding Joey's feelings. Although I'm sick of the whole Joey loves Rachel storyline (never liked it that much anyway), I would have liked a real, final closure much better.
Christoph, nitpicking
"Anonymous" wrote in message
Joey's reaction at the wedding did not appear to be particularly realistic. I thought his indifference was strange. I'm going to agree with you there.
Rachel is, and has always been, an almost completely self-absorbed person. I am not surprised that she was more interested in being the center of attention and dreaming about her fake wedding than she was in checking to make sure Joey was feeling OK about it. Ross was enjoying all that money - and I think in the back of his mind, he still wants to end up with Rachel somehow. Let's make it a given that Joey shouldn't have been that neutral. What did you expect Rachel and Ross to do differently?
"Anonymous" wrote in message news:[email]...
news:...
what I
itself
on
big
I found several things in 818 that were unrealistic. In particular I thought Parker and Rachel were both *way* over-the-top in their respective scenarios (by over-the-top I mean unrealistic). In fact, I think much of what happens on the show is unrealistic. That's what makes it funny--at least for me. It fits the typical sitcom role very well that way. It's when they start getting real that the anti-soap opera group chimes in.
In general, I like to see a little sentiment, a lot of humor, and I like to have something to chat about at the water cooler Friday morning. If that means something happens between Joey and Rachel, that's fine with me. If it's Ross and Rachel, that's also good. If she ends up staying unmarried, that's okay too.
I think the writers of the show have done a very good job, especially this season, in finding fresh and exciting situations for us to enjoy. But they walk a fine line between sitcom humor and soap opera reality.
As you aptly pointed out, I am indeed a moderate Ross & Rachel fan. However, my preference is based on the reality that I perceive within the framework of the entire eight seasons thus far.
(What I am writing now is my opinion, and my perception of realty within the show.) Ross's first love was Rachel. It was an infatuation for several years, but as they became friends (season 1) it grew into something real and in later seasons (2&3) it continued to grow until "the break".
Because of its deep roots I don't think Ross will ever lose those feelings. He can rationalize around it, he can build emotional barriers to protect himself from it, but ultimately, I think Ross's greatest secret wish is to be with Rachel. Oddly it represents his character's greatest potential strength, but also his greatest vulnerability. The vulnerability of it prevents him from openly admitting it.
Rachel, on the other hand, doesn't have the same deep rooted emotional connection to Ross. I think she loves Ross, but she is conflicted, especially with issues of trust. Even if she accepts that "a break" means broken up, Ross still betrayed his own feelings for her when he slept with the copy girl. If he was unable to recognize his feelings and act on them accordingly then, how can she trust that he will be true to his convictions now?
I have seen only brief glimpses that Ross is becoming more self-aware. I assume this is because the writers probably feel (and accurately IMO) that it would bring the show too deeply into the soap opera realm.
For Rachel to move on to another relationship at this point would be to discard everything that has happened with Ross. It is perfectly rational that any woman in her situation might do just that. But I think the little things that many R&R fans have pointed out in endless threads on the subject show that she still has feelings for him. I think she *wants* him to come around and figure out their emotional mess. I think she *wants* him to rescue her (emotionally), but right now, she is unsure if he is capable of it.
So, for their relationship to really happen, I think Ross needs to demonstrate that he understands himself, but more importantly, that he understands why she still has trust issues. If he can recognize and admit that what he did was wrong, not by betraying her, but by betraying his own convictions, then I think she can find her trust in him and they can live happily ever after.
(Or until he realizes that he loves her more than she loves him, and he gets all paranoid again. But that's a hurdle they can let the couple work out after the wedding.)
Is that rational?
"David Buehrle":
That's one of the best sum-ups of the whole Ross&Rachel story I've ever read. So good, I didn't want to delete anything of it.
<spoiler space for 820-822>
I think Ross agreeing to not see other women just because Rachel wants him to do so in 821 is way more important (your trust issue) to their relationship than the kiss and making out we'll see in the episode after that. Oh yes, being her sandsac in 822 seems to be very sweet and upright, too. Although from what I've read by now Ross hasn't thought about his feelings at all, while Rachel has.
Christoph, who can't await the discussions after 821 & 822
"Anonymous" wrote in message news:[email]...
news:...
is being
Sigh...
You know, it's this "Let me try to summarize what you are saying, but intentionally overblow it" kind of garbage that only serves to start fights. And you've done this now several times, but I've tried to ignore the first couple.
Would the AVERAGE UNBIASED VIEWER of this show just have spent a hour on this board typing about the R&R relationship in great detail? No! Average viewers watch the show, turn it off, and then watch it the following week. That is as invested as they become, but they still care to see a realistic show from week to week.
"Anonymous" wrote in message news:[email]...
Paul - please stop and look at the way you talk to people. To me. To Laurie. To David. Look at the words you just used to describe my reaction. Your wording in this venue is this personally harsh very frequently, and yet you insist that any fights started are unilaterally somebody else's fault. I really noticed it the other day when you responded to Laurie's *very gentle* post about why she still supported R&R. There just really isn't any need to describe what other people says as garbage that starts fights. You fly off the handle way too easily. It was this particular behavior that led to me confusing you with Footballguy. Please, please keep a handle on this. I may say I think you really don't have complete respect for any opinion that doesn't support your point of view. It's true. I really don't think you do. Your posts show a certain, systematic disdain for R&R enthusiasts - and it's evident you really don't like me at all. Now, mind you, given the bitterness of our last fight, I can understand why there might be some ill feeling there. But you really need to look at this.
Please note that in this last post, which I have written with some alarm, I have not once called you a name, insulted what you said as garbage, or suggested that you didn't have a *right* to your opinion. What I am asking is that you try to keep your temper under control and be civil.
"Anonymous" wrote in message news:[email]...
This is a balanced and considered point of view for which I have no arguement. I agree with the basic point you make. In fact, I intended to post my agreement, but failed to post it because I got so far off track with my R&R tirade. I agree that it would be helpful to see more closure with the J&R storyline, and I expect we will see more.
(I understand that the above response was directed *to* Anonymous by abrahammy.) I made an effort to explain my last post that the whole R&R section was ". . . my opinion, and my perception of realty within the show." When I say that something is my opinion, I am making an effort to leave the door open on other's opinions so as not to offend anyone.
At no time did I intend to summarize anything you wrote. I simply expressed my own point of view in response to what you wrote.
I have in the past disagreed with posts, and stated so. In this case, I wasn't trying to express direct opposition to your point of view, but rather point out why I believe some of it is, in fact, true.
Overblown: yeah, I think your right. I did get into it didn't I? But intentionally? Honestly, I didn't sit down and think, "I'm going to blast Paul with a 30 minute tirade." It just came out that way.
But at no time would I EVER characterize someone else's opinion as "garbage."
I agree with you. In the big scheme of things I do consider myself an "average person" (Your words Paul, not mine), but I'm definitely not an average viewer of "Friends."
With this I also agree.
(I'm diverting off of this topic slightly to address the ng as a whole.)
I am one who really doesn't care to see long tirades about any topics in the ng. I usually skim through them lightly and rarely respond, because the effect is usually another long tirade, and I'm usually nowhere near as invested in the topic as the original poster.
"To thine own self be true." With this in mind I would like to apologize for my own tirade. If I may summarize it in simple terms (summarizing only my own post) I think the continuation of the R&R storyline is the most realistic way to go. I don't believe it is the only realistic way to go.
"David Buehrle" wrote in message news:CxZq8.15120$[email]...
with
.
that
expressed
rather
the
only
posts as garbage. Of course it is you right to do it if you feel like it and I got to say that I admire the way you keep your cool and do not seem to be offended by his comments. You are a nice guy and as I have told you before, I like reading your posts. I like reading some people's long posts as long as they have something interesting to say and you definitely do. If some people do not like it, don't "punish" the rest of us who enjoy reading your posts.
Dennis
[clipped for simplicity]
and
be
before,
your
Thank you Dennis.
As for the personal emails that I've received today, thank you also.
"David Buehrle" wrote in message news:...
That is exactly what I was trying to say. I don't think many would find problems with R&R getting together in the end, but that they need to give proper closure to J&R before that should happen. (i.e. some sort of payoff)
You didn't offend me.
No, no, no! That commment above was directed to abrahammy. Several times, she has taken what I have written while stating a point, and summarized it with obvious hyperbole along the lines of "So what you are saying is you think all R&R fans have brains the size of macademia nuts" to somehow make her point look better. I am trying to make the argument here for someone who doesn't like EITHER couple, and she turns around and fires that I'm being totally irrational to one side on this argument.
David, you were very reasonable in stating your opinion.
The "overblown" part was for the remark abrahammy made.
David, you did nothing wrong in your post. abrahammy has it ingrained into her head that I am an irrational J&R fan who automatically refutes every opinion an R&R fan has made, while prasing the genius of any J&R fan. So any time I try to make a reasonable argument, such in this case about the continuity of storylines, she tends to come out and proclaim that I'm being unreasonable when I counter an opinion for R&R. I have agreed with an R&R fan's opinion on many occasions, and likewise disagreed with several J&R fans here at certain points.
I have my favorites, but I'm sensible enough to discuss the show on an objective level, such as yourself. But neither of us, nor likely anyone else here in the newsgroup, is just an average viewer of this show.
"Anonymous" : schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:[email]...
It looks like you're answering yourself but you're quoting some third person -- strange.
How come this post is threaded below mine with MID ? Is it just my newsreader or did you somehow respond to the wrong post?
Christoph, confused
"Christoph P�per" wrote in message news:a8ifdn$30il$[email]...
The levels on the got goofed up a bit in the thread, and since this thread seems to have reached a level of closure, I will exit to enjoy the other fine new posts.
"David Buehrle" wrote in message news:...
Honestly? No, that doesn't sound like an average guy's opinion. That sounds like someone who is really invested in the R&R relationship. Most people probably don't care either way about who ends up with whom, but that it's done well. It's not done well when one storyline is dropped and another one is picked up like nothing happened, and I think both sides of the coin will agree with me on that.
"Anonymous" wrote in message news:[email]...
news:...
the
of
either
here
another
welcome
one
thought
of
to
that
If
unmarried,
this
they
the
the
but
later
feelings.
to
means
with
them
convictions
I
that
rational
little
subject
come
of
admit
own
live
gets
out
What I think I'm seeing here is that you really won't think anybody is being unbiased and rational unless they agree with you.
The bread and butter fans have a simpler guage than we do.
Is it funny or stupid?
Then why is Survivor averaging MORE viewers with Season 4 than it did with Season 3?!?!?
Is it? I haven't been keeping track. I just know that it hasn't been trouncing the other shows like it used to in the first season.
The problem with this thread is that it is about assumptions based on statistical analysis of data which happens to have several variables in it. Paul is focusing exclusively on what he claims to be the certain importance of one particular variable, while asserting that no other variable was of any possible importance at all.
This is very much like a scientific hypothesis. There is no way to prove or disprove his hypothesis with the data we now have. As it stands, all we really are able to do is have this particular exchange repeatedly:
Paul: This data means X! And only X!
R&R fan: No, it means Y!
R&R fan 2: And maybe Z!
Paul: Does not!
R&R fan: Does too!
Not!
Too!
And so forth.
We need another sample with fewer conflicting variables. The Joey/Rachel ratings came from sweeps weeks, with ads exclusively dedicated to them, in a steady stream of fresh episodes during a time when people were home. It also featured material that actually propelled the story forward. In order for this kind of comparison to be made fairly, we need an R&R tease episode during a sweeps period with low travel attraction, coming on the tail of other fresh episodes, and the advertisements have to be exclusively about them rather than about Alec Baldwin or Monica's toast. (The one promo I saw barely discussed R&R at all.) What they are doing actually has to be important; this was a filler episode. When we see the results of that scenario - and I'm pretty sure it is coming - we will be able to judge if Paul's assumptions here were accurate.
My own inclination is to think R&R should get about the same kind of ratings at the end of the season sweeps as they did at the beginning, when the episodes were about them.
By the way, the rating writeups of this particular night that I've seen talk at great length about what good ratings NBC continues to get; they continue to rule Thursday. The only analysis I've seen which calls this 13.5 rating bad comes from J&R fans.
"abrahammy" wrote in message news:...
Absolutely! That's why I left after one exchange. You can take a donkey to the stream for a drink but you can't take the stream to a donkey.
Ganesan
"Anonymous" wrote in message news:[email]...
I don't think conclusions can be drawn from poor ratings in one episode (poor being relative). If the R&R storyline continues and the ratings continue to flag, then you may have a point. However, I think there are WAY too many variables involved in order to attribute the weak showing to this one specific element of the show.
"David Buehrle" wrote in message news:...
What I have to say is not related to the subject of the post.
David, when you change the subject line of your replies, your post ends up a new post. I think its confusing to have too many threads around. I don't know if you intended your post to start a new thread. Thought I'd mention it because I didn't know this when I first started posting here and thought it was my news reader's fault. :)
Priya
"p r i y a" wrote in message news:[email]...
news:...
WAY
this
Interesting. It doesn't show up that way on my newsreader. It must be terribly confusing for others. Thanks for the info.
I think it depends on the newsreader... It showed up as the same thread for me.
"David Buehrle" wrote in message news:dh8q8.43546$[email]...
the
that
episode
are
Oddly enough, this is the first time I have seen one of your threads, which you have changed the title, start a new thread. All the other times it was just a continuation of the same thread...
"Dennis" wrote in message news:[email]...
the
the
ratings
to
which
All of a sudden, without any doing of my own (that I am aware) old posts are showing up unread, and every time the title has changed it goes to a new thread. Now I definitely see what Priya is talking about and I DON"T LIKE IT! This thread is a perfect example. I've read all this stuff already, and now I'm reading it again, wondering what might have changed, but finding nothing new. (So, here's something new. Enjoy. :-PpPpP )