I've been a bit lax in catching the syndicated versions of the show, but have noticed that in at least two shows in Season Three (though one _could_ be from Season Two) the girl that Ross eventually took a break from Rachel with is mentioned by the Boys in conversations. Chandler, especially, seems to find her quite exotic/lust-inducing.
My question for y'all is this: was this something the writers planned, or did they simply incorporate what had previously been an off-screen person from the "Friends Universe" and use them for a plot point? Either way, it's a very bit of continuity for a show that has been, *ahem*, somewhat continuity challenged.
Bet the rent, they did this on purpose, and had the entire scenario completely planned before the first credits rolled on season three. I think even TOW the Flashback was written with the idea of establishing Ross as a person who would go to the arms of another woman when hurting from rejection.
I just don't understand where you draw these assumptions from. Like Pheobe supposedly manipulating C+M for the better at the end of season 6. Can you really not envisage a scripting meeting.
"how shall we break Ross and Rachel up?" "he could cheat on her" "with who. mon.. oh wait.. pheobe?" "no thats too obvious and unlikely." "how about an extra, since theres noone else?" "okay, now we need a premise. COPY SHOP GIRL!" "brilliant. never seen before but mentioned once. the fans will think we're geniouseseses"
Chandler mentioned "that girl at the Xerox place" in 301 "TOW the Princess Leia Fantasy", and Joey imagined her buck naked covered in jam in 303 "TOW the Jam", but then there was nothing until we saw Chloe herself.
There are lots of signs in early Season Three that the writers are preparing their audience for the shock that is to come. Claire Abraham has pointed out that the brief liaison between Ross & Phoebe in 306 "TOW the Flashback" was all part of the process of reinventing Ross's past, to make his subsequent behaviour seem more likely, even though not more acceptable.
The show is so *not* continuity challenged, its continuity is actually very strong. Most sitcoms do not pay even lip service to continuity, such that the episodes can be shown in virtually any order. In contrast "Friends" has some soap-opera elements in the way its stories continue through the season, and there are many past references that are exquisite in their accuracy.
The fact that there is the odd slip in 146 episodes merely underlines how good they are. And the vast majority of the faults that some fans have complained about turn out not to be the case when correctly evaluated.
Nothing specific. I believe you and Claire corrected me in noting that she is mentioned in 301 and 303. As noted in the original post, my Friends viewing has taken a sharp nosedive over the last few months, so I was guessing about when Chloe (though unnamed at that point) was mentioned.
[obligatory Ed McMahon imitation] "You are correct, sir!"
or
person
preparing
out
was
Hadn't put that together, but it makes sense. I don't like it, but it makes sense. Ahh, back in the days when they had actually plotted stuff out...
very
has
season,
Most of the continuity errors/questions arise from the characters' pasts -- who knew whom when, and that sort of thing. You are quite correct, Tennant, in that compared to many sitcoms (at least of the American species), Friends has a much better track record with continuity and self-referencing than other shows. I've found the seemingly-constant reinvention/revision of the Friends' pasts annoying and frustrating, and while having read a great many posts here about it, it's quite obvious they had not carefully mapped out all the backstory, and as a result, have ended up contradicting themselves.
Of course, the Friends cast and crew have _nothing_ on Chris Carter (The X-Files) on contradiction and confusion, but that's a rant for another newsgroup. :-D
My respect for you just hit the stratosphere! I also share a crippling weakness for redheads, natural or augmented (Belinda Carlisle, for example....mmmmm).
Gillian Anderson.....[shivering uncontrollably]....she may be the only reason I watch this year. Yowza.
On Fri, 6 Oct 2000, Tennant Stuart stated this considered view. Waking from my doze, I hastily scrawled -
I'd disagree, I've seen her in various things, including Twin Peaks some years ago as a child, and her hair has always been that colour. Besides, wigs are easy to spot.